6.28 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
the sheep that died from copper smoke, so as to produce a fair account ? 
He did no such thing ; but formed ail enormous claim without even 
giving a reasonable account of the loss he had sustained. Could the 
jury believe that the loss had really been sustained ; although a horse, 
cow, or sheep, might die from copper smoke, there were many witnesses 
who could prove that the mortality could not have been so bad as 
stated. He was putting on the screw ; he was merely purchasing law¬ 
suits. They claimed £2000 for the injury sustained from the spring 
of last year to the present time. The plaintiff was trying to make gold 
out of copper in an extraordinary manner. He had received com¬ 
pensation already for the damage he sustained from the Briton-Ferry 
Works, the smoke of which must be mixed with that of the Fled Jacket. 
The smoke had been united from 1858 to 1860. Did he not receive 
£126 a year nett profit, and a further enormous sum of £1300 for the 
damage done by the Briton Ferry Works ? How could the plaintiff call 
upon the jury to divide the particles of smoke which come from the 
works and apportion to each its due quantum of deleterious smoke? As 
for the medical gentleman from Swansea, who found charming flowers 
in sheltered nooks—the blowing wild thyme, violet, foxglove, and 
daisy, he feared he was rather a biassed witness, and gave a dark picture 
because he did not see a greater variety of these delightful wild flowers 
than had made such an impression upon his refined and delicate or¬ 
ganization. It was commonly said, that a man could not eat his 
pudding and have it too, but the plaintiff did it twice over. He wanted 
to charge the loss of crops, seeds, outlay, &c., and yet he charged for 
the whole rent of the farm, and the other items to which he had no 
claim. The learned counsel then proceeded to analyse the exorbitant 
items claimed. He contended, that the scientific evidence adduced 
did not and would not show that the injury sustained, if any, might 
have been produced by other copper works in the neighbourhood 
as well as by the Red Jacket. The plaintiff had no books to show what 
he had paid for the lame, blind, and halt horses he purchased, and it 
was unreasonable to expect a jury to listen to such a claim. In con¬ 
clusion, he submitted that the plaintiff endeavoured to trade upon his 
neighbours who by that enterprise and industry developed the indus¬ 
trial resources of the county; and he hoped that the jury would by 
their verdict discountenance such a proceeding, by awarding, if they 
awarded anything, mere nominal damages. 
The Court, on the conclusion of the above speech, adjourned. 
Friday. 
The case for the defence was resumed. 
Lewis Jones Griffiths , surveyor and land agent, proved the accuracy 
of the defendant’s plan. 
Howard Bankhart , son of the defendant, manager to the Red Jacket 
Copper Works.—Went there in 1859, when the works were converted 
from spelter to copper smelting works. Used a patent for the latter 
about seven months, and as it did not answer it was abandoned. In 
December, 1850, there were six furnaces and six calciners. In 1852 
there were ten furnaces and six calciners. In October, 1853, there were 
twelve furnaces and eight calciners. They went on increasing till June, 
1859. Recollected plaintiff taking the farms in 1853. Previously to 
that the smoke from his works had affected the hill opposite the works, 
which hill formed part of the plaintiff’s farm. The land could not 
