398 ON THE PRESENT STATE OF VETERINARY AFFAIRS. 
measures, and not men, that I oppose: it is the ridiculous suppo- 
sition that veterinary knowledge is not to be obtained out of a 
college that I would level the artillery of my objections against. 
On this part of my subject 1 could say much more, but I, for 
the present, forbear ; and would farther observe that, as to the 
preparatory, classical, and subsequently veterinary education, 
necessary to be possessed before commencing business, we all 
know that the disciples of the old school have as great a share 
of these qualifications as ever those of the new schools have, and 
that, too, in consequence of the general diffusion of education 
and knowledge now spreading among all classes of society. Of 
course, there may be, and, doubtless, are, a few exceptions to 
this general rule ; but, then, we are not so weak as to suppose 
that an ignorant clown, or any other pretender, however great 
his impudence, and however great the ignorance of his employers 
in some solitary cases, can ever successfully compete with a 
clever, intelligent, and practical man of a more respectable cha- 
racter : to suppose he can, is, at least, to reflect on the good 
sense ana increasing knowledge of general society. I will 
now conclude, Sirs, by simply stating that I regularly take your 
Journal, and do give you credit for the general impartiality you 
evince in the insertion of articles from your various correspond- 
ents, and, therefore, hope you will oblige me by inserting this 
communication in your next Number. 
I am, Sirs, 
Your’s respectfully. 
We are so far from entertaining any objection to the insertion of 
Mr. Bull’s letter, that, on the principle of audi alterarn partem , 
and on the score of our own feelings prompting us to act so, 
we should conceive it not only a piece of injustice to him, but 
irreconcileable with our own principles, to refuse it a place in 
our Journal. We, therefore, give the communication publi- 
city ; but, in doing so, Mr. B. must permit us to tell him, we 
wish he had a little more regard to common courtesy of ex- 
pression. Mr. B. must know, as well as ourselves, that neither 
acerbity of expression nor metaphor constitutes argument; and 
were it not that we would not be guilty even of seeming in- 
justice or partiality, we tell Mr. B. frankly that, on account 
of having used such a mode of expression — bordering, in- 
deed, on personality — we would have rejected his letter alto- 
gether. 
As it is, we feel confident no member of our profession will 
have it in his power to say, 
Pudet haec opprobria nobis, 
Et dici potuisse, et non potuisse refelli. 
