Kellogg v. Barton

<p>In an action against the indorser of a promissory note, the defence that it was an accommodation note, made and indorsed for the benefit of the person who held it at its maturity, is open under an answer which alleges that, simultaneously with its execution, that person, “ who was to receive and hold said note, and for whose accommodation and benefit it was indorsed,” signed a receipt for it which contained an agreement to pay it upon certain specified terms.</p> <p>Such receipt is competent evidence for the purpose of showing that the note was given and indorsed as an accommodation note.</p> <p>In an action against the indorser of a promissory note, the defendant, for the purpose of proving that it was an accommodation note, executed for the benefit of the person who held it at its maturity, proved the following receipt given by that person to the maker at the time the note was given: “ Received of A. a note of two hundred dollars, thirfy days from date, which I agree to pay if said A. has not received bis state bounty.” A. then expected to receive bounty under his enlistment as a soldier; but on examination he was then rejected, though he was accepted more than a year afterwards. Held, that a verdict for the defendant should not be set aside on account of the admission of evidence that before the maturity of the note A. received a certain sum from the town towards whose quota he then enlisted, and afterwards, upon his second enlistment, another sum from another town towards whose quota he then enlisted, and also that his state bounty was then paid to his mother.</p>