
    (51 Misc. Rep. 673.)
    FERGUSON v. BIEN et al.
    (Supreme Court, Appellate Term.
    November 14, 1906.)
    Usury—Notes—Innocent Holder.
    A note in the hands of one receiving no bonus, nor knowing, nor chargeable with knowledge, of the taking of a bonus, is not tainted with usury. [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 47, Usury, §§ 168, 364.]
    Appeal from City Court of New York, Special Term.
    Action by Julius M. Ferguson against Franklin Bien and another. From a judgment of the City Court for plaintiff, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
    Argued before GILDERSLEEVE, DUGRO, and DOWLING, JJ. Franklin Bien, for appellant Nellis.
    William Klein, for appellant Bien.
    Ferguson & Ferguson, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

If the defendants were not entitled to have the question of usury decided by the jury, the judgment must be affirmed; for that is the only question the defendants asked the court to submit to the jury. There was no evidence that the plaintiff received the bonus, or knew of or was chargeable with knowledge of the taking of the bonus; and therefore the note in the plaintiffs hands was not tainted with usury. See Lee v. Chadsey, 3 Abb. Dec. 43.

The judgment must be affirmed, with costs.  