New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1867-02-13
SUPREME CoURT-CmcuTr.-FEB I2.-Before Mr. Jus
tee CLERKE.
TnE LAW or PRoMlssonY NoTEs'

Gains N Hubbard at AmasA NJ Barbur
Tlsi5a silt on three notes of 81 800 each, and three
note 81 OsO, AL given to g. W. Chadwick at the
tine, and Tor which he had given receipt under
Of consideration in the inception OF the notes and usury
~ their delivery 10 the plaintiff The trial OF the case
coupled ,r'e ays one Phcpa. WI t hut no
Fall Of 1864 the defendant renewed his acquaintance with
ShadWiek, VINO ma Deeh sIIoo,c; an p ps nu luz
for which he paid partly in notes.
could not explain very clearly what his purposes IN
entering into this banking operation, nor was he very
clear rs to the means adopted o tax up one OF th notes
note transactions between them down to the TINE
SELF was brought from Edrdgest. where nc IS as
result OF the explosion OF the bank and the plaintiff on
the stand acknowledged that he was Graham Coz firm
who sent tickets promising valuable JeWey Tor small re-
The charge Of the Court was in substance AZ follows
think, gentlemen that We may consider the persons,
the plaintiff and defendant and principal witness,
g coDrDgtc ~ the ncfease or redundancy OF the cur
I5N1T-hat ihty 0I3 al lf6tty equally Implicated that
not think that either Of them deserves IN tbs pofe
relation TO the involved I'm this case but though
NAV offect their credbty 10 some extent and as fhev
are eGnay implicated IL Is not best 10 take that circum
stance into consideration at all. The law makes
great distinction between note given for business pur
pose, and note that Is given purely for the
purpose OF borrowing money at an usnrons
rate Of interest One. is valid, the other is
The only thing you consider is whether these wero
business notes given IN the FIRST instance for valuable
or any else II Is not necessary that he should be the
purchaser al that particular time OF Mr. Chadwick OF
property OF kind &C is sufficient that no was In
debted to Chadwick to the bank for the stocks That
would make the notes valid In the first instance chad
wick would have the right to sell them at whatever rate
he pleased We're the notes in question made for vana-
BILE consideration, were hey made by the defendant
merely for the purpose u accommodating Chadwick
II they made for the purpose OF satisfying indebted
Chadwick to the bank or TO any one else they
were made for a valuable considerations
In reply TO requests TO charge the Court held mat
good consideration might be the pAymcn OF future ser
vices TO be rendered by Chadwick but refused to charge
that II the plaintiff gathered from Chadwick statements
that they were good business paper it would render them
good In his hands.
The Jury found for defendant.
Mr.. Hoxo for plaintiff; Mr. f. W. Dodge for defend
ant.
CHAMBERS.
1.-THE LAWS DEIAY"-ACTIoN or THE BAR.
The call of the motion calendar at Chambers IL
fixed by the Supreme Court for ~ m, ana the az pdre
business Is usually completed by this time during the
present month considerable complaint has arisen rOn
The fact that tho pdrte business followed by recess OF
from 10 to 20 minutes has largely enooached on the aer
n0On Yesterday the hundred lawyers WHO are e0ppee@