VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
239 
fodder, and not a blade of grass in the field. In the next field there 
were thirty-four sheep, two cows, and two calves. Part of a dead 
cow was in the shed. I could not get into the shed without knock- 
ing the lock off. I then went into the rick-yard, and saw about 
thirty-two lambs, three of which could not stand. I lifted them up, 
but they could not stand, and fell down again. The lambs appeared 
to be all of them in a state of starvation. I have visited the farm 
every day since. When I first visited the premises four of the 
lambs were dead, and fourteen have died since. Two of the lambs 
that were dead had been taken down to Brigstock by the defendant.” 
For the defence it was contended that the lambs had died from 
disease and not starvation, and the excessive drought had con- 
tributed in a great measure to the loss of the natural keep. As a 
rule the defendant had an excellent character for farming, and his 
cattle and sheep brought good prices. 
After hearing the evidence, Lord Lvyeden said the bench had 
come to the conclusion, notwithstanding the difference in the 
medical evidence, that it was their duty to convict the defendant 
of the offence with which he was charged, conduct which was very 
discreditable to a British farmer. They did not wish, however, to 
convict on more than one case, and, therefore, the other summonses 
would be withdrawn, with the consent of the prosecution, on the 
payment of costs. The utmost penalty they could inflict in one 
case was £5, and their decision was that the defendant pay a fine 
of £4, with costs amounting to £3 3s. 6d. — Chamber of Agricul- 
ture Journal. 
An allied case was heard at the Brill Petty Sessions, Buckingham- 
shire, on Saturday, February 11th, before the Duke of Buckingham 
and other magistrates. Emanuel Hall, of Long Crendon, farmer, 
was charged, on the complaint of Mr. H. P. Andrewes, Chief Con- 
stable of the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, 
with cruelly ill-treating, abusing, and torturing eighty-eight sheep, 
three horses, and four pigs, at Long Crendon and Shabbington. 
Mr. Andrewes conducted the prosecution. 
William Sinclair , one of the officers of the society, stated that he 
went to the defendant’s farm at Long Crendon on the 1st inst., and 
found there in a meadow, about a quarter of a mile from the home- 
stead, fifty-four sheep in a wretched and debilitated state. The 
ground was covered with snow, and there were no signs of food 
about. The animals were nothing but skin and bone, and witness 
could lift any one of them with one hand. He had a conversation 
with the defendant, who told him that four of the sheep had died — 
he supposed, he said, because they had not had enough to eat. 
Witness next visited defendant’s farm at Shabbington, where he 
found thirty-four sheep in the same state as those at Long Crendon. 
On the former farm he saw two ricks of clover, two of barley, ten 
of wheat, and one of beans. 
