Phenix gazette. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1825-1833, 1830-01-27
BILLS OF EXCHANGE-LAW CASE

BILLS OF EXCHANGE-LAW CASE
Circuit COurtofMe United STATE, Philadelphia, Ian.
VALID AccErrANcE.-Osd Ferguson ,t
Company plaintiffs, and GIllIngham, Mi ch,I
& Co. defendants, this was an action upon ~
alleged acceptance, by the defendants, .G
OF exchange, drawn upon them, ii favor o'As
ifs, Wy q. D Ward as attorney for Thorn
as Newboud, who carried on business IN 10,
name of Thomas Nrwbould x COMPANY
On the trial Of this cause al the pr'OH
session of the Circuit Court, the Jury fOun!
verdict for the plaintiffs, subject 70 ii.
| opinion of The Court on the validity u h
acceptance, and on the the authority Of b:
attorney to draw the bill under The cireum'
ances in evidence. 1t appears that 10 July.
1926. Thomas NewbouId, Of this city, ahouIn
depart for England, appointed Oliver D W.t
and George II. Newbould jointly aud several!
his .t,crneys, for him and in MS name, or 10
the name Of Thomas Newbould; su,hoInHs
| Them, or ether Of them, among other thlhHi
| 10 draw such bills Of exchange, checks, noes
! and 10 accept, endorse, &c. as they should con-
slider necessary in he manaeen'n' oil bis DIS
NESS In March, 1923, the dcfrrdan's' hasfg
previously had trsusactions with o. d. wax
a. attorney for Thomas Nrvboud d, and k'o'
ing him TO have authority 10 open me p.""
and transact the business Of The latter, 'oa'"
sed letter 10 Thomas Newboud 70. &C.
knnwIedging The sale OF quantity Of ill.,
he net amount Of S2,569 70, and giving AZ
thori,y to value on them f,r hat sum
At the time Mr.. Ward rcteiyrd TINS !',''
Thomas NewbnuId was indebted to the P'D
lifts, and continued to be so al er tins SUI W.
brought Mr. Ward showed The lr''sf ~
pl,in IFS, offering to give them dFs' on ;"
defendants 10 the amount stated, whic" u"
agreed TO receive as cash IN par pay
their claim, and The draft was accof'I"sj
drawn on the second. day after the dse
defendants letter. Al this time, 's q
wards appeared, Thomas NewhouiG nl'
come bankrupt in England, and mere '''
rumor to that effect before The draft was o'''I
bu Mr.. Ward was not officially ih'","..
The fact ill two days after. Whrn inc O''
prt sented to the defendants, which "a' '" w.,
second day after il was drawn 'n'' '' t'n.
tina, il could not BE paid tor the wan va.
,horiry; aud it was protested The POM.
served for the decision of the court "e'. IN
| " neither there was an arcep'ah'e U, :"
and I'd Whe,her The bankruptcy OF in''" -,
Nrwbould took away the au'h''iY u n,
agent 10 draw the bill. On The hrs' pow,
court decided, in the language Of ne o'p :.
Courr, in the case of Coolidge vs. fay,"r Il,
Wheaton, 6s1 that letter within r' ,m sex.
time before or after The date OF ''' . ~
change, describing it in terms not 10 DC , ""
ken, and promising to accept IT, IS II s" w II.
The person who afterwsrd 'akes ne oi'' hind.
credit Of the letter, a virtual accep'an,e q,
ing the person who makes ihe promo" ~, hank
the second point il was decided, ina, ~" W.. ,o,s,
rup,cy has no efftc, upon the aes OF ~. ' -
whatever It's general operation on ,oe ' I.r.a.
NAV be. The fund in The hands OF nc 81,
dsn,,. to the amount Of heir accept'nSge' and
oppropriated TO the use OF the paio'":' mi,
they are entitled to recover that amour
action .-Evening Post. =. r, s.
In the case Of Ogden, Ferguson x W. .';,,3,
Gillinehsm, Mitchell & Co. It was aom rs,.1,.
tina, before the bill in the question w,s LIQUID
ed: an attachment, against Thomas Ne' ,,.i.
was laid in their hands, which was ,nen linn
ing, that they had received "oiice o. ' ~ bank.
rihe a,signres under he commission o, r" ~
ru,,cy against him, from the attorney Gos
persed.d Mr.. Ward Ia hi, agency Ap''