260 



it is over, there should be introduced into the written 

 contract all representations previously made of the 

 horse's qualities ; for if he fails to do this, he will 

 be bound by the written contract ; and he will not 

 be at liberty to bring his action for deceit on the 

 verbal representations previously made. The fol- 

 lowing case is a leading authority upon this point, 

 and it is the more important because it clearly illus- 

 trates the real meaning of the legal maxim, caveat 

 emptor ; but it must be received with reference to 

 the case of Kain v. Old, 4 D. and R. 52, which 

 certainly appears to be somewhat at variance with 

 its principle. 



4 Taunton, 779, Pickering and Dowson. — " If a 

 representation be made before a sale of the quality 

 of the thing sold, with full opportunity for the pur- 

 chaser to inspect and examine the truth of the 

 representation, and a contract of sale be afterwards 

 reduced into writing, in whicli that representation 

 is not embodied, no action for a deceit lies against 

 the vendor, on the ground that the article sold is 

 not answerable to that representation, whether the 

 vendor knew the defects or not." 



In delivering his judgment on this case, Mr. 

 Justice Gibbs observes, *' I hold that if a man 

 brings me a horse and makes any representation 

 wliatever of his quality and soundness, and after- 



