VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
687 
His Honour .—That will be a verdict for the plaintiff. What are the 
damages you award ? The Foreman. —We consider that £25 is sufficient. 
His Honour gave judgment for that amount, with costs for plaintiff. 
PROFESSIONAL DISCREPANCY—ALLEGED CRUELTY 
CASE AT BURSLEM. 
(Before H. C. Greenwood and J. Edge, Esqrs.) 
Thomas Corns, carter, was summoned for ill-treating a horse, and 
William Leigh, manufacturer, was summoned for causing the horse to be 
worked. Mr. Tomkinson appeared for the defence. 
Inspector N'icholls said that on the morning of the 26th June he saw 
the defendant Corns driving a dark-brown horse attacked to an empty 
cart near the Chatterley Wharf. The horse was extremely lame on both 
fore feet. Corns said he had worked the horse from November to March 
only three days per week, and he was going to fetch a ton of coals. 
Witness thought the horse was unfit to draw the empty cart. He had 
seen Mr. Leigh, who said a side bone had been coming on ever since 
they had it, and that he was going to sell it to a farmer. 
Mr. R. Trigger, veterinary surgeon, gave evidence as to having ex¬ 
amined the horse, and gave it as his opinion that the horse was quite 
unfit for road work, and wanted a long rest, and to be worked on soft 
ground. 
For the defence Mr. Tomkinson called Mr. George Smith, veterinary 
surgeon, Tunstall, who said he saw the horse in question in March 
last, and it was then suffering from quittor. The horse was brought to 
his stables, and after treatment the wound was healed, and the horse 
was sound. He believed now that the horse was better doing light work, 
and it would not be cruelty to work the horse on the roads in the 
district. 
Mr. William Carless , veterinary surgeon, Stafford, said he had ex¬ 
amined the horse, and his condition was as good as need be. He corro¬ 
borated Mr. Smith’s evidence, and said the horse was quite fit to be 
worked on the roads. 
The Stipendiary said he believed that an act of cruelty had been com¬ 
mitted on the day named, but it was of a slight degree, and he would 
dismiss the case on the payment of costs. 
CASE OF GLANDERS—CONVICTION. 
At Greenwich Police Court, August 19th, John Rowell, livery - 
stablekeeper, of Stanstead Road, Forest Hill, and Henry Buckingham, 
marine-store dealer, of Finsbury Place, Hosier Street, Deptford, appeared 
to summons at the instance of the Metropolitan Board of Works, the 
first being charged with having a grey gelding suffering from glanders 
and farcy in his possession and not giving notice to Mr. Ingersoll, 
the veterinary surgeon appointed inspector under the Act for the 
district of Lewisham, and the second defendant for driving the animal 
from Forest Hill to Greenwich, where it was slaughtered. 
Mr. Balguy fined Rowell 20s., and 10s. 6d. the veterinary surgeon’s 
charge for attendance, with 2s. cost of summons ; and Buckingham 10s, 
and 2s. costs. 
