SOUNDNESS IN HORSES. 
461 
only, even though that had been overlooked on purchase, it cer¬ 
tainly would have been returnable; but, since a crack has super¬ 
vened upon the star, and thereby the vessel rendered useless and 
valueless, the buyer, I should say, ought to be made the sufferer. 
Let us apply these remarks to soundness in horses. Suppose a 
gentleman makes a purchase of a horse of a dealer; that the ani¬ 
mal has a catarrh or cold at the time of purchase; and that this 
catarrh proves to be the forerunner of a violent inflammation in 
the lungs: is the horse in such a state returnable ? I know I may 
be told that the answer must be framed according to the circum- 
( stances of the individual case;—that it must depend upon the length 
of the interval of the transfer, or of the accession of the pulmonary 
disease; upon the usage the animal experienced in the interval; 
or upon some other contingency: but I must contend, that it ought 
not to be made to hinge upon any circumstantial contingency 
whatever; but ought to be brought to bear upon plain matters of 
fact and presence , and by that, and that alone, to be determined. 
The plain straight-forward question to be put, first, in this case, 
is— Was it a simple catarrh that the animal had at the time of 
purchase; or had the disease in the lungs shown itself , hy any un¬ 
deniable symptom , already to have commenced? If it can be proved 
to have been catarrh , and nothing but catarrh, why, I should say, 
the animal is no more returnable with an inflammation in his lungs 
than the cracked decanter is which was sold with merely a star: 
on the other hand, if any unequivocal symptom of the pulmonary 
inflammation can be shown to have existed at the time of the 
transfer, why, then, I should pronounce the animal to be return¬ 
able, even though he were dying or dead from the disease. 
But, let us view this question in another light. Suppose it 
should be argued that the horse certainly is returnable under such 
circumstances, because the catarrh was the forerunner of the pneu¬ 
monia, and because it is common and natural for one of these 
disorders to run into the other. Grant this, what does it lead to? 
Why, it leads to the deduction that a star (in glass) may become 
a crack; and that from a crack the piece may fall out; and that 
the decanter, which was simply starred when bought, is ever 
afterwards returnable for anything connected with that star, even 
though there should be actually a hole through it: or, to apply 
this to the case before us, that a horse that had only a simple cold 
when he was bought, is ever afterwards returnable for anything 
that can be traced to have any connexion with that cold, whether 
it be pneumonia, or roaring, or broken-wind, or a state between 
life and death, or even death itself. In making the comparison 
between the cases of the horse and the decanter, I feel fully con¬ 
scious of the broad line to be drawn between animate and inani- 
o *3 
