ACTIONS AT LAW. 197 



Arthur's, found, on his arrival, two letters awaiting him 

 from the defendant. In the first of these, dated the day 

 of the sale, the defendant enclosed a cheque for £150 to the 

 plaintiff's order, with the following endorsement on the 

 back : " For a chestnut gelding, Pembroke, five years old, 

 warranted perfectly sound, free from vice, and all right." 

 In the second letter, dated the 9th, the defendant said the 

 horse had been examined by a veterinary surgeon, who 

 had telegraphed to him that the horse was a "roarer." 

 " With this advice," the defendant wrote, " of course, I 

 cannot keep the horse as a sound horse ; but as I believe you 

 thought the horse was sound, and I do not wish to incon- 

 venience you, we had better meet and see what is to be 

 done." The plaintiff, in reply to this letter, wrote : " You 

 bought my horse at your own price, and without any 

 warranty at all. I told you all I knew about him, and 

 what I had been doing with him. I most certainly was 

 not aware that the horse was unsound, and it was hardly 

 likely that the horse should have been commended in the 

 hunter's class had such been the case." The defendant to 

 this replied that he only paid £150 on the condition that 

 the plaintiff sold the horse as sound, and he certainly 

 should not keep it. The defendant then stopped payment 

 of the cheque, which had been endorsed and presented by 

 the plaintiff, and sold the horse by auction. The price 

 which it realized was £55 13s., and this sum the defendant 

 paid into Court. 



The plaintiff was cross-examined as to the reason for 

 which he endorsed the cheque after he had seen the 

 warranty written on the back by the defendant ; and he 

 explained this by saying that he did not know what the 

 legal effect of striking out the words might be, and as he 

 had repudiated the notion of a warranty in his letter to the 

 defendant before he presented the cheque, he thought it 

 unnecessary to do more. 



