648 Report on the Horseshoeing Competition at Nottingham. 
The prizes offered by the Society were the same as last year, 
viz. 61., 41., 31., 21., and 1/. ; but there were only two classes of 
competitors in place of four, Class 1 being for hunters, and 
Class 2 for agricultural horses. In addition to these prizes tlie 
Lincolnshire Agricultural Society very generously added half 
those amounts in cases where the winners came from that 
county. Moreover, the Worshipful Company of Farriers most 
handsomely offered to elect the first-prize men in each class 
members of their guild free of cost, an honour which in itself 
should stimulate our shoeing smiths to advance in their pro- 
fession, and I am sure will be highly appreciated both by the 
present and future prize takers. 
The Competition was confined to Shoeing Smiths residing 
in the district for which the Nottingham Show was intended to 
serve, viz. the counties of Derby, Leicester, Lincoln, North- 
ampton, Nottingham, and Rutland. Each competitor was re- 
quired to forge and fit a hind and fore shoe and to put the fore 
shoe on. The hind shoes were retained by the Steward, and 
those made by the five prizemen were subsequently deposited 
at the Society's house in Hanover Square as samples for future 
reference. 
The number of entries was 48 in Class 1, and 45 in Class 2. 
Competitors were allowed to enter in both, and 34 men in 
Class 1 consequently appeared again in Class 2. I am not quite 
sure that this is a desirable arrangement, and it may require 
revision hereafter. 
The time test was omitted this year as an experiment. This 
was certainly a mistake, and resulted in such very dilatory pro- 
ceedings that I was requested to warn the men when Class 2 
came on that the Judges would take note of any evident waste 
of time. This had the effect of improving the speed of the work 
considerably, and, strange to say (as appears also in the Judges' 
I'emarks), the average quality of the work was much better. 
In my last year s report I ventured to state my opinion that 
" most of our best shoeing smiths are very deficient in knowledge 
respecting the anatomy of the horse s foot." It was one of the 
objects of the present competition to ascertain definitely Avhether 
there was suflacient ground for such a serious statement. For 
this purpose the Judges, at my request, drew up the . following 
half-dozen simple questions, and put them to twenty-five of the 
best selected workmen separately — 
1 . How many bones are there in a horse's foot ? 
2. Name them. 
.■>. Where is the hoof of the fore foot the strongest for holding the nails? 
4. "Where is the hoof of the hind foot the strongest ? 
C. What is the use of the frog? 
C. IIow is the hoof attached to the sensitive part of the foot ? 
