VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
305 
sciously. The Master of the Rolls, however, was of opinion that 
the ewes and hoggets died of eating the yew, and decided in favour 
of the plaintiff, on the ground that as between the landlord and 
tenant there is an implied warranty on the part of the former that 
the trees and shrubs which he plants or suffers to be on the demised 
premises shall not be noxious or injurious to the tenant.— Chamber 
of Agriculture Journal. 
OVERSTOCKING CATTLE. 
Conviction of a Farmer. 
At the Swindon Petty Session yesterday (March 20th) Mr. 
Edward Seager, farmer, of Cotmarsh, near Wootton Bassett, was 
charged with cruelly ill-treating a cow, by what is known as over¬ 
stocking, at Swindon, on the 10th of March. The prosecution was 
undertaken by the Cirencester Society for the Prevention of Cruelty 
to Animals. 
Mr. Peters, the inspector to the Society, said he was on duty in 
Swindon Cattle Market on the 10th inst., when he saw a cow 
standing by the side of a cart containing a calf. He noticed that 
she was very uneasy and kept trampling about, and that milk was 
running from the udder in a stream. The udder was much dis¬ 
tended, the teats were dry, stiff, dirty, being covered with manure. 
From the appearance of the cow he concluded that she had not been 
milked for a length of time. The cow looked wild, and was 
evidently suffering much from an accumulation of milk. He called 
the defendant’s attention to the state of the udder, and asked him 
to ease the cow, but he refused, saying she would not sell so well if 
she had not such a large udder. This was at 10.15, and the cow 
remained in the same state until after she was sold at 12.15. Every 
time she moved the milk ran away in a stream.— P.C. Kibblewhite 
confirmed the inspector’s statement. 
John Adam M ( Bride, M.R.C.V.S., said he had heard the evidence 
of the last witnesses, and had no hesitation in saying the case was 
one of cruelty. Overstocking was one of the common causes of 
inflammation of the udder. Overstocking was a practice quite 
unnecessary, but was generally resorted to to make the udder look 
large, and thus enhance the value of the cow. The udder was so 
connected to a large number of nerves that the retention of milk in 
it must be very painful. Mr J. Whapham, M.R.C.V.S., gave 
similar evidence. 
Defendant had nothing to say in his defence. He admitted that 
the cow had not been milked that morning, but said she had been 
the night before. After a long consultation the bench convicted 
defendant, and fined him £>\ and £5 11s costs.— Bristol Press. 
