340 
DEONTOLOGY. 
the former privately. But frequently no error in judgment 
has occurred, and still the consultant must differ in opinion 
from the attendant in order to gain favor with the client. 
It certainly is amusing in some cases to observe the extent 
to which this diversity of opinion is carried. If the attendant 
is treating a wound with dry antiseptic dressings, the con¬ 
sultant will order poultices. If poultices have been used in 
the first instance, then they are rapidly condemned, and strict 
antiseptic measures prescribed, not forgetting any amount of I 
probing, etc., and a display of antiseptic solutions and different 
dressings to catch the eye of the client. If hot applications 
are being applied they are changed to cold and vice versa. If 
the attendant has enjoined strict rest for the patient, the 
consultant will order exercise and vice versa. 
But it is in cases of obscure disease that the consultant 
has the best chance of showing his superior knowledge. Per¬ 
haps the attendant has very properly given a guarded diag- ; 
nosis after a careful examination of the patient; the consultant 
has hardly entered the stall before he gives a blunt opinion, ji 
no doubt or difficulty exists in his mind as to the nature of 
the case or its proper treatment. Of course this is bound to 
be different from that given by the attendant, and with the 
result that the consultant is put down by the client as being 
a very clever man, “knows what is wrong with a horse as 
soon as he looks at him” is what we are often told. 
If the patient lives the consultant gets the credit, and in 
all probability the client in addition. But if the patient dies 
and an autopsy is held, a very different state of affairs comes 
to light and the man who indulges in “ bluff” or “lightning 
diagnosis” is shown up in his true colors. 
Similar remarks would apply to cases of lameness. Here 
the consultant has great scope, because he sees the result of 
the attendant’s treatment, and his opinion of course will vary 
according to the original diagnosis. If the horse goes sound 
ultimately, it is the consultant that cured him, and no credit 
is given to the power of nature or the influence of rest. 
Can we wonder why veterinary surgeons dislike consulta¬ 
tions and only have recourse to them at the express wish of' 
