Liberty advocate. [volume] (Liberty, Miss.) 1835-1866, 1840-04-23


piece a property on credit. He replies that
ne is afraid TO trust me lalone-that may not
be worth the amount, ormay not be disposed to
pay him; but i'll will give him my friend D.
for security, he will accommodate me- 90
and state the case TO him, and he, having entire
confidence in my solsency and integrity, en-
dorses for me. What, ask, is the nature Of
the obligation which D.. takes upon himself?
Unquestionaby, that it ! do not pay The debt
he will Itis on his credit that am credited,
and the debt IS as much his as mine. But for
his pledge to pay ihifI do not, should not be
credited at all. Ana yet we are told by some,
that security debt isnot moral but only a
legal obligatian. This connot be true, unless
il be understood by all the parties that the Sc
|curity debt is only to bepaid at the end of the
law, Is this the understandings No, neyerl
Does the creditor sellh his property or lend his
money, TO buy law suit? Does he take D. as
my security, depending on that most uncertain
among earth's contingencies, the decision Of a
Jury? If d. tells him Of the time he makes
the contract that he is determined not to pay a
cent of it unless compelled by law, and on that
condition is accepted, it is legal and not a
moral obligation; but if he simply signs a
promlssory note in the usual form, or even
gives his verbal promise, without any such con-
diton, he is bound to pay, and TO pay at the
time, the debt is due, iflhe principal does not,
Tor this is the contract. | am aware that to
bind security to as strict punciualty as the
pricipal, is taking higher ground than is usual
now. But is 1t not correct? Does he not
promise TO pay it at the time! By what rule
then, can he claim longer indulgence than The
principal? appeal to every business man if
this is not the basis OF such transactions in the
commercial world. Before the lale general
suspension, when the Banks conducted business
in the ordinary way, no man who was under
protest for security debt could obtain any
farther accommodations until it was paid; and
even now. the security is protested at the same
time with the principal, and when suit is
brought, they are both sued together, for they
are considered as equally bound From these
facts infer two things; first, if the principal
is morally bound to pay, so is the security; Sc
condly, ifthe principal is morally bound TO be
punctual SO is the security; they are one.
cannot dismiss this modern heresy without ar
additional remark. If a security debt is only q
legal obligation, it follows that any steps tc
ovade the law are morally right. On this prin
clple security is at liberty 10 sell off his prop
lerty, put the money in his poke, and declar,
Insolvency, provided he can escape the insol
vent debtors oath and if the pains and penal
ties of perjury await him here, he does no NOR
al wrong tog 60 to Texas, land take all his ''plun
der" with him.-To such monstrous conse
quences does this error load.
But il is said, no man becomes security fol
another with the expectation ofpaying. Thi.
may be true; but still it does not alter the ma
ture of the obligation. He does not expect to
pay, because he thinks his friend will not SUITE
Eit-he has confidence in him. But if he is all
honest man, he intends to pay, if perchance the
other should not,-and there is always posi-
bility ofthis. 1t matters not what he expects
It ne excites expectation in the mind of another
that.he will pay, and does not correct it, he is
bound to satisfy it, Slut il is hard 10 be
broken up and stripped ofovery cent TO pay 0
debt that never profted me larhing." This
is granted. tits very hard case; but it i.
what you risked when you made the debt, alic
what was implied iGyour promise. The hard.
ness OF bargin constitutes no exemption
Remember the text: ''TIe that sweareth 10 his
own hurt, and changeth not" is the successful
candidate for heaven Because we are dsap
pointed in our friend, we have no right tc
forfeit our word and disappont others Yet i,
isa hard case; and hence wise man, deeply
read in the school Of experience, and under the
inspiration ofthe Almighty, near 5000 years
ago wrote as follows: "a man void of under.
standing strketh hands, and becometh surety
in the presence Of his friend. And again;
He that's surety for a stranger, shall smart
forit; and he that hateth suretyships is sure
One more thought will close this head. The
man who stands security FOR more than he has
q reasonable prospect of being able to pay, is
just as guilty Of wrong as he who contracts
debts Of his own without probability OF pay
ing them. and for the same reason, viz: he
voluntarily exclies expectation which he can
not meet. 1t is not morally right for any one
to stand security for more than he IS worth
for it istobe presumed that he as an honest
man would not contract Lebts without being
able TO pay them, and in the event OF foilure,
an injury is inflicted in consequence Of this
deception. 8
Thirdly. As it would be oppressive and alb
surd 10 make promises morally binding in all
cases, it is important to ascertain in whatcases
they are not 'tf
\ "a. promise is not obligatory, il the pcrfor-
nance be impossible. For example: man
promises to do job Of work for another, but is
disabled by sickness or accident If A. sells
a horse to B and promises 70 deliver him at a
certain time, but in the mean time, the horse
dies, A. is certainly clcafof his obligation.
Butlhere is great need Of caution here. The
common expressions, "impossihle," "cannoi''
tout Of my power,n &c, are, il the conventions