ness acquainted with the laws of the foreign country. Clegg v. Levy, 15. A receipt for taxes, signed by a clerk of the deputy-receivers 16. Where the agreement, on which the action is brought, is con- 17. Where the body of a bill is written, and the acceptance of it 18. An I. O. U. is neither a receipt nor a promissory note, but a When not. 19. A bond conditioned to produce a box containing the sub- 20. An agreement for the sale and payment of goods, with a sti- 21. A guarantee for the payment of goods, which a third person War- 22. A written paper, containing a bare acknowledgement of a 23. After a breach of contract for the sale and delivery of goods, 1 24. Where a peculiar stamp is appropriated, an ad valorem stamp Denomination. 25. An ad valorem stamp of a different denomination is sufficient, 27. A bond given for the purpose of securing certain conditions 28. A deed by which the plaintiff covenants to give up his trade value. Number. Time of stamping. Dispensation with. Effects of the want of. 29. The value of a stamp upon a bill of exchange under the statute 35 G. 3. c. 184. shed. tit. bill of exchange depends upon the face of the bill. Peacock v. Murrell, 2 Starkie, 558. 30. If two persons by an agreement in writing lay a wager, and then by another agreement indorsed on the first, consent that it should be doubled, there must be two sixpenny agreement stamps. Robson v. Hall, Peake, 128. 31. But if there is only one stamp, the winner may cover the first bet on a count thereon. Robson v. Hall, Peake, 128. 32. If the several parts of an agreement are proposed at different times, and ultimately and for the first time ratified, their dates are brought down to the time of ratification so as to make the whole one entire contract, and to require one stamp only. Knight v. Crockford, 1 Esp. N. P. C. 190. 33. Even admitting that a paper containing separate agreements is inadmissible as evidence of any one agreement, unless it has stamps sufficient to cover the whole; yet if it appears that some have been erased, whereby a sufficiency of stamps is left, it will be presumed that the erasure was made before the paper was stamped. Waddington v. Francis, 5 Esp. C. 182. See 12 East, 6.; 1 Camp. 8. 34. If a receipt for money and an agreement are written on the same piece of paper, this is receivable in evidence as a receipt, if it has a receipt stamp, without an agreement stamp. Grey v. Smith, I Camp. 387. 35. It is no defence to an action at the suit of the indorsee of a promissory note or bill of exchange, that the bill was not stamped at the time of making it, if it has a proper stamp when produced at the trial. Wright v. Riley, 173. 36. Although a policy of insurance produced at the trial of an action has a sufficient stamp, evidence will be received that it had no such stamp when it was effected, in which case it is a mere nullity, though stamped afterwards by order of the Commissioners of Stamps, for this is forbidden by 35 G. 3. c.63., and not authorized by 37 G.3. c. 136., which extends only to such instruments as could before be legally stamped after they were executed. Roderick v. Hovil, 3 Camp. 103. 37. In an action on a bill of exchange after payment of money into court, the defendant cannot object to the sufficiency of the stamp on which the bill is drawn. Israel v. Benjamin, 3 Camp. 40. 38. An agreement not stamped cannot be received as evidence for any purpose whatever, not even to show that the party meant to commit a fraud by that agreement. Whitwell v. Dimsdale, Peake, 167. 39. A bill of exchange unstamped is a nullity, and therefore no discharge of the demand for which it was given. Ruff v. Webb, 1 Esp. N. P. C. 129. 40. If an unstamped bill or note is given for an existing demand, since it is a nullity the creditor may sue on the original consideration. Wilson v. Kennedy, 1 Esp. C. 245. 41. Where a written agreement subsists between the parties, though unstamped, the plaintiff cannot resort to an implied one, at least where it may now be stamped on paying the penalty. Brewer v. Palmer, 3 Esp. C. 213. 42. Where a bill or note is void for want of a stamp, the payee may recover on the original consideration. Wade v. Beasley, 4 Esp. C. 7. 43. Although a promissory note without a stamp cannot be received in evidence as a security, or to prove the loan of money, it may be looked at by the jury with a view to ascertain a coll atera fact. Gregory v. Fraser, 3 Camp. 454. 44. Goods consigned to A. upon their arrival are landed on the defendant's wharf, the plaintiff in an action of trover may prove his title by parol, although the bill of lading which has been indorsed to him cannot be received in evidence for want of a stamp. Davis v. Reynolds, 1 Starkie, 115. 45. A bill, dated 2d September, payable twenty-one days after date Alteration. and accepted, is afterwards, and whilst in the hands of the drawer, with the acceptor's consent, altered, by making it payable fifty-one days after date; on the 30th September, it is again, and under like circuinstances, altered to twenty-one days after date, and the date brought forward to the 14th September. This last is a distinct transaction from the first, is in effect drawing of a new bill, and therefore a fresh stamp is requisite. Bowman v. Nichol, 1 Esp. N. P. C. 81.; S. C. 5. T. R. 537. 46. Inserting words merely specifying where the bill or note is to be payable, will not vitiate it. Trapp v. Spearman, 3 Esp. C. 57. 47. After a bill has been accepted, substituting "date" for "sight," vitiates it, though it had been originally drawn in that form. Long v. Moore, 3 Esp. C. 155. n. 48. The insertion of the words "or order" after a bill has been negotiated, if in furtherance of the original intention, and with the consent of those concerned, does not vitiate. Secus, an alteration in the date or sum. Kershaw and another v. Cox, 3 Esp. C. 246. 49. Semble, that the only alteration that may be made in a bill of exchange without a fresh stamp, is when a mistake in the terms of it is rectified before it gets abroad into the world. Cardwell v. Martin, 1 Camp. 79, 180. b. 50. A. and B. for their mutual accommodation, exchange acceptances, the bill accepted by A. being made to fall due sooner than that accepted by B. A. having kept the bill payable to his order twenty days in his possession without negociating it, alters the date of the bill with the consent of B., so as to postpone the payment twenty days, and then indorses it to C. In an action at the suit of C. against B., held, that by this alteration, without a fresh stamp, the bill was vitiated. Cardwell v. Martin, 1 Camp. 79, 180. b. 51. Words written on a bill, which do not affect the responsibility of the parties, will not vitiate it. Marson v. Petit, 1 Camp. 82. n. 52. A. and B. fer a debt due to C. agree to give him a bill of exchange to be drawn by A. and accepted by B.; instead of this they send him a promissory note made by the one, and indorsed by the other, which he immediately returns to be altered into a bill of exchange according to the agreement. The instrument so altered is a valid bill of exchange without a fresh stamp, as it had not been negotiated in the shape of a promissory note, and the alteration may be considered as a mere correction of a mistake. Webber v. Maddocks, 3 Camp. 1. 53. Where there is a policy on goods by ship or ships to be thereafter declared, if the broker by mistake makes a written declaration upon goods by a wrong ship, to which the underwriters put their initials, he may afterwards, in compliance with the orders of the assured, declare upon goods by another ship, without the assent of the underwriters, and without a fresh stamp. Robinson v. Touray, 3 Camp.158. 54. An accommodation bill payable to the drawer's order cannot be altered after acceptance, and an attempt to negotiate it, and before it is actually negotiated. Calvert v. Roberts, 3 Camp. 343. 55. The Rr3 Apprentice indenture. Evidence. Collateral pur poses. 55. The alteration of a bill of exchange by the drawee after it has been drawn and indorsed, and before it is accepted, postponing the time of payment, renders the bill void. Outhwaite and another v. Luntley, 4 Camp. 179. 56. If after a bill of exchange is delivered by the drawer to the payee, its date is altered by an agreement between the payee and the drawee before acceptance, it is void as against all the parties. Walton v. Hastings, 4 Camp. 223. 57. A. being indebted to B. draws a bill of exchange upon C. payable to B. two months after date, and upon presentment of the bill by B. to C. for acceptance, the date is altered at the instance of C. without any communication with A. B. cannot recover against C. on his acceptance for want of a new stamp. And, semble, if A. had assented to the alteration, a new stamp would still have been necessary. Walton v. Hastings, 1 Starkie, 215. 58. A. draws a bill of exchange upon B. payable at three months, for a debt due from B. to A.; on the delivery of the bill to B. for acceptance, B. requests that four months may be substituted for three, and afterwards, by the assent of A., the alteration is made. A new stamp is not requisite. Kennerly v. Nash, 1 Starkie, 452. 59. After a bill of exchange has been accepted, and whilst it remains in the hands of the payee, he alters it, by making it payable at a particular place, this alteration will not vitiate the bill. Jacobs v. Joseph, Hart, 2 Starkie, 45. 60. A promissory note is "signed by A. and subsequently by B., whilst in the hands of the payee as surety for A.; unless such signature of B. is in virtue of a previous agreement at the time of making the note, the note will be void without an additional stamp. Clerk v. Blackstock, 1 Holt, 474. 61. An indenture of apprenticeship is not void by 8 Ann. c. 9., although it was originally agreed between the master and apprentice's father that a premium of 207. should be paid; and the master afterwards, to reduce the amount of the duty, agrees to take 19. 19s. 6d., which is the sum inserted in the indenture, and actually paid. Shepherd v. Hall, 3 Camp. 180. 62. Against a party who refuses, after notice, to produce an agreement, it is to be presumed that it is stamped; but he may prove the contrary. Crisp v. Anderson, 1 Stark. 35. 63. An illegal policy of insurance on lottery tickets may be read in evidence, without being stamped. Holland v. Duffin, Peake, 58. 64. A copy of a newspaper may be read in evidence, though not stamped according to the act of parliament. Rex v. Pearce, Peake, 75. 65. It seems that an indorsement by a sheriff's officer on his warrant, that he has received the levy money, is evidence of the fact, without being stamped as a receipt. Perchard and another v. Findall, 1 Esp. C. 396. 66. An indorsement on a deed after its execution, controuling its terms, need not be stamped. Herne and another v. Hale, 3 Esp. C. 237. sed quære. 67. Although a receipt for the payment of a bill on unstamped paper is not admissible in evidence, yet the fact of payment may be proved by a witness who saw the money paid; and even such an unstamped receipt may be shown to the witness, as a memorandum to refresh his memory. Rambert v. Cohen, 4 Esp. C. 213. 68. A writing offered in evidence to prove, that the condition of a bond bond has been broken, is admissible without a stamp, though it is in the form of an agreement or a promissory note. Carter v. Bond, 4 Esp. C. 253. 69. An instrument not given in evidence as such, but as proof of a collateral fact, need not be stamped. Dover v. Maestaer, 5 Esp. C. 92. 70. A receipt, as for interest money, indorsed on an unstamped note, may be used as presumptive evidence that a principal sum of an amount, to warrant that interest, was then due. Manley and wife v. Peel, 5 Esp. C. 121. 71. If there are two parts of a written agreement, both executed at the same time, but the one stamped and the other unstamped, the unstamped part is receivable as secondary evidence of the contents of the stamped part. Waller v. Horsfall, 1 Camp. 501. 72. A receipt for the price of a horse, containing a warranty of soundness, may be read in evidence to prove the warranty, without an agreement stamp. Skrine v. Elmore, 2 Camp. 407. 73. In an action for not delivering goods made by the defendant for the plaintiff, in pursuance of an order, a memorandum in writing ordering the goods, but not proving the contract between the parties, may be read in evidence without a stamp. Ingram v. Lea, 2 Camp. 521. 74. Where indorsements of receipts on a bond have left no blank space for receipts of subsequent payments to be written upon, such receipts written on an unstampt piece of paper, annexed to the bond, may be read in evidence. Orme v. Young, 4 Camp. 336. 75. A written notice of the dissolution of a partnership, reciting the dissolution, and signed by the parties in order to its insertion in the Gazette, may be read in evidence to prove notice of the dissolution, although it has not been stamped. Jenkins and another v. Blizard and another, 1 Starkie, 418. 76. The plaintiff having signified by a printed prospectus, the terms on which he is ready to engage to perform particular services, may, in an action against one who has employed him to render those services under a parol agreement, read the printed prospectus to show what the terms were, although it is not stamped. Edgar v. Blick, 1 Starkie, 464. 77. A letter read to prove a contract of marriage need not be stamped. Orford v. Cole, 2 Stark. 351. 78. A. brings an action against B. for the price of a gun ordered by the latter; he may read in evidence, for a collateral purpose, part of a letter written by B. to him; although the remainder of the letter contains directions for making the gun, and is not stamped as an agreement. Forsyth and others v. Jervis, 1 Starkie, 437. 79. In an action for work and labour, a proposal on the part of the defendant, which was not finally acceded to, containing an estimate of the amount of the work, may be read in evidence by the defendant, although it be not stamped. Peniford v. Hamilton, 2 Stark. 475. STARCH. Hair powder made of starch ground fine still remains starch; and Hair powder. packages of more than twenty-eight pounds' weight removed from one place to another must be marked starch. Aitcheson v. Madock, Peake, 162. |