267 



except by lying; but if in the presence of a witness, 

 he lies upon any material point to enhance the 

 price, and deceive his customer, he exposes himself 

 to litigation that may exceed in costs ten times the 

 value of the bargain. 



Although the cases which I have quoted, are 

 amply sufficient to make it perfectly intelligible 

 what is the nature of the action for fraudulent 

 misrepresentation, yet, as my object is to furnish 

 my readers with every authority that I can find 

 upon horse-dealing transactions, I shall add a few 

 other cases that are authorities upon the subject 

 of fraudulent deceit. 



Steward v. Coesvelt, 1 Carr. and P., 23.— "If a 

 horse is sold with a warranty, any fraud at the 

 time of sale will avoid the sale, though it is not on 

 any point included in the warranty." 



The warranty was, that the horse was sound, 

 and free from vice. The defendant resisted the 

 action (which was for the price of the horse), on 

 the ground that the plaintiff had represented the 

 horse to be five years old, and had often been used 

 as a hunter. The horse was more than four, but 

 not five. Mr. Justice Burrough told the jury that if 

 there was fraudulent representation at the time of 

 sale, it invalidated the contract, no matter whether 

 it was a breach of the warranty or not. In a note 



