
    Murphy v. G. F. & M. J. Merchant.
    An allegation in the complaint that the note was made by the defendant, AB_, and “for a further inducement to the plaintiff to accept the same, was indorsed by the defendant, C-D-, and was then delivered to and indorsed by the plaintiff,” held, insufficient to charge G-D-, the indorser, with liability, where the note was made payable to order of the plaintiff.
    It seems, that it is very doubtful whether any evidence of a parol agreement, varying the legal rights or obligation of the payee and second indorser, can be admitted. (Reported in 14 How. Pr. R. 189.)
    (At Special Term,
    February, 1857.
    Before Duer, J.)
     