2jt INJURY TO VALUABLE GREYHOUNt). 



the defendant declined, and the horse remained at the livery stable. 

 The plaintiffs afterwards offered to deliver the horse to defendant at 

 Sandv, but the defendant refused to receive it nnless delivered at his 

 farm and with payment of a snm of money for his expenses and loss of 

 time. The horse remained at the livery stables till November, when 

 the plaintiffs paid the livery stable-keeper's charges and sent tlie horse 

 to defendant, who received it. The plaintiffs brought an action to 

 recover the amount of these charges, and the Court held that the defen- 

 dant was liable. 



In the case of Hodrpnan v. Tlie West Midland Raihvay Comjiany, the 

 plaintiff sent a valuable racehorse under the care of a groom to the 

 station of defendants' railway at Worcester to be carried from Worcester 

 to liOndon. The horse while being led by the groom came in contact 

 with some sharp-edged girders situate in defendants' yard, and was so 

 injured that it became necessary to kill it. No declaration of value 

 had been made, nor had any ticket been taken, and it was held by the 

 Court, CocJcburn C.J. diss., that the plaintiff could not recover more 

 than £50 (33 L.J. (N.S.) Q.B. 233, and 35 L.J. (N.S.) Q.B. 85). 



In the case of Grcfjory v. The West Midland Raihvay Company, the 

 Court of Exchequer upheld this decision, and decided that an owner is 

 not bound by conditions annexed by a railway company to their cattle 

 tickets which are neither just nor reasonable (33 L.J. (N.S.) Ex. 155). 

 3PMamis v. The Lancashire and Yorlrshire Railway Comjmny (28 L.J. 

 (N.S.) Ex. 353). Allday x. Great Western Railway Company (34 L.J. 

 (N.S.) Q.B. 5). 



In the case of Richardson v. The North Eastern Railway Company (7 

 L.R. C.P. 75), the plaintiff sent a valuable greyhound to be carried by 

 the defendants. In the course of the journey it became necessary to 

 transfer the dog from one train to another, and while waiting for this 

 second train it was tied by the strip with which it had been sent by 

 plaintiff to an iron spout on the platform ; while so fastened the dog 

 slipped its collar, got on to the line and was killed ; held that as the 

 dog was fastened by means furnished by the plaintiff, there was no 

 evidence of negligence on the part of the company, and judgment was 

 given for them ; and in Bloiver v. The Great Western Railway Company 

 (7 L.R. C.P. G55), when the plaintiff sent a bullock to be conveyed by 

 the defendants, and the bullock, by its own efforts and exertions, 

 escaped from the truck in which it was being carried, and was killed, it 

 was held that the defendants were not liable. 



In reyard of delay in forivardiny cattle to marlcet, the decisions liave also 

 hcen ofjainst the senders. Of this class of cases was The TorJf, Newcastle, 

 and Beri'.'icJc Railway Company (appellants) v. Crisp and Logan (respond- 



