CORRESPONDENCE. 
55 
and are withal so unanswerable, that silence respecting them, a strict adherence to the 
stifling system, has been hitherto considered the safest policy; were it not so, there 
are means of reviewing any work : condemn it if wrong, praise it if deserving, or let 
extracts speak for themselves if it be difficult to analyze ; but, as late events may 
have shewn, it will no longer serve to affect ignorance or indifference, for both the 
public and pupils are aware that there is better information without the College-walls 
than within them. 
I am, Sir, 
Your obedient servant, 
Charles Clark. 
PS. — This correspondence is as yet between ourselves, and you can act as you think 
proper; but if one part is published without the whole, with the exception of this 
postscript, or any garbled statement of it given, as far as regards myself, l will take 
prompt measures to rectify the matter. I am not to be bullied or cajoled. For years 
I have forborne to expose your Journal; and when I conducted the opposition periodi- 
cal, in the year 1828, you had no reason to complain of its conduct; but there is an end 
now to the immunity you have hitherto enjoyed. Peace or war are indifferent to me. 
4G, Grove Street, Camden Town, 
19th December, 183G. 
Sir, — In the last number of the “ Centaur,” I meet with the following accusation, 
to which your name is appended : that “ there are not a few useful and important dis- 
coveries of your’s in the veterinary art which it has been the particular effort of the 
Veterinary College and their periodical to say as little about as possible, and to con- 
ceal and keep from being known, through a miserable petty jealousy, and fear of ex- 
posing more conspicuously their own very numerous and flagrant mistakes and blunders. 
And in noticing your works, they have cunningly, and for purposes of misleading, at- 
tached consequence to those deemed by you of but trivial value, in order to keep out 
of sight the more important ones ; the performance of which had been to you a work 
of long-continued and real labour, — the other but of truly little ; in this way misleading 
people.” 
Now, Sir, as to the accusation that The Veterinarian is the hireling of the Col- 
lege — for such must be your meaning if you have any — it is false , and you know it. 
We have both been opponents of the College, and I will tell you the difference between 
us. I have attacked its abuses of every kind; your opposition has had direct or indi- 
rect reference to the neglect of your “ not a few useful and important discoveries.” 
My opposition necessarily led to very considerable pecuniary sacrifice — your’s tended 
to the sale of your publications. I am not accusing you of being sw ayed by this calcu- 
lation, but I am stating the obvious result of our mode of proceeding. 
You complain that your “not a few useful and important discoveries” are not ac- 
knowledged. 1 will tell you, Sir, one reason, and a principal reason, for this. — No 
one likes to review your works. The work on Biting (qu. ?) the Horse has been sent 
to four different persons to be reviewed, and they have successively refused. Its last 
journey was one of some hundred miles, and it is not yet come home ; but it has baen 
