HISTORICAL. 355 



impossible to be determined if the relations of the parts have not been studied, 

 and if there be not for them certain mean terms of comparison. To say that a 

 region is too long, exactly normal, or too short, is to express that, relative to its 

 ordinary beautiful length, it i?, proportional or dkproportinnal ; it is therefore 

 tantamount to admitting good or bad ]>roportions. There exist, therefore, certain 

 standard dimensions which must be known in order to be able to base one's 

 judgment. 



Without any doubt, it would be contrary to reason to establish by arbitrary 

 measures the limits of development of any region. But the great error in our 

 esteemed colleague's argument lies in not jjroving what he asserts. The meas- 

 urements are arbitrary only when they proceed solely from the self-conceit of 

 him who invents them ; in all other cases they are as real as the things from 

 which they are taken. 



M. Richard has advanced exactly, with regard to Bourgelat, that of which he 

 has accused the latter : a pure theory. He has not taken the trouble to study 

 this author closely. If he had attempted this, would he ever have written the 

 following passage ? 



■' But we will go still further. We mean to prove in two words that a horse which would 

 display the most rigorous proportions advanced by this author might he very badly conformed and 

 in very bad condition as regards strength and speed. We wish to show still further that, in order 

 to remedy his vice of conformation, we are forced to do the contrary of what is prescribed by the 

 founder of veterinary medicine. 



" Suppose that a horse wliich is in conformity with the proportions of Bourgelat haswerj/ 

 long and corded flanks and a very short croup, which is often observed; this horse will have weak 

 loins, and his gait will be shortened for want of length in its croupal muscles. What shall we 

 do now, if we wish to give this horse the qualities of strength in which he is wanting and which 

 the acknowledged proportions would indicate as excellent? We will lengthen its iliac bones, 

 which Bourgelat condemns, so as to diminish a part of tlie surplus length of the loins; we will 

 also lengthen the ischiums to carry the point of tlie buttocks farther backward. We have no 

 other means of remedying the evil and making a good horse from a bad type of construction of 

 the loins and the croup. To arrive at this essential result, what shall we do? We will do the oppo- 

 site of what is prescribed by the proportions of Bourgelat : we will lengthen the body of the horse 

 by lengthening the croup in front and behind through a greater predominance of the buttocks. 

 The proportions of the whole, like those of the individual regions, are therefore contrary to 

 physiological and mechanical laws as well as to those of reason. Then, as we have said, written, 

 and taught for more than fifteen years, the proportions of Bourgelat, which have always been 

 considered as the key to the basis of all the principles established by this author, are falsely 

 founded ; we cannot repeat too often that they shoidd be condemned as a material error, fatal to the 

 progress of science, fatal to the perfecting of our races of hwses, especially cavalry horses." 



In the face of such assertions, without proof, we must acknowledge that 

 this verdict is very severe. M. Richard takes for granted precisely what he 

 should at first have commenced to demonstrate, — namely, that a croup such as 

 Bourgelat requires would be very short. But it would have been easy for him to 

 ascertain the contrary by measuring this region upon subjects selected by him- 

 self as well formed in that part of their body. Then he could have proved that 

 a croup whose length is equal to the distance comprised between the top of the 

 head and the commissure of the lips is not too short, that, consequently, this 

 proportion was not i)oorly founded, and should not be condemned as a material 

 error and one fatal to the progress of science. M. Richard's objections, very 

 judicious theoretically, we repeat, fail when practically applied, for the same 

 reason : want of deliberation. To what would they be reduced if it were settled 

 that Bourgelat had taken his measurements upon horses in which they showed 



