Conference noted::equitation

    Does anyone know anything about the Morgan museum in Vermont? Where is
    it and what is there? I'm going to be in the Middlebury area this
    weekend and heard that it might be there. 
    
    Any other horsey things to do up there?
    
    Thanks,
    Andrea

    
     It is there in Middlebury. Any info. center should have directions
     and it's very easy to find. We went the last weekend in April,
     opening day in celebration of there 200 aniv. We received a private
     tour of the place. It was great. There were many horses in
     training and the on-site trainer is very willing answer any questions.
     They also  have direct ancestors of Justin still there.
     
     I just wish I could have rode a couple...
    
     There is a ranch just down the street that has riding. They are
     paints. They were closed when we went.
    
     
    

    The Morgan Center (I don't know the official name) is runned by UVM
    (University of Vermont). It's just a few minutes from Middlebury.
    	cindy
    

    there are two good morgan spots near middlebury vt. the amha in
    shelburn vt.-about 30 miles north on rt 7- is the new hq for the
    amha. you will find a small museum a good spot to get to now the
    breed.  in middlebury is uvm's morgan breeding farm which is open
    to all. to get there just ask once in town  it is real close and
    a great spot to visit.

    She'll have to have the papers updated by the Morgan Registry.  Have
    her call the AMHA at 802-985-4944.  They can tell her exactly what she
    needs to do to get the papers changed.  I'm not sure if she has to wait
    till the papers are changed before she can show him as a gelding.  I
    would doubt it since if she's shows him in gelding classes, they can
    obviously tell he's a gelding, plus I don't think the shows are going
    to check with the registry to make sure his papers have been changed.
    She can check with the AMHA on this, too.  They should be able to look
    it up in the rule book (if there is any rule about it).
    
    						Jan

    	Jan's correct w/the number.. and giving them a call for details.
    It is my understanding that the original papers, and a document
    signed by the attending vet who performed the castration need to
    be dated and signed and sent to AMHA.  They will update the original
    papers to reflect that this horse is now a gelding, and the date
    that he was gelded.....
    
    	I'm fairly sure she can show the horse in any gelding class
    once he's been gelded...
    
    

    Are there any Morgan Farms/Breeders in the New Hampshire/Massachusetts
    area?  Any info would be greatly appreciated.
    
    Thanks.
    
    

    RE: .15   I'm sorry I don't know of any specific references to NH or MA
    breeders.  I've visited (and bought) from a farm in Conn; also, lots of
    breeders in VT (UVM is definitely worth checking out).  If you're
    interested in the Conn reference, let me know.  Our family was
    delighted with the colt we purchased.
    
    
    -Greta (who wishes she was still riding/owning horses)
    
    

    
    	Richard Boule at Stepping Stone Stable in Brookfield, MA
    	has some beautiful horses. I had a stallion with him for
    	a couple of years. The farm number is (508) 867-9883. 
    
    	Sherry
    

    If you are looking for a Sport Horse type Morgan, try Phil and Jennifer
    DuBois, Otterbrook Farm, Peterborough NH (603)-924-6745. They were our
    neighbors for 11 years so I knew their stock very well. They are both
    active in Combined Driving and Jennifer rides dressage. They also used
    to do competitive trail riding so they are well rounded horse-folks.
    
    They have some very nice Morgans for using activities. Phil also
    happens to be the current President of the American Morgan Horse 
    Association. Jennifer is the Founder and an officer of The Morgan Sport
    Horse Association. They would be able to refer you to someone else
    if they don't have anything you like. 
    
    If you are looking for a Saddle Seat-type show horse, there are lots of
    breeders in MA and NH. I can't recommend any off hand because I don't
    paticipate in that kind of riding.
    
    If you did want to make the trip all the way to Middlebury VT for a
    show horse prospect, you could try the UVM Morgan Horse Farm. They
    always have show prospects for sale, although the price may be steep.

    Townsend Morgan in Bolton...they have some very well known horses.
    A friend of mine at DEC Corine Crossmon raises some very good
    bloodlines; she works in Boxboro but the best place to reach her is at
    home in the late evenings....207-457-1774 and for the life of me, at
    this moment, I can't remember the name of her farm...horses have done
    well in the show ring as well as family/pleasure/trail horses.
    
    Good luck....looking is great fun.
    
    

    >A friend of mine at DEC Corine Crossmon raises some very good
    >bloodlines; she works in Boxboro but the best place to reach her is at
    >home in the late evenings....207-457-1774 and for the life of me, at
    >this moment, I can't remember the name of her farm...horses have done

    Menomin Meadow! :^) 
    

    Thank you all for the greatly appreciated information on Morgan
    Breeders.  I have slowly begun looking at Morgans but needed more
    leads.  I want to look at as many horses as I can before deciding on
    which one to buy.
    
    Thanks again.
    

    Does anyone know the exact opening date and time of the Morgan Museum
    in Vermont?
    
    Thanks.
    
    Send mail to:  SOLVIT::CREWS
    

A while back, somebody asked about larger(15.2-17 hand) Morgan horses and 
where they came from. Here's some information I came across over the years
which shows that Figure aka Justin Morgan was about a 15.2 hand horse. This 
is in SHARP contrast to the MYTH that Justin Morgan was a 14H horse! 

THE NEWS Vol 1 No 1(published by Justin Morgan Memorial Museum) has the 
following article:

"Figure This

Stud Ad Circa 1793

Could this be OUR Figure?

The beautiful full blooded black bay horse FIGURE,

WILL COVER on Monday and Tuesday every week through the season at the stable 
of Bezabeel Latimer, in Weathersfield, and on Wedsnesday  and Thursday of the 
fourth week in May at the stable of Mr. Joseph Galpin, in Worthington; and 
thence at the stable of Mr. Abel Andrns in Newington, being on Friday and 
Saturday and from whence to return to the above stable at Weathersfield. He 
was bred in Pennsyvania and sire by the noted imported Horse True Britain, his 
dam by bold Britain, his grand dam by the Narraganset Horse Feather. He is
five years old in July, 16 hands high and equal for strength, activity, 
movements, and for the saddle, to any Horse in America. Price for the season, 
four Dollars, or two Dollars the single leap.
			---source of advertisement unknown, possibly the 
			1793 Connecticut Courant"

We will probably never know whether or not that ad was for the horse 
that was later called Justin Morgan. Some of the statements in the ad are 
consistent with what is currently known or believed about JM but others are 
not. JM did stand at stud in CT for the preceding(i.e. 1792) season and is 
supposed to have stood 2 seasons there before standing in VT. This implies 
that he stood the 1793 season in CT because 1792 ads state that he was 
15 hands and 3 YO. It's believed that Figure was foaled in 1789 so,
if that's true, he couldn't have been 5 in 1793. However, if he were actually 
foaled in July 1788, he could have been called age 3 in the Spring of 1792 
and "five years old in July" in the Spring of 1793. 

JM's sire is believed to have been True Briton(various spellings of names 
were common 200 years ago) but the pedigree of the dam is believed to have 
been of the "Wildair" line which is said to be Thoroughbred and/or Arabian 
stock, not Narraganset Pacer stock.

I doubt there was a PA connection. True Briton was owned by a man from CT.
Justin Morgan stood stallions while living in Springfield MA and, in fact,
he stood True Briton in 1785. His cousin, John Morgan stood True Briton in 
Springfield MA for the 1786-1788 seasons.

If the horse advertised in 1793 really was the same Figure that was later 
called Justin Morgan, I would also say that his height was probably 
overstated by about an INCH. The reasons I say that will become clear soon.

A few years ago, I read Betty Bandel's biography of the man Justin Morgan 
titled "Sing the Lord's Song in a Strange Land." Professor Bandel discovered 
additional information about Figure's height and how Justin Morgan parted 
with him that DIRECTLY contradicts the legends. And I did a little more 
research...

The remainder of this note is based on an article I wrote for the 
Morgan Sport Horse Association Digest about 4 years ago. It incorporates 
information from Professor Bandel's book as well as information from Volume 1 
of Battel's "The Morgan Horse and Registry"(published in 1892).

The modern myth about Figure being 14 hands and 950 pounds originated in
D.C. Linsley's "Morgan Horses" published in 1857. Linsley cites NO
evidence for his estimates.

In Volume 1 of "The Morgan Horse and Registry", Joseph Battell quotes Linsley's 
statements but provides additional evidence that contradicts the 
14 hands and 950 pounds statement. The evidence includes Samuel Whitman's 
1792 stud advertisement from Hartford CT which says that Figure was a 
3 YO bay and 15 hands. Battell also quotes text from a letter written by 
John Woodbury, owner of Woodbury, a son of Figure. 

In this letter(Vol. 1 Page 112), Mr Woodbury states that Figure weighed about 
1,000 pounds and was about the same height as the Backman Horse. In those 
days, horses were frequently known by several names. Often, they were known 
by their owners names as well as what the owner called them(e.g. Figure became 
Justin Morgan, Woodbury took his name from John Woodbury, etc.)

The Backman Horse was registered by W.W. Backman under the names of 
"Charley(Josiah Richardson Horse or Green Mountain 2D)" and was sired by 
Green Mountain Morgan. Battell accepted the application and 
pedigree. He registered the horse on Page 691 of Vol 1 of the Registry. The 
height and weight of the Backman Horse was given(by the owner) as 15.2 hands 
and 1030 pounds.

Battell states that either Mr Woodbury(who certainly knew Figure and his get!) 
was wrong, the Backman Horse's height was exaggerated or Figure was taller 
than 14 hands. Battell concludes, "This is one of many suggestions that
Justin Morgan was considerably more than 14 hands high."

Back in the 1960's, Professor Bandel had more evidence called to her 
attention in the form of an advertisement from a 1796 Burlington(VT) Mercury. 
This advertsisement was placed by Samuel Allen of Williston as owner of 
Figure. Said advertisement says that Figure is bay and 15.3 hands. Betty 
Bandel wrote an article as long ago as the April 1968 issue of The Morgan 
Horse which contained this information! 

In the general horse book, "Growth and Nutrition in Horses", Mr. D.P. 
Willoughby states that Figure could not have been 14 hands and 950 pounds as 
that would have given him the same proportions as a draft horse. Based on a 
statistical analysis of horses listed in Linsley's "Morgan Horses"(remember 
that was published in 1857 which was only 30 years after Figure's death), 
Willoughby states that the average height and weight for those horses was 
15 hands and 1035 pounds. 

On page 97, Willoughby concludes that if Figure had the same proprtions as 
his descendants, he would have weighed about 840 pounds at 14 hands. I 
reversed that logic and estimated Figure's weight based on a height 
of 15.3 hands and got about 1140 pounds. 

That was inconsistent with Mr Woodbury's recollection of Figure being 15.2 
and 1,000 pounds. However, in a very cursory review(10-20 minutes) of 
stallions listed in Volume 1 of the Registry, I found statistical evidence 
that supports Mr Woodbury's statement. 

In Vol 1, there are numerous Morgan stallions which stood 15.2-16 hands
with weights between 925 and 1100 pounds. Since condition affects weight and 
not height, the taller horses are not always the heavier ones even though
taller stallions were, on average, heavier. For example, the 15.2 stallions 
weighed from 925 to 1100 with about 53% weighing 1000 or less. The 15.3 hand 
stallions weighed 950-1100 with 40% weighing 1000 or less and 60% in the
1050-1100 pound range. The 16 hand stallions all weighed 1050-1100 pounds.

These height and weight statistics are not limited to a single sire 
line descended from Figure. I found multiple individuals from each of the 
major sire lines(Bulrush, Woodbury and Sherman).

Therefore, it seems entirely consistent for Figure to have been advertised as 
15 hands at age 3 in 1792 and as 15.3 hands at 7 in 1796. Many horses continue 
to grow long past age 3. There is evidence in Vol 1 that supports Mr. 
Woodbury's statement that Figure was about 1,000 pounds and about 15.2 hands. 
There is also the modern calcluation by Willoughby based on horses listed by 
Linsley that Figure could NOT have been 950 pounds and 14 hands.

Based on the above analysis, I came to the opinion is that Figure was probably 
15.2 or 15.3 and weighed between 950 and 1050 pounds depending on his 
condition and the accuracy of the eyes of the people who made the estimates. 
To some people, "about 1000 pounds" means more than 900 and less than 1100. To 
others, it means between 975 and 1025 pounds! It amazes me that this ad 
stating Figure's mature height as 15.3 has been known for over 25 years and 
yet the myth endures! Even Morgan books published AFTER 1968 do not MENTION
the POSSIBILITY that the 14 hand height is false!

John

The legend also says that Figure was sold to Richard Evans from Justin Morgan's 
estate. In fact, Battell noted ONE HUNDRED YEARS AGO that this could not be 
true. The tax records of Randolph VT show that Justin Morgan had disposed 
of the horse a full two years before his death. Battell said he could 
find no information about how Justin Morgan parted with Figure. 

The 1796 ad that Bandel wrote about proves that Battell was right. 
Samuel Allen was the owner of Figure by then but that still doesn't tell how 
he got him from Justin Morgan.

Betty Bandel found information showing that Justin Morgan obtained 100 acres 
of land in the town of Moretown VT in 1795. She estimates that this land was 
worth about the same price as Figure was valued at. This shows the falsity of 
the romantic notion that Figure was not highly valued until after his death.

Samuel Allen owned a lot of land in Moretown. Justin Morgan had advertised 
Figure as standing at Allen's stable in Williston for the 1795 season. 
Professor Bandel combines that information with previously known information 
from Randolph VT tax records(which showed that Justin Morgan had owned a 
stallion in 1795 but not in 1796) to conclude that Justin Morgan SOLD Figure 
to Samuel Allen in May or June of 1795 in exchange for the land. She also 
concludes that this was an attempt to provide a legacy for his young children 
as he(Justin Morgan) was in poor health and his wife had died several years 
earlier. 

So, please propagate the historical facts(meager though they are) rather than
the myths from Linsley, children's books and movies.

John

    re. previous 2 replies. 
    
    Don't confuse selling with installing; or more myths shattered.
    
    I am highly sceptical of the accuracy of any height measurement of a
    horse, even those made today. The "marketeers" have a way of inflating
    favourable attributes, and then the breed societies, most of which were
    established 100 years or so after the period in question, get to work.
    
    I did some brief research into the heights of draft horses recently and
    found some evidence that average height has shot up about two hands
    within living memory. Older reference works list most draft breed as
    being around 16 hands with Shires as the biggest at 17 hands. You won't
    find an example of any draft breed in the show ring at less than 18
    hands nowadays because that's what judges pin.
    
    Horses' heights were traditionally measured by counting the number of
    clenched fists, one on top of the other, which could be made in the
    distance from the ground to the horses withers. Thus a horse was
    described as so many "handful's" high. Whose hand did the measuring was
    not specified. At some point four inches became the accepted definition
    of a hand. The industrial revolution was only just getting started at
    the end of the eighteenth century, the period in question, so whether
    standardized measuring sticks were widely available is another point to
    ponder.
    
    Further down this rathole, another image of times past is the knight in
    shining armour riding into battle on a huge horse, the forebears of
    today's draft breeds. The Medieval War Horse was actually somewhere
    between fourteen and fifteen "handful's" high. Medieval monarchs were
    desperately trying to breed larger animals in the escalating arms race,
    forbidding the breeding of smaller animals. Then gunpowder arrived from
    China and made knights in armour irrelevant. It was only towards the
    end of the nineteenth century that the draft breeds approached their
    present dimensions.
    
    So Justin Morgan could have been 16 hands but it's more likely that he
    was smaller.

    Oh, I never said I BELIEVED the 16 hand estimate. In fact, I doubt it.
    I'm simply saying that there was ample evidence that Figure was NOT 
    14 hands but was between 15 and 16 hands. 
    
    The most likely estimates from several contemporary sources put
    him at 15 1/2 hands. Many people are quoted as saying he was 15 hands
    or taller without being able to pin it down. John Woodbury did estimate
    Figure's height by comparison to another horse who was 15 1/2 hands. 
    The 1796 ad supports that by calling the horse 15.3. I'd believe
    either.
    
    There has never been disagreement over the estimates of Figure's
    weight which were 950 to a little over 1,000 pounds. That weight is 
    consistent with a height of 15.2 or even 15.3 in his close descendants. 
    But, it's too little for 16 hands.
    
    As for whether or not they had standardized  measuring instruments at 
    the time, I don't know either. I do know that some of the weights
    given for horses in the early-mid 1800's did not end in zero(e.g. 1034
    pounds) so it is possible that there was some standardization...but I
    wouldn't bet the farm on it. ;-) Of course, without standardization,
    you can't trust ANY estimates of size from that era so we'd never be
    able to answer any questions.
    

    John,
    
    I'm not certain that height is consistent with the weight (15.2-3
    hands/950-1000 pounds).  My horse is 15.1 hands, close to 900 pounds
    and looks his best at about 900 pounds.  *BUT* Algiers is extremely
    light boned, light bodied and long legged.  He really has the body of a
    lightly built 14.3 hand horse with super-long legs.  Considering that,
    and the morgans I've seen (especially the stallions that I just saw at
    a local morgan breeders farm), I can see a weight of 9000+ pounds on an
    under 15 hand horse.  The stallions I just saw are pretty typey (one is
    from UNV) and pretty stocky.
    
    Mary

 
>>I can see a weight of 9000+ pounds on an under 15 hand horse

    YIKES! I wouldn't want to ride that one! ;*}
    Although it might make a great commuter horse, nobody would
	get in my way!

    (Just teasing, ya know!)

 

    Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!Ha!  Tanks a lot -- just caught it!  Well -- you've 
    heard people refer totheir horses as "tanks" before -- haven't 
    you???!!!????
    
    mary :-)

   
   Heck we *own* one! If you want to see a funny picture watch me
   try to ride Ed's DWB...my legs only come half way down the sides.
   I look like a five-year old in a lead line class. (I love having
   the other horses run to get the heck out of my way in the warm up 
   area though!) 
 

    Re May's original comment... before we got sidetracked into tanks and
    armor...but isn't a tank your armor? ;-) I'm sure Mary just had a
    case of lack-of-coffee...UNV is more famous for it's basketball teams
    than Morgan horses. I'm sure she meant UVM. 
    
    This is gonna get me in trouble with every Morgan person in the
    conference but... It constantly amazes me how many people equate Morgan 
    type and FAT! 
    
    For example, Jan's mare is 15 hands 950 and quite typey. In the days
    before ivermectin, this mare had to be larvicidal dewormed by tube to
    prevent colic from migrating larvae. 
    
    After one of those tube dewormings, she had a sore throat and didn't
    eat fo several days. She lost over 50 pounds before she started eating 
    and never looked better in her life! She remained properly hydrated and 
    continued to work. What did she loose? Fat! 
    
    Her type didn't change; just the amount of body fat she was carrying.
    Th reason I think that a 950-1000 pound Morgan in the late 1790's or
    early 1800's would have been 15.2 or so is that you never saw any fat
    horses then. They worked too hard to ever gain that 50-100 pounds of fat
    that modern people call "type." 
    
    John

  So where do Lippitt Morgans fit in? I've seen a few and they remind
  me of the old style QH...not too tall, fairly broad and with well 
  muscled necks that are set on fairly low (as opposed to the "new"
  Morgan type which has a thick cresty neck which is set higher on the
  shoulders.) 
 
  The Lippitt people say they are preserving the "true" Morgan type.

    Since we're on the subject of tanks, I'll take this moment to say that
    many's the time I dream of buying the biggest, baddest warmblood tank I
    can find and getting revenge on all those who've terrorized li'l
    Algiers and me all these years!!!!!!!!!!  So look out cause we're
    comin' to get ya....heh!heh!heh!
    
    900 pounds, folks, 900 pounds.
    Whatever the initials are for the University of Vermont, thank you,
    cause I distinctly remember that whatever Lancaster's initials were,
    they translated into University of Vermont!
    
    Well, all I can say is Algiers tapes in at about 850 pounds and looks on
    "the lean side of right" (I keep him that way, cause as soon as he 
    looks *really* good, he becomes an arrogant, conceited Brat instead of 
    just a regular little brat).  And he is lightbodied to the point if he
    was any lighter, he'd be tweedy and then I wouldn't own him.
    
    Besides which, its probably a case of they were as good at estimating
    weight as they were at estimating height back in those days...or did
    they have giant scales then, too?
    
    mary

    My neighbors daughter owns a Morgan gelding, I believe he's Lippit
    lines, who is VERY small....probably too small but breed standards,
    actually. He's very typy and absolutely adorable, but cant' be anymore
    than 14.2 hand if that...I couldn't possibly guess at his weight. He
    is however, quite the jumper! When they had him at home (he is now
    a lesson horse at Brindle Ledge Farm) he used to periodically jump out
    of their 4.5 foot paddock fence from a standstill. The darn fence was
    'bout over his head. Nice little horse, a bit rambuncious but a ball
    to ride!
    

    Kiirja,
    Are you trying to get me in REAL trouble or what? ;-)
    
    Seriously though, my biggest point of contention with "old type" 
    FANATICS(not old type fanciers...I'm one of those) is that many
    of them believe that type = short and fat. 
    
    I have seen Lippitts that were every bit of 15.2 and one that was 15.3.
    They were still typey but were disavowed by some as being too tall to
    be "true" Morgan type. 
    
    I've also seen Lippitts that were 13.3-14.1 that the owners OOOhed and
    Ahhed over claiming that they were "true" Morgan type. Other Lippitt
    breeders would make remarks like, "Oh yeah. I heard about so and so's
    miniatures." 
    
    That was one reason I wrote that article about the historical information 
    that Figure was called 15 hands at age 3 and 15 hands 3 inches at age 7 by 
    people who knew him first hand. The point being you can't get truer to 
    "Morgan type" than the original! If HE was 15 hands or taller then it 
    doesn't make sense to say that "true" Morgan type can only be seen in 
    horses under 15 hands.
    
    I think that the main reason that many Lippitts are so small is simple:
    INBREEDING. A well known side effect of inbreeding is loss of size.
    Lippitt Morgans are one of the most inbred lines of horses on the planet.
    Without breeders conscientiously selecting for size, they got smaller and 
    smaller.
    
    Similarly, the UVM herd has gotten smaller through intense linebreeding
    and inbreeding. The early horses bred by the US government(which 
    originally ran what is now the UVM stud) were sizeable and substantial 
    horses. The full brothers, Mansfield, Canfield and Ulysses stood about 
    15.2 hands. They were not "large" compared to other horses at the stud. 
    Due to 5 decades of government and UVM inbreeding without selection for 
    size, the horses now average 14.3 hands with many considerably
    shorter(e.g. One of their stallions stands about 14.1 hands). A 15.1 
    horse is considered tall in the UVM herd.
    
    There are knowledgeable Lippitt breeders who know Morgan history as
    well as genetics and select for small horses(14.3-15.1) rather than large 
    ponies(13.3-14.2). UVM has also been trying to increase the average
    size of its horses for some years. Most people are simply too large for a 
    14.1 hand horse so they've been trying to increase the average to 15 hands. 
    
    But, I'll bet most Lippitts are 50-100 pounds over what I would call their 
    ideal weight too.
    
    John

    We had what I would call the "Figure Duplicate" at a barn
    I boarded at years ago.  He couldn't have been more than
    14.2-14.3, but he was a solidly built little guy.  Dark
    bay with a stripe or snip, I can't remember now.....unfortunately
    he was also neglected, so I used to brush him and scratch him
    when I was there.....

    
    	Whew!!  I've been very tied up with P.I., Internal Controls
    	auditors, transferring product to Mexico, hiring some internal
    	folks, family visiting from New England and life.....  
    
    	I *do* believe that John is our resident expert on the historical
    	elements being discussed - and I very much agree - with the over
    	stated requirements for larger morgans - and with the small(er)
    	Lippitts not being "the standard".
    
    	I breed 1 or 2 Morgans a year and aspire to improve my own stock.
    	Both physically and mentally.  If I wanted a saddlebred I'd buy
    	one... I love my Morgans for all of their personality traits,
    	ease of training, ease of keeping and extreme beauty!!  I have a
    	coming 3 year old who is 14.3 and I expect will hit 15.0 by the
    	time she finishes.  I'm 5'9" and so it IS important to me that I
    	don't look like an amazon on my horses... and with the depth of
    	bodies that mine have, I guess I can say I don't.  
    
    	And, it is important to me that folks (especially non Morgan and/
    	or illinformed folks) be able to recognize a Morgan when they
    	see it... I know that I can... but that's from years of gazing
    	over years of magazines, fences, horse shows, clinics, etc etc...
    
    	There ARE some big Morgans out there and some of them are passing
    	their height on... and some are not.  I do believe that the 
    	original was not a 14.1 hand horse... and that all in all... we
    	do ourselves a disservice when we (the Morgan breeders/owners) are
    	in disagreement w/EACH other.  
    
    	I'm with you John all the way (can I play on your team?... left
    	handed 1st baseperson!)
    
    	smiles to all - holly
    
    

    Well, I used to play first base because I was too slow footed to play
    outfield. But since I'm righty and you're such a nice person, you can
    play first base. I'll play third...just remind me not to wear glasses...
    
    Re:
    >I *do* believe that John is our resident expert on the historical
    >elements being discussed - and I very much agree - with the over
    >stated requirements for larger morgans 
    
    I used to read lots of breed history during those long, cold, snowy
    winters in NH because the weather kept me from riding. Sit by the fire
    and read for a couple months. Nothing better to do since we didn't 
    have an indoor ring(or a VCR or a satelitte dish). 
    
    It was interesting reading even though HARD facts are few and far
    between. Lots of speculation, deductions, etc. Why can't we borrow 
    Mr. Peabody's "Way Back Machine" or H.G. Wells' "Time Machine" and go
    back and get some straight facts from Justin Morgan on Figure's
    pedigree/origins/history/etc and measure the horse while we're at it?
    (Yes, I AM sober! Just naturally whacko... ;-)
    
    In '75, I got involved in an inbreeding study with the UVM Morgan Horse
    Farm and wrote a computer program to analyze their herd's level of
    inbreeding. That required lots of pedigree research as well as gaving me
    access to some of their historical data like measurement records which 
    is not generally available.
    
    Sorry if I got carried away making my point about the size thing. It's
    just that I get tired of having people tell me that my 16.1 1/2 gelding
    can't be a Morgan because he's too big!
    
    John

    Someone on usenet asked whether or not Morgans could be grey. In case
    there are folks who don't read usenet, the answer is yes but there
    aren't very many grey Morgans. As of 1991(the last date for which I have
    statistics), there are 6 live grey Morgans. There have only been 255
    greys registered in the history of the breed, so they're pretty rare.
    
    Morgans can be ANY color except white. They cannot have any white 
    markings above the knees except for the head. The colors break down like 
    this:
    
    Chestnut		58.4%
    Bay			27.4%
    Black		 7.7%
    Brown		 4.9%
    Palomino		 0.95%
    Buckskin		 0.27%
    Grey		 0.22%
    Black chestnut or
    Dark chestnut	 0.09%
    Dun			 0.05%

    I saw a beautiful sorrel at UVM named Robin a few years back; is that
    dark chestnut?
    
    Just curious, John.

    Sorrel is generally defined as a reddish or goldish chestnut, and some
    use the term to mean a chestnut with a light mane and tail.
    
    -ellie

    If you think it was sorrel, it was probably sorrel. What other breeds
    call liver is generally called dark chestnut or simply chestnut in
    Morgans. There seems to be no reason for this other than habit.

I was asked off-line about the origin of the so-called "white" rule in 
Morgans. I'll paraphrase the rule and say that it prevents registration of
a horse which has NATURAL white above the knees(or hocks) excluding the head.
Horses which have had part of their coat turn white due to injury or disease 
can be registered. 

Since I no longer breed Morgans, I don't have a copy of the registration 
rules anymore but, as I remember the rules, they also preclude registration 
of blue-eyed horses. If there are any Morgan breeders out there who are 
breeding for colors like palomino/buckskin, beware. If you breed 2 
palomino/buckskin horses together, about 1 in 4 foals will be cremello or 
perlino. While I think cremello and perlino are legitimate colors for 
registration, such horses frequently have blue eyes which would preclude 
their registration.

In case anybody is wondering, the dilution gene which turns bay into buckskin 
and chestnut into palomino has been around in Morgans since the very 
beginning! One of the grandsons of the foundation stallion was buckskin. 
That was the Wheeler Horse aka the Buckskin Wheeler Horse. He was a son of 
Revenge, one of Figure's less prominent sons. Although many buckskin/palomino 
Morgans trace to this horse, he's not the only source of the gene.

The white rule was put into effect in 1962 because of 2 horses. These horses 
were bred in the 1950's by a Wyoming rancher and his son, George & Albert(Ab)
Cross, respectively. One horse was named Chingadero and he was registered as 
white. The other horse was called War Paint and, you guessed it, he was 
registered as having a pinto coat pattern. 

These horses caused an uproar in the conservative Morgan strongholds and was 
viewed as "evidence" that the horses couldn't be "pure" Morgan. Some folks 
actually believed that Mr Cross either didn't know that a paint snuck into 
his corrals to breed his mares or that he had knowingly tried to pull a 
trick on folks. Funny thing is, that some of the strongest opposition to 
these horses came from folks who advocated allowing Thoroughbred, Saddlebred 
and Arab crosses with Morgans be registered. Go figure!

However, if one looks the pedigrees of the horses with a 1980's-1990's 
knowledge of genetics, you can see that he could have legitimately produced
those horses out of his stock. 

War Paint's dam was called Painted Gal who had 2 white markings on her side.
Since the overo coat pattern is recessive and very variable when it is 
expressed, overo horses often produce solid or near solid  foals. It is 
likely that Painted Gal was simply an overo waiting for the right mating to 
produce a paint. 

This should be no more "remarkable" than an overo showing up in the European 
warmblood breeds. This DOES happen even though they have been conscientiously
trying to breed for solid coat colors for MANY generations. But, in the end,
Mr Cross gave War Paint to a paint breeder. Presumably he did this because of 
the furor the horse caused in Morgan circles.

The "white" horse is easy to explain. Chingadero wasn't white! 

Ab Cross called the horse white with blue eyes. Chingadero was described 
by someone who knew him well as being a light palomino with lighter mane
& tail when he was born but that later he looked cremello with DARKER 
mane & tail and hazel eyes. Another person who knew the horse said that, 
before he was used for a parade or some other public event, they gave the 
horse a bath with a bleach in the water to whiten his coat! 

These statements indicate that Chingadero was either a cremello(cream 
colored) or a perlino. These diluted coated colors are related to 
chestnut and bay respectively. A chestnut with a single dose of the
dilution gene becomes palomino and becomes cremello with a double dose.
A bay with a single dose of the dilution gene becomes a buckskin and becomes 
perlino with a double dose. Both cremellos and perlinos are a creamy off-white 
color but the cremello has a mane and tail that are lighter than the body.
The  mane and tail of the perlino is darker than the coat color.

Chingadero's dam was Haager who is usually described as a buckskin but 
was registered as a dun. Since there is much confusion between these 2
colors, she could have been either color. Since she foaled palominos 
and buckskins but no duns, I suspect she was buckskin and not dun. In either 
case, she carried at least one type of dilution factor if not both. 

Chingadero was sired by Ketchum who was registered as chestnut but threw
a number of palominos. This is genetically impossible because chestnuts
cannot carry the "cr" dilution gene without becoming palominos or
red(claybank) duns themselves. It is possible that Ketchum's color was 
misstated and that he was actually a palomino or red dun. 

However, there is another simple possiblity. People commonly confuse liver 
and with darker shades of chestnut. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen
a liver Morgan whose registration papers didn't say chestnut!

IF Ketchum were actually a liver rather than a chestnut, he could have 
carried the dilution gene and passed it on to his foals without expressing 
it himself because that dilution gene only acts on the red hair cells. The 
liver color is produced a variation of the black pigment.

So, we have a case where the "white" horse probably wasn't white but could 
be either cremello or perlino from the descriptions. Since the horse died more 
than 15 years ago, we have to look at his breeding record to decide what color 
he was. Chingadero sired 137 foals. Their colors were black(92), bucksin(31),
chestnut(5), palomino(4) and bay(3). If he had been genetically white, half
his foals would have been white as genetic white is dominant to non-white 
colors. The fact that he sired so many black and bucksin foals indicates that
he was NOT cremello but perlino. He threw a bucksin foal out of a palomino 
mare. Since bucksin is a dilution of bay and 2 chestnut horses cannot produce 
a bay foal, this proves that he was perlino. A cremello/palomino cross could 
only produce cremellos and palominos as they are both based on chestnut. 

One thing puzzles me though. How did a horse with a double dose of dilution
genes throw solid colored chestnuts and bays? One could hand wave away the 
chestnuts and say that they were actually liver colored so they got the 
dilution gene but it wasn't expressed because they were liver. But those bays 
should have been buckskins or perlinos because Chingadero had to pass a 
dilution gene to each and every one of his get! The only explanation I can 
think of is that they were DARK buckskins which were mistaken for light bays.
Who knows?

John

    Thank you for the genetics lesson John.  It has been a long time since
    I have hear colors explained that way.  Now I guess I have to dig out
    my books and review everything.
    
    I have ridden one Morgan and a MorArab.  Both were a joy to ride and
    the MorArab (that was how the owner decribed her breeding) was excelent
    on trail.  Both were dark chestnuts.
    
    Virginia

    After the discussion of Justin Morgan's height back in April, I wrote
    the the museum which published the newsletter and asked basically the
    same questions that were asked in .17; namely:
    	1. When did a hand become standardized at 4 inches?
    	2. If it was standardized before the birth of Figure, were
           mesasuring devices generally available?
    
    They published the letter and their response in the June newsletter.
    In summary, the hand was standardized *long* before Justin Morgan was
    foaled but they aren't sure about measuring sticks until shortly after
    his death(which was circa 1820). Here's a fuller [but still shortened] 
    version of their response:
    
    "R.E. Zupko's 'Dictionary of Weights and Measures' cites sources as far
    back as 1561:'Foure graines of barlye make a fynger: foure fyngers a
    hande:four handes a foot.' A later citation reads:'1728: The Measure
    for Horses is the Hand or Handful; which by the Statute, contains four
    Inches.'
    
    Although the general acceptance of the hand equalling 4" and an inch
    equalling the breadth of a man's thumb at the root of the nail(or the
    length of 3[sic] barley corns) was evident in England prior to the reign of
    Henry VII(1485-1509), it was in 1491 that Parliament first ordered that
    standard weights and measures be constituted and nationally
    distributed.
    
    The hand standard was no doubt brought to the colonies complete...[but]
    without the wide use of standardized measuring devices, the hand was
    variable. By the mid-19th century, however, the use of a standardized
    stick was comomon in America...."
    
    John

  A friend asked me what my opinion was on the pedigree of the 
  foundation sire of the Morgan breed. She said that, while she 
  trusted my opinion, she also wanted to know what all the facts 
  were so she could understand what all the controversy on this 
  topic was about. I ended up typing a 7 page letter. So, I 
  thought I'd break it into pieces and post it here too. 

  To avoid confusion, I'll refer to the Morgan foundation sire as
  Figure rather than any of the other names he was called. When I
  use the name Justin Morgan, I am referring to the man who owned
  Figure.

  My personal opinion is that Figure was sired by True Briton and
  out of a mare by Diamond. It is likely that Justin Morgan was the 
  breeder of both Figure and his dam. It is possible that Justin 
  Morgan was also the breeder of Figure's second dam. In that case,
  the second dam is likely to have been sired by Sportsman. 
  
  Diamond was sired by *Church's Wildair, a Thoroughbred stallion and
  said to be out of a mare called Wild Air. Sportsman was sired by 
  *Ranger(aka Arabian Ranger or Lindsey's Arabian) whose pedigree is 
  unknown to me. The breeding of the dams of Sportsman, Diamond and 
  the third dam of Figure is unknown. 

  I consider the pedigree of True Briton to be unknown but that he
  was of English breeding and probably a Thoroughbred or a cob
  hunter. 

  People have frequently said that Figure must have been
  the result of a mutation to be so prepotent when his ancestry
  wasn't "pure." However, the descriptions of the stallions
  (True Briton, Sportsman and Diamond) indicate that they were 
  very similar in type to each other and to Figure. The terms used
  include: middling size, strong, thick, large chest, high headed, 
  etc. Figure's dam is described in similar terms.

  In fact, the description of all these horses is the classic 
  definition of cob: a thickset, stocky, short-legged horse. 
  Note that the definition does not say short but short-legged which 
  means that the legs are short in proportion to the horse's height.

  So, his prepotency may have come from breeding several generations of 
  similar type horses. In other words, breeding "type to type."

  My opinion of Figure's pedigree is based on the information
  about Justin Morgan, his family and Figure as well as the history of
  the debate. This information comes from several sources:
       "Morgan Horses", D. C. Linsley, 1857
       "The American Morgan Horse and Register, Vol. I(1894) &
                Vol. II(1905)"; Joseph Battell
       "The Great Justin Morgan Pedigree Controversy", Margaret Gardiner &
                 Alexander McKay-Smith, The Chronicle of The Horse, 
                 Nov. 1966-Feb. 1967
       "The Morgan Horse Handbook", Jeanne Mellin, 1973
       "Sing The Lord's Song In A Strange Land", Betty Bandel, 1982
       "Origins of The Modern Morgan", Kenneth Telford, 1988

  The next note will be about Justin Morgan.

  Justin Morgan was born in Springfield MA in 1747. Springfield MA
  is probably less than 50 miles from Hartford CT(which appears
  later in the story). He owned some land which he farmed. He
  stood stallions at stud in Springfield from 1778 until he left
  for Vermont. Most accounts present Justin Morgan as a sickly man 
  incapable of hard labor who was a school teacher. The fact that
  he farmed in an age before mechanization and the fact that he handled
  stallions suggest that such accounts are incorrect. 

  Some accounts say he also ran a tavern but, in reality, MA 
  differentiated between serving alcoholic drinks and selling liquor(i.e. 
  the difference between a bar and a liquor store). Justin Morgan's 
  license allowed him to sell liquor from his house.

  Morgan moved to Randolph VT in 1788 with his wife and children.
  Two of his brothers had already moved to VT, one to Randolph.
  Nothing has changed in 200 years. People in the 1980's moved to
  New Hampshire to escape Massachusetts taxes(when I lived in NH,
  we referred to MA as "Taxachusetts"). Justin Morgan and many
  others moved to VT to escape taxes and a general economic
  depression in the 1780's. 

  While in VT, he farmed, served as town clerk, stood Figure at
  stud and taught school, especially singing. He also composed
  music; the only surviving examples are hymns. His wife died in
  1791 leaving him with several children including a 10 day old infant.

  When his eldest daughter married at age 17 in 1793, Justin Morgan 
  was forced to break up his household as he could not care for the 
  younger children without his daughter's help. The children were 
  dispersed to the homes of friends. N.B. that Justin Jr.(who will play 
  a part in this story) was born in 1786 and was sent to live in another
  village several miles from Randolph. 

  Justin Morgan Sr. died in March 1798.

  The interest in details of Figure's pedigree did not begin until
  about 20 years after his death in 1820 or 1821. Justin Morgan
  had died in 1798 so he was no help! The basic theories on the 
  ancestry of Figure are:
      1. Canadian
      2. Dutch
      3. Grade Thoroughbred
      4. Imported cob hunter x grade Thoroughbred

  The first known printed discussion of the pedigree was in 1841
  in the Albany Cultivator magazine. A Mr. Barnard of Quebec said
  that he believed that Figure was of French Canadian origin based
  on a sworn statement by a Mr. Stearns. 

  Publication of Mr. Barnard's and Mr. Stearns comments prompted
  replies repudiating the theory of Canadian ancestry from Justin
  Jr. and John Morgan, Justin Sr.'s cousin. 

  The grade Thoroughbred theory is based on John Morgan's statements as well
  as contemporary evidence found later. An offshoot of this theory is based
  on the series of articles by Margaret Gardiner and Alexander McKay-Smith.

  The Dutch theory is based on the initial statements by Justin Morgan Jr. 
  He later repudiated his statements and essentially deferred to John 
  Morgan's first hand knowledge.

  In the 1841 discussion of Figure's pedigree in the Albany Cultivator,
  Mr. Stearns gave rise to the "Figure was French-Candaian." theory. 
  Mr. Stearns said that Figure was brought to St. Johnsbury VT when 
  he(Stearns) was 13 years old. Because he was 50 at the time of his 
  statement, he placed the date as 1804. He said that his uncle, John Goss:
          1. brought the horse over from Randolph
          2. said that the horse was Canadian and
          3. got the horse directly from Justin Morgan who had borrowed
             40 dollars from Goss and couldn't repay it. He claimed that
             Morgan gave the horse to Goss when Morgan was returning
             from a trip to Montreal where he had purchased the horse.

  Two problems: 
	1) He contradicts himself saying that Morgan delivered
	   the horse on returning from Montreal and that Goss brought 
	   the horse over from Randolph. 
	2) Justin Morgan had died 6 years earlier in 1798 and had sold
           Figure in 1795(see notes 103.15 and 103.16). Justin 
	   Morgan Jr. never owned the horse so there can't be any 
	   confusion from that quarter.

  Publication of Mr. Barnard's and Mr. Stearns comments prompted
  replies repudiating the theory of Canadian ancestry from Justin
  Jr. and John Morgan, Justin Sr.'s cousin. 

  John Morgan was a distant cousin of Justin Morgan Sr. More importantly,
  he was Justin's near neighbor in Springfield. John Morgan said that
  Figure was sired by True Briton(aka Beautiful Bay) who had been
  stood by Justin Sr. one season and by himself(John) 2 years
  later for 2 seasons. 

  John Morgan also said that True Briton was said to have been captured 
  from DeLancey who was a commander of refugee troops and rode True 
  Briton during the Revolution. John Morgan claimed that the dam of Figure 
  was by Diamond who was by Church's Wildair(a Thoroughbred stallion). John 
  Morgan said that Justin bred her dam to Diamond at the time Justin stood 
  Diamond. That fixes her foaling date as 1784. John Morgan also said 
  that he was told that Figure's second dam was a descendant of *Ranger. 
  Note that John Morgan was careful to distinguish between what he knew 
  and what he was told.

  A later letter from someone who had corresponded with John, Justin Jr. 
  and others confirmed John Morgan's statements. The grade Thoroughbred 
  theory is based on John Morgan's statements.

  Note that John Morgan's statements indicate that Justin was breeding
  from a 4 year-old mare. If Justin were also the breeder of the second 
  dam and she was a descendant of *Ranger, the fact that he stood 
  Sportsman, a son of *Ranger, in 1778 means that the second dam would 
  have been foaled in 1779 and 4 years old in 1793. While it's not 
  proof of that part of Figure's pedigree, it is plausible.

  Battell offers the following supporting evidence for John Morgan's 
  statements about the pedigree of Figure:
      1. Stallion ad placed by Justin Morgan for Diamond in 1783
      2. Stallion ad placed by Justin Morgan for True Briton in 1785
      3. Stallion ads placed by John Morgan in 1788 and 1789 in which
         he refers to True Briton as a full-blooded English horse.
      4. Stallion ad placed by Justin Morgan for Sportsman 1778
      5. Stallion ad placed by Samuel Whitman(Hartford CT) for Figure
         in 1792 which says Figure was 3 YO and 15 hands. This ad was
         canceled in late May 1792
      6. In June 1792, Randolph town tax records indicate that
         Justin Morgan was taxed for a stallion. He was so taxed
         through 1794 but not thereafter. That means JM did not own a
         stallion between June 1795 and his death in March 1798.
      7. Stallion ads placed by JM for Figure in 1793-1795. The 1793
         ad says that he had previously stood in Hartford CT. The 1795
         ad says that Figure "sprang from a curious horse owned by
         Col. DeLancey of New York."
      8. Put 5-7 together and you can see that Figure was foaled in
         1789 and JM brought the horse to Randolph VT in 1792 and parted
         with him in the spring of 1795.

  There was additional information supporting John Morgan's
  statements that Battell didn't know about. There was a 1796 ad
  for Figure. He was then owned by Samuel Allen of Williston VT
  who said the horse was bay, 15.3 and a grandson of the Wildair line.
  This is consistent with John Morgan's version of the pedigree since 
  Diamond was a Wildair line stallion.(See notes 103.15 & 103.16 for 
  more on that 1796 ad and other evidence found in Betty Bandel's 
  "Sing the Lord's Song in a Strange Land" which is a biography of 
  Justin Morgan,the man)

    re - previous inputs from John..
    
    	This is excellent information - I only wish that I could share
    	the pictures (woodcuts, hand drawn sketches, etc) that were
    	used at the 1994 Morgan Judges Seminar in Phoenix this month.
    
    	In a presentation given by Nancy Eidam the information you have
    	shared is coupled with lots of visual data... a walk through
    	history... and significant evidence that they "type" war has
    	gone on in the breed for years (and cycles).
    
    	Great job John - now we need to get videoconferencing into notes!
    
    	smiles - h

    John... Thank you; how interesting!
    

  Justin Jr. at first said that his father:
      1. Brought the horse to Randolph VT in 1795 as an untrained 2 YO
      2. Called the horse "Dutch"
      3. Owned Figure until his(i.e. JM Sr.'s) death
      4. Trained Figure
      5. Got Figure in payment of a debt that was owed him.

  The Dutch theory is based on these statements by Justin Jr. 

  From 1878 to 1880, a Mr. O. W. Cook wrote articles in which he assumed
  that the 1795 arrival date was absolutely correct and that this
  made it impossible for Figure to have been sired by True Briton.
  He referred to the pedigree given Figure by John Morgan as a 
  "rickety and incoherent fraud." 

  One of his articles in the series says that Figure must have 
  been foaled in 1793 and, therefore, a possible sire would be Young 
  Bulrock. Young Bulrock was advertised in the Springfield area for 
  the 1792 season. The ad says "Bulrock is a horse of the Dutch breed, 
  of a large size and bright bay in colour." 

  All later claims of Figure being Dutch and sired by Young Bulrock are 
  based on 1) Justin Jr.'s statement that his father called the horse Dutch
  and 2) Mr. Cook's articles. No other evidence has ever been presented.

  I have rejected the "Dutch" theory because the only evidence we
  have that Justin Morgan did in fact refer to Figure as a Dutch
  horse is from Justin Morgan Jr. In the same statement, JM Jr.
  made several factual errors(i.e. that JM Sr. brought Figure to
  Randolph in 1795 as an untrained 2 YO and owned Figure until
  Sr.'s death). To me, that invalidates the rest of statement
  including the "Dutch" part. Well, other sources confirm that JM Sr.
  took Figure in payment of a debt, so I can accept that part! The
  other sources suggest that the debt may have been from the sale
  of Figure's dam as Justin had bred her to True Briton in the
  same year he moved to Vermont. 

  I feel it is unlikely that a boy who was 6 when Figure came
  to Randolph in 1792, only 9 in 1795 and hadn't lived with his
  father since 1793 would be very accurate about events of those
  times. My doubt of his accuracy grows when I remember that he
  was recalling the events as a middle aged man some 50 years
  later. I certainly don't remember much about my father's activities
  when I was 6 to 9 years old. And I lived with him then!

  When faced with the evidence of Justin's 1793, 1794 & 1795 ads
  for Figure, Mr. Cook changed his argument. He claimed that Justin
  Morgan may in fact have owned 3 horses in VT: 1) a son of True
  Briton, 2) Figure and 3) the Morgan horse sired by a Dutch
  horse. All claims that Figure was not the "original Morgan"
  horse stem from this article.

  There is no evidence that Young Bulrock stood in the Springfield area 
  until 4 years after Justin Morgan moved to Vermont. By that time(1792), 
  he was already being taxed for a stallion in Randolph. He was never 
  taxed for more than 1 stallion in a single year and he was not taxed 
  for a stallion after 1795. Justin Morgan advertised Figure at stud 
  from 1793 to 1795. Beyond that date, he was in very poor health as 
  he died in March 1798 of a chronic and progressive lung disease. 

  Besides, Justin Morgan Jr. later recanted his earlier statements. In 
  a letter published in 1847, Justin Jr. said that John Morgan had 
  every opportunity of knowing the truth of the pedigree and of knowing 
  that they were all English blood horses. Jr. also said in that letter, 
  "His[John Morgan's] means of knowledge and the respectability of his 
  character entitle his statements to the fullest credit." He also says 
  that the circumstances of his own life may have prevented him from 
  better understanding the facts. He concludes by saying "my father
  always spoke of him[i.e. Figure] as being of the best blood."
  Justin Jr. is also reported as later having told his own son, H. D.
  Morgan, that he had confused the date of the horse's arrival
  with the date of his departure.

  To me, these facts refute the "Dutch", "Young Bulrock" and "Figure was 
  not the original" theories.

  In her 1973 book entitled "The Morgan Horse Handbook", Jeanne 
  Mellin says "the young Vermonter" called his stallion Dutch and
  that the probable Dutch sire of Figure was Young Bulrock(see preceeding
  2 notes for arguments against those theories). I also have some minor 
  problems with the phrase "the young Vermonter" as Justin was middle aged 
  and from Massachussetts(native Vermonters *really* get their hackles up 
  over a "flatlander" being called a Vermonter!) but the phrase does give 
  the flavor of romanticism that Mellin seems to be fond of. 

  In her book, Mellin also makes the statement that it would be
  "logical" to substitute Friesian for Dutch but offers no
  supporting evidence. She then spends 2-3 pages describing the
  Friesian and remarking on how much they resemble Morgans. This
  is where the "Figure was Friesian" theory came from. She offers
  no indications that there were Friesian stallions standing in
  New England or imported in that era. The Dutch turned the New
  Amsterdam colony over to the British in 1664. Without later
  importations and/or tightly controlled breeding programs, any
  Dutch horses(Friesian or otherwise) in the colony at the
  turnover would be dead and their genes would be extremely
  diluted through interbreeding by the 1780's. Mellin is well
  known within the breed as she's an artist, breeder/owner, trainer, 
  exhibitor, etc. An author with her reputation among devotees of
  the breed and who is widely read by impressionable youngsters
  should be more responsible than that(IMHO).

  You may have seen a pedigree of Figure. It was probably an
  extended version of the following:

          Lloyd's Traveller
      True Briton
          Betty Leeds
  Figure
            Church's Wildair
         Diamond
            Wild Air
      mare 
         mare by Sportsman

  That is the pedigree given by Joseph Battell in Volume 1 of "The
  Morgan Horse and Register" published in 1894. Battell used a
  lot of historical research and a bit of imagination to produce
  that pedigree. He concludes that True Briton and Diamond 
  were Thoroughbreds. Sportsman was by the Arabian stallion *Ranger.
  Battell produces extended pedigrees for True Briton and Diamond 
  going back to all the Thoroughbred foundation stock. This is the 
  extreme version of "grade Thoroughbred" theory.

  The major mistake that Battell made was to produce an extended 
  pedigree for True Briton based on incomplete and/or erroneous evidence. 
  I think this was a case of the theory defining what can be observed.

  Battell shows a lot of evidence that True Briton was captured
  from a Tory officer, Col. James DeLancey, during the American
  Revolution. He also concluded that True Briton was sired by
  Lloyd's Traveller and out of Betty Leeds and bred by Col. James
  Delancey. He found a 1791 stallion ad for True Briton which said he 
  was sired by the stallion "Traveller" kept in New Jersey and out of 
  DeLancey's imported racer.

  An aside here, there are 2 cousins named James DeLancey in this 
  story and Battell confused them. Captain James DeLancey was a 
  famous importer and breeder of Thoroughbreds. He sold most of his 
  stock and returned to England shortly before the Revolution started. 
  Captain DeLancey was the first American owner of True Briton. The 
  other cousin was Col. James DeLancey who stayed on as a British 
  officer during the Revolution. Col. DeLancey got True Briton after 
  Captain DeLancey returned to England. It was Col. James DeLancey 
  from whom the horse was stolen.

  Based on that 1791 ad, Battell went looking for a pedigree for
  True Briton. Captain DeLancey's sales inventories showed Betty
  Leeds had produced a filly foal by a horse called Lloyd's Traveller
  (from Maryland/Virginia). Battell concludes that this must be the 
  correct ancestry and that True Briton was Betty Leeds' 1768 foal. 
  Betty Leeds was the only mare in the sales inventories who was
  imported and had raced. Besides, she had been bred to a horse
  called Traveller. Close enough when you're desperate for facts
  to support your theory!

  In that same series of articles in "The Chronicle," Margaret Gardiner
  gave rise to another possibiity for the ancestry of True Briton.
  Gardiner found records indicating that James DeLancey had imported both 
  Thoroughbreds and cob hunters in the years before the Revolution. No 
  breeding of the cobs is available from the records. Actually, the article 
  says "hunters" but, in correspondence, she indicated that she had written 
  "hunting cobs" which the editor(i.e. McKay-Smith) changed to "hunters."

  A man named Andrew Corsa, who is said to have been well acquainted
  with Col. DeLancey and the horse that was stolen from him, is quoted
  as saying that True Briton was a blood bay of fine size and strength;
  that he had been told that the horse was imported from England; and
  that he had seen Col. DeLancey jump True Briton back and forth over
  a 5 rail fence for the amusement of bystanders. McKay-Smith concludes
  that this evidence supports Gardiner's conjecture about True Briton 
  an imported cob hunter.

  John Morgan's ad refers to True Briton as being a "full-blooded 
  English horse." Unfortunately, that's ambiguous. The terms 
  thorough-bred and full-blooded were *generally* used to refer to 
  Thoroughbred race horses. However, they were still occassionally 
  used to mean purebred. Without other evidence, we don't know which 
  way John Morgan meant the term.

  In his 1988 book "Origins of the Modern Morgan", Ken Telford
  speculates that True Briton may have been as well bred as
  Battell thought even though Battell got the pedigree wrong. He
  bases this statement on the fact that the name "True Briton"
  appears in the pedigree of one of DeLancey's Thoroughbreds as a
  broodmare sire. 

  That's an unconvincing argument because of the dates involved(True 
  Briton was foaled in or before 1768 and DeLancey left in 1775). 
  Furthermore, the records indicate that DeLancey bred a mare to a 
  stallion known "Waters' True Briton" which is probably a different 
  horse. In those days, many horses had the same "given" name so they 
  used the owners' name as a prefix. To me, that suggests that 
  "Waters' True Briton" was owned by a Mr. Waters and the horse was 
  so called to distinguish him from other horses called True Briton.

  So, even if Figure was sired by True Briton out of a mare sired 
  by the grade Thoroughbred stallion, Diamond and the second dam 
  was sired by Sportsman(a half Arabian stallion) with both first & 
  second dams owned & bred by Justin Morgan, there is still wiggle 
  room for True Briton to be a Cob or a Thoroughbred. 

  In 1899, a member of the DeLancey family wrote to Battell and
  pointed out that the horse was not bred by them. The letter, which
  was printed in Vol. II of the Register published in 1905, says
  that Captain James DeLancey imported True Briton from England.
  This letter invalidates Battell's extended pedigree for True
  Briton because that pedigree relied on the horse being bred by
  Captain James DeLancey while he was in New York. Unfortunately,
  the letter doesn't say what his breed/pedigree was.

  Margaret Gardiner(a noted Morgan breeder in Maine) and Alexander 
  McKay-Smith(retired editor of The Chronicle & father of Dr. Matthew 
  McKay-Smith, the EQUUS medical editor) wrote a well researched series 
  of articles which were published in "The Chronicle of the Horse" 
  magazine in the winter of 1966-67. In that series, McKay-Smith 
  questions the veracity of the 1791 ad that Battell used to establish 
  the pedigree. 

  First of all, Lloyd's Traveller had not yet retired to stud at the 
  time True Briton was supposedly foaled so Battell got the wrong 
  "Traveller." Secondly, he thinks the pedigree in the ad was a marketing 
  ploy by the new owner who had essentially the same information as Battell: 
  True Briton was captured from DeLancey, DeLancey bred Thoroughbred 
  racehorses, DeLancey sold his horses and the sales inventories were 
  published in the newspapers.

  McKay-Smith says that anyone fabricating a plausible pedigree would
  have kept it vague. The specification of the dam as "DeLancey's
  imported racer" is pretty vague. He also speculates that
  selecting the sire for this fabricated pedigree from DeLancey's
  sales inventories was a process of elimination: Forget
  *Wildair(the most famous of DeLancey's stallions) as he had many
  sons in the region including Church's Wildair!; Forget *Lath because his 
  offspring were undistinguished; that left the exalted line of *Morton's
  Traveller represented in DeLancey's stock by Lloyd's Traveller.
  So, the owner perhaps felt he could "get away" with a vague
  reference to "Traveller kept in New Jersey" even though no horse 
  called Traveller was standing in NJ.

  McKay-Smith believes that this false pedigree did not fool
  horsemen of the time. True Briton was well known in the region
  and the only previous indication of a pedigree was John
  Morgan's statement that True Briton was a "full-blooded English
  horse". True Briton had stood at various places in the
  Hartford-Springfield area in the preceding years. The 1791 ad
  was withdrawn and another ad said he would not stand the season.
  The stallion was moved to another area 20 miles north of
  Springfield and stood without pedigree. A year or 2 later, his
  name was changed to Traveller and he stood in yet another area
  *with* the 1791 pedigree. He feels that both John and Justin
  knew of the claims in the 1791 ad because John made references
  to the contents of the ad in some of his later statements about
  Figure. Justin suddenly felt compelled to add a reference to a
  "horse owned by Col. DeLancey of NY" but didn't endorse the
  pedigree by repeating it.

    I'm sure glad that I didn't ask any dumb trivia questions about Figure
    or Justin Morgan.

    I think I'll remove the Morgan horse stuff from my latest trivia
    research.  I'm currently working up another bunch of questions and
    John is no fun 'cause he already has provided all the answers!! ;>{)
    
    Carl

    Thanks! I'm glad you enjoyed all that. I tried to make it as complete
    as possible without going overboard on details(e.g. Battell spent
    hundreds of pages on the topic). Reading your replies gave me a
    big grin and that made it worth the effort.

    Very good reading.  Thank you very much.
    

Are there still any Morgan folks in here?  I'm looking for a few tips re:
what to look for (both negative and positive) in one, soundess/health wise.

Let me explain;  I am in the process of purchasing a 16 month old Morgan 
colt, pending a vet check.  What I'm interested in is if anyone has any
tips on problems to look for in the breed (such as moonblindness in Appys,
HYPP in Quarters, OCD in warmbloods, etc).  While I like this colt very
much, I'm not exceedingly familiar with the breed and am trying to get
any input I can from those more experienced with them.  

If it's any help, he is a "Courage of Equinox" baby out of a Rum Brook
(Immortal Command) mare.  These lines mean nothing to me; I'm not familiar
enough with the breed to recognize the names.  I'm not intending to breed
this fellow, and in fact will be gelding him the soonest possible moment
papers are passed.  

Thanks for any tips anyone can offer!

Linda

    Linda,
    
        I don't think there are any problems in Morgans like those you put
    in as examples.
    
        The only things that I've noticed going on in the breed tend to be
    related to how the horse will be used. Some of the show horses are
    beginning to look more like Saddlebreds than Morgans (my opinion). A
    lot of the show horses tend to have flatter croups and finer legs than 
    I'd like to see for a dressage horse. There are people who are breeding 
    more for sport horses. You didn't say what you would be using the horse 
    for.
    
        From what I remember of Courage of Equinox, he had good
    conformation and substance. I think Immortal Command was basically a
    show horse, but Rum Brook did get into sport horses, too, so it's hard
    to tell what you'd get from the dam's side. Is she available for you to
    see?
    
        Our mares come from UVM which in the old days bred for good using
    horses (especially when the farm belonged to the US Govt. and breed for
    cavalry horses). The one problem I've had with my mare is getting
    saddles to fit. She has very wide withers and a very round barrel.
    Morgans tend to have shoulders that slope back more than other horses
    which could also contribute to problems fitting saddles. I have a very
    wide tree and had my front billet moved forward. With the front billet
    in it's original position, it contributed to the saddle being pulled
    forward by the girth.
    
        Most Morgans have nice dispositions and are easy to work with and
    train. One of our mares is a bit on the hot side, but she is very
    sensible at the same time.
    
        Let us know what you'll be using the horse for and maybe we can
    provide more specific information. Good luck!
    
    						Jan

    Well Jan said most of what I would say, except that I remember Courage
    of Equinox very well. He's a really nice horse. He stands about 15
    hands and 2". Marvelous neck and back. Very soundly built horse.
    His breeder (Mr. Beatty who died about 15 years ago; last I heard, his
    widow still owned the horse) used to use Courage of Equinox as a hunter. 
    He cleared anything he was pointed at and galloped quietly in between. 
    
    I'm not sure about the dam's side. I've never seen Immortal Command in 
    the flesh but I do know his breeding. He's from a line of show horses 
    that tend to be hollow backed & high headed. They also tended to have 
    saneness(as in extra hot and spooky) as well as soundness problems. They 
    are also prone to having straightish shoulders and being somewhat 
    ewe-necked which goes with the hollow backed & high headed parts...
    
    I suspect you'll be using him as a trail horse. I'm sure Papa will
    cause no problems for your needs but I'm not sure about Mama. So, take 
    a close lookat mama and the colt before you make a final decision. 

Yes, I do intend to use him predominantly for trail, and would like
to ultimately do 50 mile endurance rides with him. Perhaps a little
jumping for fun, nothing serious, and not interested in dressage
beyond the basics that any horse should (I believe) be schooled in. 

His dam is on the same farm, and I have done several 20 mile rides in
her company over this summer.  She's not particularly 'showy', and has
a calm, level-headed, and sane temperment (the owner's 10 year old rides
her with no trouble in the least).  No history of soundness problems in
her at all.  The owner has had her since birth, and she's now 6. She does paddle a bit 
when trotting, but does not have excessive front end action.  To be honest, 
I don't recall now if I was told Immortal Command is her sire or grand-sire .
.. I'll ask again and let you know.  I did see photos of Courage of Equinox
and was impressed.  Alledgedly he was an excellent trail horse in his day
and my neighbor tell me the owner's grandchildren still ride him on trails.

Spitfire (the colt) does not show much front end action at all, but rather
moves forward nicely.  This is one of the things I thought would make him
suitable for trail.  He looks like he'll be pretty nicely balanced when
grown, and although small has good substance and conformation.  I don't
expect him to be more than 14.3 as an adult (this is good, I *like* that
size for myself). His temperment is excellent: he was imprinted at birth, 
and at only 16 mos old already clips, ties, bathes, trailers, walks along
the road in traffic, is good for the farrier, wears blankets, is started
on ground-driving, and has had a fair degree of Lyons-style roundpen 
training.  He's also going through his nippy stage, but is starting to
improve and I expect that being gelded will help more. 

Thanks for the input, I'll let you know more details on the dams
pedigree in a few days. 

- Linda

    Since you are interested in endurance riding, I'll add one other
    caution. Some Morgans are built like chunky little furnaces. This means
    that they will have a hard time dissipating heat generated by strenuous
    exercise. While Morgans have the stamina for long rides, I have read
    of numerous cases of heat prostration if they went too fast for too
    long. 
    
    Of course, proper conditioning and nutrition are part of that equation
    and I'm sure you know more about that than I do. What I'm getting at is
    that some Morgans and their owners had problems with endurance stuff.
    I'm sure that it was in part the rider/trainers ignorance but there is
    also the simple fact that Morgans are built like boilers rather than
    radiators. So, you'll have to be cautious in trianing and competition.
    
    Now, 50 miles may not be a problem. Many Morgans competed  in the GMHA 
    100 mile competitve trail ride. As you probably know, the first 2 days
    are 40 miles and the 3rd day is 20 miles, each section to be done
    within prescribed min. & max. time limits. The winner is the horse that
    most closely matches the ideal  time and comes back in good condition.
    This kind of thing is no problem for Morgans. But, a 100 mile *race* 
    where the winner is the first one over the finish line and passing the
    vet check may not suit some Morgans.
    
    j

I hear you on the 'chunky built' issue, and I'm well aware
of the problems heavier horses have disappating heat.  Spitfire
is obviously going to be built more robustly than the more
typical (to endurance) than an Arab ... although I don't think
he will be as robust as many Morgans, either.  His dam is not
especially so, nor from the photos I saw, is his sire.  If
I were looking to do endurance races at 100 miles, I would
look more to an Arab, but my main goal is 25 milers with 
the possibility of one day doing a 50 mile competitive ride;
which is ridden differently than endurance races in that
the pace is slower and they are a 'judged' situation rather
than the flat out 'races' that endurance rides entail.

I absolutely agree that your observation is correct, though!
I see many, many Morgans on the 20 - 30 milers I have been
doing the last few years.  Perhaps more so than Arabs, even.
I had orginally kind of planned to look at Arabs for my next
mount, in fact.  But I like Spitfire a lot, I appreciate
the excellent 'childhood rearing' he has had, and I guess
I've kinda fallen for his pretty face. :-)

Keep the input coming, it's much appreciated!

    >[snip] although I don't think
    >he will be as robust as many Morgans, either.  His dam is not
    >especially so, nor from the photos I saw, is his sire.
    [another snip]
    >my main goal is 25 milers with
    >the possibility of one day doing a 50 mile competitive ride;
    
    I odn't think you'll have any problem then. A lot of the Morgan
    robustness is (pardon the expresion) just plain fat! They are usually
    very easy keepers. And, you're right. As I remember Courage of Equinox,
    he was nearly a "racy" horse as a youngster even though you could tell
    he was Morgan a block away. 'Course with age, we all put on a bit of
    weight so he might be a little heavier now.
    
    My old mare, Charity and I used to do serious conditioning. I planned 
    to take her in a 25 miler but never got around to it. After we passed 
    the 9 MPH stage in the distance work,  she began to "lean out" and I
    had to start giving her grain. Before that she was getting grass hay 
    and a handful of grain to mix with her vitamin supplement. I held her
    in the lean & mean stage through the summers and she never had any
    problems. 
    
    Jan's mare, Ellie, is rounder than Charity and even that is fat, IMHO.
    Ellie got a sore throat once from tube worming and didn't eat for
    several days. Over those several days, she lost weight and looked
    almost like an Arab! It sure wasn't muscle that she lost!
    
    j

    I've also noticed what easy keepers morgans are since I got mine.  
    My Trakehner eats 4 to 5 times as much grain, (she's bigger, but not
    4 to 5 times bigger).  I quickly learned to cut down his grain, he
    gets just enough to make him think he got some, and he's still fat and 
    full of energy.  Very easy to get along with too.
    
    Sharon

    I have a 1/2 Morgan 1/2 welsh. We use him for team penning,
    roping, barrels, poles, pony rides for my young children (2 & 3),
    and long trail rides.  I almost bought a 18 year old Morgan but
    he was a little stiff.
    	The only problem is he would eat himself to death if I let him.
    "Taylor" is quite the piglet and the lead horse. 
     
    Carl
    

re: Morgans tending to be easy keepers

I keep hearing this about them, from owners on the rides I
do and now in here.  Let's hope it works out to be true in
Spitfire's case!  I hadn't thought to ask that about him
mom.  She's a tad fat right now, not having done a lot of
work over the year of having him, but she's getting back
into shape gradually.  She's pregnant again, too, so she's
a tad belly-heavy anyway. :-)  I will make a point to ask
about her feeding program, though!

I visited the colt last night, and was pretty impressed!  Conformationally he
is wonderful, and he's remarkably well-balanced for 16 months old. Hes not
a 'showy' type at all - I doubt anyone interested in a saddleseat mount would
look twice at him.  He has almost no front end action, and did not inherit his
dams paddling action either.  He moves forward freely and easily, and should
cover ground nicely.  

His temperment is very nice, too!  He demonstrated all his abilities for me,
willingly and easily.  He's done basic Lyon's style round pen work and appears
to have learned it quite well, he bathes, he clips, he walked right on a 
trailer for me, and ties perfectly, and he *loves* people.  Came running right
over from the pasture to be caught and stood quietly while his owner toyed with
fitting a brand new bridle on him (yes, he wears a rubber snaffle, too).  
He even bows on command!

Still, he's a young stud, and very playful.  When walked on a lead, he once
in awhile bounces around and fidgets, but settles with a tap on the chest from
a crop.  He's also somewhat mouthy.  His owner tells me he has shown a lot
of improvement lately, but he defineatly wants to put things, including human
body parts, in his mouth. It's not a 'vicious bite' thing, and he clearly
knows that it is unacceptable.  A slap on the nose and he squares right up (something 
else he has been taught) and stand still with a "I'm being good now!" look
on his face.  I a little concerned about this nippy stage and my inexperienced
husband, but the two will be meeting Saturday and seeing how they get along.  Im
sure being gelded would be a big help, as well as simple growing up.  I dont
expect that he'll turn into a biting 3 year old.

I also found out more about his pedigree.  Time to admit I should have payed
more attention last week.  His sire is Courage of Equinox, at least I got that
right. :-)  But his dam is not *by* Immortal Command, she is *in foal* to Immortal
Command (due next May).  BIG difference!  Her sire is 'Winbrook Gemini", and her
dam is "Gaylyn Pride".  I've never heard of either on.  I took a good look at
the dam - honestly, Spitfire looks very little like her.  From the photo I saw
of Courage, while he is not an exact replica, he does carry a strong resemblance.

So, if hubby and colt get along well on Saturday, I'll be vetting him next week!

    Linda,
    
        The colt sounds pretty nice and it seems like the owner is doing a
    good job with him. On being mouthy - you probably need to just keep on
    reminding him that it's not acceptable. Growing up and gelding should
    help.
    
        I have heard of Winbrook Gemini. He was bred by the Winches of
    Exeter, NH. He is by Merrie-Lee Venture and out of Tara Tiffany.
    Merrie-Lee Venture was bred by Evie and Wally Dennis and he is by Jesta
    Venture who was owned by Otterbrook Farm (our neighbors when we lived
    in NH). Jesta Venture was a really good carriage horse and roadster. We 
    knew or at least had met all of the people above and from what I
    remember, they basically bred for good, working Morgans. I also looked
    up Gaylyn Pride in our registries, and she is by Gladgay's Pride and
    out of Burkland Heiress, which is also very good breeding. In my
    opinion, it looks like the colt has a very nice pedigree.

    
    How can a reg' morgan be a reg' morgan if it is crossed with a
    Saddlebread?  
    
    My friend was/is interested in morgans and around the Mass/NH area that
    seems to be all their is, morgans that look and act like saddlebreads,
    but they are reg' morgans.  Is there some kind of blood % rule in the
    morgan rule book that says a horse can be a reg morgan if it has
    atleast 90% of morgan blood ??
    
    My friend has her eyes on a 4yr old Buckskin Morgan Gelding.  He is
    quite beautiful.  He is 15.3, nice body. He seems to take after the
    lippit morgans line.  He has had reining training - he's the only
    morgan we have seen advertised that did not have that saddlebread look
    and saddlebred gaits. (something we did not want)
    
    But he does have a sleek body, just like my arab.  
    
    lou 

    Hi Lou,
    I'm sure John knows much more about Morgans than I do, but...
    
    some years ago the Morgan registry was not a closed registry so
    some saddlebred blood was introduced.  Whether it was "legal" or
    not I don't know.  But I remember seeing Chasley Superman at the
    Nationals in Northampton (a LONG time ago) and I thought he was
    just about the coolest thing on 4 legs I'd ever seen.
    
    Now, over to you, John. :)
    
    gwen
    

    
    	Hi Lou,
    
    	I used to have a Morgan stallion with a show barn and there was talk
    back then that some breeders kept a saddlebred way out  back for
    occasional stud use because that was when the 'spidery' Morgans were
    in vogue. I don't know about registry details but I am 99% sure they
    were registered under a Morgan stallion's name. Obviously before blood
    typing...
    
    Sherry
    

    Saddlebred crosses were previously allowed to be registered as Morgans
    but I'm pretty sure the registry has been closed since sometime in the
    1940's. However, that most likely didn't stop some people from sneaking
    some Saddlebred crosses in until the registry started blood-typing
    horses. I've heard rumors about various Morgans being crosses but nothing 
    was ever proven. From what I've seen in the magazines, it looks like 
    people have been breeding for more of the Saddlebred looks in the Morgan 
    show horses. This is probably the case for Morgans that look more like 
    Saddlebreds today, especially now that all Morgans have to be blood-typed.
    
    From what I've seen of the Lippitt breeders, they tend to go for more
    of the old type Morgan looks. However, a lot of the Lippitts tend to be
    on the small side. So if you've found one that is 15.3, that's great!
    Hopefully it will pass vet check, too.
    
    Personally, I'd steer clear from anything that looks like a Saddlebred
    because I don't like that look in Morgans.
    
    						Jan

    
    The morgan we found is not a lippit, he just has a lippit head.  I
    think he must of had lippit in his blood lines somewhere.  I really
    like the looks of this morgan.  I have a friend here who knows alot of
    Morgan blood lines and I'm going to give her the petigree.
    
    I was just wondering about the saddlebread part.  I know for a horse to
    be a reg' Arab it must having something like 99.2% (gwen you can
    confirm the right %) to be a reg Arab.  I thought mabye the same thing 
    applied. But from the horses we looked at, they looked like they were 99.9%
    Saddlebrad with a Morgan mane. :-)
    
    This Morgan did pass a vet, so we are all set their.
    
    He's real cool looking, espcially the buckskin/dun/gruella color.  He
    is a reg Buckskin, but I would classify him more in the dun/gruella
    frame.
    
    I check the web and it says that a buckskin has no dorsil strip, and a
    Dun does.  This one has one (kinda) it's not a small black line going
    down the spine, but a wide dark mixture of black/dark/light hairs going down
    this spine - I wonder if that qualifiys as a strip? 
    
    Oh well.
    
    

    My better half said:
    "Saddlebred crosses were previously allowed to be registered as Morgans
    but I'm pretty sure the registry has been closed since sometime in the
    1940's. "
    
    1947 to be precise. Up until that time, crosses to Saddlebreds that
    had some Morgan ancestry in their pedigree were permitted under the
    so-called X-rule. There were also conditions under which crosses to
    Thoroughbreds and Arabs could be registered as Morgans. 
    
    Actually, the whole idea that early Morgans were "purebreds" is kinda
    silly. When Justin Morgan (aka Figure) was breeding, he was bred to any
    kind of mare that the owners wanted to bring to him. They ranged from
    cart horses to Throughbreds and evrything in between.
    
    When old Joe Battel published the first registry in 1897, there were
    various rules for registration. The *strongest* one was that the horse 
    had to have 1/32(i.e 3.1%) of Justin Morgan's genes...in other words if 
    the horse had Justin Morgan (aka Figure) appearing *once* in his 5 
    generation pedigree, he could be registered as Morgan. Of course, most
    of those horses had numerous crosses to Figure as many of them were out
    and out inbred.
    
    Jan also said "However, that most likely didn't stop some people from
    sneaking some Saddlebred crosses in until the registry started
    blood-typing horses."
    
    Even blood typing didn't stop it completely. There was a court case a
    couple years ago where a woman was convicted of fraud involving a
    breeding scam. Fortunately, it shouldn't happen again because the scam
    involved using a mare old enough not to have been blood-typed
    and that had never had foals (so they couldn't do any tests on her
    babies). Since all horses born after 1973 have to be blood-typed,
    odds are slim and none that anybody could try more funny business.
    
    

    Lou,
    
    >He's real cool looking, espcially the buckskin/dun/gruella color. He
    >as a reg Buckskin, but I would classify him more in the dun/gruella
    >frame.
        
    >I check the web and it says that a buckskin has no dorsil strip, and a
    >Dun does.  This one has one (kinda) it's not a small black line going
    >down the spine, but a wide dark mixture of black/dark/light hairs
    >going down this spine - I wonder if that qualifiys as a strip? 
    
    That doesn't *sound* like a strip down the spine. Most horses (even
    chestnuts) have darker hair around their spine. Actually, the
    distinction between dun and buckskin (and other dilute colors) has been
    fuzzy in the Morgan breed. For one thing, the registry takes the color
    written down by the owner on the application as the gospel truth. This
    means that an ignorant owner or one who "wants" the horse to be a
    particular color can call it taht. 
    
    There are numerous cases of horses whose breeding records (i.e. the
    color of their babies) suggest that they were *not* the color their
    owner called them on the registration application. (e.g. See Note
    103.35 < Why no white? >; P.S. The "white rule" has been rescinded 
    since I wrote that note so it's a little out-of-date with the
    registration rules.) The other thing about Note 103.35 is that the
    part that puzzled me about Chingadero's solid colored babies has been
    explained to me by a geneticist. I forgot the details of the explanation
    but it did make sense at the time. ;-)

                Snow v. American Morgan Horse Association

NOTICE: This opinion is subject to motions for rehearing under Rule 22 as
well as formal revision before publication in the New Hampshire Reports.
Readers are requested to notify the Clerk/Reporter, Supreme Court of New
Hampshire, Supreme Court Building, Concord, New Hampshire 03301, of any
errors in order that corrections may be made before the opinion goes to
press. Opinions are available on the Internet by 9:00 a.m. on the morning
of their release. The direct address of the court's home page is:
http://www.state.nh.us/courts/supreme.htm

                   THE SUPREME COURT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
                       ___________________________

Sullivan
No. 94-794

                             MAXINE W. SNOW
                                   v.
                 AMERICAN MORGAN HORSE ASSOCIATION, INC.

                            December 5, 1996

Brown, Olson & Wilson, P.C., of Concord (Howard B. Myers and Bryan K. Gould
on the brief, and Mr. Myers orally), and Sheehan, Phinney, Bass + Green,
P.A., of Manchester (Daniel J. Lynch and James E. Higgins on the brief),
for the plaintiff.

Sulloway & Hollis, of Concord (Irvin D. Gordon and Edward C. Mosca on the
brief, and Mr. Gordon orally), for the defendant.

THAYER, J. The plaintiff and counterclaim defendant, Maxine W. Snow,
appeals a judgment of the Superior Court (Morrill, J.) finding that she
committed fraud and violated the New Hampshire Consumer Protection Act, see
RSA ch. 358-A (1995), when she registered five foals as offspring of a
Morgan mare, Senora Showblez Vona (Senora). On appeal, Snow argues that the
trial court erroneously: (1) found that she engaged in fraud; (2) applied
the Consumer Protection Act to her conduct; (3) awarded damages to the
American Morgan Horse Association, Inc. (AMHA); and (4) denied her request
for a jury trial. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. 

Snow was involved in the Morgan horse business for almost twenty years.
During that time, she was a member of the AMHA, a nonprofit association
dedicated to the preservation and promotion of the Morgan horse breed. The
AMHA's primary function is to maintain accurate records of the bloodlines
of purebred Morgan horses. To accomplish this function, the AMHA keeps a
registry of existing Morgan horses which it updates by taking blood samples
from newborn foals.

In 1991 and 1992, the AMHA suspected that Snow had falsely certified five
foals as offspring of Senora. As a result, the AMHA's Registry Committee
began an investigation into Snow's business practices. Because the
investigation interfered with Snow's ability to sell the foals in question,
she petitioned for preliminary injunctive relief and requested an order
compelling the AMHA to recognize the five foals as Senora's offspring. The
AMHA filed a two-count counterclaim alleging that Snow committed fraud and
violated the Consumer Protection Act. 

After the superior court denied her application for a preliminary
injunction, Snow withdrew, without prejudice, her claims against the AMHA
and its officers. The case then went to trial on AMHA's counterclaims. The
superior court found that Snow had committed fraud and violated the
Consumer Protection Act. It awarded the AMHA damages in the amount of
$376,362.13 for Snow's Consumer Protection Act violation. This appeal
followed.

I. Fraud

Snow argues first that the AMHA failed to prove fraud by clear and
convincing evidence. We disagree. 

The scope of our review of the trial court's factual findings is narrow.
Concord Steam Corp. v. City of Concord, 128 N.H. 724, 727, 519 A.2d 266,
269 (1986). "This court will not disturb the decision of the trier of fact
unless the findings are clearly erroneous." Dimick v. Lewis, 127 N.H. 141,
144, 497 A.2d 1221, 1223 (1985). 

The party alleging fraud "must prove that the [other party] intentionally
made material false statements . . ., which [she] knew to be false or which
[s]he had no knowledge or belief were true, for the purpose of causing, and
which does cause, the [party alleging fraud] reasonably to rely to his
detriment." Caledonia, Inc. v. Trainor, 123 N.H. 116, 124, 459 A.2d 613,
617-18 (1983) (citations omitted). "Fraud must be proved by clear and
convincing evidence, but such proof may be founded upon circumstantial
evidence." Id., 459 A.2d at 618.

The trial court found the following facts, all of which are well-supported
by the record. In late May 1986, Nancy Odams, owner of Senora, was
approached by Snow's partner, Bill Thomas, who said that he had been hired
to purchase Senora for an "elderly couple." Odams agreed to the sale. On
June 22, 1986, Snow, who was introduced as a friend of the "elderly
couple," gave Odams a check for $1,200 to cover the purchase price of
Senora. The superior court found, however, that no "elderly couple" planned
to take Senora; instead, the Thomas and Snow partnership became Senora's
registered owners. 

During the next five years, Snow registered five foals with the AMHA, each
of which she represented as an offspring of Senora. The first foal was born
on April 6, 1987. Because the normal gestation period of a Morgan mare is
eleven months, that foal would probably have been conceived in early May
1986. Yet the trial court found that the earliest date that Senora could
have been purchased was May 23 or 24. Furthermore, Thomas and Snow did not
take immediate possession of the horse after their purchase as they agreed
to leave Senora with Odams until late summer. 

Odams stated that Snow and her partner had not taken actual possession of
Senora until August 1986. Additionally, Odams testified that neither Snow
nor her partner mentioned that they had inseminated Senora prior to her
delivery, and even Snow admitted that horse breeders do not go onto
another's property to inseminate a mare they do not own.

Other witnesses also questioned whether Senora could have been the dam. For
example, Pauline Villeneuve, who housed Senora at her barn in 1986,
testified that no one came on to her property to inseminate Senora in early
May of that year. Several other witnesses stated that it would be unusual
for a mare of Senora's age (twenty-five), who had never before produced a
foal, to give birth to five offspring.

Finally, other witnesses questioned blood samples on file at the AMHA. In
March 1987, Snow submitted to the AMHA's blood-typing laboratory a blood
sample drawn by Dr. Virginia Prince which Snow claimed was from Senora, and
which matched the blood sample taken from the foal conceived in early May
1986. Evidence introduced at trial, however, indicated that the dam whose
blood Snow submitted might not have been Senora. Furthermore, the superior
court found that Snow told Prince she would send the vials to the AMHA
laboratory herself, permitting the inference that Snow had substituted a
non-Morgan mare's blood for the samples allegedly taken from Senora. 

During the next four years, Snow submitted "Registration Applications" for
four additional foals, each of which she represented as Senora's foals. The
parties agree that each of those foals, along with the first foal born in
1987, were offspring of the same dam. 

In 1991, following the birth of the last of the foals, the AMHA began its
investigation of Snow. The superior court found that Snow's behavior during
the investigation was suspicious. For one thing, following the onset of the
AMHA investigation, Snow moved Senora from her farm in New Hampshire to a
location in Rhode Island, allegedly to prevent colic. When the AMHA's
Registrar made an initial visit to Snow's farm in October, however, Snow
advised the Registrar that Senora was at an unidentified "vet clinic." 

Two months later, on December 10, 1991, the AMHA's Registrar returned to
Snow's farm with a veterinarian to take a blood sample from Senora so that
it could be compared with the blood sample previously submitted by Snow
under Senora's name. Snow informed the Registrar that Senora was in Rhode
Island. She initially agreed to allow the Registrar to drive to Rhode
Island to take the blood sample, but later refused, citing the AMHA's
unwillingness to identify her accusers.

During the next seven months, the AMHA made repeated requests for hair and
blood samples from Senora. Snow refused. She never indicated that her
reason for refusing the requests was that Senora had, in fact, died; on the
contrary, she continued to indicate that the horse was alive. 

In July 1992, Snow was ordered to produce Senora for blood testing by the
superior court in a separate action brought against Snow by a purchaser of
one of the foals at issue here. Snow responded by filing a "Death Report
Form" indicating that Senora had died on December 2, 1991. The date of
death was one week before Snow told the AMHA Registrar who visited her farm
that Senora was in Rhode Island. Snow contended, however, that she had not
been informed of Senora's death at the time of the Registrar's visit.

The evidence and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, amply support
the trial court's finding that Snow intentionally defrauded the AMHA by
falsely registering five foals with the AMHA as offspring of the registered
Morgan mare, Senora. Furthermore, based on the evidence, the trial court
could have reasonably concluded that the AMHA reasonably relied upon Snow's
fraudulent registrations to its detriment by accepting Snow's registration
applications and, as a result, issuing parentage certificates for the
fraudulently registered foals. Accordingly, we cannot say that the trial
court's finding of fraud was clearly erroneous. 

II. Consumer Protection Act

Snow next argues that the trial court committed reversible error by
applying the Consumer Protection Act to Snow's registering the foals as
Senora's offspring with the AMHA. Snow essentially contends that she did
not conduct any trade or commerce with the AMHA because she never sold or
offered to sell the foals to the AMHA, but merely registered the foals with
the AMHA. We agree. 

"The issue before us is a matter of statutory construction; accordingly, we
must begin our analysis by considering the plain meaning of the words of
the statute." Gilmore v. Bradgate Assocs., 135 N.H. 234, 237, 604 A.2d 555,
556 (1992). "In so doing, we will focus on the statute as a whole, not on
isolated words or phrases." Roberts v. General Motors Corp., 138 N.H. 532,
536, 643 A.2d 956, 958 (1994). 

The Consumer Protection Act provides, in relevant part: "It shall be
unlawful for any person to use any unfair method of competition or any
unfair or deceptive act or practice in the conduct of any trade or commerce
within this state." RSA 358-A:2 (1995) (emphasis added). The statute
defines "trade" and "commerce" as including "the advertising, offering for
sale, sale, or distribution of any services and any property, tangible or
intangible, real, personal or mixed, and any other article, commodity, or
thing of value wherever situate, and shall include any trade or commerce
directly or indirectly affecting the people of this state." RSA 358-A:1, II
(1995). The consumer bears the initial burden of establishing a Consumer
Protection Act violation, which necessarily includes establishing that the
violating practice occurred in trade or commerce. McMullin v. Downing, 135
N.H. 675, 680, 609 A.2d 1226, 1230 (1992). 

In the present case, Snow fraudulently registered foals as Senora's
offspring with the AMHA. As far as the AMHA is concerned, Snow's act of
fraudulently registering foals fails to satisfy the statute's definition of
trade or commerce. Registering foals is not a transaction involving either
"advertising, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any services and
any property, tangible or intangible, real, personal or mixed, and any
other article, commodity, or thing of value wherever situate." RSA 358-A:1,
II. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's finding that Snow's
fraudulent dealings with the AMHA implicated the Consumer Protection Act.

III. Damages

The trial court awarded AMHA damages based on its finding that Snow
violated the Consumer Protection Act. The trial court acknowledged that it
did not consider what damages and attorneys' fees AMHA might have been
entitled to recover for Snow's fraud. As the trial court erroneously
applied the Consumer Protection Act to Snow's conduct, we reverse the
court's award of damages and remand the case for consideration of what
recoverable damages AMHA incurred as a result of Snow's fraud. Accordingly,
we need not consider Snow's other arguments regarding the trial court's
damage award. 

IV. Jury Trial

Lastly, Snow argues that the superior court unconstitutionally denied her a
jury trial. Snow initiated this case by filing a petition for a preliminary
injunction against the AMHA. On October 9, 1992, AMHA filed a two-count
counterclaim alleging Snow engaged in fraud and violated the Consumer
Protection Act. After a hearing in October 1992, the superior court found
Snow had an adequate alternative remedy in AMHA's internal hearing
procedures and denied Snow's request for an injunction. Subsequently, the
superior court explicitly noted in a pretrial conference report dated
January 26, 1993, that the parties had not requested a jury trial. On June
21, 1993, some seven and one half months later, Snow filed a motion
requesting, among other things, leave to file an answer and an amended
complaint, a continuance of the trial date, and an order granting a jury
trial. 

The superior court granted Snow's motion to extend deadlines and continue
the trial's date. Additionally, the superior court ruled that Snow's other
requests were "[m]oot in light of amended trial schedule and granting of
motion to extend discovery deadlines and continue trial date." Since the
court did not address her jury trial request specifically, Snow should have
requested clarification of the court's order. In any event, Snow should
have timely objected at trial to trying the case to a judge and not a jury.
Instead, Snow proceeded to present her case and submitted it to the court.
Accordingly, Snow did not properly preserve the issue below. It is settled
in this jurisdiction that "[w]e will not review on appeal constitutional
issues not presented below." Hansel v. City of Keene, 138 N.H. 99, 105, 634
A.2d 1351, 1355 (1993). Furthermore, Snow effectively waived any claim she
had to a jury trial by proceeding, without objection, in a bench trial. See
Hatch v. Hillsgrove, 83 N.H. 91, 93-94, 138 A. 428, 430, rev'd on rehearing
on other grounds, 83 N.H. 91, 96-98, 139 A. 366 (1927).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.

All concurred.