248 
REPLY TO THE STRICTURES OF 
A REPLY TO THE STRICTURES OF MR. FINLAY 
DUN ON HOMCEOPATHY, 
WHICH HAVE RECENTLY APPEARED IN A WORK OF HIS, 
ENTITLED ‘ VETERINARY MEDICINES, THEIR ACTIONS AND 
uses/ 
By W. Haycock, V.S., M.R.C.V.S. 
“ The import of the discourse will, for' the most part, if there be no 
designed fallacy, sufficiently lead candid and intelligent readers into the 
true meaning of it.” — Locke. 
Sir, — In the c Veterinarian ’ for the month of April, of the 
present year, your numerous readers have doubtless perused 
a review’ of a book, entitled ‘Veterinary Medicines, their 
Actions and Uses/ by Mr. Finlay Dun, V.S., and Lecturer on 
Materia Medica at the Edinburgh Veterinary College. In 
this book I find the author has ventured to attack the tenets 
of the new 7 medical doctrine, which is popularly known to 
the world as the Homoeopathic ; and as you, Mr. Editor, have 
selected those passages of the work which bear upon this 
question, and have caused such to be printed entire, probably 
from the supposition that they contain a something which is 
not only pithy, but very damaging to the new doctrine, I 
trust you will favour me with a portion of space in your next 
journal, and I will endeavour to prove that Mr. Dun has 
entirely misrepresented the principles of Homoeopathy, that 
he does not, in fact, even so much as comprehend those prin- 
ciples in a degree at all approaching the truth of the matter. 
[ should not, Sir, have troubled you with the present letter ; 
but I thought it probable that Mr. Dun’s remarks may pre- 
vent some individuals from examining for themselves into 
the principles of the new doctrine ; and thus deprive them- 
selves of practical aids of the most paramount importance, 
not only to themselves, but to the public in general. The 
first requisite to the full appreciation of a new truth, is the 
clear understanding of it ; and I assume it as an axiom, that 
ere an individual can rightly expound the principles of the 
new doctrine, it is first necessary that he, the expounder, 
should clearly understand such doctrine himself. I trust, 
therefore, that Mr. Dun will not consider me discourteous, 
when I inform him that he has taken upon himself the posi- 
tion of an expounder of the Homoeopathic doctrine, and that 
