Cooper's Clarksburg register. [volume] (Clarksburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1851-1861, 1858-06-25
Important to Buyers and Sellers of

Important to Buyers and Sellers of
Horses.
i June IL. Psqon Us. Spear and Eg5ert-
son.-This is an action for damages for
alleged fraud in the5sale of pair Of hor-
SEES by defendants to plaintiff, and for
which he paid them $500. Plaintiff told
defendants that he wanted pair of hor.,
SEES for the private family carriage of q
gentleman. The defendants said they
had pair that would suit him; both de-
PENDANTS were present at the sale. One
of theihcrsss had run away with defend.
ant Egbertson last November. and he
told the other defendant Of 1t at the time.
The other defedant, Spear, told the
plaintiff that the horses were, gentle and
kind as far as he had driven them or seen
them. He says he did not say they were
gentle and kind as far as he knew; he did
not, however, tell the plaintiff that the
horses had runaway with his partner al
though he knew the fact. The horses
did not prove gentle or kind; they ran
away with the plaintiff, broke his car
riage, and injured himself very much,
breaking his collar bone and three of his
ribs. Witnesses were called to prove the
difference in the value of the horses
Some testified it to be $500, and some as
low as 500.
By the Court-This action is for fraud
in the sale of pair of horses. There are
three classes Of actions in the sale of hor.
SEES: First, on warranty; Second. on a
fraud; Third. on fraudulent warranty.
On warranty alone, if the action is made
out. the defendants must respond in dam.
ages TO the actual amount the plaintiff
has sustained, and no more, because he
may warrant or represent horse to be
sound. or kind and gentle. believing him
to be SO. In such case he has acted hon
estly, and therefore while he was liable
to the plaintiff for the actual damages. be
should not be visited with smart money,
In the other two cases, it the action is
made out, the defendant must have been
guilty OF moral wrong; and in such ca.
ses courts and juries are required to give
damages with "a liberal and unsparing
hand" not only as compensation to the
plaintiff on bringing the defendant to jus.
ice, but to teach the defendant moral
lesson. AS has been well said, most men
think when dealing in horses that they
are released from all moral obligation
Such is not the law. If a merchant deal.
ing in broadcloth should know that mice
had gone into the end Of bale and eaten
hole through several folds. and should
sell it to customer without divulging
such knowledge, there is not horse deal,
er in the country but would say the mer.
chant ought to respond in damages, and
the law says so too. A fraud may be
perpetrated by the withholding of fact
as we'll as by the utterance of falsehood
and if these defendants knew that those
were runaway horses. they were as much
in law. in honesty and good faith to make
that fact known to the plaiutiff as was the
merchant in the case just stated. Amar
may obtain $500 for horse that has the
heaves." and that is net worth So
Yet such fraud would not be as grea
as the one here in question. In the for
mer case the plaintiff could only lose hi
$500; in this case the selling of the run
away horses) the plaintiff mig ht have los
his life aud the lives Of his wife and fami
ly. He runs such risk at any rate, ant
without knowing it; aud in this case tn,
plaintiff ran such risk. He was injured
by the running away; he lay senseless TO
some time. and is not we'll yet. Men may
be founp who would run such risk for q
hundred dollars, and am not sure blu
that even at that price they set too high {
value upon their lives. They are the bes
judges on that point. In this case tn,
plaintiff and both defendant testify to fact
| that the law nronounces frauds On thar,
is no dispute, but the action is made out
The limited jurisdiction Of this Court viii
not allow damages to be assessed with 81
liberal and unsparipg hand" therefore
the plaintiff must be content with $500
damage. Judgment accordingly.
| 'a TN Y. Herald.