VETERINARY MEDICAL SOCIETY. 
497 
Mr. ./. Percivall. —Most certainly; for some horses with tho¬ 
rough-pin will perfectly stand their work; others will not bear 
much rattling about. 
Mr. W. Percivall. —The case of windgalls would illustrate what 
he meant. A horse was not unsound because he had windgalls: 
it depended on their size, and connexion with the joint. 
Mr. Henderson. —This'doctrine being admitted, would often place 
the surgeon in unpleasant circumstances. He is expected to give 
a decided opinion—Is the horse sound or unsound: a contingent 
opinion would be unsatisfactory, and good for nothing. 
Mr. Youatt imagined, that the only way in which we could come 
to a conclusion on a subject so extensive and complicated,—so 
interesting to the veterinarian, and compromising so frequently 
his professional reputation, was to confine ourselves at first to the 
principle of the thing—What was unsoundness ?—was it or was 
it not that which Mr. P. described, not merely altered structure 
of a part, but impaired function,—or, if the function was not at 
present impaired, how far were we justified in considering whether 
the altered structure might soon produce impairment of function? 
—What was the rule by which we were to be guided in dis¬ 
charging the duty we owed our employer ? 
Mr. Field agreed that we should understand each other as to 
the principle of the thing—What is soundness? Mr. P. had cha¬ 
racterized some altered states or conditions of certain parts of the 
frame as constituting unsoundness, others as being perfectly con¬ 
sistent with soundness; other cases he had described as dependent 
on circumstances; and yet he had said that there was no inter¬ 
mediate # state, and that the horse was either sound or unsound. He 
coincided with Mr. Coleman’s opinion of soundness, but he did not 
understand it as Mr. Percivall seemed to do. He considered any 
alteration in the structure of a part, which at the time interfered 
with the function, or which in a certain or definite period led to 
alteration of function, as unsoundness. The duty of the veterinary 
surgeon was, from his previous experience to determine whether 
that alteration of functure would ensue. There might be a great 
variety of altered structure, without any alteration of function; in 
all such cases the horse would be sound. He agreed with the 
view of Mr. J. Turner; if a horse has spavin, unsound—but with 
the consent of the seller conditionally : otherwise unsound. 
All horses with blood-spavin have been condemned by some as 
unsound; but the fulness of the joint is very different in differ¬ 
ent horses. No two persons have the bursm of the ancle of the 
same dimensions, yet action and strength may be unimpaired. 
The rule which he would adopt is, that all horses with alteration 
of structure which does not interfere with the function of the part, 
