VETERINARY REFORM. 
580 
it may be remedied, are topics interesting 1 to the whole profession. 
We were previously “sunk low enough in the scale,” and could 
ill afford to lose more ground. 
These matters have been w r armly,but we think, on the whole, 
very fairly taken up by the two Army Veterinarians. We know 
them both;—w r e know that they are too honourable to assert that 
which they do not themselves believe to be true, and that, if 
need be, they are ready to defend, in their ow r n names, what they 
have said; otherwise no anonymous communication should have 
been admitted on such a subject. If these writers have been 
inaccurate in any portion of their statement—if the picture has 
been too highly coloured—if blame has been unjustly attributed 
to any institution, or to any individual—the pages of our Journal 
are at the service of the aggrieved, or of their defenders; but the 
defence must bear the real signature of the w r riter, or we must 
be put in possession of it. The correspondents of The Veteri¬ 
narian shall never act the part of assassins, nor shall one line 
appear which the author w ould be loath to own. 
On this principle w r e have declined to insert the letter of 
“A Constant Reader.” We think that he has mistaken the 
meaning of the gentleman to whom he alludes; but, at all 
events, his language is too strong for an anonymous and unknown 
correspondent. 
We need not say that the confidence reposed in us would be 
sacred; but the possession of the names of our correspondents is a 
pledge of honourable intention on their part, which our own re¬ 
sponsibility and the interest of the profession entitle us to demand. 
We have always ranked our friend Mr. Brown, among the 
steadiest friends of veterinary reform, and have been assured 
that he possesses 
“All that the contest calls for; spirit, strength, 
The scorn of danger,” 
and that he would be the last to deprive us of that most impor¬ 
tant of all the means of war, “ united heartsbut in the present 
state of veterinary affairs, w e should much doubt the good result 
of “a public meeting, in London, of passed veterinary surgeons.” 
The actors and speakers in the disgraceful meeting of July 22, 
