740 
REMARKS ON ACTUAL CAUTERY. 
article on the method of firing, I read, much to my surprise, 
that in cases of ringbone, ossified cartilage, quittor, farcy, thick 
legs, &c., the writer fired to the depth of an inch — deep in- 
deed, and I should say deeply overdone. Surely, if sloughing 
of the parts and permanent blemish were to he dreaded at all 
after the application of the actual cautery, it would be in inch- 
deep firing. Will practical experience elsewhere, even of 30 
years’ standing, bear out such testimony ? Is it, I ask, in 
accordance with the teaching of the present day ? I venture 
to say, No. We fire for what? To effect, if possible, a cure, 
the operation acting as* follows : — By applying the heated 
iron to the surface of the part affected, we may be said to 
produce (as Mr. Wilson says), a greater inflammation than 
that existing in the diseased part ; and as two inflammations 
cannot go on together with the same strength, so this greater 
inflammation prevents to a certain extent the action of the 
lesser, and consequently the further growth of the diseased 
structure. But would this be the case in firing to the depth 
of an inch ? Take ringbone for example. By going to such 
an outrageous depth, we should bury the cautery-iron in the 
very substance of the diseased structure, and thereby increase 
instead of diminish the inflammatory action existing in the 
part ; and surely if sloughing might not be expected to follow 
such an operation as that, then I think we may give up 
our fears of it ever taking place in connection with the use of 
actual cautery. 
Secondly, we look forward to the operation producing a 
bandage (and, I contend, a permanent one), giving support to 
the affected part and its surrounding tissues, and when this 
has taken place, then we have done all that is necessary as 
far as the use of the firing-iron is concerned. Cutaneous 
firing, if I may so express myself, is, I consider, all that is 
required in bony or bursal enlargements, sprained tendons, 
and thick legs ; and never would I in any one case inten- 
tionally divide the skin. But exceedingly more surprised was 
I to find in the article in question, that 30 years’ experience 
still advocated that most barbarous of all practices, firing for 
“lampas,” an operation cruel as it is needless, an operation 
that every member of our profession should look upon as 
ignominious to his calling. If ever the intervention of the 
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals is neces- 
sary, it would be in such a case as this, which is more severe, 
equally absurd, and infinitely more cruel, than the operation 
of cutting dogs’ tails or docking horses ; these are instan- 
taneous operations, while the other is one of slow and useless 
torture, reflecting unquestionably discredit upon the operator, 
