VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
319 
for a considerable time, and he had opportunities of looking at her, I 
think the mare was kept in the stable for a fortnight. The accident 
happened about one hundred yards from the stable. She did not walk 
lame, but bled a great deal. I sent for Mr. Gregory, who came within 
two hours. After I took her into the hunting field she never went lame ; 
in fact, she was never lame either before or after the accident. I rode 
her from 9^ till 6, with Lord Portsmouth. She was remarkably fresh 
on the next morning. I don’t recollect saying that she would fetch £l00 
in another year. I said “ Kingsdown’s” stock had fetched £100. The 
mare never made a false step with me. She fell with me, owing to a 
bank giving way. This was on the 10th of February. I rode her again 
two days after. I did not see defendant get off and examine the fetlock, 
by putting his hand on the enlargement. On the 27th February 
defendant offered me £40 for the mare. I swear that he did not say it 
should be only conditional on having his “vet.’s” certificate of sound¬ 
ness. I said she was sound, with the exception of the enlargement of 
the fetlock, and the crib-biting. I did not mention the crib-biting till he 
offered me £40; the reason was, that I did not know it, as the mare had 
taken up the habit recently. I said she never was a regular crib-biter, 
and when the strap was on she scarcely did so at all. I might have 
seen her crib-biting; there were no marks on the manger. Mr. Beedle 
asked if 1 had any objection to having his “vet.’s” examination as to 
her soundness. I asked what unsoundness he suspected. He said, “ She 
might have curby hocks.” I was not opposed to his having Mr. Parsons. 
I said I had no objection to his having Mr. Parsons, or any one else. I 
said, “No ‘vet.’ could tell more than I have told you about the two 
blemishes. Mr. Gregory could give a better opinion than any one else, 
as he has known her from a colt.” Before he talked about going to the 
“ vet.” I told INIr. Beedle that Mr. Gregory had said the swelling might 
be reduced by iodine. 
Ee-examined.—Mr Beedle came back to me and said he had con¬ 
sulted Mr. Gregory, and his statement agreed with mine. 
Mr. T. D. Gregory sworn.—I am a veterinary surgeon, of Bideford. 
I know the mare “ Crinoline.” I knew her from a colt. On the 4th 
December I was called to attend her for an accident. It was simply an 
incised wound through the skin, over the region of the fetlock-joint. It 
was nothing more than a skin wound. The joint was in no wise injured, 
nor were the tendons or the ligament that connected the part with the 
joint. She was never lame—not in the slightest degree. 1 ordered the 
mare out to exercise on the 10th January. So satisfied was I that the 
injury was of a trivial nature, that I promised Mr. Hole that he should 
ride her in the hunting field by February; and he did so ride her with 
Lord Portsmouth’s hounds on the 10th February, and on the 13th with 
Mr. Eolle. On the 27th February I was out at Staple Vale, when Mr. 
Beedle rode up and said, “ Is it fair to ask you for an opinion in the 
hunting field?” I said I should be happy to serve him if I could. He 
said he had bought or was about to buy JMr. Hole’s chestnut mare. I 
remarked that she was a crib-biter, and we had some conversation as to 
the cause and effect of crib-biting. I examined the mare on Saturday 
last, and she is now perfectly sound. I never had more confidence in 
giving a professional opinion than in this instance. 1 don’t believe she 
will ever become lame, or that any ill effect will result from the injury, 
save and except the appearance. 
Cross-examined.—The cellular tissue lies between the skin and the 
joint. I don’t believe that it was injured in any way ; nor would it be a 
matter of importance if such were the case. I am perfectly certain that 
