1 9 4 2 ▁( although ▁delayed ▁by ▁the ▁Second ▁World ▁War ), ▁Lord ▁Justice ▁Mac K inn on ▁j ok ingly ▁suggested ▁that ▁it ▁had ▁been ▁proven ▁that ▁Don og h ue ▁did ▁not ▁find ▁a ▁sn ail ▁in ▁the ▁bott le . ▁" To ▁be ▁quite ▁candid , ▁I ▁det est ▁that ▁sn ail ▁... ▁I ▁think ▁that ▁[ L ord ▁Norm and ] ▁did ▁not ▁reve al ▁to ▁you ▁that ▁when ▁the ▁law ▁had ▁been ▁settled ▁by ▁the ▁House ▁of ▁L ords , ▁the ▁case ▁went ▁back ▁to ▁Edinburgh ▁to ▁be ▁tried ▁on ▁the ▁facts . ▁And ▁at ▁that ▁trial ▁it ▁was ▁found ▁that ▁there ▁never ▁was ▁a ▁sn ail ▁in ▁the ▁bott le ▁at ▁all . ▁That ▁intr ud ing ▁g ast rop od ▁was ▁as ▁much ▁a ▁legal ▁fiction ▁as ▁the ▁Cas ual ▁E ject or ." ▁ ▁This ▁alleg ation , ▁suggests ▁Chap man , ▁established ▁itself ▁as ▁a ▁legal ▁myth ; ▁it ▁was ▁repeated ▁by ▁Lord ▁Justice ▁Jenkins ▁in ▁a ▁ 1 9 5 4 ▁Court ▁of ▁App e al ▁practice ▁note . ▁However , ▁both ▁Mac K inn on ▁and ▁Jenkins ▁were ▁una ware ▁that ▁the ▁trial ▁had ▁not ▁gone ▁ahead ▁because ▁of ▁Stevens on ' s ▁death ▁– ▁the ▁events ▁following ▁the ▁case ▁were ▁only ▁published ▁in ▁response ▁to ▁the ▁practice ▁note . ▁As ▁Don og h ue ' s ▁fact ual ▁claims ▁were ▁therefore ▁never ▁tested ▁in ▁court , ▁it ▁is ▁generally ▁held ▁that ▁what ▁happened ▁in ▁the ▁Well me adow ▁C afé