Experiments and their Verification 163 



fore feet the application of weight would act as shown in the curves 

 of Fig. 19, but where by a quick muscular contraction the front 

 legs have a jerky action, weight seems to aggravate such action. It 

 would, therefore, take a great deal of weight to effect a slight increase 

 in extension. And again, having increased such front action, we are 

 apt to see the animal go very low behind ; so much so, in fact, that the 

 heels of hind shoes will slide a couple of inches. Such a contact 

 with the ground cannot in any way give the horse any improvement 

 of gait. There must be no sliding of shoe or any unusual or unequal 

 concussion with the ground visible in the foot prints. 



The off hind in this case, was carried inside of off fore slightly, 

 as will be seen in the next trial of Fig. 132. Here we have again an 

 effect of the toe- weight applied to the near fore foot only, which 

 effect for extension was somewhat counteracted by the increased 

 weight of shoe (12 oz.) For, with such an action as this horse 

 possessed the effect of weight in shoe will be in elevation more than 

 in extension. Hence the light toe-weight on near fore foot did not 

 extend that foot as much as anticipated, but it did influence the off 

 hind in a measure. 



The off hind has a shoe with a little thicker web (1/16 inch) 

 on account of the lack of extension of that leg at the previous trial. 

 The additional ounce does not in itself make the change in its ex- 

 tension, but this slight change and the influence of the action of toe- 

 weight on the near fore have the desired effect of regulating the 

 distances of the correlated feet, making these practically the same. 

 (3-35 3.30). There was less sliding of hind heels, even though 

 the stride was the same and the distance between fore and hind 

 feet was less. (3.49 3.32 = 0.17 ft. = 2.05 inches.) Here we 

 have the true trotting extension, that is, the diagonal feet instead 

 of the lateral ones extend together, and in consequence we have a 

 diminished tendency to single- foot which existed previously. Incidental- 

 ly attention should be called to the inaccuracy of shoeing by the eye 

 only, for the difference of angles of hind feet (Fig. 131) is an 

 error that a hoof gauge would readily detect. Such differences 



