COMPENSATION 99 
charges for his subsequent attendance, and the 
assent of the patient to the making of such con- 
tract is not necessary.’’?> This was a case in 
which a physician had been called to attend a man 
who was injured. Upon hearing of the accident, 
and not knowing who was in charge of the case, 
the man’s employer telegraphed to the same phy- 
sician, directing him to attend the case and im- 
plying that he would pay the bill. Such an order 
is entirely ditferent from the ordinary call of a 
third person. It is not an impersonal matter, but 
it involves the personal obligation of the one giv- 
ing the order, though put in the form of a request. 
No matter by whom first called, there is nothing 
which would prevent a veterinarian from trans- 
ferring his future charges to the account of an- 
other, when the third party thus requests. 
For self protection it is quite customary among 
certain classes of corporations to pay for first aid 
for their employees, and for such as may be made 
ill or injured in connection with the operation of 
the corporation, and continuing to pay for such 
services until the liability of the corporation shall 
be shown not to exist. For example, a man is 
injured by a street car. A surgeon is called and 
attends to the case. The street car corporation 
asks for a report of the injuries discovered, and 
pays for this first attendance. The patient is then 
at liberty to select whom he wishes to look after 
the case. If, however, it shall appear that the cor- 
poration is liable for the accident, its officers may 
provide their own surgeon for future service. The 
25 White v. Mastin, 38 Ala. 
147. 
