119 



etiology and pathology would seem to require very little com- 

 ment. There are some considerations, however, connected 

 with these morbid conditions, that render a proper appreciation 

 of these causes of much importance in the study of the various 

 physiological and pathological questions associated with the 

 foot of the horse. 



CONTRACTIONISTS AND NON-CONTRACTIONISTS. 



Simple as the causes of these lesions appears to be, the 

 whole veterinary profession is divided into two hostile parties, 

 contractionists and non-contractionists ; the latter adducing 

 the quarter-crack, and some of the facts associated with its 

 existence, as a positive and demonstrative proof of the truth 

 of their non-contraction views. The former for want of a missing 

 link in the construction of their argument, and unable to ignore 

 the teachings of the " early fathers K of veterinary science, be- 

 lieve in the contraction of the foot, functionally and otherwise, 

 without being able to explode the fallacy which gives coun- 

 tenance to the opposite view. 



The non-expansion seems to have been a necessary accom- 

 paniment of no-contraction doctrine, as the adoption of the latter 

 has led to the extravagance of the former notion. 



SOLID PROOFS WANTED; NOT FALLACIOUS ARGUMENTS. 



The no-contractionists declare contraction as a morbid con- 

 dition, and functional contraction and expansion an " ignis 

 fatuus;" "a myth;' " a coinage of the brain ; " "a chimera;" 

 " a phantom of the imagination ; " and so forth. 



And upon what ground do they thus dogmatize upon the 

 questions of functional and phenomenal conditions of the foot, 

 and stigmatize as visionaries the ablest writers, upon the foot 

 of the horse, for the last three quarters of a century ? What 

 reasons do they advance, when they ask us to reverse conclu- 

 sions that rest upon the basis of fact, of universal observation 

 and experience? Simply "this and nothing more" having 

 even the shadow of a reason, a false interpretation of the 

 rationale of a quarter-crack ! The no-contractionists draw 



