St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1889-03-02

q. W. Stockton ". w. G. Warren.
Court Of Appeals. Fourth Circuit Of
Louisiana.

q. w. Stockton ". w. g. Warren.
Court Of Appeals. Fourth Circuit 81
Louisiana.
I hereby csssify that On the 95th day
Of February. 1854. the following judy.
msnt vas rendered in the Aforesaid
court. in the above entitled suit. in the
wossla and ngursa following. to-wit:
Appeal FROM the Eightss0th Judicial
District Court in and for che Parish Of
u. Tau,msny. -Plainti6 was defendant
ON Gir~it drawn BY hin to the order Of
plainsi1 ON ]. d. Terry 4 lions. New Or
leans. La. datsd Dsosnsbsr Z. lo63. aad
due thirty days after date. This drafs
waa accepted by Terry L Soos, AMI de-
fendaut's liability therein VISA therefore
only coatingent and conditional. He
admits his signature. bus avess that BY
an aSreemens and certain ssansa.tiou
made with plaintiff and Que u. +. Terry,
. member Of said 6rm, which are in his
answer and evidence. defendant VA not
70 be held bouni for the payment Of
sAid d:Hft. and this 10 bis most ssrious
defense. The cause WAS triad by Q Jury,
and frOm verdict and Judgment there
in N favor Of d-feniAnt the plaintiff haa
appealed. The issues raised involve
questions Of fact only. Il appeass that
defsudaak being indebted to plaintiff
for merchandise, rendered him in past
On Terry / sons BY n. r. Warren. "a
whom they we're indebted for more than
amount Defendant vas owner Of this
ds.ft, is having been given 70 him BY
=. b. Warren 70 discharge debt which
he owed degsndane Plaintiff refused
70 take the sight drAfe. - the CONNER.
eial standing Of Terry 4 Sons vas MOI
good, but - defendant swears. sent him
for o. +. Terry, vho eams II once %
plaintiffs place VI business, where they
catered into An agreement By which de-
faudAnt WAS 70 destroy the sight dan
aud draw his own draft &c the order III
plaintiff On said Terry 4 sons fos said
amount SUI. payable It thirty day.. u.
+. Terry 70 Individually AMI psrs0nall.
guarantee the payment Of said draft.
which defendant seys be did. and even
dspositsd with plainei6 $3UO in cash u
pay ssid draft. shosld the sccspeoss de-
fault. otherwise the am Sunt Was 70 bo
crsditsd upon U. F. Terry's individual
account Defendant then drew . sight
draft in favor Of plaintiff On u. w. Ses.-
tell / Co. for t63 "a. the balance due
plaintiff. whsrsupon he gave defendant
= receipt in full inr all demands TO slats,
December 3, lSSS. The testimony Ut U.
I. Terry wss twics taken. once in March.
l86o, and again IN October. 1854. In the
evidences AEst taken, at . time asd under
circumstances not auApieious. he sub.
staniially controvssted the defendants
testimony in its mutual facts, - does
". = Terry IN regard to the important
fact that U. F. Terry vas individually n
pay the debt. and that Stockton looked
% him for payment. Plaintiff nasasally
disputes al this. and % does u +. Ter.
~ in his second evidence. and the Jury
and the District Jucge seemed 70 have
believed his 6rst state n cut 70 b true.
The secs ipt found in she record 10 abso-
lutte and unconditional. . receips for al
demands TO date; and while such . re-
ceipt - not conclusive upon the parties
and may he explained. il 10 prims facia
evidence ofthe facts therein stated. casts
the burden OF proof upon the Ezty Who
ave IL. AMI requires at his hands satim.
factory and convincing evidence ~ i'm
peach the statements Or destEoy il e.
fsct& There IL strong reason. intrinsic
and patent, on The face Of this receipt.
% believe thst the thirty days dsait was
accepted In absolute payment. The r.
ceipt especially mentions the draft ON
Sentsll I Co.. aud had the draft in qusa-
tion only have been accepted in pay.
mens conditionally, the receipt would
very probably have msntionsd il il e..
press terms. - it did the other. AZ all
events, it goes to corr oLorass other sea-
tiDony. and to support dsfsndsnt's
theory Of the case; whereas another cir.
cu0stAnce. which has had it, weight
With the Court and that il, that NO
businees relations exist between defend.
ant and Terry 4 Sons. He had NO cred.
it with them, NO funds in their hands,
and ~ far ~ the recs,ed shows. no sea-
son 70 believe thai they would hOaSs his
draft. besides. under the circnmstAAess.
could not have belt H. L.
Warren bound on the sight dsait. IN
alt0geshsr. II bis evidsncs be not true
in al material and Substantial respects.
he o0t0Tesi into t.anaaetiON With those
parties. unworthy Of man Of good com.
mon SENSE. 70 say nothing Of business
man of some considerable experience.
Besides the issues he-ein are, - - have
raid. wholly issues of TACT, aad quss-
lions Of the crslibilisy Uf witnesses.
which have been p~ssed upon by jury.
whose verdict has been approved BY the
District Jadge. and il II we'll settled that
such verdict will not 10 set aside nor
Judgment therein disturbed. except for
sogent reasons. Il H. p. 81 q seq. ] We
Ind none such in this ease. L u
therefore orlered, adjudsed and de-
freed that the juden,soe Of the lower
sOurt he affirmed With cos.x.
In testimony whereof I grant this Ger
i6cate under my hand ami sssl o@leial.
y. at the town of Covington. La. this
Desh day Of February. a. ID. 1859.
+. b. NAsrixD.Lv,
Deputy Clerk.
CoVIU04uH Ia Feb a 1iSl0