Stuart v. Ralston
Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Philadelphia County
THE following case was stated for the opinion of the court. “ This is an action brought by the plaintiffs as holders, against the defendants as drawers of a bill of exchange on London, for the amount of the bill with damages, it having been protested for non-payment.
Read the full summary
THE following case was stated for the opinion of the court. “ This is an action brought by the plaintiffs as holders, against the defendants as drawers of a bill of exchange on London, for the amount of the bill with damages, it having been protested for non-payment. The whole claim has been settled, except the difference of exchange, between sixteen and twenty per cent “ It is agreed that the bill on which suit is brought, was not presented to the defendant until October 16, 1837, at which time the rate of exchange with England, was sixteen per cent, advance. That official notice of protest…
1Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.—
The question submitted is, whether the damages ai*e to be computed at the rate of exchange at the time of the notice of protest, or at the rate at the time of the presentment of the bill to the drawer. Although the second section of the act of 1821 specifies that the damages shall be ascertained and determined by the rate “at the time of notice of protest and demand of payment,” yet the following words, “as before mentioned,” refer to the provisions of the first section, which designate that “ whenever any bill &c., shall be returned unpaid, with a protest,” the payee shall have…
2Cited by1 opinion
- United States v. Gurney and OthersSupreme Court of the United States · 1808