681 
ROYAL VETERINARY COLLEGE, 
PROFESSOR SEWELL’S CONDUCT TOWARDS A REPORTER FOR 
THE PRESS. 
To the Editor of “ The Veterinarian .” 
I AM surprised at the statement contained in your Journal of 
last month. When the Crown so far recognizes the press as to 
retain a person in the capacity of court newsman attached to the 
palace — when the Parliament waves the prerogative of which the 
legislature has always been severely jealous in favour of the short- 
hand writers for the newspapers — and when in Courts of Justice 
accommodation is provided for the reporters of the different jour- 
nals, it might be thought Mr. Teuten, as a member of a recognized 
body, had a legitimate claim to respect. If on the score of his 
profession, however, he had no claim as an individual, he must 
have been entitled to the civility which ought to regulate the 
actions of men in the ordinary transactions of life. Unless the 
narrative given of his expulsion be false — and it is so attested 
that it bears the character of truth — the proceeding is an insult to 
the public affecting established rights and recognised usages; and 
will you pardon me if, on so serious a subject, I endeavour to ascer- 
tain why the outrage was committed 1 
The Journal, as the representative of which Mr. Teuten appear- 
ed, is not notorious for its slanders or famed for its scurrility. It 
has never been convicted of libel ; nor am I aware that it has ever 
closed its pages against those who supposed they had any injury 
to complain of. It is fairly conducted ; and as a public organ has 
forfeited no right that appertains to the body of which it is a mem- 
ber. Of The Veterinarian as a journal there could exist no 
reasonable cause for fear ; but, as the organ of the profession to 
which the College belonged, it might advance substantial claims, 
such as could not be impugned or negatived. Most important is 
it that the public should be informed of the proceedings of those 
gentlemen to whom the responsibilities of education are confided ; 
and most essential is it that, in your capacity of Editor, you should 
be acquainted with every fact on which there is a possibility of 
your being hereafter called upon to comment. 
I cannot conceive that Mr. Sewell will be able to justify his 
conduct. Neither on the occasion of the address, the place where 
it was to be pronounced, nor the position of the gentleman who was 
to deliver it, can I find any reason palliative of his behaviour. To 
the opening lecture of a session the invitation is considered gene- 
ral, and the doors are then free to all who may please to enter. 
The custom is established, and of it I have frequently availed my- 
self: therefore I am unable to suppose the peculiarity of the occa- 
VOL. XXI. 4 Z 
