MR. RAREY'S MODE OF BREAKING. 129 



Rarey, no one but the subscribers had any certain knowledge of the 

 yecret, although it subsequently appeared that it had oozed out, 

 and had been propounded in several directions as a rival scheme 

 of much older date. However, it is not now my intention to at- 

 tempt the discovery of the inventor of the system generally known 

 as Rarey's, my sole object being to ascertain its real worth in 

 breaking young stock, and in remedying or curing the vices to 

 which older horses are occasionally sujjject. It will be seen here- 

 after that Uiough I think the plan of great service in some cases, 

 T doubt its utility as an aid to the breaker ; but, having cost the 

 country far more than 25,000?., and having received the approval 

 of hundreds of experienced horsemen, it would ill become me to 

 pass the subject over without giving reasons for the conclusions to 

 which I have arrived. I was not one of the original subscribers, 

 but I have seen Mr. Rarey exhibit his extraordinary powers over 

 the horse more than a dozen times, so that I am in a position to 

 form an opinion upon the whole process as compared with our ordi- 

 nary English methods, with which I have also long been practi- 

 cally acquainted. 



In his public demonstrations Mr. Rarey always commenced 

 by some introductory remarks on the natural history of the horse, 

 in which there was nothing to impress the auditor with any great 

 respect for his powers. At the end of this act, which was evi- 

 dently intended to kill time, jve were put in possession of the 

 three fundamental principles of the new theory of the proper 

 management of the horse, namely : — 



First, " That he is so constituted by nature that he will not offer 

 resistance to any demand made of him which he fully compre- 

 hends, if made in a way consistent with the laws of his nature." 



Secondly, " That he has no consciousness of his strength beyond 

 his experience, and can be handled according to our will without 

 force." 



Thirdly, " That we can, in compliance with the laws of his na- 

 ture, by which he examines all things new to him, take any object, 

 however frightful, around, over, or on him, that does not inflict 

 pain, without causing him to fear." 



No one will, I believe, dispute the first two of these principles, 

 which have certainly nothing very novel in them. The third, 

 when promulgated, was more opposed to our experience, and a de- 

 monstration of its truth was naturally enough required before it 

 was accepted. To comply with this demand horse after horse was 

 submitted to an exhausting and painful proof, which I shall pre- 

 sently describe, and then certainly anything which did not inflict 

 pain was borne without apparently producing fear. This, there- 

 fore, was proving the letter of the third principle ; but was the 

 spirit of it established? The words just quoted, if they mean 

 I 



