Hempler v. Schneider

• Decision Date: 31 October 1852
• Parties: HEMPLER, Respondent, v. SCHNEIDER, Appellant.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

17 Mo. 258

HEMPLER, Respondent,

v.SCHNEIDER, Appellant.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

October Term, 1852.

1. A. executed to B. a note “for goods received by C.,” payable “in case C. should not return to St. Louis within fifty days.” C., owing to sickness, did not return within fifty days, but did soon after, and executed his own note to B. for the goods. Held, A. is liable to B. for the full amount of his note, whether B. sustained any damage by C.'s not returning within the time or not; nor did the giving of the note by C. discharge A.; nor the verbal declaration of B. that A. was free.

2. A party may give jurisdiction to an inferior court by a voluntary renunciation of a part of his demand.

Appeal from St. Louis Law Commissioner's Court.

F. Spies, for appellant. 1. The taking of a note by Hempler from Nauman, after his return, was a satisfaction of the debt for which Schneider was security, and operated to discharge him. 2. The fictitious credits given by Hempler on the instrument sued on, did not give the law commissioner jurisdiction. Ramsay v. Court of Wardens, 2 Bay (S. C.), 180. Sanders v. Stratton, 2 Penn. 528. Coleman v. Purcell, ib. 561. Simpson v. McMillion, 1 Nott & McCord, 192. An agreement of the parties cannot give jurisdiction. Lindsey v. McClelland, 1 Bibb, 262. Bent's Executors v. Graves, 3 McCord, 280. Foley v. People, Breese, 31. Folkenburg v. Cramer, Coxe, 31. Parker v. Munday, ib. 70. Much less can one party, without the consent of the other, give jurisdiction.

S. H. Gardner, for respondent.

SCOTT, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action commenced by Hempler, the plaintiff, against Schneider, on a note, in the German language, of which the following is a translation: “I, the undersigned, bind myself to pay to Heinrich Hempler, for Wilhelm Nauman, the sum of two hundred dollars, for goods received, in case that Wilhelm Nauman does not return to St. Louis within fifty days from to-day. In case said goods should be damaged by fire or water, I do not hold myself bound to pay the above security; for all such damages H. Hempler will alone bear the damages.

CASPAR SCHNEIDER.

St. Louis co., 5th April, 1852.”

On this note, there was the following endorsement:

“Received on this, fifty dollars.

HEINRICH HEMPLER.”

It appears that Hempler delivered goods to Nauman for the purpose of peddling, and that Schneider, on his behalf, executed to Hempler the note set forth above. Nauman, from sickness and other unavoidable accidents, did not return to St. Louis within fifty days from the date of the note, but in a short time after did return. After his arrival, he executed to Hempler a negotiable note for the sum of two hundred dollars, the amount of the bill for the goods received of him. There was some evidence of a conversation between Hempler and Schneider, in which Hempler was heard to say, “you are free now;” this was after Nauman had given his note to Hempler. Nauman had never paid any thing to Hempler for the goods. On this evidence, after instructions not...