170 THE TRUNK, 



between the fore legs, might with propriety be considered in 

 conjunction with those of the shoulders (p. 182), to the bones 

 (shoulder blade and humerus) of which they are attached at 

 one end. The ''thickness of the shoulders" is directly 

 influenced by their development, which is naturally more or 

 less in agreement with that of the other muscles of the 

 shoulder. Thus we rarely see a horse wide in front which is 

 not at the same time thick just below the withers (p. 183). 

 As these facts are perhaps not known to the majority of 

 readers, I have thought it well, for simplicity' sake, to discuss 

 the respective subjects of width between the fore legs and 

 shoulders separately. For further remarks on '* thickness of 

 shoulders," see pp. 183 and 184. 



Mr. H. Wilton points out to me that horses vary very 

 little — comparatively to their depth of body, from top of 

 withers to brisket — in their respective '' width through the 

 heart, ' which is the term applied by saddlers to the 

 horizontal and transverse measurement through the chest at 

 the points touched by the ends of the points of the tree 

 (supposing that they are both of full length) of a properly- 

 made and well-fitting side saddle, when it is placed in correct 

 position on the animal's back. The point at which the 

 measurement is taken is indicated by the letter "^," Fig. 287. 

 I need hardly explain that the expression ''width through 

 the heart '' is not quite correct ; because the heart is situated 

 lower down, and more to the front, than the line in question. 

 The term is, however, well understood, and serves its 

 purpose. Mr. Wilton gives me the following average 

 measurements "through the heart," which he has obtained 

 during a long experience in the fitting of side saddles : — 



19I inches, foi a very heavy-weight hunter (maximum), 



18 „ „ 15 or i6-stone hunter. 



17 1 „ „ 13-stone huntei. 



i7i jj 3j hght-weight hunter, or thoroughbred. 



i6f „ „ Arab, say 14, 1 or 14.2 high. 



These figures certainly prove that comparative width of 

 breast, or width between the fore legs, is not dependent, or 



