IN SEARCH OF A HORSE. 281 



for the purpose of throwing the plaintiff off his 

 guard. 



In Sheider v. Heath, 3 Camp. 506, Sir J. Mans- 

 field held that " the vendor could not avail himself of 

 a similar stipujation if he knew of secret defects in 

 her, and used means to prevent the purchaser from 

 discovering them, or made a fraudulent representa- 

 tion of her condition at the time of sale." 



In Parkinson v. Lee, 2 East, 314, which was an 

 action respecting the sale of hops by sample, Mr. 

 Justice Grose observed, "If an express warranty be 

 given, the seller will be liable for any latent defect, 

 according to the old law concerning warranties. But 

 if there be no such warranty, and the seller sells the 

 thing such as he believes it to be, without fraud, I do 

 not know that the law will imply that he sold it on 

 any other terms than what passed in fact. It is the 

 fault of the buyer that he did not insist on a war- 

 ranty ; and if we were to say that there was, notwith- 

 standing, an implied warranty arising from the con- 

 ditions of the sale, we should again be opening the 

 controversy which existed before the case in Doug- 

 lass." Before that time it was a current opinion 

 that a sound price given for a horse was tantamount 



