Mechanics Bank of Alexandria v. the Bank of Columbia
Decision Date | 13 March 1820 |
Citation | 5 L.Ed. 100,5 Wheat. 326,18 U.S. 326 |
Parties | MECHANICS' BANK OF ALEXANDRIA v. THE BANK OF COLUMBIA |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Upon the evidence thus offered by the plaintiffs below, the counsel for the defendants objected to the whole of the said evidence, and insisted, that if the said check for 10,000 dollars, could be used as evidence against the said Mechanics' Bank, that the character of the said check could only be decided by the check itself, and that no parol or other testimony could be received to explain the same, and objected to the testimony offered upon that ground. But the Court overruled the objection, and gave it as their opinion to the jury, that the said check was, in connexion with the other evidence, proper and competent evidence in this case against the said Mechanics' Bank, and that it was competent to explain the character of the said check; or, in other words, to prove, by parol or other testimony, that the said check was drawn under such circumstances, and in such a manner, as justified the plaintiffs in considering it as an official check, and paying it as such, and charging the same to the debit of the defendants. And the evidence offered as aforesaid, with the said check, was admitted by the Court, and given in evidence to the jury.
The defendants below then prayed the opinion of the Court, and their instruction to the jury, that the check for 10,000 dollars, produced in evidence by the plaintiffs, is, on the face of it, a private, and not an official check, and of itself cannot, in law, charge the Mechanics' Bank with the payment of the said 10,000 dollars; and that the said William Paton was liable in his individual character for the payment of the same. Which opinion the Court refused to give.
They also prayed the Court to instruct the jury, that the check aforesaid was, upon the face of it, prima facie evidence of its being the private individual check of the said William Paton, and the possession of the said check by the said Mechanics' Bank, if proved to be in their possession, was prima facie evidence that they had paid a value for it; and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Grant County State Bank v. Northwestern Land Co.
... ... world, although not strictly within his commission ... Mechanics' Bank v. New York & N.H. R. Co. 13 ... N.Y. 633; 1 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 960; Edwards v ... 181, 12 Am. St. Rep ... 636, 39 N.W. 315); Mechanics' Bank v. Bank of ... Columbia, 18 U.S. 326, 5 Wheat. 326, 5 L.Ed. 100; ... Rathbun v. Snow, 123 N.Y. 343, 10 L.R.A. 355 and ... ...
- Auten v. Manistee National Bank
-
Schuling v. Ervin
... ... appears. In Exchange Bank v. Schultz, 167 Iowa 136, ... 149 N.W. 99, the signature ... Pioneer ... Mining Co., 66 Cal. 451, 6 P. 86; Mechanics' ... Bank v. Bank, 5 Wheat. 326; Second Nat. Bank v ... ...
-
Andrus v. Blazzard
... ... and Notes, vol. 1, pp. 89-90; Bank v. Mfg. Co., 17 ... A. 170; Tayler v. Davis, 110 U.S ... 147; Metcalf v ... Williams, 104 U.S. 93; Mechanics' Bank v. Bank ... of Columbia, 5 Wheat. p. 326; Kean v ... ...