Brown v. Barry
Brown v. Barry, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 365 (1797), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court determined the following: The suspension of a statute for a limited time is not a repeal of it. The intention of the legislature when discovered must prevail, any rule of construction. declared by previous acts, to the contrary notwithstanding. In an action on a bill of exchange, which had not been protested for non-payment, it is not necessary to aver in the declaration that the bill had been protested for non-acceptance. As to bills of  exchange drawn in the United States payable in Europe, the custom of merchants in this country does not ordinarily require, to recover on a protest for non-payment, that a protest for non-acceptance shall be produced, though the bills were not accepted. Where the action is for foreign money, and its value is not averred, a verdict cures the defect. The reason that debet for foreign money is ill, is the uncertainty of its value; and this is cured by a verdict.