•274 
VET E KINA It V J UKISPltU DENCE. 
counsel nothing to say against defendant, but the witness called 
in the after-part of the case for the plaintiff actually contradicted 
the very first witness produced, who emphatically, and three or 
four times, declared that the mare (which he had known three or 
four years) was “ sound as a roach.” The Learned Sergeant 
then commented on the evidence in order to shew that it proved 
the mare had not been properly treated. It appeared, too, let 
them recollect, that the groom had not been “ remembered and, 
he believed, that was a most important part in every horse trans- 
action, as the aijnals of Leicestershire and Melton would fully 
prove. If the groom were not “ remembered,” it was astonishing 
with what aversion he always looked upon the animal. (Laughter.) 
His learned friend (Mr. Balguy) had sold a good many horses, 
and he no doubt knew that the “ remembering” formed a most es- 
sential part in the affair. 
His Lordship then went over the whole of the evidence, after 
which the jury found a verdict for the defendant. 
CAMBRIDGE, MARCH, 21.— COFFIN JOINT LAMENESS. 
Saunderson v. Harrison. 
This, an action for alleged breach of a warranty of sound- 
ness given by the defendant to the plaintiff on the purchase 
of a bay gelding, was tried before Sir N. C. Tindal, Lord Chief 
Justice of the Court of Common Pleas. 
Mr. Sergeant Storks and Mr. Gunning were counsel for the 
plaintiff; and Mr. Andrews conducted the defendant’s case. 
The facts were simply these : — 
At Horncastle fair, on the 18th of August, 1841, the plaintiff, 
Mr. Saunderson, a horse-dealer, living in the town of Cambridge, 
purchased for the sum of £26 a bay gelding from the defendant, 
Mr. Harrison, a farmer living at Harmston, in the county of 
Lincoln, and received therewith the usual warranty of sound- 
ness. The plaintiff, willing “ to turn an honest penny,” in a few 
hours after he had completed the purchase, accepted an offer 
from Mr. Marriott, of Abbott’s Hall, near Braintree, Essex, and 
transferred to that gentleman the gelding, the subject of the pre- 
sent action, (and along with it the warranty of soundness) in con- 
sideration of the sum of £31 had and received. 
On the day following these transactions the gelding was started 
with three others towards Mr. Marriott’s residence, a distance of 
