204 ACTIONS AT LAW. 



it had been trained to carry " gin and water." He saw 

 no symptoms of vice. His wife and another lady were with 

 the horse one day when it did not shy. 



The learned judge, in summing up, said the question 

 they had to determine lay in a very short compass. He 

 had never known a case which when the question arose 

 about the quality of a horse there was not on one side or 

 the other a great degree of exaggeration and untruth, and the 

 present case afforded no exception to the rule. The ques- 

 tion the jury had to determine was whether at the time 

 of the sale the horse was " quiet to ride and drive, and free 

 from vice." If they were satisfied that it was so, their 

 verdict must be for defendant. On the other hand, if the 

 vice suddenly developed, they must find a verdict for 

 plaintiff. 



A verdict was given for the plaintiff. 



[Note. — It is difficult to conceive how any jury could 

 have arrived at any other conclusion.] 



Turnham v. Paris. 



WARRANTY — BOTS IN THE STOMACH — ALLEGED 

 UNSOUNDNESS. 



This was an action brought by the plaintiff, a licensed 

 victualler, at Islington, against the defendant, a horse 

 dealer in Clerkenwell, on the warranty of a mare, which 

 was purchased by the plaintiff of the defendant for the 

 sum of £46, and which, after having been used for some 

 two or three weeks, died suddenly, as it was alleged, 

 from the accumulation of a large number of bots in 

 the stomach. 



Mr. Digby Seymour, Q.C., and Mr. Collins appeared as 



