42 
singular, in view of the fact that it is quite common and particularly because the parts 
affected, are so important in the construction of the foot, that the disease of which I 
shall speak, has never been referred to, at length, in any veterinary work, at least so far 
as my knowledge extends. 
The nearest approach to any mention I find made of it, is in Gamgee’s work on 
“ Horse Shoeing and Lameness” in which he gives an account of some peculiarly 
diseased and deformed coffin bones, illustrated by wood-cuts of unusual and interesting 
specimens. 
It was not until after I had arrived at some of the conclusions, which I shall attempt 
to explain, that I happened to find in Gamgee’s work the account of which I speak, and 
although written prior to my conception of such knowledge, I have read it with a good 
deal of pleasure, for it confirms much that I had thought out somewhat crudely and 
disconnectedly myself. 
In order to be definitely understood I shall now state that in a large majority 
of cases of chronic lameness, I believe the cause to be inflammation of the periosteum 
of the coffin bone and of that bone itself; that I have reasons for believing this inflam¬ 
mation in many instances, to be of a rheumatic nature, and that in most all cases of 
chronic lameness, even where navicular disease is found it is the part primarily diseased. 
I shall argue these propositions briefly for your consideration as follows : 
The variety in size and shape'of the hoofs of horses, is as great, perhaps greater 
than in the feet of man, so we should not expect to find the coffin bones alike, either in 
bulk or form in the feet of different horses, but for any one who possesses the ability to 
carefully and discriminately examine a number of these bones, and who has never done 
so—there remains a fine opportunity for observation and study. 
I do not hesitate to express an opinion that more than one half of the number 
examined, be it large or small, will be found diseased, and have never yet seen what I 
considered a perfect one myself. Furthermore I have never read a correct description 
of a healthy coffin-bone, nor yet have I seen a drawing of one ; but I have seen a few 
so nearly perfect, that I can imagine about what figure and external appearances the 
normal bone should present and know that the descriptions given by some anatomists 
convey wrong ideas of the appearances it should present. 
A description of the coffin-bone by Percival in his anatomy is interesting in this 
connection, as showing that its author failed to distinguish the difference between a 
sound bone and one showing all the evidences of disease during life. 
“ The coffin-bone ” he says “ has everywhere a furrowed and porous surface, the 
furrows which run from above downwards and forwards, being most distinct inferiorly 
and latterly, and the holes or pores consisting of a large and a small set, of which the 
large set only are numerable or worthy of particular mention, the small ones being in¬ 
finite and numbers of them even imperceptible.” 
“ The inferior edge is notched or serrated particularly towards the sides where in 
places the notches widen into gaps in order to give passage to the bloodvessels to the 
sole.” Finally he speaks of the bone as being “ of a soft, spongy, fragile texture, its 
intrinsic stability being still further reduced by the canals pervading its interior for the 
transmission of blood-vessels and nerves.” 
Now to my mind this description is as faulty as it can be and unworthy a place in 
a book containing so much other useful and valuable information. 
I should find it very difficult to write a true description of the coffin-bone, but I 
fancy I can give a few ideas concerning it, which will convey a better idea of it than 
