Cruelty to a Mare Print E-mail
 
Edward BARDGETT, miller, Sockbridge, was charged with causing a horse to be cruelly treated, by allowing it to be worked when in an unfit state. Mr. ERRINGTON appeared for the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, and Mr. H. RICHARDSON for the defendant. Mr. ERRINGTON said this was an offence under the Cruelty to Animals Act.
 
 It appeared that their inspector, on the 5th of January last, was at Penrith on duty, and whilst there he noticed a servant of the defendant, called John HARRISON, in charge of two horses yoked to two carts laden with corn, and perceived  that an old grey mare was going very lame. He found on examination, that there was a large suppurated would about three inches in diameter, under the saddle. His client consequently gave the man in charge, and brought the horse in question down to this Court in order that the magistrates might have a chance of examining it themselves; however they did not happen to be there.
 
Inspector CRAIGIE substantiated Mr. ERRINGTON’s statement, adding that the wound had been brought on by the friction of the saddle.
 
Sergeant McGUFFIE said he saw blood and matter on the pad. The wound was red raw, and blood and matter were oozing from it. He tested the sensitiveness of the wound, and the horse flinched when he touched it.
 
Mr. RICHARDSON for the defence, said that the mare had been suffering from a warble for some time, which was really reduced, and was healing again, On the day in question the horse was very stiff from want of exercise, and he (defendant) thought it would be right to send it to Penrith for that purpose. They admitted that there was a wound, but that was from the warble alluded to.
 
The Bench said they were bound to follow the law, which was to protect these animals from being cruelly treated, and would consequently fine the defendant £1 and costs, and the driver of the horse £1 and costs.
 
 
< Prev   Next >