ACTUAL CAUTERY AND THE SETON. 23 
frame, I shall pass over this evidence with merely observing that 
the bias leans towards hot iron rather than to cold steel—at all 
events towards fire. 
Mr. Simonds commences cautiously, and very properly ob¬ 
serves that the merits and demerits of either operation cannot 
be decided in one discussion. Like a man of sense, however, 
he then proceeds at once to results ; and, after admitting the 
superiority, at all events the efficiency, of the seton, in a few 
certain cases, strikes a fearful balance in favour of the iron. In 
fact, he all but condemns the seton in toto as a substitute for the 
actual cautery. 
Mr. E. Braby acknowledges the importance of the subject in 
debate, and gives the result of his experience, which is greatly 
in favour of the iron, for all cases of lameness; allowing credit to 
the seton in acute disorders of the body, which I imagine every 
one admits to be its due. 
Mr. Hutchinson speaks only of the bone spavin, but speaks 
very boldly ;—I should be inclined to say, too boldly. He says 
he had horses (query, how many ?) under his care with spavin, 
which he had fired in the usual way (query again, what is the 
usual way’^ ?) without any good efect. He then had recourse 
to the seton, and they became sound. Here we have a triumph 
for the seton, and I rejoice much at it; for I was not aware that 
horses could be thus cured, wholesale, of what I have hitherto 
considered one of the most incurable diseases to which they 
are subject; and it is, unfortunately, by no means an uncommon 
one. 
Note .—If the reader will turn to article “ Burning,’’ in the 
Encyclopaedia Britannica, he will see some curious facts of the 
effects of fire on the human body—such as in the cure of colic, 
violent head-ach, swollen legs, &,c. 
We next find Mr. Spooner—high authority—complimenting 
Mr. Mayer on his essay, but, with the diffidence that invariably 
accompanies first-rate talent, declining to jump at any conclusion 
on the points at issue. The merits of each are, however, very 
clearly stated. The cautery, he says, is consideredy and as such 
have I ever considered it, a powerful counter-irritant, a local de¬ 
pletive, and eventually a mechanical bandage. The seton, he 
tells us, is advocated as a counter-irritant, and more especially 
as a depletive; but with regard to its effects as a bandage he 
believes it to have no advocates. Here, then, it would appear, 
that the balance at once is in favour of the actual cautery, the 
benefits being in proportion of three to two. This delusion, 
however, if Mr. Spooner’s theory be correct, is soon dispelled ; 
for we are almost immediately informed, and this on the result 
