360 
EDITORIAL OBSERVATIONS. 
Then again, concerning the nature and objects of the experiments, 
and the methods of conducting them — eleven of them out of the 
twenty-four, says Mr. Cherry, were “performed on dead feet,” 
and they were “squeezed in a vice” And where is such impro- 
priety or unscientific procedure in this that Mr. Gloag is to be 
taunted and held up to ridicule for it ] Has not human physiology — 
ay ! and veterinary too — obtained some of its most valuable facts 
and brilliant illustrations from experiments on dead parts? How 
was it, but through such means, that tendons came to be ascertained 
to be inelastic cords, and to be physically stronger than the 
muscles to which they respectively belong] Were the tendons not 
first dissected out of the body to undergo (like the foot in the vice) 
the mechanical trial of having weights fastened to them ] Elasticity 
is a property of inanimate as well as animate bodies, and needs not 
vitality for its demonstration. It is neither dependent upon nor 
anywise influenced by the vital force. Mr. Gloag well enough 
knew this ; and, among other experiments, found it expedient to 
place the foot in a vice, and to “ squeeze” it, in order that he 
might leave no mechanical force untried to elicit its elastic pro- 
perties : so difficult was the problem he was engaged in en- 
deavouring to solve, — the expansibility of the horse's foot. 
But, no more! We feel — we hope, at least — we have said 
enough to make it quite evident that Mr. Gloag, for his paper of 
“ Experiments on the Expansion of the Horse’s Foot,” published 
in The Veterinarian for May, June, and July 1849, has de- 
served at the hands of the profession treatment very different from 
the “ sarcasm and irony” administered to him by Mr. Cherry. 
We entreat our reader to take the trouble to peruse Mr. Cherry’s 
two letters. The first will be found in The VETERINARIAN for 
October 1849, at page 571 ; the second in the Number for April 
last, page 204. The perusal we beg of him to make will take up 
but little of his time, and will so far put him in possession of 
the bearings of the question as to enable him to decide who is right 
and who is wrong in the matter. 
For our own part, notwithstanding we have not, in the letters 
referred to, escaped Mr. Cherry’s kind remembrances, we have in 
this article contented ourselves, in return, with plain and truthful 
statements. Our weapons have been arguments, not words, we 
being quite content to let the affair rest upon its own merits. 
Mr. Gloag, much to his credit and praise, has refrained from 
entering into contention. And as for Captain Hely, since he merely 
stepped forward in defence of Mr. Gloag, he is altogether out of the 
professional controversy : the letter containing the “ sarcasm and 
irony” having been published a month antecedent to his entering 
the ’field . 
Here the matter must end. We cannot insert any more com- 
munications. 
