y medicine without a license in
taking care of Brown's sick horse, because he had not claimed to be a
veterinary; he had not been paid for his services; and because all he
had done was to help a suffering animal, as any man who called himself a
Christian and had a heart would have done, and as it was his duty to do.
Who "shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit"? and so on. It was in
Holy Writ! The highest law!

There was no evidence against Danny at all, because Brown was an
accomplice and his testimony was not corroborated; at any rate he was a
procurer and instigator of crime, an _agent provocateur_, a despicable
liar, hypocrite and violator of the very law he was paid to uphold; and
as he had held himself out as a physician to Danny Lowry everything that
passed between them was privileged as a confidential communication and
must be disregarded as if it had never been said.

Daniel Lowry was a man of the highest reputation, of such character that
he never had been guilty of an unkind or selfish act in his entire life,
much less commit crime; which alone, taken by itself, was quite enough
to interject and raise a reasonable doubt--upon which they must acquit.

Then Tom Hingman got up and grimaced and said he had known Mr. Tutt all
his professional life and he was a peach, but they mustn't believe what
he said or let him put anythin' over on 'em, for he was pretty slick
even if he was a fine old feller. Now the plain fact was, as they all
knew perfectly well, that this old boy had been caught with the goods.
It might be tough luck, but the law was the law and they were all there
to enforce it--much as they hated to do so--and there was nothing to it
but to convict and let the judge deal with the defendant with that mercy
and leniency and forbearance for which he was so justly famous. He
panted a few times and sat down.

Then the judge took his crack. He told the jury, in so many words, to
pay no attention to either the A.D.A. or to Mr. Tutt, and to listen only
to him, because he was the whole thing. The question was: Had the
defendant assumed to give medical treatment to Brown's horse, for any
kind of valuable consideration? In determining this they should consider
all the evidence, including the fact that the prisoner had claimed to be
a veterinary, had been paid for treating Brown's horse as such, had
pleaded guilty in the police court, and that none of the alleged facts
upon which the charge was based had bee