There is another deformity of the foot, chiefly of the instep, which might be called the _stub-foot_. It is not the natural short, thick foot of short, stout persons, but seem an unnatural chubbiness, made by prevention of the foot’s growth lengthwise. It is an approximation to the Chinese foot—thick and large round the ankle and instep, but short and small at the toes. There is no correct proportion between one part and another. The arch is high, but thick and clumsy, without its natural regularity and beauty. The constant cramping of small shoes, worn when the feet are young, is most probably the cause of such development, by preventing a normal and perfect growth. As the forward parts of the foot, being smaller and weaker, are more easily cramped, the increase of size is at the heel, and around and above the arch. It is a very Chinese idea of perfection which admires feet of this character. A correctly educated taste prefers to see a foot equally well developed in all its parts, and of a size _proportionate to the size of the whole body_. This is the idea of the artist, as opposed to that of the Chinaman, and has a reason for it, while the other has none. If a chance is given the toes to develop themselves before the body gets its full growth, the fault may perhaps be partially outgrown; but after that, the foot will be almost sure to keep the same shape always. The thing to be remedied, is the strange taste which looks upon feet that are abnormally small with any more admiration than would be given to a small head, or short legs, or stumpy fingers. When people who are otherwise intelligent come to see that the foot has the same right to a full and natural growth that belongs to any other part of the body, they will not cramp it with tight boots, or consider a foot of this kind as any more beautiful than a pug nose, a dwarfed limb, or any other lack of development whatever. The defect will then become the result of chance or misfortune only, instead of intention, governed by a false standard of beauty. It is not, however, intended to deny that there are many feet which are proportionally too large, made so by some occupation or habit demanding an extreme development of bone, muscle, and strength. Nature committed no mistake in their production. She made them no larger than was necessary to adapt them to the habits of their possessor, or of the parents from whom they were inherited. To attempt to improve them by cramping, is only to make them worse by distortion. They will probably decrease their size somewhat in time, if circumstances favour them in so doing; but if not, they are still no worse than big hands, big noses, big bodies, or many of those other unbalanced developments from which none of us can claim to be entirely free.