Alexandria gazette & daily advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [Va.]) 1817-1822, 1818-03-23
From 'hp Richmond Enquirer.
LAW INTEL. GENCE.


The following case is deemed interest.
ing to those who are in the habit OF send
ing bark notes BY mail.
Fi.hback and Ware exhibited heir bill
in The chancery district Court Of Rich
mond, rs. The president. directors &
Go. Of the kark-o Virginia. charging
that being merchants in Calpeppe; ccun-
". and having occasion {" make re-
mittaucc to their correspondents ~ Phi
Iadelphla, they, a. is customary with
merchants not convenient to banks. cut
in two. four notes OF the bank 81 Virg'-
MA, three PAYABLE at Frederick bu e, and
the other one in Richmond. the amount
and numbers Of hi,h they :peoify, and
enclosed a halt Ct each note in letter
addressed to their said correspondents,
wach they pur in the post Office at JET
ter on in Cup'pper county, TO be cen.
vryet bv mail. but thar the SAID letter
and half notes never reached their co.,
respondents and are lost OF destroyed {:
hat after waiting a reasonable time,
they applied to the president aud direc-
tors of the branch bank at Fredericks-
burg, for payment Of the noie., and Of
fe, ed TO give bond and security 10 in
demniiy item against any claim that
might thereafter be exhibited against
them on account Of the said notes, and
produced the halves at the notes ia their
possession, all Of which, except one, of
which they make al exhibit, The bank re-
tanned. and paid them hal! the amount Of
the three notes payable at their office in
Fredericksburg, but subsequently and at
ter consulting the mother bank refused
TO paw any thing more. The prayer of
the bill is, that upon the compliments
giving bond and security, &c. the de-
PENDANTS shall be decreed to paw them the
residue Of the money due on all the notes
and Tor general relief.
The answer ef the president and d.
rectors Dies not admit that the complain
ants were propriet,rs Of the notes Or sent
the halves bv mail as they state, and call
FIR proof Of the fact; and if proved, they
contend that as the complaindpts cut the
bills in twain themselves, they have TO-
UNFAIRLY destroyed their own security
ADD cannot now look to the bank for pay
ment, but that if the court should think
differently, then they contend that the
bank is not liable to pay the money upon
the complainant' producing the haires of
the said notes only. I. Because the in
nocent holders Of the other halves might
thereby BE- injured, 2. Because the bank
cannot guard against surprize, as it will
be impossible to identify the correspond
ing halves; for the numbers. dates and
letters of the halves produced will fit the
same denominations on anv other bills or
halves OF similar description, IS well as
those alIedged to be lost.
They also aver that the payment at the
branch bank aforesaid was without Their
knowledge, and therefore ought NOT to
bind them to further payment, but that
the compliments ought TO refund
Tho. compisinants BY the deposition Of
one witness prove, that they enclosed IN
a lette directed as Trey charge, and de.
posite' ir the Pos' Office, !"u' hall notes
corresponding in amount vi h the hail
notes men'ion.d In the bill but there is
10 proof that these half notes, were the
halves OF the notes set forth by the CON-
plainants. or that they agreed 10 any O.
ther particulars save in amount
They also p'eve that the hall notes re.
'ained by the bank, correspond in a.
mount with those described in he bill.
The bank proved by the affidavit al
Mr.. Nekervis, agreed 10 be received :.
testimony, that it the bank note. Of thc