30.2 
Veterinary Jurisprudence. 
LOUGHBOROUGH COUNTY COURT, January 21. 
( Before Mr. Serjeant Miller, Judge.) 
OUTRAM V. WALKINGTON. 
A jury consisting of the following persons to try the case: Messrs. 
Thomas Hutchinson, Joseph Miller, Henry Henson, Joseph Foulds, 
and Robert Crane. 
Mr. John Iluish, barrister, instructed by Mr. Edward Gamble, of 
Derby, appeared for the plaintiff; and Mr. Staples for the defence. 
Mr. Huish , in addressing the jury, observed that the plaintiff, Mr. 
Joseph Outrarn, was a timber merchant at Derby, and the defendant a 
butcher and innkeeper at Rempstone. The action was brought to 
recover damages arising from an alleged breach of warranty of a horse 
which the plaintiff had purchased of the defendant for £24, and which 
proved to be unsound. After due notice the animal was sold by 
auction, and realised £13 1 O^r.; the deficiency, together with the 
expense of keep, sale, and professional attendance, made the amount of 
the claim £1G 6s. 6d. The circumstances were these: In August last 
the defendant was possessed of a chestnut gelding, four years old. The 
plaintiffs brother was leaving the farming business at the place where 
the defendant resided, and was requested on behalf of the plaintiff, as 
his agent, to purchase the horse, which he did, arranging that the 
defendant should send it to the Kegworth station. On taking it away 
the same day, and before it got far on the road, it was found to be 
lame, in which state it walked to Belper, where plaintiff then resided. 
The next day the plaintiff tried it, and found that it went lame. On 
the 25th the horse was examined bv a veterinary surgeon, who found 
that the lameness was in the fore foot. After apprising the defendant 
of the circumstance, the plaintiff sent the horse back again on the 4th of 
October; but the defendant refused to repay the money, saying he had 
got it and would keep it, and also that the horse was not the one he had 
sold. After other veterinary surgeons had examined it, the animal was 
sold by auction. The learned gentleman then called the following wit¬ 
nesses in support of the case : 
Mr. J. Outrarn , brother of the plaintiff, deposed to buying the horse 
for £25, a sovereign to be returned. Told the defendant it was bought 
for his brother; asked if he would warrant him all right and sound, 
when he replied in the affirmative, and said he would give him a written 
warranty, if wished. As there was a witness present (Mr. Blount) he 
said he did not require that. 
The Judge —You are a young man, and I give you this advice—never 
refuse a written warranty again if there be fifty witnesses present. 
Mr. Perkins said he would admit the warranty. 
Witness continued — Made arrangement for the defendant to take the 
horse to Kegworth station on the Saturday after the 15th of August. 
Went to the station himself the same day, and saw the horse in the 
stable, and remained there till the man (Thomas Barrow) came for it, 
giving him his brother's cheque for £25 ; gave defendant the cheque, 
and received a sovereign back. Defendant then said if he proved 
unsound he would take, him back again. Shortly afterwards witness 
told defendant the horse was lame, and that his brother (plaintiff) 
