VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
159 
without its being discovered by such as these; I shall, therefore, 
content myself by commenting on the veterinary evidence, and, 
so far as 1 am able, to convince your readers that an incorrect 
judgment was given. It will be seen that Messrs. Grover, 
Burt, and myself, distinctly stated on oath, that the horse shewn 
to us by Mr. Blaber was unsound from ossification of the lateral 
cartilages of both fore feet , which existed to such an extent that 
it could be readilv detected bv both sight and touch ; and 
Messrs. Comber (of Worthing) and Dawtry (of Petworth) as 
distinctly stated that the cartilages were not ossified. With 
the evidence of Messrs. Grover and Burt I entirely concur, 
therefore I have no remark to make on either of their state¬ 
ments. Mr. Comber states, “ The veterinary surgeons opposed 
to him had not minutely examined the enlargement, but that he 
had, and found that it was horny fibre.” This enlargement 
being situated under the skin above the coronet, I will leave to 
the common sense of your readers to judge how far this state¬ 
ment can be correct: as for myself, horny fibre in a horse is 
quite a new tissue to be deposited in any place except on its 
hoofs. He then states, “if it u-as an ossification, it would not 
produce lameness;” and Mr. Dawtry states, in direct contradic¬ 
tion to this, that “ if there had been an ossification of that size, 
the horse would have been dead lame.” Mr. Comber also 
stated (which does not appear in the report) that neither splints, 
spavins, nor ossified cartilages, were unsoundness after the 
process of ossification had been completed. Now, sir, 1 think 
this sweeping assertion at once proves how much this gentle¬ 
man’s opinion was worth, and I shall not trouble you by 
dwelling more on his evidence. Mr. Dawtry’s evidence, with 
the exception of the difference I have drawn attention to, was 
in effect the same as Mr. Comber’s; and he also stated the en¬ 
largements (which I wish distinctly to impress on your readers 
were situated immediately above the coronets towards their 
hinder parts) were not within an inch of the cartilages; and also 
that the lateral cartilages were situated within the hoof, and in 
no part extended above it. Now, sir, had I heard any amateur 
moderately well acquainted with the structure of the horse, make 
such an assertion, I should have been surprised; but when a 
member of the veterinary profession states it on oath, I cannot 
find words to express my astonishment; and, to prove how en¬ 
tirely opposed this statement is to what is correct, I beg leave 
to copy the description of these parts from our best veterinary 
anatomists. Mr. Percivall says, “ The cartilages project back¬ 
wards beyond the coffin-bone, giving form and substance to the 
heel. Supposing one of them to be divided into two equal 
parts by a line drawn horizontally across its middle, the su- 
