McMillan v. Bethold, Smith & Co.

Citations

• 35 Ill. 250

Syllabus

<p>1. Second art evidence of contenis of lost note, when admissible. In a suit to recover upon a note alleged to be lost, an agent of the payee testified that the note was in his possession, and was lost or picked from his pocket, and that it was not indorsed. This was sufficient to let in secondary evidence of the contents of the note.</p> <p>2. Had the note been adapted to circulation by an indorsement, then, indeed, might absolute proof be required that the note was actually lost or destroyed.</p> <p>3. Secovery upon original consideration of a lost note. In a suit to recover the amount of a note alleged to be lost, if there is a common count embracing the original consideration for which the note was given, the proof of the loss being sufficient, the plaintiff need not resort to the contents, but may recover upon the common count, and the loss of the note will stand in place of a surrender of the note.</p>