The copper era and Morenci leader., 1913-06-06
POPULAR TALKS ON LAW.
SIGNING A NOTE.
BY Walter K. Towers, Abb, ]. D., of
the Michigan Bar.

farm nome. resting +D6IOT6 ne TStufAcQ
to the fields, a shiny top buggy drawn |
by long-legged bay drew into the
side yard and a brisk young man
descended He presented the card |
OF the National Silo Co., and solicited
an order Mr.. Edwards needed a
silo and signed an order for one, to be
erected later. He read the order
carefully and noted its contents. Il
clearly read as an order for a silo, for
the erection of which, if completed
within sixty days after date, he was
to pay $4,000.
No silo appeared nor could Mr.. Ed
wards locate the company, but he
saw nothing to worry about until.
sixty days later, a nearby bank orc
sented to him for payment a note for
$4,000 in regular form and bearing
his signature. He protested that he
had signed no such note, yet ac-
knowledged that it was his signature
Examination showed that it was one
end of the Silo order he had signed.
1t had been so worded and arranged
that one end might be cut off leaving
a promissory note in regular form
| The bank insisted it had paid full.
price for a regular note and as it was
a negotiable instrument" it was
protected as bona fide holder. Ed
wards sought advice and being told
that he would have to pay the note
did so.
! Proper advice by competent at
| torney would probably have saved
/ Edwards 500 since few states
vii, / sunnort such a. note. signed under
such circumstances. True, if one is
j induced to sign a negotiable note
Through fraud and that note is sold
in ordinary course to bank or IN
dividual, the purchaser accepting 1t
lin perfect honesty and good faith, pay
ing full value for an apparently regu-
lar instrument that is not yet due,
the quality of negotiability is slch
THAT the purchaser will have better
rights than the rogue who transferred
lit. Indeed, under such circum-
stances; the signer would have to pay
the note. But rightly viewed the
case of Jason Edwards is not such
case. He was not induced by fraud
to sign a note, because he did noi
sign note. What he signed was an
order Having never signed a note,
but something entirely different
which was changed into a note, he
is no more liable than if his sigma
ture was forged to regular note.
Yet it is not strange that many lay
men have confused this rule and suf
fered needlessly when some of our
i courts have made the mistake.
The other side of the picture is the
fraud practiced on Allan McGoorty
and his wife. Again buggy came
down the road, but it was driven
wildly by an attractive young man,
and to his arm chung young woman.
5 They paused at the MISUNDERSTANDING
house for refuge and told of clipping
from E cruel father. Now all the world
loves a lover and the McGoortys were
all assistance. Opportunity, quite by
t accident, of course, a clericailooklng
!. tgentleman appeared from the other
direction. Yes, ne would marry
them, and did-at least, he went
Through the ceremony. OF course,
the bride wept, so did Mrs. McGoorty.
and Mr. McGoorty blew his nose and
found his eyes a bit dim. In the
|, that the witnesses must sign the
/ certificate and pushed paper toward
:. them which they readily signed.
Three months later bank produc-
I ed the marriage certificate" for pay
Y ment. 1t was a regularly drawn note
a for $4,000. McGoorty had to pay it,
as he was LEGALLY liable. He had
committed the fault of failing to read
s what he has signed. In his case he
t. actually signed a note OF course
( neither the Rev erend" nor his col
:. federates could have collected frcln
IL the McGocItys, but they had nego,idt
ed the note at the bank, which, having
nothing to arouse its suspicious and
knowing Meg oorty's signature, PIC
z chased il for full value. wherenpon
r the Reverend and his friends m ovcd
q on to try their scheme in virgin soil
:, taking care to be we'll away when the
notes fell due Where one of two
e innocent persons must suffer the law
1 takes the view that the one who by
+ his carelessnesS made the fraud posi-
9 BILE must foot the bill
= A similar result followed in the case
of Clarence Tucker, who purchased
and accepted a barrel of medicated
calf meal, giving his note for SIC
g therefor The bottom two-thirds OF
= the barrel proved to be filled with
n sawdust, but by that time the bank
: had purchased the note and the agent
g. had vanished. Tucker was legally
>, bound to pay the note. The vendeI
Il of the meal could not have recovered
n the sum, but again the quality of ne
c gotiability protected the innocent pur
e chaser, and the man who signed the
=, note had to pay it He had signed
u note and it having come into The
hands of an innocent third party ii
due course of busiess, his liability
: was settled.
;, So when you sign a promissor'
" note, drawn in the familiar FORM
o sixty days after date, for value re
l. ceived, l promise to pay to the ordel
Il of John Doe, the sum of One Hundred
-, Dollars with interest at six per cent
. per annum-remember that it is ne
gotiable and so is a great deal like
e money in that it may be freely passed
If from hand to hand by simple indorSe
ment on the back, and the man who
comes by it honestly has full right:
against the person who signs it.
" In order to possess this quality o
= negotiability-to be able to pas:
u from one to another by simple indOrSe