220 
EDITORIAL OBSERVATIONS. 
The imputation attempted to be cast upon us for support¬ 
ing our colleagues we are content to leave unnoticed, only 
observing that we trust we shall always be able conscien¬ 
tiously to give them our professional support; and in the 
case in question the opinion expressed by Mr. Varnell was 
in perfect accordance with our own. We do not envy the 
state and condition of that mind which can find itself ready 
to condemn those who labour to produce unity and co-opera¬ 
tion among men who are associated together to promote a 
public good. Vain boasting we repudiate, and, as such, we 
regret to observe that it pervades Mr. Dollars communica¬ 
tions throughout. If a man’s professional reputation hangs 
on such a slender thread as this, its destruction is no less 
certain than quick. We can but admire the modesty of 
Mr. Dollar, as being akin to the whole proceeding, in telling 
us that we are yet ignorant of the symptoms which denote 
the existence of glanders! Ignorance, however, deserves 
pity, not censure; but what are the deserts of studied ambi¬ 
guity of language, put forth to mislead the uninitiated ? Will 
Mr. Dollar inform us why he has preferred to call the 
cicatrices left on the septum nasi , by the healing of the ulcers, 
abrasions? Of course there was nothing studied in the 
selection of this term, any more than there was in the 
request made to Mr. Mavor to speak lightly of the indica¬ 
tions of the horse having had glanders in its acute form. 
We are content, however, to let the letter of Mr. Mavor, 
which we give elsewhere, explain this part of the transac¬ 
tion. 
With reference to the curability of the disease, we could 
hardly have supposed, w r hen we penned the remarks, that 
“the healing of the ulcers in the nostrils, and the diminution 
of the enlargement of the submaxillary glands, were the very 
cases to deceive the man of boasted specifics,” that Mr. 
Dollar would apply the remark, in all its truthfulness, to 
himself. It seems, however, that his acumen has led him to 
do so, and he being thus content, we have no right to enter 
our protest against the act, as it affects only his own indi¬ 
vidual interests. 
