Woodward v. Mathews

Suit on note by appellants, who averred that long before the same became due it was “ negotiated, assigned, *340gold, and delivered to them for a valuable consideration,” &c. Answer: 1. Want of consideration. 2. That the note was procured by false and fraudulent representations. 3. That the note was given to procure the exclusive right to use , . ° , ,, , , , or vend a certain corn shelter, m, &c.; and that cotemporaneously with the execution of said note, the vendor of said right executed to defendant an agreement, which -is copied, that if defendant “could not in ten days make a trade of said…