Bangs v. Hornick

This was an action on a promissory note. Defendant pleaded that it was void because given for a gambling debt. 'I instructed the jury that the defense was not made out. A verdict was thereupon returned for the plaintiff. The principal question, therefore, is whether the testimony shows the consideration of the note was a gambling, transaction; or, perhaps more correctly, whether it left a doubtful question of fact, and one which the jury alone were authorized to decide. The defendant was the principal witness in his own behalf,— a young man of great candor, and one who, though largely…