308 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
in this year I had him destroyed. I kept him for eighty weeks, as 
I considered him to be a very valuable horse, and I wished to keep 
him. I made a post-rnorte^n examination, and was assisted by Mr. 
Griffiths, of the Veterinary College. I found great injuries in the 
dorsal and lumbar vertebroe. I sent a portion of the back to Pro¬ 
fessor Spooner, at the Veterinary College. Had the horse been an 
old one his back would have been broken at once. 
A portion of the back of the horse was produced in Court, and 
the structure of it and the injuries received were explained in a 
most lucid manner to the Court. 
The plaintiff was minutely cross-examined by Mr. O’Malley, but 
he adhered strictly to the evidence he had given, and said he bought 
the horse to show at Oundle, and did all he could to keep it alive, 
as he considered it was a valuable one. AVhen he bought the horse 
he offered £50 for it, but he gave another horse and a sum of money 
in exchange for it. The horse was a young horse, and had pro¬ 
bably never been in a train before. He was quite sure his servant 
was in the box with it at the time of the accident, and came up with 
it to Thrapston. The horse was not a restive horse. He was first 
tied with a rotten halter, which gave way, and he ran back when the 
sides of the box were opened for a fresh halter to be put on him. 
He did not kick, and there was not much trouble in getting him in 
again. The partition in the box was broken by the concussion and 
by the weight of the horse falling against it. Pie examined the 
horse-box, and the beam at the top of the carriage was thrust out¬ 
wards. He called the attention of the station-master at Thrapston 
to that. The other horse in the box was shaken, but he made no 
claim for that. 
3Ir. O' Malley said that after the lucid manner in which the 
plaintiff had explained the medical part of the case, it would not 
be necessary to call the other veterinary surgeon, who attended on 
behalf of the plaintiff, as they must be able men indeed if they 
could make the matter plainer. 
The Judge thought it would be quite unnecessary. He never 
heard anything more plainly explained in his life. 
Henry /u56ee,“under-gardener at Lord Lilford’s, said, in 1867, he 
was with the plaintiff at Bury St. Edmunds. Two horses were 
put into the box. The injured horse was put in the centre com¬ 
partment, and the second liorse in the compartment furthest from 
the door. There was not much difficulty in getting the colt into 
the box. When they were being shunted on to the train they went 
at such a pace that he put his head out of the window and called 
out to one of the men to go gently. After that he laid hold of the 
horse’s head to steady him, to prevent his being pitched. They 
bumped the horse’s head, and cut him on the forehead, and drove 
him down. They drove his (witness’s) head against the top of 
the window, and broke the crown of his hat, and made a bump on 
his head. He corroborated the plaintiff as to the position in which 
the horse was found, and the injuries he received. 
By Mr. Metcalfe—The colt went quietly into the box. He was 
