MAXWELL V. MORRIS. 333 
Cross-examined. — I can undertake to say they are perfectly sound. They 
are rather narrow feet, but I cannot say they are contracted. 
Mr. William Butler. — I am the huntsman of the Badsworth hounds. I do 
know a little about horses, and I know Mr. Morris’s horse. It has been fre- 
quently seen out with our hounds, and we have had many hard days. Mr. 
Morris generally stays to the finish, and I never saw any lameness about the 
horse. 
Mr. Wm. Simpson , of Trumfleet. — The horse formerly belonged to me. 
I sold him to Mr. Morris. I warranted him sound. He had rather a long 
muley kind of a hoof. I saw the horse on Tuesday. He was run on the 
stones, and appeared to go sound on his feet. 
Mr. Stephen Field. — I am a veterinary surgeon in Doncaster. I am a nephew 
to the late Mr. Field, the veterinary surgeon, of London. I have been in 
business five years, and have attended Mr. Morris’s horses for three years. I 
occasionally call in as I pass, not having any direct business. I have known 
the chestnut horse for three years. I was at the stables the latter end of 
the last year when the horse was shoeing, about a month before he went 
away. I never saw any thing in his feet indicative of lameness. I have seen 
him in the Doncaster streets and on the road, and never saw any lameness. 
I have examined his fore feet, to see what sort of feet he had. There was 
nothing of unsoundness in his fore feet. There was decidedly no cause of 
disease, or any thing that could produce any unsoundness. His feet are 
natural, and there are no symptoms of disease in the structure of them. I 
have had casts of the horse’s feet taken since he came home. [The casts 
were produced.] They are casts of the fore feet. The foot is wider across 
the heel than the generality of horses’ feet. I have examined with a view 
to this inquiry nearly a hundred horses’ feet, and I only found one that was 
wider across the heel. Some were wider across the quarter. As a man 
acquainted with this subject, there is width enough to give free play to the 
heel. There is nothing in the heel or quarter of the horse’s foot to con- 
stitute it an unsound horse. The only horse I found wider was a large 
carriage horse belonging to P. D. Cooke, Esq. He stood nearly seventeen 
hands high. I remember seeing the horse after he came back from York. 
He was not in the same condition as when he left. I have seen him put to 
his paces, and he is quite sound on his fore legs. He is rather lame of one 
of his hind legs. He was lame of both when he came back. In my judg- 
ment the horse has no heat or inflammation in his fore legs. 
Mr. Samuel Peech. — I am a veterinary surgeon at Sheffield, and have 
followed my profession thirty-nine years. I have had an extensive practice. 
I know Mr. Morris, and was called in on the 30th of December to see the 
horse in question. I went in company with Mr. Parkinson and Mr. Morris : 
I examined the horse ; but he was so stiff all over as to be in an unfit state 
to give a satisfactory opinion. I took him out: he was lame in the off fore 
leg or foot. I could not judge whether he was lame or not of the other legs. 
I observed his foot on that occasion. It was a long muley foot. I believe 
his lameness proceeded from distress of work, with a great weight on his 
back. From the opinion I then formed there was no disease, except a very 
slight contraction in the outside quarter of the off fore foot, but that I did 
not consider disease. I had his shoes taken off at York. He was shod very 
bad in his fore feet. I was of opinion that the shoes occasioned the lame- 
ness. I have seen the horse since then, but I have no reason to alter my 
opinion, and still think so. I have seen the horse since, and he now goes 
sound on his fore feet. 
Cross-examined. — I went professionally to York, and not as a friend. I am 
not aware that a stilty horse will go more on his toes than his heels. It all 
VOL. XVII. X X 
