134 
MR. KENT IN REPLY TO THE EDITORS 
sent at least,” that had it rested on newspaper report, they 
would at once have said so. It gives me pleasure to ^believe, 
while I controvert their opinion, that they are (I have the pleasure 
of personally knowing one of them, Mr. Youatt) gentlemen of 
candour,-veracity, and honor. 
I feel no hesitation at telling the editors the ground on which 
I refused to go to the dead horse. I was not applied to for the 
purpose of examining him, but to remove him, with a view, as 
I saw, or thought I saw, to advance a claim against me for the 
value of him. I refused to go for two reasons; first, because I felt 
apprehensive that an effort would be made by bringing forward 
persons to swear that I had said or done something, subsequent to 
death, to make myself responsible for the value of him (the man 
who had the carcase told me that Nisbett did ask him to come 
forward on the trial to swear that he purchased it of me, although 
he never saw me respecting it); and next, because I knew that 
I had, in every respect,bled the horse properly; and anticipating, 
by what fell from young Nisbett, that an action would be brought, 
I thought I should steer more clear of suspicion by leaving the 
examination to any other practitioner whom they might call in. 
Had any doubt existed in my own mind as to the operation 
being properly performed, or in other words, had I felt that Nis¬ 
bett had sustained loss by incaution on my part, I would have 
anticipated his demand by an offer to pay the fair value of the 
horse ; but being fully persuaded (and I am still persuaded of the 
same) that I had operated properly, as an honest man I refused, 
and should again refuse, to offer any compromise or apology. 
I did not “ cavalierly refuse,” but declined in as respectful a man¬ 
ner as sympathetic feeling on the occasion could dictate. I thought 
it prudent not to go, and have not yet seen reason to regret 
having done so. I believe I did not “ bring this business on 
myself,” and think the editors will concur in opinion with me 
on the subject, when I tell them that Nisbett did not incur any 
expense by the action, as within sixty hours from the verdict 
being given, he decamped without paying any thing to his own 
attorney, and left me to pay the expenses of defence; consequently 
he had only the chance of gaining by the trial, without any coun¬ 
terbalance in the risk of loss. I think the editors not quite cor¬ 
rect in saying, that according to my account the horse fell down 
and died instantly. My expression is, “ I heard that, &c.” It 
ought to be taken for granted, that at the time I refused to go, 
I had heard Nisbett, junior’s account, which, if true, would have 
given him opportunity to apply while the horse was alive. 
In applying to the editors for the insertion of the above, I feel 
that some apology may be necessary, on account of the length of 
