
    Robert Stuart and Hamilton Stuart against David Greenleaf.
    THIS was an action by the endorsees of a promissory note against the maker.
    The note was made in the state of Arw-York, and was, by the laws of that state, negotiable. It was payable to John I. Staples isf Hon, and by them endorsed to the plaintiffs. .
    The defendant offered in evidence two receipts, signed by John I, Staples & Son, for two hundred dollars each, which he contended ought to be allowed in part on the note, unless the plaintiffs could prove, that it;Was assigned to them, before the receipts were given.
    
      Whether,: lu-án action tif-the endorsee of a negotiable note against the maker, a discharge by the payee shall be avail» able as a de» fence, until it be shown hy the maker* that the re« ceipt was given before the endorsement was made?
    
      The plaintiffs contended,
    that the onus probandi lay upon the defendant; that every endorsed note was presumed to have been endorsed the day it was made, or at any. rate, before it became due, unless the contrary were shown.
    
      Daggett and Bristol, for the plaintiffs.
    The District Attorney, for the defendant.
   And of this opinion was

Livingston, J.

Edwards, J.

was of a contrary opinion; and strenuously contended, that the onus probandi lay upon the plaintiffs.

It afterwards appeared, that the case was with the plaintiffs on other grounds.  