in that indifferent ſtate, than to keep up their ſize by a care and nouriſhment which would coſt him much labor. If on this low fare, theſe animals dwindle, it is no more than they do in thoſe parts of Europe where the poverty of the ſoil, or poverty of the owner, reduces them to the ſame ſcanty ſubſiſtence. It is the uniform effect of one and the ſame cauſe, whether acting on this or that ſide of the globe. It would be erring therefore againſt that rule of philoſophy, which teaches us to aſcribe like effects to like cauſes, ſhould we impute this diminution of ſize in America to any imbecility or want of uniformity in the operation of nature. It may be affirmed with truth, that, in thoſe countries, and with thoſe individuals of America, where neceſſity or curioſity has produced equal attention as in Europe, to the nouriſhment of animals, the horſes, cattle, ſheep and hogs of the one continent are as large as thoſe of the other. There are particular inſtances, well atteſted, where individuals of this country have imported good breeders from England, and have improved their ſize by care in the courſe of ſome years. To make a fair compariſon between the two countries, it will not anſwer to bring together animals of what might be deemed the middle or ordinary ſize of their ſpecies; becauſe an error in judging of that middle or ordinary ſize would vary the reſult of the compariſon. Thus Monsieur D'Aubenton[1] conſiders a horſe of 4 feet 5 inches high and 400lb. weight French, equal to 4 feet 8.6 inches and 436lb. Engliſh as a middle ſized horſe. Such a one is deemed a ſmall horſe in America. The extremes muſt therefore be reſorted to. The ſame anatomiſt[2]
