21 6 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
Upon this the jury interposed, and declared that without 
hearing any more of the defendant’s witnesses they had made 
up their minds to find a verdict for him. 
Verdict for defendant accordingly. 
STAVELY V. CARTER. 
In the Court of Common Pleas, an action was brought by 
Mr. Stavely, a veterinary surgeon at Highbury, against Mr. 
Carter, a horsedealer at Burwell, Cambridgeshire, upon a 
warranty that a black mare, sold by the defendant to the 
plaintiff for £120, was sound and quiet to ride and drive, 
whereas it was alleged she was both unsound and unquiet. 
In August last the parties were introduced to each other, 
and immediately afterwards went to look at the mare in 
question, which the defendant represented as a very extra- 
ordinary animal. The plaintiff having seen her trot, and 
fast-trotting horses being his “ hobby,” engaged to buy her, 
and gave a check for the money; but this check being irre- 
gularly drawn, was refused by his banker, upon which a 
quarrel ensued between the parties, and the purchase went 
off. The next day, however, negotiations were resumed, and 
a proper check being given, a receipt was given, in which 
the mare was ‘ c warranted quiet to ride and drive, and 
sound.” After taking the mare home, the plaintiff rode and 
drove her himself and by others, and found her to be restive 
and unmanageable, so that he was obliged to drive her with 
double reins, and it frequently took two persons to hold her. 
At the end of August the mare was tried against a well- 
known trotting horse called the Artful Dodger, and was 
beaten ; and on the 22d of September the plaintiff wrote to 
defendant, complaining that she was not quiet to ride and 
drive, and requesting that he would take her back. Some 
correspondence ensued, but nothing was said about her being 
unsound until the plaintiff had consulted his attorney, after 
which the attorney wrote, and, in addition to the plaintiff’s 
complaints, complained that she was “ a whistler.” The de- 
fendant refused to take her back, and ultimately she w T as 
sold at Tattersall’s, and the plaintiff only received a balance 
of £41 45., after deducting the expenses. Evidence was 
now given on the part of the plaintiff to prove that the mare 
was not quiet to ride and drive, and several eminent vete- 
rinary surgeons deposed that she was “ a whistler.” They 
admitted, however, that she might have become so since the 
