PRE TO THE FI THE many modern de cate e acquaintance with minations, is a fufficie collect and methodiz tempt, what are commo Cah Bills, and Promif gether; for a Cafh E age as any Inland Bil Feb. 1789. PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. THE many modern determinations upon the Law of Bills and Notes, and the importance of an intimate acquaintance with the principles of thofe determinations, is a fufficient apology for an attempt to collect and methodize them. In the following attempt, what are commonly ftiled Bills of Exchange, Cash Bills, and Promiffory Notes, are confidered together; for a Cafh Bill is as much a Bill of Exchange as any Inland Bill, and a Note after a transfer is in legal operation a complete Bill, and must therefore have, when first made, the fame effential qualities with Bills. 4 Feb. 1789. PREFACE . TO THE SECOND EDITION. THE former Edition of this work was a Collection of Principles only, and did not state the Cafes from which thofe Principles were deduced. That statement is now added, and extracts are supplied from fuch Acts of Parliament as apply immediately to the fubject. This is done in the notes, and the text continues as before, except that in fome inftances principles which had no authorities to fupport them are expunged, and others which have fince been established, are introduced. Temple, 25th May, 1797. OF CITED CASES. Ancher v. Bank of England, 33. Bacon v. Searles, 90. Carvick v. Vickery, 37, Chadwick v. Allen, 3. Clarke v. Martin, 95. Claxton v. Swift, 87. Cockfhot v. Bennet, 122 Coleman v. Sayer, 66. 9 Collins v. Butler, 58. Collis v. Emett, 14, 29, Connor v. Martin, 37. Cooke v. Coleham, 11. Cooper v. Le Blanc, 117 Cooper v. Pepys, 89. Corney v. Da Cofta, 82. Cotton v. Horfemanden, Cox v. Coleman, 44. Daniel v. Cartony, 126. Dale v. Lubbock, 118. Dawkes v. Lord Delorai De Bert v. Atkinson, 81 Dehers v. Harriott, 26. De la Courtier v. Bellam Derry v. Duchefs of Ma Dingwall v. Dunfter, 56 Eaft v. Eflington, 110. Eaft India Company v. Edie v. Eaft India Comp Elliott v. Cooper, 13. Ellis v. Galindo, 55. Ereskine v. Murray, 14. Evans v. Cramlington, 3 Evans v. Underwood, 1 Fletcher v. Sandys, 63. Gale v. Walsh, 72. Gofs v. Nelfon, 11. Grant v. Vaughan, 12. 35, 95- Hall v. Pitfield, 85. Hawkins v. Gardner, 34, 107. Hayward v. Bank of England, 62. Hoar v. Da Cofta, 64. Jackfon v. Pigott, 46. 106. Keffcbower v. Tims, 96. Lambert v. Pack, 115. Macleod v. Snee, 11. Mafter v. Miller, 54. Maunfell v. Lord Maffareene, 121. May v. Cooper, 69. M'Donald v. Bovington, 88. Rawlinfon v. Stone, 38. Saunderfon v. Judge, 59. 77. Smallwood v. Vernon, 31. Smith v. Boheme, 8. Smith v. Chester, 115. Smith v. De la Fontaine, 78. |