In 1698 the doctrine was mentioned in dicta by Sir Holt in the English case of "Jones v. Hart", 2 Salk 441, 90 Eng. Rep. (K.B. 1698). In the US, it was discussed in the case of "Wright v. Wilcox", 19 Wend. 343, 32 Am. Dec. 508 (1838), in which a boy climbed on a wagon driven by defendant's servant, who drove his horses faster, causing the boy to be thrown and injured. The judge ruled that the master was not responsible under "respondeat superior", because the servant had acted in a way in driving the horses that the master had not assented to, and therefore it was not within the scope of his employment.