48() 
'SIR. MAYER IN REPLY TO MR. C. CLARK. 
profession. We took up the gauntlet which you threw down—• 
we quietly, and, we trust, gentlemanly, expressed our doubts 
upon the subject, by calling upon you, not to prove assertions 
made *‘some ten years ago,’^ but as our resolution, ‘‘ambiguous,” 
as you are kind enough to call it, expresses, to prove, by a refer¬ 
ence to well-authenticated facts, the statement made by you and 
inserted in The Veterinarian in Mai/ last. 
Such being the plain facts of the case, we were surprised, 
knowing with what nice gentlemanly feelings your breast is actu~ 
ated, and how careful on all occasions you are lest an inadvertent 
word should tax others with doing what, perhaps, they had not 
done, and what they did not intend to do, to find ourselves 
charged with having “ the simplicity to require” you “ to defend 
assertions made ten years ago by a reference to present opinions, 
changed from what they then were.” Sir, we have perused (as 
requested by yourself) the resolutions again, and we certainly do 
not find any such assertion, nor can it be implied; nor do we find 
that we “ distinctly accused the Professor of having veered round 
and changed the doctrines which he pertinaciously promulgated 
thirty years before.” God forbid that we should accuse any man 
of changing his opinions: on the contrary, believing as we do, 
that every man is a student in his walk through life, constantly 
striving after, yet never arriving at perfection, we should con¬ 
sider that his investigations had led to little profit, did they not 
either tend to the establishment of new principles, or to the over¬ 
throw of old ones, if borne out by facts and experience: and 
sooner than censure a man for adopting that which he believes 
to be the truth, to the overthrow of his former opinions, we think 
that he is entitled to the highest praise. 
But, Sir, you further state that, by allowing that Professor 
Coleman’s opinions have undergone considerable alteration and 
modification, we have “nonsuited ourselves.” What! have we 
proved that the word College no longer commands respect ? 
Have we proved the failure of all Mr. Coleman’s patents, and that 
the peculiar theories which he enforces with most weight and 
vehemence are almost uniformly true when exactly reversed? 
We are obliged to you for your kind and considerate remarks 
on our objects, and on the friendly feelings by which we are ac¬ 
tuated towards Professor Coleman. It is not our intention to 
inform you whence we derive our information on veterinary mat¬ 
ters ; suffice it to say, we do not obtain it from The Lancet: and 
we will stake our character and reputation for the truth of the 
statement which our resolution contained. 
You say, that it is the body of the profession which has 
changed; you truly say this in one sense of the word. It has 
