368 THE HORSE. 



Where there is no warranty, an action may be brought on the ground 

 of fraud, but this is very difficult to be maintained, and few possilily 

 will hazard it. It will be necessary to prove that the dealer knew the 

 defect, and that the purchaser was imposed upon by his false repre- 

 sentation ; and that, too, in a case in which a person of ordinary cir- 

 cumspection might have been imposed upon. 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, it extends to all unsoundness, 

 palpable or concealed. Although a person should ignorantly or carelessly 

 buy a blind horse, warranted sound, he may return 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 warranty, he has no remedy. The law sup- 

 poses every one 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 discovering no defect 

 in him, and relying on the warranty, resells him, and the unsound- 

 ness 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 the first seller, and may demand of him not only the price of the 

 horse, or the difference in value, but every expense that may have been 

 incurred. 



Exchanges, whether of one horse absolutely for another, or a sum of 

 money being paid in addition by one of the parties, stand on the same 

 ground as simple sales. If there is a warranty on either side, and 

 that is broken, the exchange is vitiated: if there be^no warranty, deceit 

 must be proved. 



The subject of trial is a very intricate one, and we are inclined to think 

 that the dealer is often very ill-used. It is well known that a horse from 

 a dealer's stable is seldom or never fit for hard work until he has under- 

 gone some preparation and training. It is right that the purchaser should 

 have a trial of him, but he should try him in a fair way— in a way consistent 

 with the state in which the animal is. If a horse from a dealer's stable is 

 galloped far and fast, it is probable that he will soon show distress; and 

 if he is pushed farther, inflammation and death may ensue. The dealer 

 rarely gets recompensed for this; and if it should occur soon after the 

 sale, the horse is returned, or an action is brought for its price. When 

 accidents have arisen in the fair trial of a horse, the decisions of the courts 

 of law have been strangely contradictory; and, indeed, it is often difficult 

 to determine whether the fault rests with the horse or the rider. If the 

 horse be detained after the specified time of trial, he is supposed to be 

 sold, and with all his faults. 



In London, and in most great towns, there are repositories for the 

 periodical sale of horses by auction. They are of great convenience to the 

 seller, who can at once get rid of a horse with which he wishes to part, 

 without waiting month after month before he obtains a purchaser, and 

 who is relieved from the nuisance or fear of having the horse returned on 

 account of breach of the warranty, because in these places only two days 

 are allowed for the trial, and if the horse is not returned within that 



would have been if returned immediately after such discovery, I think the party can have 

 no defence to an action for the price of the article on the ground of non-compliance with 

 tlie warranty, hut must be left to his action on the warranty to recover the difference ni 

 the value of the article waiTauted, and its value when sold.' — Curtis v, Hannay. 3 Esp. 83. 



