454 
SOUNDNESS IN HORSES. 
to have contemplated that the living body was u not the work of 
man’s hands—that it was a work which possessed within itself 
the power of formation, repair, and action ; and that man had such 
limited insight into the machinery, that there was no time at 
which he could take upon himself to say that the works were all 
perfect; while but too often flaws and defects existed, which, from 
being out of the reach of his superficial survey, necessarily escaped 
his observation. I shall not offer anything further by way of 
refutation of a doctrine so palpably absurd and untenable; but 
quit it with observing, that it furnishes a remarkable example of 
the notorious deficiencies evinced by our most eminent lawyers 
when they come to practice in u horse-causes.” 
The subsequent exposition of the law, by Lord Ellenborough, 
bears, to say the least of it, the face of plausibility. It set out on 
the principle, that unsoundness consisted in “ any infirmity which 
rendered the animal unfit for present use or convenience.” His 
Lordship’s words are — “ To constitute unsoundness, it is not 
essential that the infirmity should be of a permanent nature y it 
is sufficient if it render the animal for the time unfit for service; 
as, for instance, a cough, which for the present renders it less 
useful, and may ultimately prove fatal. Any infirmity which ren¬ 
ders a horse less fit for present use and convenience is an un¬ 
soundness.” This, I repeat, is a specious doctrine: it is one, 
however, viewed in a medical light, that is liable to heavy objec¬ 
tions. If by “ infirmity” be meant to be understood disease , then, 
I would ask, if there were not diseases which did not u render the 
animal unfit for present use or convenience ?” Because, this once 
admitted, it follows that a diseased horse may, according to Lord 
Ellenborough, be regarded as a sound horse. On the other hand, 
if by infirmity be understood, not disease, but incapacity, from any 
cause, then a horse enfeebled by age, condition, 8cc. would be un¬ 
fairly pronounced unsound. In fine, according to my notions, a 
horse may be unsound in a variety of ways, and yet be pronounced 
to be “ fit for present use or convenienceor, he may be “ unfit 
for present use or convenience,” and yet be a perfectly sound 
horse. 
The present Chief Justice, Lord Tenterden, has, in a recent 
case, given it as his opinion, “ that a horse that cannot go through 
the same labour as before the existence of the defect or blemish 
in dispute, and with the same degrees of facility and safety, is 
unsound.” There is no nearer or surer way of coming at the truth 
of any proposition than to place it before us in the reverse form: 
Let us do this with the present one—if a horse can “ go through 
the same labour as before ,” ergo, he is sound. Now, in the first 
place, the word “before,” (referable to an antecedent—we will 
