LONDON VETERINARY MEDICAL SOCIETY. 
337 
To the Editor of “ The Lancet .” 
Royal Veterinary College, 2d May, 1836. 
Sir, 
You have probably seen The Veterinarian for the 
present month, containing, what the Editor of that Journal is 
pleased to designate “ A Faithful Narrative,” but which I con- 
sider in most respects a very partial and garbled, as well as un- 
true statement of the occurrences which have led to the resignation 
of the three gentlemen who held, among them, the offices of Pre- 
sident, Vice-President, and Treasurer, Secretary, and Librarian of 
The London Veterinary Medical Society. The au- 
thor of the Narrative in question, with the affected candour 
which partisans in disguise frequently assume, tells us that, “ if 
the Narrative has not been told with perfect accuracy, the error 
shall be promptly rectified but he seems to forget, or to wish 
others to forget, that a month must elapse before the “ prompt 
rectification” promised can possibly take place ; and that as in 
the meantime the General Annual Meeting of the Governors of 
the Institution will take place, the “ faithful,” alias the partial 
and garbled, “ Narrative” may pass current for and be received 
as a true statement. It is to prevent this evident manoeuvre 
that I beg the favour of your giving insertion to this hasty letter. 
You will observe, it is stated that Mr. Vines was ousted from the 
office of Librarian, and Mr. Morton elected to it, by a majority of 
One in 1831. I am not personally acquainted with the facts which 
actually occurred upon that occasion ; but I confidently believe, 
and it will hereafter be proved, that Mr. Vines was most unfairly 
ousted, and Mr. Morton most unfairly elected to that office ; and 
that there may be no doubt as to who it was that tore up the bal- 
lotting tickets upon that occasion, I beg to add my belief (but it 
shall hereafter be proved), that Mr. Morton was the person who 
so tore them ; and that he did so, not for the purpose, as is ridi- 
culously pretended, of preventing Mr. Vines from seeing who 
had voted against him, but to prevent several members who had 
demanded a scrutiny (and who suspected Mr. Morton might pos- 
sibly have made some mistake in checking the ballot in his own 
favour) from having such demand complied with. Unfortunately 
for Mr. Morton he was prevented from destoying the whole of the 
ballotting tickets, for a dozen of them was saved, seven of which 
are favourable to Mr. Vines. 
As the writer of the “ faithful Narrative” quotes the “ records” 
of the Society, I will only mention here, that they were kept by 
Mr. Morton, the person directly interested in having them ap- 
pear favourable to himself and unfavourable to his opponent. 
The author of the “ faithful Narrative” says, “ that his inform- 
