1. Either to the post-office nearest to his place of residence, or to the post-office where he is accustomed to receive his letters; or

2. If he live in one place, and have his place of business in another, notice may be sent to either place; or

3. If he is sojourning in another place, notice may be sent to the place where is so sojourning.

§ 166. Same: Illustrations. If the indorser were a farmer, who, to suit his convenience, received his mail at the one of two neighboring post-offices more distant from his home, notice might properly be sent to either under Rule 1. Rule 2 would apply to the case of an indorser residing in a suburban town whose place of business is in a large city. An example of Rule 3 is the case (27) of a notice sent to Daniel Webster at Washington, while he was there attending to his duties as a United States senator, although his legal residence and office were in Boston. It was held that the notice addressed to Washington, the place of his temporary residence or sojourning, was sufficient, the court saying:

"The ground relied upon to show that such notice was not sufficient is that the defendant's general domicile and place of business were in the city of Boston, where he had at all times an agent, who had the charge and management of his affairs. The defendant, though his domicile was at Boston, was actually resident at Washington, in discharge of his public duties as a senator, at a session of Congress called by public proclamation, and continued until after

(27) Chouteau v. Daniel Webster, 6 Metcalf, 1 (Mass.).

the time at which this notice was sent; so that the place where he might be presumed to be actually residing was fixed and well known by the nature of these duties. Under these circumstances, the court are of the opinion that notice to the defendant by mail, addressed to him at Washington, was good and sufficient notice of the dishonor of these notes. This decision is founded on the circumstances of the particular case, and may be varied by other facts. It is not like a case of a merchant stopping for a day or two at a hotel or watering-place, or on a journey of business or pleasure."

§ 167. When notice dispensed with or delay excused. If, within the regular period for sending notice, the necessary data to enable the holder to give proper notice cannot, after the exercise of reasonable diligence, be ascertained, a delay is excused. But, "when the cause of delay ceases to operate, notice must be given with reasonable diligence" (28). In Gladwell v. Turner (28a) it appeared that the bill was drawn by the defendant on one Welsh, at three months after date, duly accepted, and afterwards indorsed to one Smith, who indorsed it to the plaintiff. It became due on Friday the 17th of September, 1869, and was presented on that day to Welsh by the plaintiff, but was dishonored. All the parties to the bill lived in London. On the day following its dishonor, the plaintiff, with a view of giving notice to the defendant, and being ignorant of his address, applied to Smith for information. Smith was from home; but later on the same day, at about

(28) Neg. Inst. Law, sec. 113.

(28a) L. R. 5 Ex. 59.

half-past five in the afternoon, the plaintiff went to him again, and obtained the defendant's address. He posted his notice of dishonor the same evening, but not until after six o'clock. The consequence was that it was not received by the defendant until Monday, the 20th of September. If it had been posted before six, the defendant would, in the ordinary course of the London postal delivery, have received it on Saturday evening. The court held the delay in giving notice excused, saying:

"The holder of a bill is not bound, omissis omnibus aliis negotiis, to devote himself to giving notice of its dishonor. He must, however, use due and reasonable diligence, or the notice will be too late. Now here, unless we are prepared to say as a matter of law that the plaintiff was under an absolute necessity of writing and posting his notice in the half hour which elapsed from his discovery of the defendant's address and six o'clock, I am of opinion that there was evidence of sufficiently reasonable diligence, both in discovering the address and in posting the notice. The notice was therefore in time."

If the address which the holder ascertains after diligent inquiry is incorrect, notice sent there is sufficient, though it is never received. And if the holder's diligence does not result in information as to the indorser's whereabouts, or a proper place of address, notice is unnecessary. The N. I; L. says:

Sec. 112. Notice of dishonor is dispensed with, when, after the exercise of reasonable diligence, it cannot be given to or does not reach the parties sought to be charged.

SECTION 4. PROTEST.

§ 168. Necessity for protest. The conditional liability of the drawer and indorsers of promissory notes and of inland bills of exchange is fixed by a due presentment and due notice of dishonor. But in the case of foreign bills of exchange, an additional act must be performed by the holder in order to charge the drawer and indorsers. He must protest the bill.

§ 169. Inland and foreign bills. An inland bill is one drawn and payable in the same state. A foreign bill is one drawn in one state and payable in another. Thus, a draft drawn in Wisconsin, directing payment to be made in Chicago, is a foreign bill. In case neither the place of drawing nor the place of payment appears from the face of the bill, the holder may treat the instrument as an inland bill (29). This option is given the holder in order to relieve him from the necessity of determining at his peril whether or not a protest is necessary.

§ 170. Requisites of protest. The first step in protesting a bill of exchange is its formal presentment for acceptance or payment, as the case may be; the second, is "noting" the dishonor; and the third, the preparation and execution of the certificate of protest. Each of the steps must be taken by a notary public (30). The presentment by the notary must be in accordance with the ordinary rules governing presentment (31). The "noting" is the making by the notary of a memorandum on the bill of

(29) Neg. Inst. Law, sec. 129.

(30) N. I. L., sec. 154; Ocean Bank v. Williams, 102 Mass. 141. (31) See §§ 141-52, above.

the facts later to be incorporated in the certificate of protest. The "noting" must be made on the same day as the presentment and dishonor. If the certificate is executed by the notary upon the day of presentment, there is no occasion for a "noting." But either the "noting" or the certificate itself must be made on that day (32). If the certificate is not then executed, "the protest may be subsequently extended as of the date of the noting" (33). The requisites of the certificate of protest, called the "protest," which is a document signed and sealed by the notary who presented the bill, are stated in the N. I. L.:

Sec. 153. The protest must be annexed to the bill, or must contain a copy thereof, and must be under the hand and seal of the notary making it, and must specify; 1. The time and place of presentment;

2. The fact that presentment was made and the manner thereof;

3. The cause or reason for protesting the bill;

4. The demand made and the answer given, if any, or the fact that the drawee or acceptor could not be found.

(32) Neg. Inst. Law, sec. 155.

(33) N. I. L., sec. 155.