The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1877-10-31
AN INTERESTING BULL SUIT.
An Eighteen Thousand Dollar
3a Calf.


At no time, since your correspon-
dent has been sending you letters
from blue-grassdom, has their been
more interest felt among Shorhorn
breeders, in any matter pertaining
to their calling, than to the trial OF
the great t'bull suit" between T. j.
Megibbon, OF Harrison, and E. G.
Redford, OF Bourbon, held at Paris.
Kentucky. during the past week.
The high standing Of the parties.
the novelty Of the issue and the
amount involved, brought out a
large crowd. and as the evidence
brought out some facts as TO the ex-
perience ofveteran breeders in re-
gard to Shorthorn bulls powers OF
procreation. feel disposed to brief
ly detail the case. In September
1873, the parties to the suit attend
ed the New York Mills sale of Short
horns and purchased a Young
Duchess heifer-the 4th Duchess OF
Oneida pure Duchess. for which
they paid $4,000. She was brought
to Kentucky, placed upon the farm
of E. G. Bedford, at Woodlawn
villa, in Bourbon county, and was
served by 18th Duke or Thorndale
in January, 1874; from this service
she produced in October, 1874.
red bull calf-recorded as Wood.
lawn Duke. The dam, at birth OF
calf, was weak and feeble. and could
not nourish it; so she was taken
from it. and soon thereafter died.
The Young Duke was given a foster
mother and wAxed and grew strong.
When eight months old, Z. O.. Bed
ford wrote to Megibbon, proposing
to sell him his half interest in the
calf for $40, 900. Megibbon came
up to Bedford's accompanied by
Col. L. P. Muir. and seeing the calf
was defective CENTRALLY. agreed to
pay So, 900 for him on the 1st Of
March, 1876, provided the calf prov
ed himself breeder. Thus far both
parties agree. Megibbon contend
ed the test was to be made by Bed
ford. by Megibbon sending four or
five COWS to be bred by him between
October 10, 1875, and March !,
1876, and if these cows were con-
sidered safe in calf, then he was 10
pay for the bull and take him home.
Bedford admitted test to be made
but not upon Neighbours or any par
ticular cows; but that he was to test
the Duke upon a number Of cows.
and as soon asst the cow refused him
or as soon as he turned his cows off,
then the test should be complete
Megibbon sent his cows to Bedford s
in December, 1875, and in March,
1876, took the bull home. paid the
$4,000. but AYERS as he got no calves
and the bull failed TO prove himself
breeder, he rendered him back TO
Bedford in the summer of 1876, and
demanded the return OF the $4,000
and interest upon it. B. refused to
receive the bull or give up the mon
ey; so Megibbon began this suit, at
October term 1876, of the Bourbon
county court of common pleas, claim
ing the $4,000, and also $4,000 as
interest and damages sustained by
the use of an impoteHt bull upon his
valuable cows. The case came TO
trial at the March term of 1877. and
was contested. occupying a full
week in the examining of witnesses
and arguments of counsel, and re-
suited in hung jury-nine being
for Neighbours recovery of the So.
900 and interest. while three were
favorable to Bedford.
This case, before the Same court
came up at a special called term on
the second instant, and at sunset on
the evening of the 9th was handed
to the jury. The testimony in the
main went to show that while the
bull looked stout, healthy and mas
culine, he was CENTRALLY defective
imperfectly formed and poorly devel-
oped, there, that none of NJ; gibbons
cows had produced calves from him.
Bedford proved that while at his
house the bull had bred to twelve
COWS and six of them showed evil
dence of the bulls capacity. 1t was
proved by Groom, Latimer and
Jacobs that Bedford had stated to
them that the bull should prove him.
self breeder or it was no trade.
The leading breeders we're called in
to define, by order of the court what
they considered necessary to prove
q bull to be a breeder, and they all
testified that upon fair lot of cows.
he should serve successfully from 20
to 80 percent. Itwas acknowledged
that an animal might prove a breed
er though genitaliy defective, large
well formed and fully developed
therein. The testimony upon which
the case seemed very strong for the
plaintiff was the omission of Bed
ford to state to him lin the letters
upon which his decision was made to