496 HIGH COURT OF CHANCERY.

when responsive to the averments of the bill, shall be taken as
true, unless discredited by two witnesses, or one witness with
pregnant circumstances, is not subject to the modification which
the introduction of such a principle would involve. The rule
rests upon a principle which protects it from the modification
insisted upon, and that is, that the complainant, by addressing
himself to the conscience of the defendant, makes him a wit-
ness, and must take his answer as true, unless he can.overcome
it in the way suggested.

Finding, then, that the allegations of the bill were denied by
the answer, I looked carefully into the evidence taken under
the order of the court, to see how far the complainants had
been successful in proving their case; and without here analyz-
ing the evidence, or going into a detailed examination of it, I
deem it sufficient to say, that I do not think it sufficient to over-
come the denials of the answer. Several of the witnesses, it is
admitted, are incompetent, and their depositions are eyp.Inded
from the inquiry. My attention has been directed to the com-
petent proof, and that, I think, is insufficient. The motion for
a receiver must be refused, and the injunction dissolved.

[No appeal was taken from this order.]

LEVI L. TAYMON

vs. DECEMBER TERM, 1849.
JOHN MITCHELL ET AL.

[WARRANTY—JURISDICTION.]

THOUGH the seller of a chattel of which he has the possession, warrants the
title, he is not bound to answer for the quality, unless he expressly warrants
the goods to be sound and good, or unless he makes a fraudulent misrepre-
sentation, or uses some fraudulent concealment concerning them, which
amounts to a warranty in law. '

An assertion respecting an article, must be positive and unequirocal, and one
on which the buyer places reliance, in order to amount to a warranty. And
if the vendee has an opportunity of examining the article, the vendor is not