Williams v. Merchants National Bank

Citations

• 67 Tex. 606
• 4 S.W. 163
• 1887 Tex. LEXIS 929

Syllabus

<p>1. Promissory Note— Indorsers.—When according to the terms of a promissory note, payable to the order of the maker thereof, and which was indorsed by the payee and by other names which appeared after his on the note, a licensed attorney was authorized to appear and confess judgment against the maker in ease of non payment, and be entitled to ten per cent additional as attorney fees for so doing, held: The legal presumption is that no authority was given to confess judgment against any one but the maker—that the indorsers did not sign before delivery. Their names appearing after the payee, it must be presumed that the indorsers signed after the payee had indorsed, and parol evidence can not be admitted to vary the plain terms of such a contract to subject others not named to so extraordinary a remedy.</p> <p>2. Cases Followed.—Rickey v. Dameron, 48 Missouri, 61; Clapp v. Rice, 13 G-ray, 403, and Blatehford v. Milliken, 35 Illinois, 434, followed.</p> <p>3. Indorsers.—Though the indorser, by his indorsement, in effect agreed that the principal of the debt, with interest and attorney’s fees should be paid according to the terms of the note, yet this was subject to the indorser’s right to notice of protest for non payment, or that suit should be brought within the prescribed time. To hold otherwise would be to ignore the provisions of the statute for the protection of indorsers.</p>