80 HORSE WARRANTY. 



cussion may arise as to how such a rule would 

 apply to a horse dealer. An ordinary buyer 

 w(»uld not notice many classes of defects in a 

 horse, or see blemishes or wants in the animal 

 which are pynii»l(»niatic of disease, but wliich 

 would or should be at once seen by a horso 

 dealer, and should put him on his diligence. For 

 instance, sujipose a horse dealer were bargaining 

 for a horse with very contracted feet, in nine cases 

 out of ten such feet are the results of some sort of 

 foot disease, and a person accustomed to horses 

 would instinctively look out for something wrong 

 there ; in such case, would a warranty to a horse 

 dealer exclude such defect, which should be at 

 least patent to him ':' That is to say, if he took a 

 ^^'arranty, and afterwards the horse turned out 

 faulty on his feet, could he set up the warranty, 

 or ought he to bo bound by the doctrine of patent 

 defects? As will bo shown at a future page, a 

 committee of the House of Lords, presided over 

 by Lord Eosebery, took a great deal of evidence 

 on the subject of wan'anty, and recommended its 

 discontinuance in horse dealing transactions; and 

 this recommendation was chiefly owing to the state- 

 ments that some horse dealers insisted upon a 

 warranty from breeders, then kept the horso a 

 few days, and, if tlicy did not get a market, re- 

 turned it on the breeder's liands. Sometimes this 

 is so, and the reasf)n is that the dealer from his 

 knowledge and skill, detects defects in a horse 



