331 



where it first came before the court, in 1 Carrington 

 and Payne, 632, deserves attention upon another 

 point not connected with my present subject. The 

 warranty had been fraudulently recovered back 

 from the purchaser by Osborne's son ; and the 

 purchaser was precluded from giving evidence of 

 its terms because he was unable to prove the son 

 to have acted as his father's agent. 



A recent case is reported in 1 Adolphus and Ellis, 

 508, in which the obligation of the purchaser to 

 take notice of the condition of return posted up in 

 the place of sale is emphatically decided. It is the 

 case of By water v. Richardson. The plaintiff bought 

 a horse, warranted sound, by private contract 

 at a repository. At the time of sale there was 

 a board fixed to the wall of the repository having 

 certain rules printed upon it; one of which was, 

 that a warranty of soundness there given, should 

 remain in force till twelve on the day after the sale, 

 when the sale should become complete, and the 

 seller's responsibility terminate, unless a notice and 

 surgeon's certificate of unsoundness were given in 

 the mean time. The rules were not particularly 

 referred to at the time of this sale and warranty. 

 ; The horse proved unsound, but no complaint was 

 made till after twelve the following day. The un- 

 soundness was of a nature likely not to be immedi- 



