BILLS and notes are usually, but it is apprehended not necessarily, written on paper. It is conceived that they might be written on parchment, cloth, leather, or any other substitute for paper capable of being transferred from hand to hand.

They may be written in any language, and in any form of words.

A bill or note, or any other contract, may be written in pencil, as well as in ink. "There is," says Abbott, C. J., "no authority for saying, that when the law requires a contract to be in writing, that writing must be in ink. There is not any great danger that our decision will induce individuals to adopt the mode of writing by pencil in preference to that in general use. The imperfection of this mode of writing, its liability to obliteration, and the impossibility of proving it when so obliterated, will prevent its being generally adopted."(a) Contracts written in pencil have been admitted *at Nisi Prius,(6) and testamentary writings often in the Ecclesiastical Courts.(c)

[ *57]

The signature or indorsement of negotiable instruments may be by a mark.(d)

It is proper, though not necessary, to superscribe the name of the place where the bill or note is made.

But a check on a bank must, unless stamped as a bill, express the place where drawn, and such place must be written within fifteen miles of the banker's place of business.(e)

The 9 Geo. 4, c. 65, prohibits the circulation of all negotiable notes or bills under 5l. or on which less than 57. shall remain undischarged, payable to bearer on demand, and which were made, or purport to be

(a) Geary v. Physic, 5 B. & C. 234; 7 Dow. & R. 653, S. C.

(b) Jeffery v. Walton, 1 Stark. 267.

(c) Rhymes v. Clarkson, 1 Phil. 22; Green v. Shipworth, 1 Phil. 53; Dickenson v. Dickenson, 2 Phil. 173.

(d) George v. Surrey, 1 M. & M. 516.

(e) 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, s. 13; 9 Geo. 4 c. 49, s. 15. See the Chapter on Checks.

made, in Scotland, or Ireland, or elsewhere, out of England, under the penalty of 201., to be recovered in a summary way.

Neither is a date in general essential to the validity of a bill or note; and, if there be no date, it will be considered as dated at the time it was made.(f) And if in pleading it be stated to have been drawn on a particular day, but the declaration does not state the date appearing on the bill, that is sufficient of a motion in arrest of judgment or on demurrer.(g)

The date expressed in the instrument is (except when it is tendered by assignees of a bankrupt as evidence of a petitioning creditor's debt,(h)) prima facie evidence of the time when thein strument was made.(i)

Promissory notes, payable to bearer on demand, must not have printed dates under the penalty of 50l.(j)

*In general, a bill or note may be post dated.(k) But if [*58] this is done so as to postpone the time of payment beyond the period of two months after the making, or so as to make it in effect payable at a longer interval than sixty days after sight, and thus evade the higher scale of duty for bills at long dates, a penalty of 1007. is incurred, (2) and the instrument is inadmissible in evidence.(m)

But an unstamped bill or note issued by bankers under the provisions of 9 Geo. 4, c. 23, must not be post dated, under the penalty of 1007.(n)

All negotiable bills, notes, or drafts, for 208. or any sum between

(f) De la Courtier v. Bellamy, 2 Show. 422; Hague v. French, 3 B. & P. 173; Giles v. Bourn, 6 M. & Sel. 73; 2 Chit. R. 300, S. C.

(g) Ibid.

(h) Wright v. Lainson, 2 M. & W. 739; 6 Dowl. 146, S. C.; see post.

(i) Anderson v. Weston, 6 Bing. N. C. 296; 8 Scott, 853, S. C.; Taylor v. Kinloch, 1 Stark. 175; Obbard v. Betham, 1 M. & M. 486; Smith v. Battens, 1 M. & Rob. 341; but see Cowie v. Harris, 1 M. & M. 141; 4 M. & P. 722, S. C.; Rose v. Rowcroft, 4 Camp. 245. And this rule applies to written documents in general. Sinclair v. Baggaley, 4 M. & W. 312; Davies v. Lowndes, 7 Scott's New Rep. 213; Potez v. Glossop, 2 Exch. Rep. 195; Harrison v. Clifton, 17 L. J. 233, Exch. (j) 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, s. 18.

(k) Pasmore v. North, 13 East, 517.

(1) 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, s. 12.

(m) Field v. Woods, 6 Dow. 23; 7 Ad. & El. 114; 2 N. & P. 117, S. C.; Serle v. Norton, 9 M. & W. 309.

(n) s 12.

208. and 57. must bear date before or at the time of issuing, under the penalty of 201.(o)

Post dating a check invalidates it, and subjects to a penalty of 1007.(p)

The usual allegation that a bill or note was made on a particular day is not matter of description, and the day need not be proved as laid.(q) It would be otherwise if the declaration went on to describe the instrument as bearing date on a particular day.

The sum for which a bill is made is usually superscribed in figures; in a note or check, the figures are commonly subscribed.

The superscription or subscription of the sum payable is not necessary, if the sum be stated in the body of the note, but it will aid an omission in the body: as, where the word fifty was written in the body of the note, without the word pounds.(r)

The time of payment is regularly and usually stated in the beginning of the note or bill; but, if no time be expressed, the instrument will be payable on demand.(8)

Negotiable bills or notes under 5l. must be made payable within [ *59] *the space of twenty-one days from the date.(t) But in other cases there is no limitation as to the time when the bill or note is made payable, but it may be on demand, or at certain period after date, or after sight, or at usance. exchange be made payable at never so distant a day, that must come, it is no objection to the bill."(u)

sight, or any "If a bill of

if it be a day

The expression, after sight, on a bill of exchange, means after acceptance, or protest for non-acceptance, and not after a mere private exhibition to the drawee, for the sight must appear in a legal way.(v)(1) But if a note is made at or after sight, the expression merely

(0) 17 Geo. 3, c. 30, revived by 7 Geo. 4, c. 6.

(p) 55 Geo. 3, c. 184, s. 13; 9 Geo. 4, c. 49, s. 15. See the Chapter on Checks. (q) Coxon v. Lyon, 2 Camp. 307, n.; Smith v. Lord, 14 L. J. 112, Q. B. (r) Eliot's case, 2 East, P. C. 951; 1 Leach, 175, S. C.

(s) Whitlock v. Underwood, 3 Dowl. & R. 356; 2 B. & C. 157, S. C.; Down v. Halling, 4 B. & C. 333; 6 Dowl. & R. 455; 2 C. & P. 11, S. C.; Bayley, 5th ed. 109. But on a motion to set aside an annuity, the Court will not assume that even a Bank of England note, or a draft on a banker, are payable on demand. See the cases collected in the recent case of Abbott v. Douglas, 1 C. B. Rep. 491. (t) 17 Geo. 3, c. 30.

(u) Willis, C. J., Colehan v. Cooke, Willes, 396.

(v) Marius, 19, cited by Lord Kenyon in Campbell v. French, 6 T. R. 212.

(1) A bill payable so many days after sight means legal sight, and the bill be

imports that payment is not to be demanded till it has been again exhibited to the maker, (w) for a note being incapable of acceptance, the word "sight" must, on a note, bear a different meaning from the same word on a bill.

Foreign bills are commonly drawn at one, two, or more, usances, or, as it is sometimes expressed, at single, double, treble, or half usance. Usance signifies the usuage of the countries between which bills are drawn with respect to the time of payment. If a foreign bill be drawn, payable at sight, or at a certain period after sight, the acceptor will be liable to pay according to the course of exchange at time of acceptance, unless the drawer express that it is payable according to the course of exchange at the time it was drawn, en especes de ce jour.(x) Where half usance stands for half a month, it is fifteen days. And, in the case of all bills payable in England, month means calendar month.

The bill or note must be certainly payable at some time or other.(y)

[*60]

The order to pay need be in no particular form; any expression. amounting to an order,(z) or direction, is sufficient. (a) *The word "pay" itself is not indispensable. Any synonymous or equivalent expression will suffice, as "Credit in Cash."(b)

(w) Holmes v. Kerrison, 2 Taurt. 323; Sturdy v. Henderson, 4 B. & A. 592; Sutton v. Toomer, 7 B. & C. 416; 1 M. & Ry. 125, S. C.; Dixon v. Nuttall, 1 C., M. & R. 307; 6 C. & P. 320, S. C.

(z) Poth. 174.

(y) Vide post. Irregular Instruments.

(2) Hamilton v. Spottiswood, 18 L. J. 393, Exch.; 4 Ex. 200, S. C. (a) Beawes, 3; Marius, 11. In France, il vous plaira payer, is the common language of a bill. Morris v. Lee, 2 Ld. Raym. 1397; 1 Stra. 629, S. C. Quære, whether a mere written request, without any words of demand, amount to a bill. Lord Kenyon held this instrument to be a bill:-" Mr. Nelson will much oblige Mr. Webb, by paying to J. Ruff, or order, twenty guineas on his account." Ruff v. Webb, 1 Esp. 129. But Lord Tenterden held the following instrument not to be a bill:— "Mr. Little, please to let the bearer have seven pounds, and place it to my account, and you will oblige your humble servant, R. SLACKFORD." Little v. Slackford, 1 M. & M. 171. "The paper," says his Lordship, "does not purport to be a demand made by a party having a right to call on the other to pay. The fair meaning is, you will oblige me by doing it.'" But see Russell v. Powell, 14 M. & W. 418. (b) Ellison v. Collingridge, 19 L. J. 268, C. P.

gins to run from the presentment and mere presentment. Mitchell v. De Grand, acceptance, and not from the time of 1 Mason, 176.

The payee should be particularly described, so that he cannot be confounded with another person of the same name. But if the bill get into the hands of a wrong payee, unless it be payable to bearer, he can neither acquire nor convey a title. One Christian, drew a bill on the defendant, in London, payable to Henry Davis. The bill got into the hands of another Henry Davis than the one in whose favour it was drawn, was accepted by the defendant, and by the wrong Henry Davis was indorsed to the plaintiff. Held, that the indorsement of his own name by Henry Davis was, under these circumstances, a forgery, and (dissentiente Lord Kenyon) could convey no title to the plaintiff.(c) If the name be spelt wrong, verbal evidence is admissible to show who was intended.(d) If there be father and son of the same name, it will be intended payable to the father till the contrary appear.(e) But if the son be found in possession of the note, and he indorse, that is evidence that he, and not the father, is payee.(ƒ) A note payable to A., or to B. and C., or his or their order, is not a promissory note, within the statute.(g) A note in this form"157. 58. balance due to A. C., I am still indebted, and do promise to pay."(h) Or in this-" Received of A. B. 1007., which I promise to pay on demand, with lawful interest," sufficiently designates the payee.(i) A note payable "to the trustees acting under A.'s will," is a good note, and parol evidence is admissible, to show who the trustees are, and what are the trusts.(k) A note was made payable to the manager of the National Provincial Bank of England. To an action by the payee in his own name, the defendant pleaded that he did not make the note. Held, that under this plea, the plaintiff was entitled to recover.(1)

*If the bill be not made payable, either to any payee in par[*61] ticular, or to the drawer's order, or to bearer in general, it would seem, according to the opinion of the majority of the Judges,() to be payable to bearer; but, according to the opinion of Eyre,

(c) Mead v. Young, 4 T. R. 28.

(d) Willis v. Barrett, 2 Stark. 29.

(e) Sweeting v. Fowler, 1 Stark. 106; Wilson v. Stubs, Hobart, 330; see Bro. Ab

Addition, 18, 34, 43, 9 to 6; 13 Dyer, 5.

(f) Stebbing v. Spicer, 19 L. J. 24, C. P.

(9) Blanckenhagen v. Blundell, 2 B. & Al. 417.

(h) Chadwick v. Allen, 1 Stra. 706.

(i) Green v. Davies, 4 B. & C. 235; 6 D. & R. 306, S. C.

(k) Megginson v. Harper, Tyr. 96; 2 Cr. & M. 322, S. C.

(1) Robertson v. Sheward, 1 Man. & Gran. 511; 1 Scott, N. R. 419, S. C.

(7) Minet v. Gibson, 1 H. Bl. 608.