INTRODUCTORY LECTURE. 
605 
Caliph Omar burnt the famous Alexandrian Library, on the 
grounds, that if the books it contained agreed with the Koran 
there could be no need of them, and if otherwise, they ought 
not to exist. Those were the dark ages, when all learning 
was confined to a few individuals living within cloisters or 
monasteries, and the veterinary art was but little cared 
for. 
But -with the revival of letters, and the introduction of 
printing, this, in common with the other branch of medicine, 
was soon again raised into importance. Time, how r ever, the 
great innovator, has wrought its changes here as well as 
elsewhere. A separation of the professions has taken place, 
and schools are now established both at home and abroad, 
where instructions are given in both divisions of medical 
science. And this, doubtlessly, has been as much the result 
of necessity as of choice, while the advantages each has 
derived from it are too obvious to require any comment. 
I need not stop to particularise, but almost every European 
state has its school of veterinary medicine. The French, who 
were the first in modern times to take this matter up, have 
also formed one in Egypt, and there is, or was, one in Moscow. 
America has been even slower than England in this respect, 
and, except that a school has been lately opened at Montreal, 
in Canada, I am not aware of there being one in all that vast 
and influential territory. The United States is without one. 
Surely a splendid field is here. 
But it will be asked, what have these schools done? Is 
quackery less rife than it was ? I answer, no, not a whit ; 
and it will be a long time, if ever, ere empiricism v r ill cease 
to exert its baneful influence over medicine. With an un- 
blushing front, it takes its stand as boldly, in this, our day 
of advancing science, as ever it did, nor does it in the least 
fear exposure. And hear what a high authority, John 
Hunter, says on this subject. “The uncertainty of cures, 
both of physic and surgery, gives the hardy and ignorant 
empiric frequent opportunities of exulting over science. 
Ignorance is rash and fearless ; knowledge is always cautious 
and circumspect. The first amidst much mischief, now and 
then boasts a random cure ; the other, though active where 
there is a prospect of success, is frequently restrained by the 
fear of doing harm. At the same time, by this caution, and 
a proper view of the bounds of art, the rational practitioner 
enjoys much secret satisfaction, and has frequently, in his 
turn, ample cause of triumph over empiricism.” 
But has not superstition given way under their enlightened 
influence ? I fear not, if reliance can be placed on what from 
