530 HORSE-SHOES AND HORSE-SHOEING. 



The best work produced at this period was un- 

 doubtedly that of Mr Goodwin, veterinary surgeon to 

 King Georee IV/ It is Vx^ritten in a fair and scientific 



CD O 



spirit, and gives an excellent resume of the merits and 

 demerits of the various systems of shoeing then in vogue. 

 With regard to the different kinds of shoes in use, he dis- 

 covers faults in the seated, jointed, thin-heeled, and com- 

 mon shoe, which forbade his recommending them for 

 general purposes. The French mode of shoeing, which 

 was Bourgelat's, came nearest to his standard of supe- 

 riority, yet he had two objections to this system m 

 general: 'the convex form of the shoe on the ground 

 side, and the concave form on the foot side. I object to 

 the first, because the horse is by no means so safe or 

 secure on his feet, more particularly when going over 

 stones.' The second objection was that offered by the 

 older writers to the common English bowl, or quoit-shaped, 

 shoe. His new system appears to have been similar to 

 that recommended by Professor St Bel, so far as the 

 ground surface of the shoe was concerned. ' In the shoe 

 I have adopted, I have reversed the form on each side 

 (speaking of the French pattern), making it concave on 

 the ground surface, and convex on the foot .s?<r/r/ce, with an 

 inclination from the inner to the outer rim (figs. 194, 

 195). To effect this form on each side, it is necessary 

 that the shoe should be sloped or bevelled on the ground 

 side, from the outward to the inward part all round the 

 shoe, except about an inch and a half at the heels. To 

 accomplish this inclination on the foot side, it is necessary 

 to thicken the inner part at the heels, as far as the flat sur- 



' A New System of Shoeing Horses. London, 1820. 



