Denton and Others v Rodie and Another
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 23 December 1813 |
| Date | 23 December 1813 |
| Court | High Court |
English Reports Citation: 170 E.R. 1458
IN THE COURTS OF KING'S BENCH AND COMMON PLEAS
1468 DENTON V. BODIE 3 camp. 484. Thursday, Dec. 23, 1813. denton and others v. rodie and another (Where one of several partners, with the pnvity of the others, draws bills of exchange in hia own name upon the partnership firm, m favour of persons who advance him the amount, which he applies to the use of the partnership, although the partners are not jointly liable on the bills, they may be jointly sued by the payers for money lent.) This was an issue to try whether James Henry Clough, Joshua Smithson Wilkes, and James Butler Clough, were, at the date and suing forth of a commission of bankrupt against them, indebted to the plaintiffs in any and what sum of money. The bankrupts entered into paitnership together as general merchants at Liverpool, in 1806, under the firm of Clough, Wilkes, and Clough Soon after, in pursuance of a previonis arrangement, James Butler Clough went out and established hirnaelf at New York, in the United States of America, with a view to form connexions, and to procure consignments for the benefit of the house at Liverpool. While there he did no business on his private account For the purpose of raising money, he was in the habit of drawing bills in his own name upon the house, in the following form : New York, No 218. Exch. £1500 Sterl. 17th Aug. 1810 Sixty days after sight of this second of exchange (first, third, and fourth unpaid), pay to Messrs Denton, Little, and Co or order £1500 sterling in London, value received ; and place the same to account of sundries, as advised by J B clough. To Messrs Clough, Wilkes and Clough, Liverpool These bills he sold at New York for cash or promissory notes at short dates, according to the current rate of exchange The money thus raised he applied entirely in the purchase of homeward investments for the house at Liverpool, or in defraying has personal expences, for which, it was understood, he was to have had £400 a year, but for which no regular allowance was made him. He had often no other funds for these purposes. He periodically re-[494]-mitted home an account of the manner in which he thus raised and applied the money, which was never complained of. The house at Liverpool regularly accepted and paid the bills so drawn, till it stopped payment in November, 1810. J B Clough afterwards returned to England , and a j'oint commission of bankrupt \vas sued...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nicholson and Others against Rickets and Other
...with Von Seutter & Co., who received the money from the plaintiffs for the partnership purposes ; Ex parte Bolitho (c). Denton v. Rodie (3 Camp. 493) is directly in point to shew that the defendants are liable [516] as for money lent. [Cockburn C.J. There was a direct loan of money by the p......
-
Humphrey Ewing Maclae, Francis Somerville and John Blair against John William Sutherland, John Connell, James Farquhar, Thomas Newman Farquhar Patrick Hadow and James Ochterlony Walker
..." sold " is used in the documents, no doubt; but, if the transaction was in substance a loan, the words are immaterial; Denton v. Eodie (3 Camp. 493). In that case the borrower was a partner; but the authority of a partner ia but an instance of agency. Here Allan was " the agent of the Bank......
-
Bult and Others against Robert Morrell, James Morrell, Henry Morrell, John Rainsford, James Parker, and Richard Parker
...any member may be said to have ac-[751]-cepted.] That authority, (a) 3 Now Ca. 968; where Emly v. Lye, 15 East, 7; Denton v. Rodie, 3 Camp. 493; South Carolina Sank v. Case, 8 B. & C. 427; and Duearrey v. Gill, M. & M. 450, are cited. 12AD.&E.7B2. CULVERSON V. MELTON 999 if relied upon, was......
-
Bourne and Others v Gatliffe, in Error
...assigns, or a reasonable time for conveying them from the said wharf to A. or his assigns had (a) Denton and Others v. Rodie and Another, 3 Campb. 493, was a feigned issue, directed to try whether, at the time of the date and suing forth of a commission of bankruptcy against J. H. Clough, J......