162 
Vtttvimvv ifWrtncal Sutt^prulrenc^ 
The Oration of Professor Renault at the Public 
Distribution of Diplomas and Prizes at the Royal 
Veterinary School of Alfort, August 28,1833. 
[Concluded from page 116.] 
As yet, gentlemen, we have considered the question only with 
relation to the inconveniences that result from the diversity of 
usage ; and although I have been able to point out but a part of 
them, you must be, doubtless, convinced, that they are serious 
and numerous. 
Let us now examine them under another point of view. We 
will consider ourselves for a moment as veterinarians, and prove, 
by a few examples, taken at hazard from among a thousand, to 
what degree the principles, according to which such and such 
maladies have been determined by usage to constitute unsound¬ 
ness, are erroneous, and the data upon which the different dura¬ 
tions of the warranty have been determined for each of them, 
are false. 
Every person must be convinced that it would be unjust to 
authorize the return of an animal for a disease which the pur¬ 
chaser might have easily perceived at the time of sale, or for one 
that may be developed after the sale, and by the act of the pur¬ 
chaser. It may also easily be conceived that it is just to con¬ 
sider as unsoundness every disease that renders the animal unfit 
for the service to which he is destined, or that, although existing 
before the sale, was hidden at the time of it. Such, at least, are 
the principles which reason seems to prescribe: let us see how far 
usage corresponds with them. 
I look at the synoptical table of Gohier, and I see (among the 
number of diseases constituting unsoundness, recognized by the 
custom of Franche Comte) quinsy with a duration of the war¬ 
ranty for forty days. Now, quinsy is acute inflammation of the 
pharynx, and which may commence and develop itself in the 
space of one or two days, and which also, as soon as it exists, 
betrays itself by symptoms sufficiently evident to convince the 
purchaser that the animal is ill. Wherefore, then, extend the 
duration of the warranty for forty days, with regard to a disease 
that may appear on the fourth day after the sale, and that 
may be presumed to be caused by some act of the purchaser, 
and which, if it had existed before the sale, could not fail of being 
recognized by him ? Is not this, evidently, a crying injustice ? 
