92 LESSOR MUST SUPPLY A FIT HORSE. 



The liorse hired may be a particular animal, in which 

 case the subject is certain, or an indeterminate and uncertain 

 one, as in the case of a jobmaster furnishing horses for a 

 carriage, where neither party has fixed upon the particular 

 animals which are to be the subject of the contract, (a) 



The hire must be certain, or ascertainable by reference to 

 some standard ; for if there be no consideration, the contract 

 is one of commodate. (6) The use may be either according 

 to what is implied in the bargain, (c) or according to stipu- 

 lation, as where one hires a horse for a particular purpose ; 

 such as a horse for riding a definite distance or for a definite 

 time. 



68. The Lessor must supply a fit Horse. — The lessor 

 is bound to supply a horse (cZ) or carriage (e) fit for immediate 

 use, and if he omits to tell the lessee of any defect 

 in the horse, Avhich he knows or ought to know of, 

 which renders it unfit for the purpose, he will be liable in 

 damages.(/) Where a warranty is given along with a hired 

 horse, it must be up to the terms of the warranty, as in the 

 case of sale ;(g) but in general there. is no implied warranty 

 against latent defects. (/«,) So, when a horse (f) or carriage 

 is hired for a particular journey, it is implied in the contract 

 that the lessor warrants it fit for such journey. Lindley, J., 

 observes: "A person who lets out carriages is not, in my 

 opinion, responsible for all defects discoverable or not ; he 

 is not an insurer against all defects ; nor is he bound to take 

 more care than coach proprietors or railway companies who 



(a) B.C. i. p. 482. 



(6) Ersk. iii. 1, 18 ; see § 76, 



(c) See §§71, 72. 



(d) Foivlcr V. Locke, 1872, L.R. 7 C.P. 272 ; 10 ib. 90. See also Johnstone v. 

 Rankine, 1687, M. 10,080. 



(c) Sutton V. Tem-plc, 1843, 12 M. and W. 52, 60. 



(/) 1 Smith's L.C. 266 ; B. Pr. 141. 



(cj) §§ 37, 38, 39. 



(h) B. Pr. 141 ; Foivlcr v. Locke, cit. ; Hyman v. Nye, cit. infra, p. 93. 



(i) Chew V. Jones, 1847, 10 L.T. 231. 



