The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1886-09-16

James A. Harris, Appellant vs. nc Hank
of Jacksonville ct al, Appcllees-Duval
county.
RANEY, j.:
l. A party to an action cannot he examined as a
witness in his own behalf concerning Il trans
action or communication had with party de-
ceased at the time of such examination, against
the Assignee oil the deceased person, although
one Jointly interested with and represented by
the deceased. yet not in fact participating in the
transaction, still survive, unless such assignee be
examined in his own behalf rs to such transac
ton. or the testimony of the deceased person
concerning it be given in evidence.
2H p r. & Bro. drew a bill of exchange
upon J. A. H., addressed to j. A. H., Citra, Fla,
and payable TO their own order. j. A. ii. ac'
cepted it, The negotiations as TO and resulting
in the acceptance were between }. A. d. ana
G. Frs member of the partnership OF IL +.
r. & Bro the other member OF the firm, H. r
r., not in fact participating therein. H. r. r.
& BRO. endorsed the bill before its maturity to
The Bank of Jacksonville for value, and with
out notice, and after this g. F. X. died. In a
suit in equity subsequently instituted by j. A
II. to compel the surrender Oh dra't which
had been given by him to the bank in exchange
for such bill of exchange, upon the ground that
his accertance, which he claimed was as follows: :
Accented. James A. Harris" had been materi-
ally altered by writing over il and across the
face of the bill the words payable at the Me-
tropotan National Bank, New York City
Harris being under examination a witness in
his own behalf, offered to testify that the words
" PAYABLE. &C" were added after he had nc
ceped il and without his authority: Held That
though c. F. r. was not solely interested, but
acted In behalf of q partner as well as himself,
the acceptance was a transaction between j. A.
II. and a person deceased at the time of such
examination as to the alteration of which j. A.
II. could not, under the act OF 1874, sec. "a page
61S, McC g Dig, testify in his own behalf against
the bank. :,
3. II the acceptor of a bill Of exchange allege
affirmatively that il has been altered materially
and without his authority since he accepted it,
the burden is upon him to prove the alleged al
teration. The production of the bill will, If the
Alteration is apparent upon its face, make pr1naG
facie case for the acceptor and throw the burden
upon the holder to show that the alteration was
| made before 1t was accepted The party produc'
| ing and claiming under the paper must explain
every apparent material alteration and remove
eyery suspicion thereof, of which there is evi-
dence on its face, before he can recnver Ii there
is nothing upon the face OF the bill TO Indicate
or to put one on notice 40 TO the alteration, the
acceptor must prove 1t by extrennous testimony
| T. The bill OF exchange In quesuon was drawn
an a printed blank form, ell the blanks being
| Allied In the handwriting Of q. r. T.. In whose
hsndvrftiuR were also the words payable o.
Metopoliten Nationai Bank, New York City.
| The words, Accepted, James A. harris, 10
| Harris handwriting, were 10 RED INK, and tne
other writing on the paper In O'ack INK HS'0