December, 1880.
Sir,—The correspondence on Mrs. Power O'Donoghue's articles has contained many remarks on ladies' spurs, but I have noticed scarcely any reference to one point which I think is worth consideration—namely, the mode of fastening. I think ladies would find it an advantage to wear what are known as "spring" or "box" spurs, instead of those fastening with the usual straps, or strap and chain. I have never seen a lady's spur of this description, but possibly they are made—if not, they easily could be. They are much the most easy to attach or remove, and there is no chance of a strap being cut in walking or otherwise, or of an over-tight buckle hurting the foot. Their principal advantage, however, is not one of mere convenience, but of safety; the absence of strap and buckle removes one element in a great danger—that of the foot sticking in the stirrup in a fall. Captain Whyte-Melville speaks from observation of the risk of the buckle catching in the angle of the stirrup-iron, and says he has never seen a spurless boot so entangled. He is arguing against the wearing of spurs at all; but the risk is avoided if box spurs be worn. Since I became convinced that the strap and buckle were a quite possible, though perhaps unlikely, source of danger, I have altogether discarded them, and have felt my feet more free in the stirrups in consequence. Box spurs are certainly not fashionable in the hunting-field, and I have often seen people looking askance at them; I suppose a particular man misses the finish that the strap gives to the boot. But I don't think that matters much, and to ladies it would not matter at all, as the difference could very seldom be detected. In getting spurs or boxes, I find it convenient to adhere always to the regulation cavalry size, because then one's old spurs fit one's new boots, and vice versâ. It would be well to have a uniform standard for ladies' spurs also. I have not ventured to say anything on the subject of spurs generally—my own opinion is that legitimate occasion for their use is excessively rare—and I dare say my suggestion may seem very trivial. But I do not think any precaution is trivial which lessens, however slightly, the risk of that most disagreeable and dangerous of accidents—getting "hung up."
I am, Sir,
Your obedient servant,
Oxonian.
Ball. Col., Oxon., December, 1880.
Sir,—I cannot but feel flattered that my Ladies on Horseback papers should have called forth so large a correspondence. I have read every letter most carefully, and on perusing that of "Hersilie," which appeared in last week's issue, it struck me, from two of her observations, that persons might suppose I had said something to advocate the style of riding of which she approves. Permit me to say, emphatically, that I have never done so, and that I fervently hope, in the interests of my sex, that such a practice may never be introduced. Modesty is, in my opinion, a woman's most exquisite attribute; once this, or the semblance of it, is lost, her fairest charm is gone. Nothing could be more ungraceful or more unwomanly than for women to ride like men; and for short women or "little girls," it would be most objectionable. I maintain that a lady who knows how to sit has a far safer and surer seat on a side-saddle than a man can ever have, and that her grip of the pommels affords her infinitely greater security than a man's "grip of the knees." "Hersilie" is correct in saying that short-skirted hunting-habits frequently ride up, but she might just as well say that hunting-hats frequently fall off, and that ladies' back hair frequently comes down—giving these facts as a reason for discarding head-gear, whether natural or artificial. As a rule, nothing that is properly made and properly adjusted ever comes to grief. It is by going to cheap and incompetent habit-makers, neglecting to stitch elastics to their hats, and plaiting the hair too loosely (being also too sparing of hair-pins), that ladies are inconvenienced and made to blush. Two yards wide round the hem is ample for a hunting-habit, which should fit like a glove about the hips. First-class tailors always have a model horse, upon which they mount their lady customers, and thus secure the right position for the slope at the knee, upon which so much of the "set" of the skirt depends. A well-dressed woman, sitting properly upon a well-constructed saddle, cannot, in my opinion, be improved upon for style and comfort, and I hope it will be long indeed before ladies strive to follow in any way the customs or callings of the sterner sex. I may add that one of the chief recommendations of a box spur is that it does not get out of order, nor can it possibly become entangled, unless the habit-skirt be one of those which some ladies still persist in wearing—nearly twice too long, and quite three times too wide. I earnestly hope "Hersilie" will take these observations in good part. I make them in a perfectly friendly spirit. I feel kindly towards all ladies, especially those who love horses; and so I offer "Hersilie" a warm shake-hands, and hope she will fight me as much as ever she likes—in a friendly way, of course!
Now, a word to "Jack Spur." I think he is under a mistake in averring that there is any severity in the sheath spur. He says it must be applied with a kick. As I always ride with one, and never with any other description, I must entirely differ from him in this opinion. A slight pressure is alone necessary. No gentlewoman would be guilty of kicking her horse. I strongly object to rowels, as I hold to the belief that almost anybody—except a really first-class équestrienne—would be likely to hurt or worry the horse in an unnecessary manner.