343 
ROYAL VETERINARY COLLEGE. 
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE APPOINTED TO CONFER 
WITH A DEPUTATION OF VETERINARY SURGEONS. 
Your Committee, by appointment, met to-day, Feb. 9 th, a Deputation 
from the London and Provincial Veterinary Surgeons, who feel aggrieved 
at what they term “the unfair competition of the Royal Veterinary 
College with them in their ordinary practice.” 
The Deputation was numerous, and comprised, among others, Messrs. 
J. Moore, T. Moore, J. Howe, J. I. Lupton, W. Hunting, W. Helmore, 
and R. Ward. 
The Committee invited the members of the Deputation to express, 
either collectively or individually, their grounds of complaint and the 
remedies which they would suggest. 
It soon became obvious that the grounds of complaint were divided 
into two heads, viz.— 1 st. The injury done to private practitioners by 
the privileges enjoyed by Subscribers, as sanctioned by the Rules of the 
Royal Veterinary College ; and 2nd. The injury also done to them by 
the alleged practice of the Professors of the College among the public. 
The Committee beg to state that the complaints were very temper¬ 
ately and fairly stated. 
With regard to the first ground of complaint—namely, the privileges 
of Subscribers—it was urged by the Deputation that though the great 
majority of the Subscribers did not avail themselves of their privileges 
to any unfair extent, yet there were a certain number of dealers and 
large firms who did so, and who thus received advantages at the expense 
of the College, at great loss of time to the Professors and to the injury 
of private practitioners, which was not warranted by the amount of 
their subscribtions. 
The Committee think that this complaint is not unreasonable, and 
suggest, for the consideration of the Governors, that the privileges of 
Subscribers should not be taken advantage of to such an extent as to 
afford fair grounds of complaint. 
The object of the College is not profit, but the promotion of Veteri¬ 
nary education. It is right that those gentlemen who are kind enough 
to subscribe towards this desirable object should receive in return some 
advantages. But it is certainly not the object or wish of the Governors 
to injure or interfere with the fair rights of the Veterinary Profession. 
The Committee think that these abuses might be checked without 
any detriment to the Subscribers by restricting the number of horses to 
be examined in a year to five without fee, or to ten on payment of an 
additional sum of £2 2s., or at a charge of 10s. 6d. for each horse above 
five. 
The Committee also recommend that the charges per night per horse 
should be raised from 3 s. 6d. to 4 s. 
The Deputation complained of the very low charge made for the visit 
of a Professor in serious outbreaks of disease, viz. £2 2s. 
The ground of this complaint was not that such visits interfered with 
the practice of the Local Veterinary Surgeon, for in such cases his daily 
attendance would, of course, be still required 3 but the fact that the 
services of an eminent Professor from London could be obtained for 
£2 2s. caused much discontent, and interfered with the usual and indeed 
proper charge of the Local Veterinary Surgeon. 
There is no doubt a good deal of truth in this argument, but, on the 
