293 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Mr. Spooner —No, I went to the stable door, but was refused admit¬ 
tance (laughter). From what I have heard in evidence as to the size of 
the enlargement, it must necessarily have taken some time to form. 
Ossification generally begins in the hoof, where it is not visible. Con¬ 
traction of the foot is generally a slow process. It is more frequently 
the effect than the cause of navicular disease. I still adhere to the 
statement made in my work, that “ A horse may point from corns, or 
from other injury at the posterior part of the foot, but then this point¬ 
ing is different from that of navicular disease. In the latter, the foot is 
generally set out straight; in the former, it is not extended so far, but 
the heels are more elevated. In the former, the animal having put his 
foot in the easiest position, turns his attention to other objects; whilst 
in the latter, the solicitude of the horse is evidently directed more con¬ 
tinually to the part.” 
Cross-examined—A horse would not point, in the sense in which 
true pointing is understood by professional men, except from navicular 
disease. The probability is that if it pointed from some other cause, 
that cause would be quickly found out. If there was a bruise in the foot, 
for instance, the pointing would be very different. A sprain of the 
sinews would not cause a horse to point. Lameness may, or may not, 
accompany an alteration in structure. Ossification may be completed 
in a few months, and it may take much longer. Where it occurs in a 
short period, there must be much active inflammation going on. If the 
lateral cartilage yields to manipulation, it cannot be completely ossified. 
Mr. Norris —Partial ossification might take place iD a month or six 
weeks, I suppose ? 
Mr. Spooner —The moment there is a speck of ossific matter, ossifica¬ 
tion has begun. It takes some months to complete. Ossification of the 
inferior cartilage might cause mischief without its being noticed. Dray- 
horses are more susceptible of ossification than others. It is generally 
a much mure serious matter in horses employed in faster work. There 
is such a thing as hereditary predisposition to ossification. I should 
call ossification unsoundness, even without lameness. Ossification 
scarcely ever occurs from outward pressure. Hunting horses are not 
so subject to navicular disease as those on turnpike roads. Since the 
discontinuance of coaches, navicular disease is far less prevalent than 
formerly. Ossification may commence and go on for a long period 
without being observed. It may not, perhaps, be noticed until lame¬ 
ness comes on. Lameness does not necessarily arise from ossification 
of the cartilage. 
By the Judge— Ossification would be more or less quick in proportion 
to the acuteness of the inflammation. In cases of ossification, the car¬ 
tilages which ought to yield no longer yield; the superincumbent weight 
of the animal produces pain, and lameness, which is the language of 
pain, ensues. 
This was the plaintiff’s case. 
Mr. Norris submitted that there was not sufficient case to go to the 
jury. Mr. Hussey said he found the mare to be lame at first, but yet 
he retained possession of it for nearly three months without making any 
complaint. He thereby adopted the animal, with whatever defects she 
might have. 
The Judge said Mr. Hussey might have adopted it so far as to be 
unable to return it; but the second rule of law was this—that if a man 
brought an action for the price which had not been paid, evidence of 
breach of warranty might be given in diminution of damages. The 
question appeared to him to be one of evidence and not of law. 
