FITTING AND APPLICATION OF SHOES.
Having selected shoes suitable for the feet and adapted to the special
work of the horse, having also prepared the foot for shoeing, we arrive
at another important part of the farriers' art--fitting the shoe. No
matter what form of shoe be used or how the foot be prepared for it,
unless the two are properly fitted the horse does not obtain all the
advantages of good shoeing, and may be positively injured. The owner of
horses seldom knows anything about the fitting of shoes, and therefore
fails to appreciate how some of his directions concerning feet and
shoes are quite impracticable.
[Illustration: Fig. 48.]
I have in a previous chapter attempted to show how a foot should be
prepared for shoeing, and what bearing surface should be left for the
shoe. I have also described what I consider the best forms of shoe. The
object at all times should be to follow nature as closely as possible,
but it often happens that we may, with benefit, depart from the exact
indications given and still fulfil all essential requirements. If we
examine the unshod foot which has been worn down to proper proportions
we find the bearing surface is not level--it is worn more at the toe
and heels than elsewhere. If we examine the ground surface of an old
shoe the same thing is noticed--the surface is not level, the toe and
heel show most wear. The question then arises, should we make the
artificial bearing surface of the foot on the same plan and adjust the
shoe to it, as in Fig. 48, or should we make the surface level and
apply a level shoe as in Fig. 49? I believe that the ideal arrangement
would be to follow the line suggested by a worn foot or a worn shoe,
but it is difficult to carry out, and greater exactness of fit is more
readily obtained by two level surfaces. The ground surface of a shoe
may, if necessary, be altered to suit the outline of wear, whilst the
level foot-surface is preserved, as in Fig. 50.
[Illustration: Fig. 49.]
[Illustration: Fig. 50.]
Whatever form the farrier adopts, a shoe should rest equally
throughout, and the contact of foot and shoe should be exact over the
whole bearing surface. Assuming then that a properly prepared foot
presents a level surface, the fitting of shoes becomes simple so long
as the smith possesses manual dexterity and follows the indications of
common sense.
There are two conditions to be fulfilled, (1) to fit the shoe to the
plain surface of the foot, (2) to fit the shoe to the circumference of
the wall. Most amateurs judge shoeing by the way a shoe follows the
outline of the hoof, but the practical man knows that it is equally
difficult and important to fit the surface.
=Outline fitting.= A shoe is first compared with the foot, it is then
heated, and the heels cut off or turned down to the proper length.
Each limb of the shoe is fitted to follow the outline of the wall,
and it is necessary to warn the novice that the inside and outside
borders of a foot are not alike. The outside is rounder and fuller,
and the shoe should be shaped to follow exactly the direction of the
wall. The outer border of a shoe should always be as prominent as the
outer border of the hoof; it should never be within it. The inner
border must not protrude beyond the wall lest the opposite leg be
struck. A well fitted shoe must be fitted full to the foot. What is
called "close" fitting, _i.e._, bringing the shoe rather within the
circumference of the wall, is injurious, as it loses the best and
strongest bearing of the wall, and permits the farrier to give an
appearance of neatness by rasping away any horn which protrudes beyond
the shoe. On a well-shaped foot the shoe should follow the outer line
of the hoof from toe to heel, but where the heels of a foot are turned
inwards there is an advantage in fitting the shoe wider at the heels,
as by so doing the base of the foot is not constricted and a wider
resting surface is afforded to the limb. When a shoe is fitted wide at
the heels it is essential that the foot-surface of the shoe should be
level at the heels. If it be inclined, as it often is in seated shoes,
a very grave defect in the fitting results, for the heels have no level
bearing-surface.
A shoe fitted too wide is liable to be trodden off by the opposite
foot, or it may cause the horse to hit the opposite fetlock joint.
Provided the nail holes are properly placed, when the outside border
of the shoe is fitted nicely to the circumference of the hoof, they
are brought to their right position. When nail holes are placed too
near, or too far, from the outer border of the shoe--_i.e._, when they
are too "fine" or too "coarse"--it may be necessary to correct their
position by fitting the shoe "closer" or "fuller," as the case may be.
When a farrier fits shoes made by another man he may overlook this, as
we are all slaves to habit. The man who in his daily practice combines
"close" fitting with "fine" nailing has to alter his routine when
fitting a shoe with coarse nail holes.
The length of a shoe at the heels is a matter of more importance than
is generally recognised. As a rule hunters are all shod too short,
while most cart horses are shod too long. The objections to a long
front shoe are that it is liable to be trodden off by the hind shoe,
and that it may injure the elbow when the horse lies down. A long hind
shoe is free from both these disadvantages, and as it usually has a
calkin is the best form to adopt.
In fitting the heels of front shoes, in all but galloping horses, the
iron should generally extend slightly behind the extremity of the
horn. (Fig. 48). Horses used for galloping should have the end of the
shoe just within the termination of the horn, and should finish with
an oblique extremity. (Fig. 49). There is nothing gained by greater
shortening, if the iron be fitted exactly to the horn. Why shoes are
often pulled off, when only just the length of the hoof, is because
they are not fitted close enough, and very often because they are
wilfully and ignorantly designed to leave a space between hoof and
iron. This so-called "eased" heel is an unmitigated evil.
[Illustration: Fig. 49.--Shoe fitted short at the heels.]
=Surface-fitting.= It is simple to direct that the bearing-surface of
a shoe should be exactly adapted to the bearing-surface of a foot. It
is not so simple to carry out. When the horn on the lower surface of
a foot is thin any uneven pressure--_i.e._, pressure applied directly
to one spot--soon causes injury, pain, and lameness. When a good thick
layer of horn exists, uneven pressures are less injurious, because
the horn distributes them over a wide surface. Good workmanship is
displayed by leaving no uneven pressure, and by so fitting a shoe that
it shall do no harm. With a narrow shoe--one only the width of the
wall--no uneven pressure can be applied to the sensitive foot, but
such a shoe is seldom used as it is too light to afford sufficient
wear. A wide shoe with a flat foot surface is easily fitted on all
concave feet--_i.e._, on all hind and most fore feet. To make use of
the whole bearing-surface a shoe must rest evenly from toe to heel--the
flat surface of the shoe must take a level bearing on the whole flat
bearing-surface of the foot.
There are two places where injury from uneven pressure is most likely
to happen--at the toe and at the heels.
In preparing a foot the wall at the toe may, from want of care, be
reduced a little below the level of the sole, or in making a shoe the
inside border at the toe may be left higher than the outside. In each
case uneven pressure is placed on the sole just where the back border
of the shoe rests. In fitting a hot shoe, wherever the hoof is unduly
marked warning is given that pressure at that point must be prevented
by altering the surface either of the shoe or the foot. On a strong
foot, the knife may be used to remove a little horn; on a weak foot the
alteration must be on the shoe.
At the the heel uneven pressure is most frequent on the angle of sole
between the wall and bar, where it causes the so-called "corn"--a
condition in the horse having no analogy to the affliction similarly
named in the human subject. It is simply a bruise of the sensitive
parts under the horn.
A bruised heel--a corn--is most likely to arise from the use of a
shoe too short, especially if fitted too close. It may arise from a
properly-fitted shoe retained too long on the foot and shifted from
its proper bearing on the wall to an improper bearing on the sole. A
bruised heel may also result from the use of a well-made shoe if the
preparation of the hoof has been faulty. Rule-of-thumb directions to
"reduce the heels to a level by the use of the rasp, but on no account
cut away any sole" may result in injury. In a strong foot with an
overgrown sole it is easy to get a level surface and to fit on to it a
level shoe, but the horn of the sole does not remain level. As it grows
and flakes off the portion between the bar and wall is raised. If the
weather be wet it swells, and then, bound down by the shoe, it acts
simply as a stone might and bruises the sensitive parts within by its
uneven pressure. It is always safe and it is never injurious to remove
so much of the surface of this portion of sole with the drawing-knife
as will ensure no uneven pressure on it by the shoe.
[Illustration: Fig. 50.--An "eased" heel.]
The more exactly the shoe fits the foot-surface the more easily it is
retained in position by the nails, and the less likelihood there is of
any part of it pressing distinctly on a limited portion of horn. Exact
fitting allows all bearings and pressures to be distributed equally
over the surface of the hoof, and thus permits the shoe most nearly to
resemble a mere continuation of the hoof in iron--an arrangement to
prevent wear, but not to interfere with natural functions. There is one
departure from level fitting which requires special notice since it
is made, not by accident or negligence, but by design. It consists in
taking the bearing of an inch or an inch and a half of the extremity of
a shoe off the foot. (Fig. 50). It has been called "easing the heels,"
and the space permits a knife-blade, sometimes even a pencil, to be
placed between the shoe and the foot. It is one of the very worst
practices that theory has forced into horse-shoeing. Men who do it say
"the heels won't stand pressure." I reply they will stand all proper
pressure, and a good deal more than the quarters. But the practice
does not relieve the heels of pressure. If you examine a shoe fitted
in this way, after it has done a month's service, you will find it
sometimes polished bright, sometimes with a deep groove worn into it.
You may also test its bearing by raising the foot from the ground and
inserting between shoe and hoof a flat bit of wood, then on releasing
the foot and raising the opposite one, you will find that the bearing
is such that the bit of wood cannot be removed. The "eased heel" does
not relieve the heels of pressure but, instead of constant normal
bearing, it permits a downward movement of the back of the foot at each
step--which is unnatural, and which cannot occur in an unshod foot
on a level surface. The "eased heel" does more than this. It wastes
a large extent of good bearing-surface, and it concentrates pressure
at one point--where the shoe and foot meet--at the quarters. It loses
good bearing-surface where it is important to have it, and unevenly
throws extra weight on the quarters which are the weakest parts of the
wall. An "eased heel" has not one single advantage, but it has every
disadvantage which misplaced ingenuity could contrive.
[Illustration: Fig. 51.--Section of a seated shoe.]
For flat feet a wide shoe with a flat foot-surface is unsafe as there
is liability to uneven pressure on the sole. For such feet the safer
form of foot-surface is one presenting a level narrow bearing-surface
round its outer border, from which an inclined or bevelled surface
continues the shoe inwards. (Fig. 51) This form of shoe can be fitted
to nearly any kind of foot. To escape injury to a flat sole "seating
out" shoes is necessary, but the operation should always leave a level
bearing-surface for the wall. When a shoe is seated from one side to
the other so as to produce a saucer shaped surface harm is done to the
foot. Such a shoe presents no level bearing-surface, and the weight of
the horse pressing the wall on an inclined plane causes the foot to be
pinched or compressed in a manner which soon causes lameness. (Fig.
52). A few years ago these shoes were too common, and to make them
still more injurious, the foot was pared out from the centre to the
circumference like a saucer, and the two spoiled articles were fitted
together. Their surfaces of contact were two narrow ridges which even
the most expert workman could not fit without injury to the horse.
[Illustration: Fig. 52.--Section of a "saucer" shoe.]
In Fig. 52 a shoe with an inclined surface is applied to a foot with
a bearing-surface as wide as the wall but the only contact is at the
edges. The horn at the edge will yield, and the hoof be pressed inwards
as the weight of the animal forces the foot into the saucer-shaped
shoe. When the bearing-surface of the foot, instead of being as wide as
the wall, is only a ridge, the horn yields more rapidly, the clinches
rise and the shoe becomes loose.
In Fig. 53 is shown a section of another shoe with an inclined instead
of a level surface, but the slope is from within outwards. The effect
of this is exactly the opposite of the previous shoe. The wall is
forced outwards, and if it does not as a whole yield to the pressure
the portion in contact is broken. When this form of bearing-surface is
adopted at the heels of a shoe the two sides of the hoof are violently
forced apart, and it has even been recommended as a means of expanding
the foot; but forcible expansion is both unnecessary and dangerous.
Always regarding the shoe as an extension of the natural hoof in a
harder and more durable material, it is evident that the most stability
will be attained by the use of as wide a bearing-surface of foot and
shoe as is compatible with ease and safety to the horse.
In Fig. 54 is shown a section of a narrow shoe which takes a bearing
over the whole extent of its foot-surface.
[Illustration: Fig. 53.--Bearing-surface inclined outwards.]
[Illustration: Fig. 54.--Narrow shoe with level bearing-surface.]
In Fig. 55 is shown a shoe with as wide a bearing-surface as in Fig.
54, but which loses half its bearing because the foot-surface is too
narrow to utilise it.
[Illustration: Fig. 55.--Bearing-surface of foot too narrow.]
[Illustration: Fig. 56.--A good bearing-surface.]
In Fig. 56 we have a model bearing-surface on the foot, nearly twice
the width of the wall, and we have a shoe with a flat foot-surface
capable of using the whole bearing. Such is the fitting of all hind
shoes, and it might well be adopted with advantage in all fore shoes on
good feet.
=Clips= are thin projections drawn up from the outer border of shoes
for the purpose of giving greater security to their position on a
foot. On heavy cart horses the clips are sometimes of great size and
encourage the idea that the smith looks upon them as designed to assist
the nails to retain the shoe on the foot. They should have no such
purpose, their use being merely to prevent the shoe shifting to one
side. A clip should not be narrow and high, it should be low and wide
so that its bearing is taken against the lower edge of the wall. A high
clip is a most serious danger when shoes get loose and are trodden on
by the horse. The usual position for a clip is at the toe, but there
are occasions when two clips--one at each side of the toe--are used. On
some shoes a clip is placed at the outer quarter to prevent the shoe
being displaced inwards; this is more often required on hind shoes. A
clip at the toe affords some assistance in fitting a shoe exactly, and
it also affords steadiness to the shoe during the driving of the first
nails. In America clips are not used, and when American machine-made
shoes were first introduced into London they were fitted without clips.
I am bound to confess that these shoes did not shift on the feet to any
noticeable extent, but they are now all fitted with clips so I suppose
the workmen found they were an advantage. The greatest evil resulting
from clips is seen in slovenly fitting, when the farrier with his knife
carves out a great hole in the wall in which to imbed the clip. As a
clip is flat it cannot be fitted to the rounded face of the wall, but
all that is necessary is to reduce the round to a flat surface with the
rasp, so that the clip may rest on it, care being taken that at the
extreme edge the horn is not left so prominent as to be unduly pressed
upon when the clip is driven close to the wall. It is easy to lame a
horse by violently hammering up the clip, especially when the horn
behind it has been so much cut away as to leave only a thin protecting
layer. A clip should only be hammered up sufficiently to leave it
firmly applied to the wall. A bad workman in making his clip may spoil
the foot-surface of a shoe by causing a bridge on the bearing surface
of the iron at the toe, and this, on thin or flat feet, may cause
lameness.
A very unsightly appearance and very defective work results from the
fireman leaving his clip at right angles to the line of the shoe. It
should be inclined backwards at about the same slope as the portion of
wall against which it is to rest. The two diagrams (Fig. 57) illustrate
what is meant.
[Illustration: Fig. 57.--Toe Clips.]
=Hot and Cold Fitting.= When an engineer or a carpenter has two
surfaces to fit together with great exactness he employs some colouring
material to show where they do come in contact and where they do not.
When a farrier fits a shoe to a horse's foot he tests its adaptation by
applying it at a dull red heat to the horn. This proceeding shows with
precision the bearing surfaces, as the horn is charred in proportion to
the contact. If the shoe be found not to fit exactly, it is taken back
to the anvil and altered. It is then again for a few seconds applied
to the horn and the surface of contact examined. This proceeding is
repeated until sufficient exactness is arrived at and then the shoe
is cooled ready for nailing on. As horn is a bad conductor of heat
this process of "hot-fitting" does no harm to the sensitive structures
within the hoof unless it be carried to an extreme. When the horn is
very thin the heat of a shoe retained too long in contact with it
does serious mischief, and the injury known as a burnt sole has often
resulted from careless work. If a shoe, whilst being altered to fit a
foot, were cooled each time it was laid on the hoof, it would have to
be re-heated before the necessary alterations could be made and this
would cause great waste of time. The abuse of hot-fitting may do harm
without any direct burning of the sole. An ill-fitting hot shoe may be
held on the hoof until it beds itself into the horn and thus a complete
correspondence between the surface of the foot and the surface of the
shoe be effected. Such a proceeding is well described as "fitting the
foot to the shoe" and is not only destructive to the horn but damaging
to the foot by permitting an uneven shoe to look as though it were
properly fitting. When hot-fitting is used and not abused--when it is
adopted merely to indicate how and where the shoe fits, and not to make
it appear to fit--I consider it has many advantages over cold-fitting.
With some feet and some shoes it is quite possible to produce a good
fit without heating the shoe. When a shoe requires much alteration
to bring it into exact correspondence with the foot, even the most
expert farrier cannot do justice to his work with cold iron--he gets
as near to a fit as he can and when the hoof is strong little harm is
done. The best work is that which includes the greatest exactness of
fit, and uneven pressure or loose shoes result from inferior work.
A badly fitted shoe requires more nails to retain it in place, and
experience has shown that hot-fitted shoes give a smaller average of
loose or lost shoes than those cold-fitted. The slight charring of
the end of the horn fibres which results from proper hot-fitting has
never been found to do injury, and it apparently has some advantages.
One is that the surface of the hoof less readily absorbs moisture than
when not charred. Another is that the horn is softened for a time and
expanded, allowing nails to be easily driven, and then contracting and
retaining them more firmly. The objection to hot-fitting applies only
to its abuse. The advantages are greater exactness of fit, greater
security that the shoe will be firmly retained on the foot, and greater
facility in the operation of shoeing. Perhaps I ought to add that when
cold-fitting is inevitable machine-made shoes are the best, because
they are more regular in form, and more often level on the foot-surface
than hand-made shoes. Army studs on active service, and studs used in
coal mines comprise, perhaps, the only animals upon which cold-fitting
is unavoidable.
[Illustration: Fig. 58.]
=Tips= are short shoes protecting only the foremost half of the foot.
Upon grass or soft roads tips are quite sufficient to prevent undue
wear of the hoof. Even upon hard roads tips will protect the hoof in
dry weather, but in wet seasons the horn becomes softened, and then
that part coming in contact with hard road-surfaces wears rapidly and
lameness may follow. Tips require more care in use than shoes because
they protect from wear only the toe, and when retained on the foot
too long a time cause the hoof to become very disproportionately long
at the toe. In fitting a tip care must be taken to afford the horse
a level surface to bear on. The unprotected horn at the back of the
foot must take a bearing on the ground level with the ground-surface
of the tip. If there is sufficient horn on the foot this can be easily
effected by only removing the overgrown wall to just the length the
tip extends and leaving the horn behind untouched. Where there is not
sufficient superfluous horn this method cannot be used, and we apply a
tip gradually thinned off towards its hinder extremities. If a little
horn can be removed obliquely from the front half of the foot by a few
strokes of the rasp this "thinned" tip is more easily fitted so as to
get a level surface on the ground. When a horse has worn this form
for a month it is generally possible to bring a tip, of even thickness
throughout, into the same line of bearing as the horn at the heels.
[Illustration: Fig. 59.--Foot prepared for a tip.]
[Illustration: Fig. 60.--An ordinary and a "thinned" tip.]
Tips do not give a good foot-hold on grass, but they afford greater
security of tread on hard smooth roads and on ice than long shoes. The
great advantages of tips are two-fold--they are light, and they permit
the greatest freedom of movement and action in the posterior part of
the foot. In some cases of chronic foot lameness the use of tips and
regular work will effect soundness when every other method of treatment
has failed.
[Illustration: Fig. 61.--Groove for Charlier shoe formed by cutting
away strip of wall.]
[Illustration: Fig. 62.--Section of Charlier shoe on foot.]
=The Charlier System= is a method of shoeing which a few years ago took
a very prominent hold on the fancy of horse-owners. Like every other
system it has advantages and disadvantages--it has prejudiced enemies
and indiscreet friends. The principle or theory upon which it is based
may be thus stated. The lower border of the wall is, it is said, the
chief sustaining structure of the hoof, and as all that is required of
a shoe is to prevent undue wear, therefore, remove a small strip of the
lower border of the wall and substitute for it a similar sized strip
of iron, and we shall protect from wear at the same time that we leave
entirely to nature every other part of the hoof--sole, frog, and bars.
This seems eminently simple and logical, but it is easy to show that
it is more plausible than true. First, I would point out that the wall
_only_ is not the natural sustaining structure of the hoof. The wall
_and the sole at its connection with the wall is_. Next I deny that
the Charlier system does "leave entirely to nature every other part of
the hoof." In cutting away the wall from the sole to affix the shoe,
the natural function of the sole is seriously interfered with, and the
bearing on the wall which ought to be partially distributed over the
arch of the sole is limited to the wall. It is claimed that when the
foot has had time to grow the sole will be found on a level with the
shoe, and thus directly sharing in the weight-sustaining function. I
have examined many feet shod by Charlier specialists, and have never
yet seen the sole of a hind foot level with the shoe three days after
the shoeing. Only once have I seen the sole of the fore foot level
with the shoe after a week's wear. I am often apologetically told,
"Well, it is not quite in wear, but it is not an eight of an inch below
the surface of the shoe." Quite so, it is _nearly_ in wear, but if
not actually in wear what becomes of the principle? The sole is not
directly in wear and bearing is confined to the wall. As to the frog,
the Charlier affords no greater use to it than any other shoe of a
similar thickness, unless instead of being placed on sound firm horn it
be dangerously let down into the hoof so that its edge approaches very
closely to the sensitive foot. It is sometimes difficult to arrive at
the truth as to the significance of the phrase "embedding or letting
down" the shoe of the Charlier system. At one time we are assured that
"the shoe is not sunk, the sole is permitted to grow up." When this is
so, very little positive objection to the system can be taken, because
the shoe then rests at the same level on firm horn as does any other
narrow shoe; but then the frog takes no better bearing than in other
systems and the superfluous growth of horn on the sole is of no value.
When the shoe is really "let down" of course the frog does receive
increased pressure--it is forced to share with the wall the primary
function of sustaining weight instead of, as in nature, taking only
a secondary share of such action. It does this at the expense of a
shoe placed so close to the "quick" that if the upper and inner border
of iron be not bevelled off, immediate lameness results. When the
Charlier shoe was first introduced it was applied the full length of
the foot, but it was found that when thinned by wear the heels spread
and led to injury of the opposite leg or to its being trodden off.
Now the Charlier is only applied like a tip round the front portion
of the surface of the foot, and it therefore partakes of some of the
advantages I have credited to tips. It is a very light shoe and only
requires small nails to fix it securely, but as the shoe is only the
width of the wall the nails have to be driven solely in the wall,
and their position is open to the objection applying to all too fine
nailing. The disadvantages of the Charlier are its being "let down"
too near the quick, its limited bearing, and its fine nail holes; the
advantages are the lightness and the freedom given to the back of the
foot, both of which are attainable with a narrow tip not let down. One
very apparent effect resulting from the use of the Charlier system is
the alteration in the action of the horse. All knee action is lost, and
some horses go decidedly tender whilst others acquire a low shooting
stride, which is certainly not in accordance with our notions of good
free locomotion.
[Illustration: Fig. 63.--Groove for modified or short Charlier.]
[Illustration: Fig 64.--A Tip laid on, not let down.]