342 
HORSE CAUSE-NISBETT V. KENT. 
the fleam was, that an excessive effusion of blood took place, 
which proved fatal to the animal. When the horse died, Mr. 
Nisbett sent for the defendant to inquire into the mode of treat¬ 
ment he had adopted; but the defendant refused to go, saying 
The horse is now dead, and there’s an end of it.” He (Mr. 
Williams) considered this language highly unworthy of a profes¬ 
sional man. 
Another veterinary surgeon was then called in, who ascertained 
that the vein had been cut through, and the arteiy punctured. 
Mr. Robert Mead Nisbett, the son of the plaintiff’, proved 
that the operation of bleeding was performed on the horse by the 
defendant on. the 21st of June in the present year. The horse 
was in very good condition at the time he was bled. The horse 
was bled with a lancet at the right side of the neck, and about a 
gallon of blood taken away. The bleeding was followed by a 
large swelling, which extended up both sides of the neck. The 
defendant did nothing with it till after he had pinned up the neck. 
He then ordered his man to chafe it with cold water. That was 
done for about a quarter of an hour, but the swelling did not 
subside. The defendant then desired witness to take home the 
horse quickly, and to chafe him with salt and water, and' at the 
same time to tell his father not to be alarmed. He also said that 
the swelling would get larger, but that it would subside again. 
The defendant said that such a swelling occurred but in very few 
instances, and that witness might ride the horse if he chose. 
Witness did ride the horse a short distance, about half a mile. 
Was obliged to dismount, the horse w^as so unwilling to go on. 
In the mean time the swelling increased, and witness led the horse 
on, and afterwards went to procure the aid of a farrier, as the horse 
was bleeding out of both nostrils. The*horse died in about two 
minutes. Witness afterwards went to the defendant to tell him 
that his father wished him to see the horse before it was removed. 
Defendant said he could not come, as the horse being noio deady 
he could be of no f urther service. 
Cross-examined.—The swelling was equal on both sides of the 
neck. 
By a Juror.—The horse was a well-bred horse, and had a veiy 
fine skin. 
Mr. Davis, a farrier, said that he had been in practice in Bristol 
for upwards of twenty years, and had bled several hundreds of 
horses. In his opinion the horse in question had died from having 
been unskilfully bled. He found a great quantity of blood had 
escaped from the orifice. The vein was punctured through, and 
he thought the artery had been divided. He took from six to 
seven pints of arterial blood out of the horse’s neck. The imme¬ 
diate cause of the death of the horse w as siiflbcation, in consc- 
