654 
CASTRATION OF CAVALRY HORSES. 
employed in any undertaking is an essential element of suc- 
cess. At the time, I gave Lieut, (alias Major ) W. Dickson 
full credit for the proposition “ that geldings were less expen- 
sive to rear than entire colts. 5 ’ Who did not know this ? 
But the opposition of his brother-officers was decisive against 
the measure, and stud-colts remained entire. Wherever 1 
travelled I was asked my opinion of Billy Dickson’s or 
Italian’s. I replied, allow me a little experience in the 
country ; at present I can only state it is of utility in Europe, 
a civilised country, and the supposed difference— geldings 
being allowed 3 lb. avoirdupois in a race. 
The circumstances under which geldings must be used in 
the East during war are widely different, being more or less 
exposed to the climate, heat, cold, and rain, privation of food, 
and unavoidable neglect of grooming. 
The use of entire horses is, besides, expensive, as precluding 
the use of mares in regular cavalry corps. Mares were tried 
in the 6th N. C., and rendered the horses unsteady in the 
ranks ; yet mares are used in irregular cavalry corps. But 
there is a great difference between regular cavalry horses, 
fully fed and doing little work, and irregular cavalry horses, 
less fed and doing all the fatigue duties. The temperament 
of the former is pampered, the latter is kept down. The 
former, if he breaks loose, is more difficult to catch than the 
latter, and is obliged to be surrounded by men with long 
ropes. The Cossacks’ horses, like grasscutters’ ponies, are 
turned loose, though entire, and will come to their owner’s 
whistle. The Indian cavalry horse not unfrequently becomes 
so vicious as to render castration necessary, for the safety of 
riders and others’ horses — these are rather exceptions. Entire 
horses for war have always been preferred by Asiatics, the 
use of mares being by them a politico-economic measure, as 
breeders of horses to mount themselves and sons as soldiers, 
other use not being there made of horses. The late Marquis 
of Hastings, when Govern or- General, said, “our Empire in 
veterinary knowledge, to which all the practical acquirements of breeder, 
trainer, jockey, stud-groom, farrier, are subordinates, when from necessity 
they are brought into (as Capt. Apperley termed it) “ antagonism,” which 
should never exist. Mr. H. Wood, civil auditor, member of the Stud 
Board, on deputation in 1818, inspecting the stud at Hissar, wrote to the 
board, “ I intimated to Mr. Hodgson, that his duties were to assist the 
superintendent in any manner he might deem his professional knowledge of 
advantage to the Government.” The stud officer could not then ignore the 
duties of veterinary surgeons, either by “antagonism” or by supereession. 
The freedom of thought and tender of professional advice is immediately 
checked by either, to the detriment of the stud; and the result is shown in 
the reports by cavalry officers and veterinary surgeons, of deteriorated 
horses. 
