A bill having a receipt, in general terms, on the back of it, is presumed to have been paid by the acceptor.
Click here to view a pdf copy of this documet : PDF Copy
Robert Young accepted a bill drawn by Robert Steel junior, and Company, payable 100 days after date, which the drawers afterwards discounted with the Falkirk Banking Company.
When it became due, it was retired by Thomas Steel, one of the partners of Steel and Company, who took a receipt from the cashier of the bank in the following terms: ‘Received payment of the within.’
Thomas Steel died soon after, and the retired bill having been found in his repositories, it was assigned by Robert Steel, his partner, to Andrew Fergusson, in security of a Company debt.
Fergusson raised an action against Young the acceptor, for payment of its contents.
Young pleaded in defence, That he had pot the money with which Thomas Steel had retired the bill into his hands for that express purpose, and that this action was a fraudulent and collusive attempt to make him pay the debt twice. And, in support of this allegation, he founded upon the nature of the receipt granted by the bank, contending, That wherever a bill appears with a receipt on the back of it in general terms, not mentioning by whom it was paid, the presumption of law is, that it has been retired by the acceptor the proper debtor, or at least with his money; and that this presumption can only be removed by his writ or oath: That if Thomas Steel had retired the bill with his own funds, he would, in order to have preserved his recourse against the defender, have, according to the usual practice, taken a receipt, bearing that its contents had been paid by himself.
It was answered for Fergusson, That it was highly improbable, that Young, a man conversant in business, would have given money to one of the drawers to pay the bill, without taking a receipt for it; and that since he had not, it was incumbent on him to establish the fact by proof; and that the discharge by the creditor, however loosely worded, could not cut off the drawer's right of relief against the acceptor.
The Lord Ordinary assoilzied the defender.
On advising a reclaiming petition, with answers, it was
Observed on the Bench: When a bill is retired by a person not primarily liable for it, he will always take care to get a special receipt. A receipt in general terms, like the one in question, operates as an extinction of the debt in favour of the acceptor, unless the contrary is proved by his writ or oath.
The Court unanimously adhered.
Lord Ordinary, Ankerville.Act. Corbet.Alt. C. Hay.Clerk, Menzies.
Fol. Dic. v. 3. p. 79. Fac. Col. No 80. p. 175.
