Cox v. Simms

<p>Assumpsit. Indorsee against drawer of a foreign bill of exchange for £200 sterling, drawn by Simms on Stewart, in favor of Fletcher & Otway, and by them indorsed to Cox, dated 10th of September, 1797, at sixty days sight; presented 14th December, 1797, protested for non-payment 15th February, 1798.</p> <p>offered evidence of a settlement between Fletcher &• Otway and Simms, subsequent to the date of the bill, but it was rejected by the Court; the bill appearing to have been indorsed to the plaintiff before dishonor. Mr. Lee prayed the Court to instruct the jury that the plaintiff cannot recover unless he shows a protest for non-acceptance.</p> <p>The Court stopped Mr. Taylor, who was about to reply ; and said they had frequently decided the point and overruled the objection on the authority of Brown v. Barry.</p> <p>■ Mr. Lee then prayed the Court to instruct the jury, that reasonable notice of the non-acceptance ought to be proved.</p> <p>The Court refused to give the instruction.</p> <p>■ Mr. Lee required evidence of notice of- non-payment.</p> <p>produced the defendant’s letter, dated 21st August, 1798, promising to pay the bill, and contended that the jury were to decide whether the notice was reasonable; Maclde's Ex'or v. Davis, 2 Wash. 231,' Judge Carrington’s opinion.</p> <p>cited Stott v. Alexander, 1 Wash. 331 and Wood v. Lutierel, 1 Call, 232, that the reasonableness of notice was a question of law arising on the facts.</p>