2. A single seal appended to a
notary's certificate of protest is a
sufficient authentication of his cer-
tificate beneath the seal, and on
the same page, of the service of
notice of non-payment. Olcott v.
546
Tioga R. R. Co.,
3. If a bill of exchange, payable in
a specified length of time after
date or on a day certain, be pre-
sented for acceptance on the day
it is due, and if acceptance be
then refused, no further demand
of payment is necessary to charge
the drawer or indorser. Plato v.
Reynolds,
586
See CORPORATION, 2, 5;
Mortgage, 7.
BURDEN OF PROOF.
See ATTACHMENT, 4;
CRIMINAL LAW, 1, 3,
ELECTIONS, 6.
CANAL COLLECTOR.
1. The words, "collectors of tolls
on the canals" (1 R. S., p. 229,
869), are merely descriptive of
2. Such controversies respecting the
adjustment and administration of
a quasi trust fund, in which a mul-
titude of persons are concerned
as contributors and distributees,
have, by the customary law of this
State, antecedent to the constitn-
tional provision for preserving trial
by jury, been regarded as of equi-
table and summary cognizance,
and are not among the cases in
which the trial by jury has been
heretofore used so as to be fastened
among rights to remain inviolate.
id
3. Digging a ditch upon the land
of a private owner, under the au-
thority of the legislature, for the
purpose of draining such land and
that of the adjoining proprietors,
is, it seems, a taking of property
within art. 1, §§ 6, 7, of the Con-
stitution of 1846; and the act cf
the legislature professing to au-
thorize such taking is so far void,
unless it provides for the payment
of a just compensation, to be as-
certained by a jury or by commis-
sioners appointed by a court of
record. People v. Nearing, 306
4. The mode, however, of appor-
tioning and assessing such com-
pensation and the expenses of
executing the work, upon those
benefited thereby, is wholly within
the discretion of the legislature. id
5. The act of Congress passed Feb-
ruary 25, 1862 (ch. 33), making
certain treasury notes of the Uni-
ted States a legal tender in pay-
ment of debts between private
persons, is constitutional and va-
lid. Metropolitan Bank v. Van
Dyck,
6. The power to borrow money
on the credit of the United States
carries with it, it seems, the power
to attach the quality of a legal
tender to the notes issued, when,
in the judgment of Congress, it is
necessary to make them effectual
for the purpose of borrowing. id
7. The validity of this provision, as
an exercise by Congress of the
power to regulate commerce, dis-
cussed and maintained by MAR-
VIN, J.
id
See NEW YORK CITY, 2, 4.
1. Upon the consignment for sale
of cotton in store with third par-
ties at New York city, the con-
signee made an advance of 114
cents for each pound, to be repaid
at a day certain, under an agree-
ment that, should there be a de-
cline in the market price of cotton,
the consignor should, on demand,
deposit cash sufficient to cover
such decline, and if he failed to do
so, or to repay the advance at a
fixed day, the consignee might
sell the cotton at public or private
sale, or otherwise, at his option,
for the most it would bring. This
if a pledge at all in a legal sense,
was a peculiar contract, including
more than a pledge, and to be
construed upon its own language
and circumstances. Milliken v.
Dehon,
5. A coal company indebted to the
railroad corporation for freights
gave its notes for a less amount,
which the latter indorsed and pro-
cured to be discounted. There
being no evidence that the coal
company received the avails of
the notes, it is immaterial, in re-
spect to the objection that the
notes were indorsed for its accom-
modation, that it did not appear
whether these notes were given
to apply on the coal company's
indebtedness. If so, the railroad
corporation was the owner; if not,
the notes were lent for its accom-
modation.
|