38 ON WARRANTY. 



its defects, and then returns it in a worse state than it 

 would have been if returned immediately after such dis- 

 covery, I think the party can have no defense to an ac- 

 tion for the price of the article on the ground of non-com- 

 pliance with the warranty, but must be left to his action 

 on the warranty to recover the difference in the value of 

 the article warranted, and its value when sold." — Curtis 

 vs. Hannay^ 3 Esp., 83. 



When there is no warranty, an action may be brought 

 on the ground of fraud, but this is very difficult to be 

 maintained, and not often hazarded. It will be necessary 

 to prove that the dealer knew of the defect, and that 

 the purchaser was imposed upon by his false representa- 

 tions, or other fraudulent means. If the defect was evident 

 to every eye, the purchaser has no remedy — he should have 

 taken more care ; but if a warranty was given that extends 

 to all unsoundness, palpable or concealed, although a per- 

 son should ignorantly or carelessly buy a blind horse, 

 warranted sound, he may reject it — the warranty is his 

 guard, and prevents him from so closely examining the 

 horse as he otherwise would have done ; but if he buys a 

 blind horse, thinking him to be sound, and without a war- 

 ranty, ho has no remedy. Every one ought to exercise 

 common circumspection and common sense. 



"A man should have a more perfect knowledge of horses 

 than falls to the lot of most, and a perfect knowledge of 

 the vendor too, who ventures to buy a horse without a 

 warranty. 



If a person buys a horse warranted sound, and discover- 

 ing no defect in him, and relying on the warranty, resells 

 him, and the unsoundness is discovered by the second 

 purchaser, and the horse returned to the first purchaser, 

 or an action commenced against him, he has his claim on 



