
    Gregg v. McCollock.
    A payment made by the maker of a note to the payee, after it was transferred, and of which the maker had knowledge, cannot he allowed as a set-off in an action on the note for the use of the holder.
    Error, to Des Moines District Court.
    
    An action of assumpsit on a promissory note, by Hugh McCollock, for the use of Andrew Snyder, against Azariah Gregg. By consent of parties, the cause was tried by the court without a jury. The defendant offered a receipt against the note, signed by Hugh McCollock, which states: u Received of Azariah Gregg, one hundred and thirty-five dollars, which amount I agree to have credited on a note I hold against him, and signed over by me to Andrew Snyder, February 25, 1846.”
    The plaintiff objected to the introduction of the receipt. The court allowed it to be road ; but decided that it was not sufficient to entitle the defendant to a credit for the amount, unless it was followed by proof that Snyder had received the money from McCollock; or that he was authorized to receive the money, as Snyder’s agent. There being no farther proof, the court gave judgment for the plaintiff.
    
      M, B. Bo-owning, for the plaintiff in error.
    
      Ch-iones and Starr, for the defendant,
    cited Hickole v. Labussier, Morris, 115; Sater v. Hendeoshot, ib. 118, 122.
   Opinion by

Hastings, C. J.

The question presented is, whether a -payment by Gregg, the maker, to McCollock, the payee, after the transfer of the .note to Snyder, for whose use the suit is brought, can be received as an offset to the note.

, It is evident, from the record, that Gregg knew when the payment was made that the note was transferred. The payment then, to McCollock, was no payment on the note, unless he was the agent of Snyder. The equitable rights of Snyder must be protected against any acts of McCollock, unauthorized by him.

Judgment affirmed.  