14 HORSE WARRANTY. 



form a contract (/). It is not necessary that the 

 wliolo note should bo on ono piece of paper, if 

 tlie different parts can bo shown to be the same 

 contract [it). It was said above, that tlie me- 

 morandum or note contemplated by the 17th sec- 

 tion of the Statute of Frauds should contain tho 

 names of tho parties to the contract, but that it is 

 not necessary that it shoidd contain the signature 

 of both pai-tios. The party whose signature is 

 required is f/ic parti/ to lie cJiiinjal. This is now 

 settled by authority and practice (?r). A mark 

 made by a jiarty as his signature is sulTiciont (.r), 

 or even if the party hold the top of a pen while 

 another person ^^Tites liis signature (//). 



So, too, it has been held, that the signature may 

 1)0 in print or stamjifd, and in tho body of tho 

 ]»apcr, or at tho beginning, or at tho end. Tho 

 leading case on this is Sdunderson v. Jackson (c). 



{t) Jackson v. Lone, 1 Biiif,'linni, 9 ; Allni v. Bennett, 3 

 Taunt<jn, 1G9; Cooper v. Ihod, 2S L. J., Ch. 212. 



(»«) Archer v. Jitii/ne.i, 20 L. J., Ex. 51, fiiiil '> Ex. G2.j; Gib' 

 ton T. Holland, L. R., 1 C. P. I. 



(«•) Allat V. Bennett, 3 Taunton, 109; Thornton v. Kempiter, 

 ') Taunton, 7SG ; Laythoarp v. Brijant, 2 Binglinni, N. C. 735, nud 

 3 Scott, 238. 



(x) Bilker V. Deniny, 8 Ad. & E. 91. 



(y) Jlehhauy. I.angloj, 11 L. J., Ch. 17. 



(:) 2 B. & r. 238; Knujht v. Crock/unl, 1 Enp. 190. Soo, 

 abw, Schneider v. Xorris, 2 Maulo & S. 28G ; Johnton v. D'/dgton^ 

 2 M. k W. C53. 



