Scottish Court of Session Decisions

The suspender, Morrison, obtained from Taylor and Corbett, ironmongers in Glasgow, their acceptance of a bill, drawn by him upon them, for £25, he granting the following acknowledgment:—“Glasgow, 17th April, 1833. Mr James Taylor and Mr John Corbett. Sirs.—I acknowledge to have received an acceptance of Taylor and Corbett's for the sum of twenty-five pounds, and which I promes to retier when due, which fall due 13th August, 1833. Yours,” &c.

This bill was indorsed by Morrison to one Cunningham, by whom it was discounted with the Western Bank of Scotland at Glasgow. During its currency, the copartnership of Taylor and Corbett was dissolved, and John Corbett, one of the partners, was empowered to wind up the concern. On the 12th of August, the day before the bill fell due, it was taken up by the charger, Dick, a writer in Glasgow, from the bank, who indorsed it to him without recourse. It was thereafter protested, and a charge given to Morrison, who brought a suspension, on the allegation that Dick was truly the agent of Taylor and Corbett, and had taken it up for their behoof, and that he (Morrison) having retired a bill for a larger sum, accepted by him for their accommodation, they could not have had recourse on him under his obligation to relieve them of the bill charged on; and, consequently, that Dick could be in no better situation. These allegations he referred to the oath of Dick, who emitted a deposition in these terms:—“That he was aware of the existence of the company of Taylor and Corbett, and had been acquainted with Mr John Corbett, one of the partners, for a number of years; but he does not recollect of having over seen the other partner, Mr Taylor: That he was aware of the dissolution of the said concern before 12th August, 1833, and the deponent has no doubt that that fact has been the topic of conversation between him and Mr Corbett. Interrogated, How the deponent came to know that a bill of Taylor and Corbett was lying in the Western Bank? depones, That he learned the fact from Mr Alexander Corbett, a brother of Mr John Corbett before mentioned: That that gentlemen called on the deponent, and stated that he was a creditor of Taylor and Corbett: that Taylor had been guilty on several occasions of abusing the company firm, and had granted some bills for his own individual transactions, even subsequent to the date of dissolution, though bearing a prior date: that he and several of the other creditors were afraid they would lose their debts by these fictitious claims being brought against the estate: That he mentioned in particular the bill charged on, and stated it had been granted by Taylor in the Company's name for an individual debt: That Mr Alexander Corbett wished the deponent to take up the bill, to see whether Mr Morrison, who, he understood, had bound himself to retire the same, would fulfil his obligation: That the deponent stated that he would comply with this request. Depones, That the deponent had no conversation with Mr John Corbett on the subject of the bill previous to payment. Interrogated, From whom the deponent received the letter by Mr Morrison to Taylor and Corbett, dated 17th April, 1833? depones, That he must have received it either from Mr Alexander Corbett or Mr John Corbett, and he did so some time after the suspension was commenced in consequence of the denial by the suspender: That he was bound to retire the bill when it became due: That on retiring the bill, the deponent did not look to Mr Alexander Corbett for relief, conceiving the names upon the bill a sufficient guarantee: That in the event of all the parties in the bill having become bankrupt, the deponent made no agreement Mr Alexander Corbett for relief, and nothing passed in conversation regarding this point, which could give the deponent a legal title of relief, the deponent having trusted to the name of Mr John Corbett, and the other names upon the bill, as a sufficient security to protect the deponent against loss: That the deponent did not know Mr Cunningham, one of the indorsers on the bill, nor the suspender, except in so far as he was informed of their circumstances by Mr Alexander Corbett. Interrogated, What were the deponent's reasons for applying to the suspender, and to none of the other parties whose names Were on the bill, for payment? depones, That the deponent applied to the suspender in the first instance, because he understood him to be the person who got the benefit of the bill, and was bound to retire it, and in reality stood as acceptor of the same, and this understanding arose from the conversation with Mr Alexander Corbett: That the deponent understood that Mr John Corbett was the partner winding up the concern of Taylor and Corbett, although the deponent was not employed professionally in assisting him to do so. Farther depones, without any special interrogatory under the reference contained in the revised reasons of suspension, That he was not the professional agent of Taylor and Corbett, nor was employed by Mr John Corbett to assist him in winding up the affairs of the company: That the deponent took up the bill from the bank with his own funds, and without the desire of Taylor and Corbett, or of Mr John Corbett, and in doing so he did not act as their agent.”