banbury vers lisset et all at guildhall see griffin v Weatherby lr Q b what be  not a bill of exchange or absolute acceptance the plaintiff declare upon the  custom of merchant against the defendant as acceptors of a bill of exchange  and the instrument run in these word strange report er p strange messieurs  gilly and   Feb pray pay Mr Richard Banbury one month after date two hundred  pound on account of fraught of the veil galley Edward champion and this order  shall be your sufficient discharge for the same I gibson accept for Lissett  and gilly of leghorn to pay as remit from thence at usance march h gilly and  two objection be make by the defendant that this be not a bill of exchange for  it be not Payable to order so as to be negotiable this objection be take in  Chamberlyn v Delarive will where the court give no opinion upon the point but  in smith v Kendal mich Geo they decide a bill to be negotiable without these  word this point be on a promissory note vide TR see the declaration also in  Mannin v caryi Lutw Horton v clog lev and that they be not necessary in  promissory note vide more v pain case in b r tempt hard it be not say to be  for value receive and it be only a order upon a particular fund like the case  of Jenny v Herle ante and several merchant prove that they do not look upon it  to be a bill of exchange and other be of a contrary opinion the chief justice  rule it not to be a bill of exchange he say it be not in the power of the  party to make what form they please pass for such a bill it ought to be  agreeable to the law a merchant the privilege arise from the convenience to  trade which be not consult in this case and he think it have upon the  objection to the fund out of which it be to be pay however be a mercantile  transaction he leave it to the special jury of merchant who find it to be no  bill of exchange on the objection for want of value receive vide that this be  unnecessary mackleod v she Lord raym Evelyn v merry barn b r Joselin v  Lascerre fort death v Serwonters l Lutw Jenny v heal Mod Cramlington v Evans  show Mod Ent and white v Ledwicke Baily on bill appendix No where the point be  consider as settle the second objection be that the plaintiff suppose it a  bill of exchange have not show there be any remittance to the defendant and  that this be not a absolute acceptance but only conditional and so the chief  justice declare he understand it and leave it to the jury smith v abbot ante  Julian v Shobrooke will S p but it be now hold that it be the sole province of  the court to decide what be a absolute and what a conditional acceptance and  that it be not a question for a jury Sproat v matthews term Rep per buller and  Ashhurst I will I contra but they find for the defendant upon the first point  give no opinion as to this strange michaelmas term george king in b r sir  William lee Knt chief justice sir William chapel Knt Martin wright Esq Thomas  denison Esq justice sir Dudley rider Knt attorneygeneral the Hon William  Murray solicitor general