IN SEARCH OF A HORSE. 286 



" A false affirmation made by the defendant, with 

 intent to defraud the pLiintiff, whereby the plaintiff 

 receives damage, is the ground of an action upon 

 the case in the nature of deceit. In such an action, 

 it is not necessary that the defendant should be bene- 

 fited by the deceit, or that he should collude with 

 the person who is." 



In vindicating his opinion, Mr. J. Grose says, 

 " Suppose a person present at the sale of a horse, 

 asserts that he was his horse, and that he. knows him 

 to be sound and sure-footed, when in fact, the horse 

 is neither the one nor the other, according to the 

 principle contended for by the plaintiffs, an action 

 lies against the person present, as well as the seller ; 

 and the purchaser has two securities." Mr. Justice 

 Grose put this hypothetical case, to illustrate the un- 

 reasonableness of the principle, that a stranger to a 

 contract incurred a personal responsibility to a pur- 

 chaser by a false representation in favor of the 

 seller. The principle, however, was nevertheless 

 adopted by Justices BuUer and Ashurst, and by the 

 Chief Justice Lord Kenyon ; and I shall quote some 

 of the remarks made by Mr. Justice Buller, because 

 they very clearly and concisely explain the principle 

 25 



