within the range of his limited capacity. He
regards it, as the sum of all human acquisition.
If he is learned in a Horse, he has nothing
else to learn. And the same remark applies,
with some little abatement, to his acquaintance
with Dogs. I have seen a good deal of Man
in my time, but I think I have never met a
Man who didn't feel it necessary to his reputation
to pretend, on occasion, that he knew
something of Horses and Dogs, though he
really knew nothing. As to making us a
subject of conversation, my opinion is that we
are more talked about, than history,
philosophy, literature, art, and science, all put
together. I have encountered innumerable
gentlemen in the country, who were totally
incapable of interest in anything but Horses
and Dogs—except Cattle. And I have always
been given to understand that they were the
flower of the civilised world.

"It is very doubtful, to me, whether there
is, upon the whole, anything Man is so
ambitious to imitate, as an ostler, a jockey, a
stage coachman, a horse-dealer, or a dog-
fancier. There may be some other character
which I do not immediately remember, that
fires him with emulation; but, if there be,
I am sure it is connected with Horses, or
Dogs, or both. This is an unconscious
compliment, on the part of the tyrant, to the
nobler animals, which I consider to be very
remarkable. I have known Lords, and
Baronets, and Members of Parliament, out
of number, who have deserted every other
calling, to become but indifferent stablemen
or kennelmen, and be cheated on all hands,
by the real aristocracy of those pursuits who
were regularly born to the business.

"All this, I say, is a tribute to our
superiority which I consider to be very remarkable.
Yet, still, I can't quite understand it.
Man can hardly devote himself to us, in
admiration of our virtues, because he never
imitates them. We Horses are as honest,
though I say it, as animals can be. If, under
the pressure of circumstances, we submit to
act at a Circus, for instance, we always show
that we are acting. We never deceive
anybody. We would scorn to do it. If we are
called upon to do anything in earnest, we do
our best. If we are required to run a race
falsely, and to lose when we could win, we are
not to be relied upon, to commit a fraud;
Man must come in at that point, and force us
to it. And the extraordinary circumstance to
me, is, that Man (whom I take to be a powerful
species of Monkey) is always making us
nobler animals the instruments of his meanness
and cupidity. The very name of our kind
has become a byeword for all sorts of trickery
and cheating. We are as innocent as counters
at a game—and yet this creature WILL play
falsely with us!

"Man's opinion, good or bad, is not worth
much, as any rational Horse knows. But,
justice is justice; and what I complain of, is,
that Mankind talks of us as if We had
something to do with all this. They say that such
a man was 'ruined by Horses.' Ruined by
Horses! They can't be open, even in that,
and say he was ruined by Men; but they lay
it at our stable-door! As if we ever ruined
anybody, or were ever doing anything but
being ruined ourselves, in our generous
desire to fulfil the useful purposes of our
existence!

"In the same way, we get a bad name as if
we were profligate company. 'So and so got
among Horses, and it was all up with him.'
Why, we would have reclaimed him—we would
have made him temperate, industrious,
punctual, steady, sensible—what harm would
he ever have got from us, I should wish to
ask?

"Upon the whole, speaking of him as I have
found him, I should describe Man as an
unmeaning and conceited creature, very seldom
to be trusted, and not likely to make advances
towards the honesty of the nobler animals.
I should say that his power of warping the
nobler animals to bad purposes, and damaging
their reputation by his companionship, is,
next to the art of growing oats, hay, carrots,
and clover, one of his principal attributes.
He is very unintelligible in his caprices;
seldom expressing with distinctness what he
wants of us; and relying greatly on our better
judgment to find out. He is cruel, and fond
of blood—particularly at a steeple-chase—and
is very ungrateful.

"And yet, so far as I can understand, he
worships us too. He sets up images of us
(not particularly like, but meant to be) in the
streets, and calls upon his fellows to admire
them, and believe in them. As well as I can
make out, it is not of the least importance
what images of Men are put astride upon
these images of Horses, for I don't find any
famous personage among them—except one,
and his image seems to have been contracted
for, by the gross. The jockeys who ride our
statues are very queer jockeys, it appears to
me, but it is something to find Man even
posthumously sensible of what he owes to us.
I believe that when he has done any great
wrong to any very distinguished Horse,
deceased, he gets up a subscription to have an
awkward likeness of him made, and erects it
in a public place, to be generally venerated.
I can find no other reason for the statues of
us that abound.

"It must be regarded as a part of the
inconsistency of Man, that he erects, no statues to
the Donkeys—who, though far inferior animals
to ourselves, have great claims upon him. I
should think a Donkey opposite the Horse at
Hyde Park, another in Trafalgar Square, and
a group of Donkeys, in brass, outside the
Guildhall of the City of London (for I believe
the Common Council Chamber is inside that
building) would be pleasant and appropriate
memorials.

"I am not aware that I can suggest
anything more, to my honorable friend the Raven,