BLACKWOOD V. WRIGHT. 
435 . 
they do not say that this better treatment would certainly have 
saved the horse: Finds, that the horse was opened on the same 
day on which he died ; and it is established by the testimony of 
the two farriers, and of tw’O other witnesses, that there was an 
internal growth of a hard substance in the intestines, and that 
this was the cause of the inflammation in the intestines, so far 
as there were such symptoms, but that acute inflammation was 
not the cause of the adhesioii: Finds it stated as the opinion of 
these persons, that this growth was the cause of the horse’s 
death ; and that it must have been the growth of some months’ 
duration—one of the witnesses savs six months: Finds, that 
both Dick and Henderson, the veterinary surgeons, consider the 
disease a very uncommon one, and which they profess not to un¬ 
derstand from the description given; but they do not state that 
such a disease could not exist, and one of them admits that he 
has seen one instance of the kind : Finds, that these two wit¬ 
nesses, while they differ in opinion with the two farriers as to the 
cause of the death of the horse, differ also from each other as to 
the cause of the death; but finds that Dick depones, that he 
would consider that a growth, such as is proved in this case, was 
caused by chronic inflammation, and of considerable standing, 
although he cannot specify the time; and that a growth caused 
by acute inflammation would exhibit symptoms of inflammation 
on dissection : Finds, that Henderson states that a tumour of 
the consistency described would take two months, or, at least, 
six weeks, to form : Finds it thus established, that the disease of 
which the horse died was contracted prior to the sale : Finds it 
admitted, that next day the advocator was informed of the death 
of the horse, and asked to come and inspect the intestines, which 
had been preserved for that purpose, which he declined : Finds, 
that till the post-mortem examination, it could not be ascertained 
that there had been unsoundness at the time of the sale, as all 
the symptoms might have existed, and the death might have 
proceeded from a supervening disease subsequent to the sale; 
and therefore finds, that there was no undue delay in intimating 
the claim under the warrandice, as it was done as soon as the 
latent defect was discovered on inspection, and therefore as soon 
as the respondent knew that he had right to go against the ad¬ 
vocator : Advocates the cause: Decerns for £30, as the price of 
the horse, with interest from 16th December 18:29, and till paid, 
together with the expenses as decerned for by the Sheriff: Finds 
the advocator liable in the expenses of this process, of which al¬ 
lows an account to be given in, and remits to the Auditor to tax 
the same, and to report. One word delete. 
(Signed) 
J. H. Forbes. 
