Rensselaer Union, Volume 10, Number 51, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 September 1878 — Uneven Heels on Horse-Shoes. [ARTICLE]

Uneven Heels on Horse-Shoes.

The advantage or disadvantage of having calkins either on the fore or on the hind shoes, or on both, wilt vary in different cases. But there should be no difference, under any pretense whatever, between the outer and inner heel of the same shoes, in point of elevation. We know that a difference is frequently made for the purpose of preventing brushing, or probably for some imaginary reason; but it is highly improper, because in the long run it will lie sure to induce lameness in the leg, in consequence of the weight of the body being thrown more on one side of the joint than on the other. It is just as barbarous and injudicious to shoe a horse on this plan as it would be to oblige a man to walk in aboot with one side of the heel double the thickness of the other. However, our interposition on behalf of humanity to the contrary, the notion will likely prevail that one side of the florae’sshoe must be higher than the other in order to prevent brushing (interfering or cutting); so, as it has to be done, it should be made in such a manner as to bo at least of practical utility. VYemay* andean, in many cases, effectually prevent a horse

from cutting by using bevelled shoes: but this is not always to be trusted. We only prevent by this the sharp edge of the shoe coming in contact with the standing leg, which would otherwise be wounded by it. There are many horses that would still hit if they had no shoes on them, and if we could cut half the hoof away, they would still interfere. It is the position in which the standing leg is placed by Nature, and the direction of the moving or passing leg. that produces the failing. We cannot alter Nature, vye can only bring art to remedy to a certain degree the natural defect. Smiths are very apt, on being told, or seeing that a horse cuts, to shoe him “ thick-heeled,” as it is termed, on the inside, or to make his shoe altogether thicker on the inside than on the out. They tell you that by this mode they turn or twist the ankle further out of the way of the passing leg. This is true; but they are not aware that by removing the ankle of the standing leg —say an inch further out of the way—they bring the passing leg three inches nearer the standing one. To show the effect of this, let anyone place a bit of wood an inch thick under the inside of the tread of his shoe; if he does this by the right foot, he will find his body thrown out of equilibrium to the right. Let him, in this position, attempt to pass his left leg by the other he will find it inclined to touch the standing leg. Now let him remove the piece of wood, and place it under his right foot, on the outside of his tread; he will find, though it may bring his ankle nearer the left leg, that leg in passing will be some inches away from it. His body is thrown out of equilibrium to the left; the left leg follows the body, and try as he will, he will find that he cannot bring it, in passing, close to the rigtit standing leg.— National Live Stock Journal. —A strange story comes to us from down river. Mr. Frank Billings, an old fisherman, near the upper lock on the river, while running his trout-line a few days since, found that he had hung a monster catfish. In order to make sure of his game, he wrapped the line around his wrist. The fish, making a desperate effort for liberty, upset the skiff, and the fisherman, being unable to disentangle himself from the line, was dragged under the water-’and drowned before assistance could reach him. Some neighbors on the bank witnessed the catastrophe, and hastened to the scene, but too late. They recovered the body of the drowned man, and then secured the fish, which weighed 225 pounds. This statement comes to us so well authenticated that we cannot doubt its truth.— Hart County (Ky.) Democrat.