352 
ON WARRANTY, &C. 
that the purchaser, had he been aware of their existence, would 
not have bought it at all, or else not at so high a price. 
“ 2. For self-apparent defects, such as the buyer could not fail 
to discover, the vender is not responsible. 
“ 3. But for such as are not perceptible, even though he was 
ignorant of their existence himself, still is he amenable, unless 
stipulated that he tvould not hold himself chargeable with any 
warranty. 
“ 4. In a case of false warranty, it is at the option of the pur¬ 
chaser either to return the article and claim back the price of it, 
or to retain it and claim the restitution of such proportion of the 
original cost as shall by judicious arbitration be awarded. 
u 5. If the vender possessed a knowledge of such defects, he 
is reponsible not only for the return of the price of the article, 
but for any damage or inconvenience sustained by the purchaser 
in consequence thereof. 
“ 6. But if the vender was unconscious of them, he will be 
only liable to refund the price of the article, and reimburse the 
purchaser for any expenses attending the sale. 
u 7. If such defective article becomes lost in consequence of 
its defectiveness, the loss belongs to the vender, who will have 
to return the price paid for it, as well as make good other ex¬ 
penses incurred by it: should the loss, however, be the result of 
accident, it will remain chargeable to the account of the pur¬ 
chaser, 
“ 8. Any action intended by the purchaser, in such cases as 
these, should be instituted with as little delay as the particular 
case demands, and as is consonant with the customs of the place. 
“ 9. No such action will lie when the sale is one ordered by 
judicial authority.” 
On which laws M. Huzard remarks, that—“ nothing can be 
plainer, more in accordance with nature, and better ordered, to 
protect the rights of the purchaser, than the first of them; he (the 
purchaser) cannot suffer grievously , unless it be through his own 
want of foresight, or through accidents not under the controul of 
human ordinances.” 
“ No less just does it seem to make hidden defects pleas for 
return, than unjust to consider those which are apparent in the 
same light: this would be placing the vender at the mercy of the 
purchaser. The second article of the law is intended to counter¬ 
act this, by clearly defining the rights of the purchaser.” 
In regard to the law (No. 8), that, where an action is intended, 
the interval should be as short as is consistent with the nature of 
the case, and the customs of the place of the judicial proceedings, 
it may, in certain cases, be difficult for the most experienced 
