BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

RIDING: ON THE FLAT AND ACROSS COUNTRY.

A Guide to Practical Horsemanship. Third Edition. Illustrated by Sturgess. Square 8vo. 10s. 6d.

The Standard.—“A master of his subject.”

VETERINARY NOTES FOR HORSE OWNERS.

A Popular Manual of Veterinary Surgery and Medicine. Fourth Edition. Illustrated. Crown 8vo. 10s. 6d.

The Field.—“Of the many popular veterinary books which have come under our notice, this is certainly one of the most scientific and reliable.”

TRAINING AND HORSE MANAGEMENT IN INDIA.

Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.

The Veterinary Journal.—“No better guide could be placed in the hands of either amateur horseman or veterinary surgeon.”

SOUNDNESS AND AGE OF HORSES. Over 100 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d.

The Field.—“Is evidently the result of much careful research, and the horseman, as well as the veterinarian, will find in it much that is interesting and instructive.”

INDIAN RACING REMINISCENCES. Illustrated by I. Knox Fergusson. Crown. 8vo. 8s. 6d.

The Field.—“The last page comes all too soon.”

THE STUDENT’S MANUAL OF TACTICS. Crown 8vo. 6s.

The Times.—“Captain Hayes’s book deals exclusively with tactics, and is a well-considered treatise on that branch of the art of war, giving not merely rules, but, also, principles and reason.”

Illustrated
Horse Breaking.

Illustrated
H o r s e B r e a k i n g.

BY
Capt. M. Horace Hayes,
LATE OF ‘THE BUFFS.’
AUTHOR OF “RIDING: ON THE FLAT AND ACROSS COUNTRY;”
“VETERINARY NOTES FOR HORSE OWNERS;”
“RACING REMINISCENCES IN INDIA;”
“TRAINING AND HORSE MANAGEMENT IN INDIA,” ETC.
Fifty-two Illustrations by
J. H. OSWALD BROWN.
LONDON:
º
CALCUTTA: THACKER, SPINK & CO.
BOMBAY: THACKER & CO. LIMITED
1889.

LONDON:
PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, Limited,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.

CONTENTS.

ILLUSTRATIONS.

PREFACE.

I offer this work to the favourable consideration of the public, as an attempt to describe a reasoned-out system of horse-breaking, which I have found, by practical experience, to be easy of execution, rapid in its effects, and requiring the possession of no exceptional strength, activity, pluck, or horsemanship by the operator, who, to become expert in it, will, as a rule, need only practice. It is in accordance with our English and Irish ideas on the subject; for it aims at teaching the horse “manners,” and giving him a snaffle-bridle mouth; so that he will “go up to the bridle,” and “bend” himself in thorough obedience to rein and leg.

As a personal explanation, I may mention that after having spent many years racing and training in India, during which time I practised the ordinary methods of breaking, I returned to England, where I learned the use of the standing martingale and long driving reins, as applied specially to jumpers, from Mr. John Hubert Moore, who was the cleverest “maker” of steeplechasers Ireland ever knew. He, I may remark, obtained these methods, in his youth, from an old Irish breaker, named Fallon, who was born more than a century ago. I had also valuable instruction in “horse taming” from Professor Sample. Having read an account of MM. Raabe and Lunel’s “hippo-lasso,” as a means of control for veterinary operations, I conceived, with happy results, the idea of utilising this ingenious contrivance in breaking. I also learned, about the same time, how to halter a loose horse without running any danger of being kicked, or bitten.

Having thus acquired a fair amount of information, on what has always been to me a favourite subject, I naturally wished to put it into practice.

As I knew, judging from my former ignorance, how much men in India stood in need of instruction in horse-breaking, I determined to return to that country with the object of teaching this art; so as to acquire the experience I needed, and to “pay my expenses” at the same time. I am glad to say that I was successful in both respects. During a two years’ tour, I held classes at all the principal stations of the Empire—from Tricinopoly to Peshawur, and from Quetta to Mandalay—and, having met a very large number of vicious animals and fine horsemen, I obtained experience, and greatly added to my stock of knowledge, which I shall now try to utilise for the benefit of my readers. As I proceeded through India, I felt the necessity of rejecting some methods I had formerly prized, altering others, and adopting new ones; so that the course of instruction which I was able to give to my more recent classes, was far more extensive, and of better proved utility, than what I had to offer at the beginning of my travels. The great want which I had, at first, felt was a method by which a person could secure and handle, with perfect safety, any horse, no matter how vicious he might be. However, after many kicks, a few bites, and several lucky escapes, I was able to perfect the required method, which is so simple, that the only wonder is that I did not think of it before. I may explain that the Australian horses met with in India, where they form a considerable proportion of the animals used for riding and driving, are far more dangerous and difficult to handle and control, than British stock. Had I remained in England all my life, I should not have acquired a quarter of the experience of vicious horses I was afforded, during the time I lately spent in India. It goes almost without saying, that the harder the pupil is to teach, the greater chance has the instructor of becoming expert in his business. I need hardly say, that I shall, always, be very grateful to any of my readers who may favour me with special information on this, or kindred subjects.

I may mention, that, after returning from India, I held classes in England, Gibraltar, Malta, Egypt, Ceylon, Singapore, and China.

I have much pleasure in giving, in the body of this work, the sources from which I have taken various hints.

The chief claim I, here, make to originality, is, that in bringing together the results of experience in different countries, I have endeavoured to reduce the art of breaking horses to a more or less complete system, many of the principles of which, I venture to think, I have been the first to expound, and that I have made several improvements in existing methods. The new things which I have introduced need no special mention here.

My best thanks are due to Mr. J. H. Oswald Brown, for the faithful and painstaking manner in which he has illustrated the letter-press of this book. The drawings speak for themselves.

Although I am aware that the proceeding on my part may be deemed unusual; still, in order to strengthen my words, I have ventured to submit to my readers, in an appendix, the recorded opinions of various members of my classes on the practical working of the theories and methods described in this book.

I shall, at all times, be ready to give practical instruction to persons wishing to learn this art of making the horse a safe, and pleasant conveyance.

Junior Army and Navy Club,
St. James’s Street, London. S.W.

January 1, 1889.

ILLUSTRATED HORSE-BREAKING.

CHAPTER I.
THEORY OF HORSE-BREAKING.

Object of horse-breaking—Causes of faults which can be remedied by breaking—Vice in the horse—Distinction between nervousness and deliberate vice—Mental qualities of the horse—Association of ideas in breaking—Value and scope of breaking—On the possibility of overcoming any form of vice—Necessity for obtaining control over the horse—On the nature of the coercion to be applied to unruly horses—Punishment—Fatigue as a means of subjugation—Effect of the voice—Personal influence in breaking—Advisability of possessing various methods of breaking—A good mouth, the chief requirement—Permanency in the effects of breaking—Expedition in breaking—The ordinary method of breaking—Breaking by kindness alone—The rough and ready style of breaking—Summary of the principles of the art of rendering horses docile.

The object of horse-breaking is to teach the animal to obey the orders of his master in the best possible manner. Hence, this art includes instruction in the advantageous application of his powers, as well as methods for rendering him docile.

Causes of faults which can be remedied by breaking are:—1. Nervousness; or the unnecessary fear of the presence or handling of man, or of the effect of any of the horse’s other surroundings, which, however startling they might be to him in a wild state, he can find by experience will not hurt him.

2. Impatience of control, which frequently co-exists with nervousness, in the same animal.

3. Ignorance of the meaning of the indications used by man to convey his wishes to the horse.

4. Deliberate disobedience. There is no doubt that sulkiness of temper is, often, inherited.

5. Active hostility, which, as far as my experience goes, is, always, the result of bad treatment, whether brought on by cruelty, or by allowing a naturally fractious animal to get the upper hand.

It is evident that vices caused by disease, or infirmity, do not come within the province of the breaker.

6. The fact of having been taught some trick—for instance, kicking when touched behind the saddle—the practice of which constitutes a vice.

Vice in the Horse, from a breaking point of view, may be held to signify the practice, on the part of the animal towards man, of disobedience—wilful or otherwise—of any legitimate command; or want of docility.

The distinction between nervousness and deliberate vice may be easily made, if we observe how a horse acts after we have proved to him that he need have no fear of us. For instance, if we fix up a horse, say, in a “strait-jacket,” (see [page 118]) so that he cannot kick, and continue to “gentle” him over with our hand, until he is thoroughly assured of the good faith of our intentions; we might justly term him a vicious brute if he kicked at us, without our touching him, the moment the restraint was removed. I may mention, in this connection, that fear of the near approach of man will often induce a purely nervous animal to kick out, if a person, and especially a stranger, ventures to come within reach. Although we may frequently find a horse kick from nervousness, he will rarely bite from that cause alone. As a verbal distinction between faults due to deliberate vice, and those caused by fear of man, or of the animal’s strange surroundings, would not, generally, be understood at first glance, I need not attempt to make it in these pages.

The more experience I acquire in the breaking of horses, the more convinced I become, that the so-called “nervousness” of animals that have been handled some time, is largely made up of impatience of control, and, in many cases, of active hostility. Without, for a moment, imputing intentional deceit to a “nervous” “old stager,” I make bold to assert that many crafty, dangerous brutes pose before their owners as ill-used victims of a too highly strung nervous system. Take, for instance, an aged horse, like many I have met, that snorts with apparent terror at anyone that approaches him, and is ready, on the slightest chance of reaching his mark, to strike out in front, or lash out from behind, if saddling or mounting him be attempted. His nervous emotion, the first time he was taken in hand, or the first time he began his unpleasant tricks, may have been thoroughly genuine; but its exhibition was evidently attended with the result of his more or less successfully resisting control. This act of insubordination having revealed to the horse the extent of his own power, which, to every animal, is a pleasurable sensation, was naturally repeated again and again, until the vicious habit was confirmed; although its necessity might have been, scores and scores of times, disproved by the saddling or mounting having been accomplished without the infliction of any pain to the horse, however great the trouble may have been to the groom or rider. In the case I have mentioned, the fault lay with the person who had charge of the animal, and who ought to have, then and there, mastered him the very first time he shewed resistance to a legitimate order. Whether the continued failure to resist discipline was caused by the infliction of cruelty, or by the exhibition of incompetence on the part of the man, matters little as regards their detrimental result on the animal, except, that unsuccessful punishment always aggravates a vice to a deplorable extent. I am inclined to think that really nervous horses are not as naturally “game” as their more placid fellows; while I am thoroughly convinced, that the majority of the pseudo nervous sort are sulky, treacherous brutes. I am, however, ready to admit that there are many exceptions to the rule I have ventured to lay down. At the same time, it would be most unwise to ignore the fact that the repetition of any trick, however it may be caused, the practice of which renders the animal difficult of control, has an increasingly bad effect on him the longer it be continued.

Mental qualities of the Horse.—The possibility of our being able to obtain an easy mastery over the horse, who is greatly our superior in strength and activity, and quite our equal in pluck, rests on the fact that instinct, rather than reason, guides his actions. To investigate this, we may try the experiment, when standing to the side and a little to the rear of a kicker, of touching him about the hocks or quarters with a conveniently long stick, when, if he “lets out” straight behind him, we may conclude that this is a purely reflex or instinctive action on his part. If the animal kicks at the stick, as the cause of annoyance, he certainly conducts himself in a manner that is not altogether irrational. But if he tries to kick the man who holds the stick, we cannot deny him the possession of reasoning power. In order that my meaning be not misunderstood, I here suppose that this experimental horse is one which would viciously kick a person who, when standing behind him, would be rash enough to touch the animal, however gently, with his hand; and not one whose kick would be more of a push—to remove an offending object—than a blow. Luckily, horses that can reason, even to such a small extent as this, are rare.

I usually teach horses to lie down (see [page 153]) by tying up, in the first instance, one fore-leg, arranging the necessary gear, and then making the animal forcibly “go down.” Although many horses will “fight” desperately, time after time, when they are thus compelled to submit, and at a moment when they are utterly helpless, I have never found one that would resent, as a result of this hard-earned experience, the preliminary tying up of the fore-leg. But after having even once been twitched in the usual way, a horse will, as a rule, “fight” the moment his muzzle is touched. In the first case, owing to the more distant connection, the animal is unable to associate the idea of the irksome compulsion employed to make him lie down, with that of tying up his leg; apparently to us an extremely simple mental effort. In the second instance, the action of the muscles, on the hand touching the muzzle, would seem almost entirely instinctive.

The useful intelligence of the horse undoubtedly depends on the retentiveness of his memory, upon which we should work in educating him to become our faithful servant. If, however, we neglect the cultivation of this his chief mental gift, and try to gain our end by stimulating other and weaker qualities of his mind, we shall run a serious risk of spoiling his disposition. It has been often remarked to me by good judges—and it is my own experience—that teaching horses a lot of tricks, the acquisition of which demands some strain on their reasoning powers, and petting them, are very apt to cause them to become crafty and difficult to manage. In acting as I have advised, we follow the practice of judicious parents who educate their sons according to the lads’ respective talents. Thus, for instance, a boy with an extremely retentive memory, but small capacity for reasoning out problems, would have a fair chance of shining as a linguist; although he would, certainly, prove a failure as a mathematician.

The feeling of self-preservation is so strongly implanted in the mind of every animal, and the retentiveness of the horse’s memory is so great, that, if once the idea of his being our physical superior gets into his head, he will, naturally, be inclined to resist our commands. Hence, it is a maxim among all good breakers, that, if possible, a horse should never be allowed to know his own power. As a corollary to this, I may state that if we have a dispute as to discipline with a horse, we should not part company before making him yield; lest he may carry away the mischievous impression that he has got the best of the battle. The breaker need not attempt too much in any one lesson; but what he undertakes he should succeed in performing before quitting his pupil. For instance, with a horse that will not allow his hind legs to be touched, the breaker may reasonably content himself with making him quiet to handle about these parts, without insisting on his standing submissively to be shod behind—an operation that may be attempted on the following day. We should also make use of our knowledge of the limited scope of a horse’s reasoning powers, to change the subject of contention, if we fear that there is any chance of our being worsted in a pitched battle with the animal; so that the victory—even if it does not affect the original cause of dispute—shall always remain on our side. As an illustration, I may mention the advisability of forcibly making a determined and headstrong runaway lie down, until he thoroughly “gives in”; in order to make him yield the more readily to the indications of the rein.

Association of ideas in breaking.—As association of ideas is the most valuable aid we possess to memory, we should largely utilise the practical working out of this principle in breaking. The intelligent obedience to the voice of their driver, in turning, stopping, going on, and in varying their paces, displayed by many cart-horses, is a common instance; as is, also, that of the ’bus horse, who starts onward the moment he hears the door of the conveyance slammed-to by the conductor. A friend of mine had a horse that became so increasingly difficult to mount, that at last he found it impossible to get on to him by ordinary means, on account of the animal “breaking away” the moment he attempted to put his toe into the stirrup. Living near a river, he hit on the expedient of placing the horse with his off side “broad-side on,” and close to, a steep part of the bank, and then attempting to mount on the near side. As usual, when the man’s foot touched the iron, the horse swung round, and, on this occasion only, fell down twenty feet into the river. The effect of this lesson, which was entirely harmless, was to make the animal perfectly steady to mount, so long as he stood on the bank of the river, in a position similar to that from which he had had his tumble; but he was just as difficult to mount as ever, anywhere else. Such a method, to be perfect, should be of universal, and not of local, application. I may add, with reference to my remarks on [page 4], that my friend’s unruly brute of a horse would, by many, be deemed a nervous creature, and a worthy recipient of any amount of kindness and petting. The most effective means of applying the principle of association of ideas to the breaking of vicious horses, is one by which the animal arrives at the right conclusion from wrong premisses; as with Pratt’s rope-twitch (see [page 113]), when making a horse steady to mount. Evidently mistaking the cause of the pain inflicted on him by its employment, he connects the idea of punishment with the word “steady,” and not with the application of the cord. Were he able to argue rightly on this subject, he would remain quiet only when the twitch was on, and would entirely disregard the verbal admonition, for which he entertains such marked respect.

Value and scope of breaking.—The scope of breaking is wider than persons might generally imagine; for not alone does it include the education of the untutored animal, but it also embraces the correction of faults, which, while seriously detracting from the horse’s value, are usually looked upon as unavoidable dispensations that have to be borne with becoming philosophy; as, for instance, prancing and refusal to walk quietly, when “fresh”; chucking up the head; stargazing; boring to one side; shewing excitement in harness when the whip is cracked; shying off the ball at polo; refusal to stand perfectly steady when being mounted; etc. I need hardly say that the knowledge, which I shall endeavour to impart to my readers, of the art of giving a horse a snaffle-bridle mouth and to render him steady and reliable, is of infinitely more value to everyone, except, perhaps, to the showman who requires an advertisement, than instruction, which I shall also supply, in methods for taming man-eaters, and other exceptionally dangerous animals. This art of “horse taming” is of very little practical use; for the need of its application is of but rare occurrence. Even the celebrated Rarey, after subduing three or four “savages,” when in England, had to content himself with exhibiting them about the country, as reformed characters, for lack of new subjects on which to shew his skill. When wishing to form a class for practical instruction in breaking, during my tours, I have frequently met with the objection that there were no vicious horses in that particular place. As I always replied that I needed animals with only common faults of mouth and temper, I was never at a loss for subjects to demonstrate the fact, that there are but few horses that are entirely free from some riding or driving fault, which, more or less, impairs their value, and which, as a rule, can be readily overcome. The more frequent vices I have encountered among army horses are: unsteadiness at mounting; “rushing” at fences; refusing to quit the ranks; refusing to jump; buckjumping (among Australian horses); and “difficult to shoe behind.”

On the possibility of overcoming any form of vice.—The influences which man, being the weaker animal, can apply to making the horse obedient to his wishes, are: affection; the natural submission yielded by an inferior to a superior intellect; fear; and the impression—which is, generally, erroneous—that the order given cannot be resisted. The first three are the usual means for rendering docile a high-couraged horse. Although we may, to a certain extent, use the last-mentioned influence with quiet horses, and, especially in mouthing, we should remember that it is our last resource, when all others fail, in reducing a rebellious animal to submission. If, however, the horse which we have taken in hand, happen to reason sufficiently well to enable him to “see through” our artifices, our labour will, of course, be in vain. Herein lies the whole question of success, or failure, in making vicious horses docile. Man-eaters, like the historic Cruiser, the taming of whom made Rarey famous, being actuated, almost entirely, by instinctive hostility, yield far more readily to authority, than the sulky animal that, having found out a method by which he can thwart the wishes of his would-be master, craftily adheres to it, with a fair show of reason on his side. I may mention that the assertion made by many “horse-tamers,” that they can cure any horse of any kind of vice, is manifestly absurd.

Of all forms of vice, those caused by stubbornness are the most difficult to eradicate; for the animal which sets its will in deliberate opposition to ours, fights us with the weapons—those of reason—by which, alone, we are, usually, superior to it. A horse that objects, from nervousness, or from mere impatience of control, to have its hind quarters handled, will quickly submit; as will, also, in the vast majority of cases, a “refuser,” or jibber in saddle; if they be broken in the manner which will be explained further on. A jibber in draught, however, is apt to find out, that although the breaker is all-powerful, when it has no harness on; the advantage is all the other way, as soon as it gets between the shafts; it being easier, as Professor Sample used to say, to break a horse than to break a horse and trap. Besides this, it is impossible, in many cases, to directly apply breaking methods to animals in harness, in the same manner as we can do in saddle. For instance, if a trapper be accustomed to jib, as soon as it comes to a stiff incline; to back into the ditch, or fence; and, then, to proceed to kick the vehicle to pieces; all that the breaker can do, is to take it out, and endeavour to, indirectly, counteract the fault in some convenient place. He may succeed, to all appearance; although the pupil may forget the instruction received, if anything goes wrong, such as an abrupt halt, which cannot always be avoided, the first time the horse is driven up a hill in a crowded thoroughfare. In such a case, if the animal “shows fight,” it will, almost to a certainty, gain the victory, and the good influence of the previous teaching will be lost. For vices unconnected with harness, on the contrary, the breaker can always find some suitable spot on which to work his will on the disobedient one, under every advantageous condition. I say this with every reasonable reserve; for we may meet with cases, sometimes, of saddle vices—such as running away on a race-course, only, when galloped—to which it is difficult to directly apply efficient breaking methods.

Unless when caused by disease, as, for instance, chronic sexual excitement in the mare, defects of vision, and pain in the legs or feet, which might make a horse refuse to jump, practically speaking, almost any riding or driving vice (I naturally exclude those vices that concern the veterinary surgeon, and not the breaker) can be overcome in time, say within a week or ten days; although I readily admit that I have been beaten in a few cases (about two per cent. of faulty horses) when my time was limited, or when I did not possess the experience I have since acquired.

I have had many hundreds of horses with various forms of “pain in the temper” pass through my hands, and, out of all these, selected from thousands of other animals, I met with only one or two which I would call incapable of being made serviceable on account of absolute idiocy. Hence, I conclude that cases of marked mental aberration are extremely rare in the horse. I do not think that I met with more than one horse which appeared incapable, from natural nervousness, of being rendered quite steady.

As the breaker has to work on the material at hand, and as he has no power to change the nervous organisation of the animal, however well he may establish the habit of implicit obedience, it is impossible for him to make a naturally sulky animal work with the gaiety of heart and pluck, that an honest horse will display.

Necessity for obtaining control over the Horse.—In order to fulfil the necessary conditions of safety for himself, the breaker should be able, by the system under which he works—to quote the words of that admirable horse-master, Professor Sample—to make the animal rideable and driveable before he is either ridden or driven. The breaker who employs the ordinary methods, is not alone exposed to danger when mounting, or even driving his pupils for the first few times; but also in the preliminary handling, unless, indeed, in the case of young foals. The advice to go boldly up to the horse and show him that you are not afraid of him, so freely tendered on such occasions, should be treated by its recipient as a piece of “cheap swagger,” or the outcome of pretentious ignorance; for, even granted that such a demeanour would efficiently soothe a terrified animal, or cow a treacherously-disposed one—suppositions that are altogether absurd—such counsel would in no way supply the necessary foolhardiness for such an undertaking. My advice to either amateur or professional is, never to give a horse a chance of doing wrong; so, in order to be consistent after having said this, I shall endeavour to describe a method by which any horse, unsecured, say, in a yard or loose box, can be brought under complete control with, practically speaking, no risk to the operator.

On the nature of the coercion to be applied to unruly Horses.—The only risk run in enforcing the obedience which it is absolutely necessary to exact from unruly horses, is that of spoiling the animal’s pluck and spirit—a contingency that can be incurred only when the fractiousness arises from “nervousness,” or from want of comprehension; for what we term pluck and spirit in the horse should have no taint of stubbornness. The coercion employed should, naturally, be limited to what would be sufficient to overcome the wilfulness; for we should never employ a general effect, when a particular one will answer our purpose. Thus, suppose we had a high-couraged, generous animal, that had been made difficult to mount by a bad rider, on various occasions, prodding the horse in the side with his toe, when attempting to get into the saddle, we might get control over the animal by Pratt’s twitch (see [page 113]), or by tying him head and tail, and then prove to him that we would not touch him with our toe, when mounting. The Rareyfying of such an animal for this or any similar fault, would be injudicious in the extreme; as it would, almost to a certainty, injuriously affect one of his most valuable qualities, namely, his pluck. As a sulky animal has little or no pluck to lose; we may well content ourselves in gaining his obedience without troubling ourselves much about any possible deterioration of his courage.

Punishment.—The chief practical reasons against the employment of punishment in the breaking of horses are: that it is very liable to fail in its object; and that it is calculated to break the spirit of high-couraged animals, and to increase the sulkiness of stubborn ones. Of course I don’t mean to say that a vigorous “shaking up,” and a sharp cut or two with a stick (for preference), or whip, is not advisable for stopping the exhibition of “calfish” tricks by a young colt. Owing to the galling failures I have had—they were not many, for I stopped in time—I have made it a rule for my own guidance, never to touch a mare, so as to hurt her, when breaking.

I am aware that punishment, pushed to extreme limits, has, often, proved efficacious in reducing an animal to obedience, when all other means have failed. As it would, then, amount to gross cruelty, I cannot recommend its adoption in this form.

Fatigue as a means of subjugation.—Fatigue may be used as a valuable adjunct to other means of breaking, but should seldom be employed alone; its effect, usually, appearing to be as transitory as the sensation itself. Thus, if we, while riding or driving a bolter, in order to cure him of his vice, allow him to run himself to a stand-still, we shall, in all probability, find the animal quite as ready, if not more so, to run away, the next time he is “fresh.” In such a case, the fact of the horse having been allowed to do the very thing he wanted to accomplish, in defiance of the wishes of his would-be master, can have no possible effect in forming in him the habit of obedience. Fatigue may, often, appear to be the sole cause of the quietness evinced by an animal under treatment of some of the breaking methods I describe. This, however, will, on investigation, be found to be incorrect. Even the fatigue caused in, say, rendering an unruly horse quiet to shoe behind, by keeping him on the ground and “gentling” him (see [page 157]), is out of all proportion small compared to the amount of control obtained. One of the best examples I know of the fact, that it is the feeling of powerlessness to rebel, and not the sensation of fatigue, that compels obedience by these methods, is furnished by the experiment of making a violent horse, like an Australian buckjumper, quiet to mount in the manner described on [page 197]; the effect produced being striking; the feeling of helplessness, evident; and the amount of fatigue, small.

Effect of the voice.—The human voice has a powerful controlling effect over the horse. To apply it to advantage, the same tone and the same word or words should be invariably used to express the same meaning. All ambiguity of sound should be avoided. The words employed should be expressed in a decided manner, and in a clear tone of voice. I have seen some very dangerous animals approached and handled by “shouting at” them, and adopting a resolute manner, when going up to them in the stable. A horse, undoubtedly, recognises the voice more quickly than the appearance of a man.

Personal influence in breaking.—For obtaining quick results, the breaker should have the horse entirely to himself; so that no disturbing influence may distract the animal’s attention. The great objection to the practice of personal influence, as a breaking agent, is that, although the animal may be perfectly obedient to the man who has had the exclusive handling of him, he may be refractory with other people, and may, even, jealously resent any interference from an outsider. I have frequently been struck with this fact when breaking savage horses who would, if they could help it, allow no one, except their groom, to meddle with them; for I always found that they were far more vicious to approach when their stable attendant was holding them, than when he was absent. We may often see the same trait of character evinced by dogs that would fly at any stranger who dared to touch them, as long as they were with their master; although they might be fairly amiable if he were not present. However much we may admire, in the abstract, this fidelity to one, in the horse, it is very apt to detract from the animal’s usefulness under civilised conditions, especially, if the owner be not regarded as the confidential friend in question. When the groom is the object of this exclusive form of affection, it is generally advisable to have him changed for a new man. If a horse has to be rendered serviceable for general, as well as particular use, the breaker should refrain from accomplishing his ends by the exercise of his own personal influence, and hence, should get him to obey by rein and leg, rather than by voice and petting.

Advisability of possessing various methods of breaking.—As the removal of the cause is the only proper plan for the treatment of either disease, or vice, and as these causes differ, the breaker, to be successful, should be provided with various methods for enforcing his commands. Hence, we may rest assured that the horse-tamer who advertises his one particular method, as a certain cure for all forms of vice, is as arrant a quack as the man who foists on the public a pill for the removal of every kind of disease. In the following pages I shall describe various breaking methods, which the reader can apply according as he recognises the cause of resistance to his wishes, or of inability to understand them.

Giving a Horse a good mouth, the chief requirement in breaking.—The horse’s mouth ought to be the foundation of all good breaking; for an animal with a good mouth can hardly “do wrong”; unless, indeed, under very exceptional circumstances. As it is impracticable to be constantly repeating any “taming” method, such as Rareyfying, or tying a horse by his head and tail, we must disregard such practices as means for the maintenance of a permanent state of discipline—however useful they may be for enforcing authority in the first instance—and must trust to the influence of the rein, which is ever constant on the mouth, when riding or driving, to keep the horse mindful of his duty when in action. The use of the leg should, of course, not be neglected in riding. The taming methods will, naturally, be required with animals that are difficult to handle when dismounted, or when out of the shafts.

Permanency in the effects of breaking.—The primary step to establish the habit of obedience, is, naturally, to make the horse obey in the first instance, and then to repeat the process as may be needed. Such a procedure is thoroughly rational; for it is founded on the fact that force of habit is the strongest influence which rules the equine mind. I have often, what I think unjustly, incurred blame because, after I had practically demonstrated to my pupils the feasibility of making a confirmed jibber, obstinate refuser, or almost unrideable buckjumper, willing and quiet in one lesson, that such animals have, in the course of time, become just as bad as ever; on account of their respective owners not taking the trouble, as advised by me, of repeating the easy methods I shewed. The reason men usually fail to subdue “difficult” horses, is because they do not know how to take the first step towards making the animal obedient. If, however, they be supplied with this all-important information, their task should be one of increasing facility after each repetition; and, if persevered in, would be rapidly completed; but it must be repeated until the desired habit is established.

However well a horse may have been broken of a bad habit, he will be far more likely to acquire it again under bad management, than he would have been, had he been originally free from it; for no course of discipline, although it may keep the animal under thorough control, can efface out of his mind the memory of the practice of a former habit. I need scarcely say that injudicious treatment will always be capable of spoiling any horse, whether invariably quiet, or reformed. Hence, a teacher of breaking will be wise to confine himself to showing “how it is done,” and not to risk his reputation in making the impossible attempt of permanently “curing” a vicious horse. Besides, it is only “human nature” for the owner of an animal that has reverted to his evil courses, to blame the breaker, and not himself.

Expedition in breaking.—In order to give some idea of the possibilities of the system of breaking which I advocate and practise, I may state that, by it, any unhandled horse, no matter how wild or how old he may be, can be made quiet to ride and obedient to the ordinary indications of the rein, in from, say, two to four hours. Such a horse, to become a reliable “conveyance,” would, probably, require about six more lessons—two a day—of an hour and a half’s duration each. He ought, by that time, to have acquired a good mouth, steady paces, and “cleverness” to jump any ordinary fence. Army remounts that have never had even a halter on them, should, on an emergency, speaking generally, be fit for the riding-school in a couple of days. I need not dwell on the value of such expedition in military exigencies, and in all cases where time is an object. “Spoiled” horses, such as jibbers, rearers, kickers, and buckjumpers, that have learned to know their own power, would, naturally, take longer to break, than entirely unhandled animals; although the limit of five days need not, usually, be exceeded even with them. The possibility of horses going back to their old tricks may always be provided against by judicious repetition of the necessary discipline, which will be very rarely needed after the first three or four days, if the animal be “mouthed” in the manner I shall hereafter describe. Without using any forcible methods, which, as a rule, would not be required with a valuable horse, the breaker ought not to need more than a week to make any ordinary horse thoroughly fit for all the usual requirements of saddle or harness.

To those who might advance the argument that because the ordinary method of breaking takes about ten times as long as the system I advocate, it must, therefore, be more permanent in its influence, I would beg to submit that such a contention would hold good, only, on the untenable supposition that the effects of the respective processes were equal in force. I see no possible benefit, except the very questionable one of giving the animal an exaggerated opinion of his own powers of resistance, in taking a month to accomplish what may be quite as efficiently done in an hour; as, for instance, making a fractious horse steady to mount, or quiet to shoe behind, or a sulky refuser to jump kindly. We must surely admit that the repetition of an effect, and not the time occupied in its production, is the cause of the permanency of its influence.

The ordinary method of breaking.—The usual method of rendering horses docile by early and continued handling, followed by patient and skilful riding, answers fairly well with men who regard breaking as a pleasure, and have plenty of spare time to indulge their taste in this respect. It is, however, inapplicable to circumstances under which the number of animals to be broken is out of proportion to the supply of labour; especially in the case of inexpensive stock. It is, also, besides being tedious, often ineffective in the reduction to obedience of “spoiled horses,” and of those that have been allowed to run wild for a considerable time before being “taken up”; the reason being, that it does not supply us with means for enforcing our commands, then and there, on exceptionally unruly animals, which, in order to be rendered docile, must be confirmed in the habit of obedience.

Breaking by kindness alone.—While fully admiring the kindness of heart of those enthusiasts who regard a horse as a friend to be won by affection, I must say that the better plan for making him a useful member of society, is to treat him as a servant who has to be taught his work, and from whom implicit obedience has to be demanded. Until he does his work honestly and well, the less petting he gets the better; for he is an animal that is very apt to become headstrong and fractious, by a small amount of indulgence in his own way. I entirely deprecate any fighting with the horse, or punishment with whip and spur, which he can resist; but I insist on the necessity—after proving to the horse that he has nothing to fear, and after teaching him to understand one’s wishes—of shewing that he must obey. I shall endeavour, in due course, to explain to the reader how such obedience can be peremptorily enforced.

The rough and ready style of breaking.—The method of reducing a horse to discipline, by forcibly securing him, getting on his back, and sticking on until he bucks himself to a standstill, is applicable only to unbroken animals of a more or less mature age, whose owners demand nothing further, than to have them made “quiet to ride.” The objections to this method, as far as I can see, are: that it is not always possible to obtain the services of a rider of sufficient pluck and adhesiveness; that some horses, by “throwing themselves over,” can get rid of any man off their back; that if the horse wins the fight, the victory will have the effect of making him much worse than he was before; that the mastery, even if the process be repeated, is, often, not permanent, especially with a new rider; that it is apt to spoil the horse’s mouth; and that, in the case of nervous or sulky animals, it is liable to increase their particular faults. The buckjumping style of breaking is, of course, only good as far as it goes, and has no just claim to teach the manners that make the horse, as assuredly as they do the man.

Summary of the principles of the art of rendering Horses docile may be summed up as follows:

1. To obtain control over the animal.

2. To prove to him that he has nothing to fear from us, or from the surroundings in which we place him: in other words, to give him “confidence” and cure him of “nervousness.”

3. To teach him to understand the meaning of the indications by which we desire to convey our orders to him.

4. To make him obey our orders in the most implicit manner, in the event of his offering deliberate resistance to them.

5. To instruct him how to use his powers to the best advantage.

6. To make, by repetition, these acts of obedience and “cleverness” thus taught, into confirmed habits; so that the horse, who is, essentially, an animal of habit, may become a permanently useful servant.

As an illustration, I may say that we should conduct the education of a colt or filly, according to the principles we should adopt with a recently-caught young savage whom we desired to make a useful servant. While shewing him that we had complete control over him, we should prove to him that he had nothing to fear from us, and, in doing so, would gain his confidence and affection. We should teach him our language, and, according as he understood our words, so should we demand implicit obedience to our orders, and would, thus, quickly establish the desired habit.

CHAPTER II.
PRINCIPLES OF MOUTHING.

Making a horse obey the rein—Manner in which a horse should carry his head and neck, when in motion—Suitability of the horse to the bridle—How the mouth-piece should act—Teaching the horse to bend his neck to the rein—Proper direction for the pull of the reins—The running martingale—Bearing reins, side reins, and running reins—Teaching the horse to turn—Reining back—Lunging—Good hands—Snaffles and curbs—Elastic reins on dumb jockeys—The standing martingale—Nose-bands.

Making a Horse obey the rein.—In mouthing, we should act on the principle I have advocated, in the preceding chapter, of making our equine servant accord ready obedience to the lawful commands of his master; after we have taught him to understand our wishes expressed by the proper “indications.” The breaker will do well always to bear in mind the old maxim, that “a horse should never get the chance of pulling successfully against the bit, or unsuccessfully against the collar.” As a man on foot has as thorough command over a horse, as the animal has over its rider—supposing that both know how to exercise their respective powers—the breaker should, naturally, commence his mouthing lessons on foot, and should, as a rule, refrain from giving the horse the advantage of having him in the saddle, until the habit of obedience to rein, leg, and, if need be, to voice, is fully confirmed. In all this, we act on the retentiveness of the horse’s memory, which is his strongest mental quality, in guarding ourselves from the ill consequences that might ensue from the exercise of the animal’s reasoning powers, which, luckily for us, are comparatively feeble, or from his natural impatience of control.

With some horses, especially with those that have learned to know their own power, the process of inculcating the habit of obedience to the rein, by simply working on the horse’s mouth, may be ineffective, or may be too tedious for practical requirements. In such a case, I would advocate the advisability of exacting obedience, in the first instance, by some readily feasible method, as advocated on [page 11]; so as to impress the animal with the idea of our supreme power over him, and to banish from his mind any thought of resisting our will, even on a point concerning which he would always prove victorious, had he sufficient intelligence to see through our artifice. Our power over the horse, when we are on his back, being necessarily limited in extent, it follows that, with all our teaching, we may, at times, be unable to control our mounts.

Although young horses, well bred and truly shaped, will, generally, “carry” themselves to the best advantage, we may find that many animals, even in a state of freedom, and, more particularly, those that have been in bad hands, contract a stiff and awkward carriage, which, as a rule, may be easily remedied by two or three days’ “mouthing,” on the system I shall describe further on, followed by good handling and the ordinary routine of saddle, or harness work. I in no way mean to say that careful riding or driving would not, in time, accomplish the object in view, without the aid of the work on foot; but I maintain that the preliminary mouthing is invaluable in the saving of time, and that it can produce effects which are unattainable by any rider, however good his hands may be.

Manner in which a Horse should carry his head and neck, when in motion.—When the animal takes a stride to the front, the fore-limb, which is connected to the body by muscular attachment, is drawn forwards and upwards by certain muscles of the neck; their action being naturally regulated by the depression or elevation of the head. If the head be unduly raised, the forward reach of the fore-legs will be curtailed by this “high” style of going; and the speed will, consequently, suffer. If, on the contrary, the head be brought down too low, the animal, if at the gallop or canter, instead of “going level,” will have a more or less pitching motion, from too much weight being thrown on his forehand; and will lose time in his stride by excessive bending of his knees, which is necessary to enable his feet, in that case, to clear the ground.

Owing to the variety in the conformation of different horses, and in the work they are called upon to do, it is impossible to lay down any fixed rule as to the angle at which the neck should be carried: a fact that is of little moment; as experience will enable us to form a sufficiently near approximation for all practical purposes.

The neck muscles, which draw the fore-limb forward, will naturally act to the best advantage when the neck vertebræ are extended on each other; that is, when the neck is straight. According as the neck is bent, so will this forward “pull” be diminished.

The chief muscle that draws the fore-limb forward is attached to the head in such a manner, that it acts best when the head is carried, more or less, at right angles to the neck. Hence, we may take for granted, especially, as the correctness of the assumption can be verified by experience, that this position of the head is the best one for requirements demanding the exhibition of speed, or strength. For military purposes, “pace” is to some extent sacrificed for obtaining increased control and “handiness.”

Suitability of the Horse to the bridle.—When the horse carries his head and neck in an easy, natural manner, in fact, in the best one for the display of his powers—as we have seen in the preceding paragraphs of this chapter—the mouth-piece of the snaffle will rest on the “bars” of the mouth, as long as the reins are held not much above the level of the withers. Hence, from the peculiar conformation of the horse, we obtain two special advantages for rendering him obedient to the rein. First, the “bars”—that portion of the gums of the lower jaw which are devoid of teeth and which are in front of the molars—are singularly suitable for the application of pressure; being sensitive and smooth. Secondly, when the horse carries his head and neck in the best manner for facilitating his movements, the mouth-piece will be in the position easiest for the rider or driver to control the animal by the reins. The breaker’s task, therefore, as regards the carriage of the horse’s head and neck, will simply be to teach him to carry them in a perfectly natural way.

How the mouth-piece should act.—If an impetuous, hard-pulling horse gets his head up and tries to “break away” with a good rider, the man will ease the reins, “drop his hands,” and wait till the animal lowers its head, before he takes a pull: a rule that is followed by all our best horsemen. When the animal finds its head released, he will quickly bring it “down.” The reasons for not pulling at the reins when the head is “up,” are: that, when it is carried in this position, the mouth-piece falls on the corners of the mouth, pressure against which, we find by experience, is not effective in restraining the horse; and that the horse will not, as a rule, lower his head as long as the rider continues to haul on the reins. As soon as the head is brought down into its natural position, the pressure of the mouth-piece will fall on the bars. We may readily conceive, that far more pain results from the superficial nerves of the bars being squeezed between two hard bodies—the mouth-piece and the bone—than that caused by pressure on the loose and mobile tissue which forms the corners of the mouth. If, in the case I have imagined, the horse tries to get his head too low down, our typical good rider will endeavour to make the animal bring it into its proper position. The relief to the mouth obtained by arching the neck and bringing the chin close in to the chest, as some hard-mouthed horses will do, is due to a portion of the pull of the reins being, then, taken by the crown-piece of the bridle; instead of the whole of the pressure, as it should do, falling on the bars. A horse may, also, by stretching his head out, get the mouth-piece off the bars, and on to the corners of the mouth. It is needless to say that such actions on his part, are done with the object of “saving” the mouth. As they are opposed to the possession of proper control over the horse, the breaker should teach him to abandon, if he has learnt, these tricks, and to acquire the habit of bending his neck to the rein, and slackening his speed, as his sole defence against the pressure of the mouth-piece. The only alternative I can see for the use of pressure on the bars, would be its application on the nose by some form of nose-band.

Teaching the Horse to bend his neck to the rein.—Having taught the horse to hold his head, when he is ridden or driven, in an easy, natural position—namely, in one that will allow the mouth-piece always to rest on the bars—we must then teach him, on the reins being “felt,” to bend his neck in order to “save” his mouth. The partial check to the action of the muscles that draw the fore-limb forward, caused by the bending of the neck (see [page 45]) will be an easily understood signal to the animal to moderate his pace.

Proper direction for the pull of the reins.—When the horse is in motion, the forward propulsion by the hind-legs is given through the hip-joints; while that by the fore-limbs, passes through, we may roughly say, the elbow-joints. As the former impetus greatly exceeds the latter, we may assume that the centre of motion is a little in front of, and a little below the level of, the hip-joints. To comply with mechanical requirements, any pressure of the bridle on the mouth must, therefore, be in the direction of this centre of motion, so that the regularity of the stride may be interfered with as little as possible. The rule, taught by experience, of holding the hands, when riding, and especially when galloping, just below the withers, is in entire agreement with this fact.

If the rider’s hands be unduly raised, so as to make the horse carry his head too high, there will be too much weight put on the hind-quarters.

As a point of interest, I may state that, under ordinary circumstances, when a horse begins to tire in his gallop, he will, instead of “going level,” throw increased weight on his forehand, and his croup, when his hind-quarters make their stroke, will become more and more raised. To accurately express this “dwelling on his stride,” we may say, that as the horse becomes fatigued, the forward motion becomes, proportionately, converted into one of rotation, the chief cause of this being that the weight of the rider falls principally on the forehand. Hence, we find that, at the finish of a race, a good jockey “sits down” in his saddle, “catches a good hold” of the animal’s head, and holds his hands a little above the withers: actions on his part which tend to relieve the horse’s forehand of weight, and, consequently, to make him use his powers to the best advantage.

In military riding, which demands special control over the animal’s movements, the horse’s head is drawn in, and the rider’s hand raised, much more than they would be in ordinary work.

The running martingale.—The legitimate uses of this gear are to aid in keeping the horse straight, and to prevent the reins going over his head; but not to keep the head down. If this martingale be so short as to exert a downward pull on the reins, too much weight will be thrown on the forehand. If the horse raises his head even when this martingale is lengthened out, so as to bring its rings on a level with the withers, when it is pulled up, the downward direction of the reins, from the mouth-piece to the rings of the martingale, will produce the same ill effect. Hence, it is a maxim among all good jockeys, that the head of the race-horse, with whom a level style of galloping is one of the chief essentials to success, should be kept down by the rider’s hands, and not by the running martingale. It is the custom, therefore, among jockeys, when they use this gear, to lengthen it out, so that, when it is drawn up, to test its length, its rings will come up to the angle of the lower jaw, when the head is held in a natural position—a length which will obviate any chance of there being a downward pull on the reins.

In the training of a race-horse that “star-gazes,” the use of a running martingale, in order to keep his head down, besides interfering with his action, is detrimental to the soundness of his legs and feet, by reason of the extra weight thrown, thereby, on his forehand.

Respecting the injurious effects of hampering the action of the neck muscles, and of putting a severe downward pressure on the mouth, especially during rapid motion, I may quote the following interesting extract from ‘White’s Veterinary Art,’ which was written many years ago: “There is a great danger, however, of attempting to make the mouth at the time of riding, by means of a running rein; for if he is a stubborn or runaway horse, there is great danger of throwing him down, and in the most dangerous manner that can be. For, if he is determined to run away, and the rider endeavours to prevent him by a running rein, in drawing the nose down to his chest, the muscles of the shoulder are so restrained that he must of necessity pull him down topsy-turvy. Since the body being propelled by the muscles of the hind parts, the restraint thus imposed upon the extensor muscles of the fore-leg, prevents their being thrown out to the extent required, and he comes down with the most dangerous violence. I have known this accident happen with horses that have had upright shoulders and very well-formed hind parts; and I have also known very safe horses, that have contracted a habit of going with their noses poked out, become very unsafe, and soon get broken knees by the endeavour to improve their carriage by a martingale or running rein.”

Bearing reins, side reins, and running reins.—I would dispense with the use, in breaking, of these three appliances, as ordinarily employed; for the first acts by exerting pressure on the corners of the bars, while the other two tend to keep the head in an unnaturally low position. Were the side reins lengthened out so as to act as a properly arranged standing martingale (see [page 70]), or were the running reins attached high up on the saddle; as near as possible on the level of the withers, their use would be wholly unobjectionable. With the long reins (see [page 172]), the standing martingale (see [page 70]), and driving pad (see [page 166]), the horse can be quickly taught to carry himself properly, without any injurious effect being produced.

Teaching the Horse to turn.—When we fail to make a horse turn properly, we find, almost always, that our want of success is due to the animal’s hind-quarters not “coming round” in concert with his head and neck, which, as a rule, can be “bent” to the right or left with facility. I venture to dissent, with all diffidence, from the principle of the “suppling” lessons enjoined by that great master of equitation, M. Baucher, as first steps for “forming the mouth,” for teaching the horse to bring his head round to one side or the other, according to the indication used, while the hind limbs remain fixed. To my thinking, precision in the simple movements of advancing to the front, reining back, and turning, should be sought for, before attempting any artificial evolutions,—such as the “passage,” and “shoulder-in,”—only, in which, the bending of the head and neck is made independently of that of the hind-quarters. As, in riding, all turns should be made with the aid of the support of the “outward leg”—a fact too widely recognized for the

Fig. 1.—Horse bending his neck to the rein without swinging round his hind-quarters at the same time, in answer to the pull.

necessity of proof here—we should teach our pupil, from the outset, to avail himself of such assistance. As the rider’s weight tends to advance the position of the centre of gravity, the natural turn, especially at fast-paces, will be a compromise between the turn “on the centre,” and that “on the haunches.” I may remark, that the further the weight is thrown back, and the greater is the support of the outward leg, the more will the turn be made on the haunches. The use of this leg-pressure, although necessitated by the unequal distribution of the rider’s weight, is, besides this, valuable in all sharp turns made at speed. The turn “on the forehand” can be taught by the rider, after the simpler one is mastered. In treating about turning, I draw no distinction between the saddle and harness horse; for the latter should be made as “clever” as the former, in “collecting” himself and “coming round.”

Let us suppose that a horse is ridden at a fence, A B (see [Fig. 1]), and that he “runs out” to the left; although the rider has pulled the animal’s head round to the right, in his endeavour to keep him straight. In this case, the horse yielded to the rein with his neck, but refused to swing round his hind-quarters—a movement, on his part, which would have brought him at right angles to the fence (see [Fig. 2]); so that he would have had either to jump or to stop, neither of which actions would affect in any way the precision with which the turn had been made. Again, if a horse jibs in harness, and refuses to turn, say, to the right, we shall, in the vast majority of cases, have no difficulty in making him turn his head round in the required direction, although he will obstinately keep his hind-quarters fixed. The same may be said of a horse that rears. If these animals would only turn their hind-quarters round with the same facility that they bend their necks, they would lose their strongest “defence” against our “aids” (the reins and legs of the rider). It is evident that in every turn, the hind-quarters have to move round

Fig. 2.—Shews horse having answered the pull of off rein as he should, and consequently coming straight at his fence.

in the opposite direction to the head and neck; the centre round which the movement is made, being advanced or brought back, according as the turn is made “on the forehand,” or “on the haunches.”

Reining back.—It is an axiom of the riding-school, worthy of implicit acceptance, that, until a horse has learned to rein back with facility and precision, he cannot be considered to have a good mouth; for, by performing this movement in the manner described, he shews that he is intelligently obedient to the indications of the rein, in yielding to its pressure, and, at the same time, in bringing his hind-legs “well under” him. Herein lies the value of the practice of reining back, which teaches the animal to understand that a pull on the reins is quite as much a signal for him to “collect” himself, as to moderate his pace. Hence, the use of a judicious pull when going at high “timber,” or when galloping through heavy ground, especially, when the horse is tired. If, when travelling fast, the animal will only bend his neck to the rein, while letting his hind-quarters sprawl out behind, he will quickly tire, and will, also, be a most unsafe “conveyance,” from inability to raise his forehand, as occasion may require.

Lunging.—Although lunging usually forms a considerable portion of the work given to young horses, during their period of breaking, I mention it, here, solely with the object of advising its discontinuance altogether. Making a horse circle with the weight on his forehand, while his hind-quarters are “thrown out,” not alone teaches him an awkward style of moving, but is also a fertile cause of sprain to the tendons and ligaments of the fore-limb. Again, as it is much more easy for the vast majority of men to keep turning round in one direction—in one opposite to that in which the hands of a clock revolve, for right-handed people—than in the other; it follows, that the generality of men, when they lunge a colt or filly, will circle the young one more to the left than to the right; just as we may see done any day on Newmarket Heath, opposite the railway station. The injurious effects of such a practice are self-evident. I shall describe, further on, a method of circling a horse—the breaker being on foot—by which the animal is made to move in a thoroughly “balanced” manner, and by which his mouth can be “formed” at the same time. I am confident that all good horsemen to whom it is new, will, on seeing how it is done, adopt it unreservedly. I am aware that the practice of lunging is discredited by many good breakers who are unacquainted with the method of circling which I have introduced.

Good hands.—The term “Good hands” signifies the ability of taking a pull at the rein—supposing it be required—when the horse’s head is in the proper position for the mouth-piece to act on the “bars” of the animal’s mouth; and of slackening them when the horse attempts to escape the pressure by bringing his head into a wrong position, or when the animal yields to the indication of the rein. The action of the mouth-piece, and the advisability of refraining from pulling at the reins when the head is in a wrong position, have been fully dealt with in the preceding pages. I may, however, draw attention to the fact that when the horse’s head is in the wrong position for the action of the bridle, it is in an unfavourable one for the movements of the fore-limb; being raised or depressed to an undue extent, or too much flexed or extended on the neck (i.e. chin drawn in, or poked out). Hence, the natural tendency of the horse will be, if his mouth be not interfered with, to bring his head in the position which is the best for his own movements, and which is the most suitable for the action of the mouth-piece of the bridle. A hard-pulling horse, for instance, ridden or driven by a man with “good hands,” will, probably, get his head “up,” on feeling the pressure of the mouth-piece, when he tries to break away. Being inconvenienced in his movements by this awkward carriage of the head, and lacking, on account of the slackness of the reins, the incentive to keep it “up,” he lowers it, to again experience the restraining pull. This will, probably, go on for a few times, until, wearied by a contest in which he finds himself baffled, he yields to the indication of the rein, and slackens his pace. Feeling that he “saves” his mouth the moment he does this, by the rider “giving” to him, he remains “in hand” for the rest of the journey. The typical “mutton-fisted” man, on the contrary, will keep hauling away at the reins, after the horse has got the mouth-piece on to the corners of the mouth, or, by getting his chin into his chest, and his head down, has transferred the pressure on to his poll. Consequently, the animal, experiencing the relief thus obtained, will naturally conclude that he has got the best of the battle, and will continue on his own course as long as he pleases. The harder such a man pulls on the reins, the more likely will he be to incite the animal to shew fight. In this case, the man foolishly pits the strength of his arms against the greatly superior power of the horse’s neck. The rider with good hands, on the contrary, uses a pull on the reins, merely as a means of letting the animal know, that, if it will obey his wishes, it will “save” its own mouth; a hint which, as a rule, is readily taken. I need hardly say that the severer the bit, the better should be the hands of the man who employs it. A really fine horseman can ride with success in almost any kind of bit.

Snaffles and curbs.—The only advantage possessed by the curb over the snaffle is, as a rule, its greater power of control. This superiority is attended with the serious objections that: (1) the use of the curb is, often, irritating to the horse, who, if roused, can always successfully resist its control; and (2) that it is, more or less, detrimental to the action of the horse, by tending to make him averse from “going up to his bridle,” and by obliging him, so as to “save” his mouth, to carry his head in a more or less constrained manner. As we can easily obtain the necessary control with the snaffle during breaking, it is evident that we should altogether dispense with the use of the curb during this process, so as to avoid the introduction of any disturbing element in the working out of the principle of using indications, rather than severity.

The thin, so-called, racing snaffle should not be used; as it is apt to wound the bars of the mouth, and thereby irritate the horse into shewing fight, which is the very thing we should seek to avoid while using the reins, of which, when we are in the saddle or driving seat, we are masters only on sufferance.

Elastic reins on dumb jockeys.—These contrivances should not be employed in breaking; for they never allow the complete freedom from pressure which the horse should experience as a reward for obedience, when he bends his neck and yields to the rein; unless, indeed, the elastic lines are ineffectually loose, or the animal draws in his head to an immoderate extent.

Fig. 3.—The proper length for a standing martingale.

The standing martingale.—The use of this martingale is to prevent the horse from getting the mouth-piece off the bars, when he throws up his head. Hence, if we employ it lengthened out, so that it will be just short enough to accomplish this object, and no more (see [Fig. 3]), it will give us the immense advantage of having the mouth-piece always in an effective position, with but little drawback. I, here, suppose that it is attached to the rings of the snaffle and not to the nose-band. At first glance, it may be considered that this mechanical restraint would be a constant source of danger, in the event of the animal getting into difficulties. I have frequently heard it urged,—but only by men who had not seen its use practically demonstrated,—that if a horse, on making a “blunder” at a fence, could not extend his head more than the properly lengthened out martingale would allow him to do, he would, being thus deprived of this supposed means of recovering his equilibrium, run a great risk of falling. We may see the fallacy of this argument, if we consider that the only effect of this poking out of the head, is to endanger the equilibrium, which becomes unstable, the moment a perpendicular line drawn through the centre of gravity, falls beyond the fore-feet. We find, therefore, by observing the comparative tightness, before and after jumping, of the standing martingale, that the horse’s tendency, when fencing, is to bring his head back, on advancing the fore-limbs. If he adopts, with the martingale on, the other and unsafe course, the pain caused by the consequent severe pressure of the mouth-piece on the bars, will soon teach him to save his mouth by holding his head in a proper position. Besides the increased control obtained by the mouth-piece always remaining on the bars, the presence of the standing martingale, by stopping him from poking out his nose, will tend to prevent him going “uncollectedly” behind, and, even on this account alone, will be specially useful for the hunter, chaser, and polo pony. Whatever be the horse’s work, whether on the flat, across country, or in harness, he should be ridden or driven in a standing martingale, if he has the habit of trying to get the mouth-piece off the bars of the mouth, or has any tendency to go uncollectedly. Objection to its use can be taken, only, in the case of the ’cross-country horse, who will be much more liable to be brought to grief by the practice of either of the faults just mentioned, than by this martingale. When he has learnt to carry himself properly, but not till then, should its employment be discontinued. Its constant use quickly teaches the horse to hold his head and to carry himself in the desired style; for obedience to the indications it automatically affords, is at once rewarded by relief to the mouth. No such useful lesson can be learned by the employment of the running martingale; for, with it, no saving of the mouth is obtained by any yielding of the head and neck to the rein. When it is on, whatever relief is procured, must be the result of the action of the rider’s hands, which cannot possibly “give and take” with the same precision as the fixed martingale. I may mention, that this gear has the great advantage of preventing a rider with “bad hands,” from hauling on the reins when the mouth-piece is on the corners of the mouth. Hence, the worse the rider, the more need he has of using a standing martingale with a horse that requires one.

That good horseman, Mr. Blew of The Field, remarks to me that he has seen one or two falls result from the use of the standing martingale, in cases of horses, out hunting, getting their fore-feet into a deep “gripe,” and, then, being prevented by this gear, from throwing up the head, and, thus, relieving the fore-hand. He, consequently, advises that it should be employed, only, in breaking. Those fine steeplechase riders, Colonel Hickman of the 21st Hussars and Colonel Wardrop of the 12th Lancers, as well as many other good ’cross-country performers, consider, with me, that its addition renders horses requiring such restraint, safer over fences than they would be without it. Although the solution of this debatable question may be left to each man’s own individual feeling on the matter, there can be no doubt as to its paramount importance in breaking, which is the subject, at present, before us.

The statement may be advanced, that men with really fine hands will gain nothing from the employment of the standing martingale. I entirely dissent from this; for it is impossible for any man, however delicate his touch may be, or strong his arms, to prevent, as this martingale will do, the animal from getting his head up, and thereby successfully resisting control, for the time being. I may mention that many of our finest Irish riders are its devoted admirers.

When a horse pulls hard, he will, almost invariably, try to advance his chin further than the standing martingale—at a proper length, let it be understood—will allow him to do. Hence, this amount of restraint will always be a direct saving to the arms; while it will be taken off the mouth, and the controlling indication afforded, the moment the animal brings his head back into its natural position. I need hardly explain, that the horse being unable to bring forward the bars of the lower jaw, will try, when resisting the action of the standing martingale, to advance his poll as much as possible, by bending the joint connecting the lower jaw to the head, and that by which the head is attached to the neck.

If the standing martingale be fixed on to the nose-band, it will fail to act in the manner described; owing to the fact that the pressure thus exerted on the nose by this strap, causes little or no pain; unless, indeed, it be specially arranged to produce this effect, as in the way described on [page 217].

Nose-bands.—The use of the nose-band is to prevent the horse relieving the bars of some of the pressure of the mouth-piece, by opening his mouth; an action on his part which will tend to render this pressure oblique, and to transfer a portion of it to his poll.

CHAPTER III.
HORSE-CONTROL.

The breaking enclosure—Making a rope-halter—Haltering a loose horse—Making a loose horse stand still—Taking up a fore-leg—Holding up a fore-leg—Tying up a fore-leg—Blindfolding a horse—Applying the halter-twitch—The rope-twitch—The head-stall twitch—The bridle-twitch—The strait-jacket—Lifting up a hind-leg—Gagging a horse.

The breaking enclosure.—In order to carry out the system of breaking horses, it is a great advantage to have a proper enclosure, of about 20 yards square, with walls around it about 7 ft. high. The ground inside should be quite soft, so that horses which are made to lie down on it, may not run any chance of hurting themselves.

I may here impress on the reader the danger there is to the breaker of having any one standing right behind him when he is handling vicious horses; for, in such a case, if the animal make an offensive movement, the man will probably knock up against the other, and thus fail to get out of harm’s way.

Making a rope-halter.—The simplest way to do this is to take a half-inch rope, about 9 yards long; make it double for about 3 ft. 6 in.; put a knot on the doubled part, so as to form a large loop, in which make a small loop, for the leading rein to pass through. The second knot should divide the large loop, so that the head-piece should be about twice as long as the nose-band. The halter will now be ready to be put on (see Figs. 4 and 5). The nose-band may be made sufficiently long, and the loop through which the loose end passes, tight enough to prevent the nose-band and leading rein (the free end of the rope), forming a running noose, which might hurt the horse. Or, if required, a knot may be made with the leading rein at the ring through which it passes; so that the nose-band of the halter may not squeeze the horse’s jaws together.

Fig. 4.—First loop in forming a rope-halter. Fig. 5.—Second step.

The rope employed should be soft, and not too thick, so as to allow the knots to be made with facility.

The reader will observe, that this halter which I have devised, is only an improvised adaptation, which need not take half a minute to make, of the ordinary rope-halter. I have no doubt that others, prompted by necessity, like myself, have hit on this rough-and-ready method; although I have never seen a halter made in quite the same manner as I have described.

Haltering a loose Horse.—Let us suppose that the animal is in some suitable enclosure, such as a yard, loose box, or small paddock; for it is almost needless to say, that if he were at liberty in the open, and averse from being captured, no man unaided could possibly catch him. The first thing to do is to make the rope-halter—as described in the preceding part of this chapter—if one be not at hand, and then to get the horse to stand quietly in some convenient corner. We may make him move, or stop, as may be required, by gently working a long pole held in the hands across the body, alternately, behind and in front of him; and, having got him into the proper position, we may induce him to stand steady, as I have found by experience, by touching him on the neck, and then rubbing it with the end of the pole. I have hardly ever known this to fail in its object. Horses, almost always, like having their necks scratched. As soon as the animal will stand still, while his neck is being “gentled” with the stick, the halter may be put on the end of the pole by a couple of turns (see [Fig. 6]), while the free end of the rope may be twisted once or twice round the pole, to prevent it hanging down too low. The operator will now take the pole, with the halter then rigged on to it, and will endeavour to bring the crown-piece of the halter behind the ears, without frightening the animal; while holding the end of the pole a little above

Fig. 6.—Rope-halter on pole, ready for use.

its head (see [Fig. 7]). He can take the precautions I have described, for making the horse stand still, as he may think necessary. As soon as the crown-piece of the halter comes behind the ears,

Fig. 7.—Haltering vicious horse with rope-halter on pole.

the operator should swing the pole smartly down in front of the animal’s nose, and then under the lower jaw; a proceeding which will bring the halter into its proper place. Nothing now remains except to withdraw the pole. Care should be taken not to bring the pole under the lower jaw, until the nose-band is in front of the ears; for, if it remains behind them, when the end of the stick is brought down, the horse will be lassoed and not haltered. The precautions necessary to be taken in haltering the horse will depend on the amount of his vice, or timidity. A horse can be thus caught best, when he is standing in the corner of a wall which is too high for him to look over. In a circular enclosure, the animal will be able, by turning round, to defeat the intentions of his would-be captor, much more easily than he could do in a rectangular one. In a roped-in arena, the horse can get his head away from the halter, easier than he could do when close to a wall. There is no fear of a horse, however vicious he may be, of “charging home” on the operator, if the man keeps the pole across the animal’s face, ready, if need be, to give him a tap or two on the muzzle. The larger the enclosure, the less will a horse attempt to “savage” any one approaching him. In extreme cases, a blow on the forehead might be necessary. I may mention that the brain is covered at the forehead, by only a thin plate of bone. Mr. O. S. Pratt, the American “horse-tamer,” gives, in his book, a method for haltering a loose horse, by putting the crown-piece of the halter on the end of the pole (see [Fig. 8]). In applying this, the horse is very apt to shy away from the halter, which has to be put on from the front. The manner of haltering which I have described, and which was shewn to me by Mr. Banham, F.R.C.V.S., appears to be much better than Pratt’s plan.

Making a loose Horse stand still.—If timidity

Fig. 8.

is the only cause that renders a loose horse difficult to halter, we may make him stand still after having put him in a proper enclosure, by cutting him, with the whip, about the hocks and hind-heels whenever he attempts to turn round, and to shew his hind-quarters to the breaker. If the animal attempts to pass by, the man should stop him with the point of the whip. As soon as the horse understands that he exposes himself to punishment by turning round, he will, proportionately, abstain from doing so. He will then be readily induced to stand still by the point of the whip preventing him from passing; and the fear of punishment, from turning round. As a rule, the operator can quickly get up to his forehand by “gentling” his crest with the end of the whip or pole, and afterwards with the hand. The foregoing method, which I learned from that excellent teacher, Professor Sample, is not altogether suitable for horses that “strike out in front.” The punishment that has to be inflicted during its application, may be an objection to its employment.

Taking up a fore-leg.—Having haltered the horse, we may, in order to gain further control over him, take up a fore-leg in two ways.

1. If we are afraid that the horse, on our approaching him, will “strike out,” or kick, we

Fig. 9.—Noosing a fore-leg.

Fig. 10.—Pulling up a fore-leg when noosed.

may, as Colonel Rawlins, R.H.A., shewed me, form a noose about two feet and a half in diameter, with a rope, and having laid it on the ground, give the free end to an assistant to hold. We may, then, make the horse move about until he places one fore-foot within the noose (see [Fig. 9]), when the assistant should pull the rope, and thus lasso the pastern. The end of the rope may, now, be thrown over the animal’s back to the other side, and the leg pulled up (see [Fig. 10]); or, if the animal will not stand this being done, the leg may be pulled back by the rope, and lifted up by another assistant. If the horse “shews fight,” it may be necessary to blindfold him at this stage of the proceedings. The long pole may, also, be called into requisition to “gentle” the horse, and thus render him comparatively quiet. The operator can always quickly accomplish his object, in the manner described, if he will only exercise a little patience.

I may mention that this method of noosing the leg, is precisely similar to that employed in securing the limbs of wild elephants, in India, when they have been driven into a stockade.

2. The best way for lifting up a fore-leg, with the hand, is, as I have found out, to grasp, say, the near fore, with the left hand; pinch it with the fingers to stimulate the flexors of the knee to contract; turn the elbow in, and press it against the upper part of the fore-arm, so as to throw the weight from the near, on to the off fore, and thus to render the picking-up of the near fore a very easy matter (see [Fig. 11]). If required, an upward pull is given with the left arm, and the foot is caught with the right hand as the horse lifts it up. I may add, that the muscles against which the man’s elbow presses assist in raising the foot from the ground. By this plan the breaker can stand at the side of the leg that has to be raised, and a little away from it, thus keeping out of danger, as much as possible. If

Fig. 11.—Picking up a fore-leg.

he attempts to lift the fore-leg of a bad cow-kicker, in the ordinary way, by catching hold of the pastern, he will run a great risk of getting hit on the head or body, by having to stoop down while standing close to, and a little behind, the fore-leg.

Mr. J. Leach, M.R.C.V.S., shewed me a neat method for lifting up the leg of a heavy cart-horse, by catching the hair of the fetlock, and then drawing up the leg. The slight irritation caused by the pull at the roots of the hair will cause the horse to readily bend the knee.

Holding up a fore-leg.—If the fore-leg be held up by the hand passing under the fetlock or pastern, as is frequently done, the horse, by bearing a portion of his weight on the man’s hand, can easily kick with either hind-leg. The foot should, on the contrary, be held by the hoof, under which the fingers pass, while the thumb presses down on the sole (see [Fig. 12]). The animal will now avoid placing weight on the man’s hand; for by doing so he would cause the joints of the foot to become bent in a painful manner.

Fig. 12.—How to hold up a fore-leg.

A convenient way for holding up the fore-leg, for “gentling” and other purposes, is that shewn by Fig. 10.

Tying up a fore-leg.—Having “picked up” the foot, we may secure it as follows:

1. By Rarey’s leg strap, which is about 3 ft. long, and is furnished, at one end, with a buckle, below which, a leather “keeper” is placed on both sides (see [Fig. 13]). To apply it, the free end is passed round the pastern, from the outside, through the keeper at the back of the buckle, thus forming a loop. Another turn is taken round the forearm, and a second loop is made by passing the end through the buckle. The strap can now be tightened up as may be required, and the end run through the second keeper. Fig. 14 shews how this can be equally well done with a stirrup leather, with which two or three turns have been taken round the pastern; so as to bring the punched holes sufficiently near

Fig. 13.—Rarey’s leg-strap.

the buckle. (See, also, Fig. 16.) The objections to the employment of this method of tying up the leg are: (a) That it is apt to irritate the animal by the compression needed to keep the strap in its place; (b) That, when the leg is thus fixed, the horse, in the event of his “coming down,”

Fig. 14.—Tying up fore-leg with stirrup-leather.

is liable to hurt his knee, “capped knee” being the usual result of the injury; on account of the broad extensor tendon being, necessarily, tightly stretched over the part. I have had this accident occur, on different occasions, when making a horse lie down, even when he had knee-caps on, and when the ground was quite soft; (c) The heel of the shoe, if one be on, is apt to bruise and cut the elbow; (d) The compression exercised by the strap on the fore-arm numbs the leg, and tends to make the animal fall awkwardly, if he is made to lie down; (e) Unless the strap is kept very tight, it is apt to slip down the fore-arm, and thus exercise an injurious strain on the fetlock joint.

2. By far the best way for tying up a fore-leg is the one described by Mr. Saunders in ‘Our Horses,’ by which the leg is simply suspended, at any length required, from the surcingle. Mr. Saunders advises the use of a small loop to connect the surcingle and strap together (see [Fig. 15]), with the object, I presume, of keeping the limb in a plane parallel to the general direction of the horse’s body. This is certainly an advantage when making a horse lie down, although I have found, for ordinary purposes of control,

Fig. 15.—The best method of fastening up a fore-leg.

that the employment of the small loop may be dispensed with, and the leg-strap passed through the surcingle, or girth.

This method of suspending the leg is most useful, when gentling the fore-limb, and when shoeing a “difficult” animal; as the foot can be retained at any convenient height from the ground without irritating the horse, and, consequently, without inciting him to “fight.”

I have learned, on more than one occasion, by bitter experience, that it is possible for a horse to effectually cow-kick with the hind-leg of the side on which a fore-leg is tied up.

A stirrup leather, with two or three holes punched at convenient distances, will make a capital leg-strap (see [Fig. 16]). It has the advantage of having, at the back of the buckle, no leather keeper, which is always liable to give way, by reason of the strain exerted on it.

For suspending a fore-leg, we need punch no extra holes in the leather, if we take, as before

Fig. 16.—A stirrup-leather as used for holding up a fore-leg.

described, a few turns with it round the pastern, before passing its end through the lower part of the buckle. This way would naturally take a few seconds longer than if the holes were punched at proper distances, and, consequently, is not as applicable as the other, to horses that are extremely difficult to handle.

Blindfolding a Horse.—After the animal has been secured in the manner described, or after he has been simply haltered, a further step in the process of rendering him helpless may be taken, by throwing a rug, or other convenient cloth, over his head, and then applying the rope-twitch (see [page 113]). If he be dangerous to approach, the rug may be placed on the end of a long pole, and then brought over his head, or a blindfolding halter may be put on, now, or in the first instance. The originating idea of this appliance is, I believe, of French origin. It consists of an ordinary halter, with a cloth filling up the space between the cheek-pieces, brow-band, and nose-band; so as to cover the horse’s eyes.

Blindfolding is an efficient means of control with the majority of horses, although it excites some to offer more vigorous resistance than they would otherwise do. I have never found a horse that would, when blindfolded, attempt to kick, or strike out, on the chance of hitting his man, unless he was touched about the limbs or body; nor bite, whether touched or not, under similar circumstances. I, therefore, think that the breaker runs no risk whatsoever in going up to the animal’s head, when it is, thus, temporarily deprived of sight, no matter how vicious it may be.

Applying the halter-twitch.—At this stage of the proceedings, the breaker may apply a modification of Pratt’s twitch, by making a half hitch with the free part of the rope of the halter, passing the loop over the ears (see [Fig. 17]), bringing the lower part of the loop under the animal’s upper lip, and then pulling it taut (see [Fig. 18]). He may jerk the rope (leading rein) three or four times, accompanying the action on each occasion with the word “steady.” I may

Fig. 17.—The halter-twitch.

mention that the part of the rope which passes under the upper lip, should be kept slack, except

Fig. 18.

when the jerk is given, and that any other suitable word may be substituted for that of “steady.” It is now perfectly safe to remove the blindfolding apparatus; as no horse will attempt any aggressive movement towards the man who holds the leading rein, when thus secured. The rope may be jerked and the word “steady” used, as may be required. The pain inflicted by the application of this twitch, is a necessary evil, which may well be disregarded; for its amount is trifling in comparison with the extent of control obtained by its means. If employed carefully, no mark need be left on the mucous membrane. The proper use of this twitch is thoroughly rational, for it keeps the horse quiet by its deterrent effect, and not by retaining the horse in a continued state of suffering, as is done by the ordinary twitch. The word “steady,” or any convenient substitute for it, should never be omitted; for, after the animal has learned, as he will do in a minute or two, to connect it with the idea of pain, the twitch may be removed, and the word alone used, in order to keep him in subjection. In this experiment, it is evident that the horse fears the word, and not the twitch; for, no matter how often the rope is put on, he will not resent its application more than he did on the first occasion. The oftener, on the contrary, the ordinary twitch is employed, the shyer will the animal become of having his muzzle touched. The chief advantages of the rope-twitch over the common one, are: that it can be easier procured and applied; it does not inflict so much pain, which, with it, is momentary, and not continuous, as with the other; it is more effective; it is not so liable to slip off; it can be retained in position for any reasonable length of time, to be used as required; it has a more or less permanently good effect on the horse’s temper, and not a bad one, like the other; and it does not make the horse shy of having his mouth touched. The fact of numbers of horses being rendered difficult to bridle, by the employment of the ordinary twitch, will, naturally, occur to the reader. The general substitution of this twitch for the ordinary one, by veterinary surgeons, would certainly remove a grave reproach against us which now exists. It is, of course, used by them, only, faute de mieux.

If, when the ordinary twitch is twisted up tight, its stick be struck or jerked, as some do, on the animal moving, it will doubtless have a deterrent effect, as well as the one produced by the brutal and needless infliction of continued pain.

The rope-twitch.—Everything I have said in the preceding paragraphs, respecting the halter-twitch, applies equally well to its original form, as described in Mr. O. S. Pratt’s book, ‘The Horse’s Friend,’ which was published at Buffalo in 1876. Mr. C. G. Frasier, who was Pratt’s assistant for some years, in America, tells me, that this twitch was not invented by Pratt, long before whose time it was in use. He thinks that it was, probably, the idea of the “horse-tamer,”

Fig. 19.—Pratt’s rope-twitch, first portion.

Fanchion, who practised his art many years ago in the States. Pratt calls it “the double-hitch Bonaparte bridle.” It is made as follows: Take a rope, and make a simple knot with it at one end, at a distance of about eighteen inches from which make another knot loosely, and pass the

Fig. 20.—Pratt’s twitch completed.

first knot through the second, so as to form a loop which will not draw tight. Make a halter by taking a turn of the rope through the fixed loop (see [Fig. 19]). Place the halter over the horse’s head, and the loop in his mouth. Make a half hitch with the free part of the rope, pass it over the horse’s head and under his upper lip, and draw moderately tight (see Figs. 20 and 21). By making the fixed loop long, one can obtain more power than with the halter-twitch.

Fig. 21.—Pratt’s twitch on horse’s head, and tightened at word “steady.”

If an ordinary head-stall or snaffle-bridle is on, the twitch may be applied by knotting the end of the rope to one of the D’s on the cheek-pieces of the former, or to one of the rings of the latter, and passing the half hitch over the ears and under the upper lip, as before described.

Fig. 22.—Head-stall twitch on horse.

If there be much difficulty in applying the rope-twitch, the horse may be tied head and tail (see [page 197]), and it can then be put on without trouble; the animal being, of course, released, immediately after this is done.

Head-stall twitch.—Fig. 22 will explain this ready and effective method of applying the twitch. The rope is passed through the upper ring of the cheek-piece of the head-stall, and is tied on to the lower ring. The turn over the ears and under the upper lip is, then, taken, with the portion of rope which, after being drawn out, is included between the two rings.

The bridle-twitch.—This is a useful and ready means for making the horse stand quiet after he is bridled, and is applied by passing one of the snaffle-reins under the upper lip, and drawing it tight to the opposite side (see Figs. 23 and 24). I was shewn this twitch by Mr. Esa, of the firm of Shaikh Ibrahim & Co., Poona.

The strait-jacket.—For English readers, I

Fig. 23.—The bridle-twitch, front and near-side view.

venture to apply this term to the hippo lasso of MM. Raabe and Lunel. It consists of a

Fig. 24.—The bridle-twitch, off-side view.

breachen and breast-band, supported by straps passing over the back, and connected by traces, which proceed from the breachen, through D’s, with rollers on them, at the end of the breast-band, back again through similar D’s on the breachen, and then forward; to become finally attached to buckles on the sides of the breast-band (see [Fig. 25]). A strap and buckle, laid along the top of the back, connects the two back straps together. A felt guard may be used with the supporting strap of the breast-band, so as to prevent it hurting the back. The breachen should be lined with felt. The back straps should be made of strong stirrup leather. The traces should be particularly strong, close to the breachen. The breachen and breast-band should be provided, at their respective centres, with a D, to which ropes may be attached, in order to keep the animal steady, before and behind.

This gear may be applied in the following way:

If the horse is quiet, the breast-band and breachen may be put on separately, with the back straps supporting them, and may be

Fig. 25.—The strait-jacket.

connected together by the strap on the top of the

Fig. 26.—Horse with strait-jacket on.

back, and by the traces on each side. The breast-band should rest high up against the fore-arms, and the breachen behind, and a little below the level of the stifles (see [Fig. 26]).

If the animal is dangerous to handle, only, behind; the breast-band may be put on, and the breachen attached to it, in the manner just described, but without putting it over the quarters. A rope can now be fixed to the D in the centre of the breachen, which, by the aid of the rope, can be pulled over the croup into its proper position, by an assistant from behind. Before doing this, the traces should be let out, to be pulled tight, the moment the breachen slips over the tail. In this and other cases of difficulty, ropes may be attached to the ends of the traces, so that the assistants who hold them, need run no risk of getting kicked.

When the horse strikes out, as well as kicks, the different parts of the strait-jacket may be connected together, with the exception of, say, the near trace, the end of which may be held by an assistant, while another helper holds a rope attached to the D which is on the near side of the breast-band. The loop formed by the breast-band and its back strap is, now, passed over the horse’s neck, the end of the near trace passed through the near side D of the breast-band, and the remaining fixings accomplished. Or, if the animal be not very violent, the gear may be connected together; the loop made by the breast-band and its back strap, passed over the head and neck; and the breachen pulled over the croup by a rope.

If the precaution of putting on the rope-twitch be taken, no difficulty need be experienced in subsequently applying the strait-jacket.

Lifting up a hind-leg.—The two methods to which I need direct my readers’ attention, for performing this operation, are as follows:

1. If the operator has two assistants—one to

Fig. 27.—Picking up a hind-leg.

Fig. 28.—First step in picking up a hind-leg without the assistance of a helper.

hold the horse, the other to hold up, say, the near fore-leg—he may get alongside the animal’s near hind; catch the tendo Achillis (the hamstring) with the left hand, and the pastern, backhanded, with the right hand; give a signal to the assistant to let go the near fore; then lift the leg, and place it resting on his left thigh (see [Fig. 27]).

If he has no one to hold up the near fore, he may “pick it up” in the way previously described; grasp the hoof with the right hand, while facing to the horse’s rear (see [Fig. 28]); take a step forward with the left foot; catch the hamstring with the left hand (see [Fig. 29]); let go the near fore, and, at the same moment, seize the pastern, backhanded, with the right hand; and place, as before, the animal’s leg on the left thigh. This method, which, I believe, I have been the first to devise, ensures almost complete immunity from danger. As long as one has hold of the fore-hoof with the hand, one can get forward, out of danger, if the horse tries to kick. The grasp of the left hand deprives the hind-leg of the greater part of its action, and the hind pastern is caught so quickly after, even if not before, the near fore reaches the ground, that the animal has not time to make a deliberately offensive movement. By catching the pastern in the way described, we aid in preventing the animal from cow-kicking, to do which, he must bend his hock; for the muscle which flexes the foot extends the hock. Were we to catch the canon bone, instead of the pastern, we should, besides losing this advantage, have less ability to act on the lever formed by the bones below the hock, by reason of our shifting the point of application of the “power,” closer to the fulcrum (the head of the tibia). The irritation caused by the grasp of the hand on the hamstring—which is composed of two tendons—stimulates their muscles to contract, and, thus, to keep the hock extended. In this operation, we should follow the principles, already laid down, of removing the cause of any pain or irritation,

Fig. 29.—Second step in picking up a hind leg without the assistance of a helper.

inflicted by us on the horse, the moment he yields to our wishes. I need hardly say, that if the horse overpowers the grip of our hands on his hind-leg, and kicks out behind, he can do us no harm, for we are then in front of his hind-leg. If the animal will not submit, we should apply the rope-twitch (see [page 113]); and, by its aid, and a little “gentling,” proceed as before described.

2. In order to “gentle” the hind limb, or to take it up and let it down at will, while maintaining complete control over it, we may proceed as follows: Put on, say, the near hind pastern, a hobble with a D attached to it. Take a strong cord about 20 ft. long, and tie with it a “double sheet bend” (see [Fig. 30]) to the end of the tail, in the middle of the cord. Pass one end through the D to the near side, the other end through it to the off side, and give the respective ends to an assistant on each side to hold (see [Fig. 31]). These men should stand at right angles to the horse, and can lift the leg by

Fig. 30.—Shewing how to fasten a rope to the end of horse’s tail with a “double sheet bend.”

pulling equally on their respective cords. In this manner, the leg will be brought straight up under

Fig. 31.—Hind hoof held up by two assistants with rope from tail.