COMPENSATION 123 



tween these apparently conflicting statements. As 

 we remarked above, when a physician, a veterina- 

 rian, or other expert, makes an examination to 

 enable him to give expert testimony, as by per- 

 forming a post mortem examination, he becomes 

 a witness of fact, and as such can be compelled to 

 testify without extra compensation. However, the 

 party requesting a veterinarian to examine and 

 treat his animals is thereby putting himself under 

 obligations to pay a reasonable sum for the serv- 

 ices rendered; and the reasonable sum must de- 

 pend upon the character of the services rendered. 

 On this same basis the man who is asked to make 

 an examination as a preliminary to giving expert 

 testimony has a legal right to expect comiDensa- 

 tion for his services as an expert.^^ Though this 

 compensation may not be included in the fees 

 taxed by the court in which the expert evidence 

 has been given, apparently the witness may have 

 therein ground for action against the person en- 

 gaging his services, where there is no law to the 

 contrary. It seems reasonable, also, that a dis- 

 tinction should be made between cases in which 

 the community needs the services of an expert in 

 criminal prosecutions, and those in which his serv- 

 ices are required for the benefit of parties engaged 

 in civil suits. 



Several states have enacted statutes providing 

 that witnesses called to testify only on an opinion, 

 founded upon special study or experience, shall 

 receive additional compensation to be fixed by the 

 court. Such statutes are found in Iowa, North 



69 Barrus v. Phaneuf, 166 

 Mass. 123, 44 X. E. 141. 



