292 THE ADVENTURES OF A GENTLEMAN 



The case of Chanter v. Hopkins, already quoted, 

 is decisive on the admissibility of parole evidence to 

 vary a written contract, and I may refer those read- 

 ers who wish for more authority on this point to the 

 cases of Powell v. Edwards, 12 East, 6 ; Bradshaw v. 

 Burnett, 5 C. and P. 50; Greaves v. Ashlin, 3 

 Camp. 426, and Thelton v. Livius, 2 C. and I. 411. 

 It is not worth while to quote them at length in a 

 work like this, as they only establish the general 

 principal of law. Yet it may be noticed generally, 

 that although parole evidence is inadmissible to alter 

 or vary a written contract, it may be received in aid 

 of such contract. In the case of JefFery v. Walton, 

 1 Star. N. P. 267, the contract was for the hire of a 

 gelding for ^' six weeks at two guineas." The action 

 was brought for damages arising from mismanage- 

 ment of the horse. The written contr^ict was con- 

 tained in a pencil memorandum made by the plaintiff, 

 * and which he was called upon to produce by the de- 

 fendant at the trial. The defendant had kept the 

 horse for twelve weeks. He paid twelve guineas 

 into court, as it would seem, for the six weeks' hire, 

 according to the written contract. The case, like 

 most law cases, is so briefly reported, tliat the facts 



