242 CENTURY OF ENGLISH FOX-HUNTiNG 



us. Our forefathers were generally their own 

 architects, so far as stables were concerned. At 

 least, they knew what horses required. I lately saw 

 in a paper called The Builder a design for stables 

 which were to be built for a self-made millionaire. 

 The general effect was a picture worthy of a place 

 on the walls of the Royal Academy, but when 

 I analysed the details in outline I concluded that 

 the architect was not fit to design a monkey-house. 

 The forage loft, instead of being between the ceiling 

 and roof of the stable, was at least fifty yards away, 

 thus causing extra labour to the grooms. 



Now, I have no wish to dip my pen in bitter ink 

 in regard to the modern architect. An architect 

 informed me lately that it was not his business to 

 look after stable fittings. " Perhaps not," I replied, 

 " but it is your place to supply room for them." My 

 reason for making this reply is that in modern 

 stables the gangway is far too narrow. It should 

 be at least eight feet in width, and as far wider as 

 space permits. Then again, the doors should be 

 at least six feet, and if possible, seven feet in width. 

 A narrow gangway and a narrow doorway are more 

 liable to blemish a horse than all the fences in 

 Leicestershire ; and it is the duty of the architect 

 to provide space so that they should not be narrow. 

 I should add here that the doors should be half-doors, 

 ie. cut horizontally in the centre, and that there 

 should be no projections of any sort in the door. 

 Sunken bolts and ring handles obviate any necessity 



