80 THE ORCHID REVIEW. 
assessing the damages, to take into consideration the uncertainty whether 
the bulb would ever flower at all, but in this case the plaintiff was well 
within his right and, according to the warranty,-as he understood it, he was 
justified in waiting until that which was uncertain was proved to be certain. 
In fact, he never could have sued, in his opinion, with any chance of success 
on this warranty until the fact was ascertained that it turned out to be 
purple and not white. For these reasons he agreed in the judgment 
which had been delivered by his learned brother. 
Lord Justice Collins agreed in the main with what had fallen from his 
learned brethren, but had some misgivings as to whether the learned 
County Court Judge had made any mistake in this matter. It must be 
remembered that on questions of fact the decision of the learned Judge was 
final, and they had no right to review it, therefore unless one was satisfied 
that he had arrived at his finding of fact through the medium of a mis- 
direction or a misconception of the law, he thought they had no right to 
question him, and he was not altogether free from doubt himself as to 
whether the learned Judge did not in point of fact direct himself properly. 
He quite agreed that the warranty here was that this plant if it flowered 
should produce a white flower, and it seemed to him the principle of law 
on which the damages were to be assessed on a breach of such a warranty 
was clear enough. He agreed it was possible that the first part of the 
paragraph in which the learned Judge gave his opinion was that which he 
acted upon—the possible market price for it was the only part that he could 
act upon, namely this “‘I hold as a fact that if this Orchid had been an 
actual alba it was at the time of sale worth more than £50.’ He rather 
took the succeeding part“ But that until it showed its real nature there 
was no probability that an Orchid grower would give more than 20 guineas 
for it,”’—as qualifying that. He thought if there was a difference between 
those two articles—the article with the possibility and the article with the 
certainty—it was for the learned Judge on the evidence to assess the 
difference between the two, and he was not satisfied he had done more 
than that in this case. If he had done no more he did not think they 
could interfere with the decision. At the same time he was not sufficiently 
clear, particularly in view of his brothers’ opinion on the matter, that he 
had distinguished those two possible views, and he was satisfied on the 
evidence, if he had been at liberty to go into it, that in giving £50 to the 
plaintiff they were not really giving him more than he himself should have 
given him on the evidence. Therefore he thought no injustice was done, 
and he did not differ from the decision of his brothers in the matter. 
The Appeal was therefore dismissed, judgment being given for the 
plaintiff for £50, with the costs here, and of the Court below, together with 
the costs of the trial. 
