83 
CONFORMATION AND ACTION, &C. 
The breadth of the hind fetlock, from before to behind. 
The breadth of the knee , in front. 
The thickness of the gaskins. 
13. One quarter of this same third (of the entire length of the 
head) gives the thickness of the fore cannon. 
14. One-third of the same measurement gives 
The thickness (from side to side) of the hind pastern. 
The thickness of the arm, near the knee. 
15. The distance from the elbow to the bend of the knee, is 
the same as 
The distance from the same bend to the ground. 
The distance from the stifle to the bend of the hock. 
Also from the bend of the hock to the coronet. 
16. The sixth part of this last measure gives 
The lateral breadth of the fore cannon. 
The lateral breadth of the fore fetlock. 
IT. The third of this measure is about equal to 
The breadth of the hock , from its bend to its point. 
18. One quarter of the measure gives 
The lateral breadth of the knee . Also its length . 
19. The measure of the interval between the angles of the eyes, 
is equal to 
The lateral breadth of the thigh, taken opposite to the tu¬ 
berosity of the tibia. 
20. One half of the same interval gives 
I he lateral breadth of the hind cannon. 
The breadth of the fore fetlock , from its anterior summit 
through to the point in the heel. 
Lastly , The difference in the height of the croup , compared 
with the summit of the withers. 
Sainbel, who, in what relates to this subject,may be looked 
upon as the disciple or follower of Bourgelat, measured and 
proportioned after the same manner, and upon the same scale, 
the celebrated racer Eclipse; and it may be worth our while to 
inquire in what particulars these relative dimensions of real 
nature differ from those scientific deductions constituting the 
standard of perfection of Bourgelat. “ This difference,” to use 
the words of Sainbel himself, “ which proceeds from the pecu¬ 
liar conformation of each, contradicts, in some particulars, the 
table of geometrical proportions in the use of the veterinary 
schools of France. It proves, that no common measure can be 
made to apply equally to every species , since Nature has even 
diversified the forms which compose it” 
“ If each species” (continues Sainbel) “has its own style of 
beauty; if even each individual has its own peculiar beauty; 
