In his article on horseshoeing Mons. Lavalard makes some good points, and also some that appear to me to be erroneous. He says, in regard to the frog, "It is evident, then, that the frog helps the hold, but strange to say, it alone of the three parts has a share in the hold when the hoof is shod."

We see nothing strange about this where horses travel over hard roads; the case is otherwise on soft roads or race tracks. It is easy to make the ground surface of such shape that it will have sufficient hold, without the action of the frog. In the shod foot, the frog has more to do with keeping the foot healthy than assisting in the hold. With horses used for speeding purposes, the frog helps to sustain the sole of the foot, as when the foot is brought down with great force and the road soft enough to receive the imprint of the shoe. He further says that: "Simultaneous with this preservation and regeneration of the frog, the hold of the horse becomes firmer, and more equally divided toward the heels, and when starting a load, there is no clamping with the toe of the hoof, but the foot is brought down flat."

Let us examine this statement and see if the reason why the horse brings the foot down flat is because the frog is good, and has a good hold on the ground. The reason appears to us to be because from the manner of shoeing the horse cannot put his foot in any other way. The shoes are much thinner behind than in front, and the heels pared low enough to insure the frogs resting on the ground. Excessive paring of the heels gives extra length to the shoe, which, being thick at the toe, props the toe up in such a manner that the horse is forced to let the foot remain flat when starting a load. Nothing is gained by keeping the foot flat while starting a load, and to prove this, we ask the reader to observe unshod horses when starting a load. The frog having free access to the ground, see if the horse does not clamp the ground with the toe when exhibiting the maximum of strength. Also examine the imprint of horses' feet (especially the hind ones) when drawing heavy loads over soft ground, and see if the shoe is not pressed more firmly into the ground at the toe than at the heel. This is not because he gets a better use of the frog by so doing, but because the foot is in a better position for the horse to exert his strength without injury to the back tendons. As a further test, place yourself on an incline facing squarely up hill, and see how much power you can exert; then place your feet exactly opposite in direction, and note how much power you can then exhibit. What has made the difference? Simply the relative position of the heels and toes. We do not, like Mons. Lavalard, wish to force our horses to travel up hill all the time, which is the case when shod as he describes.

Horseshoers, like other men who follow a special calling, are apt to think that their theories and practices relating to their special trade are superior to those of other men. I think it is safe to make the assertion, without fear of successful refutation, that there is not more than one horseshoer in ten thousand but what can convince the average horse owner that he (the smith) knows just about all that is worth knowing about horseshoeing.

And the same average horse owner is conceited enough to think himself a better judge of a good job of shoeing than the intelligent animal that wears the shoes till his feet feel as though they were full of thistles. A horse's foot is not a thing that can be cut and slashed into all shapes with impunity, but requires careful as well as intelligent treatment. It is a great mistake to suppose that every sound foot should be treated alike. Each foot has its individuality, which must be recognized and respected if good results are to follow shoeing. It is a lamentable fact, and one that cannot be disputed, that most horseshoers have but a faint notion of what is required to shoe a horse properly, even where no defects exist. If he gets pay for the work, he gives himself no trouble to improve on his methods. But with the owner the case is different. The usefulness and value of the horse are largely affected by the condition of the feet, and he must learn to know how his horse ought to be shod, and then see to it that the work is properly executed. We know from personal experience that this is hard to do. The smith must understand that you are in earnest about the matter, and that you are bound to have your orders obeyed. I have found some men very obstinate, and others always ready to do anything that was an improvement on the old way. First decide what kind of labor the horse is expected to perform. If he is expected to go fast, great care and skill will be required to get everything just as it should be, and don't blame the smith for charging extra for extra work.

It will often be necessary to make several trials before you find out just what suits the horse best, and don't fail to let the horse be judge in the matter, for when he is suited you ought to be.

Place the horse on a smooth, clean floor, and note the set of each foot, and whether it is in line with the limb above it. Cut away the wall of the foot until you come to where it joins the sole; except at the heels and quarter, it may not be quite as low; let the frog and bars remain intact, but see that the shoe will not bear much on the bars. Give the sole about its natural concavity of surface up to the wall, but no further. Place the foot on the floor and see if it is in line with the limb; if not, remove enough horn to make it so. The slant of the front part of the fore foot should, as a rule, be the same as that of the pastern; that of the hind ones a little steeper. Now stand behind the horse while he is made to walk, and see if when the foot approaches the floor both sides come down at the same time so that there is no rocking motion from one side striking first. Disregard the advice of some writers who recommend to have the sole bare on the iron; that theory when put into practice doesn't work worth a cent.

In most cases it will not be necessary to remove much, if any, of the horn from the sole, but there are cases where it will be found necessary to remove quite an amount, or the sole will become so inelastic that it will greatly interfere with the action of the internal organs of the foot. It is evident that nature made the sole of the foot so that it might be acted upon mechanically to remove its surplus growth in the same way as the wall, for in the unshod foot it receives the impact of all sorts of substances, from soft mud to sharp, flinty rocks; and that, too, without becoming dry and brittle.

The bearing surface should be half an inch wide and made positively flat and level, being without lumps or depressions, and not beveled either way unless they are hard and inclined to pinch, when it should be beveled to the outside, so that the weight of the horse when brought upon its surface will cause the heels to open, thereby causing a more healthy condition of the frog. The nail holes of the shoe should be further from the outer edge of the shoe, especially at the toe, than those usually seen in the market. The bearing surfaces of the foot and shoe should be as nearly approximated as possible, else the hoof will be bruised and the shoe soon loosened. The holes being further from the edge, allows the nails to take a deeper and lower hold than is usually given them; the direction of the nails is more nearly across the grain or layers of horn, causing less splitting of its substance, thereby securing a firmer hold upon the foot. Two large nails are usually chosen, 5s or 6s being large enough for ordinary shoes. It is not necessary to hammer down the clinches, if care has been taken to draw the nails, finishing with light strokes of the hammer. The shoes will stay just as long, as we can testify by four years' experience, and the advantages are that the horn is not injured by filing below the clinches nor by the strokes of the hammer during the operation.

Should the horse step upon the shoe, no horn will be removed with the shoe, as is usually done when the clinches are left long and then turned down with the hammer. In such cases, the shoe will be torn off, no matter how solid the clinches hold, and it is better to come away without breaking the hoof. We repeat and make emphatic that the bearing surface of the shoe must not be concave, as it is almost sure to make corns, and induce an inflammatory condition of the foot, and this inflammatory action is the forerunner of the long list of evils that are sure to follow, unless means are taken to relieve the parts. And yet almost every horseshoer in the country gives the bearing surface of the shoe a bevel to the center. Many smiths will deny this, but after they have the shoe ready to apply to the foot, take a square and place the edge across the bearing surface at the heel of the shoe, and ninety-nine times out of one hundred the outside will be the highest.

The front action of a horse may be greatly modified by the weight of the shoe, and here is where great caution, close attention, and a thorough knowledge of the principles involved are required, or one will be liable to throw his horse out of balance if he is used for speeding; for slow work it is better to have the shoe somewhat lighter than the horse might carry than to err in the opposite direction. It is not intended by me to take up all the points of horseshoeing that might be dwelt upon with profit, and no one who reads these remarks will be more ready than I to learn a better method of shoeing than that I now practice, and I sincerely hope that some reader of this paper will favor us with more information on this important subject.—P. D. B., in Wallace's Monthly.