GOO ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS. 
Mr. Withers moved that £100 should be invested, and a 
portion of the remaining balance he placed on deposit. 
Mr. Silvester seconded the motion, which was agreed to. 
He- examinations. 
Mr. Wilkinson , after expressing his cordial and hearty 
thanks for the letter which the Secretary, under the direction 
of the Council, had written to him, containing their expres- 
sion of thanks for the manner in which he had performed 
the duties of the presidency during the past year, said he 
wished to draw the attention of the Council to an event that 
took place at the last examination. A gentleman who had 
been educated at the Edinburgh School, and examined by 
the Scotch section of the Board of Examiners and rejected, 
applied to one of the members of the Council for information 
as to whether or not he would be eligible for examination in 
London. The gentleman to whom he applied was not aware 
at the time that he had been rejected, and he therefore in- 
formed him that he certainly was eligible for examination in 
London. On the evening before the examination it was 
mentioned to him (Mr. Wilkinson) that the candidate had 
been rejected in Scotland, and he thought an examination 
by the English Board would be irregular, but inasmuch as 
the gentleman had gone to the expense of coming to London 
on the assurance of the member of the Council, that he was 
eligible for examination, it was considered that under the 
circumstances he might be examined. The examination, 
however, confirmed the decision of the Board in Edinburgh, 
and he was again rejected. His object in bringing the matter 
before the Council was to obtain a decision as to what course 
should be adopted in the event of a similar application in 
the future. The principal reason in favour of the re-examina- 
tion being permitted in London was, that if the gentleman 
resided in the south of England it would be a great expense 
to him to have to go to Edinburgh, but this was a considera- 
tion that the Council could take no notice of. On the other 
hand, it was intended when a candidate was rejected, that 
he should return to the school at which he had been educated. 
This, in fact, ought to be a sine qua non before re- exami- 
nation. 
Professor Simonds said the whole question resolved itself 
into a nutshell. There were not two Courts of Examiners, 
hut simply two sections of one Board. Any pupil who was 
rejected by either section was in reality rejected by the Court 
of Examiners, and he could not come before that Court again 
