1778-11-21 (static/transcriptions/1778/11/066.jpg)

1778. 4 Sittings. [Saturday] Nov. 21.

that even if it had been a Receipt written in the words “to be payment when the Bill of Exchange is paid” the acts of the present Plaintiff giving credit to the Acceptor, were sufficient to discharge the original Debt for the Goods Sold, and to load the Plaintiff with the hazard of the Bill, and wholly to discharge the Defendant from that hazard, and from payment of the original Debt for the Goods the Defendant had bought of Huggins the Plaintiff.
Andrew 187 to 190, Smith v Wilson, Easter 11 G. 2d. 1738 K. B. which is mention’d in Buller’s Nisi Prius, 182 2d Edition, was cited to prove that if a Note be taken in payment, expressly by the Words of the Receipt, to become payment for Goods sold, when the Note shall be paid, it will become absolute payment, if there be any Laches in demanding payment of the Note. [Mem: On looking into Andrews 187 I find the Case is as cited.]
In the present case it was proved that Ogden the acceptor, at the time the Bill of Exchange became payable, had Goods in his Ware-Houses much exceeding in Value the amount of this Bill of
/ Exchange