The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1884-05-01
SHOULD HORSES BE sHoD.
BY JOHN NJ. STAHt, st. Louis, Mo.

We have always had men who con-
tended that to do so was wrong, for
nature did not put shoes upon them.
and If was right she would shoe every
colt. Mere logical reasons are now
advanced for the abolition of horse
shoes when attached to an equine hoof.
rms question is an important one
There is no other animal so valuable
to the farmer or for which he finds
more constant employment.
1t cannot be denied that many hors IS
are injured temporarily or permanent
ly by bad shoeing. There is scarcely
a farmer who has not had an animal,
more or less valuable, ruined in this
way. The hoof of the horse is tender
and easily injured, A bad fitting shoe
or one bunglingly put on may lead
to temporary, and in time permanent
lameneSs. 1t may be urged that
this is not the fault of shooting per Sc,
but of our unskillful, incompetent
workmen. But if shoeing We're abol-
ished outright it is clear that there
would be no bad shoeing or lameness
and ruined horses occasioned by it.
The blow, nevertheless, draws blood
for the opponents of Shoeing.
Another objection to shoeing is that
horse frequently "corks" himself, or
is kicked by another shod horse and
severely cut. When the shoes are
made with sharp "cork," as they are
in winter to prevent the horse from
slipping, and at all seasons for use on
the paved roads of the cities. stroke
with them, whether received at the heels
of another horse or the result
of the animals own awkwardness is
sure to produce no small injury. Too
often the cut is neglected until 1t has
developed into a painful sore, and
cure has become difficult. There will
always be kicking and clumsy horses,
therefore there will be horses injured
in this way as long as they are shod.
Ergo, shoeing must go.
In its natural state, the crust of a
horses hoof resembles Il number of
small tubes bound together by glu-
tinuous, hardened substance The nails
are driven through this crust. In order
to penetrate they must force the mat
ter of the hoof aside and thus close up
the adjacent pores, or tubes. This in
turn prevents the circulation of the
fluids of the hoof, producing dryness
and brittleness. The result is
that the hoof cracks, breaks,
and in time becomes diseased.
That shoeiDg thus interior es
with the nouriShment of the
hoof by vital fluids is proven by 1.-THE
structure of the foot, and that it is the
cause of ninety-nine per cent. of the
breakings and diseases of the hoofs is
conclusively demonstrated by the
ho"fs of shod and unshod animals.
While shod horses suffer from con-
tracte,i. infrm feet. the hoofs of those
never snod are solid, firm, and tough.
A very good authority has said
that ninety-nine hundredths of the
diseases and infirmiJies of horses
shoeing, good and bad.
The horses foot is capable of con-
trac' ion and expansion. Any per-
son may prove this to his own salts
faction by few easy measurements
when the foot is raised and when
it rests firmly on some solid surface
The object of this capabillty is to
give the horse firmer hold upon hard
sufaces and to permit him to draw
his foot with greater ease from Shiny
or sticky i stances. The shoe is a
band of iron incapable of being eX-
banded or contracted. Hence when it
is nailed to the horses hoof it pre-
vents expansion or contraction and
seriously interferes with the intend
ment of matchmaking the horse less
sure-foote1 upon hard surfaces, and
causing him greater difficulty in trav-
cling through mire and mud.
Again, the interior of the hoof is a
soft, spongy substance, pupularly
called the frog" When the hoof is
in a natural state, not rendered
abnormal by the work of farIiers,
the tough horny shell projects
but little below the frog, aid when
the foot expands while resting on
firm surface the frog is brought in
contact with that surface, giving the
horse a better hold and preventing
slipping in smooth places, just as the
India rubber shoes put on English
hunting horses prevent their slipping
on icy ground. But the shoe raises
the hoof off the ground and prevents
its expansion, thus precluding the
contact of frog and surface. The
horse travels with greater difficulty
and less security.
The object of the shoe, as usually
given, is two-fold-to protect the hoof
from injury, and to prevent slipping
on smooth or icy surface. AS
shoeing is disadvantageous in
so many respects, and leads to
so many mischiefs, it may be well to
inquire if the shoe is at all necessary
and if nature has not made the hoof
of such texture that it needs no pro-
lection, and of such a formation that
man cannot make it more sure ON
slippery surfaces.
1t SHOULD be remembered that shoe
ing is q modern thing. 1t is an inno-
walton upon the usual course of
things. The ancients did not know
anything of shoeing, and yet we never.
read of their horses feet giving way.
Zenophon gives pretty complete ac-
count of the retreat of the Greek
army, composed in good part Of cav
airy. from the plains of Babylon to
the shores of the EuXine,and has much
to say of horses, of their care and
treatment, and yet he says nothing of
those cavalry horses becoming sore
footed. If such a thing had hap
pened, we may be pretty sure he
would have spoken of 1t.
During the Indian mutiny the Eng
lish cavalry horses were rarely shod,
yet they made long distances over a
rough country. The horses CorteZ
brought with him to America were
unshod, yet their hoofs stood the
rough usage well, and the descendants
of those horses to-day are the Next
can Mustangs, as sure and firm-foot-
ed as horse could be, yet never shod.
History informs us that when the
French made their memorable re-
treat from Moscow nearly all the
horses lost their shoes before they
reached the VistaIa yet they made
their way over rough and icy ground
to France. Shoeing is altogether
unknown in many parts of Europe
and among the Welch hills. Yet
those horses are the only ones which
are noted for their firm and sure
| feet. The pack animals used in the
Andes are never shod and they travel
over the very toughest surfaces pos
sible. yet their feet never wear out,
and they are certainly more sure-foot-
ed than the sharpest shod horse in the
United States. Colts are rarely shod
before they are four or five years OF
age, yet their hoofs are sound and
they are sure-foOted. If facts prove
ANYTHING they certainly prove that
shoes are not necessary either to pro-
tect the hoof or prevent it from slip
ming on smooth surfaces.
The truth of the matter is, that the
horse shoe is relic of the dark ages,
and the sooner we can safely
| d;,oo,d II tho halter Rut this