Page images
PDF
EPUB

are

indemnify the drawer for the liability incurred on his behalf (a).
The words, "au besoin," or, in case of need to Messrs.
often inserted in bills of exchange as an indication to the holder
to present the bill for payment to such parties in case the drawee
should refuse the same. Foreign bills are often drawn with
words such "as per advice," or "without further advice." In
the former case, if the drawee has received no advice, he is jus-
tified in refusing acceptance till he receives it.

SECTION V.

ALTERATIONS IN BILLS AND NOTES.

alteration

Any material alteration on a bill or note after it is issued, as A material in the date, sum, or time of payment, vitiates the instrument, vitiates the inexcept as against the parties consenting to the alteration (b). strument. Thus, altering the word "date" into "sight" (c), or changing the place of payment (d), or adding "and interest at 6 per cent." (e), are sufficient to invalidate a bill or note. So if a joint note be altered into a joint and several, any of the makers objecting, would be discharged, even if the other party consented to the alteration (ƒ).

alteration renders the

new bill.

Any material alteration made on a bill or note after it is a material issued, although with the consent of the parties, makes it a new bill or note, requiring a new stamp, though no fresh stamp could instrument be imposed on it. But that such alteration may vitiate the bill under the Stamp Acts, the bill must be complete and ready to pass into the hands of other parties and available for exchange. When the alteration is immaterial, as where it consists An immaterial merely in the correction of a mistake, or in furtherance of the alteration does apparent intention of the parties, the bill or note will not the contract. be invalidated either at common law or under the Stamp

(a) Nouguier, Traité des Lettres de Change, p. 178.

(b) Master v. Miller, 4 T. R. 320; Davison v. Cooper, 13 M. & W. 343; Outhwaite v. Luntley, 4 Camp. 179; Walton v. Hasting, 4 Camp. 223; Trapp v. Spearman, 3 Esp. 57.

(c) Long v. Moore, 3 Esp. 155, 1 Taunt. 20.

(d) Cowie v. Halsall, 4 B. & Ald.

197; M'Kintosh v. Haydon, Ry. &
M. 362; Desbrow v. Weatherley, 6 C.
& P. 758; Taylor v. Moseley, 6 C. &
P. 273; Burchfield v. Moore, 3 E. &
B. 683.

(e) Warrington v. Easley, 2 E. & P.

763.

(f) Perring v. Hone, 4 Bing. 28; Nicholson v. Revill, 4 A. & E. 675.

not invalidate

into

Acts (a). Thus, changing the words "twenty pound
"twenty pounds," or inserting the words "or order," if omitted
by mistake, are immaterial alterations, not avoiding the bill or
note,

SECTION VI.

IRREVOCABILITY OF BILLS.

A bill of exchange once issued cannot be revoked. The engagement of the drawer is absolute and irrevocable, and he is not excused from the nonperformance of it unless prohibited by the laws of this country. No hindrance interposed to the drawee for the payment of the bill would absolve the drawer from the liabilities arising from the bill (b).

All persons

SECTION VII.

BRITISH LAW.

PARTIES TO BILLS AND NOTES.

All persons capable of contracting, and not legally dis

may be parties qualified, may be parties to bills and notes.

to bills. Infants.

An infant or a person under twenty-one years of age cannot bind himself by bill or note even for necessaries (c). If, however, he accepts a bill after he becomes of age, he would be liable, though the bill was drawn when he was an infant (d). A bill or note made by an infant during his infancy may be ratified when he becomes of age, but such ratification must be in writing, signed by the party to be charged thereon (e). If one of two partners is an infant, the holder of a bill accepted by both partners may declare on it as accepted by the adult only

(a) Kershaw v. Cox, 3 Esp. 246;
Byrom v. Thompson, 11 A. & E. 31;
Farquhar v. Southey, 1 M. & M. 14;
Sanderson v. Symonds, 1 B. & B. 426 ;
Marson v. Petit, 1 Camp. 82.

(b) Mellish v. Simeon, 2 H. Bl. 378;
Tooting v. Hubbart, 3 B. & P. 201;
Pollard v. Herries, 3 B. & P. 340.

(c) Harrison v. Cotgreave, 5 D. & L. 159; 4 C. B. 562; Roberts v. Bethell, 12 C. B. 778; Williamson v. Watts, 1 Camp. 552.

(d) Stevens v. Jackson, 4 Camp. 164; Harrison v. Cliften, 17 L. J. Ex. 233. (e) 9 Geo. 4, c. 14, s. 15.

in the name of both (a). An infant may sue on a bill or note drawn, made, or indorsed in his favour (b).

women.

A married woman cannot bind herself by drawing, accepting, Married or indorsing bills or notes, without authority from her husband (c). Where, however, she is treated as a feme sole, as where she is separated from her husband, or has obtained a judicial separation, or is divorced from her husband, or has a separate maintenance, she may bind herself by bills or notes (d). Where a feme sole has become liable on a bill or note, if she marries the husband becomes responsible upon it, and must be sued jointly with her (e). And when a bill or note is payable to a feme sole, if she marries it becomes her husband's property, and she cannot indorse it over while she is covert, except as agent to her husband (f). The husband may both negotiate it and sue upon it, in the joint names of himself and his wife (g).

Liability of the husband by a feme sole

for bill made

before mar

riage.

Mutual partners for liability of bills, unless they are unnecessary for

In all partnerships for trading purposes each partner is Partners. presumed by law to have authority to draw, make, indorse, or accept bills and notes in the name of the firm for partnership affairs (h). The mutual authority of partners to bind each other by bills and notes is, however, limited to partnerships for trading purposes. Partners not in trade have no authority as regards third persons, to bind the firm by bills and notes (i). Thus, unless it can be shown that it is necessary, or that it is usual, the members of a mining (k), farming concern (), or attorneys acting as partners, cannot bind the rest by drawing or accepting bills (m). But in all cases where this mutual authority is presumed to exist, any private stipula

(a) Burgess v. Merill, 4 Taunt. 468; Glossop v. Coleman, 1 Stark. 25.

(b) Warwick v. Bruce, 2 M. & S. 205; Holliday v. Atkinson, 5 B. & C. 501; Teed v. Elworth, 14 East, 210.

(c) Marshall v. Rutton, 8 T. R. 545; Barlow v. Bishop, East, 432; Cotes v. Davis, 1 Camp. 485.

(d) Marshall v. Rutton, 8 T. R. 545; Lewis v. Lee, 3 B. & C. 291; Hulme v. Tenant, 9 Ves. 189; Stewart v. Lord Kirkwall, 3 Madd. 387.

(e) Mitchinson v. Hewson, 7 T. R. 348.

(f) Rawlinson v. Stone, 3 Wils. 5; Barlow v. Bishop, 1 East, 432.

[blocks in formation]

the business.

To be binding on partners,

the bill must be signed in the name of the firm.

Joint-stock companies.

directors on

on the company.

tion in the deed that one partner shall not draw, indorse, or accept bills for the firm will not affect third persons, except such as had special notice of such limitation (a).

In order that a partner may bind the firm by his signature in a bill or note, he must sign it in the name of the firm. Where one of two partners signs a bill in his own name, the partnership is not bound, though the proceeds were carried to the partnership account (b). Where, however, the name of the individual partners is that of the firm, the signature must be taken as that of the firm (c). And where a partner indorses a bill or note in a name differing from that of the partnership, the firm is not responsible, unless the name, though inaccurate, yet substantially describes the firm, or there be evidence of the consent of the firm to such variation (d). And where a person not a partner accepts a bill drawn on the partnership, and in its name, he may, by making others believe that he is a partner, acquire a personal liability on the bill so accepted (e).

Joint Stock Companies.-The directors or members of jointstock companies, unless expressly authorised by the charter of incorporation or by the deed, have no power to bind the com

pany by bills or notes. That joint-stock companies may be bound by bills or notes, the same must be signed by some persons acting under the express or implied authority of the Bills signed by company. Bills drawn or accepted by directors of joint-stock behalf of com- companies must be drawn and accepted by and in the names pany binding of the directors, and by them expressed to be on behalf of the company (f). When the company is trading with limited liability, the officers signing the bills or notes in behalf of the company must add the word "limited" after the Banking com- name (g). Banking companies of more than six persons, carpanies. rying on the business of banking in London, or within sixtyfive miles thereof, may draw, accept, or indorse bills not being payable on demand (h). Banking companies residing at a

Issue of bank notes payable on demand.

(a) Lord Galway v. Mathew, 10 East,
263; Shirreff v. Wilks, 1 East, 48.
(b) Emly v. Lye, 15 East, 7.

(c) South Carolina Bank v. Case, 8
B. & C. 435.

(d) Williamson v. Johnson, 1 B. & C. 146; Faith v. Richmond, 11 A. &

E. 339; Kirk v. Blurton, 9 M. & W 284.

(e) Gurney v. Evans, 3 H. & N. 122. (f) Aggs v. Nicholson, 1 H. & N. 165; 25 & 26 Vict. c. 89, s. 47.

(g) 25 & 26 Vict. c. 89, ss. 41, 42. (h) 7 & 8 Vict. c. 32, s. 26.

L

greater distance than sixty-five miles from London, may issue their notes, payable on demand, at the place where they are issued, and also in London, or at any other place at which such bill or note is made payable for the sum of £5 or upwards, but such bill or note cannot be re-issued in London, or within sixty-five miles thereof (a). Banking companies of six or fewer than six persons, existing under the Act of 1824, as banks of issue, may issue notes for any sum not less than £5, payable to bearer on demand, or to order, not exceeding seven days' sight or twenty-one days' date, on unstamped paper, except within the City of London, or three miles thereof (b).

Corporations. The right of corporations other than banking Corporations.
corporations to draw, accept, or indorse bills or notes, depends
on the terms of the charter under which they are constituted.
Where no provision exists to that effect, if the nature of their
constitution is such as to render the drawing of bills necessary
for the purpose of the corporation, then it would be implied
that they possessed authority to do those acts without which
the corporation could not exist (c). A general power to
transact all matters requisite for the management of the affairs
of the corporation would not imply the power to make or
indorse bills or notes (d).

A person may draw, accept, or indorse bills or notes by his Agents.
agent or attorney. The power of an agent to draw, accept, or
indorse bills or notes so as to charge his principal, may result
from some general or implied authority, or from a clear and
distinct evidence of his assent or acquiescence (e). But a power
to transact all business does not authorise the agent to negotiate
bills or to indorse them on account of the principal; nor does
an authority to draw import in itself an authority to indorse
bills or notes (f).

An agent acting with a limited authority, and for a particular Agent acting

(a) 3 & 4 Will. 4, c. 98, s. 2.

(b) 9 Geo. 4, c. 23, s. 1; 20 & 21 Vict. c. 49; 7 & 8 Vict. c. 32, ss. 10 -12.

(c) Harmer v. Steele, 4 Exch. 1; 14 M. & W. 831.

(d) Mayor of Ludlow v. Charlton, 6 M. & W. 821.

(e) Saunderson v. Griffith, 5 B. & C. 915.

(ƒ) Fearn v. Filica, 7 M. & G. 513; Murray v. East India Company, 5 B. & Ald. 204; Higg v. Smith, 1 Taunt. 347; Robinson v. Yarrow, 7 Taunt. 457; Lee v. Zagury, 8 Taunt. 114.

with limited

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »