Barlow

The plaintiff’s cause of action was based upon the alleged liability of the defendant as the acceptor of a written order drawn upon him for the payment of a certain sum of money, which order reads as follows:

The answer of the defendant, while admitting the making, delivery, and acceptance of the order, denied that it was made, delivered, and accepted for a valuable consideration, and pleaded as a special defense to the action that there was no consideration for the making of the order in the first instance, nor for its subsequent acceptance by the defendant, and that prior to the happening of the condition expressed in the order the maker thereof gave notice to the defendant not to pay the plaintiff the sum of money called for by the order. The judgment upon the verdict of a jury was entered in favor of the plaintiff, from which and from an order denying a new trial the defendant has appealed.

It was an admitted fact in the case that the order in question was executed and delivered to the plaintiff by Wood- worth, the maker; that it was thereupon accepted in writing by the defendant; that subsequent to the date of the defendant’s acceptance a sum of money greatly in excess of…