The daily press. (Cincinnati [Ohio) 1859-1859, 1859-04-27
l. A w REPORT.
SUPERIOR COURT.

GENERAL TrRM.-Young & Pomeroy vs.. The Exec.
of t6S CoOp JmdSe Storer the opinion
oailee who receives draft for collection on distant
mii; with his ndoissment to his agent there for col
GI6sS9s ta him to PLACE the to his
name Of the agent-wherovcr the draft is collected
an me proceeds placed TO the credit Of the bailee
equivalent to payment to the principal, and The
Dsilor may recover from the baiee the amount thus
Pau, although the depository in the meanwhile may
have failed, and the bailee has received actually no
part otthe money.
Second-Thet wherever bailee receives note for
the money to his own credit in bank, Whereby the
lights III tds i5e bnse bsc1gd sSTS .
liable to the bsor for the amount thus deposited
SSalles hsying actually received or having had any
worth, trustees must be made to understand that II
their duty 70 keep trust funds separate and dis.
on no consideration, the trust money themselves,
Or Or permit Il 70 be mingled with their own. II
to complain when they meet with trouble and n eX.
pense, and sometimes with serious loss. Tie iudg.
Fatman & Co. vs. Thompson & Taft, In error.
Judge storcr also announced the opinion in this
Held first That where, by the usage of trade in all
sales i0r particular quality of manufactured tobacco
there Is an implied guaranty that the articles sold
sPeI p remain sound and merchantabe for the space
cI nUur months alter the sale the yendee in case the
rely on the warranty, and recover the difference be-
'Seh te price pu ana the then value of the article.
second, That such usage may be proved on trial as
in ordinary cases, but it must be generally known
reasonable, and sufficiently ongestobiished to be,
Third-Whenever such usage Is proved to exist the
dealer III the article sold can not protect himself by
Of the law Of the place hemercRant is bound to
know IT, and he can not exclude himself from the
Liabilities which attach to others in the same busi.
ness The contract of sale must be regarded to have
peen made IN reference to the custom, which thus
becomes an essential part of the agreement between
the parties The seller must contemplate It when he
indemnity. The usage In all cases must depend, in
great measure, on the place where the contract Is
made Th and m the nature Of the commodity sold.
SPECIAL TERM.=Several cases were disposed of by
Judge Spencer. Thomas Morgan VS.. Copcn h Bas.
sett demurrer sustained, and leave to amend poti-
Leopold Frank vs. Little Miami and Columbus and
Aenla, and Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati
haliroad Company. Demurrer sustained and leave
J. K. Hurin VS. II. F. wacher. Demurrer sus-
tanned, and leave to amend.
Rowe, Mahoney Co. VS.. James Todd and wife
before Judge Spencer on demurrer to the petition
The petition alleges the was executed by James
cumstances, showing that the consderation Of the
note was oysters, furnished by plaintiffs to James
I39d they supposng that he was dealing for himself
while in fact IL for the wife, and the proceeds OF
the sale went to her benefit, in the purchase of real
estate ~
There could not be joint Judgment in resrect to
tne hote, the wife being no party TO it. It was
sought TO charge her in her separate interest in the
matter he then could not be held liable with her in
fsspeot 70 consideration OF which he did not receive
dered against husband and wife during coverture for
cause OF action dependent upon contract. The de.
murrer was clearly sustainable as to tho wife II
was true that the other defendant carried on bust
ness IN her name, the facts up would
an,noriLe the Court, upon further petition, after
the conveyance to the wife, subject the property
to the.payment of the judgment. f'