Periculum between Mandant and Mandatary. - Postmaster, whether answerable for Money sent by Post.
Selwyn v. Arbuthnot
Date: 18 June 1730 Case No. No 28.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
A banker at Edinburgh got orders to remit his correspondent's money by a bill on the bank of England, but chose rather to remit it by a bill upon a private banker in London. The bill being taken out of the post office by some unknown person, who, upon a false indorsation and receipt, got the money from the banker on whom the bill was drawn. The Lords found the defender's remittance by bill on the private banker was on his own risk and hazard. (See Appendix.) See Baines against Turnbull, No 77. p. 1486.
