MAXWELL V. MORRIS. 
329 
horse has this contraction, he is very likely to become lame. When the con- 
traction has taken place, and there is an alteration in the structure of the 
foot, it cannot be restored. 
On the 18th December, I examined the horse. I had not his shoes taken 
off. The off fore foot was very much contracted near the outside heel. I 
have no doubt, from the appearance of the heel, that there was an alteration 
in the structure of the foot. If a horse has a contracted foot, it induces him 
to go stilty, fumbling, or groggy. I saw him trotted out — he was lame on 
both fore feet, but especially on the off foot. He was an unsound horse 
when I saw him. I should say the contraction had existed for more than 
three months. Contractions cannot take place to any considerable degree in 
the course of three weeks. If the disease comes on rapidly, there will be 
active inflammation. 
Cross-examined . — If a horse were ill shod, he might suffer from inflamma- 
tion, which would cause contraction. A narrow foot and a contracted foot 
are not the same thing. Every horse whose foot is contracted is diseased, 
and is unsound. I do not mean that every horse that has a contracted foot 
is lame ; although I say that a contracted foot is unsoundness, because there 
is a change in the structure. I know what a muley-footed horse is. I do not 
call that unsoundness, for it is the natural form. I have known some horses 
do their work as well as others with contracted feet but, nevertheless, if 
there is a deviation from the natural make of the horse, it is unsound- 
ness. There appeared in this horse’s foot considerable contraction. I was 
satisfied without taking the shoes off, and I do not believe I should have 
been better able to judge had I taken the shoes off. When I was sent 
to examine the horse, I was not told where it was lame. The horse was 
trotted out, and appeared lame in both feet. In my certificate I only certify 
to one foot. The lameness in one foot was more palpable than in the other. 
He went lame of both feet, but most so of the off foot. Supposing a shoe 
was not properly put on, if it bound the horse too tight, it would cause 
inflammation, and the cause being continued would produce lameness. 
This would be produced in a month or somewhat more. 
Re-examined by Mr. Wortley . — If a horse has a contraction from disease, 
I consider him an unsound horse. There are the seeds of lameness, and they 
would most likely turn to lameness If contraction were produced by a 
tight shoe, in a short space of time there would be active inflammation ; but 
on the 18th December there was no active inflammation, and, in fact, nothing 
to lead me to suppose he was tightly shod. 
Mr. John Bowman . — I am a veterinary surgeon at Howden. I am in the 
habit of examining horses at Howden Fair, which is one of the largest horse 
fairs in the kingdom. I have had considerable experience in examining con- 
tracted feet. I heard the statement of Mr. Hargreaves, and I concur in 
his description of the anatomy of the foot. When the contraction of the 
hoof presses on the sensitive portion of the foot, it causes lameness. I ex- 
amined the horse. There was a visible contraction on the outside of the 
foot, but not much in the inside. I should say the contraction had existed 
from four to six months. The cause of contraction is sometimes from the 
nails being placed too near the heel, which prevents the proper expansion 
of the foot when it comes to the ground. The foot was hot, but not very 
much so. A horse may have a contracted foot and still go sound, but he 
will generally go lame. The horse in question was visibly lame when I saw 
him, and in my judgment the lameness arose from the contraction of the 
foot. In this case the elasticity of the foot had evidently been affected, and 
in my opinion thg horse must have been an unsound horse for months before. 
I shoe many horses at my forge. In the shoes produced, the nails are placed 
