case ware against crying Euhan if the holder of a bill of exchange for sixty  pound send his servant with it to the payee for payment and the payee give the  servant a draft on his banker for a hundred pound and the banker write off the  sixty pound from the hundred pound draft but the servant instead of receive  the money take a note of sixty pound from the banker on a merchant who  immediate after become insolvent and refuse to pay the note the act of the  servant shall not in such case bind his master for the servant be send to  receive the money from the payee and not the note from the banker and  therefore the master may recover the sixty pound from the banker in a action  of assumpsit as money have and receive from the payee of the bill to his use S  c ld ray S c corn S c salk S c salk S c Mod S c holt a case make before holt  chief justice at guildhall be this one fellow owe the plaintiff sixty pound by  bill of exchange sir Stephen Evans the defendant owe fellow a hundred pound  also by bill the plaintiff send his man to fellow with the bill for payment  fellow send his man with the plaintiff man to sir Stephen Evans with the note  of a hundred pound to pay the plaintiff his bill sir Stephen Evans write off  sixty pound of the hundred pound note and endorses it upon the back and give  the plaintiff servant a bill of sixty pound and ten shilling upon another  person for his sixty pound take ten shilling from the plaintiff servant who  the very next day carry the bill for payment to the party who have just fail  immediate before the question be whether this be a good payment by Evans to  the plaintiff darnel sergeant there be three thing to be consider here first  how far the transaction of a servant as to receipt and payment shall bind his  master second what amount to a payment whether such a note as be give here be  good payment to the master himself three whether though this transaction of  the servant shall not bind the master general it will be bind between  goldsmith as this case be as to the first he say that upon this head of a  servant bind his master by his act there may be a reasonable difference  between the servant of merchant and those of other man for probable servant  may affect their master be merchant c in point of charge and discharge but  that first must be in matter pure concern their trade and way of deal as to  answer bill of exchange and letter of advice concern good or such like which  require dispatch but he can accept a bill of exchange without plain evidence  that he have authority to do it so be law mercat which be a excellent book  concern these matter and it be good evidence in that case that the master  allow the payment or protest of bill draw by he or give he such authority for  it be hard to put it in the power of a servant to ruin his master without his  order or knowledge it be never beard that if a merchant send his servant to  receive money that he may receive a bill for it and without doubt it will be  void if do by any other servant of a private person because beyond his  authority which ought to be pursue strict second whether such a bill be  payment at all the law take no notice of any payment to discharge a debt but  ready money or something else give and take in satisfaction see whether c S a  a less sum be no payment for a great if not before it be due or at another  place than it be Payable at mark foe modern er p modern three it be the case  of goldsmith do not alter the case for the delivery of these note as be now  use be no part of their trade a very new invention already obnoxious to such  practice as deserve no encouragement he agree that in some case such note may  be give for absolute payment as if one come to buy good of another and have  agree on a price the buyer upon delivery of good give the seller a goldsmith  note in satisfaction this shall be look upon as payment prima fancy because be  all at one time it shall lie upon the seller to prove that it be a conditional  payment and so express at that time but here it lie upon the giver to prove  that he give it in satisfaction the party not go immediate to call for it be  evidence that it be take in satisfaction but he go the next morning holt chief  justice it be plain that the servant be send by his master to receive the  money and not the bill next it be also plain that if the servant upon tender  of the bill bad come back to the master to know his mind and the master bad  send he back for the money and notwithstanding he have take the bill that will  not have charge the master see the case of sir Charles Thorold v smith easter  term whether in b r Mod holt b but here be some time for the master to assent  to what his servant have do but give such a bill as this upon a original  contract be evidence that it be give and receive for payment and be hold clear  that the endorsement by Evans on the note of fellow be a receipt by he of so  much money to the use of plaintiff for which a indebitatus assumpsit will lie  and in this point they all clear agree without doubt and at last they all  agree that if a master send his servant to receive money upon a goldsmith bill  or any other and he take another bill upon another person for payment that  shall not bind the master without some subsequent act of consent as if he do  not send the bill back in reasonable time with regard to circumstance c and  holt chief justice desire the counsel if they be not satisfy with the opinion  of the court to have their bill oh exception and that he will sign and seal it  that they may have a writ of error which they decline and by the whole court  judgement be give for the plaintiff S c ld ray S c comy Rep a