SHOEING. 559 
This is intended to give a firmer foothold of the ground than the smooth 
web of the common shoe will allow of, and answers that purpose most 
effectually. In other respects, the hunting shoe is made exactly like the 
common shoe, except that it is generally as light as possible, consistently 
with a necessary strength, and with a sufficient width to protect the sole. 
Sometimes the outside nails must be carried considerably further back 
than I have here represented, and especially when the horse to be shod is 
apt to pull off his shoes, or when he is intended for a deep clay country ; 
but for grass or any light arable, seven nail holes, punched as I have 
represented in fig. 3, and the nails well driven and clenched, will keep on 
the shoe, without any danger of its getting a twist. Here, again, I shall 
insert Mr. Spooner’s admirable description of the shoe recommended by 
him for this purpose: “ For hunting, the shoe must be narrower than 
for the road, and an additional nail may be placed on the inside ; no evil 
will result from this, because in the field the pressure on the crust is in a 
great degree relieved by the sole and frog. There must be space for a piece 
of paper to pass between the foot and inner rim of the shoe, but no more, as 
the foot can then be withdrawn from heavy soil with less difficulty than 
when the usual space is permitted. To avoid overreaching, the heels of 
the fore shoe should scarcely project beyond the heels of the crust” 
(they should not at all), “and they should be rounded off, instead of 
being left square, as is usually the case. The hind shoes should also, 
when there is any disposition to overreach, be square at the toe, set a 
little within the crust ; and the inner rim at the toe should have a piece 
cut out, so that, instead of a sharp edge, there should be a rounded surface, 
which, of course, is not so likely to catch the heels of the fore feet.” It 
will be seen that this description tallies very closely with that which 
I have given above, the only point of difference being the external con- 
cavity of the web, which I believe to be of great importance in procuring 
a secure foothold. It also allows the foot to be pulled out of wet clay far 
more easily than the flat web ; and there is a reduction of useless weight, 
as the hunting shoe does not wear out, except with those riders who keep 
to the roads, and they of course should have a road shoe.* 
2. Tun FRrencw sHoe differs from the English form in both its surfaces, 
that which comes in contact with the foot being concave, while the other 
is convex. To make it fit the foot, the toe and heels of the latter must 
be pared away and made to fit the shoe, as here represented. The web is 
very wide, and punched with eight countersunk nail holes, the English 
plan of fullering not being adopted. The holes are also punched fully the 
third of an inch from the edge of the shoe, and the nails are driven in a 
very great slant, so that they come out little more than half an inch above 
the shoe, as represented in fig. 4. By adopting this plan, several advan- 
tages are said to be gained, as compared with the English method, which 
Mr. Goodwin, who advocates the French shoe (yet proposes another on 
exactly the opposite principles), enumerates as follows: “If we refer to 
the action of the fore leg, it will tend to explain some of the advantages to 
be derived from the curved shoe. When a horse is about to move, the first 
indication of motion is a bend at the knee, which necessarily raises the 
heels, and they become more and more elevated, till the toe (which is the 
last part that leaves the ground) is suspended for the moment that the foot 
is lifted. The base of the foot, just at its leaving the ground, is almost 
perpendicular; when the knee is bent to its fullest extent, the foot is then 
in the same position, with the heels of the shoe pointing upwards. If we 
consider this final part of the motion of the limb, we find the movement 
