Kidd V. Royal Agricultural Society of England. 495 
" pure linseed " and another " best linseed," but both of them are " linseed cakes," 
and as my friend saj's they are, or should be, the result of the pressure of the 
seed. How therefore sesame and bran cau be properly united with the linseed 
in making what is called "linseed cake" I do not know. But I think it 
exceediugh' probable that you will find, if my friend goes into that matter, 
ithat sesame cake not being saleable in itself has been broken up, and being in 
a condition to do mischief if taken by itself, may also be the cause of injury 
when mixed up with linseed. But, gentlemen, be that as it may, I shall 
prove to you by the effects of this cake upon the cattle that it was an 
unwholesome cake, and one which produced results known as blood-poisoning, 
beyond all question. One of the cattle died, you know, and the rest of the 
stock were made seriously ill. 
Well, that being so, my learned friend complains of the Agricultural Society 
that they published their Eeiwrt without communicating with JMessrs. Kidd. 
Gentlemen, the course that they adopted there is one which is adopted in all 
cases. The descriptiou given in this Kejiort they received from their chemist 
and analyst, and 1 will prove it to be correct. Then under those circumstances 
it is jjart of their ordinary duty, and part of their ordinary arrangement, iu 
order that the public may know what cakes there are which are genuine food, 
and where they are to be obtained, and to publish the names of the makers 
and sellers. But that Mr. Kidd has sustained any great injury from this 
particular publication I do not think is at all apparent, because immediately 
afterwards they offer Mr. Kidd at once that he should have an independent 
person who should make an analysis of the cake, and they offer immediately 
to publish that analysis, whatever it may be. Gentlemen, I am not going to 
weary you with the letters or the long criticisms which Messrs. Koberts and 
Leak thought it right to administer. My friend says he makes two 
complaints. I am willing to meet him upon every head of complaint, and I 
deal with the first in the way I have done already. With regard to the 
second, it is that we refused to send him a sample of the cake, in order that 
he might make an analysis for himsell". Gentlemen, what we did do was this, 
— we offered him that which I hold to be the fairest thing that persons could 
ofler when they are going before a jury on the respective analyses or ingre- 
dients of any article, whatever it may be— wo said to him, "You shall 
appoint your own independent chemist, who shall make his o^vn independent 
analysis ; Dr. Voelcker will be present, and they may make a joint anal3"sis," 
but it is utterly incorrect to infer that we ever asked or supposed so absurd 
and unjust a thing as that he was to be bound by the analysis of 
Dr. Voelcker, or anybody else. I say the fairest thing that could be done 
is this ; when a man asks for an inquiry of this sort, let the two analysts 
meet and make a joint analysis, and apj^oint an independent person for that 
I purpose. That course was offered by us, and they declined to accede to , 
it, aud in those circumstances 1 think we were perfectly justified in not 
-^ending them a sample when we should not have the means of knowing 
^^ hat the experiments to be made upon it were ; because nothing is so 
fallacious as experiments made by parties to a cattse after a dispute has 
arisen, and when the litigation is active, for the purpose of supporting their 
own views of their own case. Unfortunately, you know, scientific men, 
and all men who go into examinations of that description, go into them 
with a bias beforehand, and therefore I also further say that if exiierimeuts 
have been made at all upon cake of this descriptiou by auybodj', they have 
been made behind our backs, aud no notice has been given to us of anything 
of the kind. 
Gentlemen, with this plain statement of the facts I leave the case for the 
])resent, knowing that I shall have the honour of addressing you again by- 
and-by, when 1 shall know more about my friend's case than lie has thought 
