VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
91 
together with the passing comments they have elicited from M. 
Bouley, in order that we may reserve our notice for the “ Second 
Part” of the inquiry before us, in which we find M. Bouley 
propounding his own views of the elastic properties of the hoof. 
These occupying considerable space, however, must necessarily 
be put by for our next number. 
[To be continued.] 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Action for Damages occasioned by Sheep-dipping Composition, 
at Exeter, before J. Tyrrel, Esq., 
EXETER DISTRICT COUNTY COURT. 
Huggins v. Froom. 
Mr. Huggins (the plaintiff) stated that he had bought Bigg’s 
sheep-dipping composition of the defendant for several years. 
In 1850 he bought forty pounds of a similar composition, pre¬ 
pared by Mr. Froom, who lent him an apparatus for dipping. 
He paid particular attention to the directions sent with the com¬ 
position. Used rather more water than was ordered (fifty-one 
gallons instead of forty-three), and dipped 229 sheep in the 
quantity sold him for 200. He had still enough for twenty sheep 
left; he assisted in the operation, and attended to the instructions 
given. Two or three days after the dipping, the sheep appeared 
stiff, and could scarcely walk—they seemed to be paralysed ; he 
examined them, and found them blistered, as if they had been 
scalded. After a week, they would fall down, and were unable 
to rise again : the blisters became worse, and broke; abscesses 
were formed into the bone. He called in a farrier : eventually 
twelve died, eleven lambs and one ewe; they turned black x 
the dogs and the flies would not touch them. All that were dipped 
were injured more or less—twenty-eight were under treatment 
for three or four weeks, being unable to stand; the ewes lost 
their teats, and out of about fifty, he had only eleven fit to breed 
from. He had twice seen defendant on the subject, who declined 
to make any compensation. He valued the eleven lambs which 
died at £\, the ewe at £1..10s., and the injury done to the others 
(217) at 3.9. each. 
In cross-examination, he stated that he had lost two sheep in 
a former year, after dipping in Bigg’s composition. 
Other witnesses corroborated the substance of the statement. 
