Watt v. Riddle
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the district court of Allegheny county. Watt, Burke & Co. against Riddle, Forsythe & Attlebnry. The parties stated a case by which it appeared that on the second of January 1S37, Pinckard & Payne, merchants at Vicksburg, Mississippi, drew a bill of exchange on the defendants at Philadelphia, for 2000 dollars, payable at four months, to the order of Thomas Ferguisson, who endorsed it to Steele & Hopkins, who endorsed it to the plaintiffs, wh-o discounted it at the…
Read the full summary
ERROR to the district court of Allegheny county. Watt, Burke & Co. against Riddle, Forsythe & Attlebnry. The parties stated a case by which it appeared that on the second of January 1S37, Pinckard & Payne, merchants at Vicksburg, Mississippi, drew a bill of exchange on the defendants at Philadelphia, for 2000 dollars, payable at four months, to the order of Thomas Ferguisson, who endorsed it to Steele & Hopkins, who endorsed it to the plaintiffs, wh-o discounted it at the Vicksburg Commercial Railroad Bank. It was accepted, but protested for non-payment; and the plaintiffs, having received…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
It is not a little remarkable that in so commercial a country as America, the point submitted has not been raised before; nor is it less so, that it was first decided in England so late as 1810, and with so little remark as to the principle of the decision, though a novel and an important one. It came up in Napier v. Schneider, 12 East 420, on a motion to direct that the master allow the expense of re-exchange on a judgment against the defendant as an acceptor; to which the court barely answered that it could not be done against one who…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Kip v. BrighamNew York Supreme Court · 1810
- Masser v. StricklandSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1828