452 
ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERIBARY SURGEONS. 
lowing case. lie said he had educated his youngest son, who was now 
twenty-one years of age, with a view to his succeeding him in his busi¬ 
ness. He had been with him in practice three years previous to his 
matriculation, and he entered the Royal Veterinary College in October, 
1877. He had been told that his son had creditably passed all his pre¬ 
liminaries, and both the principal and professor had expressed to him 
their surprise and disappointment at his rejection by the Board, 
and said they could only account for his failure on three occasions 
by his extremely nervous temperament, and his getting confused 
and muddled in the presence of strangers. He (Mr. Wallis) could 
not tell how burdened he was with sorrow at the result. He had 
worked hard and successfully for more than forty years, and began 
to feel that he wanted his son to assist him in advancing age. His 
plans and hopes, however, as well as those of his son, were entirely frus¬ 
trated by the 37th bye-law, and his son, whose character and conduct at 
the College had been irreproachable, was shut out from the profession 
and doomed to suffer life-long disgrace, and would have to seek other 
employment in order to maintain himself. He (Mr. Wallis) was un¬ 
willing to think that there was a single gentleman in the room who, by 
supporting the rule, would drive him to adopt so sad an alternative, and 
he earnestly hoped to have the sympathy and help of the meeting in his 
trying position. In February last, Mr. Taylor, at a Council meeting, 
had characterised the restriction as cruel, oppressive, and unjust both to 
the student and his parents. Their esteemed President took a different 
view, and regarded the rule as useful and beneficial, and as being advan¬ 
tageous to the student in checking his idleness, and to the father in pre¬ 
venting his son wasting his time at college. Fie had no doubt that both 
gentlemen were honest and sincere in their respective views, although he 
could not think the terrible power and far-reaching disastrous and irre¬ 
parable consequences of the rule could have been perceived by the valued 
and honored friend who supported it. He was quite sure that the 
President would not intentionally say or do anything to damage or hin¬ 
der the profession at large or one of its members; and seeing the ruin 
the retention of this rule would bring upon him and his son, he trusted 
the President might be inclined to vote for its abandonment; he would 
therefore move, “ That the council be requested to take Rule 37 into 
consideration with a view to its repeal.” 
Mr. Peter Taylor said he had great pleasure in seconding the motion. 
He had already given notice of a motion that the bye-law be expunged. 
Being the father of a large family he felt most grievously the effect of the 
rule on children who were nervous, or who had not the facility that 
experience would give them in answering questions before their exa¬ 
miners. He had previously brought the motion for the rejection of the 
rule before the College, but their honorable President thought it just 
and right to bring forward an amendment, and upon that amendment 
there were equal votes. Still, he hoped to see the day when the rule 
would be expunged, because he considered it iniquitous and unjust. He 
thought if a student paid his fees and passed his matriculation and exa¬ 
mination he had a perfect right as a gentleman to go within the walls of 
any college and be educated by the professors until he had the ability to 
entitle him to his diploma, otherwise, a class of men would be produced 
who by-and-bye would get their living by empiricism. Fie had stated 
on the previous occasion that there were three large bodies, the legal, 
the medical, and the clerical, who had no such bye-law. If some of the 
students who had been thus rejected had had sufficient time they would 
