328 REMARKS ON THE DISCUSSION ABOUT DRENCHES. 
been praiseworthy, and his hints, to a certain extent, judicious ; and 
if so, how much better would it have been for Mr. Markham to 
have made what admissions he could, and to have fairly disputed 
that with which he could not agree 1 Instead of which, he begins 
by finding fault ; then mistates, and, by a side-wind, endeavours to 
convict Mr. Stewart of gross ignorance : and thus hostilities com- 
mence, neither party afterwards appearing disposed to give any 
quarter. 
The mixing up of such personal feeling and rancour in any 
discussion of this sort is, I take it, a serious injury to the cause 
of science. It savours too much of the spirit of those dark days, 
when Galileo was imprisoned for teaching the motion of the earth, 
and Harvey was scoffed at and persecuted for demonstrating the 
circulation of the blood. 
Mr. Stewart says, “ a bottle is better than a horn for the admini- 
stration of draughts.” I think so too, because from the smaller 
opening of the bottle there is less danger of the medicine being 
wasted, and it is an object of great importance, where strong medi- 
cine is required, that the exact dose should be given, neither less 
nor more. For the administration of gruel, when it is of no great con- 
sequence if a little is wasted, a horn, I take it, is more convenient. 
Now, though Mr. Stewart advises a bottle, surely he does not 
wish to prevent Mr. Markham or Mr. Anybody-else from having 
their bottle made from whatever material he thinks best, for he 
does not say a glass bottle. For my own part, I make use of a 
copper vessel, holding about a pint and a half, composed of two 
parts, screwed together, the upper part being bent so as to be more 
easily insinuated into the mouth. From the other part of Mr. 
Markham’s critique any one would suppose, if he had not read 
Mr. Stewart’s first letter, that he had stated that a horse was not 
dangerously ill unless he would lie down. Now this is very ab- 
surd. Mr. Stewart’s observations imply nothing of the sort, and 
therefore Mr. Markham’s remarks on this head are worse than 
useless, inasmuch as they impute the grossest ignorance on the 
part of Mr. Stewart ; and thus, though the language is not particu- 
larly offensive in itself, yet it contains the highest provocation, 
and Mr. Markham could scarcely have expected from Mr. Stewart 
a very courteous rejoinder. 
And yet, though I admit that the provocation was great, I can 
by no means admire the spirit of Mr. Stewart’s reply. He seems 
to wish, if I may so say, to annihilate Mr. Markham altogether. If 
he had been satisfied with defending himself in a more moderate 
way, he would not have been less esteemed by the profession. 
Mr. Stewart, in this his third paper, submits six points to the 
consideration of practitioners 
