§ SIR W. WEDDERBURN (Banffshire)I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been drawn to the case of Davis and Pocock, who were summoned on the 2nd ultimo, before the Gloucester County Bench, for cruelty to a bullock by driving it for three miles to market when lame from a fracture of a leg; whether he is aware that it was proved by the medical witnesses that the animal was suffering pain and was unfit to be so driven; whether in holding that the act of the defendants did not constitute cruelty, and in dismissing the case the Justices committed an error of law; and whether he will direct the case to be disposed of in accordance with the evidence?
§ MR. ASQUITHMy attention has been drawn to the case to which my hon. Friend refers, and I find that although the animal which was the subject of the charge of cruelty was lame from a fracture of the leg, the fracture had taken place more than a year ago. Evidence was given to the effect that the animal was suffering pain and was unfit to be driven; but there was counter-evidence to show that though from this old fracture the animal limped badly, he did not suffer pain, and could be driven without cruelty. The Justices held that a case of cruelty was not made out against the defendants, and dismissed it accordingly. In this, whether their decision was right or wrong in point of fact, they committed no error in law; and I have no power to give any instructions for the re-hearing of the case.