THE 
VETERINARIAN. 
VOL. L FEBRUARY, 1828. n®. 2 . 
TO OUR CORRESPONDENTS. 
IN our examination into the state of Veterinary Periodical 
Literature, in the First Number, in hinting at the presumable 
and even palpable advantages possessed by such works in ge¬ 
neral over the single and occasional productions of individuals, 
we offered as one reason (and perhaps it is the one upon which 
we may most safely repose)—because the latter is solely de¬ 
pendent upon the labour and ability of one or two persons, 
whereas the periodical is mostly the product of the contributions 
of many.’’ Now, pray, who are the many? The many we had 
in our eye at the time we penned the word, are those indi¬ 
viduals who have ' already-—so early—favoured this Journal, 
and those who may hereafter do so, with communications ; to 
them it is that are addressed the observations that follow, not 
doubting but, upon a serious, deliberate, impartial examina¬ 
tion of the subject in their o\vn minds, in all its bearings and 
relations, they will approve of the course about to be taken to¬ 
wards establishing The Veterinarian upon a basis, no less firm 
than respectable in itself, no less creditable than advantageous 
to the Journal, to the Science, and to the Profession. 
The value of Correspondents to such miscellaneous publica¬ 
tions as the present, has been felt to be such at all times that 
Editors in general may be said to make it an important part of 
their study, to discover by what means and in what ways they 
are with most success invited to flock around the standards to 
which, from profession, interest, or caprice, they do, or choose 
to, respectively belong. We have nothing to do in this account 
with those anomalous beings who, perverting their own under¬ 
standings and running counter to common sense, profess to 
know more by instinct than others do or can by learning and 
VoL. I.—No. 2. D 
