EDITORIAL OBSERVATIONS. 359 
it a mild appellation, is an “ attack,” and an attack which has been 
neither “ provoked” nor “ deserved.” 
That the letter in question amounts to an attack , and an offen- 
sive one too, the bare perusal of it will satisfy anybody save 
Mr. Cherry “ and his partizans.” Indeed, could there by any 
possibility, after reading it, exist a doubt as to its character and 
tendency, Mr. Cherry himself, in the letter of his we this month 
publish, has cleared it up, by admitting that his former letter is 
seasoned “ with sarcasm and irony;” and this was done, he in- 
forms us, “ to induce a reply.” So that the simple circumstance 
of Mr. Gloag’s not replying to his letter was, in Mr. Cherry’s 
mind, a sufficient provocation for “ sarcasm and irony.” 
But Mr. Cherry, though he disclaims his letter being an “attack,” 
protests that — whatever he may call it — it was both “provoked” 
and “ deserved.” Provoked by what, we ask I Mr. Cherry 
answers — ‘‘By Mr. Gloag and his partizans endeavouring to 
FORCE experiments and opinions, conceived without judgment, and 
conducted without skill” What ! and is this the return Mr. 
Gloag is to receive for the labour and time, and anxious thought 
and reflexion, bestowed upon experiments made in hopeful eluci- 
dation of one of the most important and mysterious, and at pre- 
sent debated, points in the physiology of the foot of the horse ? — 
Experiments, in replying to which, Mr. Reeve, Mr. Gloag’s oppo- 
nent in opinion, has commended their author, by saying — “ Were 
it necessary, I would allude to the credit due to that gentleman 
(Mr. Gloag) for industry and perseverance, in endeavouring to 
elucidate a subject which seems to have appeared both difficult 
and novel to the experimentalist; but this has been so generally 
accorded by the profession at large, individual panegyric would 
appear superfluous* — experiments which Mr. Ernes, of Dock- 
head — certainly, for an opinion, one of the soundest men we have 
in the veterinary profession — has pronounced to be both “ able and 
well conducted,” in comparison with which his own (experiments 
made some years ago for a similar purpose) are “ only triflest.” 
After such testimonials in favour of his labours as these, and in the 
face of the accredited reputation Mr. Gloag for twenty years has 
enjoyed as an Army Veterinary Surgeon, are we to be told that his 
experiments are but “ a farrago of pseudo-experiments'?” — “ con- 
ceived without judgment I” — “conducted without skill I” Why, 
this is monstrous ! If men, pursuing scientific researches, are to 
be run down after such a fashion as this, not an individual in our or 
in any other profession is out of the reach of “ sarcasm and irony.” 
We must all of us, save Mr. Cherry, be set down as dolts and 
blockheads. 
* Veterinarian for February 1850, page 61. 
t Ibid for April 1850, page 202. 
