THE LAW OF WARRANTY. 459 



probably was antecedent to the sale ; whilst on the other side an equally 

 eminent practitioner may be found to give a directly opposite opinion. 

 Hence arise tedious lawsuits and conflicting decisions. The jury are 

 puzzled by contradictory professional evidence. The- judge' explains to 

 them the law of the case, namely, that if in their opinion the cause of 

 unsoundness was antecedent to the sale, the horse can legally be re- 

 turned ; but if they think that the cause was not antecedent, the animal 

 cannot be returned. He then reads over his notes and tells them that 

 they must be judges of the question of fact. 



The state of the law is also made in many cases a means of oppression 

 and injustice, even where the matter does not come to trial. Take a 

 very ordinary case. A farmer sells a young horse to a dealer for 70, 

 and warrants him sound. Ten days after the purchase the dealer writes 

 to say that the colt has turned a roarer, and that he must return him. 

 The farmer lives at a distance from , and has no means of investi- 

 gating the truth or otherwise of the statement. An angry correspondence 

 ensues, and the dealer threatens an action. Rather than have the 

 trouble, expense, and uncertainty of a lawsuit, the farmer eventually re- 

 turns half the money; whilst the horse may be all the time perfectly 

 sound, or may have become diseased from want of due care in bringing 

 him suddenly into the confined atmosphere of a town stable. 



Or take another case. A dealer sells a horse to a customer. The 

 animal's legs by judicious management, laxative diet, moderate exercise, 

 and bandages have been got pretty fine, and he passes muster on the day 

 of sale. After a few days' work the horse goes lame. The purchaser 

 then takes the animal to a veterinary surgeon, who tells him the un- 

 pleasant truth, namely, that he has made a bad bargain, or in other 

 words has been " done." The buyer threatens an action, but the dealer 

 laughs at him, and says that he can produce evidence, plenty of evidence, 

 that the horse has been in regular work for six months previous and has 

 always been sound. The purchaser is deterred by the probability that 

 the seller will produce the required evidence whether the jury will be- 

 lieve or not may be doubtful but he is afraid of the uncertainties and 

 expense of the law, and so he puts up with the loss. 



An excellent custom not law, for there is no law on the subject pre- 

 vails in Ireland, namely, that the purchaser may take the horse to a 

 veterinary surgeon of his own selection any time within forty-eight hours 

 after the purchase ; and that both parties are finally bound by his deci- 

 sion. If the purchaser neglects to do so, the bargain is nevertheless com- 

 plete at the end of the above time. Of late years this has also become 

 customary in England. 



As regards soundness, the Author would earnestly recommend the 

 seller only to give a warranty of the above description, namely, " sound, 

 subject to the opinion, to be taken within forty-eight hours, of a veteri- 

 nary surgeon selected by the purchaser ; " and on the other hand he 

 would advise a purchaser not to ask for anything more. 



It may however occur, that the veterinary surgeon may recommend 

 that a special warranty be given for a specified time on some particular 



