brown case lord BARRINGTON Plaintiff Susannah SEARLE Widow defendant in error  that February Mews dig ringtail ten discuss and follow in Gleadow v Atkin Cr m  the produce a receipt for interest within year endorse on a bind by the  obligee be sufficient to take off the presumption of payment though no proof  be give when such receipt be write and sign Mod viner vol p can can and note  ld raym wms note Eq ab note to can the defendant in error have on the that of  July obtain letter of administration in the prerogative court in Hilary term  bring a action of debt in the court of king bench against the plaintiff in  error upon a bind enter into by the say John wildman in his lifetime to the  say George Searle in the penalty of pound date the that of June the plaintiff  in error crave over of the condition of this bind which be for the payment of  pound S on the that of December next ensue the date thereof and thereupon he  plead that John wildman the obligor in his lifetime videlicet on the that of  February pay to the say George Searle the say pound S in the say condition  specify and all interest due upon the say bind in full satisfaction and  discharge thereof to this plea the defendant in error reply non to loosen  modus et form as by the plea be allege and thereupon issue be join brown er p  the cause come to be try before the Lord chief justice Raymond at the sit  after easter term and the counsel for the plaintiff in error instead of give  evidence to support his plea that the money be pay insist upon the presumption  in law that the bind be date the that day of June will III and that year be  lapse from the date of the bind to the exhibit the bill and therefore by law  the bind ought to be presume to be pay unless the defendant in error can show  that interest have be pay or a demand make within year or some other matter to  take off and invalidate this presumption the counsel for the defendant in  error thereupon in support of the issue on her part give in evidence that the  obligor die in the month of April and also the bind under the seal of the say  John wildman and likewise offer in evidence two endorsement upon the bind in  the proper handwriting of the say George Searle and in the word and figure  follow videlicet receive of John wildman Esq in full of all interest due on  the bind within mention to the that day of December next ensue this date  witness my hand this that day of December George Searle march the that receive  in full of all interest due on this bind to the that of this instant George  Searle but it not brown appear when these endorsement be make otherwise than  by the endorsement themselves the counsel for the plaintiff in error oppose  the give they in evidence to the jury but after this point be very full debate  by the counsel on both side the Lord chief justice be of opinion that these  endorsement be evidence to be leave to the consideration of the jury and  therefore allow they to be read and other circumstantial evidence be give to  induce the jury to believe the bind be not satisfy there be a verdict for the  plaintiff whereupon the counsel for the plaintiff in error offer a bill of  exception whereby they insist that the endorsement ought not to be read in  evidence which be seal and allow by the chief justice the plaintiff in error  bring a writ of error in the exchequer Chamber and in Michaelmas and Hilary  term the error be twice solemnly argue before the judge of the common plea and  the baron of the exchequer the judgement of the court of king bench be affirm  by the opinion of all the judge and baron then present except one to reverse  this judgement of affirmance and also the judgement of the court of king bench  a writ of error be bring in parliament and on behalf of the plaintiff it be  insist p York t reeve that the only evidence give by the plaintiff in the  action to take off the presumption arise from the great length of time that  this bind be satisfy be the two endorsement make thereon by Mr Searle who be  the obligee in the bind and who can be no witness for himself or any person  claim under he and have the bind always in his own custody on the other side  it be contend t Lutwyche n fazakerley that the plea in this case be not a plea  of payment at the day mention in the condition but of payment of principal and  interest before the action bring videlicet on the that of February which be  but year before the action bring and be under year be a short time than ought  to be allow as a presumption of payment but admit that the plaintiff in error  be entitle to the benefit of this presumption upon his say plea yet the  evidence offer and give on the part of the defendant in error be very proper  evidence to take off the presumption for the make such endorsement of the  receipt of interest upon bind write with the oblige own hand be the common and  usual method upon the payment of interest it be most for the obligor benefit  to have the discharge for the interest appear upon the security itself and in  most case it be the only evidence that the obligee can have of the payment of  interest that as such payment be frequent and general make between the obligor  and obligee when no other person be present it may be of dangerous consequence  to the oblige in old bind if such endorsement be not to be admit as evidence  to take off the presumption and as it will be brown dangerous total to reject  this evidence so likewise if the endorsement be admit to be read the jury who  be the proper judge of fraud and of the truth of fact will have it under their  consideration what credit to give they and to determine whether they be false  and fraudulent make or not that if these endorsement be make upon the bind at  the respective time they appear to bear date their be write with the oblige  own hand be no objection to their be read in evidence because it be impossible  that he can have any bias upon he or be in any manner influence to make they  for brown er p they be evidence against he and he can derive no advantage from  they as he have no occasion to take off the presumption of payment there not  be a lapse of year from the day of payment to the date of the endorsement and  therefore it be hope that the judgement will be affirm with cost accord after  hear counsel on this writ of error and also the judge who deliver their  opinion seriatim it be order and adjudge that the judgement give in the  exchequer Chamber affirm the judgement in the court of king bench shall be  affirm and that the record shall be remit to the end execution may he have  thereupon as if no such writ of error have be bring into the house and it be  further order that the plaintiff shall pay to the defendant pound for her cost  sustain by reason of bring the say writ of error jour vol p by a manuscript  note on this case it appear that Mr baron comens be for reverse the judgement  and that Lord Raymond Lord chief justice Eyre and Mr justice probin be absent