Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/17

 WATNESVILLE NAT. BANK V. lEONa. S �Matthews, Justice, {charging jury) This action is brqught hy the Waynesville ISIational Bank, as the owner and holder of ,a promis- sory note which reads as f ollows : �"$10,000. Lebanon, Ohio, April iSi 1878. �"One year after date, we, or either of us, promise to pay to the order of the treasurer of the Miami Valley Eailway Company ten thousand dollats, for value received." �It is signed by Samuel Irons, William P. Dill, Daniel Pemne, P. Hutchinson, William Morlatt, aind William V. Bone. On the back of it is the following indorsement: "Demand and notice of protest waived. W. B. Sbllebs, Treas. M. V. Ey. Co." �The note is what is known as negotiable paper, and the production of it by the plaintiff, with proof or admission of the genuineness of the signatures and of the indorsement, without any additional evi- dence, entitles it to recover from the parties the full amount thereoi, ■ffith interest, unless the defendants make out some satisfactory de- fence. The railroad company is aued together with the makers, and they defend separately. The answer of the railroad company sets up that the note was not indorsed or delivered by the treasurer to the bank, neither for a valuable consideration nor otherwise ; denies that there is anything due thereon, and denies that the plaintiff is the legal or equitable owner of it, and alleges that the plaintiff came into possession of it wrongfully and illegally, and without authority from, or consent of, the defendant. It sets up the circumstanees in detail of the original negotiation of the note, as collateral security, by Mr. Irons and the treasurer of the company, at the Lebanon National Bank, to secure a demand note of- the company for $3,000, and that it was obtained from the possession of that bank, and discounted by the plaintiff, without any authority. �The relation that the railway company occupies to the paper is different from that occupied by the other defendants, and it is proper to dispose of the questions arising on the defenoes of the railway company independently, in the first instance, and with a view to that I give you this charge : If the jury are satisfied from the testiuiony that the note in suit, having previously been indorsed in blank by the treasurer of the railway company, was delivered to the plaintiff by Israel Wright, assuming to represent the railway company in the transaction, and in consideration thereof the plaintiff paid to Israel Wright the amount thereof, less the discount, or paid, at Wright's request, an equivalent amount in obligations of the railway company, ��� �