tion of this work. Under the statute a presentment is not sufficient unless it be made at a proper place as prescribed in such section of the statute.

e. To whom made. The statute declares that presentment for payment must be made to the person primarily liable on the instrument, or if he is absent or inaccessible, to any person found at the place where the presentment is made. This proposition is, without doubt, supported by the authority of the courts and is general in its application. Presentment for payment to partners is regulated by a subsequent section of the statute and will be considered hereafter; and such is also the case in respect to presentment to several persons not partners primarily liable on an instrument. And if the principal debtor is dead, and no place of payment is specified, presentment must be made to his personal representative. If the acceptor of a bill is absent from his place of business, demand of his clerk or bookkeeper is sufficient.9 And it has been held that where a note was signed by "A., Agent" and bore on its face nothing to indicate who the principal was, that a demand of payment of the agent was sufficient to bind the principal, although at the time the note fell due the agency of A. had terminated.10 Where an instrument is made payable at a bank or at any other particular place no presentment or demand is necessary, as it is sufficient if the note or bill is at that place ready to be delivered up to the party calling for and prepared to pay it.11 A presentment to the clerk of an acceptor

9. Gardner v. Bank of Tennessee, 1 Swan (Tenn.), 420; Decatur Branch Bank v. Hodges, 17 Ala. 42. In the case of Luning v. Wise, 64 Cal. 410, 1 Pac. 495, where A., who held a power of attorney from B., a resident of another State, signed a note in his own behalf, and also in B.'s behalf, it was held that an indorser was liable, though the note was not presented to B. for payment.

10. Hall v. Bradbury, 40 Conn. 32. In the case of Stinson v. Lee, 68 Miss. 113, 8 South. 272, 24 Am. St. Rep. 257, 9 L. R. A. 830, it was held that in order to render an indorser liable on a

note signed by one who affixes the word agent" to his name, without disclosing his principal, payment must be demanded of, and refused by, the agent; and that demand on the principal is not sufficient. See, generally, on this subject, Brown v. Turner, 15 Ala. 832; Commercial Bank v. St. Croix Mfg. Co., 23 Me. 280.

11. 1 Parsons on Notes and Bills, p. 365. In the case of Magoun v. Walker, 49 Me. 419, it was held that to charge the indorser of a note payable at a bank it must be shown that the note was at the bank, or payment of it was demanded there on the day when it fell due; it is not sufficient to show that payment was demanded of the cashier of the bank. See also Hunt v. Maybee, 7 N. Y. 266, where it was held that when the instrument designates the maker's place of business as the

or promisor, at his counting-house, or place of business, has been held sufficient without showing any special authority given him under such circumstances.12

§ 93. Proper place of presentment.

a. Statutory provision.— The Negotiable Instruments Law contains the following provision: "Presentment for payment is "made at the proper place:

"1. Where a place of payment is specified in the instrument and it is there presented;

"2. Where no place of payment is specified, but the address "of the person to make payment is given in the instrument and "it is there presented;

"3. Where no place of payment is specified and no address is "given and the instrument is presented at the usual place of business or residence of the person to make payment;

"4. In any other case if presented to the person to make pay"ment wherever he can be found, or if presented at his last known place of business or residence." 13 This is the same as a provision contained in the English Bills of Exchange Act, with some difference in language, but none in effect.14

b. Where place of payment is specified.— The rule declared in the statute is that which exists at common law; it is well established that a presentment for payment at the place specified in the instrument is a proper presentment, and if no person is found at such place with authority to pay the instrument the presentment will be sufficient, in case of nonpayment, to bind the indorsers.15 Cases arise where the drawer of a bill of exchange

place of payment, a demand made there of a person who states himself to be the maker is sufficient.

12. Stewart v. Elden, 2 Caines (N. Y.), 121, 2 Am. Dec. 222; Draper v. Clemens, 4 Mo. 52; Stainback v. Bank of Virginia, 11 Gratt. (Va.) 260.

13. Neg. Inst. L. (N. Y.), § 133. For the same provision in the statutes of other States see Appendix.

14. English Bills of Exchange Act, 1882, 45 (4).

15. Presentment at place specified in instrument. In the case of Buxton v. Jones, 1 Man. & Gr. (Eng.) 83, a bill of exchange was presented for payment at the door of the house where the drawee was described as liv ing, to a lodger who was coming from

the passage of the house into the
street. The drawee had removed to
another residence, known to the oc-
cupier of the house, but not to the
lodger; and it was not shown that he
had left funds for payment.
It was
held that the presentment was suffi-
cient to maintain the affirmative of an
issue raised on the due presentment
of the bill in an action against an in-
dorser. See also Boydell v. Harkness,
3 C. B. (Eng.) 168; Selby v. Eden, 3
Bing. (Eng.) 611; Fayle v. Bird, 6
B. & C. (Eng.) 531.

In New York it has been held that no cause of action arises against an indorser of a promissory note, payable on demand at a place specified, until demand is made in compliance with

designates in the instrument the place of payment, and the decisions are that in such a case both the drawer and the indorser will be discharged unless the bill be there presented for payment at maturity; but the same decisions hold otherwise as to the maker of a note and the acceptor of a bill, the rule being that, unless the restrictive words "only and not elsewhere," or words of similar import, are added, no presentment there at maturity or afterward is necessary to charge such a party." Where an in(U. S.) 171; Sebree v. Dorr, 9 Wheat. (U. S.) 558.

strument is made payable generally in a city or town without specifying any particular place therein where payment is to be made, it will be sufficient to present the instrument to the maker or acceptor at his place of business or residence, if he have any therein; if he have neither place of business nor of residence, then if the holder of the instrument is at the place where it is in general made payable, on the day of payment, with the instrument, ready to receive payment, it is sufficient to constitute a presentment and demand.17 The parties to a note may agree orally, in such a case, that the note shall be payable at a particular place so far as to make a demand of payment at that place sufficient to bind the indorser.18

c. Where place of payment is not specified, but address of person is given. Where the address of the drawee of a bill is given in a bill, or that of the maker is added as a memorandum under his name, in the absence of a specified place of payment, the bill or note should be presented at such address. This is the rule of the statute, and is also that generally established in commercial law.19 And where a holder of a note before transferring it adds to the name of the maker a memorandum of his address without the maker's knowledge, he will be bound upon his indorsement by a demand made by a subsequent holder at the address so given.

20

17. Meyer v. Hibsher, 47 N. Y. 265. See also Woodworth v. Bank of America, 19 Johns. (N. Y.) 391; King v. Holmes, 11 Pa. St. 456; Malden Bank v. Baldwin, 13 Gray (2 (Mass.), 154. And see Wood v. Rosendale, 18 Ohio Cir. Ct. 247, where a note due four years from date at "Fostoria, Ohio," and the maker prior to the maturity of the note had moved from such place, it was held that the payee, who afterward became an indorser, must have contemplated a possible change of residence by the maker and to have assumed to be governed, in making presentment, by the exercise of such diligence as change of residence and circumstances might require.

Where a bill of exchange is directed to the drawee in a city generally, it can be made payable by the drawee by his acceptance at a particular place in such city. Troy City Bank v. Lauman, 19 N. Y. 477, 481.

19. Presentment at address of drawee or maker. In the case of Hine v. Alley, 1 N. & M. (Eng.) 433, a holder of a bill carried it, when due, to the residence of the acceptor as stated in the bill, found the house closed, and inquired for the acceptor in the neighborhood, but could not hear of him; held that the bill was dishonored. But in an early English case of Saunderson v. Judge, 2 H. Bl. 509, where the place of payment was mentioned in a memorandum beneath the maker's name, it was held that the memorandum was directory only, and that presentment at the place named was not necessary, although it is assumed that a presentment at such place would bind an indorser.

20. Farnsworth v. Mullen, 164 Mass, 112, 41 N. E. 131.

d. Where place of payment or address is not specified.— By the terms of the statute and also under the general rule, where no place of payment is specified, and no address is given, presentment may be properly made at the usual place of business or residence of the person primarily liable on the instrument.21 Where the maker of a note has no place of business, presentment should be made at his residence;22 and in such case a demand at such residence is sufficient, although the maker is not at home.23 If the principal debtor has a place of business, and presentment is made at his residence and he is not at home, the instrument should also be presented at such place of business if known to the holder,24 although, under the statute, this would seem unnecessary to bind the indorser. The character of the office is immaterial if it appears that the principal debtor customarily transacts his business there, and that it is his principal place of business.25 It has been held that where the maker of a note has changed his residence, the holder, after making diligent inquiry to ascertain his new residence, and being unable to ascertain it, may present the note at his former residence.26 But the abandonment of his place of business by a maker of a note prior to its maturity will not permit of a proper presentment and demand at the place abandoned, where it appears that he has a residence in the place which is known, or which could, with reasonable diligence, have been ascertained.27 It has been held that the maker's removal from the State before maturity, and his continued residence without

21. Levy v. Drew, 14 Ark. 334; Bank of Red Oak v. Orvis, 42 Iowa, 691; Jarvis v. Garnett, 39 Mo. 268; West v. Brown, 6 Ohio St. 542; Kirk patrick v. McCullough, 3 Humph. (Tenn.) 171, 39 Am. Dec. 158; Apperson v. Bynum, 5 Coldw. (Tenn.) 341; Wallace v. Crilley, 46 Wis. 577, 1 N. W. 301.

22. Bank of Red Oak v. Orvis, 42 Iowa, 691; Jarvis v. Garnett, 39 Mo. 268; Apperson v. Bynum, 5 Coldw. (Tenn.) 341.

23. Bank of Red Oak v. Orvis, 42 Iowa, 691.

24. Kirkpatrick v. McCullough, 3 Humph. (Tenn.) 171, 39 Am. Dec. 158. But see Fields v. Mallett, 10 N. C. 465.

25. In the case of West v. Brown, 6 Ohio St. 542, it was held that demand of payment of a promissory note,

made at an office where the maker received business calls, and directed them to be made (he having no other place of business in the city), is sufficient, although the same office was the place of business of other persons. See also Bateson v. Clark, 37 Mo. 31; Sussex Bank v. Baldwin, 17 N. J. L. 487; Winans v. Davis, 18 N. J. L. 276.

26. Central Bank v. Allen, 16 Me. 41. If the maker before maturity changes his residence to another place within the State, demand must be made either at his new domicile, or personally, to charge the indorser. Bigelow v. Kellar, 6 La. Ann. 59, 54 Am. Dec. 555.

27. Reinke v. Wright, 93 Wis. 368, 67 N. W. 737; Talbot v. National Bank, 129 Mass. 67, 37 Am. Rep. 302: Trease v. Haggin, 107 Iowa, 458, 78 N. W. 58.