788 
CORRESPONDENCE. 
down, and so far as my observation extends this course has gen¬ 
erally reacted against the movers, and, unfortunately also, 
against the profession. 
I hope that the gentlemen who are so much interested in my 
position concerning this matter will see, from this plain state¬ 
ment of my views, that I am not opposing the advancement of 
veterinary education, or in any sense posing as the champion of 
a “ dying cause." My efforts are now devoted, as they always 
have been, to the elevation of our profession and the improve¬ 
ment of our science by a steady, normal process, which is much 
more certain in its results than any attempt to reach the object¬ 
ive point at a single bound, and especially so under the present 
unfavorable conditions. D. E. SALMON. 
SURGICAL TREATMENT OF PERIODIC OPHTHALMA. 
December 27, 1894. 
Dear Dr. Liautard: —I notice in the November number 
of the REVIEW the report of the United States Veterinary 
Medical Association meeting, held in Philadelphia, in which I 
see that the paper I read at Chicago was discussed. After which 
it stated that the sense of the meeting was “ a general lack of 
approval seemed to prevail as to the wisdom of performing a 
paracentesis for the disease." 
Will you kindly ask in your REVIEW how many, especially 
of those who discussed the wisdom of the operation, ever saw 
the operation performed on the human or equine eye, or ever 
operated themselves? To condemn or censure a new surgical 
procedure, without having had any experience in the matter, is 
not what the modern veterinarian should do. 
To elevate the profession, of which I hear so much among 
veterinarians, is in this age of progress and enlightenment, not 
to cavil at anything new , but try and improve on any sugges¬ 
tion made. 
Many an operation and invention has been scoffed at by 
educated men, for the simple reason that they were too narrow 
