283 



authority to warrant the horse to be sound ; and 

 •' in an action upon the warranty, it is enough to 

 prove, that it was given by the servant, without 

 caUing him, or showing that he had any special 

 authority for the purpose." 



Lord EUenborough: " If the servant w^as autho- 

 rized to sell the horse, and to receive the stipu- 

 lated price, I think he was incidentally authorized 

 to give a warranty of soundness. It is now most 

 usual on the sale of horses, to require a warranty ; 

 and the agent who is employed to sell, when he 

 warrants the horse, may fairly be presumed to be 

 acting within the scope of his authority. This is 

 the common and usual manner in which the busi- 

 ness is done, and the agent must be taken to be 

 vested with powers to transact the business with 

 which he is entrusted, in the common and usual 

 manner." 



It is remarkable that w^hen the servant was 

 afterwards called by the plaintiff, he swore posi- 

 tively on his examination in chief, that he was 

 expressly forbidden by his master to warrant the 

 horse, and that he had not given any warranty. 

 Lord EUenborough, though it was objected to, 

 i allowed the plaintiff to contradict his own wit- 

 ness, and to call another to prove that at the time 

 of the sale, the servant declared that " the horse 



