VETERINARY JURISPRUDENCE IN SCOTLAND. 493 
required? Were the lungs sound when the horse passed from 
the hands of the first dealer into those of the second ? 
Without stopping to recapitulate the whole of the evidence 
in this case, we give the following, which contains all the im¬ 
portant parts of the Judge's summing up.—This is an action 
between two persons of the same trade, Mr. Fisher and Mr. 
Joyce : they are both horse-dealers ; and the action is brought 
to recover upon a breach of the warranty of a horse. The 
question, therefore, which you will have to decide is, whether 
or not the horse was sound at the time of purchase. The plaintiff 
alleges that this contract was made on the faith of the war¬ 
ranty that the horse was sound ; and the defendant, by the 
pleadings, takes upon himself to say, that the horse was 
sound. I just tell you what is the outline of the evidence, 
and then you will be enabled to see more clearly what it is 
which you have to decide. 
In order to prove that it was a sound horse, the defendant 
traces his history, and calls a person, Holmes, who attended 
Dr. Blackinstone’s horses; and he says that, whilst he knew 
him, the horse was well, excepting two days, when he had the 
strangles slightly. In 1838, in the month of September, he 
was sold to a Mr. Williams. We have no servant of Mr. 
Williams’s before us, to give any account of the horse whilst 
in his possession ; but we find that soon afterwards, in Nov. 
1838, he passed into the possession of Mr. Cottrell, who is a 
a horse-dealer, living near Birmingham. We are told that 
while in Cottrell’s possession it was perfectly well, and taken 
care of; and that while it was at Rugeley fair it was not at 
all exposed. Joyce got possession of the horse in December, 
and keeps it till Bristol fair; and the two persons who have 
jointly the care of it, take upon themselves to say that it was 
perfectly sound, and in good condition; and that when sold 
to Fisher, on the 26th of February, there was nothing to in¬ 
duce a suspicion that it was in the slightest degree unsound. 
That, gentlemen, is the defendant’s case. 
Now, the case on the part of the plaintiff is this: He says 
that it is very true that there was nothing at all in the ap¬ 
pearance of the horse to show that it was unsound. And 
here, gentlemen, I will remark, that you are not to believe 
the horse was so free from ailment as these men would make 
out; for you have it in evidence, that whilst at the Saracen’s 
Head, the horse had a cough, and that it w as pointed out by 
Fisher as being a nasty cough, w’hich he did not like. Then 
their case goes on, that on the 26th of February, although 
it escaped the notice of Mr. Fisher, and afterwards of Mr. 
Kent, the horse had a chronic inflammation of the lungs ; 
vol. xxv. 3 u 
