92 
EXPANSIBILITY OF THE HORSE’S FOOT. 
Now, 1 would ask, What would be the consequence, if the con¬ 
tents of the horny case, consistino; of bones, ligaments, tendons, 
nerves, and bloodvessels were pent together by an unyielding 
material ? What would the superincumbent weight and con¬ 
cussion be guilty of then ? Complete destruction ! What can 
a Clark and a Turner say here ? I regret that my friend Mr. 
Turner did not take up the argument more zealously, and by 
sound reasoning prove the utility and practicability of the uni¬ 
lateral method. So far as the harmony and welfare of the foot of 
the horse are concerned, this system stands unrivalled. I wish, too, 
that Mr. Hallen, of’the Inniskillen Dragoons, had been present 
during the discussion, for I feel confident that some very valuable 
and practical observations would have been advanced. I have 
heard that gentleman defend the utility of the unilateral shoe in 
the presence of Professor Sewell in a very clear and scientific 
manner ; and Mr. Sewell’s reply was, that he approved of the 
system very much, and believed it to be a good one. 
Now, much has been said respecting the unilateral method, 
yet no one was bold enough to bring it on the carpet during the 
discussion. Has it fallen into disrepute, and the universal fetter, 
with the addition of a leather sole, become the order of the day? 
I hope not. For my part, I will oppose the system of driving 
four nails in each quarter of the shoe with all my might. 
As far as regards the leather sole, I must confess it indispensable 
at times : I have witnessed its good effects when actually neces¬ 
sary; but, as a general applicant, J regard it merely as an addi¬ 
tional expense, and productive of more evil than real benefit. 
It may do for the streets of London, but for the country, practice 
has taught me that it is a real failure. 
To the preparatory process of the foot, for the adaptation of a 
shoe, I agree with Mr. Charles in some points; but Mr. C. 
advances a little contradiction in another part of his theory, 
which I cannot consent to. Circumstances alter cases, and 
require variation. Does not the natural formation of the foot 
require our strictest attention ? Who has not observed the 
progeny of a certain horse predisposed to contraction of the feet ? 
Have we not seen the unshod colt with his contracted heels, his 
concave and unyielding sole, his diminished and unhealthy frogs, 
and badly developed cartilages ? And has not the offspring of 
some horses been subject to splints, spavin, ringbones, &c.; and 
another family susceptible of taking on diseases of the eye, such 
ns cataracts, ophthalmia, &c. ? Have we not observed and regret¬ 
ted that such a promising colt should be so afflicted ? 
Now, suppose that a colt is brought to a veterinarian to be 
shod, with his feet suffering from all the bad consequences of 
contraction, so far as structure is concerned; how would you 
