JARDE. 243 



that this splint was in a very bad situation, as it pressed upon one 

 of the sinews, and would naturally produce, when the horse was 

 worked, inflammation of the sinew, and consequent lameness. The 

 jury, therefore, drawing their attention to this particular splint to 

 which the evidence related, appear to us to have intended that 

 this individual splint, though it did not at the moment produce 

 lameness, was, at the time of the contract, of that sort, and in that 

 situation, as to contain, in their language, the seeds of unsound- 

 ness, that is, the efficient cause of the subsequent lameness. If the 

 lameness complained of had proceeded from a new or different 

 splint, or from the old splint taking a new direction in its growth, 

 so as to affect a sinew, not having been on one before, such a 

 lam.eness would not have been within the warranty; for it would 

 not have constituted a present unsoundness at the time of the 

 warrajity made. But the jury find that the very splint in question 

 is the efficient cause of the lameness. 



" On the former motion, our attention was not called to any 

 evidence, if any such was given, as to the different nature and 

 consequences of splints, which the learned Judge reports to have 

 been given upon the present occasion ; but it now appears that 

 some splints cause lameness, and others do not, and that the 

 consequences of a splint cannot be apparent at the time, like .those 

 of the loss of an eye, or any other blemish or defect visible to a 

 common observer. We, therefore, think that, by the terms of their 

 written warranty, the parties meant that there was . not at that 

 time, a splint which would be the cause of future lameness, and 

 that the jury have found that it was. 



" We therefore think that the warrtmty was broken.'' 

 In " Smith v. O'Bryan" (" The Law Times," vol. ii.. New Series, 

 p. 346) the horse which was warranted sound, had a splint, that, 

 at the time of sale, did not cause lameness. The fact of the 

 animal subsequently becoming lame, on account of this splint, was 

 held to be a breach of warranty. 



Enlargement of the Splint Bones. 



As a result of inflammation, the two following forms of enlarge- 

 ment of the splint bones may be met with, without counting 

 alterations in the size of these bones under the familiar forms of 

 splint and spavin : — 



1. Enlargement of the head of the outer splint bone of a hind 

 leg (Figs. 84 and 85). Though this disease is well known to 

 Continental veterinary surgeons (the French calling it jarde, the 

 Italians giarda) ; no distinctive name has been given to it by 

 English veterinarians, an omission which may be accounted for 



16* 



