EDITORIAL. 
723 
such, a warranty in the sale catalogue or in the sign on the auctioneer’s 
box, which announces the representations under which each horse is 
sold. It has been said that not one in twenty of all the horses sold un¬ 
der the hammer in the metropolitan market is warranted sound. Nearly 
ever} firm in the commission business advises its consignors not to give 
such a warranty, regardless of whether the horse sold is believed to be 
sound or not. 
The term “ sound, ” as interpreted by many veterinarians, means too 
much, according to the dealers, so much, indeed, that not one horse 
among a hundred could be certain of passing inspection. An3^ insig¬ 
nificant blemish or defect that a practical horseman would see and dis¬ 
regard is frequently enough to “turn down ” a valuable animal, and 
when once a horse has been officially rejected as “ unsound ” his mar¬ 
ket price is cut in two. lhe word condemns hi m without much regard 
to whether his shortcoming is a harmless splint or scar, or a spavin or 
something equally serious. 
A case in point: At one of the oldest and best known auction marts 
in New York not long ag'o a fast and handsome road horse was put up 
for sale under a full warranty as to soundness and was sold for $57s. 
When inspected by the veterinarian he was rejected as “ unsound, ” and 
was accordingly returned to be resold for the account of the original 
consignor. That the horse was practically sound was not denied, but 
he failed, nevertheless, to fill the bill as an absolutely sound horse. At 
the second sale he brought a little less than one-lialf the original price, 
a Brooklyn horseman getting him this time for $250. After having used 
him daily for nearly a month the present owner of the horse now says 
he would have been cheap at $700. Since the second sale took place a 
competent veterinarian has pronounced the horse to be absolutely sound. 
At another sale a consignor, who was not familiar with the full im¬ 
port of a warranty of soundness, sold a pair of horses under such a rep¬ 
resentation. They failed to pass after bringing $1200, and were put up 
again and sold for $600. The second buyer, who saw for himself that 
nothing of consequence ailed either horse, was able to resell the pair at 
private sale for $1000 within twenty-four hours. 
While we are of opinion that a great injustice is done the 
dealer when a horse is condemned on account of an “ insignifi¬ 
cant blemish or defect ” that will not interfere with,the useful¬ 
ness or value of an animal for the purposes for which he is pur- 
:hased, yet we would emphasize the importance and professional 
luty of the practitioner in discriminating between this class and 
Dther so-called “insignificant blemishes and defects” that do im¬ 
pair, or are likely to impair, the usefulness and market value of 
m animal. 
It is right at this point where the competent practitioner’s 
>pinion is of greatest value to the purchaser. It is for the prac- 
itioner to determine what is harmful and what is unharmful. 
