
    John Poag, Assignee, against Nathan C. Wade and Thomas M'Donald.
    Wamuf;ons.: berít0"P SSst a negotiable note, «n*ysed due to an endor»u|k ¡wears,** a bonajide bolder^'
    This was a summary process brought by the plaintiff against the defendants on a note of hand, which had been transferred before due. The defence went to show a want of consideration; . .. but there was no proof that the plaintiff had any knowledge of this fact, or that he was not a fair bona fide holder of this paper for valuable consideration : so that the sole question on this trial was, whether the proof of a want of consideration, as in this case, (the note having been given for an unsound horse,) could be set up to bar a recovery. The presiding Judge determined the case in the affirmative; and an appeal is made to th.s Court to set aside that decree.
   The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Gantt.

I am of opinion that the decree ought to be set aside, inasmuch as I conceive the principle of the law to be the reverse of that established by the decision of the presiding Judge. A want of consideration cannot be pleaded against the claim of an endorsee, standing in the character of the present plaintiff: that is, a bom fide holder of a negotiable paper, endorsed before due, for valuable consideration, and without any notice had of a want of consideration. I think a new trial should be had.

Grimke, Mott, Colcoch, Johnson, and Cheves, J, concurred.  