Bartlett v. Hawley
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Contract upon a bill of exchange, dated September 9, 1873, drawn by Henry Clews & Co., upon Clews, Habicht & Co. of London, payable thirty days after sight to “ F. A. Hawley & Co., Agents,” indorsed by “ F. A. Hawley & Co., Agents,” to the order of W. A. Chase, who indorsed it in blank.
Read the full summary
Contract upon a bill of exchange, dated September 9, 1873, drawn by Henry Clews & Co., upon Clews, Habicht & Co. of London, payable thirty days after sight to “ F. A. Hawley & Co., Agents,” indorsed by “ F. A. Hawley & Co., Agents,” to the order of W. A. Chase, who indorsed it in blank. Trial in the Superior Court, without a jury, before Allen, J., who allowed a bill of exceptions in substance as follows: The bill was duly presented by Chase to the drawees in London and accepted September 22, 1873. All the signatures were admitted or proved. The only defences made at the trial were, first,…
1Opinion of the Court
Gray, 0. J.
No error of law, prejudicial to the defendants, is shown in the rulings below. The evidence warranted the in» *94ference that the bill and protest were forwarded to the plaintiff upon the next day and by the next mail after the protest, and were received by the defendants as soon as if they had been forwarded directly to them. Cabot Bank v. Warner, 10 Allen, 522. The defendants appeared upon the face of the bill to be themselves the payees and indorsers, the word “ agents ” was a mere designatio personarum, and paroi evidence was inadmissible to discharge them. Tucker Manufacturing…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Tucker Manufacturing Co. v. FairbanksMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1867
3Cited by2 opinions
- Farrell v. ReedNebraska Supreme Court · 1895
- Ware Trust Co. v. StolgitisMassachusetts District Court, Appellate Division · 1952