404 
EDITORIAL OBSERVATIONS. 
soon, we trust, to have their questions satisfactorily answered. 
The Bill passed, members of the “ Body Politic and Corporate” 
will find themselves in a position enviable to those who do not 
belong to that body ; since it must be plainly understood, “ that 
members of the said Body Politic and Corporate, solely and ex- 
clusively of all other persons whomsoever, shall be deemed and 
taken and recognised to be Members of the said Profession, or 
Professors of the said Art, and shall be individually known and 
distinguished by the Name or Title of Veterinary Surgeons,” &c. 
And that no other persons, we may add, whomsoever and what- 
soever, will be included in the said Bill now before Parliament. 
We hope next month to be able to speak in terms of congratula- 
tion to the Profession on the successful progress, or even the 
passing, of their much desired Bill. It was read for the second 
time in the House of Lords on the 19th of last month. 
Since the above has been in type, the Bill passed the third 
reading in the House of Lords, on Tuesday last, the 24th ult., 
and was read for the first time in the House of Commons on the 
following day. 
In our present Number appear no less than three letters on 
the “ Status or Respectability of the Veterinary Profession,” in 
reply to two anonymous communications ; one of which — ori- 
ginating the matter — appeared in our Number for April last, 
and was subscribed “ a Sporting Surgeon the other, in our 
publication for last month, subscribed “ a Veterinary Surgeon.” 
One of the letters, Mr. Dickens’, reached us at too late a date 
in April to obtain insertion — as probably was the intention of 
its writer — in our May Number, which, in some measure, ac- 
counts for its apparent lateness of reply to that of the “ Sport- 
ing Surgeon.” 
We have as “ great an aversion” to anonymous communica- 
tions as Mr. Pritchard or any of our correspondents can have, 
and particularly when they relate to matters other than are 
purely scientific. This constitutes a question, however, in 
which Editors — who, like ourselves, are not at all times placed 
by their “ correspondents” in a position to be fastidious or saucy 
— on occasions find themselves in a difficulty which way to act. 
