416 THE MEANS OF PREVENTION. 



The question we have to consider is one of expediency, not of 

 State-rights. No one denies the right of each State to a veterinary 

 school if properly endowed and controlled. What I do, however, 

 emphatically assert is, that such a system is not in the interests of the 

 citizens of any one State, section, or whole country. There are some 

 thirty-eight States in our Union at present, with every prospect of a 

 constant numerical increase for many years to come. Being now 

 thirty-eight, if this plan were to be carried out, there would be that 

 number of schools. Even though these schools were regulated by the 

 respective States, one may positively assert that there would be even 

 less uniformity in reference to the term of study and examination 

 requisite than at present nominally exists in the numerous private 

 medical schools. It is useless to suppose there would be much if 

 any uniformity. The legislators in the different States would never 

 look upon these questions with such unanimity as to lead to any 

 great similarity between the schools. In fact, as the case at present 

 stands, there are scarcely any legislators, among the great number 

 of men at present occupying such positions in the different States, 

 that are sufficiently educated with reference to the history of veteri- 

 nary medicine to legislate sensibly upon the subject. Another ar- 

 gument, and one of the strongest, is, that unanimity in veterinary 

 schools is even more necessary than in human. Unless it exists — 

 unless the education and term of study are the same in each State — 

 how will it ever be possible to attain that oneness of purpose in all 

 States which we have shown to be absolutely necessary for the con- 

 trol and prevention of animal pests? This absolutely necessary 

 end will never be attained by State schools. State schools can turn 

 out good practitioners, but, for the above reasons, they would never 

 turn out men properly educated for State purposes. State schools 

 would mean State laws ; yet every one who knows anything admits 

 that State laws for the purpose we are considering would be almost 

 worse than useless. The manner of instruction would vary ; the 

 students would be led to look upon the pathology of the contagious 

 disease from too many stand-points. We should soon have the coun- 

 try divided up into about as many opposing cliques as there were 

 schools, each jealous of the supremacy of the other, and, although 

 State schools, we should find the contemptible rivalry for students 

 which now disgraces the medical schools. There being no hope that 

 the standard of education would be the same in each State, cer- 

 tain States would have to make laws to protect the graduates from 

 their own schools against the competition of graduates of inferior 

 schools in neighboring States. Further, there are not competent 



