« PreviousContinue »
which may lead the young practitioner into serious errors, we will take fome notice of the objectionable parts. The
• union of the crust with the coffin bone, fustains the weight of the animal. The horse is not supported by the fole or frog; for, if these parts be removed or diseased, so as to become soft and of a fungous structure, and incapable of resistance, as in canker, the crust is, nevertheless, capable of bearing the whole of the superincumbent weight. If the fole and frog, in reality, supported the weight, then the foot would flip through the crust, when the frog and sole were taken away. But, as the crust supports the weight, even when the sole and frog are removed, there can be no doubt but that one of the functions of the crust is to support the animal.' P. 25.
Hence it appears that the author would depriye the sole and frog of the use generally assigned to them, viz. that of fupporting a very considerable portion of the weight of the body. To us it seems, from the situation of the fole and frog, their form, strength, intimate connection with, and exact application in their whole extent to, the parts above them, that they must in reality receive a great part of the weight of the body. The mechanism of the laminated union of the foot-bonę with the crust is constructed on the most effectual plan for extending the surface of support; but it would not be consistent with the wisdom of the architect, because much advantage is gained by this arrangement in one fituation, that support ihould be neglected in every other part.
Mr. Coleman grounds his opinion on this fact--that the foot-bone, from which the insensible fole and frog have been removed, is not found to slip through the crust. Such a conclufion should not be drawn from this circumstance, because, in this case, the horse rests only a very small part of his weight on the diseased foot, from the pain that he experiences in it, and which is increased by pressure. If it be a fact that the fole and the frog do not support a great part of the weight of the horse, it mult follow that the foot-bones would not flip through the crusts, if the soles and frogs of all the feet were taken away at the same time ; but we will venture to affert, that, should any one make the experiment, the result would convince him of the falsity of the author's assertion.
" The use of the horny fole is to protect the sensible sole from injury, to act as a stop, by embracing the ground, and when the laminated substances elongate, the horny fole at the heel descends.' P, 27.
Is it true, that the laminated substances do elongate, and that the horny fole does descend at the heels? If there be some
proof of this action, why does not the author state it, as it involves a point of practical importance?
After describing the structure, lituation, and action of the frog, he observes, that,
. The more we investigate this subject, the more we are convinced that the use of the frog is to prevent the horse from flipping, to preserve the heels expanded, and by its motion to act as an elastic spring to the animal.'
P. 31. For fimilar ideas on this subject, we refer our readers to the Cours d'Hippiatrique of La-Fofle, published in 1772.***
Mr. Coleman also obferves, that it was very natural for those writers who supposed that one use of the frog was to serve as a cuthion or guard to the flexor tendon, to endeavour to raise the frog from the ground, in order to guard the tendon from bruises.
• But, if it be a truth' (says he) that this projecting body was intended to enter the ground, then it will follow as a law of naa ture, that, unless the frog perform its functions, it must be diseases.'
: If thick heels were adopted from reflection, we may prefume that they were intended both to act as stops, and as guards for the tendons; but M. La-Fosse, although he was de. cidedly of opinion that the frog served as a defence for the tendon, thought it should always come in contact with the ground. By projecting body,' the author probably means, that the frog in its natural state projects beyond the level of the heels.
The fa&t, we conceive, will be found to be, that heavy horses with low heels, and particularly such as have been bred in marshy lands, have their frogs large, fleshy, and sometimes on a level with, but never projecting beyond, the heels. Among lighter horses, the frogs are much more frequently found to be short of, than on a level with, the heels. We are now speaking of colts; and we must beg the reader's attention to these circumstances, as, if we thould allow that the frog projets in every case, or even in general, we should admit a basis on which the practice of shoeing, recommended in this work, is evidently founded.
Our author is much difposed to mention, as data, points not generally admitted, and to deduce conclusions froin them. But, while we differ from him with regard to some of his pofitions, we must agree with him in one point--that it is important for an active animal to have motion!".
• That the frog was not made to defend the tendon, can' (he says) be demonstrated. There is no medical man, in the least acCrit, Rey. VOL. XXIV. 08. 1798.
quainted with the ftru&ure and economy of tendons, but must be fully convinced, that the frogs of horfes cannot have been formed to protect the tendons from injury. It has been proved by expeniment, that the substance of tendons in health has no sensation; and, confequently, that one insensible body (viz, the frog) cannot have been made for the purpose of protecting an organ void of feeling.'
We cannot avoid noticing the very positive manner in which all the opinions of the professor are asserted as faits ; and we beg leave to observe, that his doctrines would not be less instructive, if he were less confident. The present case, we believe, stands thus. Tendons, in health, are insensibles but, when they are diseased, they acquire a high degree of fensibility. This is every day manifested in strains; but in no inStance is it more evident than in injuries done to the flexor ten don of the foot. Most of the incurable lamenesses in the feet arise from this tendon being forcibly driven up, and bruised against the lower furface of the shuttle-bone, constituting what is usually called coffin-joint lameness. The tendon, being bruised, is inflamed, and becomes so painful, that the animal points the foot forward, and rests as little weight as possible on it; but, as in motion the inflamed parts rub over each other, so that the friction and pressure increase the pain, à continual irritation is kept up, and the complaint remains incurable. Are we to suppose that Mr. Coleman is ignorant of this fact? Upon this supposition alone can we justity bis reasoning. We deem it unnecessary to press this subject farther, to show that too many precautions could not be adopted by nature to prevent parts from being frequently injured, which, when once materially injured, never recover their original health. The author remarks,
That paring the frog, and raising it from the ground by a thick-heeled shoe, annihilates its functions, and ultimately, if not immediately, produces disease : and that, applying a shoe thin at the heel, and exposing the frog to pressure, is the only proper meth, od to keep it in health.'
P. 34• We are not advocates for paring, as generally practised, or for thicki heeled shoes; but we cannot refrain from observing, how apt inankind are to run into extremes. Some years agóg thick-heeled shoes, which threw the weight of the body too much upon the toe, were in general use in England, and indeed in most other parts of Europe : but now it is contend. ed that thin-heeled thoes, which cause too much of the weighe to fall on the heels, ought to be generally adopted. Perhaps a fhóe equally thick at the heel and at the toe, will be found to be attended with the feweft inconyeniences.
Moreover," (continues Mr. Coleman) it has been demon itrated, from experience, that 'unless the frog sustain an uniform preffure, it becomes soft and inflamed; atid the heels contracted. but if this organ be always in close contact with the ground, then it will be callous, infenfible, and healthy, and most of the diseafes incident to the foot prevented.
• The same degree of pressure applied to the frog, that pro* duces only pleasant sensation when in health, creates exquisite pain when diseased.
From this reasoning a person would conclude, that the frog in the foot of a colt is always in contact with the ground, which is not a fact, and that, when the frog is foft, it is in a itate of inflammation. If softness and inflammation be inseparable, then every cole at grass has its frogs-inflamed; for they are uniformly foft. We thall take our leave, for the present, , with congratulating the author on his discovery, thai, although the frog is callous and insensible when in health, yet in the same state it is capable of receiving pleasant sensation !
(To be continued.)
Don Carlos, Prince Royal of Spain: an Historical Drama
from the German of Frederick Schiller. By the Translator's of Fiesco. 8vo. 6s. Boards. Miller. 1798. Don Carlos: a Tragedy. Translated from the German of
Frederick Schiller. 8vo. 55. Boards. Richardsons. 1798.
THE name of Schiller is now sufficiently known in this country to demand atten:ion to any of his works. accustomed to his gigantic beauties and gigantic faults. Of his dramas the general effect is powerful; and, while we perceive their absurdities, we acknowledge their merit.
In Don Carlos we have the last of his plays that remained untranslated; and we do not scruple to pronounce it the worst, though Messrs. Noehden and Stoddart, the translators of Fiefco *, inform us that • in its native tongue it has been justly considered as surpalling all his others, both in the extent of its delign and in the manner of its execution.' It is this extent of design that we disapprove ; for one event follows another with a rapidity that produces confution. An outline of the plan will justify our censure.
Elizabeth, the wife of Philip II. had been previously be. troched to his fon Carlos. The feelings of the young prince are virtuous, and his principles liberal and benevolent. He is
* See Crit. Rev. New. Art. Vol. XXIL P. 2016
deeply interested for the oppreffed inhabitants of the LowCountries ; but disappointed affection wholly fills his inind, when his friend Rodrigo, marquis of Posa, arrives from the Netherlands. In an interview with this nobleman, the love of the prince is thus discovered.
• Carlos. A horrid secret burns within my breaft. It shall be reveal'd. In thy pale affrighted looks will I read the sentence of my death. Listen! Shudder with horror ; but reply not.--I love the queen, my mother. • Marquis. Wretched Carlos !
Carloi. No. I reject thy pity. Speak plainly ! Say that all this earth there's no one, whose sufferings can match with mine,
-Speak! Thou canst not tell me more, than I already know. I know, it is a son that loves his mother. The ordinances of nature, the customs of the world, the laws of Rome forbid it. --But in vain.-My passion boldly tramples on my father's rights. I know all this, and yet I love. The path I tread, leads but to death or madness. My love is hopeless---criminal-beset with mortal anguish, and life-threatening peril-and yet I love. • Marquis. Does the queen know your passion:
Carlos. Could I reveal it to her ? She is the wife of Philip; she is this country's queen. Watch'd by my father's Neepless jeaJoufy, hemm'd in by courtly etiquette, how could I e'er approach her unperceived? Eight torturing months have past, fince the king recalled me from the university to attend his court, since I have daily been condemned to hear her, to gaze upon her, and be silent as the gravem Eight torturing months, Rodrigo, whilst the flame has burnt within my bosom, whilst the hazardous avowal a thousand times has trembled on my lips, a thousand times has died away in coward silence. O my Rodrigo! that I had one little moment--short as the hafty prayer of the dying penitent - to be alone with her.
5. Marquis. Your father, prince! Think of your father!
• Carlos. Cease, criel man ! why name my father to me i Speak of the sharpeft pangs of conscience, but speak not of my father. Betwixt him and me he adamantine bonds of nature are for ever tors afunder. Marquis. You hate
father! • Carlos. No! ah, no, I do not hate him ; but his very name strikes to my soul a terror like the agonies of guilt. Am I to blame, that cold austerity nipt the p’ning buds of young affection in my heart? I was six years old, when first the dreadful man they callid my father, appeared before me. 'Twas on a morning, when, with careless haste, he sign’d four sentences of death. Thenceforwari! I never faw !im, but to inark with punishment my youthful follies. Oh, God! I feel tha: bitterness of soul o'ercomes me; I must be gone away! away! (Going.)