40 OF SHOEING. 



Objections 43^ Many objections have been raised to the 



to turned- •' '' 



up shoes, tiimed-up shoes now recommended. Among the 

 more prominent are : — 1st. That a horse, when so 

 shod, cannot get a fair, level, and natural bearing 

 on the ground with his foot. This objection, if 

 well founded, would at once be fatal to the pro- 

 posed plan, but the level wear of the shoes dis- 

 proves it. 



2ndly. That horses will be liable to fall and come 

 on their heads, when deprived of the fulcrum of 

 the toe against the ground. This objection will 

 not stand inquiry. Horses very generally stumble 

 from striking their toes against the ground. They 

 are certainly not saved from falling by length of 

 toe. On the contrary, it is usually the length 

 of the toe, which first causes the horse to stumble, 

 and afterwards prevents him from recovering himself, 

 the toe forming the lever which overbalances him. 



3rdly. It is urged that a horse must be more 

 liable to slip in turned-up than in ordinary shoes. 

 This objection, although at first sight it may appear 

 forcible, arises entirely from misconception of the 

 functions of difierent parts of the frame. The hind 

 legs and feet are the agents by which the horse 

 stops himself, and prevents himself from shpping. 

 The fore feet are very little concerned in the 

 matter. 



But even as regards the fore feet, a straight 



