338 FEDERAL REPORIER. �LaNCASTEE V. COLLINS. �{Circuit Court, E. D. Missouri. Jauuary 34, 1881.) �1. Notice — Ofpicbb — Individual. �A person will be held to have notice as an individual of what he does as president of a corporation. �2. SaMB— FBAtTDULimT TbANSFER. �A., the indorser of a promissory note, was sued together with H., the maker, by E., an innocent holder for value, and judgment was recovered, part of which A. paid, and Iheu sued B. for the amount so diabursed. B. set up as a defence in bis answer that the note had beengiven by him, indorsed by A., to P., a corporation, in part pay- ment for stock in P., of which A. was president ; that the balance due on the stock was paid in cash and the note secured by a deposit of the stock with A.; that F. agreed with B. that he might, withln one year from the date of the note, have the privilege of forfeiting the stock and cash paid, and be released from all obligation to F., and that in the mean time the note should not benegotiated ; that B, had been induced by A. to make the agreement; that A., as president of F. , negotiated the note contrary to the agreement; and that B. had, within the year, notifled F. that he elected to forfeit the cash ai)d stock and be released, as aforesaid. Jlcld, that the answer set up a, good defence. �Motion for Judgment on Answer. �George A, Cdatleman, for plaintiff. �D. P. Byer, for defendant. �Tbeat, d. J. The petition sets out the making by defend- ant of a note, to the order of the Big Muddy Iron Company, for $10,000, on which there were successive indorsements. The plaintiff was one of the indorsers before maturity. After demand, protest, and notice, the innocent holder of the note for value brought suit, and obtained judgment against the defendant (the maker of said note) and some indorsers, including the: plaintiff. By the proceedings had on said judgment, the plaintiff, as indorser, paid one-half of 'the amount thereof, and now brings this suit to recover of the maker (the defendant) what the plaintiff thus paid iinder judicial process. The defence is that the plaintiff, being president of the Big Muddy Iron Company, solicited the defendant to subscribe to certain shares of the capital stock ��� �
