VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
579 
make him stale; don’t know that diuretics would increase the 
formation of urine, be adding fuel to the fire, and hasten the 
animal’s death in a case of strangury; inflammation caused the 
stoppage; won’t say how it could be relieved—that’s a secret; is 
sure you know it, perfectly sure of that; did not know that it was 
impossible ; won’t honestly confess my ignorance of the matter; 
cannot swear that if the colt was ill in Newry that he was able to 
walk home (ten miles) ; gave the colt no medicine at all, but 
injections and good advice—of course, that was useful just before 
he died. [Great laughter .] 
To the Barrister .—Does not know of any thing that could 
relieve the horse except diuretics: if that would not cure him, 
nothing would. 
Plaintiff’s case here closed, and the barrister was inclined to 
dismiss, without hearing the defence, but plaintiff’s attorney de¬ 
murred ; when Mr. Small proceeded to address the court as 
follows :— 
Defence. 
* In the absence of my solicitor, who has not arrived from Newry, 
it is my misfortune to be obliged to conduct my own defence in 
this most iniquitous action; and, although it is a saying amongst 
lawyers, that “ a man who pleads his own cause has a fool for a 
client,” I think that I may safely risk the imputation in such a 
case as this. It is an extraordinary action, and so novel in its 
nature, that in the records of veterinary jurisprudence in this 
country, in England, or in Scotland, there is not a single instance 
of such a cause of action as that which is now before the court. 
‘It is a case that does not affect me individually; it deeply affects 
the interests of every member of the profession to which I have 
the honour to belong. It likewise interests the medical pro¬ 
fession ; for a surgeon after performing amputation may have the 
misfortune to lose his patient—many a man has died from the 
amputation of a limb—when a jealous rival, or a vindictive relative 
of the deceased man, may trump up a plea of neglect against the 
unfortunate surgeon, and cast him into gaol on the charge of 
manslaughter, or it may be murder. Similar is this case before 
the court. It is notan action for debt, for I owe no man any thing; 
nor is it an action even to recover damages, for that is impossible: 
but it is a vindictive action, brought against me, not only to rob 
my purse, by bringing me here to Hillsborough, thirty miles from 
my residence, but with a diabolical intention to ruin my pro¬ 
fessional character and reputation, to rob me of the means whereby 
I live. The facts of this case, which I will prove in evidence, are 
the following:— 
