HORRIBLE CRUELTY TO A HORSE. 
727 
for a period of five days without producing to the animal a 
great deal of suffering, perhaps not acute pain. The horse 
was a domestic animal, which, from its construction, required 
feeding three or four times a day, and to keep a horse for 
five days without food was an act of the greatest cruelty. 
Mr. Serjeant Battaniine —“We don’t want an expression of 
your opinions; you are here to give scientific evidence, and 
not to give opinions that are not asked for.” 
Professor Spooner —“ I am here to answer questions and 
explain certain matters connected with the case, and I shall 
do so.” 
By Mr. Sleigh—The want of food in the stomach and 
intestines would cause spasms, which would put the horse in 
acute pain, and then he would show it by pawing with his 
feet. Tying the head of a horse up, as he had heard the 
head of the defendant’s horse had been tied up, would dis¬ 
arrange the nervous system, and would, in his opinion, be 
crueltv to the animal. 
•f 
Cross-examined by Mr. Serjeant Ballantine—Any punish¬ 
ment would disarrange the nervous system, the same as 
flogging a boy. The duty of persons employing punishment 
was to do it in a moderate degree; but it seemed to him that 
to keep a horse for five days without food was an act of gross 
cruelty. He did not contend that punishment was not to 
be applied to animals and persons, but it was a question of 
degree, and that was to be decided by persons that were com¬ 
petent to judge of it. Some animals were extremely obsti¬ 
nate and unmanageable. There was not a great variety of 
opinion as to the mode by which the subjugation of a horse 
was to be come at. There was some difference of opinion as 
to the treatment of Rarey towards his horses. Some thought 
it a failure. There were some horses that were jibbers and 
very refractory, and could not be cured, while others could 
be cured only b}^ measures of severity, which, in his opinion, 
would be extreme by cruelty. He thought a horse of that 
kind should be destroyed rather than resort to the cruelty 
that would be necessary to break it in. He thought that a 
horse might be punished judiciously, the same as a child. 
He was not a follower of Rarey; he thought that his plan 
was very consistent, and did not subject the animal to much 
torture. It was quite possible to convince a horse of the 
superiority of his master without resorting to cruelty. 
Re-examined—There was no circumstance in his opinion 
under which a horse could be kept five days without food 
without great torture. 
By the Bench—He was aware that some horses never lay 
down for weeks or months—some not at all, but these were 
