132 FEDERAL REPORTER. ���National Bank OB' Eising Sun, Indiana, w. Bsdsh and �another. �{Oireuit Court, B. Indiana. March 8, 1881.) �1. Nesotiabli! Papbb — "Waht op Coksideiiation— Evidence. �Want of consideration may be shown as between the parties to negotiable paper and others having notice. �2. Sakb— Samb— Indohseb. �Therefore an indorser may show that he becarae a party to the paper without consideration, in a suit by the holder with notice. — [Ed. �Action on Promissory Note. Demurrer. �Baker, Hord e Hendricks, for plaintiff. �Kennedy e Brush and E. G. Snyder, for defendants. �Grbsham, D. J. The National Bank of Eising Sun, Indi- ana, sues John C. Brush, as maker, and William T. Brush, as indorser, of a negotiable promissory note for $8,000, exe- cuted May 23, 1877, and payable to the latter 12 months after date. The note oontains a clause whereby the maker and indorsers severally waive presentment for payment, pro- test, and notice of protest and non-payment, and ail defences on the ground of any extension of the time of payment that may be given by the holder to the maker or indorsers. �In the first paragraph of hia separate answer, after admit- ting that he indorsed the note to the plaintiff, William T. Brush avers that the plaintiff agreed to loan to John C. Brush the sum of $8,000, which he was to secure by executing a mortgage upon specified real estate; that the act of congress under which national banks were organized did not permit them to loan money and secure the same by taking mort- gages directly to themselves, and for that reason it was agreed between the plaintiff and John C. Brush that the latter should execute to some third person bis note for $8,000, and also a mortgage upon specified real estate to secure the payment of the same, which person should indorse the note and thereby transfer the mortgage to the plaintiff; that, pursuant to the agreement, John C. Brush executed to William T. Brush the note in suit, together with a mortgage to secure its payment, ��� �
