페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

a payment made to a bona fide purchaser from such thief or finder, although made by the acceptor or maker with knowledge of the original loss of the instrument." But a payment made through negligence to one who is neither the rightful holder nor a bona fide purchaser before maturity, after notice of loss, will not be sufficient.' And it has been held that payment made to the bearer of an instrument, which is so payable, will not be sufficient, if made under suspicious circumstances and incautiously; e. g. where the bill has been pieced together and is badly soiled.11

Payment to Designated Payee.

$ 1445. If the paper is payable to a person named, without words of transfer, it should be paid to such payee. 12 And it cannot be shown by parol evidence that the parties agreed, at the time of making the note, that it should be paid to another person.13 It may be paid to the payee, who is named, although he is described as an official or agent. 14 But, where a note is payable in Indiana

9 Chit. Bills, 416; 2 Edw. Bills & X. $ 731; Story, Bills, § 416; Bevan v. Hill, 2 Camp. 381; Pierson v. Hutchinson, Id. 211, 6 Esp. 126.

10 Chit. Bills, 416; 2 Edw. Bills & N. $ 731; 2 Pars. Notes & B. 212; Lovell 1. Martin, 4 Taunt. 799. So, where the payment was made after maturity. Bainbridge v. City of Louisville, 83 Ky. 285; Hinckley v. Railroad Co., 129 Mass. 52; Coffman v. Bank, 41 Miss. 212.

11 Byles, Bills, 224; 2 Pars. Notes & B. 213; Scholey v. Ramsbottom, 2 Camp. 485. And the negligence or suspicion must not be such as to amount to fraud. Story, Bills, $ 416.

12 Chit. Bills, 144; Sigourney v. Lloyd, 8 Barn. & C. 629, 3 Man. & Ry. 58, and 5 Bing. 52). And see, as to post-office orders, Fine Art Soc. v. Union Bank, 17 Q. B. Div. 70.3, although the statute for some purposes dispenses with indorsement. And payment by mistake, to a wrong person of the same name as the payee, will not discharge the acceptor, although such person was in possession of the bill. Benj. Chalm. Dig. art. 236. But, if the payee's name was fictitious, payment to one actually bearing the name would be good as against a holder claiming in the fictitious name. Anonymous, 12 Mod. 561.

13 Dra per v. Rice, 56 lowa, 114, 7 N. W. 524, and 8 N. W. 797. But evidence of want of interest in the payee is admissible. Netterville v. Stevens, 2 How. (Miss.) 612.

14 The real ownership being a question between the principal and the agent, Durfee v. Morris, 49 Mo. 55.

to an administrator appointed in Illinois, it cannot be paid to a different administrator appointed in Indiana.15 So, it will not be sufficient to show that a bill has been paid by the drawer to the acceptor after maturity and after its transfer to a bona fide holder; 18 or that it has been paid by the acceptor to the drawer, without proof of the drawer's ownership.17

By the Code Napoleon, it is sufficient if a note or bill is paid to the holder at maturity.18 But many foreign statutes provide that the holder must be identified, if the payor requires it.' And provision is made in some countries for a stay of payment by the court; e. g. in case of loss of the bill.20 And, to constitute a defense against a bona fide holder of the bill before maturity, payment must be inade to the person holding the part that has been accepted.21

[ocr errors]

15 Although accounted for in Indiana by the Indiana administrator, McCord r. Thompson, 92 Ind, 563.

16 Coffman v. Bank. 41 Miss. 212.

17 Irrespective of the state of the accounts between the drawer and the indorsee by discounts and counter-discounts, Agra v. Leighton, L. R. 2 Exch. 56.

14 FRANCE (Code Com. art. 145); ITALY (Code Com. art. 230); NICARAGCA (Code Com. art. 275).

19 ARGENTINE REPUBLIC (Code Com. art. 870); BOLIVIA (Code Com. art. 393); CHILI (Code Com. art. 715); COLOMBIA (Code Com. art. 453); COSTA RICA (Code Com. art. 446); ECUADOR (Code Com., as in "Spain"); GREAT BRITAIN (Bills of Exchange Act, $ 59); MEXICO (Code Com. art. 391); NICARAGUA (Code Com. art. 275); PERU (Code Com. art. 133); SALVADOR (Code Com. art. 159); SPAIN (Code Com. art. 499); URUGUAY (Code Com. art. 887).

20 HOLLAND (Exch. Law, art. 161), Payment may be stayed a bill is lost or stolen, or if the holder becomes bankrupt, in BELGIUM (Code Yap.); ('HILI (Code Com. art. 716); FRANCE (Coda Com. art. 149); ITALY (Code Com. art. 23.3); NICARAGUA (Code Com. art. 276); URUGUAY (Code Com. arts. SS4, 885). In other states it may be stayed only where the bill is lost or stolen. ARGENTINE REPUBLIC (Code Com. arts. 867, 868); BOLIVIA "l'ode ('om, art. 404); COLOMBIA (Code Com. arts. 450, 451); COSTA RICA (('ode Com. arts. 443, 441); ECUADOR (Code Com., as in "Spain"); MEXICO (Code Com. arts. 388, 389); PERU (Code Com. arts. 450, 451); SALVADOR (Code Com. arts. 496, 497); SPAIN (Code Com. arts. 496, 197).

21 ARGENTINE REPUBLIC (Code Com. art. 865); BELGIUM (Code Nap.); BOLIVIA (Code Com. art. 398); CHILI (Code Com. art. 719); COSTA RICA (Code Com. art. 450); ECUADOR (Code Com., as in "Spain"); FRANCE (Code Com, art. 148); GREECE (Code Nap.); HAYTI (Code Nap.); HOLLAND Payment to Joint Payees.

§ 1446. Payment of a bill or note may be made to either of sev. eral joint payees, 22 or to the survivor of them, 23 or it may be made to any partner of a firm of payees.24 And a part payment made to one partner, and indorsed by him, on a note belonging to his firm, cannot be disavowed by the firm, although made by crediting an individual debt of the partner.25 Even where a check is made payable to a firm of partners designated as "Assignees of P.," and is deposited by the surviving partner to his own private account, it will be sufficient, unless the drawee had reason to know that the check was misapplied.26 But if a note, payable to a firm, is indorsed by it to one of the partners, it cannot afterwards be paid to another partner after notice to the maker. 27

Payment of a bill or note, payable to a firm, will inure to the firm, if made to one of the partners after its dissolution.28 And payment to one partner is notice of the payment to all, and the maker will not, in such case, be estopped by his subsequent statement to another partner, to the effect that the note was not paid, although such partner had no actual notice of payment and relied on the statement.29 A partner has, however, no authority to receive currency

(Exch. Law, art. 160); ITALY (Code Com. art. 23:3); MEXICO (Code Com. art. 395); NICARAGUA (Code Com. art. 279); PERU (Code Com. art. 458);. PORTUGAL (Code Com. art. 382); SALVADOR (Code Com. art. 456); SAN DOMINGO (Code Nap.); SPAIN (Code Com. art. 303); TURKEY (Code Nap.); URUGUAY (Code Com. art. 883); VENEZUELA (Code Com. art. 61).

22 Wright v. Ware, 58 Ga. 150. And such payment inures to the benefit of co-payees, and cannot be afterwards applied otherwise, by agreement between the maker and the payee who receives it. Frost v. Martin, 26 N. H. 422.

23 Especially if he is also sole devisee of the deceased owner, Perry v. Perry's Ex'rs, 98 Ky, 242, 32 S. W. 755; and irrespective of the equitable rights of the deceased payee, Allen v. Tate, 58 Miss. JS5.

24 Chit. Bills, 444; 2 Pars. Notes & B. 209; Duff v. East India Co., 15 Ves. 213.

25 Craig v. Hulschizer, 34 N. J. Law, 363.
26 Stewart v. Lee, Moody & M. 160.
27 Stevenson v. Woodhull, 19 Fed. 575.
28 Gannett v. Cunningham, 31 Me. 56.
29 Bigelow v. Henniger, 33 Kan. 362, 6 Pac. 393.

for a bill or note payable in gold; and, in accounting for the pay ment, he will be charged with the full amount that he should have received. 30

Payment to Persons under Disability. $ 1447. At common law, a bill or note payable to a married woman could not be paid to her without the consent of her husband.31 And, although the instrument was payable to a single woman, yet, if she afterwards married, payment to her would not be good, although made without notice of the marriage.32 On the other hand, as the law now stands in most of the United States, it is not sufficient to pay to the husband a bill or note which is made payable to the wife.$3

In general, payment should not be made to a person who is under legal disability of any sort. Thus, if a bill or note is payable to an infant, it should be paid to his guardian, although it is said that payment to the infant himself would be valid, if it was beneficial to himself.34 And the guardian of an infant cannot take his own note in payment of a debt due to his ward,35 or receive as payment a credit on account of an individual debt of his own.36

If the instrument is payable to one who is non compos mentis, payment made to him with knowledge of the appointment of a guardian will be invalid, although he is in possession of the paper.37 So, too, a payment made to the agent of a lunatic, who is in possession of the note; the legal title being in the guardian, and the maker having notice of the payee's lunacy.38

30 Honore v. Colmesnil, 1 J. J. Marsh. (Ky.) 506, 520. 31 Byles, Bills, 69; Chit. Bills, 444; 2 Daniel, Neg. Inst. 260; 2 Pars. Notes & B. 211; Barlow v. Bishop, 1 East, 432, 3 East, 226; Thrasher v. Tuttle, 22 Me. 335. And see § 321, supra.

32 Story, Bills, $ 413. And a note made to a married woman might be paid to her husband, even after a divorce a mensa et thoro. Dean v. Richmond, 5 Pick. (Mass.) 461.

33 Carver v. Carrer, 53 Ind. 241; unless the husband was the real party in interest, Dunn v. Hornbeck, 72 N. Y. 80, affirming 7 Hun (N. Y.) 629.

34 Chit. Bills, 444; Story, Bills, $ 414.
35 Heftin v. Beris, 82 Ind. 388.
3e Baughn v. Shackleford, 48 Miss. 255.
37 Leonard v. Leonard, 14 Pick. (Mass.) 280.
39 Tarpley v. McWhorter, 56 Ga. 410.

The subject of payment to an alien enemy has been already considered in an earlier chapter 39

Payment may be made to a bankrupt before commission of bankruptcy actually issued, if it is made in good faith. But such payment will be insufficient, if made with knowledge that an act of bankruptcy has been committed, *1 or that a receiver has been appointed." So, too, after a judicial order for payment to a creditor of the payee.43 After an assignment in bankruptcy by the payee, it will be sufficient to make payment to the assignee.44

Payment to Executor.

§ 1448. Where the payee is dead, the bill or note must be paid 10 his personal representative. 45 But if the will has been admitted to probate, and an executor appointed, payment to such executor will be valid, although the probate is afterwards annulled, and the will declared to be a forgery. 46 And, where the executor named in a will has died, it has been held to be sufficient in equity to make payment to his administrator.47 And a tender made to a foreign administrator, on condition of indemnity being given by him, has been held to be sufficient to stop the running of interest on a note,

39 See $ 2.5), supra.

40 Chit. Bills, 147; 6 Geo. IV. c. 16; 2 & 3 Vict. c. 29; Coles v. Robins, 3 Camp. 183.

41 Kitchen v. Bartsch, 7 East, 33, 1 Bos. & P. 378. And a check cannot be paid by the drawee bank without inquiry after notice that the drawer 11:18 made an assignment (although it did not know that the check was drawn after the assignment and dated back), and the assignee may recover against the bank. Chaffee v. Bank, 40 Ohio St. 1.

42 O'Connor v. Bank, 54 Hun, 272, 7 N. Y. Supp. 380. 43 Rice v. Jones, 103 N. C. 226, 9 S. E. 571.

44 Chit. Bills, 145; 2 Edw. Bills & N. § 743; Tennant v. Strachan. Moody & M. 377, 4 Car. & P. 31. And payment to the assignee of an insolvent payee is good as against a purchaser after maturity, notwithstanding an injunction against payment. Kelley v. (owing, 4 Hill (N. Y:) 260.

45 But an executor has no authority to receive payment in goods or property. Means v. Harrison, 114 Ill. 218, 2 X. E. 64.

46 Chit. Bills, 444; Allen v. Dundas, 3 Term R. 125.

47 Barker v. Talcot, 1 Vern. 473; Catherwood v. Chabaud, 1 Barn. & C. 130. 2 Dowl. & R. 271.

« 이전계속 »