THE ACTUAL CAUTERY IN VETERINARY PRACTICE. 551 
and thereby be rendered useless ; or to submit him to the or- 
deal of the operation which I recommend, and thereby in all 
probability effect a cure. I would say to all those who protest 
against it because it is cruel, like Othello, “ I that am cruel 
am yet merciful.” Indeed there are many occasions where 
we are called upon to be “ cruel in order to be kind.” Some 
also object to firing on account of the marks or “ scores ” 
which it leaves behind. There is certainly good grounds for 
this objection, if the operation is slovenly or unskilfully per- 
formed, and consequently sloughing of the integument occurs, 
and a disagreeable looking bare surface remains. But I con- 
tend that the operation, if skilfully performed “ secundem 
artem,” does not leave any marks objectionable to the sight. 
Indeed many gentlemen in the hunting field have not the 
slightest objection to the marks left by the firing iron, and 
some even think them ornamental as well as useful. 
It is said that “ prevention is better than cure,” and so it 
is, in the general acceptance of the term ; but then, again, 
there is an old adage, “ There never was a rule without 
an exception,” and this will apply to the unnecessary, and 
consequently cruel, practice of firing young horses for imagi- 
nary or possible diseases. The owner or groom thinks there 
is a weakness or enlargement of some part or parts, which is 
frequently the seat of lameness, and to get rid of the sup- 
posed defect, puts the poor animal to the cruel (in this case) 
torture of firing. I have frequently observed this circum- 
stance in reference to horses imported into this country from 
Ireland. Now, I have a decided objection to the operation thus 
employed, not only as regards the unnecessary pain inflicted 
on the animal, but also because, in nineteen cases out of 
twenty, the imaginary evils which present themselves to the 
eyes of the owner or groom are nothing more than the efforts 
of nature to enlarge or strengthen the growth of those parts, 
and if the animal had not been interfered with at the time, 
the operation would never have been performed, simply be- 
cause it would at length have been discovered that there was 
no occasion for it. In talking of cruelty to animals, I beg 
to mention my idea of the intervention of the Society for the 
Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in suppressing the opera- 
tion of cropping dogs’ ears and cutting their tails. I think 
they are unnecessary operations, and I cordially agree with 
the Society, and will do all in my power to assist them in their 
endeavours to abolish such proceedings. In reference to the 
cruelty of the system , I think you will all agree with me that there 
can be but one opinion on the subject. The foregoing remarks 
will equally apply to the operation of docking the horse. I 
