IHK FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



415 



Mr. Batteriby, tl.C, pressed the qiiestiou. 



The Lord Chief Justice ruled that the evidence was uot ad- 

 missible. 



Mr Battersby, Q.C, a?ked his lordahip to take a note 

 that he offered to give evidence that every head of catde 

 on the island was sound, and thst he refused to admit that 

 evidence. 



His lordship said that the plaintiff could not be expected to 

 meet the case of the sales to other parties, but it was open to 

 the defendant to give evidence to prove that all the cjttle 

 gprazed on the island which were sold to the plaintiff were 

 sound, and to give general evidence that the cattle grazed on 

 the laud were sound. 



The defendant then said that all the cattle sold at Ballinasloe 

 were sound ; had seen the lots before the fair ; was present at 

 the drawing and lotting of them ; there were four lots ; all 

 were sound ; had not the slightest doubt of it ; there was no 

 question about his telling the plaintiff that the cattle were 

 sound ; when be bought the first lot, defendant told hira that 

 he had reared them from calves ; it was not true that he had 

 said this in reference to lot No. 11 ; since the 24th of August 

 no beast had exhibited disease ; ninety head of cattle were 

 Bent to the island, and mixed with lot No. 11, in the month of 

 September, and remained till December ; all of these were as 

 sound as a bell ; a book happened, unfortunately, to be near 

 him on the occasion of the fair; he put his hand upon it, and 

 said he had uot given him an unsound beast at Ballinasloe ; 

 disease might appear suddenly ; could not say whether the 

 disease was communicated through the air. 



Chief Juslice — He would be a wise man who could. 



Cross-examination of defendant — Looked at the lots gene- 

 rally ; did not examine their heads or feel their fat ; whose 

 brand but his would be on the cattle? bought the cattle (30 of 

 them) at Eyrecourt upon the 24th of April, and the others on 

 the 7th of May, at Ballinasloe; could not say in which of 

 these places the lot was bought; the two distempered heifers 

 sold in July and August were of those bought in April or May; 

 made the sale to Barrett ; positively said that he did not 

 swear in the arbitration room that he had no distemper on his 

 lands for two years; looked into his books, and found that 

 nineteen mouths before the fair of Ballinasloe there was a case 

 of distemper in a cow ; in 1857 there were two cases of dis- 

 temper on the land. 



Mr. Samuel Garnett examined by Mr. F. Johnson — Saw the 

 stock, and was of opinion that they were sound, and did not 

 know from whence the disease came, no more than the captain 



of a vessel could say bow the tempest arose ; bad known cattle 

 said to have been unsound turn out to be perfectly sound. 



Mr. Peter Aungler — Is a salemaster ; cattle *hich he had 

 seen well at night, were in the morning reported as being ill , 

 had known cattle when slaughtered exhibit disease, of which 

 the seller had no idea. 



M r. Patrick Leonard — Heard the defendant say to the 

 plaintiff, tokingup a book (a registry of his), "As sure as that 

 is a Bible, the cattle I sold at Ballinasloe were sound;" always 

 thought a herd could at ouce detect the disease ; was of opinion 

 that the beasts were sound. 



The Lord Chief Justice charged the jury. He said it was 

 not nece3sary for him to do more thau occupy their time for a 

 few minutes, in stating the rights of the plaintiff and the 

 liability of the defendant. The que tion was, whether the 

 heifers that were sold were at the time of the sale all sound, 

 or whether any of them were affected with any disorder? 

 There was another issue — whether, if some of the cattle were 

 affected, they did not affect others ? If this were so, the party 

 was liable, uot aloac for the original damage, but also for the 

 consequences of that original damage. It was a case in which 

 the defendant had warranted that all the cattle were sound ; 

 it was in vain to say that the warranty was a puff. It was 

 admitted that the defendant had warranted them. The ques- 

 tion was, were the cattle sound agreeably to the warranty ? 

 The effect of a warranty was this — it made a man responsible 

 for all defects known or unknown to the seller ; and it was no 

 defence for him to say that in his conscience he believed that 

 the cattle were sound. He had given his warranty — he had 

 induced the buyer to purchase upon the faith of the engage- 

 ment that the cattle were sound, and he had guaranteed him 

 against any loss which might result from the purchase. It 

 had been said that if this were to be the cousequence of a war- 

 ranty, every man at a cattle fair should put up a placard 

 intimating that he did not warrant the cattle. All that he had 

 to do was to hold his tongue and give no warranty at all ; 

 besides this, there were insurance offices that would willingly 

 insure cattle and protect the buyer from any loss consequent 

 upon the sale. In conclusion, his lordship said that the jury 

 should look to the gradual development of the disease in the 

 cattle of the plaintiff himself after they became mixed with 

 the cattle sold by the defendant, and consider whether, under 

 all the circumstances, the plaintiff was entitled to their verdict. 



The jury retired, and in a few minutes returned with a 

 verdict (or the plaintitf upon all the counts — Damages £1,000 

 sterling. 



LABOUR AND WAGES, 



Mr. James Howard, of the well-known firm of agri- 

 cultural implement makers, recently delivered a lecture 

 on this subject to the members of the Bedford Working- 

 men's Institute. The address, which did great credit to 

 Mr. Howard's powers as a lecturer, is too long for us to 

 give entire. The conclusion is, perhaps, the more appli- 

 cable to our columns : — 



Wages vary in different trades considerably, and where the 

 work is equally laborious. How is this; is it an accident, or 

 is there any law which influences the rate of pay ? I think 

 there is. Why should an oak sell for more than a willow or a 

 fir, or even than elm and ash V Simply because it costs mote 

 to produce : an oak takes generations to come to maturity, 

 therefore several lots of fir trees could be grown and sold on 

 the space occupied by the oak. I said before that the cost of 

 production rules the price of all commodities ; and as labour 

 is a commodity, it rules that also. How so ? Why, any 

 awkward fellow can sift gravel and very soon shoulder a hod, 

 but to be able to build a good wall, or turn a nice arch, re- 

 quires the labour of a practised bricklayer. It costs, therefore, 

 more in time and money to produce a good bricklayer than to 

 make a slab— to produce a good smith than a hammer-mau — 

 a good engineer than a stoker. An eugiueer obtains better 

 wages than a bricklayer or a carpenter ; for the same reasons, 

 the bricklayer gets better wages than the slab, i.e , it costs 

 more in time and money to make a youth a proficient engineer 



than it would do to make him a bricklayer. Pleasantness ol 

 occupation and freeness from risk are also elements to be taken 

 into account. A man won't go down into a coal mine and 

 work for the same price as he can get in the light of day. 

 Men dou't leave pleasant employments for less agreeable ones 

 without hoping to better their condition. Occupations re- 

 quiring greater strength or bodily labour than others are also 

 better°paid. When men mow grass they get better pay than 

 when trimming a hedge. So with furnace teudprs and rollers 

 of metal, where, owing to heat and exertion combined, a good 

 deal of sweat is lost, and a good deal of beer poured down to 

 supply the waste ; their wages are necessarily higher, for the 

 simple reason, it costs more to keep them up to the mark. 

 We could multiply such reasous at great length, such as con- 

 tinuous employment ; but I hope I have said enough to prove 

 that wages do not depend on chance, but are on the mam re- 

 gulated by some general principle. There is one principle 1 

 have not alluded to, but which all will do well to bear in mind, 

 for it not only influences waxes, but leads to constant employ- 

 ment— I mean a good character. 'Tis said a " rolling stoue 

 gathers no moss,'* and I do not know what is more likely to 

 make a man roll than a bad character. I intended to go into 

 the question of piece-work, but time will not permit. I like 

 the system, as it enables the workmen to earn higher wages, 

 and the master pays for no more and no less than is done. I 

 never had any difficulty in letting a job by the piece I 

 hear there are difficuUies in other trades, but I think 



F F 



