VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
621 
pleas were, that he was not guilty, and further, that what he had done 
>vas by the leave and license of the plaintiff himself. The following 
evidence was then taken. 
Mr. David Hughes was the first witness called. He produced apian 
which as an engineer and surveyor he had prepared of the land. 
Mr. Dugdale Houghton, the plaintiff, was then examined. He 
deposed to having, in 185.1, become tenant of the farm in question. At 
that time the pasturage was luxuriant, and the cattle upon the farm 
thrived well. He had 300 brood mares upon the farm. He also grew 
upon the farm crops of fern, which were usefully employed in feeding 
horses. He had also 800 to 1000 sheep. Some time after he had taken 
possession of the farm the defendant took the Red Jacket Works, where 
he smelted copper. Soon after the works were in full operation, plain¬ 
tiff observed that the grass dried up and withered so that it was 
rendered useless. It appeared to have been affected as if blasted by 
lightning, and there were spots of a peculiar description upon it in 
different places. A number of the horses, cattle, &c., upon the farm 
died. Witness traced this to the effects of the copper smoke, and, to 
satisfy himself on this point, sent portions of the carcase of some of the 
horses to be analysed by Mr. Herapath, of Bristol, and from that 
gentleman’s report he was further confirmed in his opinion that the 
death of the horses and cattle resulted from the deleterious effects of the 
copper smoke. The witness described at length the effects produced upon 
the turnips. The leaves became green, and yellow, and shrivelled. 
The total loss he computed he had sustained amounted, according to 
his calculation, to upwards of £600, from the year 1857 to 1860. 
The plaintiff was then cross-examined at great length by Mr. Chambers, 
who evinced his usual facetiousness in the mode in which he bantered 
the witness. 
Cross-examined.—If one of plaintiff’s men had proven at a previous 
quarter sessions, that witness was in the. habit of sending a large 
number of rabbits to Bristol for sale, he said what was not true. He 
was in the habit of sending some to Birmingham, where they were sold 
at from Is. 6d. to Is. 9d. per couple. Had brood mares that were 
broken-kneed and one-eyed, but they answered his purpose well, as they 
had heavy weighted cobs not race horses. Had £7 for some of them. 
In Smithfield a good brood mare might be purchased for 50s. Con¬ 
sidered that the claim he made for loss of horses was too expensive, and 
that the sum of £425 was reasonable. Was a director and shareholder 
in the South Wales Mineral Scheme, the shipping port of which was 
Briton-Ferry. Was connected with that scheme before he took the 
farm. Did not complain of the Briton-Ferry Copper Works. Some 
portions of the farm was very cold, and some of the horses became hide¬ 
bound, lean, and thin. Some persons might have said that he starved 
his horses; but it was not true. Out of seventy horses that died, some 
fifty died from the effects of the copper smoke. Did not call any 
learned veterinary or other scientific assistance to examine the carcases 
of the horses that died for the purpose of ascertaining whether they had 
died from the effects of copper smoke or from other causes. Had sud¬ 
denly become learned enough to know which of the horses had died 
from the smoke, and which had not. In 1857, after the action had been 
brought, he called one of the Messrs. Bankart to see horses and crops 
that had been injured. Valued the injury done to the crops and horses 
himself, as he considered that he was a competent farmer. Did not 
make a memoranda of all the claims for damage which he intended 
claiming. Trusted much to his memory, which was an excellent one. 
XXXIII. * ()3 
