302 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
on the way he called at the plaintiff’s place of business, where he 
saw plaintiff’s man, Denison. Denison observed that Dawson’s 
mare was affected with a slight discharge from the nose and that it 
did not look well, and remarked upon this to the defendant, who 
said that the mare had got cold and would be all right in a few 
days. On the following morning the plaintiff saw the mare, and 
noticing the discharge at the nostrils he had a suspicion that it was 
the first symptom of glanders, which was a very infectious disease. 
He went to see the defendant and expressed a fear that the mare 
would “ smittle ” the other horses in the field, but the defendant 
said he had had a veterinary surgeon to see the mare, and it was 
only suffering from a cold and would be better in a week or two. 
Plaintiff said he had refused to take £60 for his own horse which 
was in the field, and he should not like it to take any disease. 
After that the defendant turned two other horses into the field, and 
on the 25th of June the defendant’s three horses were found to be 
suffering so much from the glanders that they had to be buried in 
the field, and the authorities ordered that the field should be closed 
to prevent the spread of the disease. Plaintiff’s horse, which was a 
young one, about the same time showed symptoms of the disease, 
and was now, it was stated, on the point of death. It ought, the 
plaintiff said, to have been destroyed a month ago, but it still 
remained in his stable in Wakefield Road. The plaintiff was 
examined at length in support of the above statement, and he ad¬ 
mitted on cross examination that his horse, since the disease had 
developed, had been at one or two trotting matches. He said he 
had given the animal away, but would not allow the party to take it 
away until that action had been tried.—Denison, the plaintiff’s man, 
having been called, Mr. Carter , veterinary surgeon, was examined, 
and stated that in June he was called in by the defendant to examine 
a grey horse in the stables which he found affected with glanders 
to such an extent that he recommended that it should be destroyed. 
He was informed about the other horses in the field and also ex¬ 
amined them. He found them also suffering and they were 
destroyed. He described the symptoms of the disease, one of which 
he said was a discharge from the nose. In answer to Mr. Berry, 
he said that the discharge was so similar to the discharge caused by 
influenza that it required a very experienced man to detect the 
difference. The discharge would take place when the horse would 
eat well, look well and work well. The disease was incurable. 
After the horses in the field had been slaughtered, he made a post¬ 
mortem examination, and found from the lungs of the bay mare 
that she had suffered from chronic glanders, as she was much worse 
than the others. Mr Walker, another veterinary surgeon, was there 
at the time, besides other persons .—Inspector Wood gave similar 
evidence as to the post-mortem examination, and Mr. Collins, 
veterinary surgeon, deposed to the state of the plaintiff’s horse, 
which suffered from glanders.— Mr. Lodge surgeon, was the next 
witness. He said that the bay mare was bought from him by the 
defendant in February, and a few weeks afterwards the defendant 
