ON TURNER AND CLARk's SYSTEMS OF SHOEING. 361 
the anterior surface presented one mass of inflammation, and 
might be considered in a gangrenous state. It was so rotten that 
it came off in bits between the finger and thumb. The lungs were 
perfectly collapsed, but otherwise healthy. The waggoner in¬ 
formed me, after death, that when the animal came into the 
stable it had a very severe fit of coughing for five minutes : this 
may, probably, account for the rupture of the diaphragm, and 
its ultimate inflammation. The air passing into the abdominal 
cavity, through the aperture in the diaphragm, in the act of in¬ 
spiration, I presume caused the difficulty of respiration, which 
1 never witnessed in any animal to such an extent before. 
ON MR. JAMES TURNER’S AND MR. BRACY CLARK’S 
SYSTEMS OF SHOEING. 
By Air. Bazing, Reading . 
To the Editor of “ The Veterinarian .” 
Sir, 
I AM not u A Veterinary Surgeon,” or “ A Farrier;” and am 
ignorant whether the observations of persons not belonging to “ the 
profession,” or “ the craft,” are admissible into your publication. 
Supposing, however, that your work is intended to diffuse infor¬ 
mation, I consider it immaterial from whom it comes. 
I happened to see your Number 19, Vol. II, and was struck 
with the gross injustice done to the labours and discoveries of a 
friend of mine, Mr. Bracy Clark, in a paper headed “ Expose of 
the chief Error in the present System of Shoeing Horses, and an 
improved Method suggested, by Mr. James Turner, Veterinary 
Surgeon, Regent Street, London.” Mr. Clark, in his valuable 
work “ On the Foot of the Horse,” published twenty years ago 
(a second and improved edition of which is now in course of pub¬ 
lication, to which I beg Mr. Turner to refer) made what then 
was an original “ Expose of the chief Error in Shoeing,” by 
proving, in the most incontrovertible manner, that the natural 
foot of the horse is an elastic and beautifully organized machine; 
to which the continued application, by means of nails, of an in¬ 
flexible ring of iron, commonly called a horse-shoe, necessarily 
“ impedes or restrains the natural expansion of the hoof.” 
Judge of my surprize and indignation at seeing a man, who I 
believe is the same that Mr. Clark complimented in that very 
work, and called him “ his worthy friend, Mr. James Turner, of 
Croydon,” coming forward and claiming, in 18^9, the merit of 
