LANCASHIRE VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION. 141 
After considerable discussion respecting the election of Lieut.-General 
Sir F. Fitzwygram, Bart., Prof. Williams, Messrs. Geo. Fleming, Peter 
Taylor, and Thomas Greaves, as Honorary Associates of this Society, it 
was decided by Rule XVII, Section 1, that members could not be made 
Honorary Associates, only strangers, or any other person who was not a 
member, and according to Section 2 of same Rule there must be three 
fourths of the members present before any person can be so elected. 
Mr. T. Taylor therefore proposed that the names of Lieut.-General 
Sir F. Fitzwygram, Bart., Prof. Williams, and Mr. G. Fleming be left 
on the list, and brought forward whenever we have a quorum for such 
an election, seconded by Mr. T. Greaves, and carried. 
Mr. James Lambert then opened the adjourned discussion of Mr. Geo. 
Fleming’s paper, read before this Association at the last meeting, viz. 
“ The Responsibility of the Veterinary Surgeon.” He said, When 1 spoke 
on the above subject at the last meeting, I ventured to say that I 
thought an amount of responsibility was assumed in this paper which is 
out of proportion to the remuneration received by veterinary surgeons. 
The two subjects which appear to me to merit most attention are—the 
examination of horses as to soundness, and injuries inflicted in shoeing ; 
as to the latter, I' will only say that it appears to me most unjust for 
many reasons that veterinary surgeons should be liable; as to the 
former we can see that veterinary surgeons are becoming more and 
more in request for this duty, and as it is done for (considering its 
importance) a small fee, generally half a guinea, we must take care that 
we do not admit for mistakes a pecuniary liability absurdly out of propor¬ 
tion to the payment received. Many veterinary surgeons were alarmed by 
the apparently severe opinion expressed in Mr. Fleming’s paper on the 
question, and began to think whether examining horses for soundness, 
and veterinary practice generally, was not a very risky business. In 
Ireland veterinary surgeons disclaim any pecuniary liability for their 
opinion, and their charge is one guinea, and examinations are of every 
day occurrence with them. He, Mr. Lambert, did not see why in Eng¬ 
land, and in fact everywhere, the charge should not also be a guinea. 
He believed, and said it advisably, that a veterinary surgeon has not 
much legal pecuniary liability in his practice ; when he makes a mistake, 
what he has most to dread is loss of reputation, and consequently loss 
of profit. 
Mr. Lambert next quoted the opinions of several barristers and solicitors. 
They had looked over causes in the law books, but found none; so you 
see cases are rare, and I think you will find they will continue to be so. 
They all concurred in the opinion that there must be proved gross 
ignorance or negligence, and you must decidedly outweigh your oppo- 
nent by numbers, if you can, and, if possible, throw a professor or two 
into the scale. This is a nice state of things—outweigh your opponent 
by numbers. It shows what lawyers think of professional evidence, 
and the same applies to the medical profession. These opinions show 
us how urgently reform is needed, and that veterinary surgeons should 
be united, and never try to make money in the witness box at another’s 
expense. Professional evidence should be selected by the court, and 
not by the advocate. Professors generally should never appear in order 
to secure a fee in cases where they have no concern, in fact, they should 
only appear in order to prevent gross injustice ; if they appear for any 
other reason it is degrading to their teaching, office, and to the college 
to which they belong. 
Mr. T. A. Dollar said he quite agreed with Mr. Lambert. It a veten- 
