Taan v. Le Gaux
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Suit for non-acceptance of a bill of exchange, drawn by the defendant on Madame Re Gaux, at Paris, for 600 livres tournois, dated 20th November 1787, payable ninety days after sight. The defendant’s hand writing to the bill, and Merrian’s indorsement having been proved, the plaintiffs gave in evidence the protest for non-acceptance, dated 29th January 1788, and notice of the protest to the defendant on the 8th May following.
Read the full summary
Suit for non-acceptance of a bill of exchange, drawn by the defendant on Madame Re Gaux, at Paris, for 600 livres tournois, dated 20th November 1787, payable ninety days after sight. The defendant’s hand writing to the bill, and Merrian’s indorsement having been proved, the plaintiffs gave in evidence the protest for non-acceptance, dated 29th January 1788, and notice of the protest to the defendant on the 8th May following. A difficulty arose with respect to the rate of exchange between the cities of Philadelphia and Paris; and it turned out upon enquiry, that there was no settled rate of…
1Opinion of the Court
Sed per curiam.
It is now settled, that if a bill of exchange is not accepted, an action will lie upon it against the drawer, before the time when it is made payable. The reason given for it is, that what the drawer had undertaken has not been performed, the drawee not having given him the credit which was the ground of the contract.
This has been determined in England, in Bull. Ni. Prius, 269, (edit. 1775,) and Doug. 55. The same doctrine has been laid down in this court, in the case of Duncan Ingraham, jun. indorsee of Cornelius Schenkhouse v. Josiah and William Gibbs, tried at the sittings…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Morris v. TarinSupreme Court of the United States · 1785