VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
653 
Cossar became pursuer against Thompson, and summoned him 
before the small-debt court for £8.. 6s.. Sd., being the highest 
sum that could be sued for by summary process before the 
sheriff. 
The case was deferred by Thompson on one and another 
frivolous pretence, three several times, occasioning a great deal 
of trouble. On the fourth time the case came on for a final 
settlement. 
The witnesses for the plaintiff were Messrs. Vessey, Dick, 
Horsburgh, and Mr. Vessey ’s groom. On the other side ap- 
peared Messrs. Ritchie and Watt, V.S., of Edinburgh, with Mr. 
Gregg, riding-master. 
Mr. Vessey deposed to the business part of the transaction, 
the buying of the pony, &c. Professor Dick deposed that he 
had examined the pony, and found him labouring under acute 
farcy and glanders, and expressed himself fully of opinion that 
these diseases existed in the animal previous to the sale. 
Mr. Horsburgh stated that he had administered a dose of phy- 
sic, and on the following day symptoms of farcy and glanders 
developed themselves, and that there were evident marks of 
severe punishment having been inflicted. A simple over-dose of 
physic, he said, could not have caused the disease. It might 
have produced inflammation of the villous coat of the intestines, 
but that would have been attended by altogether different symp- 
toms. He acknowledged that a smart dose of physic, given soon 
after the system has been affected, would, by weakening the ani- 
mal for a time, produce the effect of the disease sooner. In doubt- 
ful cases he was in the habit of giving doses of aloes of the same 
power as those here given. Physic never produces farcy or glan- 
ders unless infection has been previously communicated. From 
the circumstances connected with the case, and particularly his 
having observed the farcy-bud in the cheek before there was any 
other appearance of the disease, he is confident with regard to 
the state of the case. 
Mr. Vessey’s groom deposed to the pony having been brought 
to his master’s stables — to the physic having been given, and the 
scar pointed out by the preceding witness — to different particu- 
lars already described — and to his taking the pony to the Duke 
of Buccleugh’s kennel. 
This closed the examination for the plaintiff. 
Mr. H. Leighton, V.S., on the part of the defendant, affirmed 
that he examined the pony in question, with a view of purchasing 
him for another person — that he saw no appearance of farcy or 
glanders — that he considered the pony as sound, and would 
have bought him as such — that one dose of physic might pro- 
