158 Cases ruled and adjudged in the r 792. ver of the right which the plaintiff had to the anfwer of the wit- vvsa uefs; and, cn that ground, we hold the evidence admiilible. y '1`he Bam: of N. A. verfos M*Kmcn·r. ' PSE 52/(P HE defendant was fued, as indorfor of a promiflbry note, g · · drawn by S. Sidmmr, on the mth February, 1 ·;8_;, payable R_ Jl/_0_ in forty·Eve days. Notice was given to Sidmzm on the dayl it ` became due, and to M*Kni_gl>r four or five days after; w `ch é léthc defendant now contended was too late. • By M*Keax, Cbigf _7:¢i¢¢,‘(the other Judges declining to give any opinion on account of their interelt in the Bank). Be- fore the revolution, it was not ufual to give notice to the indor· for, or even to call on the drawer, as foon as a note became due ; it would have been coniidered as harih and unreafonable. But Iince the eltablifhmcnt of the banl-r, a rule has been introduced ; and as thefe notes, lodged in the bank, were often accommoda- ‘ tion notes, it was highly reafonable that notice {hould be given -in a _/bart time. What that time ought to be has not been de- termined. Two or three months would certainly be too long, and a day may be too {hott. I would not _/{orgy law down a rule, but leave it to the ]ury as a queilion of faét. They mult there- fqre judge for themfelves, faking into conlideration the ufual praétice at that time.* _ · Verdift for the Plaintiffi Srrzwaar vnjiu BIDDACK. N Exxon. Dorint! for Cosmeéiiout money. On report of refer- I rees, finding a certain fum in Conueifiout money due to the - plaintiff, judgment was entered for the value, in 1’mr{6·{·unnia .. money. The udgment was reverfed by confcnt ; and I.ewi.r urged, that e Court here could give the fame j udgment that the Court below had given. But, on coniidering the authorities, he aban- doned the point. C R.u.s·r·on Allignee vuyiu BELL. - N 178;, a judgment was obtained in the Supreme Court, in a cauii: removed from PZ-iladoybia Commo:1P/:·a.r, againfl: (.'bar!4·.r
- Sec r Dal!. Rs-/·. 2;:.
�
