Yocum v. Benson

• Citation: 1867 WL 5302,45 Ill. 435
• Parties: JOHN YOCUM et al.v.FANNY BENSON.
• Decision Date: 30 September 1867
• Court: Supreme Court of Illinois

45 Ill. 435

1867 WL 5302 (Ill.)

JOHN YOCUM et al.

v.FANNY BENSON.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

September Term, 1867.

APPEAL from the County Court of La Salle county; the Hon. P. K. LELAND, Judge, presiding.

The facts in this case are sufficiently stated in the opinion.

Mr. OLIVER C. GRAY, for the appellants.

Messrs. LELAND & BLANCHARD, for the appellee. Mr. JUSTICE LAWRENCE delivered the opinion of the Court:

This was an action of assumpsit, brought by the appellee against Yocum, Jackson, Heister and Paul, the appellants, and sixteen other defendants, all of whom were sued as partners, on a note given in the name of the American Protective Union, No. 642, and signed by two of the defendants as directors.

Sixteen of the defendants were defaulted, but each of these appellants filed a several plea, alleging, that “the said defendant was not a partner in trade with the other defendants in said declaration mentioned.” The jury found the issues for the plaintiff, on which finding the court rendered judgment, and the four defendants above named appealed.

On the trial, the court permitted to be read in evidence, against the objections of the defendants, a paper purporting to contain a list of the stockholders in this mercantile association, in which list appear the names of these appellants. It appears the paper, including the signatures, was in the handwriting of a former clerk and member of the association, but no knowledge of the existence of such a paper is brought home to these appellants. We are at a loss to perceive upon what principle of evidence the act of a stranger, in signing their names to a paper, without authority, so far as the proof discloses, can be used to create a liability against them. It is urged by counsel for the appellee, that the making this list was the act of defendants' clerk, and therefore binding upon them. But the very question in dispute is, whether the person who made the list was the clerk of the appellants. He was undoubtedly the clerk of this association, but whether the clerk of these appellants -- that is, whether these appellants were members of the association -- cannot be proved by a paper drawn by him, and of which there is no evidence they had any knowledge. The court instructed the jury for the plaintiff, in substance, that it was admitted by the pleadings, all the defendants except the four appellants were partners in trade under the name of this association, and, if they found these appellants...