THE FORM AND MANUFACTURE OF SHOES 663 



horses vvhicii have great weights to draw, and this may be more readily 

 observed in any draught-horse going up-hill. I have offered these few 

 remarks on action, in order to bring the reader's attention to the curve of 

 the French shoe at the toe. This form of shoe certainly harmonizes more 

 with the motion of the fore-foot than the English does ; it affords a greater 

 surface of bearing at the toe than the projecting ridge of the straight 

 ordinary si oe, and is much more calculated to allow of the motion of the 

 leg and foot ; the labour of the muscles is also diminished, and the limb 

 Ijeing in its natural position, the ligaments have less imposed upon them ; 

 they are more at ease, and consequently are not so liable to be strained. 

 The shape of the coflin-bone is also another proof of the French system 

 being more consistent with the principles of nature than the straight 

 ordinary shoe. If the coffin-bone of a fore-foot be placed on a level surface, 

 the quarters and heels are the only parts in contact with it, which proves 

 that they are intended by nature to meet the ground first, and to bear the 

 greatev proportion of weight ; but if the quarters of the hoof be removed 

 (lowered or diminished) to admit of the straight shoe, the portion of weight 

 intended to be borne on the quarters must be thrown upon the heels ; and 

 hence the great mischief which ensues from the common (plain) English 

 shoe. A reference to page 379, where the coffin-bone is cai-efully delineated 

 in profile, will show the correctness of a part of this argument; for un- 

 doubtedly the lower surface of the edge of the coffin-bone is convex, and 

 therefore there is no impropriety in cutting away the crust till it is left of 

 an equal thickness between this bone and the shoe. But if it is decided to 

 adopt the French shape, it must never be forgotten that it is not merely by 

 cutting away the heels and toe that a foot prepared in the English way 

 can be fitted to a French shoe, but by allowing the quarters to grow at the 

 part where they are usually, in this country, sliced away to arrive at a 

 plain surface. If this is not done, the heels will be too much weakened, 

 and a corn will almost inevitably be pi'oduced in the inner one. The 

 directions given by M. Bourgelat, and by M. Janze in his quarto on shoeing, 

 are nearly the same ; namely, that the convexity should be two and a half 

 times the thickness of the shoe. This curvature is distributed so that the 

 toe shall be raised twice the thickness of the shoe from the ground, and the 

 heel the remaining half ; the bend at the latter part beginning at the hind- 

 most nail-hole, and that of the front of the shoe springing from the next 

 nail. There is a great deal to be said in favour of this method of shoeing, 

 grounded on the theory of action, which is not very clearly explained by 

 INIr. Goodwin in the remarks which I have quoted ; but the strongest argu- 

 ment is founded on the fact, that French horses are much sounder on their 

 feet than the English. It must be remembered, however, that the roads in 

 France are not like ours j they are either paved or composed of loose gravel, 

 both of which surfaces are more likely to suit the convex shoe than our hard 

 flint, gravel, or granite roads. But, independently of the difference in sur- 

 face in the shoes of the two countries, there is also a great variation in the 

 nail-holes, which in the French shoe are placed on both sides of the web, as 

 I have represented them on the outside (Figs. 120 and 121) ; thus the outer 

 heel is less confined in France than in this country, and to this fact I 

 attribute a great part of their superior success. It would be a long time 

 before so great a revolution could be accomplished as is necessary for the 



X X 



