proofs of this. In Britain (except in the army), and on the continent, cold-shoeing is a mere historical souvenir.
The writer of the above article, whose knowledge of horse-shoes appears to have been almost, if not quite, as limited as his experience among horses, adds, in speaking of the manufacture of these shoes by machinery: 'Gentlemen will then be able to keep a stock of shoes for their horses at their own stables, and to have them put on there by the farrier, who will need no forge. The work of the farrier will, indeed, be so much simplified that in large stables it will probably be desirable to have a groom instructed (!), and to make the removal of the shoes a portion of the ordinary routine of the establishment.'
It can scarcely be surprising that one who is so readily captivated and can write so confidently in praise of this long-exploded system, should recommend cold-shoeing, and these shoes with calks at toes and heels, for the hunting-field. 'Another advantage of the system is one that will be greatly felt in the hunting-field. The hoof, having its natural form and surface preserved, draws out of clay or mud without the suction by which so many ordinary shoes are loosened, and so much extra labour is entailed upon the horse. It has been calculated that this suction may be nearly 1 lb. per lift to each foot, in addition to the weight of the shoe; and its total amount at the end of a day's work would be such as to seem scarcely credible.' Is it not a fact that horses have been for years, and are now, shod with hunting-shoes; that these shoes have been, and are, concave on the ground and flat on the foot surface,—even more so than Mr Goodenough's patent; and that so far as their form is concerned, they are less likely
