INFLUENCE OF DEFECTS ON BREEDING. 205 



see the system it explains so highly advocated by an 

 authority like Mr. Fearnley. Why should societies 

 feel so inclined to revert to anything they can lay 

 hold of that carries them back to what we may call 

 the infancy of the art of shoeing? The reason 

 is that they are disgusted with the results of the 

 present system, and so they are always on the look- 

 out for * any port in a storm.' There is a haven 

 open for them at an easy distance, and with wind 

 and tide in their favour. Although they still prefer 

 beating to windward, they will tire out in time. 

 They are evidently in want of smooth water at the 

 present moment. Let them therefore put back. 

 There is no cowardice in so doing when they find 

 that they really cannot weather the storm. 



Before concluding, there is yet another question 

 which demands a high consideration in many points 

 of view. It has been long maintained that many 

 diseases are transmissible by sires and dams (either 

 or both) to their progeny. Not to go farther back 

 than the last month or two, the columns of con- 

 temporaries have teemed with opinions on this sub- 

 ject, many of them emanating from acknowledged 

 authorities, amongst whom are to be found managers 

 and secretaries of horse shows, in which progenitors 

 have their special classes. It has been urged that 

 if all those who were not free from those physical 

 defects which are considered as hereditary were 

 objected to, there would scarcely be a competition, 

 on account of the number of disqualifications. It 

 appears right, however, that only perfect animals 



