Bradhuvn v. Royal Ayricultural SocieUj of Enf)land. 4G5 
{subject to Regulation No. 1) be detained and slaughtered at the 
place of landing, or if, at the port <at which they are landed, there 
is a part defined for slaughter, they may, with the permission of 
the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Customs, be removed into 
such defined part for the purpose of such slaughter. . 
XXIV. — Report of the Proceedings in Court in the case of Brad- 
hum V. Royal Agricultural Society of England. Before INIr. 
Bakox Bramwell and a Special Jury. June 13th, 1871. 
Mr. IMoRGAN Lloyd opened the pleadings. 
Mr. Henry Jabies : May it please your Lordship — Gentlemen 
of the Jury. — This, as you have heard from my friend, is an 
action of libel, but I am happy to say that in consequence of 
the course which has been taken (and 1 venture to say most 
properly taken) on the part of the defendants, you will be only 
troubled for a very few minutes by having a short statement from 
my friend Sir John Karslake and myself. 
The defendants on the Record are the Royal Agricultural 
Society of England, and the plaintiff, Mr. Brad burn, is a gentle- 
man who for some years has carried on a very extensive business 
as a manufacturer of artificial manure at Wolverhampton. At 
the commencement of the year 1870 he had an application from 
a Mr. VVhittingham — a person who had been an agent of his, 
but who had ceased to be his agent — to supply a certain quantity 
of manure called ground bones, at a somewhat low price, which 
he named. Mr. Bradburn replied in his letter (which has been 
published), that he could not supply that manure at that price 
without mixing with it an article called bone-waste, which is 
produced from the manufacture of phosphorus with bone-ash. 
Tlie manure, so prepared, was sold upon the order of Mr. Whit- 
tingham, by whom it was resold to his landlord, Mr. Broughton, 
a gentleman residing near Nantwich, in Cheshire. That gentle- 
man thought it right to have it analysed ; and when it was 
submitted to Dr. Voelcker, the eminent analytical chemist, it 
was found not to be that which Mr. VVhittingham had repre- 
sented- it to be — the highest class of manure. Under those 
circumstances, a statement was made to the Chemical Com- 
mittee of the Royal Agricultural Society of England, an expla- 
nation took place, and Mr. Bradburn (the plaintiff), by means 
of a printed document, set forth most clearly and distinctly the 
circumstances under which he had sold the manure, and that 
he had invoiced it as bone and bone- waste, and had placed 
marks upon the bags showing that it was bone and bone-waste, 
