NAVICULAR DISEASE. 
23 
confined to the stable. This kind of contraction, he [Prof. Dick] 
maintained did not cause lameness, as all the parts became ad¬ 
apted to the alteration of the hoof. Now in my [Prof. Williams] 
opinion this kind of contraction would be the one most likely 
to cause lameness; indeed, it would be impossible for an ani¬ 
mal not to be so, if the pressure of the drying hoof were suf- 
ficent to cause atrophy and absorption of the sensitive tissues 
within.” Again, Prof. Williams asserts the following : “ That 
horses’ hoofs do become contracted, more especially at the 
heels, without lameness, I do not deny. I do not think, how¬ 
ever, it is due to any want of moisture, but to the removal of 
the horn from the heels, etc., etc.” 
With all due deference to this eminent author and teacher, 
permit me to submit that the contention that “ contraction of 
the hoof is not a cause but an effect of disease cannot be 
sustained, for it is quite possible of demonstration that it must 
be both. Atrophy of the frog, for example, when the result of 
mechanical pressure between the bars, is immediately arrest¬ 
ed and can be restored by paring out the bars and keeping 
them soft; in other cases the bars can be left strong, but the 
wall must be weakened so it will bend outward, with the same 
result. Sometimes it is an advantage to reduce the wall at 
the quarter, or quarters, and at the toe, from the coronet to 
the shoe. This prevents the hoof from collapsing, and when 
properly done it relieves the circulation at the coronet, the 
hoof grows more robustly, the foot is less confined, and re¬ 
pair within it goes on more rapidly. But it is a most impor¬ 
tant matter to know how to pare a hoof, as it can be done 
right or wrong, too much or too little, and it requires prac¬ 
tice. • 
Contraction from “ atrophy of the structures contained 
within the ‘ horny box ’ consequent upon diminished function¬ 
al activity and adaptibility ” [Prof. Williams], and Prof. Dick’s 
theory of natural tendency of the hoof to contract is rather a fine 
drawn distinction and quibbling likely to confuse many a 
student, for cases where both contentions are illustrated can 
easily be found every day. Then, why mix up the terms 
“contraction” and “navicular disease?” “Contraction is 
