Page:Horse shoes and horse shoeing.djvu/566

 by inexperience, and the incorrect views of Coleman appear to have tainted his teaching, as they damaged his practice. The reason that the horse's sole was hollow, was because it descended or yielded with the weight of the animal. 'Then if the sole be naturally hollow, and hollow because it must descend, the smith must not interfere with this important action. When the foot will bear it, he must pare out sufficient of the horn to preserve the proper concavity, a small portion at the toe and near the crust, and cutting deeper towards the centre; and he must put on a shoe, which shall not prevent the descent of the sole; which not only shall not press upon it, but shall leave sufficient room between it and the sole to admit of this descent. If the sole is pressed upon by the coffin-bone, by the lengthening of the elastic leaves, and the shoe will not permit its descent, the sensible part between the coffin-bone and the horn will necessarily be bruised, and inflammation and lameness will ensue. It is from this cause that, if a stone insinuates itself between the shoe and the sole, it produces so much lameness.'

The principles of shoeing enunciated by Mr Youatt were entirely founded on the supposed elastic properties of certain parts of the foot—expansion at the quarters, flattening of the frog laterally, and descent of the sole. Grave errors certainly, resulting from imperfect study or mal-appreciation of the anatomy and physiology of the foot; and which were simply destruction to that organ, when these principles were applied to it.

The defence recommended was the 'seated' shoe of Osmer and Moorcroft, which was a vast improvement on that still in use, it appears. 'The ground surface of the