Source: https://chestofbooks.com/business/law/Handbook-Law-Of-Contracts/Necessity-For-Consideration-And-Presumption.html
Timestamp: 2019-04-18 10:16:46+00:00

Document:
63. NECESSITY - A valuable consideration is essential to the validity of every simple contract.
EXCEPTION - Want of consideration does not avoid a negotiable instrument in the hands of a bona fide purchaser for value.
64. PRESUMPTION - Negotiable instruments are by the law merchant deemed prima facie to have been issued for a valuable consideration; and by statute in some jurisdictions the same is true of all other simple contracts in writing, and of contracts under seal in those jurisdictions where the common-law effect of a seal has been abolished.
17 Eastwood v. Kenyon, 11 Adol. & E. 438.
19 Anson, Cont. (4th Ed.) 79; Thomas v. Thomas, 2 Q. B. 851. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 76; Cent. Dig. §§ 357-881.
20RANN v. HUGHES, 7 Term R. 34G, Throckmorton Cas. Contracts, 34; Cooke v. Oxley, 3 Term R. 653; Burnet v. Bisco, 4 Johns. (N. Y.) 235; Doeb-ler v. Waters, 30 Ga. 344; Lowe v. Bryant, 32 Ga. 235; Oullahan v. Baldwin, 100 Cal. G48, 35 Pac. 310; Branson v. Kitchenman, 148 Pa. 541, 24 Atl. 6l; McLean v. McBean, 74 111. 134; Baer v. Christian, 83 Ga. 322, 9 S. E. 790; Bailey v. Walker, 29 Mo. 407; Hendy v. Kier, 59 Cal. 138; Culver v. Banning, 19 Minn. 303 (Gil. 260); In re James, 78 Hun, 121, 28 N. Y. Supp. 992. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 47; Cent. Dig. §§ 220, 221, 256-258.
Bills of exchange, promissory notes, and other negotiable instruments are to some extent an exception to this rule.
21Cooley v. Moss, 123 Ga. 707, 51 S. E. 625, holding that a written contract signed by the parties is not binding on a party as to whom it is without consideration. The guaranty. of another's debt must be supported by a consideration. In these contracts there are two considerations - a consideration for the original contract, and a consideration for the guaranty. See Brings v. Latham, 36 Kan. 205, 13 Pac. 129. If, however, as we have seen, a note, for instance, is guarantied by a third person before its delivery to the payee, the consideration from the payee to the maker is sufficient to support the guaranty as well as the note. Winans v. Manufacturing Co., 48 Kan. 777, 30 Pac. 163; Heyman v. Dooley, 77 Md. 162, 26 Atl. 117, 20 L. R. A. 257. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 47; Cent. Dig. §§ 220, 221, 256-258.
22 Pillans v. Van Mierop (A. D. 1765) 3 Burrows, 1663. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 1,1; Cent. Dig. §§ 220, 221, 256-258.
23RANN v. HUGHES, 7 Term R. 350, Throckmorton Gas. Contracts, 34. See, also, Cook v. Bradley, 7 Conn. 57, 18 Am. Dec. 79; In re Hess' Estate, 150 Pa. 346, 24 Atl. 676; Brown v. Adams, 1 Stew. (Ala.) 51, 18 Am. Dec. 36; Burnet v. Bisco, 4 Johns. (N. Y.) 235; Perrine v. Cheeseman, 11 N. J. Law, 174, 19 Am. Dec. 388; Train v. Gold, 5 Pick. (Mass.) 380; Eddy v. Roberts, 17 111. 505. See "Contracts," Dec. Dig. (Key-No.) § 47; Cent. Dig. §§ 220, 221, 256-258.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 76
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 47
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 47
 v. 
 § 1
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 § 47