391 
“BERRY t\ BRISCOES 
To the Editors of the ‘ Veterinarian 
Dear Sirs, — The report in your May number of the 
dog case, <e Berry v. Briscoe,” is very important and sug- 
gestive, and one which the members of the veterinary pro- 
fession will do well maturely to reflect upon. 
Giving all parties interested the usual quantity of latitude, 
we arrive at the fact, that the dog is sent to the defendant 
and placed under his care for professional treatment, the 
animal having received an injury, either serious or slight ; 
it is not important which. 
Under his care the dog remains from two to three weeks, 
and is cured ; the while being boarded and lodged in a box 
fit for the winner of either the Liverpool or Waterloo Cup. 
The defendant for this demands two guineas, which the 
plaintiff refuses to pay, and the defendant detains the dog. 
They become irritated, and hence the action for 10/. lCb*. the 
alleged value of the animal. 
The death has nothing whatever to do with the matter in 
dispute, since legal proceedings are instituted before the dog 
dies, or is even supposed to be ill. 
A post-mortem inspection is made by the defendant , in the 
presence of other veterinary surgeons, amongst whom is Mr. 
Hayes in behalf of the plaintiff. It is clearly shown, and 
freely admitted by all present, that the animal died of a 
diseased heart of long standing, and which was not in any 
way accelerated by any circumstances over which the de- 
fendant had any control. The plaintiff would not have taken 
any money for the animal, but he should think it would be 
worth 10/. 10 s. for a dog which his own veterinary surgeon on 
oath states died of diseased heart ; and he was of necessity 
so diseased , when he is sent to defendant for treatment of an 
injured leg. He also thinks a guinea a sufficient remunera- 
tion for defendant, who, it should be known, is the oldest 
graduated veterinary surgeon in Liverpool, and whose diploma 
is dated somewhere about the year 1819. Mr. Hayes, the 
youngest graduated practitioner in Liverpool, whose diploma 
is dated 1856, also thinks one guinea for a fortnight’s at- 
tendance and keep a sufficient remuneration, although he did 
not .consider himself over paid with half a guinea for looking 
on at a post-mortem inspection. Should he, some forty years 
hence, be blessed, like the defendant, with health and in- 
