days had not elapsed from meeting with these two specimens, another came into my hands, and that, too, a case in which I ventured to predict the state of the parts prior to death. And I must further remark, that, in two subsequent visits to the tanners, in company with several of my pupils, of seven feet selected as worthy of dissection, simply from their appearance and form, without any knowledge of the horses, or whether they had been lame or not, four of these proved to be affected with the same disease.

But I must hasten to his second point, and endeavour to show why I am of opinion that all shoeing, whether good or bad, will produce the disease. Mr Clark seems to feel very sanguine about his expansion-shoe, and appears surprised I have said so little about it. Now, I thought I had said enough; I said, in fact, that in principle it is the best, but in practice it has some defects in common with other shoes.

It is attached with nails, and these nails may pinch the sensible parts within, by displacing the soft parts of the hoof inwards. Although this has been denied by the late Mr Peal of Dublin, I am sure every practical man in the profession will bear me out when I assert that such is the fact, and which I can also prove by specimens of morbid anatomy; and so sensible was Mr Clark's uncle of this, that, to prevent such almost unavoidable occurrence with the expansion-shoe, he invented a stretcher, and published an account of it for the use of those who may apply the shoes. Now, in this way, contraction may be produced even with the expansion-shoe. But, besides this, unless the jointed shoe were composed of elastic materials, it would not admit the equal expansion of the different parts, an argument which has been repeatedly urged against the jointed shoe, and which I will not therefore insist upon. But it is besides liable to the objections of the common shoe in the irregular pressure that may arise from it, if not properly bedded; that is, if it rest too much on any one part of the hoof, the effects which follow such extra pressure will be inflammation and its consequences. Besides, this is more likely to occur with the jointed shoe than any other, because, unless the joint is made to play horizontally with a degree of mathematical exactness (scarcely to be expected in the construction of the shoe, even although it is made of cast

iron), the contraction or expansion of it may cause an increase of pressure upon either heel, which may produce inflammation and all its consequences. And, unless Mr Clark sets up a claim to infallibility in his workmen, I cannot see how these circumstances should not have occurred in the course of his practice. Where, then, is the impossibility of the disease occurring with his expansion-shoe? Mr Clark surely will not deny that inflammation could be produced by the causes I have stated; and if, therefore, he has not yet had the misfortune of finding a horse going lame with the expansion-shoe, he must not suppose it is therefore perfection; he may yet have more experience. And with regard to his testimonials, I am bold to say that there are hundreds of practitioners who could tell the same tale in regard to their different kinds of shoes; aye, and get as many testimonials as Mr Clark. How rare, for example, does the "fettering" system affect farm horses in slow work; how seldom does it occur in ponies of light weight. How is it so little known in France and on the Continent, amongst horses that go much upon their haunches, and have high action, but which put their forefeet to the ground with less force than our well-bred horses? If the fettering system was so very destructive, we should have all our horses lame in a short time. But let Mr Clark look back to the case I mentioned on a former occasion, and explain how with "fettered" shoes the horse's feet continued perfect when he was otherwise worn out.

We are told that Mr Clark has " used expansion-shoes for several years on a considerable number of horses," and that he has never seen," while wearing them, a single horse become affected in this manner "-In what manner? In the manner he confessedly does not understand. But mark the caution of the expression," while wearing them." Few horses having, it would appear, used these shoes constantly, if they fell lame, it was always after they had been wearing common shoes; to them the lameness was ascribed-the fatal contamination of the common shoe.

Mr Clark asks, very triumphantly, why the ancient Roman veterinary writers have not mentioned this disease, if it arises from the "pace," and at a time when their pace was as rapid as ours, without shoes? But is there any thing wonderful in

the Romans not being aware of the existence of a disease about which even Mr Clark himself is not satisfied? Will he pretend ignorance of the fact, that, even in the present day, it is commonly supposed to exist in the shoulders? And is he really serious when he says, that "where no unnatural restraint of the foot is permitted, there will be no inflammation and no subsequent disease?" Will not the "pace," will not over exertion, induce inflammation, and that too in such a degree as in some instances to threaten separation of the entire hoof, as in acute founder, and why not in the degree and in the part I have treated of? If Mr Clark does not believe it, I do; and have had proof by "real experience."

Let us here, however, inquire into the expansion of the foot, before going farther, and see whether we have not been making a noise about nothing. What is the amount and nature of the expansion of the hoof? It appears to me that we have been led too far by the expansive doctrine. What is the action of the foot when the weight is thrown upon it and the hoof unshod? We see the under extremity of the crust coming in contact with a hard surface; and if on a pavement, the edge of the crust will embrace it with increasing firmness, as the weight increases upon it. Now it is said that the hoof expands when the weight is thrown upon it; but, unless perhaps where the frog is prominent, if pressing on a surface such as a pavement, or that of a smooth Macadamised road, where, I ask, would the expansion take place? I do not think there would, in such a case, be play to any great extent between the lower edge of the crust and the ground, so long as it is a fixed principle in mechanics, that the increase of friction retards motion.

But besides this, the laminæ on the interior of the crust are so many springs running downward and inward; and as the weight is thrown upon them, their action is to draw the sides in some degree together. But observe how nature has provided to guard against injury in such circumstances; the blood, by the peculiar construction of the vessels, escapes from the foot by innumerable channels, and the increased portion of the foot which is forced down by the superincumbent weight, is thus allowed to enter within the hoof, without any material expansion of it being required; and thus we see that the hoof becomes

fettered independent of shoeing; and of this Mr Clark is not altogether ignorant, as he has alluded to it in the Farrier, without, however, offering any remarks upon the subject.

Let us next inquire into the principles of the common shoe, so much condemned by Mr Clark. It is a defence to the hoof, attached by means of nails, which extend round one half of the foot, or rather half the circle of the hoof. It is not fair, therefore, in Mr Clark to stigmatize the common shoe as rendering the hoof "as rigid as a block of wood bound round with a ring of iron." The hoof, at most, is only bound half round; it is still allowed the play of its expansive properties behind the nails; the common shoe is at most only a half ring, in as far as the fixing is concerned; and all the boasted improvement of Mr Clark's expansion system, consists in dividing this half ring into two quarters. This is the mighty improvement-this, the ne plus ultra of the art of shoeing. I have admitted that the jointed shoe has its advantages; but, in the mean time, let Mr Clark consider what play can take place in the jointed shoe, when it is resting on a firm surface below, and pressed upon by the hoof and the weight of the horse above; that is not a likely time for its expansion. I do not deny the elasticity of the hoof-Who ever did? I allow there are circumstances where the hoof is expanded, and where it is advantageous that it should be allowed to do so with freedom. But while so much attention has been paid to its expansive properties, why should its opposite properties be so much overlooked? Has the contractile power been given to the hoof in vain? May not the fixed state which must take place in the crust, when in contact with a hard flat surface, even before the hoof has been shoed, require that the horny sole should be compressible to allow it to descend when pressed upon from above? Do we not find, when hoofs are very wide and open, that the sole is apt to descend in such a degree as to become diseased, and that, too, in defiance of what the common shoe can do to press up the sole and contract the hoof? But not only does the friction which takes place between the under edge of the crust and the ground, prevent expansion at the moment of greatest pressure, and when the greatest necessity for such expansion apparently occurs, but the heels of the hoof run in a direction obliquely forward un

der the superincumbent weight, in such a manner, that instead of expansion, there is, of necessity, a natural tendency to contract at these extreme parts. Methinks I hear Mr Clark say, What doctrine is this which is brought forward? Is every established opinion to be subverted to support an absurd theory? No but these remarks will perhaps lead Mr Clark to consider better what he advances in regard to a subject about which we chance to differ.

Having formerly shown that this disease is similar to what occurs in other parts of the animal, I only recommended the ordinary treatment for such cases. A specific was not to be expected. I certainly expected none. On the contrary, I have been led to doubt the merits of Mr Clark's specific-the expansion-shoe. Although I have not enlarged so fully as I might have done on many parts of Mr Clark's letter, I shall content myself with only farther remarking, that whatever may have been the discussions of the London Veterinary Medical Society upon the disease in question, my opinions were not even alluded to there; and whether Mr Clark thinks so or not, I am induced to believe that most of your readers will be able to draw this conclusion from the discussion-that neither the expansion-shoe, nor any other, will be sufficient to prevent the disease, so long as the animal is subjected to "a killing pace upon the road," and that combined with the other disadvantages under which this animal is compelled to labour. I am, &c.

REMARKS ON CERTAIN DISEASES OF SHEEP.

Shepherd.

By the Ettrick

THE most destructive and ruinous disease among sheep at this time, over all the south of Scotland, is that called the Pining— a very descriptive Scotticism, from the verb, for no creature can have a more languishing and miserable look than a sheep affected by this malignant distemper. Well may I describe it, for, in the course of the last nine years, I have lost upwards of 900 sheep by its ravages. It is quite a new disease on the Border, for I was twenty years a shepherd and never saw an instance