Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/255

 THIED NAT. BAKK V. HAERISON. 243 �plication. Tins conclusion is more reasonable than the Bupposition that se important au innovation upon the statute of frauds would have been engrafted so ambiguously. If it had been intended to ex- clude promises of marriage altogether from the operation of the stat- ute, it could have been plainly evinced by inserting the exception where it would naturally apply to all the classes of promises required to be in writing; as it is, it more obviously refers to the marriage clause, and the class of promises covered by that clause. It has no necessary relation to the other classes of promises. Whilethe let- ters of the parties show a marriage engagement, the terms of the engagement and the time of the marriage are not indicated suffi- ciently to take the case out of the statute. The evidence offered to show that the promise of the defendant was not, by its terms, to be performed within a year, was sufficient to present a question of fact for the jury. �As this question was withdrawn from their consideration, there miuBt.be a new trial. ���Third Nat. Bank v. Harrisok and another.* �Bame V. Samb.* �{Oireuit Court, E. D. Missouri. Pebruary 13, 1882.) �1 Gamiko Laws — Rev. St. Mo. §§ 5722-3— Option Dkai,3— Negotiable Insteu- �MENTS. �An option deal is not a "gaming or gambling device," within the meaning of the Missouri statutes, and a note givon for a balance due on such a deal may be enforced by a bonafide holder for value, without notice, if indorsed to him before maturity. �2. Negotiable Instruments — Notice. �Where a bank in the absence of a direotor, by whom a note has been oftered for discount, accepts it, and accepts a note payable to him and indorsed to it aa collateral, its rights are not affected by such director's knowledge of illcgality in the inception of the note accepted as security. �3. Samk— Bame. �An indorsee for value of a promissory note is presumed, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, to have taken it without notice of ei^Uities subsisting between the maker and payee. �4. 8aMB— COLLATERAl, SECURITY — DBMAND— BaNKING. �Where a bank discounts a demand note for a depositor and receives another negotiable instrument as collateral, the liabilities of parties to the latter are not aflected by afailure on the bank's part to make any attempt to collect such ^ demand note when the maker has a sufficient sum on deposit to meet it. �*Ri!poited by B. F. Rex, Ksq., of Ihe St. Louis bar. ��� �