484 HORSE-DEALING. 



against the buyer that the horse at the time of the 

 sale had not the defect complained of, and will 

 make the proof on his part more difficult/' That 

 this mare was not according to warranty, cannot 

 be doubted ; still it stands to reason, that a person 

 having purchased a horse under a warranty of 

 soundness, or indeed any other warranty, should 

 lose no time in returning him after finding he does 

 not answer such warranty. It is, however, laid 

 down by the late Lord Chancellor Eldon, when 

 Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, in 

 the case of Curtis «. Hannay, " that if a per- 

 son purchases a horse which is warranted, and it 

 afterwards turns out that the horse was unsound 

 at the time of the warranty, the buyer may, if he 

 pleases, keep the horse, and bring an action on the 

 warranty, in which he will have a right to recover 

 the difference between the value of a sound horse 

 and one with such defects as existed at the time of 

 warranty:" or, "• He may return the horse, and 

 bring an action to recover the full money paid ; 

 but, in the latter case, the seller has a right to ex- 

 pect that the horse shall be returned to him in the 

 same state he was when sold, and not by any 

 means diminished in value ; for if a person keeps 

 a warranted article for any length of time after 

 discovering its defects, and when he returns it, it 

 is in a worse state than it would have been if re- 

 turned 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 the warranty, but must be left to his action 



