VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
607 
of value, which had been occupied by the plaintiff himself for 
some eighteen years. The grievance of which he complained 
was an injury done by certain lead works, set up by the 
defendant. The plaintiff had experienced the greatest possible 
damage on his farm, and especially to the stock upon it. It 
was a dairy farm. Plaintiff kept from thirty to forty cows, 
and also a number of colts ; he likewise had a farm at Cheddar. 
The defendant was the chairman of what was called the 
Mendip Mining Company, and Rodwell was its manager. 
The Company had been established about ten years. They 
had been for some time getting permission to gather slag, 
which contained lead ore, and in which the district seemed to 
have abounded in the time of the Romans, who, in their 
assiduity to dig it up, had scattered the refuse about the 
district. This slag when taken up was subjected to blasting 
furnaces, and for the purpose of accomplishing these ends, 
the company had set up works. The law of the country w r as, 
that if a person sets up a factory, or a furnace, or any work 
of that kind for his ow r n advantage or good, he must take 
care that in the use of it he did not do any injury to his 
neighbour. Now the defendants, for the purpose above stated, 
had erected furnaces at a place called Ubley, of three or four 
different classes and descriptions. Three of them were 
reverberating or calcining furnaces, and the other was a blast- 
ing furnace. Charterhouse farm, which the plaintiff occupied, 
was situated near the spot on which these works were erected, 
and between it and the furnaces the plaintiff’s brother kept a 
small farm. In the early part of April, it was found that a 
very large quantity of smoke issued from the chimneys of the 
furnaces in question, and shortly after the plaintiff’s brother 
began to find that his stock suffered, and rather than get en- 
tangled he gave up his farm. Mr. Barwell became tenant 
of that, and also of another large farm near it. At that time 
they made some alteration in the chimney, and made it 
of a much greater height, the effect of which was that the 
plaintiff’s lands began to suffer. In 1851 plaintiff found the 
young animals of his stock dying — it could be clearly shown 
by the venom on the grass on the surface of the land. The 
plaintiff lost, from 1851 down to Midsummer, 1853, four 
cows, forty-eight lambs, and six colts. He (the learned 
counsel) would prove they w T ere poisoned, and poisoned by 
lead. He would show that Mr. Herapath had found lead in 
the animals, in the hay, and on the hedges, and he had taken 
weeds from the farm coated with the sulphate of lead. It 
had been found even in the milk after it had passed through 
the cow. It did not affect vegetation in the slightest degree 
