VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
709 
and lie should be glad to get salmon and ducks to-day when the 
case was over. (Laughter.) He was in the habit of going like 
the wind when in the saddle. For fourteen years he led the Queen’s 
stag hounds, and should have continued to do so but for his in¬ 
creasing weight. Had had great respect for his nags through life. Had 
shot and buried most of those which did not suit him. (Laughter.) 
Re-examined—There were roundabouts and shows at the revel, 
but the horse went quietly along notwithstanding the noise. He saw 
other horses being led through the street. If he had known of 
the. sale at Aldridge’s he would have kept on bidding until he had 
got the horse back. He was in London at the time, but knew 
nothing whatever of the sale. 
Several witnesses were called in support of the defendant’s case, 
and among them 
Mr. Cannon, jun., and Mr. William Clark, horse trainer, of Melk- 
sham, to w T hom the horse was sent immediately after its purchase 
by Mr. Palmer. Clark said it had been trained to carry gin and 
water. (Laughter.) He had seen Mr. Cannon with “a little drop,” 
but he thought it perfectly safe for him to ride the horse. Witness 
drove it eleven times, and rode it to hounds more than once. He 
saw no symptoms of vice in it, but it jumped a little at the noise of 
a waterfall near Mr. Ludlow’s, at Westbury. The jumping was 
not sufficient to cause any alarm. He once drove the horse through 
water up to its belly a distance of 800 yards, and it was then per¬ 
fectly quiet. His wife, another lady, and a blind gentleman were 
with him, and if the horse had shied or swerved, they would have 
been thrown into a deep ditch. That would have been an awkward 
thing, as witness could not swim. (Laughter.) He had a commis¬ 
sion to buy the horse for 5070 or £80, after it had been sent to 
Strange, but he was unable to ascertain where it was to be sold, 
although he went to London, Bath, Bristol, and Salisbury for that 
purpose. 
Mr. Cole having summed up the evidence, 
Mr. Edlin replied, contending that the horse did not answer the 
warranty, and that if the case set up by the defendant was accepted 
by the jury, there would be an absolute denial of justice in the 
matter. 
The learned Judge , in summing up, said the question which the 
jury had to determine lay in a very short compass; but it w r as one 
on which they would, perhaps, find some difficulty in making up 
their minds, on account of the diversity of evidence on both sides. 
They must not be influenced or biassed by the social position of the 
parties. Unfortunately there was a sort of fatality about these 
horse cases. The moment they arose there was a direct collision 
between the parties interested. He had never known a case which, 
when a question arose about the qualities of a horse, there was not, 
on one side or the other, a great degree of exaggeration and un¬ 
truth ; and he was afraid he must say that the present one afforded 
no exception to the general rule. The jury could hardly imagine 
that the witnesses on both sides were telling the naked truth. 
