365 
Veterinary Jurisprudence. 
WARWICK LENT ASSIZES. 
" Nisi Prius Court. 
(Before Lord Chief Baron Pollock.) 
IMPORTANT TO VETERINARY SURGEONS. 
WILDEN V. STANLEY. 
In this case Mr. Macaulay and Mr. Field were instructed for the 
plaintiff, who is an iron-merchant at Birmingham; and Mr. Mellor and 
Serjeant Hayes for the defendant, a veterinary surgeon, well known in 
practice in the same town. 
The declaration affirmed that the plaintiff sent a bay horse to the de¬ 
fendant’s veterinary stables to be examined, and whilst there to be taken 
due and proper care of for that purpose, but that in consequence of such 
due and proper care not having been exercised, the horse sustained 
injury. The defendant pleaded not guilty, and denied that the horse 
was delivered to him in the terms stated. 
Mr. Macaulay , in stating the case to the Jury, said that the plaintiff 
(Mr. B. Wilden) purchased a horse on the 5th of February, last year, for 
£65, it being warranted to him sound, as indeed it eventually turned out to 
be. A day or so afterwards the horse was taken to Mr. Stanley’s forge 
to be examined. Mr. Wilden was present, and Mr. Stanley tried him 
in the usual way, mounted him, and finally had his shoes taken off, for 
the purpose of measuring his feet. After the shoes had been removed, 
and before they were replaced, Mr. Stanley went into the office, for the 
purpose of ■writing his certificate of the soundness of the animal; but 
in returning with Mr. Wilden to where the horse was standing, it was 
found to be lifting up one of its fore feet, as if in pain. On examina¬ 
tion, it turned out that a stub-nail, which had been amongst a lot of 
parings of hoofs, had got into its foot, and had caused the uneasiness 
of the animal. Mr. Wilden had then no intention of making any claim 
for the injury, because it did not appear that it was of any serious 
nature. Mr. Stanley, however, was exceedingly annoyed at the circum¬ 
stance, and it was arranged that the horse should remain under his care, 
and it did so remain, in consequence of its becoming so lame that it 
could not walk, until April. In that month, on the suggestion of Mr. 
Stanley, the animal was sent to grass, and did not come back to the 
forge until June, where it remained for a short time, and was finally 
handed over to the plaintiff on the 11th of July. Since that time he 
had been gradually improving, but he was for a long time quite useless 
to Mr. Wilden, who in the mean time bought a gray horse at a cost of 
£45. The latter sold only for £32 afterwards. 
Mr. Stanley having sent in his bill, charged £18 6s. 6d. for keep, 
professional attendance, &c., which he insisted on being paid. Mr. 
Wilden did pay it under protest, and now sought to recover it back, 
with the exception of 10s. 6d., which Mr. Stanley charged as the fee for 
xxxiii. 45 
