Dean v. Young

Citations

• 21 Miss. 118

Syllabus

<p>In this case the question was, whether a payment made by a debtor of the commissioners of the sinking fund, when they consisted of the president and cashier of the Planters’ Bank at Natchez, and the auditor of public accounts, to the cashier of the branch of that bank at Jackson, was a valid payment; and in that was involved the question of the extent of the agency of the cashier of the branch at Jackson to receive the- payment; the facts are reviewed and the conclusion reached that the payment was invalid, because the cashier of the branch at Jackson was not authorized to receive it.</p> <p>It was further held, that the cashier of the branch at Jackson was a competent witness without a release from the commissioners of the sinking fund, to prove for them that he did not act as agent of the commissioners in receiving the payment; for the commissioners denied this agency, and he was therefore in no wise liable to them ; and if liable at all, it was to the debtor of the fund, and he was therefore testifying against his interest.</p> <p>To justify the granting of a new trial upon the gronnd of newly discovered evidence, it must be madq to appear affirmatively that it could not have been discovered by reasonable diligence before the trial.</p> <p>In this case application for a new trial on that ground was made and rejected, because the facts which are stated in the opinion disclosed that, by reasonable diligence, the alleged testimony might have been discovered before the trial.</p>