MEDICAL EXAMINERS AT VETERINARY BOARDS. 601 
sibility under which. I spoke when I drew attention to the 
wrong we were doing our science in this country, by appoint¬ 
ing medical men to offices which veterinarians have every 
right to hold, I have no other course open to me than to 
assure the profession that I wholly and entirely decline 
sharing in the opinions and sentiments set forth in the 
“ leader.” 
I honestly believe, because I have ample proof, that the 
knowledge of anatomy possessed by the non-teaching mem¬ 
bers of the profession is more than “mere knackerman’s 
anatomy,” and that their acquaintance with physiology is 
somewhat above “mere blacksmith’s physiology.” If the 
writer of the article in question bases the statement he wishes 
to make indirectly on indubitable facts, then, perhaps, he 
has furnished us with the severest possible condemnation of 
not only the system of teaching anatomy and physiology 
which has been carried on at the veterinary schools for the 
last eighty years, but he has doomed the medical examiner- 
ship also to immediate suppression. He solemnly sets his 
face against veterinary surgeons being competent to examine 
in veterinary anatomy and physiology, which we are sup¬ 
posed to have studied and been satisfactorily tested in, 
and which is advertised as taught at the schools; and then 
he emits the profound truism that “ a man to be an examiner 
must possess something beyond mere knackerman’s anatomy 
and blacksmith’s physiology.” Since veterinary science was 
first introduced to British soil, did it ever receive such a stab 
in the back ? How can we hold up our heads in public, call 
ourselves a body of scientific men, point to the names of the 
medical men who “ are distinguished either as anatomists, 
physiologists, histologists, or chemists,” which figure on our 
diplomas, when our professional journal lends its influence to 
degrade our knowledge to that of the knackerman and black¬ 
smith ? 
Heaven be thanked! the insinuation is as unfounded as it 
is unworthy of any member of our body to entertain for a 
moment. There are gentlemen in the veterinary profession, 
albeit they are not professors, who are as competent to ex¬ 
amine in these subjects as there are teachers to teach them; 
who are regarded, trusted, and treated as scientific men; and 
who are labouring quite as devotedly and energetically to 
raise the status of their calling as the schools. I have nothing 
to say in defence of the present body of veterinary examiners. 
If they are not efficient, as the article states, they are per¬ 
fectly able to ask in what their incapacity consists. 
I only maintain that it is a wrong to the profession that, 
