244 
ON THE EXPANSION OF HORSES’ FEET. 
ciently forward to admit of this,” he still denies that an atom of 
lateral motion takes place in consequence. Yet, though his argu¬ 
ments second mine, he follows the example of Nimrod,” in call¬ 
ing it stuff about the nails,” simply, it seems, because he can¬ 
not comprehend it; and speaks of the nails in the quarters con¬ 
fining the expansion shoe, not knowing that the point of action 
in the foot is at the toe, and that the sides move outwards, as it 
were, by halves. 
My third question, unpleasant as it is to Mr. Morgan, I must 
beg leave to repeat. “ Has he never applied his thumb and finger 
to the heels of a well-worn expansion shoe, and seen the shoe and 
foot collapsing and expanding together under the operation?” 
His angry answer is, “ No, nor did any other man !” “ Remem¬ 
ber, when the judgment’s weak, the prejudice is strong.” To 
have replied for himself would have been quite sufficient, since 
all may not be equally wilful, and this simple trial, so easy and 
conclusive, is within the reach of all. If Mr. Caleb Morgan will 
blindfold himself, and then declare there is no light, he may re¬ 
main perfectly self-satisfied in possession of his own opinion, but 
is exposed to the ridicule of all the world who use their eyes. 
However, after denying that he has ever made this trial, he gives 
us some ground to doubt it, by seriously attempting to dispute 
its value. For if, he states, the foot be forcibly compressed, and 
afterwards, on being released, resumes its natural width, it no 
more proves the expansive nature of this organ, than the same 
experiment, performed on the human knuckles, proves that they 
are constantly dilating and collapsing. And are they not doing 
so? This gentleman’s perceptions must be dull, if he cannot see 
his hand before him ! But, though this attempt to seek for ana¬ 
logy is unfortunate, I will challenge him to try again, and find, 
if he can, an instance, in the feet or extremities of any animal in 
nature, where a considerable and obvious share of expansive ac¬ 
tion does not exist. Yet this quality, so general and so indispen¬ 
sable, he would deny to the foot of the horse ! though it is not, he 
says, “ a block of granite,” but “ a horny box, or covering, to the 
sensible parts of which the foot is attached f a definition which to 
me is incomprehensible. 
What follows is a mutilated version of Mr. Coleman’s nonsense, 
with respect to the frog and its upward action, which he cannot 
demonstrate ; while to common sense it is plain, that an organ 
destined to receive the weight of the horse must be yielding and 
expansive, the proper qualities of the frog not resisting, by any 
upward movement, the downward pressure from above. But 
the grand object of this gentleman’s long letter, having but lit¬ 
tle to urge against my statements, is to depreciate the principle 
