50(3 
VETERINARY SCIENCE DEFENDED. 
be it what it may, it is plain enough to any man that notions 
so bad in theory, and highly injurious in practice, may, for a 
time, and within narrow limits, live, supporting a precarious being 
on the corruptions and imperfections of the credulous portion of 
mankind. There is one thing we do know, at all events, that agi- 
tators of such topics as those which lately gained insertion in 
The Veterinarian will not fail to reap the just recompense 
of reward in the condemnation which every virtuous and right- 
minded man, every lover of science, every true admirer of the 
advancement of useful knowledge, and, consequently, social hap- 
piness will feel if not pronounce against him. If any doctrines 
can, such as these will justify every horseman, every sportsman, 
every farmer and head of a stud in denying them access within 
the precincts of their stable. What else can be expected, if their 
hand be against every useful man ? 
1 ask again, what opinion any rational man in sober common 
sense can have of the practicability or utility of their position? 
Are they not convicted of having laid before the world the de- 
tails of a system which, by their own confession, are degrading and 
injurious to society, and destructive of the interests of the agri- 
culturist ? Are we not told that non-certificated practitioners can 
teach, nay, do teach, anatomy, physiology, and pathology equally 
as minutely and scientifically as taught at college; and yet the 
sum and substance of this study they call doggrel nonsense, 
occasioning them to become modernized smatterers, disgusting 
to any man of ordinary discernment. These assertions they 
make as if with a sense of infallibility. What childish argu- 
ment! ‘were there ever assertions more diametrically opposite to 
truth, or more palpably inconsistent with science ? Can a man 
be taught anatomy and physiology and avoid learning the tech- 
nicalities ? Impossible : it implies a contradiction in terms. 
Are we not told that ignorance and error are preferable to edu- 
cation? that a non-educated, mal-educated, non-diplomist, a 
quack, an empiric, is more rational, knows more, and is conse- 
quently decidedly better calculated, and better qualified to prac- 
tise the art of a veterinary surgeon than a man of education, a 
man enlightened at the Veterinary College, a diplomist ? But 
this is trifling with language. Can a man who has never been 
instructed in disease duly estimate its various changes, or be 
fully competent to vary his treatment with the nicety required, in 
order that his practice may be more appropriate and beneficial to 
the then particular circumstances of the case? No; nor is he 
capable of seeing that his very remedy is aggravating the disease, 
and occasioning increased and unnecessary pain ; and which he 
looks upon with a pleasant eye, regarding it as a favourable omen. 
