Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/35

 EX. NAT. EK. OF PITTSBUBGH V, THIED NAT. BK. OF S. T. 21 �he protested for non-acceptance, and due notice to be given to the plamtifï- A jury was dispeneed with, and the case heard hy the court upon the evidence submitted. �The following facts are found as the resuit of this evi- dence : �- First. That the plaintiff is the holder of 11 drafts for va- rions sums, amounting altogether to $12,292.58, which were drawn by Eogers & Burchfield, at Pittsburgh, to the order of J. D. Baldwin, and by him indorsed on Walter M. Conger, Becretary Newark Tea-Tray Company, Newark, N. J. �Second. These drafts bear different dates, from June 8, 1875, to September 20, 1875, and are in ail respects similar, except as to the snma payable, and are in the foUowiag f orm : �$1,043.75. PriTSECRSH, June 8, 1875 �Four months after date pay to the order. of J. D. Baldwin �ten hundred and forty-two and 75-100 dollars, for account �rendered, value received, and charge to account of �Eogers & Burchfield. • �To Walter M. Conger, Secretary Newark Tea-Tray Co., New- ark, N. J. �Third. They were transmitted for collection at different times before maturity by the plaintiff to the defendant, in let- ters describing them by their numbers and amounts, and by the wojds "Newark Tea-Tray Co.," and were sent by the de^ fendant to its correspondent, the First National Bank of New- ark, enclosed in letters describing them generallyin the same way. �Fourth. By the First National Bank of Newark they were presented for acceptance, and, with one exception, were ac- cepted, by writing on the face of them as foUows; "Accepted. Payable at the Newark National Banking Co. Walter M. Conger." �Fifth. The First National Bank of Newark held them for payment, but the plaintiff was not informed of the form of the acceptances until the thirteenth and nineteenth of Octo- ber, 1875. Two of the drafts were returned to it by the de- fendant when both the drawers and indorsers were insolvent. ����