THE 
VETERINARIAN. 
YOL. XXVII, 
No. 322. 
OCTOBER, 1854. 
Third Series, 
No. 82. 
DEFENCE OF MORTON'S ‘ VETERINARY 
PHARMACY.' 
To the Editor of ‘ The Veterinarian .’ 
Mr. Editor, — On looking through some of the recent 
numbers of the Veterinarian , 1 could not help thinking, when 
scanning over your review of Mr. Dun's work on ‘ Veteri- 
nary Medicines, &c.,’ with what unfairness in his preface he 
treats the author of our ‘Veterinary Pharmacy.' He tells us 
that “ during the four years in which I have lectured on 
Materia Medica, at the Edinburgh Veterinary College, I have 
endeavoured in vain to find a suitable text book for my class. 
The meagreness and inaccuracies of the published works on 
veterinary medicines, are such as to have compelled me to 
use Christisson's ‘Dispensatory,’" & c.. 
This, Mr. Editor, I conceive to be uncourteous, uncalled- 
for, and untrue ; and Mr. Dun will find that such statements 
will neither facilitate the sale of his own work, nor lessen in 
our estimation that by Mr. Morton. 
Of the ability shown by Mr. Dun, and of the care mani- 
fested in the construction of his work, I am an admirer ; but, 
I am too sensible of the great value of Mr. Morton’s 
‘ Veterinary Pharmacy,’ to admit that, on such grounds as 
those stated by Mr. Dun, he could have found any necessity 
for a compilation from the works of Professor Christisson's 
‘ Dispensatory ' and c Treatise on Poisons,’ Pereira’s ‘ Ele- 
ments of Materia Medica,’ an- ‘ Essay on the Actions of 
Medicines,’ the ‘Edinburgh Pharmacopoeia,’ Hertwig’s 
‘ Praktische Arzneimitellere fur Thievarzte,’ and Moiroud’s 
‘ Traite Elementaire de Matiere Medicale, ou Pharmacologie 
Veterinaire,’ cum multis aliis. 
Mr. Dun must, at least , admit, that, in Mr. Morton’s work 
there is originality , and that he has not merely compiled a 
xxvii. 70 
