ing in trot under riders that adopt the very "lofty" English style; the centre of gravity gets a couple of feet farther away from the basis, which is just equivalent to the latter being decreased proportionately. Every one knows that a man with a long back and short legs rides heavier than a long-legged one.

It is scarcely necessary, after what has been already said, to demonstrate over again how conducive to handiness, perfect mastery over the horse, independence of the rein, and therefore good bitting, a central position of the saddle, stirrups, and seat must be; and these are, we take it, the conditions under which road-riding may be done safely and agreeably. High speed not being the object, nothing can be gained by throwing the rider's weight forward; on the contrary, it has this further positive disadvantage in addition to those already pointed out. Corns with our horses are as equally prevalent as broken knees, and the latter are very frequently a consequence of the former. Now we have shown (see fig. 2, C) that the consequence of throwing the weight forward is to make the horse overstep with his hind foot the track of the corresponding fore foot; and this being very much our habit, our horses do very frequently overstep, and by so doing the risk is run of tearing off the fore shoes. We have got into the habit of using very short shoes, the web of which does not overlap sufficiently, at the heel, the angle formed by the frog with the wall of the hoof, but falling short, throws the whole pressure inside this angle. This is what produces corns. For racing, certainly, and perhaps for hunting, the short shoe may be inevitable, but there is no reason whatever why the roadster should be shod in this fashion, nor even a cavalry horse, ex

cept that people will persist in either sitting directly on the horse's withers, or when they sit on the loins, transferring their weight to the shoulder, through the medium of stirrups hung far forward, every time they rise in the saddle when trotting. Corns and broken knees are totally unknown in the Austrian cavalry, where the shoe is given a solid bearing on the angle of the wall of the hoof at the heel.

CHAPTER IV.

THE MILITARY SEAT.

Is there such a thing as a standard military seat or not? and is there any real necessity for it, and what? There can be no doubt that a cavalry in some respects technically inferior may achieve, and often has gained, victories over another, not having any fault of the kind. So very much depends on the way in which this arm is handled, and on its moral qualities, that it is quite impossible to say, "This cavalry, because it rides. very well, must, or even will most probably, beat that other one, because it does not ride quite so well." Are we then to conclude that the seat and everything connected with it is a matter of minor importance? The old Austrian cavalry regulations contained a paragraph to this effect: "Cavalry that cannot ride (that is to say, well) is a burden to the state;" but we have been often tempted to paraphrase this, and say, "Cavalry that can only ride is not less so." Both expressions taken together will then mean, that it is not enough for a cavalry man to be a bold rider; his riding must be done so as to make him an efficient combatant as well: for whatever doubt may exist on account of the almost impossibility of estimating precisely "the other things equal" of the question to be solved, as to whether a

cavalry that rides positively well may or may not prove superior in combat to one that rides only comparatively so, this much is quite certain, that the former will bring into and retain in the field a much greater proportion of serviceable horses than the latter, which is in itself an element of success that may be indeed squandered away like all others, but must, if properly taken advantage of, confer great superiority. In fact, what we would say to every cavalry officer of whatever nation is this: Your cavalry is very fine: it has done wonders, and beat all other cavalries in the world; but it would do still greater miracles, and beat all the rest if you only improved your seat, &c., a little more; besides which it would cost less-a matter of some importance-and perhaps look quite as well as at present.

No one, we suppose, will contend that the jockey style of riding can serve as a model for the cavalry soldier the kind of work to be done and its duration are totally different. Perhaps the hunting seat deserves more consideration. This much is certain; it is of great advantage to cavalry to be able to get across a difficult country, and much of its utility will depend on its being able to do this cleverly, and in an orderly manner. This has been recognised and acted on of late years to a much greater extent than formerly, and, as we think, very wisely too. Up to a certain time the haute école dominated cavalry riding exclusively, and, no doubt, very reasonably, in the then existing semi-cultivated state of Europe, and under the conditions of combat then prevalent. But both of these have undergone great modifications: and first of all, what the Germans call the "campaign school," was introduced for cavalry purposes; and more recently still,