612 Kidd V. Royal Agricultural Society of England. 
question. You ask me, do I agree with Mr. Simonds : upon what point do 
you mean ? 
Q. As to this suggested interference with the nerves of the rumen ? — A. I 
most certainly do not agree with him on that point. 
Q. Have you anytlaing else you would like to add ? — A. No, I do not know 
that there is. 
Q. Then I may take it you have assigned a cause which satisfies you was 
the cause of the death of this animal ? — A. As a practical man, I have. 
Crons-examined by Mr. Field. 
Q. In your judgment the cow died from the oil being administered through 
the windpipe? — A. My judgment is that the cow would not have died so 
suddenly had not oil been given to her. 
Q. I thought you said that in your opinion the cow died from the oil 
which went down the wiudpipe ? — A. In my judgment the oil choked her. 
Q. Went down the windpipe ? — A. Most likely it would — if it choked her 
at all it would. 
Q. Then why did not you answer me ? Now, in that state of things, would 
not Professor Simonds have found oil in the windpipe and bronchial tithes ? — 
A. I do not think so at all. 
Q. Do not you think so — what would become of the oil that went down the 
windpipe — the animal died you know ? — A. The small quantity of oil that 
would go down the trachia 
Q. How much do you calculate would go down the windpipe? — A. Half an 
ounce or an ounce. Mr. Simonds may laugh at my observations, but it would 
be much better if he did not do so. 
Mr. Justice Blackburn : It would be much better for you to attend to 
the questions and answer them : and, Mr. Field, do give him time to answer 
the questions. 
Mr. Field : Will you tell me how much oil you calculate went down the 
windpipe? — A. I cannot say how much oil went down, but it takes but a small 
quantity to choke an animal in that state. 
Q. Whatever quantity it would take to choke an animal in that state, the 
animal dying immediately, do you mean to tell me that Professor Simonds 
would not have found the oil in the windpipe ? — A. I say very probably not. 
Q. Ought he not ? — A. No, I do not think he ought. It is very probable 
that, looking at the circumstances of the case, he would not look at the 
trachia at all. 
Q. But if he had looked at the trachia, would he not have discovered the 
oilV — A. No, in the small quantity I do not think he would have dis- 
covered it. 
Q. When did you first mention to the gentleman who instructs my learned 
friend that in your judgment the cow died from the oil going down the wind- 
pipe? — A. I formed my opinion from the observations made an4- the account 
of the symptoms given. 
Q. You were present in Court when the witnesses were examined and when 
Professor Simonds was examined ? — A. Yes. 
Q. And you were sitting behind my learned friend ? — A. Yes. 
Q. Then, in your opinion, was the mangold the sole cause of the tymps- 
nitis? — A. I believe the mangold was the operating cause. 
Q. The sole cause ? — A. I do not mean to say the sole cause, but if the 
cake had not been given these synqjtoms would not have shown themselves 
so quickly. 
Q. You limit it to the mangold? — A. I consider it the preduiposint; 
cause. 
