Case Name: Charles S. Fowler v. Peregrine Warfield
Court: United States Circuit Court of the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1830-05
Citations: 4 Cranch 71
Docket Number: 
Parties: Charles S. Fowler v. Peregrine Warfield.
Judges: 
Reporter: Reports of cases argued and determined in the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia (District of Columbia - reported by Mackey)
Volume: 4
Pages: 71–71

Head Matter:
Charles S. Fowler v. Peregrine Warfield.
Notice to an indorser, if sent by mail, must be directed tó the post-office of his place of residence.
Assumpsit by the indorsee against his immediate indorser of a draft by T. B. Pottinger on John E. Dorsey, at Baltimore, to the order of Thomas Mustin, indorsed by him to-the defendant and by the defendant to the plaintiff for $300, at sixty days from September 13th, 1828.' 1
• The defendant’s residence was' notoriously at Georgetown, D. C., where there was a post-office, distant three,miles from the post-office in Washington, D. C. The notary who protested the draft at Baltimore,' put into the post-office there, a notice directed to the defendant at Washington. _ ' ' ,
The plaintiff proved by George Sweeny, who was then a clerk in the post-office at Washington, that it was customary, when a letter was directed to that office for a known resident in Georgetown, to forward it to the post-office there; but it was uncertain whether it would be so forwarded by the mail on the same day-on which it arrived, as it might not be noticed by any one who knew that the residence of the person to whom it was directed was in Georgetown. That he knew that the defendant resided in Georgetown, but had no recollection of sending such a letter.

Opinion:
The Court
(nem. con.) at the prayer of the defendant, instructed the jury, that this evidence of notice was not sufficient- to charge the defendant in this action ; upon the authority of the case of the Bank of United States v. Corcoran, 2 Peters, 121. Non-pros.