188 ON LAMENESS IN THE HOCK JOINT, 
colour of these and other parts ? These are hints which, if re- 
quired, I will fill up. 
In respect to the fine-spun theory, I simply beg to protest, that 
Mr. Spooner has not proved that similar changes take place 
here as in navicular lameness: there is, therefore, still the theory 
without the facts to rest upon ; it is not enough to say they are 
similar in appearance, “ The Authorities” will not allow that 
these sulci “ are instances of abrasion and absorption of sub¬ 
stance Mr. Spooner is bound to prove it. 
Mr. Spooner has accounted for his not quoting correctly, but 
he has not answered my questions as to his proof that the lame¬ 
ness did not arise from inflammation in the bones which pro¬ 
duced the slight exostosis: he has given his opinion, but I 
have taken leave to differ from him, and expect explicit answers 
and proof that he is right. I alluded to the plate with the 
astragalus and calcis connected together in reference to the 
alleged minuteness of Mr. Spooner’s examination ; and whether 
in the one case, or in the other, does not alter the position of 
the argument, because if, as Mr. Spooner contends, ulceration 
takes place in the form he represents in one joint, why not in 
another; and he was bound to have examined the articulations 
between those bones before he could demonstrate that there 
w'as no disease there, and be entitled to take “his degrees as 
Professor of Logic.” Mr. Spooner attempts to make it appear 
that his first description of his case, in 1830, conveys the idea 
of the ridge of the tibia being down; but in my humble 
opinion it is as logical to suppose that the cartilage had never 
been there, as to suppose that it had been removed. jMr. Spooner 
gives us another specimen of his logic, by comparing my infer¬ 
ence in regard to there being no appearance of friction on the 
astragalus, and that as there was none, there could therefore be 
none on the tibia, to be somewhat like Tenterden steeple being 
the cause of Goodwin Sands. Now, I w'ould simply ask Mr. 
Spooner, if he believes that the articular surface of the tibia 
could be so rubbed on the articular surface of the astragalus, as 
to produce the appearance of friction on the one and not on the 
other? For my own part, I think that, if the head of Tenterden 
steeple had been rubbed against any other head, they might, if 
they had been large enough, and of proper materials, have been the 
cause of Goodwin Sands, notwithstanding Mr. Sj)Ooner’s far¬ 
fetched simile. “But if (ah! that little word 2 '/]^ Mr. Dick is 
altogether wrong in his persuasions with regard to this case, is 
it not likely that he is equally erroneous in his ideas of the other 
cases that I have described ? ” Really, this is perfect trifling. If 
Mr. Dick is wrong, why does Mr. Spooner not prove it? has he 
