Page:Horsemanship for Women.djvu/105

From Wikisource
Jump to: navigation, search
This page has been validated.

the relative merits of crop and whip, there is room for difference of opinion. By many persons the former is looked upon as a senseless affectation of English ways, but the fact is that with a horse regularly trained to the saddle it is more useful than a whip, as by its aid a lady can "collect" her horse—that is, can make him bring his hind-legs under him, in the same way that a man does by the pressure of his calves. If, however, the horse has never been trained, and is sluggish or wilful, a whip may be more useful. Whichever of the two produces the better results will have the more "work-manlike" look and be in the "better form."


It is undoubtedly much pleasanter and more exhilarating to ride a good and handsome horse than a poor and ugly one, a horse adapted to one's size and weight than one too large or too small, too heavy or too light; but none of these points are matters of etiquette. On this whole subject etiquette makes only one demand, but that one is inexorable—it is perfect neatness. A lady's mount must be immaculate from ear to hoof, in coat and mane and entire equipment. It is in a great degree their exquisite neatness that gives such an air of style not only to English horsewomen, but to English turn-outs of all kinds, which, nevertheless, have not usually the "spick and span new" look of fashionable American equipages. On coming out, therefore, pre-