EDITORIAL OBSERVATIONS. 
115 
Our readers will find an account of a horse-cause in the twelfth 
volume of The Veterinarian — Turner, clergyman, v. Dansey, 
gentleman — which seems calculated to throw some light on what 
we have been saying. It appears that Turner, counselled by his 
brother, purchased of Dansey a horse which had been fired about 
two years previously ; not “ warranted,” but stated, “ on the word of 
a gentleman,” to be “ believed” to be, sound; which statement was 
confirmed by the opinion of a veterinary surgeon who was pre- 
sent at the time of sale. The horse was ridden away by the buyer 
immediately the bargain (for £45) was concluded, who found that, 
on his way home, the horse tripped very much, “ so much, indeed, 
that the plaintiff dismounted, to see whether he had picked up a 
stone.” Moreover, it was remarked at the time of purchase that 
the horse “ pointed his off fore foot ;” and the same observation 
was made “ when the horse had got home, and was put into the 
stable.” Another veterinary surgeon, one employed by the plaintiff, 
saw the horse “early in April” (the purchase having been made 
“ about the 31st March”), and pronounced him “ then lame.” For 
the defence it was repeated, by the other veterinary surgeon who 
had fired him, that the horse was sound when sold, although he 
admitted he had been “ lame before,” for which he had fired him 
at the defendant’s request ; and that “ after the firing he went per- 
fectly sound.” 
Now, here is a horse who had been lame, but was made sound 
by being fired, and who pointed his foot, vet shewed, we think it 
may be presumed, no symptoms of lameness at the time of sale. 
No person, pretending to any knowledge of horses, would make 
purchase of one that had been fired without suspicion of future 
failing, whatever his present or actual state might be ; and, if he 
knew that the horse had been fired for lameness, he had no right to 
suppose the same, on work, might not return. And, what ren- 
dered this, in the case before us, the more probable was, the point- 
ing of the foot . Still, as far as we dare venture on an opinion 
from the facts of the case as stated on the trial, we believe the 
horse to have been, or gone, sound at the time of purchase, while 
we admit that he was palpably lame shortly after. The animal 
was evidently “screwy” — his mended limb was evidently ready to 
give way again on but little provocation, and that “ little” he ap- 
