610 
ON SHOEING HORSES. 
ing “ the sole could take bearing on the shoe at the toe, because it 
was not exposed to sensible parts.” The principle, then, existed 
in the deviation; namely, the horse’s foot has a 'primary and 
secondary bearing; the first is not opposite to sensible parts, the 
second is. It is no matter what variety the foot may be of, or the 
changes it has undergone, to make it “ a study of itself.” I do not 
dispute that, or the necessity of modifications in practice; but the 
principles founded on the physiology are not thereby invalidated. 
I merely followed the great Caliph’s deviation, because it was 
consonant to the physiology. I left others (though, perhaps, not 
undisturbedly,) to follow the so-called principles made out of prac¬ 
tices; and they have not advanced one step towards improvement 
in the practices of the art: and this is acknowledged by the writer 
in p. 500, line 18. 
How is it that intelligent farriers, with all their practical know¬ 
ledge, as stated, have not advanced on the practices of their ances¬ 
tors 1 And is this a good and sufficient reason for still going on 
teaching in the same way! I returned to “ old practices and opi¬ 
nions,” I believe, when the writer “ was yet a boy;” and if he had 
looked below the sign he would have found these words :—“ In 
England, in the metropolis and large towns, where higher prices 
are paid for shoeing, where the workmen are most skilful, where 
horses are what is called neater shod, where most substance of 
hoof is removed, agreeable to the supposed principles of shoeing, 
there are more lame horses than in the country, where the work¬ 
manship is rougher. I would rather have our horses shod in the 
ordinary way by the latter than the former, to go over the stones 
of the metropolis, where percussion is most likely to happen.” 
(Veterinarian, vol. x, No. 112, April 1837, N. S. No. 52.) 
Here “ this simple fact of daily occurrence” is sufficiently alluded 
to. I could go on in this controversial manner to very great 
length, but to what purpose ] The question was put to me, How 
is it that Mr. W. Percivall, who has written so well upon veteri¬ 
nary subjects, yet writes little about shoeing horses'? My answer 
was, because he is a wise man. How do you make out that 1 
In this way: no sooner does a person, like Mr. Gloag, for instance, 
)retendingly write a pamphlet, let the remarks be ever so prac- 
up starts some one and writes like Punch, 
For the object of all your attempts is to mend us, 
While such as we are we desire to remain. 
We spurn with contempt the instruction ye send us : 
Insidiously meant our own plans we retain. 
To the best plan } r ou give us we bear most aversion, 
Since preserving and springing heels it promotes. 
We abhore your conversion far more than concussion , 
As checking more strongly the cutting of throats.” 
