353 



If, with these proportions, the head is square and light, the forehead wide and 

 long, the eye large, placed far from the ears, the withers elevated and extending 

 backward, the loins short and straight, the croup, the shoulder, the leg, and the 

 forearm long and well muscled, the canon short, the pastern of medium length 

 and properly inclined, the articulations wide, the articular angles well oriented, 

 the muscular system dominant and firm, the foot irreproachable, the horse has, as 

 a whole, good proportions. 



"As to the work-horse," he adds, 1 "he should not be in all respects similar 

 to the cavalry horse. The fore-quarters need not be as light nor the shoulder as 

 long and oblique, the withers as elevated ; the chest should be spacious, the 

 members shorter, the muscular system more strongly developed, the degree of the 

 temperament (blood) less sanguinary. 



" The proportions which suit the horse of 1.50 m. the best are the following : 



Head 0.60m. 



Neck (a head and about a fifth) 0.70 m. 



Height of the body (two heads and a half) 1.50 m. 



Length of the chest (a little more than a head and about a fifth) 0.70 m. 



Length of the members (a head and a third) 0.80 m. 



Length of the body (two and two-thirds heads) 1.60 m. 



Height of the hind-quarters (a little less than two heads and a half) 1.45 m." 



The preceding measures do not differ much in principle from those of Bour- 

 gelat, which they reproduce, as a whole, under another form. Their points of 

 difference consist, in our opinion, in errors or at least exaggerations, the evidence 

 of which will be seen when we present our own ideas concerning this. 



M. Richard. To our regret, and contrary to our custom, we are here forced 

 to oppose one of the most distinguished horsemen, who, in France, contributed 

 much to bring discredit upon Bourgelat's system. We mean M. Richard, whose 

 opinions on other questions are in most instances in conformity with ours. 



The principal objection to this recommendable writer proceeds from the 

 point of view in which he regards the horse. Starting out with the idea that 

 this animal has become for man a generator of force and speed, he cannot con- 

 ceive that an attempt could be made to impose limits to the mechanical beauties 

 of the horse-machine, which he would wish to realize. This manner of reason- 

 ing, although very just in principle, has led M. Richard into numerous exagger- 

 ations ; because beauty resides principally in the harmony of the parts, and not 

 in the extreme development of some of them, considered as more particularly 

 advantageous for the proper action of the whole. If the disproportion results 

 from the number of the defects, it may also become the consequence of a func- 

 tional discord of the relations. 



Now, it is with the beauties of the horse as with all other things analogous 

 to them through utilization; the motor in question must be benefited by them, 

 for otherwise they become useless or detrimental. It being granted that large 

 wheels are for a vehicle one of the first conditions of speed, of what use would 

 they be if their elevation gave it such an instability that it could be used only 

 upon special roads, or turn only in certain curves ? In the same way, it is 

 acknowledged, in an absolute manner, that a long forearm, long legs, a long 



1 Vallon, Cours d'hippologie, t. i. p. 457. 

 23 



