G90 LIABILITIES OF PROPRIETORS OF SHOEING-FORGES. 
up in the stable, being the son of a coachman, and in the 
habit of riding from the time he was old enough to get on a 
horse. This lad states, that just after turning from the — 
into the — road, the horse shied at a bricklayer’s truck 
standing by the near side of the road, and that immediately 
afterwards a carman, who was proceeding with a van, on the 
off side of the road, cracked his whip, at which the horse, 
taking fright, ran away at full speed down the — road, and 
turned off at a right angle at — gate, the turning leading to 
his stable. In making this turn, the horse came down upon 
his near knee, cutting through the skin, and inflicting, 
besides, a small wound; and as, at the same time, he came 
down upon the near hind fetlock-joint, that likewise received 
a skin wound, a little larger than a shilling. The lad, from 
first to last, never lost his seat. 
A. P—, Esq., immediately afterwards, applied to me to 
make good the damage, stating that he had given eighty 
guineas for the horse within the last year, and that now he 
considered the horse worthless,—he being in the habit of 
using the animal as a saddle-horse, as well as in harness, 
could not now think of crossing his back after he had run 
away, however slight the blemishes might prove. I replied, 
that I was not aware what the law of the case might be, but 
would seek legal advice. The letters I received from my 
solicitors I enclose. The result was, that, as my legal advisers 
considered it “ a ticklish case,” I empowered them to meet 
A. P—, Esq., and settle the matter in the best way they 
could; which they subsequently did, by agreeing, on my 
part, that I should pay A. P—, Esq., thirty pounds. 
A. P—, Esq., considers that the lad taking home the 
horse did not act with proper caution, inasmuch as he rode 
the horse with a cloth only on his back, without a saddle; 
by which, he considers, he had less command over the animal. 
In reply to this, I pointed out that the great majority of 
horses in London are used in harness, their owners seldom 
possessing a saddle; and that, if I were to keep saddles, I 
must be possessed of many, since the same saddle would not 
fit every horse. Also that, in the case of fetching a horse 
from home, the lad would never know what saddle to take, 
considerations that would render my keeping saddles both 
unreasonable and impracticable. 
A. P—, Esq., stated that his solicitor, and also a barrister , 
had informed him that the law was,— That, if the lad had been 
leading the horse , the farrier would not be liable for any damage; 
but , on the other hand , as the lad was riding the horse , the 
farrier was liable for all the damage. —To these opinions, how- 
