ON DRENCHING HORSES. 
109 
This administration of drinks, however, is the general practice with 
us. I have seen thousands of them given, but I have never seen 
any harm arising from them ; at least, I have never seen bronchitis, 
much less death, as their result. 
I admit that Mr. Mavor is a man of very great experience ; he 
is in very extensive practice, and deservedly stands high in his 
profession; and all this was in favour of the horses : but still they 
had the drinks; and if drinks were as dangerous as Mr. Stewart 
would have the world believe, neither Mr. Mavor, nor any one else, 
could have prevented the access of bronchitis and of death. 
1 flatter myself that even Mr. Stewart will be convinced that 
the danger of which he was in fear exists nowhere but in his own 
imagination. The eight horses of which he speaks either died of 
bronchitis brought on by various causes, or they were suffered to 
droop and die without treatment or care, when, probably, the 
greater part of them might have been saved. This, however, is 
not the question at issue. Mr. Stewart’s 400 drinks are quadru- 
pled, and not a horse dies or is injured. His defence, therefore, 
completely fails. 
I will not enter into any comparison as to the general propriety 
of the administration of balls or drinks. I only contend that the 
latter have been old and faithful servants, and must not be disposed 
of in the summary way in which the Professor would deal with 
them. In cases of tetanus, when the mouth is closed and balls 
cannot be administered, liquids may occasionally be introduced into 
the mouth. In cases of constipation, and in cases of superpurgation, 
one drink is worth many a ball, on account of the speediness and 
the certainty of its action. The hours which may be gained at 
these times by the use of the old drench are often golden hours. 
In inflammation of the lungs I have, again and again, witnessed 
a far quicker, and more desirable and more durable impression 
made by the medicines being given in a liquid than a solid form. 
But I will not press this, nor will I enter into a consideration of 
the objectionable points which his second letter, not addressed to 
me, contains. 
I am sorry to see this gentleman in such a sad ill-humour. It 
cannot serve his cause, nor can it benefit the profession. 
He desires me to “tell him what I think.” Then, I do think that 
his doctrine about drenches, coming from a person standing so high 
in the profession, and expressed so strongly and so unguardedly, is 
likely to do a great deal of mischief. I do likewise “ think” that the 
terms “ sculking coward,” “ practised liar,” “ canting hypocrisy,” 
savour a little too strongly of the vulgar tongue, and are neither 
becoming an instructor of youth, nor the representative of the 
veterinary profession in the Andersonian University of Glasgow. 
VOL XII. P 
