VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
341 
On bis way to Colchester the next morning, and from what he had 
heard, he asked Mr. Nibloe why he did not let the eight beasts go, 
and he said he should not let them go under the charge for a truck 
and a half. Plaintiff said he ordered a large truck. He went to 
Beccles again at the end of a fortnight, and called and saw the clerk, 
and said, “What a pity it is that we have this bother with our cattle. 
You know I ordered a large truck.” He said it was Mr. Nibloe’s 
fault. He saw the station master, who also said it was Mr. Nibloe’s 
fault. He sold the beasts at Colchester, and they realised nearly £1 
apiece profit. The eight beasts sent to Ipswich were a better class, 
and they cost more per head. Judging from the price he made at 
Colchester he thought if the eight beasts had been sold at Ipswich 
he should have realised £10. 
Samuel Fairhead , drover, said he told the railway man that Mr. 
Mudd had ordered a large truck, and that the eight beasts could not 
be got into a small one. The man replied, “ We must, somehow.” 
Seven of the beasts were got in with great difficulty, and the other 
bullock had to be put in another truck. 
Mr. M. Upson deposed that on the morning of the 3rd of 
December he sent his man to the station for some bullocks, but the 
man returned without them. About ten o’clock a clerk brought him 
a letter from Mr. Nibloe, and he sent back a message that he would 
pay for one truck and no more. He lost a customer (Mr. Gocher) 
through not having the beasts delivered. 
Wm. Carrington Mason proved going to Mr. Nibloe, at twelve 
o’clock on the 4th, and telling him that the beasts were not Mr. 
Upson’s, who was only commissioned to sell them. He (witness) 
said he would take them then if Mr. Nibloe would let them go at 
the charge for one truck. He replied that he had telegraphed to 
Beccles and had not received any reply. 
j Robert Smith said he slaughtered the eight animals in question, 
and the Company conveyed the meat to London. They were bad 
with the foot and mouth disease, and they, no doubt, caught it from 
lying in the cold. 
Mr. Corpe then opened the defendant’s case, remarking ttoat what 
really took place at Beccles did not amount to a contract in any 
shape. As to what took place at Ipswich, Mr. Nibloe had had 
frequent dealings with Mr. Mudd, and Mr. Nibloe had often allowed 
beasts to go for that which the consignee was willing to pay, and it 
was very difficult to recover the balance, as Mr. Nibloe had found to 
his cost. 
His Honour (J. Worlledge, Esq.) said he thought the beasts 
might have been taken away the following Tuesday, instead of allow- 
ing them to remain with the Company for several days after. 
William Hammond, a clerk at Beccles station, said : I remember 
plaintiff coming to the office, and he said he wanted a small truck 
and a half for Colchester, and a large truck for Ipswich. I told him 
I did not think we had any small trucks. Mr. Mudd said, “ I do 
not understand paying for a large one when I want a small one.” 
He also said he would walk the beasts if he could not have what he 
