566 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Mr. S. Reeve said the defendant was simply a nominal defendant, the 
real defendant being Mr. Larke, a gentleman, who would tell him that 
he had had the mare ever since she was foaled, that she was a six year 
old mare, and that he sent her in June last to Dunham for the purpose 
of being gentled, and that then there was nothing the matter with her. 
He should also prove by other witnesses that the animal was sound. 
Dunham, when he sold the mare, believed that she was perfectly sound, 
and in reply to the letter received from plaintiff, Mr. Larke wrote back 
to the effect that the mare had only been warranted up to the time of 
delivery. Mr. Larke inferred by that that if he did not like her, to send her 
back, by all means. Mr. Larke was not fond of courts, and going to 
law; his object was, if the man had any complaint—he knew of none— 
to get her sent back. On the 20th of August, when Dunham got a letter 
from plaintiff saying the mare had gone unsound, Mr. Larke was 
astonished, and on the 21st of August he got another from Mr. Walpole, 
enclosing the veterinary surgeon’s certificate, Mr. Larke felt that the 
man was trying to “ do ” him, and he had probably had the mare out and 
used her so that she got acute fever, and then he wanted to turn her 
back. 
Mr. Larke stated that he sent the mare to Dunham to be gentled and 
sold. He had had the mare from the time she was foaled, and she was 
always sound. She was high mettled. He had several horses, and she 
could not have been lame while in his possession. 
His Honour. —The owner is the very last person to know it: the 
owner never finds it out. 
Mr. Larke. —The horse in use is soon found out. 
His Honour. —By some people. The horse is so lame; more lame on 
the Tuesday than on the Monday ; and so little more lame on the Wed¬ 
nesday that the owner would very often go on for months without 
finding it out. But directly it is sold, the horse gets a few days’ rest, 
and the new purchaser likes to ride his new purchase, and gives it a good 
rattling along a hard road, and the horse flies all to pieces. That is my 
experience. 
Dunham (the defendant) said the mare was not lame when sold. He 
did not tell plaintiff that the mare had cracked heels. 
Tunnaley , in Dunham’s employ, a blacksmith, named March , who 
always shod the animal at Wymondham, and Sharpe , who helped to 
“ gentle ” the mare, all said that she was not lame when they had the 
care or charge of her. 
Mr. Wells, veterinary surgeon, of Norwich, said if a horse had acute 
fever in the feet to day, it might have been perfectly sound yesterday. 
He should think the horse had not acute fever when it was taken to 
Norwich on the 1st of August. Seeing the certificate of the veterinary 
surgeon describing it as acute fever, it was compatible with the fact that 
the mare might have been sound on the 1st of August. 
Cross-examined.—The certificate of Mr. Leeds was not in accordance 
with Mr. Worm’s evidence. He should not have given that certificate. 
Navicular disease might have been present for some time without a 
person like a shoeing-smith observing it. 
By His Honour.—Driving a horse suffering from navicular disease 
thirty miles along a hard road would not produce acute inflammation of 
the laminas, because it is a law of nature that no two diseases should go 
on in the system at the same time. In the one case the animal went on 
the heels, and in the other on the toes. It was likely to come on after 
a long journey, and particularly after being fresh shod. 
Mr. T. Mayes, veterinary surgeon, of Wymondham, had never seen 
