THE EDINBURGH VETERINARY COLLEGE. 
529 
remarks he made to the Highland and Agricultural Society, would 
tend to make it appear it was so ; the protest it seems, from that 
gentleman’s showing, was not against chemistry being taught to the 
class, but against the class being examined on chemistry. The 
difference between the two statements, in their practical effect, is 
rather a fine-drawn one; for whether a protest is entered against 
a subject being taught, or against the pupils taught being examined 
as to their knowledge of it, the result as a guarantee to the public 
will be found to be the same; for in the present day no man who 
is taught a particular subject has a right to expect to have it taken 
for granted that the subject is properly understood, unless means 
are afforded of testing him on it. 
But the learned Doctor not only asserts that Professor Dick did 
not protest against chemistry being required to be taught to his 
class, but that he actually awarded a medal to that student who in 
the first year of his studies should undergo the best examination on 
chemistry. Now to this assertion I give a “ most unqualified 
contradiction.” Professor Dick did not give a medal to the student 
who should undergo, in his first year, the best examination in 
chemistry. I had not the pleasure and satisfaction of having two 
colleagues to bear me out on this occasion, but I find no despicable 
one in the report of the examinations given in The VETERINARIAN 
for June: that report, after alluding to the medals given by the 
Highland and Agricultural Society, two of which were for che- 
mistry, not one only, as mis-stated by Doctor Mercer, states, 
“ Professor Dick also awarded the following prizes: Silver medals 
to Mr. Bownan, for the second best anatomical preparation; and 
to Mr. William Walker, by the united suffrages of his fellow 
students, for the best answers and general proficiency exhibited at 
the public weekly examinations of the class ;” and then mentions 
others awarded by Dr Wilson for proficiency in chemistry. This 
report was evidently drawn up by the authorities of the Edinburgh 
Veterinary College themselves, or by some of their friends and 
coadjutors. “ In charity” — I quote this opportune expression from 
the doctor’s own letter — “ in charity,” it is to be hoped it did. 
not emanate from the author of that letter himself ; as, if it did, so 
great is the discrepancy between these two statements, that well 
might the worthy Professor exclaim, as so many have done before 
him, “The Lord deliver me from my friends, and 1 will defend 
myself from mine enemies.” 
A mis-statement on the ground of mis-apprehension of words 
spoken is neither pleasant nor desirable ; but a mis-statement on a 
matter of fact, that might have been easily verified, is not only more 
condemnable in itself, but it is just possible that it may be supposed 
to give colouring to other matters mixed up with it. 
VOL. XVIII, ' 4 c 
