OWNERSHIP OF ANIMALS 245 



being able to exercise his breeding qualities.'*^ 

 So where the seller of a bull knew that he was 

 without the power of propagation, but did not 

 disclose the fact, it was held that he was liable in 

 an action for his deceit.^^ A stallion sold with a 

 warranty as '*a foal getter" was held not to ful- 

 fill the terms of the guaranty when only eight out 

 of fifty-five mares served were with foaL^° A bill 

 of sale guaranteeing a stallion as a breeder does 

 not imply a guarantee that he is pure-bred.^ ^ 



In regard to the character of the animal it must 

 be remembered that an animal which is gentle 

 and reliable in the handling of one person may be 

 quite the reverse with another, possibly without 

 any apparent reason. 



It is very evident from the foregoing that it is 

 for the decided advantage of the buyer that the 

 bill of sale state that the animal is sound, and 

 free from vicious traits; but it is of such decided 

 disadvantage to. the seller that he should not in- 

 sert such a statement unless he is willing to 

 assume the added responsibility in the matter. 



The bill of sale should describe the animal, or 

 animals sold, with as much definiteness as is con- 

 veniently possible. Of a horse it should give his 

 age, color and sex, with special marks. Of a flock 

 of sheep it should give the number, breed, number 

 of sheep in each class (ewes, rams, etc.), with 

 special marks. Of cattle on the range, in addition 



48Budd V. McLaughlin, 10 Iowa, 545; Brown v. Doyle, 69 

 Manitoba 75. Minn. 543. 



■49 Maynard v. Maynard, 49 si First National Bank v. 



Vt. 297. Hughes, 5 Cal. U. C. 454, 46 



BoMcCorkell v. Karhoff, 90 Pae. 272. 



