1)9 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
aware of. This will be always the case with him who has no 
practical experience. 
I know a veterinary surgeon, who when he first came from Col¬ 
lege, employed a farrier, and brought him into his yard to bleed 
and operate for him. I contend on the ground of common justice, 
as well connected with the honour of our profession, that the person 
who has had practice should be distinguished from him that has 
not; and I trust that we shall not much longer have to submit to 
what we feel to be an act of injustice. 
There is another class of pupils of which we have cause to com¬ 
plain ; there are a considerable number of them, who reside in dif¬ 
ferent parts of the metropolis, and attend to other business, while 
their time is going on at the College. They come, perhaps, for an 
hour or two every day, or every intermediate day. They are those 
whom Mr. Sewell calls day-scholars; and yet their time will be as 
soon expired as our’s, who devote ourselves entirely to the College. 
This is not quite right. 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Hepatized and Tuberculated Lungs. 
Fisher v. Joyce. 
We have been permitted to see the notes of a short-hand writer respecting 
a horse-cause of an unusual and very important character. The plaintiff, a 
horse-dealer, buys a horse of another dealer—he keeps it a short time, and then 
sells it to Mr. Kent, a veterinary surgeon, residing at Bristol. Mr. Kent keeps 
the horse about three weeks, and likes it. lie puts it to no kind of hard work, 
but, after the expiration of those three weeks, the horse becomes suddenly ill 
and dies. Mr. Kent examines him, and finds the lungs very extensively hepa¬ 
tized and tuberculated. A portion of the lung had attained a perfectly 
scirrhous state. His experience in the diseases of horses tells him that a dis¬ 
ease of three weeks’ standing could not have produced hepatization and tuber¬ 
cles—nor could such lesions have been formed in the course of the three weeks 
that had elapsed since he purchased the horse. lie comes to the conclusion 
that the animal had diseased lungs at the time of sale, and he writes to the 
seller, and demands a return of the purchase-money. It is sent to him. 'The 
horse-dealer then makes of his brother-dealer the same demand; he, how¬ 
ever, does not part with liis money so readily—he refuses to refund, and 
this action is brought. 'Phe question then is. What time does it require to 
form these peculiar lesions in the respiratory apparatus of the horse ; or could 
