360 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
to the state of her feet; she had corns in both feet; in consequence 
of that he wrote to defendant, stating- that the mare had corns, which 
would take £20 off her value, as she could not be warranted, and 
hoping that he would make him some allowance on account of it; on 
the 20th of December, received a letter in reply, dated 17th December, 
in which defendant pledged his honour that he had never known the 
mare to have corns, and that if she had any they must have come on 
after her last shoeing, and would be easy of extraction ; he added 
that if she had but three legs to stand upon she would be worth the 
money to breed from; the letter further stated that so far from being 
asked for any allowance, he should have to ask for some himself, as the 
chestnut nag had pulled down the manger, and “ kicked up Bob’s a 
dying” (a laugh), and that in driving him there would never be any 
need of a lantern to light him home at night, as he struck fire at every 
stone he came to, and it would not be long before he went down on his 
knees instead of his feet (laughter). The plaintiff went on to describe 
the difficulty experienced in riding the mare, as she was hot and fidgetty, 
shied when he was on her, and on one occasion bolted with him; after 
her shoeing he noticed that she went lame, and he had her shoes taken 
off, and poulticed her feet; witness’s foreman called his attention to 
the state of the mare on the 11th of January, and he observed that she 
was not quite right, and sent for Mr. Nathaniel Leigh, the veterinary 
surgeon ; on the 16th of January, wrote to the defendant to inform him 
that the mare was dangerously ill from inflammation of the lungs, and 
that Mr. Leigh had a very bad opinion of her. The plaintiff went on to 
state—The mare was never a good feeder after I had her; she died on 
the following Tuesday, the 19th, and I then wrote to Mr. Badeock to 
tell him that she was dead, that Mr. Leigh was going to open her, and 
that I would call for him to come and see her opened; he wrote, in 
reply, that he should like to attend at the opening, but was very busy, 
and could not command the time : and he further said he was sorry to 
say that he had last about £6 on the horse, as he had sold him for 
£16 55. and added “ it is a bad job on both sides;” attended at the 
opening, and went next day to the Swan and saw the defendant, and 
proposed to him to settle it in a friendly manner; said to him “ Let us go 
to Canterbury,” which meant to divide the loss (a laugh); he declined to 
do so, and I then offered to refer the matter to anybody, or to call in the 
landlord ; he would not consent, and I said, “ Remember, Mr. Badcock, 
you warranted her sound he persisted that he did not; I told him that 
if he had made her up fit for a nobleman she would never have passed 
the veterinary surgeon, as she had a sidebone in the off fore foot; he 
said he had spoken to his veterinary surgeon, and he had told him that 
that was no detriment to her; I reminded him that he had also war¬ 
ranted the mare quiet to ride, and he replied “ Yes, I have ridden her to 
hunting with a snaffle bit;” afterwards said to him, “You don’t seem 
disposed to settle,” and he said “No, 1 must consult my solicitor first;” 
ou the 26th of January wrote to him, informing him that unless I heard 
from him before Monday 1 should place the matter in the hands of my 
solicitor ; received a letter dated 27th from defendant, stating that he 
was prepared to defend any action, and advising me, before I threw 
away my money in law, to remember that he had distinctly refused to 
warrant the mare, and had referred me to the breeder for information 
respecting her. 
Cross-examined—I am not a horse dealer ; do not buy and sell a good 
many ; did not buy the mare for sale, or I should have returned 
her when l found that she had corns ; when we were at the Swan it 
