ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS. 301 
Exemptions. That bill, he said, had cost the Council £129 
and it was, to him at least, a measure of very questionable 
policy. It had the effect of shutting out many country prac¬ 
titioners from that eclat (I) which frequently attended their serv¬ 
ing on parish offices; and he wished the meeting to consider 
well whether the obtaining such a bill would really benefit the 
profession. In his own opinion it would not. The serving on 
parish offices made men extensively known, and often led to 
practice which otherwise would slip through their fingers. 
Moreover, there were certain paid offices from which such a bill 
would exclude them; offices which, he was sorry to say, the 
profession in many instances had abundance of time to fulfil. 
Mr. Pritchard said he was surprised to hear the remarks 
made by Mr. Cherry, seeing that the general feeling of the 
profession was most averse to the acceptance of parish offices. 
He was sure there was not a member of the profession within 
twenty miles of London who did not dread the possibility of his 
being called upon to act as overseer; the office of churchwarden 
was bad enough, and that of a juryman was ten times worse. 
(Hear.) The object of the bill was one that was universally 
desired among the profession; and, for himself, he should be 
ready to subscribe ten times the amount of what he had hitherto 
subscribed if it could be in any way obtained. 
Mr. Burley said he had been engaged in obtaining signatures 
to the petition in favour of the Exemption Bill, and had, there¬ 
fore, had a good opportunity for ascertaining the general feeling 
of practitioners in the provinces. That feeling was an unani¬ 
mous one in favour of the bill; indeed, he did not know a single 
member of the profession who did not express himself strongly 
on the point. It not unfrequently happened that veterinary 
surgeons had to go fifteen or twenty miles to the assizes, and 
serve four or five days on the jury. He thought they were en¬ 
titled to relief equally with the medical profession. Medical 
men did not seem to think it a benefit to be dragged into parish 
offices; and he saw no reason why it should be regarded as a 
privilege to the veterinary profession. 
Mr. Braby said he thought Mr. Cherry was labouring under 
a mistake in supposing that the bill was a prohibitory one. If 
veterinary surgeons were desirous to serve on juries or as 
churchwardens they could still do so; the bill only exempted 
them from the obligation to fill these offices. 
Mr. Dickens thought the bill would have the effect (a very 
desirable one) of letting the public know who were veterinary 
surgeons and who were not. (Hear, hear). 
Mr. Stanley bore testimony to the general favour with which 
the bill was regarded by the practitioners in Warwickshire. 
