4.)8 THE IIODDESDON AGRICULTURAL INSTITUTION. 
are they to be looked on ? Is it intended to make this institution 
a nucleus for a new veterinary school, or what can the object be ? 
Look at it in whatever light you may, it still presents an injurious 
aspect. It is detrimental to those who may be unfortunate enough 
to be imbued with a smattering of one of the most complex pro- 
fessions in existence ; complex, because embracing the study of so 
many animals different in structure, habits, liability to disease, 
and requiring each a distinct knowledge of the effects of remedial 
agents; hence it must prove to those who can have but a very 
small rudimental idea, not a benefit but a positive evil, knowing 
enough to do harm, but not enough to remedy. The axiom that a 
man is better who can merely read and write than one who can- 
not, does not hold good with the sciences ; for here, unless a man 
is capable of discriminating between cause and effect, he is in an 
infinitely worse position than being completely ignorant. For ex- 
ample — for the epizootic raging a few years ago, a crude form of 
treatment was drawn up by the principal professor of the Veteri- 
nary College, and adopted and promulgated by the Royal Agri- 
cultural Society. It was eagerly taken up by stock-keepers, and 
what followed? — the almost complete expulsion of the regular 
practitioner, who understood the nature of the malady, and was 
beginning to combat its ravages. And did the advantages of non- 
expense in the treatment save the stock-keeper any thing? On 
the contrary, it proved a fruitful source of loss, as has been since 
amply proved. From the mode of treatment being unsuitable to 
the malady, from local circumstances modifying the disease, from 
its application at an improper stage, or from general mismanage- 
ment, the result has been a very much larger number of deaths than 
would otherwise have occurred, and left in those that recovered 
a state of disease which is, even now, but too apparent. This 
must, to a great degree, be attributed to improper treatment and 
management. The same result can alone be looked for, from the 
attempt at making the agriculturist his own veterinary surgeon. 
It may be urged that “experience” will come, after a time, to his 
aid. Delusive hope ! but his purse will be inevitably emptied in 
the vain effort. 
It may be thought that the having some knowledge of the subject 
will make men more efficient aids to the veterinary practitioner. 
This is a complete fallacy. A little knowledge gives an itch to be 
dabbling and interfering, which is hard to be overcome, and hence 
there will be a constant warfare in the animal’s body between the 
mode of treatment adopted by the regular practitioner, and the 
crude nonsense of the ill-qualified. This is no ideal picture, as it 
is unfortunately too often proved. On the other hand, is it just 
towards a body of men who are devoting their lives, their health, 
