Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

29 F. Cas. 1263

Wilkinson v. Nicklin

U.S. District Court

Decided July 1, 1798

U.S. District Court · decided 1798-07-01

This was an action brought by the indorsees of a bill of exchange, drawn by McClenachan and Moore, upon George Barclay, of London, in favor of the defendants, and by them indorsed in blank, to Arthur Crammond & Co., who, likewise, indorsed and discounted them with their bankers, the present plaintiffs, under the following circumstances: The defendants, having opened a commercial correspondence with Arthur Crammond & Co., of London, remitted the bill of exchange in question,…

Decided 1798-07-01

CHASE, Circuit Justice.

¶1The defense cannot be admitted. There is no rule more perfectly established, there is none which ought to be held more sacred in commercial transactions, than that the blank indorsement of a bill of exchange passes all the interest in the bill, to every indorsee, in succession, discharged from any obligation which might subsist between the original parties, but which does not appear upon the fact of the instrument itself.

PETERS, District Judge.

¶2Though 1 can easily suppose cases of hardship may arise, and though I am disposed, indeed, to think that strong equitable circumstances now exist in favor of the defendants, yet the rule of law is so well established, and, upon general principles, is so beneficial, that I cannot persuade myself, in any degree, to dispense with its operation. X am therefore of opinion that the evidence in support of the defense proposed ought not to be admitted.

¶3Verdict for the plaintiffs.

/29/fcas/1263 · .json · Public domain