This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated.1859 Excerpt: ... I'arker v. Burgess & Leavens. text, that the statute is aimed at the rule only when, in the specified cases put, it had been construed to create an estate in fee tail in the first taker; and that by thus recognizing and repealing it in application to specified cases, it impliedly affirms and ratifies it in application to all others. Let a decree be entered, that the defendants specifically perform their contract of purchase with the plaintiff as set forth in the bill, upon receiving from him a proper conveyance of the lot therein mentioned, free from all incumbrances; and unless otherwise agreed, let a master be appointed to settle the conveyance and attend to the execution of the decree. Frederick Parker v. Burgess & Leavens. Where a note, mnde by a copartner payable to his own firm, was indorsed by him in the copartnership name to another, in payment of his individual debt, with notice that he had no authority thus to use the copartnership name, and the note, indorsed also in blank by the party who thus received it, was purchased by the plaintiff from a broker before maturity, for full value, and without notice of the transaction in which the Dote originated; Held, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover of the copartnership as indorsee, the amount of the note; the paper not indicating, and he having no notice of, the fraud practised upon the firm by its agent and copartner. Assumpsit against the defendants as indorsers of a promissory note, dated September 26,1856, for $1,995.84, made by the defendant Burgess, and payable to the firm of Burgess & Leavens, five months after date, and by them indorsed in blank. The case was submitted to the court upon an agreed statement of facts, by which it appeared, that Burgess, the maker of the note, was engaged in...