VETERINARY OBSTETRICS. 
319 
obtain as much information as possible on these points 
early. After some discussion, the choice of subject for dis¬ 
cussion at the next meeting was left to the committee ap¬ 
pointed to regulate the affairs of the society, and the meeting 
then broke up.” 
VETERINARY OBSTETRICS. 
No. 2. 
Kirkton by Burntisland ; May 9, 18G0. 
Gentlemen, —I shall feel obliged to you to insert in your 
next number the inclosed copy of a letter, which I felt my¬ 
self called upon to publish in consequence of Mr. Gamgee’s 
remarks at Glasgow—which have been copied into your 
Journal of this month—relative to my case of “A mare de¬ 
stroyed from difficult foalingf which appeared in the November 
number of the Veterinarian for last year. 
I remain, Gentlemen, 
Respectfully yours, 
Andrew Calley. 
To the Editors of the c Veterinarian .’ 
Kirkton by Burntisland; May 9, 1860. 
At a meeting’ held at Glasgow of the West of Scotland Veterinary 
Medical Society, the proceedings of which appeared in the May number 
of the Veterinarian , Mr. Gamgee, of the New Veterinary College, Edin¬ 
burgh, expressed a wish to read a paper on “ Veterinary Obstetrics. 53 
Mr. Gamgee, during the course of his remarks, called the attention of the 
meeting to a case of malpresentation in a mare which had to be destroyed, 
as, being from home when he was called, he was not provided with proper 
instruments. He also stated, “ that the case had been protracted for a 
length of time before he saw it. 53 He further remarked, “ that he had been 
considerably misrepresented by several parties, who had brought it before 
the public through the medium of the newspapers. 33 Mr. Gamgee 3 s remarks 
refer to a case the history of which was written by me, and was published 
in the November number of the Veterinarian , last year. I am the party 
wholly responsible for the printed account, having attended the case from 
first to last, and heard and witnessed all Mr. Gamgee said and did on the 
occasion ; and as lie complains of having been considerably misrepresented, 
although he carefully evades telling his professional audience one single 
point upon which he had been so, I trust you will—not less in justice to 
me than for the important bearings of “Veterinary Obstetrics, 33 in a prac¬ 
tical point of view, the promotion of which must have been one of the chief 
and laudable objects for the institution of the Veterinary Society whose 
members Mr. Gamgee was addressing—insert in an early impression of your 
Journal the following explanatory observations. 
1. With regard to Mr. Gamgee’s statement, that the case “ had been pro¬ 
tracted for a length of time before he saw it, 33 I have only to remark, that 
