The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1846-02-20


FEB. 10. TSyior Hunt rs. ST. Johns T. Burr.-The
jury in this returned sealed verdict this morning
IL favor of the plaintiffs for 500.
Noses r. Beach Us. VIM, Moiisry-This was an acton
brought TO the amount of four promssory notes
three Of which were given by John M Trimble and en.
dorsed by the defendant and by the
defendant and endorsed by John NJ. Trmbe in amount
.. follows: May 90 lsa5 for sos 50 June /, $3.50
July !, S255 os July 8, sass 0s which, with interest
protests &c. amounting in all to S793 10.
The de- sncs set up the plea of usuiy.
upon the stand, and testified as follows -
Did you discount this note -(alludng to one of the
foregeng)-l suppase bought of MIR Mallory From
II and received it from Mr.. Mallory How much money
did you advance note? don't what rive
taat notei don't recolect Have you any memoranda
or book ey which you can determine how much you
give for notes Did You give less than s47 for that
no o. do not know whal did give for the note-I did
not take interest into account at all-dd not know
whether received more less than per cent in
te'est on this note Where did you give tho money Tor
toe Sun ONCE tnais where do my sinsss Did not
remember who he gave the money TO; thinks il must
hse oeen Mairoy; does SO much of this kind Of bust
ness that he recoect cannot swear that he did
not take 30 per cent discount of Who keeps your
DOCK oil accountsl My sons Henry D. Beach and Moses
Beach ask in the first place. when am abon, 10
purchase motto. IL fven Tor consideration and is
business note TINS IS my usual practice ascertain
wheh can, whstthey re given for In this made
sneh az inqniry, and ar. Mallory told given
LOT goods nom als store All of these notes shown
nie were Purchased by me with that understanding
Alter having s.cerAined that they were fair business
10 ss he then state a what he would give for Them At
the time these not bought he made this inquiry
recosects this d fnctly as it his nvarabe rule TO
make these inq>hiss Knows that Mr. Mallory brought
these notes % me. There was deal OF cross
Song between N B Blunt. Esquire, counsel for
bssch and A. L Jorden, Esquire, counsel for NAL
4ory arc the court stated that IL wished the coun.
sol woul A try this cause and not try one another
Nhst your usual habits in discountiDg notes do
NO q" count notes purchase them. Does not know
ast he gave for either Of these S255 0s 100 notes
poe' not know whether he gave $500 each them or
nos thinks he gave much 500 each for them
arnl IN hs ha M VGrT a
fIei more than seven pet discount on these two
aotes do not know whether il would amount
more less than per cen,um. Did not tax
the nteres ntoi account Did the full face Of
these two Totes know must have taken OF some
thing. How did you pay Mallory for these notes-was
II IN coin, bills or checks do not know how paid
him think. according TO my present recollection that
gave him check un part upon the Manhattan Bank;
kept my account there that time. Did you give him
Lehighp money for either Of these notes do
rssollect
took these notes of S255 to MIR Beach got $240
for II from Of his sons Mr.. Beach standing by
(rhis note had so days to run)
JoHs NJ TsrMsLr, builder Of the Bowery Theatre
called but his testimony, elected bat little Of
rest, inasmuch that his recollection quite inds
tinct and imperfect Moses 5 Beach, Henry ID. Beach,
Walter r. James were also upon but as their tes
timony somewhat uniV RoTtant we omit details.
Mr. JORDAN centended that note for sass os given
had vitality whatever til got the hands of
Beach. II had been shown that 40 per cent discount
had been deducted from of these notes and about
per cent from that of another.
l. Mr.. BLUNT took opposite view of the matter and
proceeded at much length in support of his client.
The Court charged that the defence in this
ed upon the allegation of usury that in carrying such
plea into execution evidence of usury must be estab
shed In bis view tue defence failed far at least
peIained 10 three of these notes in question Upon the
under date Of 5th July there be some lit
tie difficulty to its validity IL question entirely
Tor tue jury to decide and he should alone conhde il TO
them to determine. Sealed verdict tomorrow
ing.