604 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
York Nisi Prius Court, Wednesday, July 15. 
( Before Mr . Baron Watson and a Special Jury.) 
DUNN V. GREAT NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY. 
Mr. Temple, Q.C., and Mr. Kemplay were for the 
plaintiff; Mr. Hill, Q.C., and Mr. Blanshard for the 
defendants. 
Mr. George Dunn, the plaintiff, is a horse-dealer, residing at 
South Cave, and he sought to recover £23 for the loss of a 
mare on the Great Northern Railway. On the 17th of 
December last, he purchased the mare in question, for the 
sum mentioned, of Mr. Bland, of the Old George Hotel, 
York, and on the following day the plaintiffs son-in-law, 
Richard Marshall, took her to the railway station at York, 
for the purpose of her being conveyed to Lincoln. 
When the train arrived at Knottingley, Marshall went to 
look at the mare, and on the door of the horse-box being 
opened the mare was found lying on the floor unable to rise. 
An examination showed that she was seriously injured in the 
spine, and on the recommendation of Mr. Kay, veterinary 
surgeon, Pontefract, who had been sent for, she w^as killed. 
This action was accordingly brought to recover her value, 
the injury being attributed to the negligence of the company’s 
servants, in not tying the animal up in the horse-box closer 
than it was tied. On the other hand, it was submitted that 
the loss was occasioned by the kicking and unruliness of the 
mare, for which the Company were not responsible. Before 
the train left the North-Eastern station at York, a ticket 
was given to Marshall containing a notice respecting horses, 
cattle, &c., in ’which it was stated that the defendants would 
not be responsible for any loss or injury in the receiving, for- 
warding, or delivering horses, &c., if such damage be occa- 
sioned by the kicking, plunging, or unruliness of the same. 
To show that the halter by which the mare was fastened 
was too long, it was stated that, although the animal was laid, 
the halter had not snapped, but continued to be attached to 
her head. 
Several of the officers of the railway company were called 
to prove that the mare was properly tied up, and that she 
was heard to plunge before leaving the station, and it was 
owing to that, that the accident was occasioned. 
The damage was reduced to £21, Mr. Bland having 
voluntarily returned the plaintiff £3, but £l had been paid 
to the veterinary surgeon. 
Verdict for the plaintiff for £21. 
