There is no presumption of law that a bank, in discounting a note, knew that it had been obtained from its maker by fraud, merely because its own cashier was one of the persons to whom the fraud was imputed.
ANDREWS, C. J.
This action was brought to recover the amount of two notes given by Mr. Bevin, the defendant, to the Natchaug Silk Company, and by that company indorsed to the plaintiff. The notes are those mentioned in the preceding case as having been given by Mr. Bevin to that corporation in part payment for certain shares of its capital stock. The defense was that the said shares of stock were void; that the notes were for that reason without consideration; that Mr. Bevin was induced to give the notes by the fraud of Mr. Risley; that the plaintiff took the notes under such circumstances that it was chargeable with knowledge of such want of consideration and fraud, and that, therefore, it could not recover.