IN SEARCH OF A HORSE. 379 



the case of Briggs v. Crick, 5 Esp. 99 ; where it was 

 hekl, that " it is not necessary to release the former 

 proprietor of a horse, who had sold him with a war- 

 ranty of soundness, to qualify him to give evidence 

 that such horse was sound at the time he sold him." 

 This case, however, seems to be over-ruled by that 

 of Biss V. Mountain, 1 Moody and Robinson, 302, 

 where it was held that " the vendor of a horse war- 

 ranted sound is not competent to prove soundness for 

 his vendee in an action brought against the latter on 

 a subsequent sale with warranty." Briggs v. Crick 

 was quoted without effect, the Judge (Alderson) 

 being of opinion that as the effect of the verdict for 

 the defendant would be to relieve the witness from 

 an action at the suit of the latter, he was incompe- 

 tent. In a note in this case, other cas^s are quoted 

 tending to support the authority of Briggs v. Crick ; 

 and it is rightly observed, that to render the witness 

 incompetent, it appears necessary to show not only 

 that he is exposed to liability, but that there is rea- 

 son to believe that his liability will certainly be en- 

 forced. A merely speculative interest appears too 

 remote to disqualify a witness ; but I recommend my 

 readers who may chance to find the decision perso- 



