U. S. VETERINARY MEDICAL ASSOCIATION 
469 
called the Continental law. In this law the condition of soundness or unsound, 
ness is not judged by the rules which prevail with us, although the method leads 
to the same results. But the point principally considered is the effect of the un¬ 
sound condition when it exists, so far as it bears upon the usefulness or the value 
of the animal. For example, the question is not so much whether an animal has 
any of the exostoses of the locomotory apparatus, or whether, when present, they 
interfere as a matter of fact with his working power, as by causing lameness, for 
example. It is not so much whether he is affected with disease, either acute or 
chronic, as whether, in a case of fatal termination, it existed previous to the pur¬ 
chase. It is not soundness as we understand it, concerning which the veterinar¬ 
ian is called to decide, but whether the animal has a “ vice rhedibitoire,” which, 
at the time, interferes with its present and possibly future usefulness or value. 
By the term “vice rhedibitoire,” is understood a vicious and deficient condition, 
such as those which bylaw render the contract void, if the animal was warranted 
free from them. By this definition, you observe, this warranty is almost synony. 
mous to our English warranty of soundness, which means free from diseases that 
constitute an unsoundness, while the other means free from any “vice rhedibi¬ 
toire,” which have been specially designated. 
To illustrate the first: An exostosis will not be a vice rhedibitoire so long as 
it does not give rise to the characteristic lameness of those affections, “intermit¬ 
tent in character,” either when warm or when cool. 
A disease which proves fatal soon after, or within a few days of the purchase, 
will not authorize the repudiation of a bargain, unless it is proved that it existed 
before purchase, or was grafted on a chronic lesion previous to it. And it is thus 
that we find intermittent lameness and chronic affections of the lungs prominent 
among the “vices rhedibitoires ” of Continental laws of warranty. 
Considering now both what you will permit me to denominate the English 
and the French laws together, we shall no doubt find much similarity in the two 
cases mentioned. The result may be about the same, but how much simpler and 
more satisfactory otherwise, professionally considered, the latter, in view of the 
performance of the duties and the execution of the trust placed in our hands. 
To comply with our English laws we must certify to the existence of a condition 
which can hardly be found, either in manor hors q— perfection in the abstract and 
literal sense of the word—and expose ourselves to no end of perplexity and 
trouble in the pursuit, while for the fulfilment of the more rational and practical 
provisions of the Continental laws, we are only required to detect within a cer¬ 
tain period of time the presence of a few designated diseases, or the manifesta¬ 
tions of a few definite symptoms. The English law obliges us to detect one of 
all diseases, the French code asks us to discover at the time of purchase or pre¬ 
viously, or within a given period from the delivery, any one of the following 
diseases and pathological conditions, viz.: 
Speaking at present for the horse only—periodic ophthalmy, glanders, farc}^ 
immobility, pulmonary emphysema, intermittent lameness of long standing, in¬ 
termittent hernia and chronic diseases of the thoracic organs, roaring, and some 
peculiar form of cribbing. 
And there is another point which I am sure will, in your estimation, count 
in favor of the Continental mode of examination. It refers to the time at our 
