NEGLIGENT DRIVING. 303 



vice of the Mare combined, and that there was no con- 

 tributory negligence. Denman, J., in delivering judg- 

 ment for the plaintiff said, " It was, I think, clearly made 

 out at the trial, that the Mare which the deceased was driving 

 was a vicious Mare, in the sense that she was a kicker. It 

 must, however, be taken that the Jury negatived any 

 knowledge in the deceased of this habit, such as would 

 have rendered it negligent in him to drive the Mare. 

 Contributory negligence on any other ground was nega- 

 tived. The immediate cause of the accident was clearly 

 that the Mare in kicking got her leg over the shaft which 

 caused her to fall, and in falling, the deceased received the 

 kick which ultimately caused his death. The Jury found Judgment in 

 that the accident was due to the van being there (which -^^"''J'" ^" 

 must be taken to mean ' to the van being unreasonably 

 left on that part of the highway so as to cause some danger 

 to vehicles passing by'), combined with the vice of the 

 Mare. I understood this finding to mean that the accident 

 would not have happened but for both these causes combined 

 — an imreasonable and dangerous user by the defendants of 

 that part of the road by their van and plough so as to 

 cause danger to vehicles passing by, — and an exception- 

 ally dangerous animal shying, and running away from 

 fright at the van and plough, and then kicking the vehicle 

 whether from fright or vice, the kicking being an excep- 

 tional vice in the Mare. This finding must also, if pos- 

 sible, be reconciled with the other finding that the accident 

 was not a mere accident, which was explained to the Jury 

 as meaning one for which no one was to be fairly con- 

 sidered to blame. 



" The plaintiffs' counsel argued that, inasmuch as the 

 defendant was guilty of an unauthorized and dangerous 

 act in derogation of the public rights, by which the Mare 

 had been frightened, this must be taken to be the only 

 material cause of the mischief, the deceased being guilty 

 of no wrong at all, and the whole transaction being one 

 flowing directly from the alarm caused by the defendant's 

 unauthorized act. 



"On the other hand, it was contended that the causa 

 proxima of the injury was the kicking of the Mare, which 

 was not a necessary or natural consequence either of the 

 shying or of the running away, so that, although it might 

 be true that, in some sense, the van and plough being 

 there led to the accident, it was not true that their being 

 there was material to the accident, or caused it, in such a 

 sense, so to make the defendant responsible for it. 



