Tucker v. Streetman
Texas Supreme Court
Appeal from Milam. Tried below before the Hon. J. M. Onins. Suit on a promissory note executed by Eke appellant, W. H. Tucker, for $450. • ' - The defense was that the note was executed upon the basis of Confederate money, and that by the express agreement of the parties it was to be discharged in such Confederate States bills. The testimony was conflicting.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Milam. Tried below before the Hon. J. M. Onins. Suit on a promissory note executed by Eke appellant, W. H. Tucker, for $450. • ' - The defense was that the note was executed upon the basis of Confederate money, and that by the express agreement of the parties it was to be discharged in such Confederate States bills. The testimony was conflicting. The court instructed the jury as follows: “In the absence of proof of an express contract for Confederate money, the law presumes that the written instrument expresses the meaning of the parties, and that they meant dollars in par funds;…
1Opinion of the CourtOgden, J.
In the criminal law a party is presumed to-be innocent until his guilt is established by proof. So, also, in the civil relations of life, and especially in matters of contract, a party is presumed to have acted legally until the contrary is proven. And when a party executed a note payable in dollars, the presumption is that he intended that note to be discharged only in lawful money; and no surrounding circumstances not connected with the contract evidenced by the note (such as the condition of the country, or the character of the currency then in general circulation), will rebut that…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Brazoria County v. PadgittCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1913
- Cooke v. HarperIndiana Court of Appeals · 1922
- Dwight v. OvertonTexas Supreme Court · 1872
- California State Life Ins. Co. v. KringCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1918
- Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. of Texas v. MarsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1927