LIABILITIES 73 
that the skill and care required of a physician are 
proportionate to his expectation of pecuniary 
recompense. Such a rule would be of the most 
mischievous consequence; would make the health 
and life of the indigent the sport of reckless experi- 
ment and cruel indifference.’’® In one case it was 
held that where services are rendered gratuitously 
physicians are liable only for gross negligence.® 
These two cases should be read together, for 
clearly both of them are just. The poor man 
should not be subject to wanton experimentation; 
on the other hand a physician giving gratuitous 
service should have more of the benefit of the 
doubt where there is a question as to his negli- 
gence. 
Similar rules apply in veterinary practice. A 
competent veterinarian, trying to aid a poor neigh- 
bor by giving him professional service, should not 
be held so strictly to account for failure to keep 
watch of the case, as where he has been definitely 
employed. In other words, the fact that he has 
given one call should not, in the absence of clear 
evidence to the contrary, presume to be the as- 
sumption of a contract in which he agrees to con- 
tinue to give his service without compensation. 
The contract presupposes two sides, and such a 
contract would have only one side. On the other 
hand, simply because he is giving his service does 
not entitle the veterinarian to experiment at the 
expense of his poor neighbor, and if there has 
been any gross negligence, or a clear departure 
8 Becker v. Janinski, 15 N. Y. 385. Shearman & Redfield, 
Sup. 675, 27 Abb. N. C. 45. Negligence, 432. 
9 Ritchey v. West. 23 Il. 
