Nelson,.. 639 665 81 Ordinary of Webster county, P Parish vs. Parish,. ... 653 253 555 522 1 Smith vs. Riley,. T 25 225 400 ........ 356 Snelling, Howard et. al. vs...... 195 266 Speer, A. & W. Pt. R. R. Co. vs 550 20 Sprayberry vs. Culberson........ 299 Spullock, Wallace & Wallace vs 488 Stephens, Battle vs.............. Stockdale vs. The State,....... Stocks & another vs. Moncas,.. 380 Pare rs. Mahone,. Stripling, Davis vs.............................. 657 Park, Harrell, adm'r, vs........ Strozier, Gill vs.......................... 688 Parnell & Jennings, Phillips vs. Sullivan, Cabot & Co., Rome Patterson et al., vs. Hickey,... 156 R. R. Co. vs...... Paul, Adkins vs................................................. 219 Sullivan vs. Hugly et. al......... 316 Phillips, Mapp vs.. 72 Sykes vs. McRorey et. al........ 348 Phillips vs. Parnell & Jennings, 522 Planter's Bank, Horne vs....... Porter's heirs, Boatright vs..... 130 Posey, Tolleson vs........................................... 372 Tarver, Heirs of Lucas vs....... 262 Price, Redding vs.................. 178 Taylor vs. Griswold,... 569 Price, Willet vs............................................................. 115 The State vs. Cone et. al......... 663 The State, Cox vs.................................................. 515 The State, Ferguson vs........... 658 The State, Gilliam vs............ 111 The State, Irby vs....................................... 496 The State, Killet vs............... 292 The State, Maddox vs............ ..... 581 The State, Monday (a slave) vs 672 The State, Robertson vs......... 424 The State, Stockdale vs.......... 225 The State, Woody vs.............. 595 Thomas, Roberts vs............... Tolleson vs. Posey, .........595 Whitehead, et al., Boyd vs.. .......530 | Woodruff vs. Woodruff......... .....358 Whitfield, Bond vs... .215 Woody vs. The State,. Willcoxon, et al., vs. Harrison,..480 Wood vs. Mitchell, ex'r............623 Wilkes vs. McClung & Co .507 Wooten & Goolsby vs. Calahan..382 Willet vs. Price,.. .115 Wyche, et ux vs. Green,.........................341 Williams vs. Logan & Meara.....165 Y Wood vs. C. & C. R. R. Co.,.....274 York vs. Clopton, et al............362 Where the testimony in support of the verdict greatly outweighs that against it, a new trial will not be granted, of course on the ground that the verdict is against the weight of evidence. When there are several items of indebtedness, the debtor has the right to make the application of payment; and failing to do so, the right devolves upon the creditor to appropriate the payments. Complaint in Dougherty Superior Court. Tried before Judge ALLEN, at the June Term, 1860. This was an action brought by the Planters' Bank of Georgia, for the use of John W. Rabun against Charles W. Horne, as endorser, to recover the amount of a promissory note, of which the following is a copy: Horne vs. Planters' Bank of Georgia. "LAURENS COUNTY, GEORGIA, Nov. 25, 1851. "Sixty days after date I promise to pay to the order of Charles W. Horne, two thousand dollars, at either of the banks in Savannah, for value received. Endorsed as follows: "C. W. HORN." “ANDREW Y. HAMPTON.” "RABUN, FULTON & Co." To this action the defendant pleaded that the note was given to the firm of Rabun, Fulton & Co., as an accommodation paper, to be used by them in bank, and if Rabun, Fulton & Co. did not otherwise arrange for its payment, it was agreed between said firm and Hampton and the defendant, that if defendant would endorse the note, he should be secured against liability thereon, as follows: That Hampton's cotton crop, which was large, was to be sent forward to said firm, and that the proceeds of the sale of the cotton should be by said firm applied to the payment of the note; that Hampton did, after said note was given, and before it matured, send forward three or four hundred bales of cotton to said firm, with instructions to apply a sufficiency of the proceeds of the same to the payment of the note; that the firm received and sold the cotton, and retained enough of the proceeds thereof to pay the note, and instead of so applying the money, they pretend that it has been applied to other debts of Hampton, in violation of the agreement and contract under which defendant was induced to endorse the note. The defendant also pleaded that Hampton and defendant were both sued on the said note in Baker Superior Court, and that at the May Term, 1855, of Dougherty Superior Court, to which the case had been transferred, the plaintiff obtained a verdict, judgment and fi. fa. against said Hampton and defendant for fifteen hundred and thirty-five dollars, with interest and cost of suit. On trial of the case in the Court below, the plaintiff introduced, as evidence, the note sued on, and proved by William J. Bullock, that on the 27th day of January, 1852, as Notary Public, the witness noted the promissory note sued on for Horne vs. Planters' Bank of Georgia. non-payment, and gave the defendant, as endorser, notice of the same, by mailing the notice in the post office at Savannah, addressed to said defendant at Dublin, Laurens county, Georgia, on the said 27th of January, 1852. The plaintiff then rested. The defendants read in evidence the answers of ANDREW Y. HAMPTON, to interrogatories taken out in said case, who testified: That the defendant released him from all liability for costs in said case; that the note sued on was given by witness to the firm of Rabun & Fulton for witness' own benefit; that Horne signed said note as endorser, on condition, and with the understanding, that out of the money arising from the sale of witness' cotton crop to be sent to Rabun & Fulton, the note should be paid; witness thinks the note was delivered to the firm of Rabun & Fulton, with the understanding that the proceeds of the cotton were to be first applied to the payment of the note; that after the note was made, witness sent to Rabun & Fulton his cotton crop, amounting to between one hundred and forty and one hundred and fifty bales, or, if he did not send that much, he sent at least enough to pay the note; he thinks he sent all, as he does not recollect dividing his crop that year, and enough of the proceeds of the cotton so sent to Rabun & Fulton was to be applied to the payment of the note endorsed by Horne; that the cotton was sold, and the witness supposes must have netted at least $4,000 00; that witness did not know but what such application of a part of the proceeds of the cotton to the payment of the note was made, until after he had moved a second time to Baker county, and returned with defendant to Laurens county, and then learned, to his astonishment, that the note had not been paid; that Rabun & Fulton received the cotton in the year 1850 or 1851, the witness does not recollect which; that there were one hundred and fortyeight bales, if he sent all his crop, and he thinks he did; that he does not recollect what the cotton sold for, but thinks the net proceeds must have been at least $4,000; that he does not recollect whether Rabun & Fulton furnished him with an account of the sale of the cotton or not, but thinks he moved |