248 
WARRANTY OF ANIMALS. 
exhibit no symptoms of uneasiness, so that it is fair to infer 
that the others partook of it also, and owe their immunity to 
the probability of its not being uniformly mixed, or, as already 
stated, by the antidotes administered. 
Whatever cause or causes may have contributed to their 
escape, no reasonable doubt can be entertained as to the cause 
of death of the one referred to. 
The condition of the kidneys, said to he the principal 
organ by which arsenic is eliminated from the body, the liver, 
and lungs, complete the chain of evidence. 
It is a strange fact, however, not easily accounted for, that 
the quantity of the poison capable of producing perforation 
of the stomach, and such effects on the various organs, could 
remain so long in the system and fail to develop its poison¬ 
ous action, as it is regarded as one means of diagnosis in the 
human subject that ulceration has never been known to take 
place from arsenic or any irritant poison until symptoms in¬ 
dicative of irritant poisoning have occurred. It seems one 
of those anomalies in the action of medicine where nature 
seems to expend her last effort in the preservation of her 
subjects. 
One great desideratum in the treatment of such cases, or 
in cases where a horse has eaten to repletion of barley or 
wheat, is a simple and effective instrument in the shape of a 
stomach-pump, by which the contents of the stomach could 
be liquefied and removed. If such an instrument could be 
devised or some of the existing ones simplified to make them 
more easily and effectively applied, it would outrival in 
public estimation the revelations of the microscope or 
thermometer. 
REMARKS ON TWO RECENT DECISIONS RE¬ 
FERRING TO THE WARRANTY OF ANIMALS. 
By A. E. Macgillivray, Y.S., Banff. 
Two rather important decisions as to the warranty of 
animals were given during the last week of January, by the 
Sheriffs of Forfar and Banff respectively, on which I con¬ 
sider it as well to offer a few remarks. 
Commonly, and I may say virtually, the practicability of 
entering into any litigation as to the sale of any animal 
hinges on the existence or non-existence of a written warrant 
—the latter being hitherto a sort of sine qua non in endea- 
