The Lafayette gazette. [volume] (Lafayette, La.) 1893-1921, 1897-05-15
A COWS HORN.
The Cause of a Law Suit Before
The District Court.


Bachert and husband occupied the attention
of the district court day this week.
The suit was originally filed in Judge Cof-
fey's court by Mr.. X. w. Elliott who sued
the defendent for $40 damages alleged
to have been caused by Mrs. Annie Bachert
breaking the horn of COW belonging to the
plaintiff. After hearing the evidence and
examining the law applicable to the case
Judge Coffey rendered decision allowing
MIR. Elliott damages in the sum of $40.
This did not satisfy Mrs. Bachert who,
through her attorneys, Messrs. Gallery aud
Chargois, took an appeal to the district
court.
The case came up for trial before Judge
Debaillon Monday morning. Mr.. VIM.
Campbell ASSISTED Mr.. Elliott and Messrs.
Caffery and Chargois represented Mrs.
Bachert.
A number of witnesses were sworn and
testified. All gave Pretty straight testimony
going to show that Mrs. Bachert had, with
malice aforethought and without any pro-
vocation, broken the horn of the docile and
unsuspecting bovine whose only offense was
that she lndulged in a little friendly scrap
with the defendants 1t fully
shown that after the unfortunate COW had
been deprived of a horn she was not the
same genial, we'll met animal that
she had been here tofore. She was often
nervous and fractions, at times morose and
melancholy and always manifested an aver
sion to the society of the other COWS of the
neighborhood. During her convalescence
she was properly attended to having re-
ceived the attention of the veterinarian,
Charley Canada, whose skill in the treat
ment of all domestic animals is well-known.
An eminent physician of Lafayette was
sworn in as an expert. At this time
gentleman entered the court room holding
in his hand the broken horn and several
small sticks. One of the sticks was supposed
to have been used by Mrs. Bachert when
she struck the fatal blow. The doctor first
examined the horn. He said it was u
sound horn and seemed to be enjoying good
health. but he could not speak in the same
way of the collection of sticks. Being
asked by one of the attorneys for the plain
tiff, if, with one of the sticks as weapon.
John Sullivan, .Corbett or even Fitzimn'ons,
could break cows horn, he replied in the
negative.
An experienced farmer testified next.
He offered a considerable amount of valu-
able information upon the act or science of
''dehorning'' cattle. He said that while
the operation was not calculated to beautify
the animal, but extremely notifying to
COW solcitous for her personal appearance,
he did not think there was anything serious
about it.
Several character witnesses testified.
Nothing derogatory to the reputation of the
COW was brought out. On the contrary
from all reports she enjoyed name second
to none for department.
When the evidence all in the attor-
neys addressed the court Two of them
spoke for Mrs. Bachert and the other two
argued on behalf of the plaintiff.
One of the attorneys paid a beautiful
tribute to the COW. She was a kind, gentle
creature and was never known to be guilty
of mean act, and would not knowingly to
do harm to any She was evidently a
COW of great worth and of sterling qualities
and it is safe to say that were she politi-
clan, she would never consent to vote
dagoes in order to be elected member of
the City Council.
The judge took the case under advisement.
Although the amount sued for is only $40
the costs may go up to over 500.
I