Kidd V. Royal Agricultural Society of England. 669 
the use of cakes have been brought under his (that is the 
chemist's) notice. The first to be mentioned is from Charles O. 
Eaton, Esq." I need not dwell further upon Mr. Eaton's case, 
because that is not in dispute here at all. Dr. Voelcker goes on 
to say this — "The cake (that is Mr. Eaton's cake) contained 
much earth-nut, also locust-meal, rice-dust, grass seeds, broken 
corn, and the usual small weed-seeds found in inferior or dirty 
linseed, and was altogether a bad linseed-cake." That sentence 
is alluded to again, when he begins to talk of Mr. Kidd's, the 
now Plaintiff's, linseed-cake afterwards, so that we must bear 
that in mind. Then it goes on (passing over the rest) — " Another 
case comes from John Wells, Esq., Feb. 18, a member of our 
Council, the whole of whose cattle were attacked with serious 
symptoms immediately after eating from a fresh purchase of 
cake, although only one case terminated fatally. This cake very 
much resembled the cake sold to Mr. Eaton." That is why I 
refer to it ; he says that the cake sold to Mr. Eaton contained 
much earth-nut, husks, and so on, and altogether was a bad 
linseed-cake, and he says this cake very much resembled the 
cake sold to !Mr. Eaton. That is, he clearly states it is an 
inferior linseed-cake — at the very least the imputation is that 
much. " Containing a quantity of cotton-cake." — When we have 
the evidence given in which the Defendants are endeavouring to 
justify it, the evidence comes to this, that there was in it some 
cotton-husks ; whether this " cotton-cake " has been a misprint 
for "husks," or whether "husks" was put in without any justi- 
fication at all, I do not know — 1 should think it was probably a 
slip in printing for " husks " — " rice, broken corn, and cocoa- 
nut, apparently made from dirty linseed, and the sweepings of 
corn-warehouses. A small sample of this cake had been sent 
before purchase to Mr. Wells, as best linseed-cake, price 10/. 
per ton, from Ayre, Brothers, Hull, the makers Messrs. Kidd, 
of Hull." That is the whole of the libel. 
Now, how much do you think that does contain in it ? One 
thing you will have to turn your mind to in that is this: I think 
it seems pretty plain that the Defendants, by publishing that, 
did state that this sample that they had examined was an inferior 
dirty cake ; and in considering the libel, and seeing what it 
amounts to, you must put yourselves for the moment out of what 
you have heard to-day in Court altogether, and in the position 
of a farmer, or anybody else, who was reading this Report 
immediately after it came out — what impression would it pro- 
duce on your mind reading it for the first time ? Would it lead 
you to think that Messrs. Kidd's cake was made of an inferior 
dirty linseed, and had these weeds, &c., in it ? 1 think certainly 
it would convey that impression ; but then comes another part of 
