894 
Veterinary Jurisprudence. 
WAKEFIELD COUNTY COURT. 
Tuesday, September 27th, 18/0. 
(Before T. H. Marshall, Esq., Judge.) 
Action for Damage to a Cow. — Fisher v. Stringer. — This 
was an action to recover damages alleged to have been sustained in 
consequence of injuries inflicted by the defendant upon a cow 
belonging to plaintiff. Mr. Gill appeared for the plaintiff, Mr. 
Jeremiah Fisher, cloth fuller, Horbury ; and Mr. Shaw, barrister, 
instructed by Mr. Barratt, for the defendant, Mr. John Stringer, 
basket maker, Horbury. The damages were laid at £25. 
The circumstances which have given rise to the present action 
were before the public a short time ago in connection with pro- 
ceedings at the police court, when Stringer was committed to prison 
for a month, without the option of a fine, for cruelty to the cow in 
question. 
M r Gill , in opening the case, stated that plaintiff was the owner 
of a cow, and on the 6th of May last it chanced to stray on to some 
land which the defendant uses as osier beds ; and while the plaintiff 
was absent for a few moments the defendant, as alleged, struck the 
cow with a heavy hack — an implement employed in cutting roots 
away from the willows — on the udder, thereby severely injuring the 
animal, insomuch that it was much reduced in value, and had done 
no good since. 
Mr. Gill then called the plaintiff, who stated that on the 6th of 
May in the present year he had been with his cow to watering, and 
on returning up a lane he left it whilst he went to buy some tobacco 
at a neighbouring shop. Whilst he was absent the animal appeared 
to have strayed on to the defendant’s premises, for on returning he 
found Stringer with a large hack striking her. He asked what he 
was doing, and Stringer replied that he had given her something 
which she would not soon forget, adding that he would do as much 
for him (Fisher), and then asking why he kept a cow, seeing he 
had “nowt” to keep it on. Plaintiff further stated that he gave 
£ 1 9 for the cow, and considered that prior to this cruelty she was 
worth £30. Formerly her yield of milk was, on an average, six 
gallons a day; now it was very little indeed. On the 10th of May 
plaintiff sent for Mr. Fallding, veterinary surgeon, to attend the 
cow. — Mr. Shaw, in cross-examination, elicited that Fisher did not 
lay a complaint with the police sergeant until the 16th May ; and 
that his wife did not, in his hearing, tell Sergeant Wheelan that he 
never saw the cow struck. James Thresh, farm labourer, stated 
that on the forenoon of the day in question he was at work in a field 
