Kidd V. Royal Agricultural Society of England. 541 
things which I now give are founded entirely upon what I received at the 
College, and the histor}- so far as I knew of the case. 
Q. Since you wrote that j-ou have heard the evidence given as to the cake, 
and the administration of it to the animal ? — A. I have. 
Q. Is it consistent with a cake composed of the elements of which you 
have heard, taken in the mode you have heard? — A. It is consistent iu 
part with the composition of the cake as it has been described. If I under- 
stand the evidence rightly there was certain vegetable matter which was 
undefined by the chemists in this cake, or by the microscopists. And I can- 
not perhaps attribute any special action to dodder or any special action as it 
were to darnel ; but at the same time I can understand that both dodder and 
darnel, and other things that are found in this cake, might have a very peculiar 
and injurious eflect on the pneumo-gastric nerves supplying the rumen. 
Q. We heard yesterday of a small portion of mouldy wheat of fungoid 
-rowth ; would that, in your judgment, if in quantity sufficient, have any effect 
ou the animals ? — A. I cannot say that according to the evidence the amoimt 
of mouldy wheat was likely perhaps to be injurious to the animals, but in the 
present state of science we know really very little indeed about fungi and their 
effects upon the animal organism. I may add perhaps, my Lord, to that, that 
a few years ago many horses were poisoned by microscopic fungi which were 
found to affect oats. 
Mr. Seymour objected. 
The Witness : 1 merely give it as a case in point. You may not admit of 
it as evidence but I give it as a fact. 
Mr. Field : You have heard the evidence given as to the mode of feeding the 
animals, that they were off their feed of cake for 7 days (taking first of all the 
feeding beasts), and then had 7 lbs. administered to them, that being the 
quantity they had had from the month of October previously. In your 
judgment do you see anj-thing in that to cause the hoven, or what you saw in 
the stomach of the animal — A. I do not imagine that 7 lbs. of pure cake as 
it is called, linseed cake, would have produced any ill consequences at all upon 
any of those animals, administered in the mode and manner, and so on, that 
I have heard. 
Q. Suppose the animal to have had a bushel, or three-qiTarters of 
a bushel, I think it is of turnips and potatoes in the morning at about eight 
o'clock, and then to have had this cake given to him in the afternoon about 
two, would there be anything in your judgment in that, from the fact of the 
cake having been given, to account for what you saw.? — A. I do not 
understand your question. 
Q. Giving them turnips or potatoes in the morning, would that account for 
the hoven? — A. Hoven, or the liberation of gaseous matter from the contents 
of the rumen, will depend very much indeed upon the nature of the ingesta 
which is already in the rumen. Presuming that these animals had turnips and 
potatoes, that is a kind of food which would more readily go into a state of 
fermentation than the ordinary straw or hay. 
Q. Then having that in the morning, and then being fed on wholesome 
cake, and having it ever since October, do you see anything that would lead 
you to suppose the consequences were due to the turnips and potatoes ? — A. 
Certainly not to the turnips and potatoes, but due to something which was 
given afterwards, which set up the fermentative action of the turnips and 
potatoes. 
Q. Would wholesome linseed-cake have set that up ? — A, Certainly not. 
Q. You have heard that the cows had a feed of mangolds which had been 
dra^vn in October and piled and put in a shed — would that have produced it ? 
— A. Not exclusively. 
Q. With wholesome cake would that produce it ? — A, Again they would go 
