From this we learn that such a horse won’t be bullied and must not be feared. But such vicious horses are rare exceptions. It is curious, that Mr. Rarey should have made his reputation by the least useful exercise of his art.
[27-*] The Cape horse has recently come into notice, in consequence of the publication of “Papers relating to the Purchase of Horses at the Cape for the Army of India.” It seems that not less than 3300 have been purchased for that purpose; that Cape horses purchased by Colonel Havelock arrived from India in the Crimea in better condition than any other horses in the regiment; and that in the Caffre War Cape horses condemned by the martinets of a Remount Committee, carried the 7th Dragoons, averaging, in marching order, over nineteen stone, and no privation or fatigue could make General Cathcart’s horses succumb. These horses are bred between the Arabs introduced by the Dutch and the English thoroughbred. I confess I see with, surprise that Colonel Apperley, the remount agent, recommends crosses with Norfolk trotting and Cleveland stallions. No such cross has ever answered in this country. Had he recommended thoroughbred weight-carrying stallions in preference to Arabs, I could have understood his condemnation of the latter. I should have hesitated to set my opinion against Colonel Apperley, had I not found that he differs entirely from the late General Sir Walter Gilbert, the greatest horseman, take him for all in all, as a cavalry officer, as a flat and steeple-chase rider, and rider to hounds of his day.—See Napier’s Indian Misgovernment, p. 286 et seq.
CHAPTER III.
The three fundamental principles of the Rarey Theory.—Heads of the Rarey Lectures.—Editor’s paraphrase.—That any horse may be taught docility.—That a horse should be so handled and tied as to feel inferior to man.—That a horse should be allowed to see, smell, and feel all fearful objects.—Key note of the Rarey system.
First.—That he is so constituted by nature that he will not offer resistance to any demand made of him which he fully comprehends, if made in a way consistent with the laws of his nature.
Second.—That he has no consciousness of his strength beyond his experience, and can be handled according to our will without force.
Third.—That we can, in compliance with the laws of his nature, by which he examines all things new to him, take any object, however frightful, around, over, or on him, that does not inflict pain—without causing him to fear.
To take these assertions in order, I will first give you some of the reasons why I think he is naturally obedient, and will not offer resistance to anything fully comprehended. The horse, though possessed of some faculties superior to man’s, being deficient in reasoning powers, has no knowledge of right or wrong, of free will and independent government, and knows not of any imposition practised upon him, however unreasonable these impositions may be. Consequently, he cannot come to any decision as to what he should or should not do, because he has not the reasoning faculties of man to argue the justice of the thing demanded of him. If he had, taking into consideration his superior strength, he would be useless to man as a servant. Give him mind in proportion to his strength, and he will demand of us the green fields for his inheritance, where he will roam at leisure, denying the right of servitude at all. God has wisely formed his nature so that it can be operated upon by the knowledge of man according to the dictates of his will; and he might well be termed an unconscious, submissive servant. This truth we can see verified in every day’s experience by the abuses practised upon him. Any one who chooses to be so cruel can mount the noble steed and run him till he drops with fatigue, or, as is often the case with the more spirited, falls dead beneath his rider. If he had the power to reason, would he not rear and pitch his rider, rather than suffer him to run him to death? Or would he condescend to carry at all the vain impostor, who, with but equal intellect, was trying to impose on his equal rights and equally independent spirit? But, happily for us, he has no consciousness of imposition, no thought of disobedience except by impulse caused by the violation of the law of his nature. Consequently, when disobedient, it is the fault of man.