Middleton and Others, Assignees of Hemingway, a Bankrupt v Barned and Others
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 18 June 1849 |
| Date | 18 June 1849 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 154 E.R. 1200
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S C 18 L J Ex 433
1300 MIDULETON I1 BANNED 4 EX 241 [241] Mmnr.ETON and others, Assignees of Hemingway, a Bankrupt v barned and others June 18, 184C)-In an action of tiovei foi u bill of exchange, it appeared that the defendants were bankers, and had discounted bills fot A B, who sent the bill in question by his clerk to inquire whether they would discount it, and to itifotm them of an agreement between him and C I) with tespect to the title The defendants subsequently placed this bill to the it edit of A B At the tiial, neithei side having called the cleik to prove that he had delivered the message -Held, that, as the presumption was, that the defendants \veie bona holders of the bill fot value, and also that they had m tod honestly, it could not be presumed that the clerk had delivered the message, and, therefore, that the defendants were entitled to the bill [S C 18 L J Ex 4.53] Trover foi a bill of exchange for 1 H001 The hist count of the declaration laid the possession in the bankrupt before the bankruptcy, and alleged the conversion to be before that time The second count laid the possession in the assignees, and stated the conversion to be after the bankruptcy The defendants pleaded not guilty, and not possessed , upon which pleas issues were joined At the trial, befoie Coleudge, J, at the List Liverpool (Spring Assizes, it appeared that the defendants weie the assignees of one Hemingway, who, previously and up to the time of his bankrupt!y, earned on business as a mei hant, and th.it the defendants were bankets at Liverpool On the Uth of February, 1H10, Hemingway made a personal application to one Holmes, a merchant, to let him have a Luge quantity of beef, and produced the bill of exchange in question, and otter ed to take 200 casks of the beef, if the former would pay him the difference between the amount of the bill and the price of the beef Holmes intimated his readiness to accept the proposal, but stated, that he could not do so unless his bankers would discount the bill, and he theiefore proposed to send to them, to inquire whethei they would discount the lull This being agreed to, Holmes called his clerk, Wallace, and said to him, in Hemingway's presence, "Mr Hemingway has agreed to buy 200 casks of provisions, if I can give him the dtffeience out of this bill Will you...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hudson v Slade and Others
...And any inference as to the course of business, or the like, is one of fact, and not a presumption of law ; see Middleton v. Earned, 4 Exch Rep. 241. It is like a case of primd facie evidence of negligence ; Piggott v Eastern Counties Railway Company, 3C B 229; and see 5 H &N 216. 3F. &F. 3......
-
Dickson v Viscount Combermere and Others
...that substantial injustice has been done , Branford v. Freeman, 5 Exch Rep 734 , Edwards v Matthews, 4 D & L 721 , Mtddleton v Bartied, 4 Exch Rep 241 , Wright v Wdcox, 19 L J , C. P 333 , Cathn v Barker, 5 C B 201 , Butler v Brayne, 5 C B 655 And to make out any cause of complaint against ......
-
Shaw, Appellant, Beck and another, Respondents
...because such evidence was not in contiadiction, but merely conhimatory of his prima facie case He also refeiied to Middleton v Banned (4 Exch 241) pollock, C B We are all agreed that there must lie a new trial in this case, in order to give the learned judge of the county couit an opportuni......