546 
THE BLOODSTONE CASE, 
stone possessed. Fie, fie on its professors ! for attempting to sap 
the foundations of veterinary science after this manner. No fear, 
however: — the groundwork is Nature’s laying; and the structure 
thereon erected is far too firm and substantial to be shaken by side 
puffs of wind such as these. P. 
THE BLOODSTONE CASE. 
Herbert v . Day. 
Mr. Platt, before the jury had been sworn, stated that the horse 
which was the subject of this action was in the town ; and as it 
might save time, he would suggest that the jury should go and see 
it before the trial was commenced. 
Mr. Baron Parke thought it would be well that such a course 
should be adopted. It was a very reasonable proposition. 
The jury were then sworn, and went to the stable where the colt 
was. 
Mr. Platt having previously submitted that it might be advis- 
able that they should examine Old England, the colt to which the 
stakes were given, which was also in the town, 
Mr. Baron Parke. — Certainly ; and they ought to take two 
(veterinary?) surgeons also with them. 
Mr. Sergeant Channell, Mr. Petersdorff, and Mr. Lush, conducted 
the case for the plaintiff; and Mr. Platt, Mr. Sergeant Shea, and 
Mr. Willes, appeared for the defendant. 
The jury having returned, 
Mr. Lush opened the pleadings, and stated that this was an 
issue directed under the Interpleader Act by the Court of Queen’s 
Bench, to try whether a certain colt that had come in the first 
at the last Ascot races had been foaled in 1842, and was a foal by 
Bubastes out of Romaike. 
Mr. Sergeant Channell, in stating the facts of the case to the 
jury, said that the plaintiff was a solicitor at Northleach, near 
Cheltenham, and the defendant was a trainer of horses. The plain- 
tiff was the owner of a colt called Bloodstone, and the defend- 
ant claimed to be the owner of another colt named Old England. 
These two colts had both run for the “ New Stakes” at the last 
Ascot races, on the 6th of June. Bloodstone came in first, and, in 
