ROYAL COLLEGE OF VETERINARY SURGEONS. $07 
enlightened members of the profession. Whatever might be the fate of 
the question now being discussed, he hoped that the profession would not 
hereafter acuse the Council of being false to their true interests, and of 
being possessed of a ricketty backbone. He moved as an amendment, 
that the bye-law stand as it is. 
General Sir Frederick Fitzwygram,. somewhat acquiescing in the 
resolution 1, arrived at on this subject at the general meeting, felt con¬ 
strained to give his vote against the motion. He did not think the repeal 
of the law would be of the slightest advantage. It was not the object of 
the Council to„admit into the profession incompetent or unqualified men, 
and he thought there was no one present who had watched the course of 
the examinations but would admit that if a man had had three chances 
and three rejections he was never likely to become a useful member of 
the profession. The rule had hitherto worked well. He had expressed 
his views on the subject, and would leave it in the hands of the Council. 
Mr. Hartley referred to the circumstances under which the bye-law 
was made, and the time and trouble that had been taken before the 
Special Committee to inquire into the subject had arrived at its con¬ 
clusion. The object of the Council at the time the bye-law was passed 
was more especially to get rid of a class of men who could never enter 
the profession, not having the ability to do so. He agreed with the views 
that had been advanced by Mr. Collins and Sir Frederick Fitzwygram, 
and would decline to vote for the repeal of the bye-law. 
On the question being put to the vote, two members voted for 
Mr. Collin’s amendment, and twelve for the motion, which was therefore 
declared carried. 
Mr. Gowing gave notice of the following motion :—“ Bye-law 36.” “ But 
should he not pass his third examination, then shall he pay—should he 
again wish to present himself—a fee of six guineas at each subsequent 
re-examination, and seven days prior thereto.” 
The President proposed the following alteration in bye-law 46 : 
“No examination shall be held unless there be nine candidates for one 
division of the examination j but if a board be assembled, and there be a 
candidate or candidates for another division, the examiners for which 
being within reach, then a board shall be constituted to examine such 
candidate or candidates.” 
He explained his reasons for the proposed alteration, which, he 
thought, would be not only in the interest of the students, but of the 
profession. 
Sir Frederick Fitzwygram pointed out that the bye-law was passed 
after due deliberation, and with the view to raise the funds of the 
College, which at the time were at a very low ebb, and he asked the 
Council to adhere to the rule to have no examinations unless there were 
a sufficient number to pay the cost. 
After some observations from the President, Professor Pritchard, and 
Mr. Greaves, Mr. Hartley seconded Sir Frederick Fitzwygram’s amend¬ 
ment. It was ultimately agreed that the consideration of the question be 
postponed. 
General Sir Frederick Fitzwygram moved an alteration in bye-law 7, 
which he said at present provided that the scrutineers shall be elected at 
the annual general meeting. The effect of the existing rule was that 
certain gentlemen who were good enough to come to the meeting were 
shunted to the outer rooms while the discussion was going on, and 
where they could neither see nor hear. It was proposed to alter the 
rule to read as follows :—“ At a meeting prior to the annual meeting, the 
Council shall choose from among the members of the profession not less 
