452 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
ian faith, and that cruelty and unkindness are altogether opposed 
to its mild and beneficent spirit.” 
And let us, with the excellent preacher before us, who has 
taken up the animal cause with so much affection of spirit and 
warmth of devotion—let us, we say, 
*****“ entertain and cultivate a kind and merciful 
spirit towards the brutes that perish, whether our own or those of 
others placed under our care, because they perish *. In our suffer¬ 
ing and miseries we are sustained and cheered by the hope of 
happiness in another world, which will compensate for the sorrows 
of this. We can look to a Heavenly Father, and, committing our 
souls and our troubles to Him in faith, anticipate that present evil 
will work out future good. But the beasts that perish have no 
such hope, no such anticipation to cheer them under suffering and 
misery: they can look only to man for sympathy and kindness. 
We are in the place of God to them; we are the highest order 
of beings of which they are conscious, and their destiny is in 
our hands. Shall they, then, look to us in vain? Shall the im¬ 
ploring eye entreat our mercy and find none, and perhaps meet only 
harshness and punishment in reply 1 For their sake, therefore, 
for our own sake, and, above all ,for God's sake, let us understand, 
let us recognize, let us labour to fulfil that duty which we owe, 
that responsibility which we sustain, towards the animal creation 
placed under our charge in the providence of God.” 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Liverpool Assizes—March 1849. 
Hyde v. Davies. 
(Before Mr. Justice Coleridge.) 
[A more correct and amplified account than is contained in our last No.] 
This was an action brought by the plaintiff, Mr. J. Hyde, a 
horse-dealer, residing at Liverpool, against Mr. P. Davies, a farmer 
residing at Stourton Court Farm, in this county, to recover £62, 
the price of a horse purchased of, and warranted by, the defendant, 
* The author has no wish to pronounce against the opinion ably maintained, 
and practically enforced by some, that animals have souls. For even if it be 
so, the argument here used would lose none of its force ; unless, indeed, it can 
be shewn that animals are conscious of a future life , and sustained by the hope 
which it inspires. 
