722 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
what was the matter with the horses when they were alive, after such 
a lapse of time. It was too bad of them to. come there and swear 
up to the mark as they had done. Mr. Superintendent Tindall, who 
saw the horses when they left the field, said he was perfectly sur- 
prised at seeing them afterwards when they were ill. The horses of 
Mr. Bamlett were perfectly well after the trial, and had since been 
sold at an increased price. Was not that sufficient to show that 
what a horse could do easily and well could not be an improper 
thing. There was nothing at all in the amount of work done to call 
for animadversion. In his mind the defendants were in no sense 
guilty of the offence imputed to them. If they were, then every- 
body who saw the trial were equally to blame. There were eight 
policemen and a superintendent there, and, as the day went on, 
gentlemen of position, and humanity, and feeling ; but not a soul 
interfered, or was aware that any cruelty was being perpetrated. If 
there was any cruelty, he should like to know why Mr. Tindall and 
all the gentlemen and magistrates who were there were not sum- 
moned. They saw all that was going on, and were all equally 
guilty. But Mr. Tijidall saw nothing wrong, even when he followed 
the horses up to the stable. They had been going at the rate of a 
mile and a half an hour, and for three or four hours of the day they 
were doing nothing at all ; and every witness said there was no 
urging or pushing of any kind. The drivers had whips, but neither 
of them seemed to have used them. There was no stumbling in the 
field, no signs of fatigue, no holding up, or anything of that kind. 
But it got out that one of the horses had died — that was sensational ; 
then that one of them was shot, and that made it worse. He did 
hope that this society would be bound over to keep the peace, and 
not meddle with other people’s business for the future. 
(Laughter.) If they were to take cognizance of such things as 
that, we should all be subject to meddlesome interference without 
end. 
Mr. Catterall said he observed that all were charged with “ caus- 
ing” or “procuring.” Now, supposing they were to draw up a 
conviction in that language, would it hold water ? 
Mr. Harris : We have thousands of convictions in the year. 
Mr. Addison said that in the event of a conviction he should ask 
for a case. 
Mr. Catterall said his impression was that it should be drawn up 
in the form of the summons. 
Mr. Harris observed that all their summonses were taken out in 
that form, and the magistrates determined on what was proved. 
Mr. Catterall : Suppose there is evidence of over-driving on the 
part of the driver, that would be an act of commission ; but could 
they couple with that the fact that the other persons “ pro- 
cured ” it ? 
Mr. Addison said the case would not stop there if the magistrates 
convicted. 
Mr. Harris did not know whether that was a threat or not, but 
they could discuss that point afterwards. 
