Townsend, Crane & Co. v. Henry
Court of Appeals of South Carolina
IN THE CITY COURT OF CHARLESTON, OCTOBER TERM, 1854. " This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, and an open account. The following is 'a copy of the note: $297 70-100. Charleston, S. C., March 26, 1852. Six months after date, we promise to pay to the order of Townsend, Crane & Co., at their offiee, two hundred, and ninety-seven and seventy cents, value received. William B. Henry, Budd C. Wall. Residence, Cook’s Law office, Ellert Co., Ga.
Read the full summary
IN THE CITY COURT OF CHARLESTON, OCTOBER TERM, 1854. " This was an action of assumpsit on a promissory note, and an open account. The following is 'a copy of the note: $297 70-100. Charleston, S. C., March 26, 1852. Six months after date, we promise to pay to the order of Townsend, Crane & Co., at their offiee, two hundred, and ninety-seven and seventy cents, value received. William B. Henry, Budd C. Wall. Residence, Cook’s Law office, Ellert Co., Ga. Endorsed, Rec’d March , 1853, one hundred dollars. The following are copies of the letters referred to in the report of the Recorder. Ellert…
1Opinion of the Court
*323The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Wardlaw, J.
This case depends upon the propriety of the remittance which the defendant made. If the plaintiffs authorized that remittance to be made at the time and in the mode which were taken, they assumed the risk, and in effect agreed that the delivery of current bank bills, by a letter duly mailed and addressed to them, should be a payment to them; and this, notwithstanding that the note, then long past due, was payable at their Office in Charleston.
Improper delay has been imputed to the defendant. Iiis letter to plaintiffs was dated December 18th,…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hairston v. Carolina Wholesale Furniture Co.Court of Appeals of South Carolina · 1987