
    Netleton v. Riggs.
    Action of trover lies against a promisor for his note which he got up through the fraud of a third person.
    Action of trover, for two notes of £9 10s. each given by Riggs to ISTetleton. Plea not guilty to the jury.
    Case was — ISTetleton had an execution against Hind and Mather of about £19. Riggs in aid of them, gave said two notes to ISTetleton, in settlement of said execution. ISTetleton owed Woodhull by note about the sum of said two notes, and delivered said two notes to him to receive his pay of Riggs. Hind goes and pays Woodhull the debt which ISTetleton owed him, and took an assignment of TNetleton’s note to himself. Mather, who was bankrupt, by means of a forged order, got up from Woodhull, Riggs’ two notes to -Netleton, and delivers them up to Riggs and Riggs gave up his indemnity. Hind sues and recovers the money of Hetleton on his note to Woodhull.— And this action is brought to recover for said two notes which the defendant got up by Mather’s fraud without paying them.
   Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff; upon the ground that Riggs may not take benefit of Mather’s forgery and fraud.  