TIIEOHY. 103 



would not." But why ? " Why, because it's contrary 

 to sense it should." Against such sound, sensible, 

 and conclusive reasoning it is I allow arrogant in me 

 to say a word : but as no man is asked, still less ex- 

 pected, to be influenced by what / may say I 

 consider the thing can do no harm if it sets a clever 

 man considering it may do good, even should he 

 reject my theory altogether; for in this particular 

 case I am writing theoretically I admit. 



In exercising or working race-horses, it is generally 

 the practice to put as light weights on them as the 

 temper and disposition of the horse will allow. 

 AVith two-year-olds this is of course quite judicious, 

 and with many, indeed the generality of, three-year- 

 olds equally so : first, because at that age when in 

 strong work, that work alone is quite as much as 

 their frames are equal to, so it is right to get the 

 lightest weight we can on them that will answer the 

 purpose ; and secondly, in their races it is only light 

 weights they will have to go under : but when a 

 horse becomes four, five, six, and aged, it is quite a 

 different affair. He will then at many places have 

 to run under light or moderate hunting weight, 

 namely, from 9st. up to 12st. ; and here he begins 

 to want to get into the secret of carrying weight. A 

 four-year-old, going the first half of the Ab. M. with 

 8st. lib., may go as he likes; but then let him go 

 over the Eglinton Course with list. 41b., he will 

 find a different style of going required : he must 

 leave his three-year-old style at home, or he will 

 never get home with this weight, or at all events he 

 will be very late there. Now therefore comes the 

 quaere how far, when a horse is at an age where he 

 must expect to go under high weights, would it be 



ii 4 



