Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 99

1875.] CLAIBORNE V. BIRGE. 99
Statement of the case.
per month interest on the following notes: after the maturity
of the same:
1 note for $200, coming due 1st April, 1871.
1 note for $200, " " 1st July, 1871.
1 note for $200, " " 1st Oct., 1871.
"All the above notes being drawn by me in favor William
Hamilton, and indorsed by M. A. Birge and W. H.
Taylor as sureties.
"Witnesses: J. . U.RQUHART.
"J. M. HILL,
" LOUIS COTTON."
The defendant, Birge, in defense, pleaded that the principal,
Urquhart, had, with the knowledge of plaintiff,
made a contract with Hamilton, the payee, for an extension
of time, as the consideration of the promise to pay
the increased rate of interest, without the consent of defendant,
Birge.
Plaintiff, in replication, alleged that no extension of
time was agreed upon, and that the promise by Urquhart
to pay the increased interest was gratuitous and without
consideration, and the claim for the increased interest was
abandoned.
On the trial plaintiff read the three promissory notes described.

The defendant, Birge, read the obligation of Urquhart
for the payment of two per cent. interest per month, and
an extract from the original petition that the contract was
for a valuable consideration.
Urquhart, for Birge, testified that he understood it as an
extension of the time for the payment of the three notes
sued on; that had suit been instituted immediately after
making the contract, he would have defended on this
ground; * * * that it was understood that the two per
cent. was substituted for the rate expressed in the notes;
that Berge is only surety, and had no knowledge of the
contract for increased interest.