Horse shoes and horse shoeing: their origin, history, uses, and abuses/Chapter XIII

by George Fleming

CHAPTER XIII.

modern farriery in france. podometric shoeing. the ‘ferrure a froid’ and ‘ferrure a chaud.’ conflicting evidence. evils of cold-fitting. interesting experiments. conclusions. new inventions. sanfarouche. anti-slipping shoes. the ‘ferrure watrin.’ naudin and benjamin's methods. machine-made shoes in france. the ‘periplantaire’ or ‘charlier’ method of shoeing. its description. m. charlier's account. practice of shoeing. tools, and fabrication of the shoe. its application. discussions. modifications and results. shoeing in england. the latest novelty. the transatlantic ‘invention.’ its admirers and success. steel-faced shoes.

In France, where veterinary science has flourished, and has been productive of most beneficial results, many excellent works on farriery have appeared during the century. Chief among them may be mentioned those of Girard,^[1] Gohier,^[2] Jauze,^[3] Bouley,^[4] Rey,^[5] Merche,^[6] nin,^[7] and Goyau;^[8] and for Belgium those of Defays.^[9] With an intimate knowledge of the structure and organization of the horse's foot, the majority of these writers attempt to establish the practice of shoeing on a really scientific basis; and to make it not only subservient to the defence of healthy organs, but also to remedy their diseases and defects. In all these works we can trace a gradual admission of, or approach to, the opinions held by Lafosse with respect to the preservation of the horse's hoof, by abstaining from mutilating it.

I regret I cannot give anything like a just idea of these writings in the limits I have allowed myself; but as they are comparatively recent, they are easily accessible to the inquirer who is anxious to learn more of the subject than I have attempted to sketch.

The curved or 'rocking' shoe of Bourgelat, so objectionable because the horse's foot shod with it had no level or firm base to support the weight of the limb and body, was in general use in France up to a late period; and though Gohier had diminished the excessive toe and heel curvature, we find Jauze still recommending it, and, more or less modified, it has continued in use to the present day.

In M. Bouley's writings we find excellent principles laid down with regard to shoeing, though he recommends a certain amount of paring of the sole. M. Goyau's little treatise is, perhaps, the best practical work on shoeing that has appeared in France; while M. Megnin's is remarkable for the great research and ability displayed in investigating the history of French farriery.

In 1840, M. Riquet, a veterinary surgeon of some repute, introduced what he termed a 'podometrical' method of shoeing.^[10] We have already casually intimated that, from the time when the improvement of fitting shoes hot to the hoofs was introduced, a few amateurs and professional men fancied that injury was done to the horse's foot. In rare cases this was the case, no doubt; for the custom of paring the sole almost to the quick was so prevalent, that we cannot wonder if a careless workman did now and again retain the hot shoe long enough against the lower margin of the crust, to permit the border of the sensitive sole to suffer from the high temperature in its vicinity. These accidents, however, appear to have been remarkably unfrequent, if we may judge from their being so seldom alluded to.

The idea prevailed to some extent, nevertheless, that hot fitting was hurtful, and it was to guard against its effects that the foot-measure shoeing was introduced. The instrument contrived to note the dimensions of the foot was ingenious, though defective, and the system altogether was so well conceived that it attained a large amount of popularity in a short time. The size, though not the shape, of the horse's feet being accurately ascertained by means of the podometer, this was entered in a register, so that the shoes could be made in the forge, and the animal shod with them without being required to leave his stable.

The idea appeared to be excellent, and was at first willingly, if not gladly, received by the veterinary profession in France, where it was extensively tested. M. Riquet had so highly exaggerated the risks and injurious effects of applying the hot shoe to the hoof, and so vaunted the advantages to be derived from his podometric ferrure à froid, that a large number of cavalry officers became temporary converts, and indeed unreasonable enthusiasts. Even the French Minister of War did not escape the contagion, and on the 30th August, 1845, issued an order that ' in all mounted corps the cold method of fitting was to be immediately substituted for the hot.' This was no proof in favour of the invention, but rather a testimony to the plausible statements and peculiar tact of M. Riquet.

Of course the matter was soon tested; though it was some time before it was finally decided. 'At the Cavalry School of Saumour,' writes M. Barthélemy,^[11] 'experiments have been made from the 22nd September, 1841, to the 5th October, 1844. During these three years all the near-side horses of the school have been shod by the cold, and the off-side ones by the hot method. In that space of time, out of 22,579 shoes which had been fitted in a cold state, 386 were lost, detached, or broken, and only 123 out of the same number fitted while hot; that is, in the first case, 1 shoe in 58 was detached, while in the second there was only 1 in 183. This enormous difference would have been still greater, if the hot fitting had been practised in the ordinary manner. But the School was then labouring under an impression of dangers which I might almost term chimerical, from burning the sole, and which the theory of podometric shoeing had developed. So that an order was given to the farriers to apply the hot shoe lightly, and immediately remove all that portion of the horn which had been in contact with it; this was almost a return to cold fitting. The order was punctually executed, under the uninterrupted superintendence of the acting brigadier.'

This evidence is in perfect harmony with that furnished at a later period by Colonel Ambert^[12] of the Saumur School, who was at first a zealous partisan of Riquet's system. 'Out of 650 horses, the effective strength of a regiment, during every month from 55 to 60 lost their shoes in marching or manœuvering, since the employment of cold fitting; or, in other terms, the regiment has not marched for an hour without losing a shoe. With the system of hot-fitting, the same regiment lost only one shoe in a journey of eight stages.' After an extensive experience, this observer arrives at the following conclusions:

'1. The hot fitting is not attended by any danger or inconvenience when properly practised (that is, on hoofs the soles of which are pared).

'2. The solidity of hot shoeing (or fitting) being greater than that of cold, the workman having more facility for the former than the latter, and also owing to its requiring less time, we are of opinion that in the army, as everywhere else, the preference must be given to the ferrure à chaud.'

Lafosse, Bourgelat, Chabert, Gohier, Rainard, Reynal, Delafond, Renault, Bouley, and Rey—in fact, all the most distinguished veterinary professors or practitioners who have studied the subject—have unhesitatingly given the preference to the mode of fitting the shoe while hot.

The Central Society of Veterinary Medicine of France, composed certainly of men most competent to judge, after discussing this question in 1846, came to the following conclusions, which were accepted unanimously by the profession:—

'1. The ferrure à chaud is undoubtedly superior to the ferrure à froid, executed in the manner recommended and practised at this time, in that it always allows the workman to make the shoe to fit the foot—a fundamental rule in good farriery, and an immense advantage that the ferrure à froid does not offer.

'2. The cold shoeing, as now practised, at the same time that it is generally more difficult and requires a longer time, is for this reason more expensive, while it is generally less solid and less durable.

'3. Nevertheless, skilfully practised by an able workman, cold shoeing may be resorted to without much danger, and even with benefit, in some exceptional cases.

'4. The inconveniences attributed to the hot shoeing are also applicable to the cold method, excepting always burning the sole.

'5. That this very rare accident never produces the bad effects attributed to it.

'6. Consequently there does not now exist any plausible or valid reason for substituting cold for hot shoeing.

'7. Lastly, the advantages attributed to podometric shoeing, especially that which allows the preparation of the shoes without the horses being present, and applying them away from the forge, are not sufficiently demonstrated; and in any case, if they were, they could not compensate for the inconveniences inherent in this procedure.'^[13]

And one of the highest authorities on shoeing. Professor Rey,^[14] of Lyons, thus sums up the advantages and disadvantages of both methods:—

'Advantages of cold-shoeing.—Cold shoeing does not expose the horse to the danger of having his feet burned. It may be executed either in the stable or in the middle of the highway. It evades the necessity of taking the horse to the forge to be shod, and where the flame of the fire might frighten it. This is an argument of little value, as, with scarcely an exception, horses are not afraid of the forge. Cold shoeing is preferable for weak, flat, or foundered feet, with thin soles. This is, in our opinion, the only real advantage.

'Inconveniences of cold shoeing.—The greatest defect in cold shoeing consists in its want of solidity. When we fit a shoe cold the horn is hard and resists every blow of the hammer, while, by the action of heat, it is a little softened, and permits a more exact adaptation. It is less solid, particularly in wet weather. When the atmospheric temperature, however, is less inconstant, its durability is greater. This phenomenon is not observed with hot shoeing (Reynal). The authors who wrote at the period when cold shoeing only was known, notice its want of solidity. Cæsar Fiaschi thus expresses himself in the middle of the 16th century: 'Je ne vois d'autre remede, eu égard au peu de solidité de cette ferrure, que de savoir soi-même brocher les clous ou de se faire suivre par un maréchal.'

'In campaigns, cold shoeing offers less resistance to the deteriorating action of humidity, mud, and bad roads. The veterinary surgeons who accompanied the expedition to Rome, in 1849, have described the inconvenience of cold shoeing in time of war, in connection with its defective solidity, and the difficulty in adopting it. . . . This system of shoeing always necessitates making the foot to fit the shoe. It is difficult of application in cases where regiments are on the march, if the farriers are obliged to seek for the horses in their billets. It takes a longer time, and is not so easy. Its duration is less among town's horses which run on paved roads, as they wear out their shoes in less than from 15 to 20 days.

'After this shoeing the horn is more brittle, and shoes are more frequently lost. Lastly, cold shoeing is less economical.

'Advantages of hot shoeing. In hot shoeing, the shoe is more readily adapted to the foot.

'The shoes which have been fitted hot to the hoofs are applied more equally. The shoeing is more solid, because the nails are not broken by the displacement of the shoe; there is a better adaptation of the clip at the toe, and a more intimate adhesion is obtained between the iron and the surface of the horn.

'Hot shoeing endows the hoof with more resistance; the horn, heated by the iron, is less hygrometrical, and less permeable by fluids.

'M. Reynal thinks that the caloric that impregnates the horn favourably disposes it for the reception of the shoe; that it destroys the absorbent, spongy, hygrometrical properties of the horn, and renders it insensible to external influences. . . . With some show of reason, the eff'ects produced on horn by the hot iron have been compared to those of fire on pieces of wood whose extremities are superficially carbonized before being buried in the ground. Every one knows that this operation contributes to the preservation of the wood by preserving it from the action of humidity.'

Professor Renault put the two methods to the test of what was looked upon by competent authorities as a convincing experiment. He took two feet from a dead horse, one of which had been shod in the ordinary manner by fitting the iron plate to it while hot, and the other by the cold plan, according to the prescribed rules. These feet were immersed for twelve days in the water and mud of a pond, and afterwards washed and exposed for eight days to the action of heat. At the end of that period, the foot that had been fitted with the cold shoe, the hoof of which was previously swollen under the influence of humidity, had lost a great part of its primitive volume by the action of the heat. The shoe projected slightly all round the foot, although it had been closely fitted to the inside quarter, according to rule. It was not so firm on the hoof; the rivets were not so solid, or so well incrusted in the wall. With the other foot, shod on the hot method, nothing like this was observed; after, as before the experiment, the solidity of the shoeing was excellent. It was this test that led M. Reynal to believe that the caloric which impregnates the horn disposes it favourably for the reception of the shoe; that it destroys its absorbent, spongy, hygrometrical properties, and renders it insensible to external influences.^[15]

With regard to the risk of injury from burning the sensitive parts enclosed within the hoof, the opponents of hot fitting, the majority of whom really knew little, if anything, of the matter practically, and either forgot or were unaware of the fact that horn is a slow conductor of heat, might have been converted by the experiments of Professor Delafond. He showed in a most conclusive manner, that a very long-continued application of the hot shoe was required to affect the vascular parts of the foot. Applying a small thermometer to the inner surface of the sole, and bringing a hot shoe in contact with the ground aspect of the foot, he found it required three minutes burning to produce any effect on the thermometer. Reynal also experimented to test this fact, and the result was, that the thermometer inside the hoof did not mark any change until after the sole had been roasted by a hot iron for a period three times longer than that needed for a farrier to fit his shoe. And M. Barthélemy has watched workmen who were unconscious of his presence, in order to note the exact number of seconds during which they held the hot shoe to the foot. These observations proved, that in shoeing 100 hoofs, the hot shoe was kept in contact with the horn on an average of from 46 to 47 seconds; that the maximum of this application was 80 seconds, and the minimum 29 seconds. He never knew of a horse being injured in this manner.

It may be useful to know Delafond's conclusions as to the relative influence of various degrees of temperature on the foot:—

'1. The shoe warmed to a dark red heat, the carbonized portion of the sole not having been removed by the buttress, transmits more caloric to the living tissues within a given time than the shoe heated to a bright red (rouge cerise).

'2. The thickness of the sole being the same, the shoe heated to a dark red causes a deeper and more severe burn than the bright red one.

'3. These experiments confirm what was stated in 1758 by Lafosse, that it is not the shoe heated to bright red that most frequently causes burns of the vascular sole, but rather that which is scarcely red or black heated.'^[16]

Latterly, the few advocates of cold fitting blamed the hot method for causing dryness of the horn and contraction of the hoof; but they either kept out of sight, or were not cognisant of the fact, that these conditions had been complained of when nothing but cold fitting was known.

In a few years the cold fitting method in France had completely failed, and was a mere tradition, only advocated by some eccentric individual, whose fancies were unassailable by facts.

Even M. Riquet, who had retired from the army, and had become veterinary surgeon to a large Omnibus Company in Paris, no longer recommended it; and the army horses were shod on the infinitely superior principle of hot fitting.

Professor Bouley remarks, that it is impossible to do justice to a horse's feet, when shoeing them in a stable, away from the forge, by this cold adjustment of the shoes. There are so many variations in size, form, and general configuration, which no workman can remember when making the shoes; and if these are not rigorously adapted to the disposition of the foot, then is that organ likely to suffer.

Alluding to the experiments that had been instituted to ascertain the relative value of the two methods, he says: 'From whence arises so great a difference in the results, which is completely to the disadvantage of the cold fitting? It is because the hot shoe, in fusing the horn with which it comes in contact, imprints itself, it may be said, like a seal into sealing wax, and in this way the foot and shoe are in the same relation to each other as surfaces that exactly coincide; while no matter how expert the workman may be in using his tools to level the horn in a cold state, he can never do this so completely as may be done by making an impression with the heated shoe, and consequently establishing between the plantar margin of the hoof and the shoe an exact coaptation. It may be added, that when the horn has been softened by the action of caloric, the nails enter it with more facility, the clips and inequalities are more easily incrusted, and when it recovers its habitual consistency after cooling, the union between it and the metallic parts which are in juxtaposition, and which penetrate its substance, become all the more intimate because of the slight contraction that follows the dilatation produced by the caloric. In these conditions, the horn contracts on the shanks of the nails, ensheathing them still more firmly. Nothing like this occurs in cold fitting. The shoe so fixed is held to the hoof by the clenches alone, and, as often happens, the coaptation between these two not being very intimate, the branches of the shoe spring under the foot at each step, the clenches are easily broken by this movement, and the shoe is detached.'

Professor Goyau is entirely in favour of the shoes being fitted while in a hot state.

It is impossible to notice all the new shoes introduced in France. As in England, many of them were scarcely submitted to trial before they failed; others underwent a longer ordeal, and gradually subsided into forgetfulness, while the best-devised never attained to any degree of popularity. In 1820, M. Sanfarouche introduced a shoe which had its brief day. Believing in the expansion of the foot to the same extent as did Bracy Clark, this device was merely an English fullered shoe, or, as sometimes occurred, one stamped in the French fashion. It was of the same thickness throughout, was bevelled and seated like the ordinary shoe in use in this country, and wider at the heels than elsewhere, in order to facilitate the expansion of the hoof. It was also narrow, to prevent slipping. A short time after this shoe had fallen into disuse, another inventor introduced a 'hipposandal' system of shoeing; a large establishment was opened for the manufacture of this article, and Paris was duly placarded with the marvellous results to be derived from the application of this humane invention to the feet of horses. It had but a very brief existence, and was quickly forgotten. Then another shoe was proposed to prevent slipping. This was almost identical with the winter shoe in use in Canada, in having its ground-surface quite concave, and the animal resting on nothing but a sharp margin, which could not fail to give excellent foothold so long as it lasted. Unfortunately this was only for a brief period, as the shoe was made of iron. Had it been manufactured of steel, as the Canadian shoe is, it would, in all likelihood, have proved too slippery for the pavement.

The prevention of slipping has determined, more or less, the form of nearly all the shoes and methods of shoeing proposed in recent times. Indeed, it appears to have been, next to the preservation of the wall of the hoof, the chief desideratum from the very earliest period. We have observed that the primitive shoes had calkins to grasp the earth, and, in addition, well-lodged nail-heads, that stood high above the level of the shoe, and while keeping the animal's foot on a plane parallel with the ground, endowed it with the grasping powers of a double row of catches such as no modern shoeing has furnished. A farrier of Tours some years ago endeavoured to imitate this very primitive mode, and made nails with an iron shank and a large steel head. These, their inventor said, possessed two advantages: 1. They preserved the shoe from wear, as the heads of the nails sustained the effects of contact with the ground, and were, in this way, economical. 2. They secured the animal wearing them a safe footing on the pavement, either in summer or winter.

No doubt, the early inhabitants of Gaul and Britain have testified to these advantages two thousand years ago.

M. Perrier, believing that the ordinary expansion theory was a fallacy, and that the supposed movement took place at the anterior part of the foot, introduced a method of shoeing which was intended to promote the toe and quarter resiliency. The hoof was pared as thin as possible at these parts, while the heels were permitted to grow strong. The shoe was very narrow in front, but wide and thick towards the ends of the branches. The method of shoeing appeared to be, in many respects, almost exactly the reverse of that in every-day use. Its trial appears to have been very brief and unsatisfactory.

Still more recently, M. Watrin attempted to modify the ordinary method of shoeing, though in a very unreasonable manner. His object appears to have been merely directed to prevent contraction of the heels; and we can scarcely doubt that the means by which he sought to attain that end were those most likely to induce this deformity. The sole was well pared, the frog and bars mutilated, the external quarter of the fore-foot was reduced to a lower level than the inner, though in the hind-foot it was the reverse. The shoe was that generally in use in France, only at the inner corner of each heel it had a clip that bent down and grasped the inner aspect of the bar. This shoe and method of shoeing could not possibly succeed, destructive as it was to the foot in general, but particularly to the inflections of the crust. It was merely Ruini's shoe.

Veterinary Surgeon Naudin proposed a very narrow, light shoe, with a level bearing on the ground; for it must be remembered that the ordinary French shoe is 'adjusted,' or curved up at the toe, like that proposed by Goodwin, Miles, and Fitzwygram. It did not vary to any notable degree from other shoes of this type; and the most important feature in the method of applying it was its being attached to the foot by from four to six nails. The sole of the foot was left intact.

Yet later, M. Benjamin introduced a shoe which may be said to be the same as that proposed by Sanfarouche; though it was a great step in advance of what had yet been offered during this century in France. The entire sole and frog were left in their natural condition, and the crust only was diminished to its natural proportions. M. Benjamin justly claimed for this light, narrow shoe, and unmutilated sole and frog, great advantages over other systems, and the discussions among the French veterinary surgeons, which followed the introduction of his plan, shows that there was a singular unanimity as to the necessity for maintaining this most important region of the hoof in its full strength and solidity.

Nor has France been without its machine-made shoes of iron and steel, contrived to prevent slipping, while resisting wear. M. Peschelle, some years ago, introduced a shoe with circular projections or double calkins on its ground surface, which was made by machinery. This shoe not answering its purpose, the same inventor had laminated bars forged with a deep groove, or grooves, running along the middle of one of their faces, and from these bars shoes were made. The foot surface being flat, and the ground side deeply cut by the groove, afforded a tolerably secure grip of the pavement.

I have not been able to learn whether these were ever much employed, or whether they are now in use. From what I have heard, it would appear that, like all the machine-made shoes in this country, their utility was limited, and they scarcely attained notoriety before they became partially or totally obsolete.

Professor Tabourin, of Lyons, introduced fers à pinçon circulaire, which were made by machinery. The result of this experiment in hoof-armature has not been made public, I believe.

To a wonderful extent, it has been otherwise with a shoe and method of shoeing which, perhaps, more than any other in this century, has attracted public attention. In 1865, M. Charlier, a veterinary surgeon in Paris, brought to notice a patented method of shoeing which he designated 'periplantaire.' It proved to be the greatest innovation on the established routine of the age, so far as the farrier's art is concerned. And yet, after all, like the 'ferrure Benjamin,' the 'ferrure Charlier ' in France is but a page of old Lafosse's treatise, which the oftener we read, the more we wonder at the existence of the grossest absurdities in shoeing, and at the presence of painful and destructive diseases that ruin the horse and prove sad sources of bewilderment to his owner.

The 'ferrure Charlier' is a gentle modification of the 'fer incruste enclave' or 'croissant' of Lafosse, and the narrow shoe of Moorcroft, Mavor, and others. It consists, or rather consisted, in the insertion or imbedding of a narrow, but comparatively thick, band of iron or mild steel, around the front of the foot, in a recess cut out for it in the crust or wall of the hoof, and is very simple to look at and to consider. Only remove so much comparative soft and brittle horn, and substitute a hard, tough rim of iron or steel, almost as light (if we look at the ordinary shoes) as the material you remove, and you have insured the soliped against the effects of travelling, and almost restored his foot to its pristine condition.

Such is the Charlier method of shoeing; and if it has been modified in one or two essential features since its introduction, in others it has withstood the test of time, and testified in the most unequivocal manner to the correctness of the teaching afforded by the great author of modern and humane farriery. The idea of this method of shoeing, M. Charlier says, was suggested by the fashion of arming the extremity of a walking-stick by a ferrule, which everybody knows is a most efficient protection to the mass of wood it encloses.

On the 10th August, 1865, he makes the following communication to the Société Impériale et Centrale de Médecine Vétérinaire: 'Many among you have already heard of a new system of shoeing that I have imagined to prevent horses from slipping, at the same time affording them a natural bearing on the ground, and opposing contraction of the heels, and preventing several diseases caused by the shoeing now in use. Have I solved this difficult problem? I hope so; for the theory of abler authors founded on the anatomy and physiology of the foot is completely in favour of my procedure, and numerous experiments made in every condition have afforded me the following results. . . . This shoeing consists in the methodical application of a small bar of iron or steel, bent on the flat, thicker and wider at the toe and sides of the toe than at the quarters and heels, especially in its outer branch; it is about the width of the crust at its upper face, is perforated by from four to six nail-holes, rarely more, and is fitted into a groove or recess made at the inferior border of the wall, by means of small English nails with very thin shanks, driven in the usual way. Simple in conception, as it is in execution, this shoeing has many advantages, and its consequences are immense. I will endeavour to prove this to you. First, let us remember what our learned colleague, Professor Bouley, has said in his admirable works on shoeing: "The art of the farrier ought to be to preserve to the hoof the integrity of its form, essentially allied to that of its functions; and this result can only be obtained in leaving to the bars, the buttresses (arcs-boutants—the angle formed by the bar and crust), and the frog and sole all their power of resistance; in protecting them without interfering with their action, their contact with the ground, their suppleness, or their natural flexibility."

'No mode of shoeing as practised to-day can completely respond to these various demands. To apply to the sole of the foot a metallic plate, more or less wide, but always inflexible, restrains it, elevates the frog, prevents its participating in weight-bearing, and, do as we may, hinders its natural functions, destroys more or less rapidly its suppleness, the elasticity of the horny box, and, in a word, injures the vitality, the nutrition, and the good conformation of the foot.

'The frog which is thrown out of its functions, says Coleman, becomes diseased. It is the same with the external border of the sole and the bars when hindered from contact with the ground and deprived of their normal functions. When a horse has its shoes taken off, it is easy to see that all these organs suffer, that they have not their amplitude, their form, or their natural consistency. Most frequently they are hard, contracted, atrophied, dried up, or rotten. In the country, where it is possible to allow horses to go without shoes, and in foals which have not yet been shod, with the exception of the crust being worn, we see nothing abnormal; the frogs are large, the heels solid, the horn of the sole supple though resisting, and all, in a word, tends to show that vitality is there as in other parts of the body, and that the foot receives the nutritive fluids necessary to it.

'Having been struck for a long time with this difference, and the troublesome consequences which result there-from, I sought in vain, like so many others, to modify the actual shoe, until one day I said to myself: Since the unshod horse travels perfectly well on unpaved or non-macadamized roads, and as it is always the crust which commences to break and become worn, owing to the hardness of the stony streets, is it not possible to protect this wall without touching the other parts? and would this not solve the problem?

'It was natural, therefore, that I should reflect that on the handles of several instruments, on the ends of certain articles, a ferrule of iron or copper was put to prevent them from splitting.

'Full of hope that the sole and the other parts would offer sufficient resistance to the hardness of our pavements and stony roads, I tried, and little by little, after many attempts, I at last imagined the shoe I now have the honour to lay before you.

'This shoe, thicker than it is wide, is very light compared with the ordinary shoe, weighing more than a third less; it is forged without trouble even by one man, and is turned, fitted, and attached as easily as the other. I am inclined to believe, then, that I have reached the end I proposed to myself, and which was to make horses travel unshod, or, since that was not possible with our paved and macadamized roads, at least with a simple rim of iron which allows all parts of the plantar surface, especially the frog and buttresses, to participate in sustaining the weight and adhering solidly to the ground.

'It is a long time since the great practitioner Lafosse had recognized the necessity of allowing the frog to play its part; we have not forgotten the famous lunette shoe which has been so much lauded, and the only inconveniences of which were that it allowed the horn of the heels to be split and prevented wearing of the toe, thus giving the limb a false position and interfering with free movement.

'My shoe has not these defects; for while accomplishing the same object, it protects the heels, wears regularly along its circumference, like the foot itself in favourable conditions.

'It is a solid artificial border, replacing the inferior margin of the wall, which is not strong enough to resist our hard roads. It is no more than this.

'The horse thus shod, after the early days succeeding its first application, when it sometimes goes less freely than usual, and appears more sensitive to the asperities of the ground, movies evenly, and with lightness, grace, suppleness, and liveliness, and is more easily managed; all his paces, in a word, indicate that he finds himself more at liberty than with the sub-plantar shoeing.

'When at rest, we observe that he has nearly always his four feet resting on the ground, while other horses have usually a foot resting—no doubt to relieve alternately the dull pain or fatigue they experience in the hoof; neither is this so hot or feverish after journeys.

'Like the Lafosse shoe, although much more efficiently, it prevents slipping. During the frost of the first days in January and February, I have been able to travel with confidence without frost nails or calkins, when the horses of others could not move unless their feet were armed with these appliances so destructive to feet and limbs. I one day travelled along boldly with a mare whose limbs were used-up, but which was shod on my system, alongside a troop of cavalry, the soldiers being forced to dismount and lead their horses by the bridle. In snowy weather, every horse had its feet balled and walked with difficulty, while mine experienced nothing of the kind, and this result has since been observed with farm horses working on heavy clay land, where, during damp weather, they previously had their feet laden with masses of soil several inches thick, from which they could only with difficulty be freed.

'It must be an immense advantage in Paris to be able to prevent horses from slipping, not only during the frosts of winter, but when the roads are greasy or leaded (plombé), on the granite pavement, where so many horses fall, or on the rolled asphalte, which, although a calamity at present, may become a great boon, in saving horses and carriages, be easier kept clean, diminish the noise, dust, etc., if my shoeing is adopted.

'What falls, sprains, and accidents of every description will be avoided in preventing horses from slipping! Perfectly firm on all kinds of pavement, they will be more light in hand, more easy to drive, will be less fatigued, and tire their riders less, will travel more quickly, and we will not so often see those premature failures of the limbs for which the curative art can do so little, and which cause such heavy losses to the owners of horses.

'My shoeing is also opposed to the development of corns (bleimes) and contusions, caused either by the ordinary shoes or the interposition between them and the sole of stones, pebbles, or other hard bodies, since the branches of my shoe do not bear on the corners of the sole, and no foreign body can fix itself there, or bruise the living structures.

'But that which more particularly makes my method of shoeing superior to all the other known methods is, I repeat, the fact of the foot being allowed its liberty of action, all its vertical and lateral elasticity, however trifling this may be at the lower part of the hoof, or whatever may be the combinations it determines there; in this respect it evidently opposes wasting of the hoof and contraction of the heels, that destructive affection which ruins a considerable number of valuable horses.

'At first sight, this precious result of my shoeing may not appear manifest, for already several of my confrères have thought that the foot must be constrained by the little bar of iron that constitutes the shoe. To convince them that this is not so, it is sufficient to take the branches of the shoe in both hands, and to separate or push them together, when it will be found that they yield to pressure. In operating in the same manner by the pressure of the thumbs against the branches of the sole, the hands being joined around the hoof, I have also remarked and demonstrated to others the elasticity of the shoe, which follows the movements, dilatation, and contraction of the heels: the animal's weight, in coming upon the foot in every part, produces on it, as on the wall itself, the effect of a wedge driven into a piece of wood. All that can be said against my shoe is its too great elasticity when it is worn thin. In striking on the pavement it may spread out from the heels, inconvenience the animal, or break. I remedy this trifling inconvenience by making the last hole as far back as possible.

'For saddle horses, for those of light draught, and for all those chevaux de luxe, or of agriculture, which do not work very severely, this shoeing will certainly prove a great benefit.

'It only remains to be seen if it will sufficiently resist the repeated and excessively fatiguing journeys performed by the horses in public conveyances, and especially those omnibus horses which travel on the bad pavement of Paris.

'For the first case, placed as I am, I am already in a position to be able to solve the question. Numerous experiments are being made with the horses of the Compagnie Impériale des Voitures de Paris, and it has already been proved that for the fore-feet, the duration of the shoe leaves nothing to be desired, and it is at least equal to that of the ordinary shoe. For the hind-feet only, because of the hard work imposed upon these horses, more resistance is required; and I hope to obtain this result when the hoofs become stronger, and allow me to employ shoes which are thicker at the toe, and also adding a kind of clips, for those which twist their feet. At present this is not possible; the feet have been too long narrowed at the toe, rasped, chiselled, deteriorated, in a word chinoisés; and it is necessary that I wait until nature, with the help of the simple protection she requires, repair the damage which has been done. It is not usually until the third or fourth shoeing, when the wall begins to grow thicker, and the horn of the sole stronger and more solid, that we may venture to put on strong shoes and imbed them well.'

As this mode of shoeing has attracted much attention, and as it presents several features which, if they are not particularly novel, are yet interesting, closely connected as they are with the functions and preservation of the horse's foot, the principles followed in its application will be noticed somewhat in detail, particularly as they are sufficiently simple to be readily understood.

The instruments required differ but little from those now in use, though they may be much lighter and more convenient. The boutoir employed by the French maréchal to pare the foot has, in this instance, its borders raised at right angles to a certain height, and is provided with a guide or regulator in the middle of its louder face, so as to give to each side of the blade a width proportioned to the thickness of the wall of the foot intended to be shod in this manner. M. Charlier insists that this instrument should only be employed to make the groove or trench for the reception of the shoe, the sole, frog, and bars not being allowed to be pared, but only relieved of the dead horn which is detached or projects in the region of the heels; and he wisely suggests that this boutoir might be replaced by a flat double or single rainette, provided with a guide. He gives a figure of an instrument of this kind, which resembles the English farrier's drawing-knife, the only difference being the presence of a stud fixed into its under surface near the curve or point, to prevent cutting too deeply into the margin of the sole. This contrivance, however, according to my experience, is imperfect, owing to the stud being a fixture, and not allowing any latitude to be observed in channelling into a large, small, thin, or strong hoof. My farrier-serjeant has devised a much safer and more convenient instrument in the form of a knife somewhat like the ordinary drawing-knife, but about one-half its length, with only about an inch of cutting edge at its extremity, the end of which, instead of turning over in a curve, stands up at nearly a right angle to the blade for about half an inch. The guide is a plate of iron about three inches long, narrower than the blade of the knife, with a slot or slit passing through the greater part of its length, and attached to the lower face of the instrument by two small screws—one of these a finger-screw, which stand in this slit, and are fixed into two holes in the knife. This arrangement, as will be readily understood, permits the cutting edge to be regulated from the extremity of the blade to the extent of an inch backwords, just as necessity may require when preparing the hoof. The guiding power in this respect is considerably enhanced by a portion of the anterior extremity of the plate being bent downwards at a right angle to the knife, and to about the same extent as the end of the blade is turned upwards; this shoulder rests against the face of the wall of the hoof, and very materially aids the shoer in performing the most difficult and hazardous part of the operation—the cutting so close to the sensitive and vascular structures of the foot without injuring them.^[17]

Charlier's directions for forging the shoes are these: 'The most convenient-sized iron is that in bar ¾ × ⅝ for large shoes, and ⅝ × ⅜ for small ones; or even square iron, more or less thick, according to the strength required. From such bars the shoes can be forged with an ordinary hammer: the iron is cut off in lengths proportioned to the size of the shoe; one side is made at a heat, but without stamping the holes; the second side is formed at the second heat, the turning of the shoe to its proper shape being effected by principally striking its upper border around the toe on the beak of the anvil, so as to give it the natural inclination of the foot. A shoe thus turned is narrower on its upper or foot surface than its lower or ground one.

'The nail-holes are made in each branch or side, and are two or three, rarely four, in number; one at the side of the toe, another at the quarter or middle of the branch, and a third at the heel, all placed at regular intervals. In my trials of this system I have usually had only three nails on the outer side and two on the inner, and always found that number quite sufficient, even in the largest shoes. With small ones I have only employed two nails on each side. To stamp these, the shoe must be frequently heated, as from the thinness of the metal it quickly cools; the holes so made are smaller than those of ordinary shoes, are oblong from before to behind, and rounded at the angles so as not to weaken the iron; they are formed by an untempered cast-steel punch provided with a very tapering and almost square extremity, the sharp corners being removed, and the point terminating like a grain of barley. An assistant holds the shoe in a pair of tongs on the anvil, and it is pierced from fine to coarse by light blows, the punch being withdrawn quickly, and straightened if bent, moistened to keep it cool, and dipped in grease to make it cut more promptly.

'To counter-pierce the shoe, it is necessary to have a thinner punch than that for stamping, and a little care is necessary to prevent the shoe being broken.

'It is of importance that the best iron be used, notwithstanding its high price; the expense is compensated for by only half the weight being required. It must not be brittle. Two old shoes furnish sufficient material to make a new one; hind-shoes are to be preferred.' The most delicate and difficult stage in the operation is, of course, attaching the metal to the hoof. Charlier's directions are as follows:

'1. The horse ought to have been shod a long time, in order that the sole may have acquired that so-called excess of thickness that is usually cut away by the farrier. The old shoes must be carefully removed, in order that the crust of the hoof be not broken. Only two shoes to be taken off at once, and these diagonal ones—near hind and off fore, and vice versa; all the old nails and fragments of these, if present, to be extracted.

'2. With an ordinary rasp cut away the angle of the lower border of the wall around the whole circumference of the foot, so as to straighten it and form a bevel or slope, which greatly facilitates the employment of the grooving-knife.

'3. On this bevelled edge form the groove to receive the shoe, but do not cut it so deep or so wide as the thickness of the sole and width of the wall, the limit of the latter being the zone or white-line that marks the separation of these two portions, just within the track of the old nails (fig. 196).

fig. 196

'4. Mould the hot shoe on the beak of the anvil by gentle blows, so as to give it, either from memory or by measurement on an old shoe, the shape of the foot, heating and reheating it until it is perfectly adapted, border to border, to the wall. If the horse wears its shoes quickly, the outer branch may be left thicker than the inner one.

'5. Make the shoe hot, and fit it into the groove by holding it there, but without pushing it towards the sole, taking great care not to leave it so long as to burn, or even heat, the living tissues which are very near this cavity. A few seconds are sufficient for this operation.

'6. A solid and equable bearing for the shoe having been obtained, with a small drawing-knife gently remove the superficial layer of horn that has been in contact with the hot shoe, making in this way a little canal (cannelure) at the angle of the groove around the sole, but without touching the latter. The intention of this is to leave a space which will allow a little play at the corresponding angle of the shoe.

'7. Take the shoe and shorten the branches if they are too long, for they should not pass beyond the heels of the foot; round them in a sloping manner from side to side, and with a half-round file take away the inner angle of the upper face of the shoe, so as to form a slight bevel which, corresponding as it does to the canal at the bottom of the groove in the hoof, prevents the sensitive parts being compressed when the weight is thrown upon the foot.

'8. Attach the shoe with nails in the ordinary manner. The nails should be small and of the ordinary English shape, but the heads a little flatter and longer; they ought to be strong at the neck and thin in the shank.'

'On good feet these different manoeuvres, which have taken so long to describe, are easy of execution; and it is only necessary that the intelligent farrier should bring to his task a little willing attention in order to practise them.

'In delicate feet with low heels, thin soles, and narrow walls, such as we so commonly have to deal with when paring and rasping has been allowed for some time, the farrier must take the greatest precautions not to injure the quick. He will not be able to imbed his shoes so deeply as can be otherwise done. In a strong foot this incrustation may be safely carried so far, that the ground-surface of the shoe and the sole are on the same level, and share in supporting the weight and strain imposed upon them. With feet damaged by previous maltreatment, this cannot be done until the horn has been sufficiently regenerated; and in the mean time the shoe may be allowed to project a little above the sole, and particularly towards the heels; though it does not last so long, does not hold so fast, and the frog, not coming entirely on the ground, is longer in regaining its healthy conformation. In these cases, lighter shoes might be used, though they must be replaced more frequently; but in this the hoof does not suffer, the nails being so small and few in number, and no paring or rasping being allowed. With feet of this description it sometimes happens that after the first application of the shoes, the horse does not travel well for three or four days, or sometimes even longer; he is afraid to touch the ground. Rest, or gentle exercise on soft soil, will suffice to give him assurance and free action; and as a longer time elapses, every inconvenience disappears; the sole and crust which are never mutilated become thick and natural, and then stronger shoes may be applied, and imbedded deeper.'

M. Charlier remarks, that it is not rare to see parts of the sole exfoliate in flakes during the first months of his method of shoeing; this, he says, is the dead horn which is being removed to give place to a good secretion as elastic as it is resisting, and in this case it may be useful to aid nature, by carefully excising these flakes, which, if allowed to project, would produce the effects of a foreign body. In this, I think, he is mistaken, as in my experiments with this system of shoeing, if it may be so named, I have always found every particle of horn useful, and never could discover that it caused any inconvenience.

At first this important modification of the ordinary mode of arming the hoof gave rise to very animated discussions. It was argued that it possessed very little novelty, and that it was but a slight improvement, or otherwise, on Lafosse's imbedded shoe. There is certainly not much difference if one compares a section of the two methods. Lafosse's we see in figure 197, and Charlier's in figure 198.

fig. 197	fig. 198

The shoe of the first-named veterinarian was lighter and narrower, and lay in a space between the sole and crust; whereas Charlier's shoe rested on the crust alone, and was thicker, a trifle wider, and much heavier.

Then grave doubts were entertained as to the amount of injury likely to be inflicted by a rim of iron placed so near the sensitive and vascular parts of the foot. To imbed the thick shoe, so that a portion of the sole might reach the ground, required the removal of so large a piece of the crust, that the union between it and the sole was seriously threatened; the shoe being thicker than the latter, it will be easily seen that to incrust it thoroughly a most extensive chasm had to be made around the margin of the sole, whose attachment with the crust was therefore greatly weakened. This objection appears to have forced itself so strongly on M. Charlier, that only partial incrustation was resorted to in 1866; the shoe being made a trifle wider and thicker, and the groove for its reception much shallower, and certainly not exceeding the thickness of the sole. It appears clips were also added, to prevent the shoe driving back against the sensitive part of the foot. So great an alteration had been made, that instead of 'preplantar,' Professor Bouley designated it 'presolar' shoeing. Its use on the hind-feet was nearly, if not quite, discontinued, as these organs are of little importance, so far as shoeing and disease are concerned, when compared with those in front; and the wear was so severe at the toes, the thinnest part of the hind-feet, that the encircling bands could not be made strong enough to last for a reasonable period, neither could they be imbedded deep enough with safety.

Veterinary Surgeon Signol, who devoted much time and attention to the new shoes and their application when experiments began to be made with them, reports that those used on the omnibus horses of Paris weighed on the average 850 grammes (30 ounces); they were from 18 to 20 millimetres thick (7 to 8-10ths of an inch), and were incrusted in the wall of the hoof to a depth of 15 millimetres (6-10ths of an inch); they had toe-clips. On the fore-feet, these shoes lasted 30, and on the hind-feet 28 days. More than 500 feet were shod within the space of six months; and the advantages noted during that period (1866) were: 1. Economy in material to the extent of at least 250 to 300 grammes each shoe, and even more, as some of the ordinary shoes weighed as much as 2 kilogrammes (4.409 pounds). 2. In consequence of the comparatively trifling weight of their shoes, the horses acquired a lightness of movement they did not exhibit previously. 3. They gained an extraordinary solidity on the pavement, and did not slip. 4. Many horses which always had corns and sandcracks, and could not be used without bar-shoes, spontaneously recovered from their infirmities after the application of this shoe. 5. Those frogs which were before shrunken and élranglé, became considerably developed, a fact which proves that this shoe is perfectly adapted to the physiological movements of the foot.

It will be seen that these horses were excessively overweighted with the ordinary shoe.

Professor Bouley, perhaps the highest veterinary authority in France, and a gentleman of great scientific attainments, laid much stress on the particular advantages to be derived from this large diminution in weight. He had given the system of shoeing his careful attention, particularly after the modifications it had undergone, and appears to have been much impressed with its favourable results, notwithstanding its having deviated from the rigorous application of the fundamental principle of rational farriery he had laid down: that at each renewal of the shoes, the foot be brought, by the aid of instruments, to the length and form which it would have had if the animal had not been shod, and the horn had been worn in a natural manner. He believed the disadvantages of the 'ferrure Charlier' were more than counterbalanced by its advantages. He noted that, in general, the feet of all the horses so shod acquired a tendency to become enlarged and regain their primitive form, a circumstance which might be explained on reflecting that the sole, bars, and frog, having recovered all their thickness, afterwards oppose an insurmountable obstacle to that movement of contraction on itself, which the hoof tends fatally to assume when the sole and frog are thinned, and the bars are destroyed by the boutoir.

For it could not be denied that, with ordinary shoeing, the paring of the hoofs brought about this result, as it was a common practice to test by pressure of the thumbs the proper degree of thinness of the soles.

M. Bouley thought the shoes could be forged and put on as readily as in the old system, and he sums up his report, in 1866, as follows: The preplantar shoeing had been modified by diminishing the depth of the groove, which was not cut so near the living parts of the foot; that this modification, necessitated by experience, prevented pain being inflicted, though it had the disadvantage of making the foot longer than it ought to be, according to the principles of physiological shoeing; that this inconvenience was increased by the necessity there was for giving the shoe a greater thickness—2 centimètres (about 9-10ths of an inch), that its narrowness might be compensated for so as to resist wear for a given time; that this inconvenience, which could not be overlooked, was yet counterbalanced: a. By the lightening of the shoe, which diminished fatigue, b. By the greater surety of the horse's footing, a more solid bearing on the ground, greater liberty of movement, and as a result, a more efficacious employment of its strength, c. By the preservation of the integrity of its feet, or the gradual disappearance of deformities or diseases affecting them.

This authority concludes, that whether the preplantar system of shoeing succeed, or, like so many other systems, fail, its inventor had none the less done good service, in showing what was vicious in the present mode of French shoeing, and how easy it was to benefit horses by making their shoes lighter; already, the opponents of the new method were beginning to see the advantage of reducing the metallic surface, and that this narrowing of the shoes was entirely due to the example given by M. Charlier.

Professor Bouley was, perhaps, not aware of what had been done in England, in this respect; and that in this century M. Charlier's modification had been largely anticipated. Goodwin and Fitzwygram had demonstrated the necessity for leaving the soles unpared, and had conclusively shown that these parts would, to a certain extent, sustain pressure from the shoe. Coleman, Gloag, and others, had shown that the frogs could only be maintained in a healthy condition by performing their natural functions; Turner, Miles, and Fitzwygram had proved that shoes could be retained by a comparatively small number of nails; and Moorcroft and Mavor, that narrow shoes were advantageous in preventing slipping.

Another good result of this method of shoeing in France, was to enlighten the veterinary profession and the farriers of that country, with regard to the pernicious cradle-like shape they gave to their clumsy shoes, in what they termed the ajusture. This unseemly, and apparently unreasonable, fashion had been maintained and strenuously defended since the days of Bourgelat; and its effects must have been very prejudicial, especially when improperly applied. The plane-surfaced preplantar shoe found as many advocates in this respect as the English shoe, equally plane, had, perhaps, previously found opponents in France.

Despite the opposition offered to M. Charlier's innovation, it made progress on the continent, and attracted much attention; though it has scarcely been noticed in England. The inventor, if such a designation may be applied, was liberally rewarded by the French Government, and his method of shoeing obtained for him marked honours at the Paris Exhibition of 1867. It has received the highest measure of praise from the principal veterinary teachers of France, among whom were MM. Bouley and Gourdon; in Italy, Professors Bassi and Demarchi, of the Turin veterinary school, have commended it; and in Spain, Professor Bellido, chief of the veterinary school of Cordova, has acknowledged its merits.^[18]

The somewhat marvellous effects that result from allowing the sole and the posterior parts of the foot to maintain their integrity, and to assume their natural functions, appear to have astonished even those who were accustomed to study the physiology of that organ; though for that matter the same happy results had been constantly, though never generally, recognized, and in this country, at least, it was not at all uncommon to employ horses with these parts unmutilated, and wearing only thin half or whole shoes.

Fiaschi, no doubt, had noted the same beneficial effects follow the use of his lunette shoes, and Lafosse was as well acquainted with the benefits to be derived from his method of shoeing as Charlier; while Osmer and Clark were earnest in their protestations against the fashion of removing the heels of the foot from the ground.

Experiments are still being conducted on an extensive scale on the continent, but particularly in France, in order to test how far the 'ferrure périplantaire' may be substituted for the ordinary method. My own trials, though they certainly have been on a limited scale, have proved very satisfactory. Draught and saddle horses have been shod, and in every case with advantage. The shoes employed weighed nearly one-half less than those previously worn, and have been retained firmly in their bed by from four to six small nails for each shoe. Two cases of foot lameness accompanied by very deformed hoofs and extraordinarily contracted heels, have immensely improved by using a shoe a little shorter than the ordinary rim—only reaching to the quarters, and, being light and narrow, incrusted on a level with the sole. An Arab horse with small feet, and whose frogs had been greatly injured by the native shoes he had been compelled to wear, has been shod for several months with a strip of iron weighing, for each foot, 3¼ ounces, and with wonderful benefit. The peculiar tendency of the Eastern horses' feet to become contracted when shod on the ordinary European principles, appears to have been successfully evaded, and the frogs so diseased and wasted previously, are regaining their normal size and firmness. The horses shod with these imbedded rims of iron have travelled with perfect freedom and safety on the hilly roads, often thickly covered by layers of sharp flints, in the vicinity of Chatham; though the soles and frogs of their hoofs were unprotected, save by the natural thickness of horn, which appears to be more abundantly secreted the more it is exposed to attrition.

When considering the best mode of protecting and preserving the foot by shoeing, we will again have occasion to refer to this system.

Since the foregoing sheets were sent to press, we learn that another 'new' method of shoeing has been 'invented,' and this time, we are told, in America—that quarter of the globe where horses were unknown until more than a quarter of a century after Fiaschi's work had been published at Spire, and where the European settlers have carried their ideas of the utility of this creature to as extreme a degree as the dwellers in the old country. This new invention, it would appear, has been for some time before the American public; though the majority of horsemen in this country were ignorant of its startling merits until the 10th of December, 1868, when a leading journal brought it into prominent notice by devoting a portion of its space to a description, that certainly reads far more like an imitation of some of the choice American advertisers than a sensible notice by a modest writer who understood his subject.

It has been our somewhat wearisome task to examine and describe several of the numerous patents sought and obtained for particular modes of shoeing, or special kinds of shoes, but which, in reality, had no right or claim to be so protected, presenting as they did no novel features, and having been in use—some of them, many centuries before. This invention is only another illustration, afforded this time by our Transatlantic cousins, of the wonderful originality pertaining to everything new with regard to hoofs and their armature. It will be seen that the 'idea' of the shoe is, if we refer to Fiaschi, at least three centuries old, or, if we look to our primitive models, perhaps as many thousands of years; while the method of applying it—or rather the art of leaving the frog and sole in their integrity—is an old story, repeated by almost every writer who had made the horse's hoof his study.

This will be at once apparent if we transcribe what the writer in the London newspaper has written, in order to attract attention to the new method. 'In 1860, Mr Goodenough invented and patented the shoe we are now about to describe, and has succeeded, we think, in securing all necessary protection to the hoof, and in removing, or reducing to a minimum, the bad effects of earlier methods. The principle laid down by Mr Goodenough is that the shoe should resemble, and preserve, as far as possible, the natural shape of the hoof, of which it is a continuation. The unshod horse has the under surface of his foot on a generally level plane, the frog and the whole margin of the hoof in contact with the ground, and the under surface of the sole, between the frog and the margin, somewhat raised by its own concavity. The Goodenough shoe is made precisely to follow the outline of the hoof for which it is intended, and to reach exactly to the bars, never projecting at all beyond the heel. Its upper surface is generally plane and true (fig. 199, see next page); its under surface is generally concave from the outer to the inner margin, the outer margin having, however, a narrow, flat bearing upon the ground, and this bearing is interrupted by portions of the margin being cut away, so as to leave a central toe-calk, and two smaller calks on either side.

fig. 199

The elevation of these calks is inconsiderable, and their general level is the same, so that they may be compared to a series of short claws on the under surface of the shoe (fig. 200). In the notches, or spaces between the calks, the nail-holes are bored and counter-sunk, so that the nail-heads are completely buried in the shoe. For frost, shoes are made in which the calks have no flat bearing, but are brought up to a feather-edge. The inner margin of the shoe is thin, so that its outline passes insensibly into that of the sole, and presents no projections by which stones or snow can be retained.' A reference to our notice of Cæsar Fiaschi's work, and the drawings of shoes which he gives, as well as the mention Blundevil makes of foreign shoes, will be sufficient evidence to prove that these groundsurface projections were in use in the 16th century, while the shoe on which they were formed differs but little, if at all, in principle from the one now under discussion.

fig. 200

A reference also to Mr Goodwin's method of shoeing, which was in use before 1821—to Mr Mavor's and Colonel Fitzwygram's shoes,—will likewise demonstrate that there is nothing novel in the American shoe, so far as either the ground or foot surface is concerned. Several shoes have been introduced with projections on the ground surface, and one employed by Mr Broad, Veterinary Surgeon, Bath, more than ten years ago, may be said to be identical with this; while in almost every town and city, except London, toe-pieces and calks are regularly worn by draught-horses.

The preparation of the foot and application of the shoe are described as follows: 'A shoe which precisely fits the outline of the hoof is selected from the stock. If a proper fit cannot be found, any slight alteration is made by a few blows on the cold iron; or, if heating be necessary, the shoe is made cold again before it is applied, and care is taken that it remain perfectly level and true. The farrier then prepares the hoof by cutting or rasping away the surface of that portion of the crust on which the iron will rest, leaving the centre of the sole and the frog and bars untouched. Having given what he judges to be a true level to this marginal seating for the shoe, the shoe is applied cold, and the hoof is rasped again and again until horn and iron come into perfect contact in every part. As a guide to the use of the rasp, the surface of the shoe is ruddled, so that any portion of horn not touched by it remain uncoloured. The adjustment being correct, the shoe is nailed on in the ordinary way, and the process is complete Mr Goodenough claims for his system the negative merit that the shoe, being applied cold, does not injure and weaken the horn by burning, as in the common method. He claims the positive merits that "it prevents slipping, over-reaching, and interfering, cutting, or picking up stones, balling snow or mud, contracted feet, corns, sandcracks, thrush, springing of the knees, and shrinking of the shoulders. It also prevents the nails striking the ground while the foot is sensitive from shoeing." ' We may conscientiously doubt the correctness of some of these statements, others are palpable absurdities, while others again are so obscure as to puzzle us. In the first place, 'cold-shoeing,' as it has been termed, was, so far as I can ascertain, the only method employed in this country and on the continent before the 16th century; so that if our researches into the antiquity of shoeing prove anything, they prove that a patent was scarcely needed to make a monopoly of this method in the middle of the 19th century. We have also shown that, in the opinion of the highest veterinary authorities, it is impossible to shoe a horse so well in this way as by fitting the hot shoes to the hoofs. This is known to every one who has had any experience of horses or horse-shoeing; and the injury supposed to be caused by the judicious employment of this means of adjusting the shoe is purely imaginary, and the result of inexperience. The horn has no vitality, being inorganic.

This subject has often been discussed, but not, as we have seen recently, as it has been definitely decided that there was no foundation for the blame attached to hot-shoeing—as it may, though inappropriately, be termed. As horse-owners may, however, be misled by the statement that fitting the shoe to the hoof while warm injures and weakens the horn, it may be as well to assert that the very opposite is the result, and that the method recommended by Mr Goodenough is really the one that injures and weakens the horn. We have already given some proofs of this. In Britain (except in the army), and on the continent, cold-shoeing is a mere historical souvenir.

The writer of the above article, whose knowledge of horse-shoes appears to have been almost, if not quite, as limited as his experience among horses, adds, in speaking of the manufacture of these shoes by machinery: 'Gentlemen will then be able to keep a stock of shoes for their horses at their own stables, and to have them put on there by the farrier, who will need no forge. The work of the farrier will, indeed, be so much simplified that in large stables it will probably be desirable to have a groom instructed (!), and to make the removal of the shoes a portion of the ordinary routine of the establishment.'

It can scarcely be surprising that one who is so readily captivated and can write so confidently in praise of this long-exploded system, should recommend cold-shoeing, and these shoes with calks at toes and heels, for the hunting-field. 'Another advantage of the system is one that will be greatly felt in the hunting-field. The hoof, having its natural form and surface preserved, draws out of clay or mud without the suction by which so many ordinary shoes are loosened, and so much extra labour is entailed upon the horse. It has been calculated that this suction may be nearly 1 lb. per lift to each foot, in addition to the weight of the shoe; and its total amount at the end of a day's work would be such as to seem scarcely credible.' Is it not a fact that horses have been for years, and are now, shod with hunting-shoes; that these shoes have been, and are, concave on the ground and flat on the foot surface,—even more so than Mr Goodenough's patent; and that so far as their form is concerned, they are less likely to be influenced by clay or mud, and to do far less damage to the horse than this newly-invented one? Few men, I think, would be found who would ride a horse to hounds unless it had been previously shod for that purpose; and all who have ridden hard know that these shoes must be of a certain pattern, and be particularly firmly attached to the feet. The ordinary, light hunting-shoe is incomparably superior to the new invention in every respect; indeed, from the presence of toe-calks, the defective position and form of the nail-holes, and its clumsiness, this shoe is a very perilous and unsuitable one for the hunting-field, or even for ordinary road purposes, while the resuscitated method of cold-fitting makes it still less secure.

It will be observed from the figures given of this patented shoe, that the projections which stud its lower surface, and which have been more eloquently than correctly compared to ostrich claws, make it a most dangerous article; as in over-reaching, a horse must inflict serious wounds on itself, and in all probability come down with its rider, if it be a riding-horse, as their front edge is quite sharp; while horses that, through defective formation or temporary physical causes, are liable to strike their legs with the opposite feet, must inevitably produce grave wounds or contusions with a shoe of this kind. Being machine-made, the iron is not of such good quality as that of ordinary shoes, and to compensate for this, and insure wear for a reasonable time, thicker and heavier defences have to be worn. The nail-holes (eight in each shoe) are most defective in form and position, and being grouped in twos, must weaken the hoof by having the nails so closely jammed to each other, and if any elasticity or lateral expansion exists at the lower margin of the forefoot (as the patentee asserts), it must be apparent that it would no longer be permitted when this shoe is nailed on. The projecting calks at the toes must greatly tend to induce stumbling, particularly with saddle-horses, while they would cause dreadful wounds in kicking. So far the shoe is a defective one; and when the calks are worn off, which happens in a brief period if horses are employed on paved roads, it is but little different from the ordinary shoe. Being bevelled or concave on the foot as well as the ground surface, it as readily allows stones and mud to insinuate themselves between itself and the sole, while from the method of applying it, it is just as likely to produce corns, sandcracks, and the other maladies mentioned, as to prevent or cure them.

In December, 1868, the mode of attaching it to the foot looked most unscientific, if not cruel and barbarous. A visit to the place where some omnibus-horses were being experimented upon, a few days after the newspaper article we have quoted from was published, proved a great disappointment. One of the merits of this system was said to rest upon the wonderful discovery that the horse's frog was intended naturally to come into contact with the ground; and as the full benefit of this novel announcement was, it appeared, to be immediately bestowed on the unfortunate horses, the problem as how this could be done with a shoe very much thicker than that in ordinary wear, and provided with additional projections from its ground face, was being readily solved. The knife and rasp were as actively employed as ever; thin crusts and thin soles were being unmercifully trenched upon to imbed the clumsy mass of iron as deeply as need be to bring the sometimes shrunken frogs on a level with the lower face of the shoe. The middle of the sole was certainly not pared, but that portion which nature intended should be thickest and strongest, was reduced to a thin pellicle on which the rigid iron was laid. A small hand-saw was employed to open up the heels. The shoes were being fitted cold (though I am informed they have been fitted while at a dark red heat), and consequently, in every respect, the foot was made to fit the shoe, and the sole and crust had to suffer the penalty of the frog reaching the ground. The foot, altogether, was treated as if it were only a block of wood, to be cut and carved into a particular model, and without any regard whatever to its anatomy, functions, or sensibility. It was, certainly, no improvement on the commonest method of shoeing in England.

The most absurd statements were, of course, circulated with regard to the merits of this method. In quoting from the newspaper article, we have noticed some of these pretentious claims, for which there was not the slightest foundation in fact. It was advertised as the 'humane horse-shoe;' and these advertisements asserted that it was 'the only horse-shoe which obeys the laws of nature in its construction, and is shaped as nearly in conformity with the natural foot as scientific knowledge and skilful labour can produce!' No pains were spared to make a good speculation of the wonderful new invention; every public announcement of its merits seemed to be written by the same hand that had penned the first tribute of admiration, and recommended this sharp-studded weapon for the hunting-field. It is scarcely necessary to say that none of these articles gave evidence of the most trifling acquaintance with the subject of horse-shoeing, and many of them appeared to be influenced solely by the special exigencies of an embryo horse-shoe company, destined to invest money and make fortunes out of one of the most pretentious inventions perhaps ever introduced to the notice of the British public. No horseman, nor yet any competent man of science whose opinion is worth having, has yet ventured, so far as I am aware, to commend it in this country; and all the proper experiments hitherto made with it have, I believe, turned out unsatisfactory, or complete failures. As might have been anticipated, it has proved a most injurious method of shoeing; the percentage of crippled horses has been very great, and far beyond that attending the ordinary improper mode of shoeing; the number of shoes cast and lost has been far above the usual average, and horses have cut, stumbled, tumbled, and limped from corns, to my certain knowledge, quite as much, if not more, than with the worst application of the old system. This appears to be acknowledged so far, as the 'only humane method' now tolerates hot fitting apparently to any extent, and also sanctions the employment of calkins at the extremities of the heels, with other modifications, which leave one in doubt how much of the American invention will remain after a few months' longer trial in England. Where it has now and again succeeded in gaining a testimonial, has no doubt been largely due either to these modifications, or to circumstances in which any other ordinary shoe would have been equally successful.

It will be seen by referring to our history of shoeing, that the only claim to scientific farriery which can be admitted in this new system—allowing the frog to reach the ground—is no novelty, and is achieved by the mutilation of the best portions of the sole and crust.

A very much less pretentious, though promising to be a far more useful, invention, is the quite recent one of Mr Gray of Sheffield, the patentee and manufacturer of grooved steel and steel-faced bars, to be made into horseshoes. Shoes made from these rolled bars have the ground surface cut into a series of ridges and teeth of various forms (figs. 201, 202, 203), adapted to secure a firm foothold, and prevent horses from slipping or falling on the pavement of large towns.

fig. 201	fig. 202

fig. 203

Owing to their being manufactured either entirely or partially of steel—in the latter case the steel is on the ground surface—they can be tempered so as to preserve their denticulated surface in an efficient condition for some time; a rather important feature to be noted. According to Mr Gray, 'shoes made from this material will not require sharpening in winter, and will be found of universal advantage on the road or in the field; they are one-third lighter, will last longer, and look much better than any other shoes.'

The combination of steel and iron appears to be that best adapted for horse-shoes that require to be tempered, as they are less liable to fracture, and should be less expensive—indeed the patentee asserts that shoes can be made at a very little more expense than the ordinary ones, over which they are said to possess such advantages. I regret I have not had sufficient time to submit this invention to the test of experiment, but from what I have seen of it, I am in hopes that it may prove useful in the triple view of lightness, durability, and increased surety of footing, more particularly in winter. The fitted shoe looks very neat, and, as may be seen, the ground face can be ridged or serrated in any fashion. The foot surface is nearly, if not quite, plane.

These shoes can be turned, fitted, and put on by any ordinary farrier, and the holes may be made wherever they are required.

1. Traité du Pied. Paris, 1813.
2. Tableau Synoptique. Lyons, 1820.
3. Cours de Maréchalerie Vétérinaire. Paris, 1827.
4. Traité de l'Organisation du Pied du Cheval. Paris, 1851. Also the article 'Ferrure,' in the Nouveau Dictionnaire Pratique, etc., Veterinaires. Paris, 1858.
5. Traité de Maréchalerie Vétérinaire. Lyons, 1852.
6. Memoire sur les Principaux Systèmes de Ferrure. Paris, 1862.
7. Ferrure du Cheval. Paris, 1865. La Maréchalerie Française. Paris, 1867. The French Government has always manifested the greatest anxiety to advance veterinary science, as it has now for many years found the national interest to be deeply concerned in its progress. The subject of farriery has, therefore, not been neglected; and we observe that the Minister for War has marked his appreciation of the value of this, and the clever little monograph by M. Merche, by bestowing on each of the authors a gold medal.
8. Ferrure du Cheval, Paris, 1869.
9. Les Ferrures Pathologiques. Brussels, 1866. Mém. sur l'Encastelure. Notice sur une Nouvelle Ferrure à Glace, etc.
10. De la Ferrure Podométrique. Tours, 1840.
11. Bulletin de la Soc. Vétérinaire, 1846.
12. De la Ferrure des Chevaux. Journal de Méd. Vét., p. 246. 1851.
13. Recueil de Médecine Vétérinaire, p. 476. 1846.
14. Traité de Maréchalerie, p. 196.
15. Vatel. Rapport sur la Ferrure à Froid. Soc. Centrale Vétérinaire, 1846.
16. 0. Delafund. Recueil de Méd. Vétérinaire, p. 951. 1845.
17. Mr Brennand, Instrument-maker, 217, High Holborn, London, now makes this knife from my model.
18. For the original papers of M. Charlier, and the numerous letters and discussions resulting from this system, see the 'Bulletin de la Société Impériale et Central de Méd. Vétérinaire,' for 1865, 1866, and 1867. For reports of the experiments in Italy, see the journal 'Il Medico Vétérinario,' for 1867.