Thomas v Cross
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 30 April 1852 |
| Date | 30 April 1852 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 155 E.R. 1142
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
thomas cross April JO, 1852 -The defendant being indebted to the plaintiff On a bill of exchange for 251, and being unable to pay the full amount, left 91 10s m cash, and a bill for 171 m renewal of the balance at the plaintiff's house in discharge of the debt A few days afterwards he met the plaintiff, who then Befuaed to take the bill in renewal, and stated that he should letain the cash as payment of another debt, which he said was due The defendant then demanded (a) Parke, B., Alderson, B, Platt, B, and Martin, B 7 EX 729 THOMAS V CROSS 1143 back the money m addition to the bill, but the plaintiff refused to leturn it The plaintiff shortly afterwards sued the defendant on the anginal bill --Held, pel Pollock, C B, and Platt, B, that, under the circumstances, the receipt and retainer of the money by the plaintiff was evidence of payment Pei Parke, B, and Martin, B, that it did not amount to a payment, but to a set-off [S C 21 L J Ex 251 Referred to, Inie Boswell, Merntt v Boswell, [1906] 2Ch J67] Assumpait by the plamtift against the defendant as the acceptoi of a bill of exchange foi 251 Gs The defendant pleaded, as to 91 10s, part payment befoie action brought, and as to the residue, a set off foi money had and teceived to the defendant's use At the trial, before Platt, B, at the Middlesex Sittings in last Teim, it appealed thftt, a day or so before the bill of exchange had become due, the plamtift had written to the defendant to lequest him to piovide foi its payment The defendant, not being able to raise the whole amount on the day when the bill became due, proceeded to the plaintiffs offire with 91 l()s in cash, and a bill foi 171 He did not find the plaintiff at home, but the plaintiff's cleik received the cash and the bill, and pionnsecl to hand them to his master, and inform him of the defendant's lequest that the 91 IOs should be taken as payment of 91 6s with the interest due on the bill, and that the f71 bill should be taken as renewal of that amount, and he added, that he thought his master would be agreeable to the proposal The defendant again went to the plaintiff's office foui days after this occuirence, when he saw [729] the plaintiff himself, who then refused to take eithei the cash 01 the second bill in payment of the original bill, and upon the defendant's demanding them again, he delivered the bill only to him, and stated that he...
To continue reading
Request your trial