Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-07-05


The legal profession throughout the
| State. so far as We are informed. are
| greatly pleased with the negotiable In
strlmeDts law. which went into effect on
the first OF this month. 1t Is regarded as
an excellent piece OF legislation. ana
shows the tendency towards uniformity
on this important branch Of the law. The
| act contains much valuable Information
| on the subject OF negotiable paper. and
being quite v~olumlnous is more likely to
be read than textbooks on the subject.
In the current number OF the Virginia
Law Register. NJ. p. Burks. Esq, gives
| us the benefits OF his investigation OF the
new statute and points out It's advantages
end the changes IL works. The last sec
ton Of this act, says he. employs the
following words: "AIl acts or parts OF
| acts in conflict herewith are TO that ex-
tent repealed" and from this he concludes
that the Legislature did not intend to re-
| peal existing statutes not In conflict with
the act. But lawyer-llke. Mr.. Burks con-
fesses that he cannot guarantee that the
Court OF Appeals will agree with him on
this point. He ventures the assertion,
however, that at least 95 per cent. OF the
new act is merely de~claratory OF the ex-
listing law, while the remaining 8 per cent.
contains some very important changes.
Mr.. Burks very ably discusses a dozen
or more Of these notifications, and TO
him we W. the credit for the changes
herein pointed out:
Under the new act II Is not necessary
that paper should be payable at a bank
or bankers In this State; but all paper
containing words Of negotiability. in
Guiding bonds, is declared to be negotia-
BILE.
DAYS of grace are abolished, and every
merchant, under the circumstances here
tofore existing, will concede that they
had outlived their usefulness.
Instruments falling due on Saturdays or
legal holidays are to be presented for
payment on the next succeeding business
day, except that those payable on de-
mand may, at the option of the holder,
be presented for payment before u o'clock
noon on Saturday, when that entire day
is not a holiday.
The new law settles a mooted question
by declaring that where the instrument
is made payable at a bank, it Is equiva-
lent to an order to the bank TO pay the
same for the account of the principal
debtor thereon"
Where d person not otherwise a party
to an instrument. places thereon his sig
=. lIo-1, pofnra Ha1ivarN- he iS la
ble as follows: II the instrument is pay
able TO a third person. he Is liable TO the
payee and all subsequent parties; If pay
able TO the maker or drawer or bearer
he is liable TO all parties subsequent 10
the maker or drawer; If he signs for the
accommodation of the payee, he is liable
TO all parties subsequent to the payee.
A check does not of itself operate as an
assignment of any part of the FUNDS 10
the credit of the drawer, nor Is a bank
liable TO the holder unless and until it
accents or c~ertifes the check.
Section 6S Of the new law declares that,
as respects one another, endorsers are
lab ID prima facie in the order in which
fhev endorse. but evidence is admissible
TO show tina amongst themselves they
have agreed otherwise. Mr.. Burks sup
poses that this means that verbal evil
dence is admissible.
IL there be no personal representative
executor or administrator OF a deceased
person. notice Of protest may be sent to
the last residence or to the last place OF
business of the deeedent.
Section 1853 of the new act declares what
n protest must specify, but wholly omits
ANYTHING on the subject of notice. In
other words. the protest Is got required
TO state how or when thei notice was
given.
1t is a matter Of the greatest practical
importance to determine what evidence
must be introduced to fix the liability of
| endorsers. Section 1850 of the Code, If still
in force, Notwithstanding the new act,
will probably meet this difficulty.
Inland bills and notes, may, as hereto
fore, be protested, but such protest is
snot REQUIRED.
The provisions of the new law do not
| apply TO negotiable instruments mao and
| delivered prior to the passage thereof.
The act was approved March 3. 1898, and
it would seem that instruments made
| after that date, and which mature after
| July LIST. are within its scope.
Mr.. Burks says hat he has been inform
| ed that a different construction has been
put upon his part of the act by many
Of the bankers in the State, and that they
do not expect to apply the new law to
any paper except that made and deliver
ed after July 1st. He regards this as cx-
tremely hazardous.
OF course. the courts and the lawyers
may find vulnerable points in the new
law, but II is now in such a form that
its defects can be easily remedied by the
| next Legislature, n meanwhile it will
serve far better than the statutes which
have hitherto been employed.
Louisiana judges are forbidden by the
new Constitution of that State TO make