ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS. 
859 
consequence was that many of them passed a very poor ex¬ 
amination compared with what they ought to do. Finally, 
the present system was an injustice to the public. If his 
motion was adopted it would, in the first place, show the 
public that the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons desired 
to support some reform, and in the next place it would be a 
guarantee that the possessor of its diploma was worthy of the 
piece of parchment. He hoped the Council would consider 
the subject favorably, as he was convinced it was for the 
benefit and advancement of the profession. As to the carry¬ 
ing out of such a scheme, it would be a very easy matter. 
Professor Brown said there was nothing he should like 
better than to have the whole question of the bye-laws 
referred to a select committee, with a view of giving the 
Council power to make alterations in the examinations as 
were expedient. As the bye-laws stood at present they were 
needlessly fettered. He suggested that Professor Williams 
should withdraw his motion, and move a positive motion to 
the same effect, indicating his desire as a member of the 
Council that the whole subject of the examinations should 
be reconsidered and rearranged. At present they could only 
entertain the question as it referred to the Edinburgh Vete¬ 
rinary College. He proposed, as an amendment, that the 
motion be received according to the obvious meaning of the 
terms employed. 
Mr. Oioles seconded the amendment. 
After some further conversation Mr. Mayer struck out the 
last clause relating to the other schools, and thereupon Pro¬ 
fessor Brown withdrew his amendment. 
Professor Williams objected to the motion if it was to 
limit the action of the Committee to the Edinburgh College. 
It was quite incompetent for the Council to discuss the 
question in that form. They could not possibly deal with 
the examinations of one school. They must be alike at all 
schools, and the petition was for the purpose of having them 
so. If the motion was adopted he should withdraw his peti¬ 
tion altogether, and go back to Scotland with a not very 
favorable report. He objected to the withdrawal of the latter 
part of Mr. Mayer’s motion, since new light had been thrown 
upon it. 
Mr. Mayer said he never intended to fetter the action of 
the Committee in any shape or way, having too much at 
heart the interests of the profession. The whole question of 
the examination required ventilation and discussion, for he 
was not at all satisfied with it as it was, and was glad that 
the whole question was to be opened. He hoped it would 
