Case Name: Pumroy Rayne and wife, v. Guthrie and Wallace
Court: Westmoreland County Court
Jurisdiction: Pennsylvania
Decision Date: 1793-09
Citations: 1 Add. 137
Docket Number: 
Parties: Pumroy Rayne and wife, v. Guthrie and Wallace.
Judges: 
Reporter: Addison
Volume: 1
Pages: 137–138

Head Matter:
Pumroy Rayne and wife, v. Guthrie and Wallace.
AN action of debt was brought on a single bill dated 12th November, 1787, for 29l. 10s. payable on demand, for value received.
Ross, for the plaintiff,
contended, at the trial, that interest should be computed from the date of the bill ;- because, the words “ for value received,” were equivalent to money lent, and this bears interest, and because it was commonly understood, that all notes or bills payable on demand, bore interest from the date; and bills and notes were so drawn on this presumption.
This point was reserved, and at December term, 1793, the opinion of the court was delivered.

Opinion:
President.
I cannot discover, that it is the common understanding, sanctioned judicially in Pennsylvania, that notes or bills on demand bear interest from the date. In the Supreme court, the law, with respect to interest is stated in the same manner as in England. " In the case of promissory notes, where a day certain is fixed for payment, interest is allowed from that day. Where no certain day is fixed, it is payable from demand." It is from judicial, and not indiscriminate, opinions, that we must take the law of Pennsylvania. And, without any publicly established rule, to say that a note for a certain sum of money on demand, should, on demand, be a note for that sum and more, seems contrary to the agreement of the parties. The creditor, by a demand, may intitle himself to interest, when he pleases. If parties will not explain their own words, they must leave them to the construction of the law. We must not change fixed rules from mere private opinions. The general rule is, that interest must be paid from the time that the principal ought to have been paid. " For value received," is a mere formal expression, and cannot put this money in the state of money lent.
Jacobs v. Adams. Dall. 52.—See also Dall 26, 313. 2 Bla. Rep 61. 3Wils 205-6. 2Bro. Cha. 2.
Vesey jr. 17.
Note.—Yet interest is recoverable on a settled account from the date of the settlement.