Page:Horsemanship for Women.djvu/105

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to 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-