EVIL OF TIGHT GIRTHING. 5ol 
the comparative lengthening of the sternum is in all of them 
remarkable. 
Evil of tight Girthing .—If a chest that cannot expand with the 
increasing expansion and labour of the lungs is so serious a 
detriment to the horse, every thing that, more than is absolutely 
necessary, interferes with the action of the intercostal muscles, 
is carefully to be avoided. Tight girthing ranks among these, 
and foremost among them. The tightness with which the 
roller is buckled on in the stable must be a serious inconve¬ 
nience to the horse; and the partially depriving those muscles 
of their power of action for so many hours in every day, must 
indispose them for labour when quicker and fuller respiration is 
required. At all events, a tight girth, although an almost ne¬ 
cessary nuisance, is a very considerable one, when we require 
from the horse all the exertion of which he is capable. You have 
perceived the address with which, by bellying out the chest, the 
old horse renders every attempt to girth him tight comparatively 
useless ; and you have observed, when a horse is blown, what 
immediate and great relief ungirthing him has afforded, by per¬ 
mitting the intercostals to act with greater power. So easy and 
effectual a method of relief will not be neglected by him who 
values the services of his quadruped dependant. If half what is 
now affirmed of the self-adjusting elastic rollers be true,—if they 
will retain the saddle secure, yet not interfere with the action of 
the intercostal muscles,—they will constitute a valuable addition 
to our horse furniture, and no person of humanity will be with¬ 
out them. 
A SERIES OF ESSAYS ON THE BLOOD, BLOOD¬ 
VESSELS, AND ABSORBENTS. 
By Mr. R. Vines, V.S., Royal Veterinary College. 
No. III. 
At the conclusion of my last communication, I stated that 
some authors contend for Claus Iludbeche, a Swedish anatomist, 
as being the first discoverer of the lymphatic vessels; while there 
are others who maintain that it was Thomas Bartholine, a Dane. 
The former, it appears, considered the lymphatics as a fifth set 
of vessels, and denominated them vasa serosa; while the latter, in 
place thereof, termed them vasa lyniphatica, and which is in ac¬ 
cordance with the name they still bear. 
We are told that Rudbeche appealed to his scholars and 
friends for his having a knowledge of the lymphatic vessels before 
Thomas Bartholine published his description of them; but that 
