114 ESSENTIALS OF VETERINARY LAW 
practice. Where the defendant raises these ques- 
tions it will be necessary to get the testimony of 
others, and especially of experts. In a suit for 
damages arising from malpractice, in which a 
veterinarian so negligently threw a horse as to 
rupture his diaphragm, it was held that a non- 
expert, who had frequently seen horses hobbled 
and thrown during an experience of from twelve 
to thirteen years, was competent to testify as to 
the methods used.*# 
85. The Veterinarian as a Witness. Whether 
he be ealled as a witness of fact, or for his expert 
opinion, the veterinarian should be careful to make 
a clear distinction between fact and opinion. Judg- 
ing from certain facts which he recognizes as 
symptoms he may form the opinion, or diagnosis, 
that a horse has pneumonia; but mistakes in diag- 
nosis have been made by good men. It is there- 
fore taking an unnecessary risk for him to assert, 
even under the most persistent urging of a cross- 
examining attorney, that the horse has pneumonia. 
It is a peculiar psychologic fact that the ignorant 
witness is often the one who is most positive in 
stating his opinions as facts. He seems to attempt 
to supply his lack of knowledge by vehement as- 
sertions. A skillful questioner may often lead 
such an one into making the most ridiculous state- 
ments in regard to nonimportant matters, and 
thus completely upset the value of his testimony 
upon essential points. 
The witness should simply tell the truth. He 
should be impartial. So far as possible he should 
44 Staples v. Steed, 167 Ala. 
241, 52 So. 646. 
