276 
VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE. 
known the horse almost from the time it was foaled ; that he 
bought it of its owner, a neighbour of his, while it was still 
quite young. He broke it in himself, and kept it for three 
years, and during that time it certainly exhibited no traces 
of the diseases the other witnesses have described. 
Mr. Thomas Garford , a solicitor, proved that he bought the 
horse of the last witness in December, 1851, for £63, and sold 
it afterwards to the defendant for £105. He had no traces of 
spavin or ringbones then. 
Mr. Macaulay , then put in a deposition of Mr. Backhouse, 
a banker, residing near Darlington, which had been taken 
in London a short time since in the usual manner, he being 
about to leave the country. This stated that he purchased 
the horse of the defendant for £115, and intended to use it 
as a hack of a superior description. He lived seven or eight 
miles from his place of business, and he wanted the horse 
for the purpose of riding over daily. He liked the appearance 
of the horse, but had some doubts whether it was not a 
heavier one than he required, and therefore he bargained with 
the defendant that if it did not suit him he should sell it 
back to him for £10 less than the original price. It did prove 
unfitting in this respect for his purposes, and it was returned 
to the possession of the defendant the day before it was sold 
by the latter to the plaintiff. Mr. Backhouse altogether denied 
that the horse exhibited any lameness while in his possession. 
A groom of Mr. Backhouse’s gave corroborative evidence. 
He knew what spavin and ringbones were, and the horse 
exhibited no traces of either disease. 
The plaintiff and one of his servants were then called, and 
they denied as positively as the other witnesses the existence 
of either disease at the time the horse was sold to Geething. 
The horse on that particular day was certainly a little lame, 
but this was caused either by an injury it had sustained in the 
horse box, or a kick it had received in the stable during the 
previous night. They varied, however, as to the extent of the 
injury, one describing it as almost imperceptible, while the 
other stated the animal w 7 as scarcely fit to be shown. 
Mr. Reeves also stated that to the best of his belief, the 
words “ particularly w ith regard to the off hind leg” were not 
in the warranty he signed at the request of the plaintiff at the 
time the bargain was concluded. 
Mr. John Colton , of North Collingham, proved that he 
attended the sale of the horse in Newark Market-place, and 
purchased it on defendant’s behalf, w ithout a warranty, for £?5. 
Mr. Collins , a horse-dealer in a very extensive line of busi- 
ness, proved that he saw- and examined the horse at North- 
