VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE, 
495 
Minister of Agriculture and Commerce, according to the 
demand of his Eminence the Cardinal Donnet. The commis¬ 
sion demands that it shall be referred to the Minister of 
Agriculture and Commerce, and the Senate seems to approve 
of this. I will now consult it on the other question, whether 
it shall be likewise referred to the Minister of the Interior. 
The Senate being consulted, pronounced itself in favour of 
the conclusions of the commission, and decided on the double 
reference of the petition to the Minister of Agriculture and 
Commerce, and likewise to the Minister of the Interior. 
M. Leblanc, in commenting on this favorable decision of 
the Senate on the petition, observes, their object being so far 
attained, it now lies with the Minister of Agriculture and 
Commerce, and the Minister of the Interior, that every effort 
should be made. The project of law presented by the 
minister will have to be examined by the Council of State, 
then laid before the Corps Legislatif, and submitted again 
to the Senate for their approval. He is satisfied that 
everything has been done by his colleagues to enlighten their 
judgments, in having drawn their attention to a question of 
such general interest, and in the different points of view, 
such as the industry, the alimentation, and the usefulness of 
the animals in general, and for the public good; and he 
has no doubt but that they will persevere in their efforts, 
and furnish the different powers before whom the question 
will be agitated with all the facts at their disposal, as on 
this question depends the existence or annihilation of the 
veterinary profession in France. 
Veterinary Jurisprudence. 
NORFOLK COUNTV COURT. 
Before Thomas Jacob Birch, Esq., Judge. 
North Walsham, Friday, June 21. 
WARRANTY OR NO WARRANTY. 
Mr. W. II. Scott , of Aylsham, appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr. 
W. L. Mendham , of Norwich, for the defendant, in the action, the 
Rev. William Lawson Barnes, Swafield, v. John Harvey, farmer, North 
Walsham, brought to recover the sum of £11 4s. 3d., arising out of a 
loss on the re-sale of a horse. The question was, it being admitted 
that the animal was unsound, was there a warranty given when he was 
sold to the plaintiff? It was pleaded by the defendant that there was 
not. 
a 
