282 
PROFESSIONAL ETIQUETTE. 
To Mr. Jones’ request for a second opinion I returned, of course, 
a ready assent; accordingly, by his wishes, you were sent for to 
advise. After hearing my views and treatment, you thought pro¬ 
per to make no comment on either, but after a few general obser¬ 
vations took your leave. Upon returning to the stable I was sur¬ 
prised to hear from Mr. Jones that you had intimated your intention 
of attending to the horse : a piece of information which, while it 
astonished, also grieved me; not from any importance I attached 
to the case, but from the somewhat unprofessional character of such 
a course. I believe it is usual, where the opinion of a practitioner 
is sought in addition to another in attendance, for a mutual con¬ 
sultation on the merits of the case to result; and if the new comer 
can adduce any reasoning which shall be calculated to throw ad¬ 
ditional light on the pathology or treatment, it becomes, I pre¬ 
sume, the office of the practitioner in attendance to adopt such pro¬ 
ceedings as shall be unitedly agreed upon. But I assure you, that 
the remote possibility of a professional man of some years’ stand¬ 
ing in public estimation quietly and without any comment taking 
a case from another’s hands, never for one moment entered into my 
imagination. 
I have preferred taking, in the first instance, this private method 
of giving you an opportunity of explaining your motives rather 
than bring the matter before the public, though, for my part, I can¬ 
not see any circumstances which could possibly justify such a mode 
of procedure. 
I remain, Sir, 
Yours obediently, 
G. T. Brown, Y.S. 
Copy of Letter from Mr. Mavor. 
In reply to Mr. Brown’s letter, Mr. William Mavor has to say, 
that he was not requested to consult with any person whatever 
relative to Mr. Jones’ horse. The details of the case were related 
by the owner, who considered that the horse was becoming worse 
under the treatment he had been subjected to, and consequently he 
felt dissatisfied. 
Mr. Mavor has no motives to account for, as he had nothing to 
do with Mr. Brown beyond ascertaining from him the nature of 
the treatment employed. 
41, New Bond-street, April 12, 1849. 
