BIG OR LITTLE HORSES? 163 



not be coaxed, nor foxes quickly bred, there is small dan- 

 ger that the riding part of the sport will soon be lost. 



This sport has shown us wliat capital material we have 

 in this country for hunters. Our American horses are 

 wonderful in their serviceableness. They have done bet- 

 ter across our country than the expensive imported Eng- 

 lish and Irish ones. The difficulty of acclimation of the 

 latter has something to do with this ; but few things have 

 shown the adaptability of our stock to any Avork better 

 than the number of horses of trotting blood that have 

 turned out fast gallopers, big timber-jumpers, and stayers 

 besides. 



There seems to be a growing tendency to breed for size. 

 May it not be a mistake ? It is doubtful if the hunter of 

 over sixteen hands averages as well, all things considered, 

 as the one which is somewhat under this measure, though 

 big thorough-breds are needed for some men. Certainly, 

 for plain saddle- work fifteen -two is a better size, com- 

 manding vastly more activity if less stride. Moreover, 

 big horses are not always weight -carriers any more than 

 they are weight -pullers. The work of the world is done, 

 the speed of the world is attained, the races of the world 

 are won, by the smaller specimens; but to-day's fashion 

 is set for either a polo -pony or a sixteen-and-a-half hands 

 thorough -bred. The ten inches between the two are 

 skipped, though the best performances have almost inva- 

 riably been between these two limits and well under the 

 higher one. 



I may here say a word anent the American horse as a 

 racer. Some Englishmen are wont to underrate our cli- 

 mate, so far as it relates to horse-breeding ; but this has nev- 

 er been a country of racing. Our national sport has, until 

 latel}^, been trotting ; and a country which has produced 

 a "Sunol," an "Arion," and a "Nancy Hanks," may well 



