388 
LAMINITIS AND ITS TREATMENT. 
warding off concussion. Upon this same principle I may 
remind you^ if an anvil be placed upon your chest, men may 
strike with sledge hammers with all their might upon the 
anvil, without hurting you in the least, the thickness and 
weight of the anvil breaking the concussion.^^ 
I must confess that I cannot find anything in this to 
account for the necessity for applying heavy shoes in lami- 
nitis; and as an apology for attaching lumbering masses of 
iron on either weak or strong feet, it is, in my opinion, 
unacceptable ; for the simple reason, that iron attached to 
horn, and brought into violent contact with the ground, 
increases concussion, and this increase takes place in pro¬ 
portion to the amount of that metal. This must be a fact 
patent to all who have studied mechanieal philosophy, and it 
is exemplified in many ways in objects connected with our 
everyday requirements. The force of impact, or the impinging 
of a heavy iron shoe on a stone pavement or hard road, must 
give far more jar to the limb than would occur if the hoof was 
unarmed, or proteeted by a much lighter iron plate. The 
illustration Mr. Greaves gives has no reference to the subject, 
unless we admit that the horse’s feet garnished with iron clogs 
*are the sledge hammers. They certainly cannot be compared 
to the anvil, nor yet to the human chest beneath it. If we 
are desirous of lessening concussion, we must diminish 
the large amount of hard material usually attached to the 
hoofs, and allow as much of the horn to meet the ground 
as we possibly can, or substitute for it something even more 
elastic. 
I could never understand why heavy iron shoes should be 
recommended as preventives of concussion, seeing that the 
plea for them is founded on a complete fallacy, theoretically 
and practically. This fallacy has dominated farriery for 
several centuries, and has proved a fruitful source of mischief. 
It should find no apologists among scientific men, as it is 
diametrically opposed to the teachings of science. 
Mr. Broad recommends heavy shoes for weak feet, and 
after cutting their soles and frogs I do not suppose the unfor¬ 
tunate horses would travel so well in what are called light 
shoes. It would be contrary to all theory, as well as practice. 
If there is any description of hoof that demands merciful 
treatment, it is a weak flat one with a very large frog. M hy 
should it, already weak, be deprived of the horn that is to 
make it strong ? This is as inexplicable to me as the recom¬ 
mendation to attach a heavy shoe to it. If the foot were 
allowed to remain uncut in sole and frog, it would soon be 
anything but a weak flat foot; but to mutilate it because it 
