654 
PROCEEDINGS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE ROYAL 
COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS. 
Quarterly Meeting of the Council, October 11, 1852. 
Present—Messrs. George Baker, Bra by, A. Cherry, Ernes, Henderson, 
Robinson, and Wilkinson; Professors Simonds and Morton, and the 
Secretary. 
Mr. George Baker, Vice-President, in the Chair. 
The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. 
Letters were read from the Solicitor of the College, respecting the claim of 
Mr. Barham, stating that that gentleman’s legal adviser had not ventured to 
commence any proceedings to enforce his demand for a return of a portion of 
the Examination Fee; and from Mr. T. Wells,of Norwich, declining, from inability 
to attend to its duties, arising from the pressure of professional avocations, the 
office of Vice-President, to which he had been elected at the last meeting. 
Mr. A. Cherry asked what steps had been taken with reference to the reso¬ 
lution of the Council, passed on the 21st of April, instructing the Board of 
Examiners to vary their divisions and report thereon to the Council. 
The Secretary stated, that he reported the notice at a meeting of the 
Examiners, and begged that it might be taken into consideration; but Professor 
Spooner urged that, as the resolution was not unanimously adopted by the 
Council, they (the Examiners) were not called upon to try the experiment 
suggested. 
Mr. A. Cherry thought the Examiners had acted improperly in refusing to 
acquiesce in the resolution of the Council, which was binding on them, however 
small the majority by which it was passed. The Examiners were consulted 
before the by-law relating to the division of the Board was altered, so that the 
Council might not run the risk of adopting a plan which would not work satis¬ 
factorily. He still desired their opinion on the subject, and would therefore 
move, “ That the Board of Examiners be directed to report on the proposal for 
an alteration in the present arrangement for Examination, in accordance with the 
minute of April 21st.” 
Professor Simonds said it was the opinion of the Examiners, that they could 
not legally try the experiment, as the by-law positively directed that there 
should be four tables, and not three only, as the resolution stated—a fact that he 
thought ought not to be lost sight of. Perhaps it would be well for the Ex¬ 
aminers to report their opinion only, without trying the experiment. 
Mr. Wilkinson contended that no examination of pupils would be legal con¬ 
ducted otherwise than as the by-law directed; and he thought the Council was 
to blame for having instructed the Examiners to vary their divisions. 
Mr. Ernes said, that the Examiners were not responsible for the illegality 
