57 Miss. 615 | Miss. | 1880
delivered the opinion of the court.
The consideration of the bill of sale of the cotton wholly failed as to Casey. The written instrument recites a consideration, and it is claimed that it is not allowable to contradict the writing in this respect. The rule of exclusion does not apply evidence of failure of consideration. It is not admissible to vary by parol the terms of a valid written instrument. If it has a valid existence, it must stand as the sole expositor of the terms of the contract it evidences; but it is allowable to show by parol that the writing never had validity, or, that having had a legal existence, it has for some reason ceased to be operative. The distinction between sealed and unsealed instruments, as to the right to impeach the consideration, does not exist in this State.
Judgment affirmed.