The judgment of the Supreme Court was entered March 22d 1880,
Per Curiam.There was nothing in the form of the note produced in evidence to preclude the plaintiff from showing that it was given for a partnership debt — that it was not accepted in satisfaction, but merely as collateral security. It matters not that the making of the note was cotemporaneous with the partnership debt. On the facts found by the referee, we are of opinion that the judgment was right.
Judgment affirmed.