'THE ETHICS OF HORSE MANAGEMENT. 359 
bis own saddle and bridle to be put on this horse, which at 
that time was thought to be ungovernable; and that no one 
might be witness to the contest, he led the horse till he was 
beyond the reach of observation. How far he walked, or in 
what manner this great business was accomplished, was never 
known; but when he returned from his journey, the horse 
was as gentle as a lamb, and would obey its master’s verbal 
orders on all occasions. When what are called irrational 
animals are taught such strict obedience to the command of 
a superior order, it is in general supposed to be the effect of 
fear; but Bakewell never made use of either whip or spur. 
When on horseback he had a strong walking-stick in his 
hand, which he made most use of when on foot, away from 
horses ; he always rode with a slack rein, which he frequently 
let lie upon the horse’s neck, and so great was his objection 
to spurs that he never wore them. It was his opinion that 
all such animals might be conquered by gentle means ; and 
such was his knowledge of animal nature that he seldom 
failed in his opinion, whether his attention had been directed 
to the body or the mind. 
Instances innumerable might be given, even from personal 
experience, in which kindness has conquered when cruelty 
only made obstinacy and viciousness more incredible; and so 
fully is this recognised now-a-days in training army horses, 
that it is indeed rare to see or hear of a vicious trooper ; 
while a soldier discovered beating or bullying his horse is 
severely punished. This more reasonable and humane man¬ 
agement is a positive saving to the country, as the horses last 
longer and there are much fewer accidents. So well is it 
understood that kindness will govern horses, and pain and 
bullying sour them, that as soon as an animal shows symp¬ 
toms of restiveness, inquiry is immediately made into the 
character of its rider; as if the old maxim might be trans¬ 
lated into “ Tell - me the temper of a trooper’s horse and I 
will tell yon the character of the soldier.” 
No men deserve the title of “ horsemen” who beat horses; 
it is not the way to manage them, and it will always be found 
that those who do so are either ignorant, stupid men, or 
possessed of a cruel disposition. Such individuals should 
have nothing to do with horses. 
In concluding my remarks on this important subject, I am 
reminded of the eloquent and noble words of Lord Erskine 
in his speech on the second reading of the bill for preventing 
malicious and wanton cruelty to animals:—“We are,” he 
said, “ too apt to consider animals under the dominion of 
man in no view but that of property, whereas the dominion 
