In this fentence, by found, the author eems to mean entire, and to intimate that, when the horny or outer frog is in part removed, what remains is not fufficient to defend the inner or Hleshy frog from being bruised.

'Granite and other hard fubftances' (he obferves) have no effect (ill, we suppose, is understood) on the frog, when it is preserved, and the hoof properly fhod: but, where it is foft and tender, in confequence of being cut, and raised by a thick heeled fhoe, one stroke from a projecting ftone will produce pain, while perpetual preffure, with a proper fhoe, is attended with falutary effects.' P. 36.

The principle chiefly recommended in this fection is, that the frog fhould be kept as much as poffible in contact with the ground, as it will thus become extremely hard, and lefs liable to be injured than when it is foft, will prevent the heels from contracting, be enabled to perform its other functions to the greateft advantage, and be preserved in its original condition.

In our capacity of reviewers, it is our duty to detect and expofe every attempt to bring forward old ideas as new ones; and, as Mr. Coleman has not acknowledged his obligations in this refpect, we deem it neceffary to ftate, that the fubftance of this fection is to be found in the Cours d'Hippiatrique of La-Foffe, under the article Ferrure. Our author, indeed, has confiderably expanded the ideas of the French writer, and has adduced fome ingenious arguments in fupport of them; but he has not entirely convinced us that this practice, carried to the extent he recommends, is free from defects, affirms, that the external frog is compofed of foft elastic horn, and is totally infenfible; and he makes ufe of the following argument in defence of original organisation.

He

• Any man in the least acquainted with the wisdom of nature will be convinced, that, if the bars had been of no ufe, they would not have been created. As they are always found in a natural hoof, the conclufion is felf-evident, that they are of some use.'

6

This, we think, is found logic. We therefore beg Mr. Coleman's permiffion to employ it here, and to substitute a few other words, which only affect the nature of the fact, without altering the force of the reafoning. Any man in the leaft acquainted with the wifdom of nature will be convinced, that, if the foftness of the frog were of no use, the frog would not have been foft in the ftate of nature. As it is always found foft in a colt at grafs, the conclufion is felf-evident that this foftness is of some use.'

It is known that hard bodies have the property of tranf mitting through their fubftance any motion communicated to their furface more readily than foft ones, and that, the more

denfe is the body, the greater is the velocity of the motion. When machinery of any kind is in regular motion in one direction, and a confiderable blow is given to it in a different one, a jar is produced, which renders the motion irregular, and tends to fpoil the machinery; and where blows of this kind are apprehended, a foft elastic body is placed to receive them, and, by its fpring, to cut off the fhock. The foot of the horfe is intended to receive a conflant fucceffion of blows; and nature has endeavoured to prevent the bones of the different joints in the legs from being jarred and interrupted in their movements, by placing the frog, a foft and very elastic cushion, to receive the blows and obstruct the propagation of the fhocks.

It is a fact that the frog, by bearing against the ground at every step, becomes much harder than it would be if it were only to come against it occafionally: but it is alfo a fact, that, as it acquires hardness, it lofes its yielding quality, which, in our opinion, is effential to the due performance of its functions. It is only by art that the frog is made to come in contact with the ground at every step. If this circumftance had been neceffary, or even the moft advantageous for the foot, we may prefume that it would not have been left to the fagacity of man to make the discovery, but rather that the frog would have been originally conftructed on fuch a plan as would have enfured its being conftantly in fuch a fituation. Now, as we have before obferved, that, in the foot of a colt at grafs, the frog is much oftener fhort of, than on a level with, the heels, we fubmit it to better phyfiologifts than we are, to determine whether it is not probable that the frog was intended to come in contact with the ground occafionally, rather than at every step. By the continual preffure, its clafticity is diminifhed; but, by preffure merely occafional, its flexibility is preferved, and comes into ufe when it is particularly wanted. In flow movements, the proportional weight of the body is thrown upon each limb flowly and without much force, and the hind tendons are able to bear it with perfect fafety, without the frog preffing on the ground; but in quick movements, where the weight is thrown with rapidity and great force on the back of the leg, the tendons would be liable to be ftrained or even ruptured, were they not fupported behind and below; and then it is that the frog, being driven against the ground, receives the blow, fpreads, and, by its claftic property, breaks

the shock.

The joint within the hoof, commonly called the coffinjoint, is formed of three bones, fo connected, as to have confiderable play in the found ftate. To preferve this play, nature appears to have wifely rendered the frog foft and elastic, as the cruft and horny fole are made hard and lefs elaftic, to

fecure and defend the interior parts of the foot from injury. Indeed, a longitudinal fection of the foot fhows that the fhuttle-bone plays on the furface of the flexor tendon, and forces the fenfible frog downward in quick and ftrong movements. Hence it is evident, that hardness in the horny frog, deftroying its natural elasticity, muft hinder the defcent of the tendon, and, like an over-tight thoe in the human subject, muft cramp and impede the action of the joint, and ultimately produce difease.

The original foftness of the frog is alfo connected with a function which we muft not pafs over in filence: a fluid of a peculiar fmell is thrown out by the frog; and, when this has long remained in contact with its furface, it becomes putrid, diffolves the parts where it accumulates moft (as in the fide fiffures), conftituting what is called a thrush, and, if neglected, degenerates into canker. Upon the fame principle, the cuticle, between the toes of men who are uncleanly in their perfons, is diffolved.

We agree with Mr. Coleman in condemning, for general fc, high-heeled fhoes, which almoft entirely prevent the frog from coming in contact with the ground, as they tend to pro duce difeafes in that part. On the other hand, it is reasonable to fuppofe, that the continual preffure of the frog on the ground, by hardening its furface, will confiderably impede the due fecretion and efcape of its perfpirable matter. In fupport of this reasoning, we may remark, that many horses, which have had their frogs hardened by long-continued preffure on the ground, and have been much ufed, frequently shift the weight of the body, when ftanding in the ftable, from one fore-foot to the other, as if uneafy, although there may be no other indication of difeafe than the heat and drynefs of the feet. Such horses, when taken out of the stable, are more disposed to canter than to trot, because in cantering they use the hind parts more than in trotting, and thus relieve their fore-feet. To moisten the lower part of the feet, tends to a removal of the fymptoms of uneafinefs, and more especially, if the hard furface of the frog be pared a little, and kept from conftantly preffing on the ground. The cut furfaces of fuch frogs have frequently been found fpeckled with a great number of fmall red points of coagulated blood.

The frog is certainly lefs liable, when it is hard, to be cut by flints or other fharp fubftances, than when it is foft: but accidents of this nature occur fo rarely, that the advantage obtained in this refpect will by no means over-balance the inconveniencies which conftantly accompany its hardness: and although the contact of the frog with the ground at every frep may tend to prevent contractions in the heels, yet we are of

opinion, that this end may be attained by lefs objectionable

means.

Upon the whole, we are difpofed to maintain, that to render the horny frog hard, is to counteract the original intention of nature, as, the harder it becomes, the more the action of the coffin-joint is reftrained, the frog is the lefs capable of spreading, or of adapting itfelf to the furface on which it falls, its fpring is the more diminished, and it is the more calculated to tranfmit fhocks to the parts which are above it.

The fecond fection relates to the common practice of fhoeing horfes, and its confequences.' In this part of the work, the writer charges farriers with greater abufes than they really commit, without confidering that he thus injures the caufe which he wishes to ferve, and raifes doubts in the minds of his readers with regard to the general authenticity of his statements.

• Before any shoe be fitted to the hoof, the bars are totally, and the frog partly, removed by an inftrument called the butteris. If it be true, that the bars are made to prevent the heels from contraction, or, indeed, if the bars have any function, that function must be loft when they are destroyed.' P. 40.

The practice of cutting away much of the lower part of the hoof is ftill too general, though it has been decried by all the writers who have treated of thoeing for fome years past; and we agree with our author that mischief is produced by it.

The bars, or binders, as they are termed, are two in number. They are placed between the frog and fole; and, at the heels, form a broad folid junction with the cruft. The toe, or small part of the bar, fometimes reaches externally nearly as far as the toe of the frog. The bars within the hoof are laminated in the fame manner as the internal part of the cruft, and are attached to the horny sole. The infenfible lamina are intimately connected with the lamina of the fenfible fole.' P. 27.

Farriers are certainly too much in the habit of fcooping or hollowing the external part of the bars; but they never cut them away totally, as, if they should do fo, the fenfible fole above would become bare, and the horfe would immediately be lamed. This we understand to be the fact; and, if only part of the bars be removed, the author's conclufion refpecting the deftruction of their functions can only be true in part.

The removal of the bars is termed, opening the heels; and is performed for the exprefs purpose, that the heels may not contract, or the heels of the fhoe prefs upon the fole, and occafion corns. But it is rather unfortunate, that this operation, intended to prevent

corns, and contracted heels, fhould be the remote caufe of the very difeafes defigned to be obviated.' P. 41.

Here Mr. Coleman seems to have had in view the following paffage of M, Soleyfel, who wrote on this fubject in 1744-On appelle ouvrir les talons, loifque le maréschal en parant le pied coupe le talon près de la fourchette, et l'emporte jufqu'au haut à un doigt de la couronne, enforte qu'il fépare les quartiers du talon, et par ce moyen il affame le pied et le fait ferrer: ce qu'ils appellent ouvrir un talon, eft proprement le faire ferrer, Parfait Maréfchal, feconde partie.

The function of the frog, as a ftop, must be injured by the removal of a confiderable portion of it; and we think that it will feldom be found neceffary to take away any more than the ragged parts.

As the cruft is always lowered before the fhoe is put on, and the fole generally thinned, we naturally expected that the author would have touched upon this part of the process of preparing the hoof for the fhoe, as well as that which relates to the bars and the frog; and we are the more disappointed in this respect, as we are of opinion, that to hollow the fole leads to confequences nearly as injurious to the fafety of the parts within the hoof, as the practice fo ftrongly reprobated by Mr. Coleman. From his filence on this head, we conclude, either that the latter circumftance has escaped his notice, which we can fcarcely fuppofe, or that he approves the practice, which we have as much difficulty in believing. Whatever may have been the cause of the omiffion, the defcription of the ufual mode of preparation is rendered imperfect by it.

We have proceeded to greater length in the examination of this fubject than we at firft intended; but we conceive the public to be interested in every thing which relates to the prefervation of fo useful an animal as the horse.

The Study and Practice of the Law confidered, in their various Relations to Society. In a Series of Letters. By a Member of Lincoln's Inn. 8vo. 6s. Boards. Cadell and Davies. 1798.

THE study of the law is obviously a fubject of great importance; and various productions have appeared, in which the authors have profeffed to point out the moft eligible mode" of directing the attention of the ftudent. It may, however, be remarked of thofe publications, that in many inftances they merely repeat the advice attributed to eminent lawyers, and that in others, by treating law more as a profeffion than as a science, the compilers exhibit no novelty of fentiment or depth of fpeculation. To combine general principles with CRIT. REV. VOL. XXIV. Dec. 1798.

Hh