THE ETHICS OF HORSE-KEEPING. 5) 
somest, or the gentlest, or the most intelligent, or the 
toughest, of animals. If these qualities fail, we come 
down to minor excellences, such as the fineness of 
his coat, the beauty of its color, the silkiness of his 
mane, the length of his tail, or the nobility of his 
descent. It is quite possible to buy for a small sum 
horses of unexceptionable pedigree; and though a 
well-bred weed or screw really travels no better than 
a “dunghill,” yet his breeding will always command 
admiration, and cast a reflected glory upon his owner. 
The point of superiority may be this or that; enough 
that it distinguishes your horse from the ruck of 
horses, and justifies in some measure, at least to the 
world at large, the pride and pleasure that you take 
in him. This reference to the opinion of others as a 
guide for our affections, even when a human being 
constitutes the object, is one of those vile traits that 
lie hid in the murky depths of our nature. Was it 
not remarked by George Sand, who knew the human 
heart, and certainly took no pessimistic view of it, 
that men love women not for what they think of 
them, but for what they suppose other people to 
think of them ? 
And yet there is another aspect of the matter. 
Just as disinterested affection, or something approach- 
ing it, may exist between man and woman, so it is 
possible to be fond of a horse, and to be happy in his 
well-being, with no admixture of those baser feelings 
to which I have alluded. I wish that you, gentle 
reader of this book, might be induced to try the fol- 
lowing experiment. We will suppose that you have 
a stable with an unoccupied stall in it, and by prefer- 
ence, though it is not essential, that a paddock is 
