DYSENTERY 
158 
Syk Dyke, and that, occasionally, in a quantity greater than the 
original stream. 
The bran underwent various washings, and, being sufficiently 
cleansed, was given to the pigs. 
The starch, however, required another process in order to fit it 
for use. The smell which hung about it was to be taken away, 
and the starch was to be bleached. For these purposes a solu- 
tion of the chloride of lime was employed, and when that had 
done its duty, it too was turned into the stream. 
Sulphuric acid was also used in considerable quantities, in 
order to perfect the manufacture. That also ultimately found 
its way into the water-course. 
At length the defendant yielded so far to the remonstrances of 
the plaintiff as to construct a sough , or circular tiled drain, 
through the plaintiff’s grounds, by means of which the empoison- 
ed water was conveyed to a river at some distance, the volume 
of the stream of which was supposed to be so considerable as 
not to be materially affected by admixture with these deleteri- 
ous ingredients. 
This being effected, the fish and the frogs began to return to 
the brook, and the weeds grew on its banks, and the mortality 
seemed to cease among the cattle ; but the defendant refused to 
make compensation for the cattle that were previously destroyed. 
In order to recover this compensation an action was brought. 
The following is the substance of the evidence : — 
Eliz. Jackson, sister of the plaintiff. — Has known the water- 
course which runs through their premises more than forty years. 
In 1823 a starch manufactory was erected in their neighbourhood. 
The plaintiff had eight closes, through which this water-course 
ran. These closes usually contained the dairy cows, from fifteen 
to twenty in number. There was no other water for these cows 
but from the water-course, except when they were driven into 
the farm-yard in order to be milked. Before the erection of the 
starch manufactory the cows did well ; afterwards they were 
evidently affected by the water. 
The first cow died in 1828. She had detected a difference 
in the water long before. It looked very dirty. It was white 
sometimes — a film or scum then came upon it, and there 
was a great sediment at the bottom, of a black colour. It was 
very good water before — perfectly pure — used for domestic pur- 
poses, and the cows did well. In 1828 three cows died, and a 
calf ; in 1829, two cows; in 1830, six cows and two calves; in 
1831, one cow and two calves; in 1832, four cows and two 
calves; in 1833, six cows; in 1835, one calf; and in 1836, 
two cows and one calf, making in all twenty-four cows and nine 
calves, the value of which was £384. .3s. 
