ROYAL AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY OF ENGLAND. 
31 
had said with respect to the diseases of cattle. He knew that 
there was a great number of lambs and calves which died yearly, 
notwithstanding that medicine was administered; and therefore it 
struck him that that must arise from something in the pasture. 
A number of sheep also cast their lambs without being diseased ; 
and he himself was disposed to think that this was occasioned by 
the red-wort or poppy. Now, it appeared to him that if some 
gentleman acquainted with botany were sent to different parts of 
the country to examine the pasture, it would be much better, and 
more likely to produce benefit than any thing that could be done by 
doctors. He thought thev would do more good by preventing the 
evil than by curing it. He hoped, therefore, the attention of the 
Society would be directed to the subject, and that some experiments 
would be made. 
Mr. Cherry said that too much was expected of the pupils who 
attended the Veterinary College, and that, instead of expecting 
them to make themselves proficient in the two branches of the 
profession — namely, that relating to horses, and also that relating 
to cattle — it would be much better that the pupils should be 
allowed to make their election for the one or the other, and to 
graduate for the one which they preferred. He thought that by 
adopting that system much good would result. 
We cannot refrain from noticing a statement, as incorrect as it 
was uncalled for, made by Professor Sewell at the annual meeting 
of the Royal Agricultural Society on Saturday last, to the effect 
that, in procuring a lecture on the diseases of cattle to be delivered 
at the Society’s rooms, “ the Society had taken the first step in the 
right direction;” and he hoped “they would receive the support of 
the Society in aid of the Veterinary College.” He repeated the 
remark, that the Society “ had taken the first step in the right 
direction.” What could have induced Professor Sewell to make 
an assertion so unfounded in fact we cannot possibly conceive. 
The Society has in seven years contributed £200 per annum (a 
sum of £1400) to the funds of the College, and the first useful 
return it has received is the lecture of Professor Simonds. We 
wish Professor Sewell would point out any one single advan- 
tage which has been obtained in return for that large sum of 
money. In our opinion, the only t( step in the right direction” on 
the subject which the Society has taken is that by which it has 
determined to discontinue a payment which has hitherto produced 
no good results. There is talent to be found in the veterinary 
profession, as Mr. Simonds has shewn by his lecture; and we doubt 
not the Society will be able to “take a step in the right direction” 
for engaging that talent upon some practically useful objects, when 
