176 
THE COMPARATIVE EFFECT OF THE 
bone (the latter doubtful), in every case in which the cautery is 
used, the seton would be equally or more effectual in its results. 
In injuries and sprains of the suspensory ligaments [hear this, 
trainers of race-horses!] he gives it a decided preference; and 
vouches for its efficacy in opened joints, and where, afterwards, 
the joint had lost much of its suppleness ; and in the thecee of 
the legs, after inflammation is allayed. In fact, for the space of 
twenty-five years he has abandoned the cautery ; and he disclaims 
having heard any thing to induce him to return to it in the argu¬ 
ments of its most earnest supporters. On hearing this, I am dis¬ 
posed to exclaim— Floreat seta! 
A few questions and answers—and these of a simple but deci¬ 
sive nature—terminate the discussion on these interesting sub¬ 
jects. Mr. Turner asks the President whether he had ever 
practised deep firing on any part ? He answers in the affirma¬ 
tive. I have,” he says, “put the cautery lesions fairly to the 
test'^ He is again asked by Mr. Turner, whether he had 
performed it within the last ten years ? He does not answer this 
question direct, but assures his audience that the periosteotomy 
knife will do all that is required to be done, and that he should 
not fear beginning the world again, and limiting his practice to 
this particular line. As to his recommendation to the students 
to ask the opinion of a surgeon as to what he thought of firing, 
as a usual surgical measure,” I think that is irrelevant to the 
subject before us; forasmuch as, from the peculiar sensitiveness 
of the human frame, it is a means of cure which would not be 
endured, except in extreme cases, such as the bite of a rabid 
animal ; although I doubt not its efficacy in many, which we 
may infer from the service rendered by the caustic, which, with 
its brother corrosive, is termed “ artificial fire.” On being 
pressed by Mr. Turner— another prick of the spur I —the Presi¬ 
dent does not pronounce the seton infallible; and the debate 
concludes with an assurance from Mr. Thomas Turner—backing 
that of his brother—that, in the hundreds and thousands of cases 
of deep firing in their practice, he had not to record one case of 
death, or of any great casualty. A staggering affirmation this ; 
but where is the man to disprove it ? 
I have only now to offer a few concluding observations on the 
statements which I have already commented upon. Here are 
the leading members of a most useful and an honourable profes¬ 
sion, with a professor of their art at their head, contending for the 
individual fame of two of the most important therapeutic agents 
in all veterinary surgery; and according to the evidence produced, 
the merits of one are declared not generally equal to those of the 
other, although the suffering to the patient is said to be less. I 
