WARRANTY. 165 



In Oliphant's " Law of Horses " the case of Street 

 V. Blay is given m extenso .• — 



" The plaintiff, on the 2nd of February, sold a 

 horse to the defendant for £43, with a warranty of 

 soundness. The defendant took the horse, re- 

 selling it on the same day to one Bailey for £45. 



" Bailey, on the following day, parted with it in 

 exchange to one Osborne ; and Osborne, in the 

 course of two or three days afterwards, sold it to 

 the defendant for £30. 



" No warranty was given on any of the three 

 last sales. The horse was, in fact, unsound at the 

 time of the first sale, and on the 9th of February 

 the defendant sent the horse back to the plaintiff's 

 premises, requesting the plaintiff to receive him 

 again, as he was then very lame ; but the plaintiff 

 refused to accept him. 



" The question for consideration was whether 

 the defendant, under these circumstances, had a 

 right to return the horse, and thereby exonerate 

 himself from the payment of the whole price. 



" Lord Tenterden, in dehvering the judgment 

 of the Court, said : * It is not necessary to decide 

 whether in any case the purchaser of a specific 

 chattel, who, having had an opportunity of exercising 

 his judgment upon it, has bought it with a warranty 



