22 SOUNDNESS IN HOESES. 



quently, the animal was found to be a roarer, " but a good 

 worker." He also had stringhalt, which the defendant 

 was supposed to have seen at the time of sale. ^' His 

 Honour said that roaring would not affect a warranty, 

 unless it affected a horse's pulling powers, and the 

 stringhalt was palpable; he therefore found for the 

 amount claimed, less the sum paid into Court." The 

 losing side, here, seems to have been strangely negligent 

 in not proving that, although the roarer was a good 

 worker, he would have been a still better puller than he 

 was, had he been free from the defect in question. 



Thomas v. Young* — In this case, roaring was held to 

 1)0 an unsoundness, and the jury immediately found for 

 the plaintiff, who had, on a warranty of soundness, bought 

 a horse that he, subsequently, found out was a roarer. 



In Vallance v. Brook t (Windsor County Court, Dec. 

 1850), the Judge, in summing up, stated that " roaring 

 was an unsoundness in law." 



Sallenders, 



Sandcrack. — "If a horse without any indication of 

 having previously had the disease, throw out a sandcrack 

 immediately after sale, it is no breach of warranty " 

 (Oliphant's Law of Horses), I believe I am correct in 

 saying that, as a rule, a sandcrack occurs only in horn 

 which has been secreted under conditions of malnutrition, 



* Veieriiim^ian for 1877, p. G68. 

 t Do. for 1851, p. 82. 



