Ladies on Horseback Part 4

MABEL FLORENCE RAYNE.

The Firs, Cheltenham, November 1, 1880.

SIR,--A correspondent in your last number advises ladies to use a rowel spur, with five p.r.o.ngs, long and sharp, so, as a friend of horses, I am inclined to write an objection to their taking this advice. In the first place, from the nature of a lady's seat, her armed heel would often unintentionally irritate and annoy the horse; and in the second place many would probably use this instrument of torture too severely, and therefore cruelly. A rowel spur, with five long and sharp p.r.o.ngs--in fact, a jockey's spur--is a much more severe instrument than is required for ordinary riding, either by man or woman, and the advantage of the ladies' bore spur is, that it can only be applied when intended, and then is quite sufficiently severe. I have no objection to ladies, who are good horsewomen, wearing a spur, and using it, too, as severely as necessary, but I have great objections to any unnecessary pain or annoyance being given to my friends, the horses. Another lady correspondent of yours says that a spur is quite indispensable for hunting. If she means that it should always be worn in case it is required, I agree; but I have ridden a courageous high-tempered horse for years with hounds without ever using the spur.

I am, &c.

FAIR PLAY.

Glasgow, 1st November 1880.

SIR,--As the subject of spurs and other riding equipment for ladies seems at the present time to occupy and interest many of your fair readers, permit me, on behalf of my sisters, who are horsewomen of some experience, both at home and in the colonies, and who have practically tried most known riding-costumes, to recommend, through the medium of your columns, the following as a comfortable and serviceable riding-dress for a lady, for long country rides, picnics, &c.; of course not for the Park, or a lawn meet. Habit--a short, strong hunting-skirt, short enough to walk in with comfort, with jacket of same cloth as skirt, made loose enough to admit of a jersey being worn under it if required; a wide leather belt for the waist, fastening with a buckle. This belt will be found a great comfort and support when on horseback for many hours. Hat of soft felt, or a melon-shaped hat. Pantaloons of chamois leather, b.u.t.toning close at the ankles. Hussar or Wellington boots, reaching to about four inches of the knee, to be worn over the pantaloons, made of Peel leather with moderate-sized heels, tipped with bra.s.s, and soles strong but not thick. A leather stud should be sewn on the left boot, about 2-1/2 inches above the heel, on which stud the spur should rest, and thus be kept in its place without tight buckling. The spur found to be the most useful after the trial of many is a rowel spur of plated steel, about two inches to two and-a-half inches long, strong and light, hunting shape, and fastened with a strap and buckle, the foot-strap of plated steel chain. This chain foot-strap looks neater than a leather one, and does not become cut or worn out when on foot on rough or rocky ground. The rowel pin is a screw pin; thus the rowel can be changed at pleasure, and a sharp or a blunt one fitted as is required by the horse one rides. The spur I mention can be obtained of Messrs. Maxwell & Co., Piccadilly, London; or of Mr. Thompson, saddler, Dawson street, Dublin.

Some ladies affect two spurs--one, the right, being fitted with a blank rowel; this is, of course, for appearance sake when dismounted. I have not often seen two spurs worn. I am not alluding to Miss Bird's riding-costume, as described in her books, Life in the Sandwich Islands and The Rocky Mountains. She rode a la cavaliere, in a Mexican saddle, and wearing big rowel Mexican spurs, and appears from her account to have preferred this style of riding to the modern style and side-saddle. Some years ago I saw a photograph of the Queen of Naples (I think in 1860), representing the queen mounted a la cavaliere, wearing a high felt hat, a long white cloak, patent-leather jack-boots, and gilt spurs. Can any of your readers inform me if this style of riding for ladies is a custom of Southern Italy as well as Mexico and the Sandwich Islands?

I am, &c.

JACK SPUR.

SIR,--I cannot regret that my letter has given the auth.o.r.ess of this work, and also the owner of the "big bay" horse, an opportunity of explaining the circ.u.mstances attending her mount on that puissant but headstrong animal, and of repudiating the erroneous construction put upon it, as probably the same idea may have occurred to many other readers of the anecdote, who may not have cared to express their sentiments. I must say, however, that I am very sorry if my remarks occasioned pain to either of your correspondents. The explanation given shows clearly that no blame was really attributable to the gentleman who offered the mount, and I can well believe he never dreamt of danger with the horse in such skilful hands. No one would doubt the sincerity of the statement given, that the horse was put in harness for the first time and driven away, after such an experience of his temper; but it speaks more highly for the courage than discretion of his owner, and I can well understand the friend's hesitation to share the driving-seat, for there are few things more trying to the nerves than to sit behind a determined bolter. Perhaps I write feelingly, having been in that predicament myself three years ago, resulting in a fractured hip and permanent lameness. I will most certainly admit that the chivalrous gentleman did all, and more than was necessary, to avert further peril to the lady who had so narrow an escape. As for the obnoxious term "rough rider," to which exception is taken, it was intended to be used generally and not individually; if it has unfortunately happened that Mrs. Power O'Donoghue, whom I have never had the pleasure of seeing, took it in a personal sense, I most sincerely beg her forgiveness, and will ask her rather to accept, as applicable to herself, the earlier remarks about ladies on horseback at the conclusion of my letter, and the a.s.surance of my belief that such a gentlewoman as she is described could never be a rough rider in any way.

I am, &c.

JERMYN.

SIR,--The spur with a five-pointed rowel was strongly recommended for ladies' use many years ago in the Queen, and is worn by many: it does not tear the habit, and is not more severe than the spring-sheath spur with a point of the same length, as only one point of the rowel can p.r.i.c.k the horse at a time; indeed, it is not so severe, as it can be applied with a very slight touch, which generally is all that is required, whilst the spring-sheath spur must be applied with sufficient force to overcome the resistance of the spring, with the result that the horse is often more sharply p.r.i.c.ked than the rider intends. The points of a lady's spur should be long enough to be effective if the skirt of the habit intervenes, as, with any arrangement, it sometimes will do, when, if the points are too short, the horse does not feel it. I dissent from the statement of "Fairplay" that, "from the nature of a lady's seat, her armed heel would often unintentionally irritate and annoy her horse." If applied to a clumsy rider the statement is accurate, but a lady who is a moderately good rider has no difficulty in keeping her foot in the proper position, and a lady's left foot should be in the same position as a man's; whilst, as a lady has the third crutch to steady her left leg, she has less excuse than a man would have for the unintentional use of the spur; but this evil carries its own antidote, for the lady would soon perceive the result of the irritation, and become more careful. The best way to cure a boy of turning out his toes and holding on with his heels is to give him a pair of long-necked spurs, and then put him on a fidgetty horse; a few minutes' experience teaches him more than a month of lecturing. I never knew of a mishap occurring to a lady through accidentally spurring her horse, but I have known many instances of ladies being put to great inconvenience and annoyance through not wearing a spur, and I do not understand why a lady should be more likely than a man to use it with undue severity. That it is an advantage to a lady is clearly shown by the fact that a lady who once tries one always continues its use. "Fairplay" is also mistaken about the spring-sheath spur, for it is as readily applied as any other, though more force is required, which is objectionable, and especially so in park riding, when the spring of the horse to an unintentionally sharp application betrays the action of the rider. I claim to be as good a friend of horses as "Fairplay," but I have some regard for the rider as well as for the horse, and I consider that, whilst we are justified in riding horses, we are justified in using such reasonable aids as we find most satisfactory to ourselves; and I have no sympathy with anyone who objects to a lady availing herself of the convenience and a.s.sistance so readily supplied by a judiciously-used spur, which every horseman knows cannot, in very many cases, be obtained by any other means, and which he never hesitates to avail himself of. In these days of locomotion a lady loses a great deal of the pleasures of travelling, and of the opportunities of seeing the countries she may visit, unless she can and will ride such horses as she may meet with in those countries; and even in the rural districts of England there is many an old nag of the "Proputty Proputty" type, which (though not possessed of the special points of a lady's horse--"Oh! such a lovely mane and tail") will carry a lady tolerably well if he feels the spur occasionally. If "Mabel Florence Rayne" tries the rowel spur and the bit I mentioned in my former letter, I am sure she will be satisfied with them, and perhaps she will write her opinion for the benefit of others. The excellent and sensible letters of Mrs. Power O'Donoghue will probably convince people that a horse, when he has a lady on his back, is very much the same kind of animal, and requires very much the same kind of management, as when he is ridden by a man. If Mrs. Power O'Donoghue can obtain this result, she will sweep away many of the peculiar prejudices and ideas that now prevail as to all matters appertaining to ladies on horseback.

I am, &c.

SOUTHERN CROSS.

SIR,--In the article under the above-mentioned heading, published in your issue of the 6th November, Mrs. Power O'Donoghue recommends that horses' tails should not be docked. Dealers, when offering horses for sale, do not usually volunteer any information as to whether the horses have been docked. I wish, therefore, to inform any intending purchasers who may not know how to ascertain whether a horse has been docked, and who may wish to obtain some which have not been disfigured in this manner, that if the dock (that is, the portion of the tail which consists of bones and muscles, &c.) is in its natural state, the hair grows thickly at the end or tip of it, and there is no bare s.p.a.ce there; but if it has been shortened by a portion of it being cut off (or docked), there is at the end or tip of it a circular s.p.a.ce of about an inch in diameter, entirely bare of hair. When a horse has been docked, the hair of the tail scarcely grows after it has reached to within six or seven inches above the hocks. The hocks of a large horse are about twenty-five inches above the ground. It is a general custom with London dealers to cut the hair of the tail very short before offering a horse for sale, so that it does not come down lower than to a distance of about nine inches above the hocks. The buyer cannot then tell to what length the tail is likely to grow. If customers would refuse to buy horses with the hair of the tail cut short, perhaps the practice in question would be discontinued by the dealers.

I am, Sir, &c.

X. Y. Z.

London, November 10, 1880.

SIR,--In your paper of last week I notice a letter on the advisability of ladies on horseback adopting the cross-saddle in place of the side, that is to say, in plain English, ride astride. This I have done abroad when far beyond conventional bondage, and it is incomparably better. Your correspondent points out the evils resulting from the one-sided twisted seat, which a lady now has, and also, in the same paper, the auth.o.r.ess of Ladies on Horseback says how impossible it is with only one foot in the stirrup to rise comfortably to a high trotter. Now I should never have dared to name such a change had it not been thus mooted. Society will shriek out and say, "Woman would be indeed out of place thus." Why? I am sure with a proper dress there is nothing to hurt the extremely proper feelings of the most modest. All who have hunted know that the very short skirted habits at times display, well, say the leg of the fair equestrienne most liberally. Now the dress for the cross-horse style is much the same as a bathing suit, loose Zouave drawers drawn close below the knee, and fastened tightly over the boot at the ankle; a loose tunic, long enough to come almost to the knee when mounted, lightly belted at the waist, a cape falling over the shoulders, not quite to the elbows. This is my attire when free to ride in the only really comfortable way, a foot in each stirrup. Oh, no woman would ever be twisted and packed on to a side saddle again if she could help it, after once enjoying the ease and freedom, as well as complete control of her horse which a man's seat gives.

So far as exhibitions of limbs go, it is much more delicate, and there is nothing to offend the most sensitive lady in this style. Only it is not fas.h.i.+onable. When shall we cease to prostrate ourselves before that Juggernaut of fas.h.i.+on? For all paces and in every instance it is better, and the risk of accidents is reduced at least one half. It is a wonderful ease in long rides to vary the stirrup length. The military, almost straight-leg, trot, I think the easiest, but, on the other hand, some of the best riders I have ever seen abroad ride with a very short stirrup; it is a matter of habit and custom. But if the fas.h.i.+on were once introduced here, I know it would prove a priceless boon to ladies who love riding. Let some lady who has the opportunity once try it in her own private grounds (at first) or in some quiet, out-of-the-way country lane or moorland, and she will be surprised. It is a new existence on horseback, and nothing indelicate about it, clad as I have named. Oh, what a difference it does make. It is twenty-three years now since I first took the idea from a book published by a lady, ent.i.tled, Unprotected Females in Norway, and whenever I can, I always ride so, of course abroad or even in the far north of Scotland. What a sensation in the Row would a party of ladies make thus mounted! Again, it is much easier for the horse, having your weight fairly distributed, not all perched on one side. Your seat is much firmer; leaping is, oh, so easy; in fact, your power seems doubled in every way. In case of conflict with your horse, you feel a veritable centaur compared with the side seat, where you have no grip, only the aid of the saddle, but with the aid of your own knees and a foot on each side of the horse I think I could not be thrown. Oh, I wish it could be initiated, dear Mr. Editor. Do use your influence in this direction. And it really looks well when the dress is well-made and tasty, and you feel so very free and at ease, can turn about any way, not pinned on to your horse, or rather on to your saddle, as ladies are. I could give full directions to make an outfit for going abroad in this style; you would smile at my saddle I know, but it is so comfortable. I can hardly bear to ride on an orthodox one now. That is the worst of it. I have been mounted on mules in this manner in Honduras, and ridden immense distances without being stiff or tired unduly. Some of these are the animals to try your mettle and seat, and I was only once thrown, owing to a stirrup-leather breaking. Then a lady is able to use spurs as easily as possible, no trouble about habit skirts tearing or getting in the way of the spur. With a sharp spur on each foot you can do anything with your horse, so very different from the wretched box spurs, eternally entangled in your habit or out of order. I do wish an a.s.sociation could be formed to carry out the idea; one or two could not do it, it must be simultaneous. For little girls it would be simply invaluable as an improvement on the present style, which really does cause distortion of the spine and a one-sided carriage when girls ride much. Do please ventilate this question, and oblige very much, Yours, &c.

HERSILIE.

P.S.--I have taken your paper ever since October 2nd, when I first saw Ladies on Horseback in it, and have been much pleased with it, and also much amused with the correspondence thereon, but I never expected to see ladies' change of seat advocated, and am so glad to-day to find that it is.

SIR,--Permit me to state that the object in having the screw rowel-pin in the spur, recommended by me for the use of ladies in your number of November 13th, is in order to enable the wearers to use a mild or a severe rowel, according to the requirements of the horses they ride. I am very much against sharp spurs for ladies (or gentlemen either), unless they are absolutely required; but from some experience, both at home and abroad, I am quite convinced that the wearing of a spur should be the rule and not the exception. If the rowel is moderately sharp only, no cruelty can arise, less I maintain than in the use of a whip. I strongly object to the use of the sheath spur because of its severity; it must be applied with a kick to be of any use, and the effect is usually much more punis.h.i.+ng than there is any necessity for. If ladies will use rowel spurs with moderately sharp rowels, such as are usual in gentlemen's park spurs, they will find that they are in possession of a very useful aid (certainly not a cruel one), and if fitted on a neat patent leather hussar or Wellington boot, a very ornamental one as well.

I am, &c.

JACK SPUR.

December, 1880.

SIR,--The correspondence on Mrs. Power O'Donoghue's articles has contained many remarks on ladies' spurs, but I have noticed scarcely any reference to one point which I think is worth consideration--namely, the mode of fastening. I think ladies would find it an advantage to wear what are known as "spring" or "box" spurs, instead of those fastening with the usual straps, or strap and chain. I have never seen a lady's spur of this description, but possibly they are made--if not, they easily could be. They are much the most easy to attach or remove, and there is no chance of a strap being cut in walking or otherwise, or of an over-tight buckle hurting the foot. Their princ.i.p.al advantage, however, is not one of mere convenience, but of safety; the absence of strap and buckle removes one element in a great danger--that of the foot sticking in the stirrup in a fall. Captain Whyte-Melville speaks from observation of the risk of the buckle catching in the angle of the stirrup-iron, and says he has never seen a spurless boot so entangled. He is arguing against the wearing of spurs at all; but the risk is avoided if box spurs be worn. Since I became convinced that the strap and buckle were a quite possible, though perhaps unlikely, source of danger, I have altogether discarded them, and have felt my feet more free in the stirrups in consequence. Box spurs are certainly not fas.h.i.+onable in the hunting-field, and I have often seen people looking askance at them; I suppose a particular man misses the finish that the strap gives to the boot. But I don't think that matters much, and to ladies it would not matter at all, as the difference could very seldom be detected. In getting spurs or boxes, I find it convenient to adhere always to the regulation cavalry size, because then one's old spurs fit one's new boots, and vice versa. It would be well to have a uniform standard for ladies' spurs also. I have not ventured to say anything on the subject of spurs generally--my own opinion is that legitimate occasion for their use is excessively rare--and I dare say my suggestion may seem very trivial. But I do not think any precaution is trivial which lessens, however slightly, the risk of that most disagreeable and dangerous of accidents--getting "hung up."

I am, Sir, Your obedient servant, OXONIAN.

Ball. Col., Oxon., December, 1880.

SIR,--I cannot but feel flattered that my Ladies on Horseback papers should have called forth so large a correspondence. I have read every letter most carefully, and on perusing that of "Hersilie," which appeared in last week's issue, it struck me, from two of her observations, that persons might suppose I had said something to advocate the style of riding of which she approves. Permit me to say, emphatically, that I have never done so, and that I fervently hope, in the interests of my s.e.x, that such a practice may never be introduced. Modesty is, in my opinion, a woman's most exquisite attribute; once this, or the semblance of it, is lost, her fairest charm is gone. Nothing could be more ungraceful or more unwomanly than for women to ride like men; and for short women or "little girls," it would be most objectionable. I maintain that a lady who knows how to sit has a far safer and surer seat on a side-saddle than a man can ever have, and that her grip of the pommels affords her infinitely greater security than a man's "grip of the knees." "Hersilie" is correct in saying that short-skirted hunting-habits frequently ride up, but she might just as well say that hunting-hats frequently fall off, and that ladies' back hair frequently comes down--giving these facts as a reason for discarding head-gear, whether natural or artificial. As a rule, nothing that is properly made and properly adjusted ever comes to grief. It is by going to cheap and incompetent habit-makers, neglecting to st.i.tch elastics to their hats, and plaiting the hair too loosely (being also too sparing of hair-pins), that ladies are inconvenienced and made to blush. Two yards wide round the hem is ample for a hunting-habit, which should fit like a glove about the hips. First-cla.s.s tailors always have a model horse, upon which they mount their lady customers, and thus secure the right position for the slope at the knee, upon which so much of the "set" of the skirt depends. A well-dressed woman, sitting properly upon a well-constructed saddle, cannot, in my opinion, be improved upon for style and comfort, and I hope it will be long indeed before ladies strive to follow in any way the customs or callings of the sterner s.e.x. I may add that one of the chief recommendations of a box spur is that it does not get out of order, nor can it possibly become entangled, unless the habit-skirt be one of those which some ladies still persist in wearing--nearly twice too long, and quite three times too wide. I earnestly hope "Hersilie" will take these observations in good part. I make them in a perfectly friendly spirit. I feel kindly towards all ladies, especially those who love horses; and so I offer "Hersilie" a warm shake-hands, and hope she will fight me as much as ever she likes--in a friendly way, of course!

Now, a word to "Jack Spur." I think he is under a mistake in averring that there is any severity in the sheath spur. He says it must be applied with a kick. As I always ride with one, and never with any other description, I must entirely differ from him in this opinion. A slight pressure is alone necessary. No gentlewoman would be guilty of kicking her horse. I strongly object to rowels, as I hold to the belief that almost anybody--except a really first-cla.s.s equestrienne--would be likely to hurt or worry the horse in an unnecessary manner.

Strange to say, I had only got thus far in my letter when the post brought me a communication from Stirling, signed "Reform," begging of me to advocate ladies riding upon the cross-saddle. Were it not that the writer says so many nice, kind things of myself (for which I beg to thank her) I should be really angry at the tremendous display of zeal thus wasted upon so unworthy a subject. It is true that a lady's seat on horseback prevents her pressing her horse up to his bridle as a man can, unless--but there is the unless--she knows how to do it. A good stout hunting-crop, properly used, will admirably fulfil the duties of the second leg; but in all my experience, and it is a pretty wide one, I have never seen more than two lady riders who had any idea of making a horse gallop or sending him up to his bit. I do not mean riding his head off--we unfortunately see too much of that; but pressing him up to his work, and riding him with firm, accomplished hands, such as are only to be obtained by good teaching, long and constant practice, and real love of the art. To give some idea of the hazy notion which most persons have about riding, a lady who came to call upon me in London, and who certainly meant to be most kind and polite, said, as we sat at our afternoon tea, "I am looking at your hands; how well-developed they are, from pulling your horses, I suppose!" She thought I was offended when I told her that my riding gloves were No. 6, and that I never pulled my horses; but I am not captious, nor would it be possible to take offence with one who so little intended to cause it.

The offer which I made at the conclusion of my Ladies on Horseback, to answer private inquiries, has led to such a host of letters that, although I regularly devote one hour every morning to the task of replying to each in turn, I find it impossible to keep pace with the work. Will you, therefore, sir, with the kindness extended to me upon a former occasion, suffer me to answer a few of my correspondents through the medium of your columns.

RICHARD R.--One measure three times daily, with a good double-handful of Indian corn mixed through it.

CAPTAIN SWORDARM.--The oats will require two waters. The grains should swell and separate, like rice boiled for curries.

EVELYN HARKESS.--Your parcel has not reached me. My tailor will endeavour to please you.

JANE V.--A very cruel practice.

REFORM.--You will see that I have acknowledged your letter. Judging by the postmark it should have come to hand three days ago, but you gave the wrong address, and it went on a seeking expedition. "Dublin" will at any time find me. This is also for "Quilp," "B. Max," and "Violet Grey."

ELLA.--Your horse is evidently a rough trotter, and can never be pleasant to ride. Try to exchange or sell him.

MARY PERPLEXED.--The pommels of your saddle are most likely too far apart; that is, the leaping head is placed too low. If you cannot change it, ride with a longer stirrup-leather. I have been lately shown the preparation for an improved side-saddle, by Messrs. F. V. Nicholls & Co., of 2 Jermyn Street, comprising a patented arrangement for the third crutch or leaping-head. I think that this will be a great boon to those ladies who, like myself, have suffered inconvenience and accident from the leaping-head being a fixture, and not in the position required to afford a proper degree of support, and at the same time to admit of the stirrup-leather being used of correct length for an easy, secure, and graceful seat. The improvement of the new saddle consists in a sliding socket or apparatus, by which the leaping-head can be moved freely backward or forward to any position, and instantly fixed firmly by the rider herself, thus enabling a lady to alter at any time the length of her stirrup, and yet gain every requisite support from the third crutch. Another little innovation by the same experienced saddlers in riding bridles, an adaptation of my favourite double-ring snaffle. The loose rings of the snaffle have some extra loops, appended to which is a short noseband, acted upon by one rein, giving a powerful effect in stopping a runaway horse, whilst the use of the other rein singly has the pleasant and easy nature of the ordinary snaffle-bridle. The principle of this bridle, which is called "the improved Newmarket snaffle" is, of course, equally applicable to the use of persons of either s.e.x.

GILES.--Have the shoe taken off and give him rest.

URSA MAJOR.--There is no real cure for ringbone. Do not waste your money.

CLAUDE, EMMA VANE, N. PARKES, HENRY B., RHODA, NELLIE K., and thirty-one others, write to me for--photographs! I am sorry that "for lack of gold" I cannot supply a kindly public with my pictures, and I am not vain enough to state publicly where they may be had.

NIMROD.--Pleader was purchased from me last week by the Earl of Eglinton. It will, therefore, be unnecessary for me to reply to any further inquiries respecting him. I named his price and made no change, nor was I asked to do so.

CROPPER.--You were evidently sitting loosely, and thus suffered for your carelessness. You will not be caught napping the next time.

ANXIOUS, MARTHA, and a host of others have asked me a very familiar question, "How I learned to ride?" I have hitherto avoided answering, rather than introduce a name whose owner did not wish me to do so. But I think I may hope to win his pardon. Most, if not all, my skill in the saddle is mainly due to the kind and untiring patience of my dear old friend and teacher, Mr. Allan McDonogh, who--despite his threescore years and ten--was, up to the time of his lamentable accident, ever ready to act as my pilot and instructor.

ENQUIRER.--Ride a steady horse, and your nerve will come back again. Mine did, after a much more terrible mischance.

CORSICAN BROTHER.--It is not true.

CRITIC.--You only discovered one mistake, but there are really three in my story, "In Search of a Wonder," which appeared in the Christmas Number of this journal. In place of "hustled me out of a sort of enclosure," read "to a sort of enclosure." Also, "suddenness" requires two n's, and "carrattella" is the correct way to spell a word which signifies a small cart or rough carriage peculiar to the Piedmontese. These are all printer's errors, and should have been corrected by me, but I revised my proof in a crowded coffee-room of a London hotel, with at least a dozen persons talking to me as I did so, and thus, being also pressed for time, a few mistakes escaped my notice.

To you, sir, and to all my friends, best wishes for the New Year, and many grateful thanks for more kindness than I can deem myself worthy of.

Yours obediently, NANNIE POWER O'DONOGHUE.

Dublin, December 1880.

SIR,--In case no one more able than myself answers "Hersilie's" letter in this week's number of your valuable paper, will you allow me, in the name of many lady riders who "can" use the side-saddle, to write and protest against the idea cropping up of our riding like men? I cannot help feeling justly indignant with those who try to introduce such a radical change, for, surely, we are already too much inclined to follow all the ways and pursuits of the opposite s.e.x without so far forgetting ourselves as to wish to ride as they do. I do not want to criticise what one is often obliged to do in foreign lands; there it may prove a necessity, for the riding is not simply for pleasure, but often the only means of transport, and the horses may not be fitted for our saddles, nor we accustomed to their paces; but, in England, the idea of a number of ladies fantastically dressed and mounted like men must shock many of your readers. I hope "X. Y. Z.," who first wrote in favour of this change some weeks ago, may pardon me if I say that the ladies of his or her acquaintance who, in consequence of only one stirrup, cannot avoid inclining the head and shoulders too much to the left, &c., and in addition gall their horses' backs, had better not attempt to ride at all. What is a prettier sight than a neatly-dressed Englishwoman riding a horse, "as a lady," and should we retain the same respect we now get if we gave up, in this particular, the few feminine tokens left to us. Why not let us accept the male attire altogether? It would be far more to our comfort in getting about on foot, and if one change is so advisable, surely the other is quite as sensible. I agree with "Hersilie" in thinking that the habits of the present day are indelicately short, and I cannot see that ladies ride any better showing their boots and with their arms akimbo than they did a year or so ago, when their feet were covered and no daylight showed between their arms. I come of as "horsey" a family as any in England, and have ridden ever since I could sit upright; but I never experienced, or knew that my sisters experienced, any of the troubles "X. Y. Z." and "Hersilie" complain of. My father, who was our sole instructor, put us on any animal that he thought likely to suit his own riding, and no matter where we were, in the hunting-field or elsewhere, the least deviation from sitting square would bring from him the sharp reprimand of, "What are you doing? Bring that left shoulder up, and don't let me see any daylight between your arms!" He also insisted that our stirrups should be short, even to discomfort, until we got used to it; but this prevented any chance of our hurting the horse's back, which most frequently comes from a lady riding with a long stirrup, and when she trots having to seek her stirrup, which constantly moves her saddle, and makes her as well look most awkward and one-sided.

If not trespa.s.sing too much, may I say one other little word in the interest of the horses I love so well? Over and over again, lately, have I seen the advice given in your paper that we should never be without a spur. Now, sir, if my experience can have any weight, I will say that I have hunted and ridden across country in all parts of Gloucesters.h.i.+re all my young days, that I was put on horses whether they or I liked it or not, both kind, unkind, or violent ones, and I am thankful to say that the idea of my wearing a spur never entered my father's head nor mine. It seems to me such an underhand way of punis.h.i.+ng one's horse--a real feminine species of torture, for no one sees the dig, dig, dig, but there it is all the time; and many a horse, I firmly believe, comes to grief with its rider simply because, not understanding its power, she taxes it beyond its strength. Not one horse in twenty will refuse, or need either whip or spur if he knows his mistress, and if he does he is not fit for inexperienced riders.

I wish every girl was taught as I have been, "that a horse can do no wrong." This made me study the peculiarities of every animal I was put upon, and I have never had an accident of any kind. Every horsewoman who loves riding must be proud of the feats accomplished by Mrs. Power O'Donoghue in the side-saddle, but would she be admired or respected as she is if she turned out as a man and rode as men do? It is being able to sit square and ride straight on a side-saddle, that we should be vain of, and not wish to make a change, which could only bring Englishwomen down in the estimation of all those who are now so justly proud of them on horseback.

I am, Sir, Yours, &c.

THE LADYBIRD.

December 18, 1880.

SIR,--Will you allow me to make one or two remarks upon a letter I read last night in your valuable paper? It is from a correspondent speaking of the ill effects produced by the use of side-saddles.

In the first place your correspondent should remember that the back of the horse, as well as the shoulder, is soft and tender when not in condition, that is, in constant work, and not fit for either riding or driving long distances at once, without damage. Get the back carefully and well seasoned, or accustomed to the side-saddle, during the time the horse is getting into condition for the hunting-field, and use a leather saddle-cloth under the saddle; let it be long enough, and not the shape of the saddle, and have all properly put on the horse, and you will not come to grief with six or seven hours' work, or before the lady is tired; that is, provided the lady will sit well down and steady in her saddle, and keep her horse as much from trotting as possible. Her horse must learn to canter slowly both to cover and home, it will be much better for the horse and much easier for the lady when she is accustomed to it; she will not be troubled any more with horses with sore backs. Another remark from "X. Y. Z." is, it is said that curvature of the spine sometimes ensues from children being taught at too early an age to ride on side-saddles. I fear the mistake is by the said children not having been taught how to sit or to put themselves in form for their own comfort, but left to sit as they like on horseback and get bad habits they cannot get rid of, never throwing the weight of the body in its proper place. Then, as to the remark about the riding-habit on the pommels, that disadvantage either has, or ought to have, pa.s.sed away a long time ago; for I am well satisfied that a lady can so dress herself for the hunting-field in boots, Bedfords, and plenty of flannel that she can keep herself warm and comfortable without a great, strong, heavy, long riding-habit. Let the habit be short and very light, and by no means bound round the bottom part with anything strong, but left so that it will give way either in a fall or in leaping through a high fence. I wonder if Mr. Lovell had his knife in his pocket when he saw his daughter suspended by the habit, which would neither tear nor be removed; had it been of light, thin material, and short, the sad accident would not have occurred. I am satisfied a little care and proper attention will put all things right of which your correspondent complains.

I am, &c.

O. P.

December, 1880.

SIR,--In your issue of the 4th December, "Farmer" writes that his horses are fed upon oats which have been soaked in cold water, and that he has the corn thus prepared because he could not easily manage to have a steaming apparatus for cooking the food in the way that is recommended by Mr. Edward Mayhew M.R.C.V.S., in his Ill.u.s.trated Horse Management. The plan that I have adopted during the last two months has been to have the oats put in a pail (made of oakwood) in the evening, and to pour upon them from a kettle a sufficient quant.i.ty of boiling water to rise a little above the oats; a sack is placed over it to keep in the heat, and the oats are then left to soak during the night; on the following morning the husk is so much softened that it will yield to the pressure of the thumb and finger. In this state the oats are more easily digested by the horse, and it is better for his teeth than to have to bite a hard substance. A wooden pail is preferable to a zinc one, because it does not conduct the heat from the oats so much as one of the latter description does. A lid would be, perhaps, better than a sack. The pail should not be filled with the oats, because the latter will swell when soaked. In the stall in our stable there is no water-trough at the side of the manger, and in order that the horse may have water within reach during the day and night, a zinc pail is placed in and at the end of the manger, and the handle of it is secured by a chain to the iron bars forming the upper part of the part.i.tion between the two stalls. In the loose-box, a pail containing water is suspended by a chain to some iron bars placed inside the window.

I am, &c.

X. Y. Z.

London, December, 1880.

SIR,--I cannot but feel flattered that Mrs. O'Donoghue has so frankly and kindly invited me to "break a lance" with her. I do, with both my hands and with all my heart, reciprocate her "warm shake-hands," and, vizor down and spear in rest, ride full tilt at her in fair and open fight to do my poor devoirs, if you will allow me once again to enter the lists in your paper. If Mrs. O'Donoghue will read her paper in your number for November 27th she will find these words: "My companion was in ease while I was in torture." Why was this? "Because he had a leg on either side of his mount, his weight equally distributed, and an equal support upon both sides; in fact, he had, as all male riders have, the advantage of a double support in the rise; consequently, at the moment when his weight was removed from the saddle, it was thrown upon both sides, and this equal distribution enabled him to accomplish without fatigue that slow rise and fall which is so tiring to a lady whose weight, when she is out of the saddle, is thrown entirely upon one delicate limb, thus inducing her to fall again as soon as possible."

Again, in the very next paragraph, Mrs. O'Donoghue says, "A man will be able to stand in his stirrups for a considerable time, even to ride at a gallop, so doing because he transfers his weight equally to his feet; but how rarely do we see a lady balanced upon one leg! The sensation is not agreeable, and would, moreover, be unpleasantly productive of wrung backs." These are verbatim extracts from "Part Three continued." I think my preference for a leg on each side of my horse, and a distribution of my weight equally on to each foot, is most eloquently and forcibly justified by Mrs. O'Donoghue when she wrote the above. I did not suggest, or at any rate did not mean to suggest, that she advocated a cross-seat for ladies, but that she unmistakably pointed out the great advantages of such a seat her own words abundantly testify. Again, some of the healthiest children I have ever seen are poor little gipsy girls, who, from being able to mount a donkey, have always ridden astride when once past the pannier period of their nomadic life. Also, some of the short, stout peasant women of Normandy ride thus, as well as the Indian squaws, and certainly these will compare favourably as to robust health with their side-saddle sisters of civilisation; to say nothing of the South American ladies. We have also the testimony of many lady travellers as to the superiority of a cross-seat when horseback is the only mode of transit. I cannot admit that in any case, even for "short women" or "little girls," it would be "most objectionable," that is, from a hygienic point of view. On the score of modesty, de gustibus, &c. &c. But then I allow a great lat.i.tude on such a point (our highest order carries the truest motto, honi soit qui mal y pense). In fact, I do not regard it as a question of modesty at all; simply of convenience, efficiency, and comfort. Mrs. O'Donoghue also says how rare it is to meet with a perfect lady's horse. "In all my wide experience I have met but two." Why? because a lady (and mainly on account of her side-seat, as I believe) is heavily handicapped as compared with a man in her choice of a horse, or, I should say, in her requirements from her horse. Every remark in the whole of the papers, "Ladies on Horseback," as to kindness, temper, and gentleness in the treatment of a horse I most cordially endorse, and I have to thank the fair auth.o.r.ess for the pleasure I have had in their perusal.

A word or two in answer to "The Ladybird." In reply to her opening remarks, I merely observe, "use is second nature," and had she happened to have lived before "Anne of Bohemia" introduced side-saddles she would have had no room for "indignation"; possibly in that case she would have always ridden pillion. Oh! if we could only once realise how much we are the slaves of fas.h.i.+on, how soon would the yoke be broken! Contrast the crinoline of 1857 and the umbrella-case attire of 1877; put a fas.h.i.+onable belle of the latter alongside her sister of only twenty years earlier mode. What a satire on taste, on modesty so called! But I would also ask "Ladybird" (if it be worth her while) to read again my letter of the 18th, and she will find I did not complain of the side-saddle, which I have an idea I can use, but pointed out its great inferiority (which I maintain) to the cross-saddle. The best test perhaps is the foreign one. Mount a horse without a saddle, but properly bitted, and then decide which is the more natural and easier seat; in one case you feel an appendage; in the other almost part of the horse. In the name of womanhood I repudiate the suggestion of an "underhand way of punishment," being "a real feminine species of torture." Perhaps it is, under the skirts of a habit, possible to "dig, dig, dig," for no one sees, truly; but surely no lady could, or would, spur her horse for the sake of tormenting him; in my attire at any rate it would not be unseen. The extraordinary teaching that a "horse can do no wrong" is an axiom with which I cannot agree. I have been mounted on horses that "could do no right," or if they could do it would not. And it has taken me all my time and taxed all my energies to prevent them from doing the things which they ought not to do; for I do object to a horse attempting to erect himself in a perpendicular att.i.tude, either from a fore or aft basis, when I am on his back, and I rejoice to know that I have (in such cases) on each foot a sharp spur to use with him as a cogent argument in convincing him that ordinary progression on four legs is infinitely better than saltimbantique performance on two--at least from my, his rider's, point of view. On a well-bred, highly-trained animal a spur is scarce ever required to be used, but even then the emergency may arise. I really laughed outright when I read what you, Sir, said of the "shoals of letters" arriving from fair correspondents "desiring to ride" as "Hersilie" suggested, but this only convinces me that there are many ladies who feel that it would be--just exactly as I described it--"a new life on horseback." I could add much more on the subject, but have already trespa.s.sed too long on your s.p.a.ce. I only repeat, let any lady once fairly try it, and she will always prefer it. I do not for a moment imagine she will always do it. I admit we must conform to custom, and I strongly deprecate individual eccentricity, especially in a lady. I shall continue to read all that appears in your paper on this and kindred topics with deep interest. Again, I specially thank Mrs. Power O'Donoghue for her genial and kindly expression of goodwill, and again heartily shake the shadowy hand she offers. I quite believe a No. 6 gloved hand can control a horse as well as any 7, 7, or 8, if it only be possessed of the cunning. And thanking you, sir, for your kindness, allow me as a woman to have the last word, and again a.s.sert, "the cross seat is much the better."

Yours, &c.

HERSILIE.

Ambleside (pro tem.), Dec. 1880.

SIR,--Kindly permit me to say a few words in reply to "Hersilie's" letter, which appeared in your issue of last week. I am referred to my own paper in your number for November 27, but "Hersilie" does not quote correctly, or perhaps the error is the printer's. I think I said "My companion was at ease, whilst I was in torture." Now, I merely related the incident with which these words were a.s.sociated in order to instruct ladies how to avoid the double rise--not to advocate for a single instant their riding upon a cross-saddle. I am quite ready to reiterate my statement that the position of a man enables him to ride a rough or clumsy trotter with infinitely greater ease than can a woman; but women should not, in my opinion, ride such at all, nor should I have done so, as related in your paper of November 27, were it not that my host, an immensely heavy man, had none but big rough horses in his stable, and I was obliged either to accept a mount upon one of them, for at least once, or give offence to a dear kind friend, which I would not do to avoid even a greater amount of inconvenience than I experienced upon the occasion in question.

The cross-seat is not the only thing which ladies may envy the sterner s.e.x, without at the same time advocating the propriety of encroaching upon their privileges. For my own part I never yet set out to walk on a wet or muddy day without sincerely envying every man who pa.s.sed me, his big boots, tucked-up trousers, and freedom from the petticoats and furbelows which enc.u.mber us and make us feel miserable in the rain; yet I certainly never felt the smallest desire to adopt his costume. Nor have I ever seen two persons, or two big dogs, engaged in fighting, that I did not envy the man who rushed between the combatants and stopped the unseemly exhibition; yet I decidedly experienced no wish to do it myself. It would not be my place. Men have their costume, their avocations, their sayings and doings, their varied callings in the world, and women have theirs. Each should be separate and distinct from the other. A manly woman, or a womanly man, is, in the eyes of all rightly-judging persons, a most objectionable creature. There are many things which a woman may legitimately admire, and, in a certain sense, envy, yet with which she should never desire to meddle, unless she is ambitious to merge her womanhood in the semblance of man. The cross-saddle is one of these. It may do very well in the wilds of a country whose inhabitants are from childhood accustomed to it, and where all ride alike, but not in civilised England. As well seek to advocate the dress (or undress) of the Indian squaws, as to endeavour to introduce their style of riding into a land whose daughters are as modest as they are fair.

"Hersilie" says:--"I do not regard it as a question of modesty at all, simply of convenience, efficiency, and comfort." The subject is one upon which a woman can touch but very lightly, yet may I affirm that if all women were to lay aside their chief charm, and simply go in for "convenience, efficiency, and comfort," society would present fewer attractions than it at present does? I shall leave "The Ladybird" to answer for herself, but I cannot help saying that I think "Hersilie" is hard upon her. She and I have met but once, yet I know that she is gentle and highborn, and worthy of nothing but the love of which her own Christian heart is composed.

You, sir, must also fight your own little battle, and tell "Hersilie" she is not to "laugh outright" at any of your "Circular Notes." She may laugh, of course, at small fry like myself, but I really can't have my Editor laughed at! nor my sweet "Ladybird" crushed!

And now, having said so much, I once again offer a shadowy hand to my adversary, and hope that though at present we see one another but darkly, we may yet do so "face to face," and meet as friends.

A word, with your permission, to correspondents:-- EVELYN HARKESS.--I have discovered your parcel. I thought you were sending it addressed to me. You shall have the contents in a few days.

FLINK.--There is never one worth buying, although unwise persons bid fast and high. Try a private source, and beware of imposition.

R. KING.--The horse is sold.

H. DUNBAR, SHAMUs...o...b..IEN, W. HATFIELD, and ROSE MARIE.--Your questions are of too personal a nature. If time permits I will answer privately.

IGNORAMUS.--Dose him with aloes until he is dead sick; then put a saddle on him, with a sand-bag at either side, and ring him for an hour. I warrant he will allow a man upon his back after this, nor will he seek to dislodge him either. It is much better and more humane than the whipping and spurring which is so grievous to a sensitive looker-on.

HUGH.--Apply to Mr. Chapman, Oaklands, Cheltenham.