310 
THE AGE OF THE HOUSE, 
get on with the other; he looks bad in his coat, with lice in it; 
his belly is large, with worms in his bowels : as the groom says, 
“ he is a bit set,” and, in fact, the animal is in a manner fixed for a 
while and grows but little, so that, on comparing the mouths of two 
colts thus situated, there would be nothing very surprising should 
the teeth of the one be much more forward than those of the other. 
I must be here understood as speaking of thorough-bred stock. 
The better all foals and yearlings are done, of course the more for- 
ward they are in formation of all structures. Hence I see one 
man’s yearling almost as big and as good as another’s two-year-old; 
but this forward development as a general rule is less remarkable 
in the teeth than most other parts. Starve young animals, and their 
bones outgrow every other part, and the head grows large, and the 
general skeleton rude and coarse. 
I have heard some observe that racing stock have their teeth very 
forward, on account of eating hard food; but what has this to do 
with the incisor teeth 1 It is not with these that they grind their hard 
meat. If Nature, in supplying her necessities, should in this instance 
prefigure, it would be in the colt’s grinders — the fifth and sixth 
grinders. In stating the difference in the appearance of colts of the 
same age, I consider that it arises as much from the slow progress 
the one makes as from the advance of the other, so that, dividing 
the time between them, the difference is no great deal. 
I never before heard of such a case as that related by Mr. Good- 
win. I do not question such authority for a moment. Unlike the 
cases of Running-rein and Bloodstone, we have here Mr. Goodwin’s 
statement that they were weaned together, taken up together, and 
in every way treated alike, and the younger of the two with the 
oldest mouth a positive twelve months’ older mouth. This will 
lead some parties in the profession to exclaim, “ Is not this perfectly 
satisfactory, and that the test of the horse’s age by his teeth is 
fallacious 1” It certainly goes to prove that it is possible for a colt 
to exhibit a mouth twelve months older than he really is ; but I 
absolutely believe it to be so rare an instance of precocity as not 
to occur in the breeding of some thousands of horses ; consequently 
it should not in the least operate upon us in preventing our con- 
cluding on the age by the appearances of the teeth. 
If the breeder of racing stock should be unfortunate enough to 
rear a colt with such an extraordinary and unfrequent development 
of the teeth, the only alternative is that the animal must give a 
year away. This is a disadvantage to the owner, it is true, but its 
rarity will render it of no consequence to the turf. From my own 
personal knowledge of the progress of dentition in the horse, I feel 
assured that judging of the age by the teeth is by far the least 
dubitable of any other method that art or device can adopt. 
