384 THE ADVENTURES OF A GENTLEMAN 



Tranter, already quoted, and Poulton v. Lattimore, 

 9 B. and C. 264. 



I have already quoted the case of Lewis v. Peat, 2 

 Marsh. 431 ; where it was held, that the plaintiff 

 could recover in damages, the costs of an action 

 brought against himself upon the warranty of a horse 

 for soundness ; of which action he had given notice 

 to the party, from whom he had himself purchased 

 the same horse upon a similar warranty. 



I have thus concluded the doctrine of horse war- 

 ranty ; and if my readers will bestow a tenth part of 

 the trouble in perusing it, that I have in preparing 

 it, the probability is, that they will be ten times better 

 paid for their labor, than I shall be for mine ; but I 

 have wished to make my book complete, as a book of 

 reference upon the law of warranty so far as it relates 

 to horses ; and I have, therefore, at the risk of being 

 prolix, referred to every case that I can find upon 

 the subject, with the exception of two or three, which 

 merely relate to dry points of pleading, in actions of 

 which horses are accidently the subject. 



The case of Miles v. Sheward, 8 East, 7, is one of 

 these, but it is expedient to mention it, because, 

 though it is only quoted as an authority on a point 



