« 이전계속 »
liable thereon may, with the consent of the holder, intervene and accept the bill supra protest for the honor of any party liable thereon or for the honor of the person for whose account the bill is drawn. The acceptance for honor may be for part only of the sum for which the bill is drawn, and where there has been an acceptance for honor for one party, there may be a further acceptance by a different person for the honor of another party."
It will be noticed that there can be no acceptance for honor until after protest.
There is no case in this State involving an acceptance for honor; and only one on payment for honor (Gazzam v. Armstrong, 3 Dana 554) which will be referred to under the next article.
§ 162. Acceptance For Honor — Requisites.-"An acceptance for honor supra protest must be in writing and indicate that it is an acceptance for honor, and must be signed by the acceptor for honor.”
§ 163. General Acceptance For Honor Deemed For Honor of Drawer.-"Where an acceptance for honor does not expressly state for whose honor it is made, it is deemed to be an acceptance for the honor of the drawer."
§ 164. To Whom Acceptor For Honor Liable—"The acceptor for honor is liable to the holder and to all parties to the bill subsequent to the party for whose honor he has accepted."
$ 165. Engagement of Acceptor For Honor.-"The acceptor for honor by such acceptance engages that he will, on due presentment, pay the bill according to the terms of his acceptance, provided it shall not have been paid by the drawee, and provided also, that it shall have been duly presented for payment and protested for non-payment and notice of dishonor given to him.”
$ 166. Maturity of Bill Payable After Sight Accepted For 'Honor.—“When a bill payable after sight is accepted for honor, its maturity is calculated from the date of the noting for non-acceptance, and not from the date of the acceptance for honor."
§ 167. Bill Accepted For Honor, Etc., Must Be Protested for Non-payment.-"Where a dishonored bill has been accepted or honor supra protest or contains a reference in case of need, it must be protested for non-payment before it is presented for payment to the acceptor for honor or referee in case of need.”
§ 168. Presentment For Payment to ACceptor For Honor.—“Presentment for payment to the acceptor for honor must be made as follows:
(1) "If it is to be presented in the place where the protest for non-payment was made, it must be presented not later than the day following its maturity.
(2) "If it is to be presented in some other place than the place where it was protested, then it must be forwarded within the time specified in Section 104."
§ 169. Excuse For Delay in Presentment to Acceptor For Honor.--"The provisions of Section 81 apply where there is delay in making presentment to the acceptor for honor or referee in case of need."
§ 170. Dishonor by Acceptor For Honor - Protest.-"When the bill is dishonored by the acceptor for honor, it must be protested for non-payment by him."
PAYMENT FOR HONOR.
Section 171. Who may pay for honor.
172. Requisites of payment for honor. 173. Declaration before payment for
honor. 174. Preference of parties offering to
pay for honor.
ment for honor.
§ 171. Who May Pay For Honor.“Where a bill has been protested for non-payment, any person may intervene and pay it supra protest for the honor of any person liable thereon or for the honor of the person for whose account it was drawn."
The only case involving a payment for honor in this State is Gazzam v. Armstrong, 3 Dana 554. The facts in this case were that on the 1st of December, 1832, James Adams, Jr. & Co. drew a bill on Armstrong payable four months after
date to the order of Darlington at the Branch Bank of the United States at Cincinnati. It was indorsed by Darlington, accepted by Armstrong and sold to the Branch Bank of the United States at Pittsburg, which forwarded it to the Cincinnati bank for collection. The bill fell due on April 1, 1833, but days of grace extended this to April 4. Adams wrote Gazzam asking him to take up the bill, offering to secure him by an acceptance, but also telling him he could look to Armstrong's acceptance until he was paid. On the 3rd of April and before protest Gazzam paid and took up the bill, but without any declaration of his motive or object in doing so. Gazzam sued the acceptor, Armstrong, and failed to recover. In affirming the judgment the Court held he could not recover because, first, the payment was not made after protest (Sec. 171) ; second, because at the time of payment he did not declare that he paid it for the honor of the acceptor (Sec. 173); third, that his only recourse was against the drawer, and that because of his request; lastly, it held that waiving all these questions, Gazzam could only succeed to the rights of the drawer, that the drawer in that case could not recover against the acceptor because the acceptor had accepted for the accommodation of the drawer.