VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
127 
proposal that the letter should be signed by the Principal in name of 
the council. From what passed the Principal and Dr. Dalzell were 
entitled to assume that the witness did not disagree with the pro¬ 
posal that the letter should be signed by the Principal in name of 
the council. He considered it was proper that Mr. M‘Bride should 
be made aware of the opinion of the council, that Mr. M‘Bride 
would have consulted his own dignity by retiring, and that the dis¬ 
turbances damaged the college. He had no idea in the world that 
Mr. Williams was fomenting the disturbances, and thought that he 
did all he could for Mr. M‘Bride. 
Re-examined—From what he heard, he thought that Mr. Williams 
had done what he could to cause the disturbances to cease. He was 
of opinion that, so far as regards order, Mr. M‘Bride was incapable 
of discharging the duties of the chair. 
By the Lord President—I think that ultimately, at the meet¬ 
ing of council, I said that the letter would do no harm if it did no 
good. 
Catherine Smith said she was in the service of Mr. Williams from 
July, 1867, to April, 1868. Mr. Williams very often had the 
students attending the college in his house. The students generally 
came between eight and nine o’clock, and sometimes sat very late 
drinking and smoking. Professor Dalzell was always there. She 
sometimes heard the students and the professors speak together 
about Mr. M‘Bride. They were always speaking against him. Once 
she said to Principal Williams—“ Why did the students speak 
against M‘Bride—what had he done ?” and he called him some 
name, which she could not recollect. About the time the petition 
was presented, Mr. M‘Bride was the subject of conversation at 
these meetings and for weeks before. The students who came were 
almost always English or Irish. No students who spoke of Mr. 
M'Bride in a friendly way came to the house at night. After 
Mr. M'Bride first came, Mr. Williams spoke of him in terms of 
praise. She understood from what she heard said, that for weeks 
before the petition appeared, the Principal, Dr. Dalzell, and the 
students, wanted Mr. McBride away. 
By the Lord Advocate—The meetings in the Principal’s house 
did not begin before the New Year’s Day, but there was a party on 
that day. The parties began to be held about two months before 
witness left in April. Dr. Dalzell was in the habit of coming to the 
house every night with the students in March. The parties of 
students generally consisted of twos or threes. 
The Court adjourned at six o’clock. 
Tuesday, December 29th. 
This trial was resumed at ten o’clock this morning, when the 
evidence for the pursuer was proceeded with. 
David Hislop, seaman, Leith, deponed—I remember the New 
Year of 1868. I got my finger taken off then. I w'as frequently 
