SHOEING. BAL 
A reference to page 320, where the coffin-bone is carefully 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. Put 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 produced 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 
0 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 hindmost 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 Mr. Goodwin in the remarks which I have 
quoted ; but the strongest argument is founded on the fact that French 
horses are much sounder on their feet than the English. It must be 
rememtered, however, that the roads in France are not like ours; 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 surface 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. 3 and 4); 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 revolu- 
tion could be accomplished as is necessary for the introduction of the 
French shoe into general use ; but I believe that it would, on the whole, 
be far superior to our own. 
3. Mr. Goopwin has suggested an improvement on the French shoe, 
consisting in making the heels of the shoe slightly convex towards the 
foot, necessitating a double sweep in both surfaces. It is difficult to 
convey an accurate idea of Mr. Goodwin’s shoe without an illustration, 
but his object is to place the heel of the crust on a sloping surface, so that 
when pressure is made downwards, it has a tendency to expand the heels. 
I believe, however, that all attempts to effect this object by mechanical 
means are fallacious, and that it is only by causing a due development of 
the frog and bars through the stimulus of pressure that it can be done. 
I, therefore, see no advantage in Mr. Goodwin’s alteration, and should - 
prefer the French plan, pure and simple. 
4. Mr. Bracy Cuark, in his great anxiety to prevent contraction, sug- 
gested a hinge at the toe of the shoe, by which it might be allowed to 
expand with the foot. At first sight this looks extremely simple, and likely 
to be efficacious, but there is one objection which completely explains the 
reason of its utter failure in practice. It must be nailed on firmly to both 
quarters, and at least four nails in each will be required. If, therefore, 
the heels are to expand, they must do so by a hinge or bend in the toe of 
the foot, since the quarters are nailed to the shoe, and no yielding can 
possibly take place between the four nails which are driven into each. 
0°90 
