
    *A. Putnam (holder) vs. E. Crymes and R. K. Owings.
    Holder is a word of tlie same import as bearer: by either of these words, or other equivalent ones, a promissory note maybe made negotiable by delivery.
    Before Butler, J., at Laurens, Fall Term, 1840.
    
      Judges’ Report.
    
    The plaintiff in this case was not the original payee, but held the note by transfer to himself by delivery. The note was made payable to Mancil Owens or holder; the plaintiff declared as holder, and defendants demurred on the ground that the holder could not sue without a written assignment. I regarded holder as synonymous with bearer and overruled the demurrer.
    
      Appeal by Defendants on the ground that the demurrer should have been sustained.
    
    
      Sullivan and Campbell, for the motion. Irby and Wright, contra.
   Curia, per

Butler J.

The word bearer is usually inserted in a negotiable note, transferable by delivery. But without it, the maker of a note may make it transferable by delivery, either by circumlocution, or using a word of precisely the same import. As if a note were made payable to A. B. or to any one to whom he may deliver it; or to any one who might hold the same by delivery. In both cases the bearer would be sufficiently meant and designated, although the word was not used. If it was the intention of the maker to make it payable to any one who acquires possession by delivery, he has no right to complain when it is presented to him without a written transfer. Holder is a word of the same import as bearer, and both may acquire a title by lawful delivery, according to the terms of the contract. All the law requires is, that the paper must have negotiable words on its face, showing it to be the intention to give it a transferable quality by delivery; otherwise the instrument must be transferred by * written endorsement, if payable to ftrder; or sued on by the original payee, if there are no negotiable words at all.

The decision below is affirmed :

the whole court concurring.  