Browne v. Philadelphia Bank
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
In Error. THIS action was brought in the District Court for the and county of Philadelphia, by the Philadelphia Bank aSains^ Liberty Browne, on a promissory note drawn by WilHam Smiley and endorsed by the defendant. On the trial, the plaintiffs in order to prove a demand on the drawer, and due notice to the endorser, offered to give in evidence a protest . .. .. * made by Nicholas Diehl, jun. styling himself a notary public, certified under his hand and seal of office.
Read the full summary
In Error. THIS action was brought in the District Court for the and county of Philadelphia, by the Philadelphia Bank aSains^ Liberty Browne, on a promissory note drawn by WilHam Smiley and endorsed by the defendant. On the trial, the plaintiffs in order to prove a demand on the drawer, and due notice to the endorser, offered to give in evidence a protest . .. .. * made by Nicholas Diehl, jun. styling himself a notary public, certified under his hand and seal of office. To this evidence the counsel for the defendant objected, but the Court admit- , . ... . , , . . . ted it, upon which an…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Tilghman, C. J.
Two reasons are assigned by the plaintiff in error against the admission of the evidence of the notarial certificate. 1st. That it had not been proved that Nicholas Diehl, jun. had received' a commission of notary public from the governor. 2d. That his certificate was not legal evidence of notice to the indorser of the note.
A notary public is an officer to whom considerable respect is paid by the laws of this State. By the act of 5th March, 1791, he is to be appointed and commissioned by the governor ; he takes an oath of office, holds…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Bellemire v. Bank of United States, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County1836
- Jenks v. Doylestown BankSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1842
- Sargent v. CollinsNevada Supreme Court · 1867