Smith v. Barstow
Michigan Supreme Court
- Error, to Calhoun Circuit Court. Assumpsit. Bar-stow was the plaintiff below, and declared against Smith, Lewis and Thornton, as makers of a promissory note for' $1,000, dated April 15, 1841, and payable to him, with interest, on the first day of March, 1842, at the Farmers and Mechanics’ Bank of Michigan. Plea, the general issue.
Read the full summary
- Error, to Calhoun Circuit Court. Assumpsit. Bar-stow was the plaintiff below, and declared against Smith, Lewis and Thornton, as makers of a promissory note for' $1,000, dated April 15, 1841, and payable to him, with interest, on the first day of March, 1842, at the Farmers and Mechanics’ Bank of Michigan. Plea, the general issue. In defence of the action, the defendants below gave in evidence a certain declaration of trust, executed to them by Barstow, on the day of the date of the note, which recites that on the 5th day of August, 1888, Asahel Finch, Jr. being cashier of the Farmers’ Bank…
1Opinion of the CourtGoodwin, J.
Upon the exception taken to the refusal of the court below to charge the jury as requested on the first point, the plaintiffs in error now insist—
*159First: That the consideration of the note was the delivery to them by Welles of the bills of the Farmers’ Bank of Homer, deposited with him to secure and indemnify him against his acceptances, and that the bills being illegal by reason of the unconstitutionality of the general banking law, such consideration was illegal, and the note was therefore void.
Secondly: That the drafts were illegal for the same reason; and that the object for which the note…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Hall v. GoodwynSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1820
- Joel Stockard & Co. v. ReisMichigan Supreme Court · 1933