470 
OBSERVATIONS ON 
the place ; and an advocate of the royal court of Paris, M. Legal, 
in a little work entitled, “ Manual for Dealer's in Horses and 
Cattle, 1828,” defended this ancient mode, in opposition to the 
decisions of M. Huzard, or rather of the commercial tribunals of 
the two principal cities, Paris and Lyons, and maintains that the 
old usages preserved in the “ civil code” are the only proper base 
for the decisions of the tribunals. 
I shall maintain that the legislation of usage, however origi¬ 
nally founded in right, is altogether contrary to our present im¬ 
proved knowledge of the diseases of animals and that it is inap¬ 
plicable, if equity is not a mere word, and if modern legislators 
recognise that eternal principle, good faith, which characterised 
the contract of sale among the Romans. 
First question. — What are the defects which constitute un- 
soundness, the civil law not having given us a catalogue of them? 
The civil code admits only as ground for action, diseases which 
are concealed; but there are many serious diseases, and consti¬ 
tuting unsoundness, which are apparent, and of which the pur¬ 
chaser may easily be aware, such as strangles, cough, broken- 
wind, &c. On the other hand, there are defects recognised in 
these usages which do not always unfit the horse for his work, 
or diminish, except in a slight degree, his value, such as curb 
and osseous enlargement of the hock, while rabies finds no place 
in the list of unsoundnesses. 
We shall better appreciate the defects of these usages, when it is 
recollected that, with the exception of glanders and broken wind, 
which are recognised in almost all the provinces, there is the great¬ 
est discrepancy with regard to soundness. Epilepsy in the horse is 
unsoundness only in Bresse; and in the ox only in some provinces ; 
the scab only in Normandy, farcy only in Brittany, roaring only in 
the jurisdiction of the parliament of Paris, in the neighbourhood of 
Lyons, and some parts of Normandy. The usage of Bigorre, the 
Maine, and Anjou, alone recognises the hydatid in the brain; 
that of Berry alone mange in sheep ; that of Gascony and Lan¬ 
guedoc, inversion of the womb; and that of Dauphiny and some 
others, obscure and occult lameness ; and there are very few usages 
which have any reference to the unsoundness of the mule or the 
ass. The usage of Artois guarantees against all unsoundness 
that cannot be recognised on the examination of the dead body; 
and an ordonnance of the police of Paris renders the cattle-mer¬ 
chants answerable to the butcher of Paris for all the cattle that 
die within eight days after the sale. Who does not see how un¬ 
just many of these usages are, and the disputes to which they 
must necessarily lead ? We everywhere find in them only an 
absurd and injurious diversity,—a diversity as it regards diffe- 
