RIDING REFUSERS. 293 



made up his mind to refuse. Many men have the wrong 

 idea that if a horse baulks with them, they are bound to 

 " have it out " with him ; as if the refusal were a personal 

 challenge on the part of the horse, and that if they did not 

 punish him severely for the supposed insult, their reputation 

 for bravery would suffer. The contest is such a one-sided 

 affair that no one but a cowardly bully or ignorant fool 

 would engage in it. Were the horse free to kick and 

 bite the man, who is at liberty to flog and spur the animal, 

 there might be some merit in the : rider's exhibition of 

 cruelty. The moment we find that punishment does not 

 succeed, we should resort to some other means (see Illus- 

 trated Horse-Breaking) to accomplish our object ; for the 

 more we punish, the worse will the effect of the horse's 

 victory be on him. 



However senseless it may be for a man to fight his own 

 horse for the unworthy object of gratifying resentment and 

 "showing off," the action is trebly unjustifiable when the 

 horse belongs to someone else, especially when the culprit is a 

 hired servant. We pay our jockeys to ride races, and our 

 grooms to look after and exercise our hunters in the best 

 possible manner, but not to afford them an opportunity of 

 displaying their bravery at the expense of our four-legged 

 property. 



Few things are more apt to disgust a horse with jumping 

 than the practice of " larking " him several times in succession 

 over the same obstacle. Instead of using whip and spurs on a 

 horse that determinedly refuses a fairly easy fence, it is much 

 better to keep him at the obstacle, work his mouth about, 

 back him and weary him, so that at last he will be glad to 

 take the fence, and thus escape the pulling-about he is 

 receiving. The moment he has cleared the jump we should 

 " make much '' of him, and, if practicable, take him straight 

 back to his stable, in order to show him that although he 



