or 'to bearer;' and sixthly, it must import a consideration, so as to preclude the necessity of inquiry and proof." (Am. Law, Sec. 180.) A contract possessing these properties, since it is liable to no other question than what relates to the responsibility of the parties.

In the succeeding chapter we shall discuss, one by one, these essentials of negotiability, and explain their meaning in detail. Sec. 756. WRITERS ON NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS.-Mr. Daniel's noted work on Negotiable Instruments is a standard authority, and has reached the sixth American edition. Byles on Bills is a smaller work which has reached the eighth American edition. Among American authors are Story's work on "Promissory Notes;" Parsons' work on "Notes and Bills;" Ames' "Bills and Notes;" Randolph's work on "Commercial Paper;" Tiedeman's "Commercial Paper." Among the more recent writers are Bigelow, who has compiled a work styled "Bills, Notes and Checks;" Edwards' work on "Bills and Notes;" Hawthorne's "What Instruments Are Negotiable;" Van Schaak's "Bank Checks;" and Benjamin's Chalmers' "Bills, Notes and Checks."

CHAPTER II.

ESSENTIALS OF BILLS AND NOTES.

Sec. 757. MUST BE IN WRITING, DATE, SIGNATURE.-A bill of exchange, promissory note, or other negotiable instrument must be in writing. There can be no verbal promise which is transferrable by delivery or indorsement. The bill or note may of course be printed, and even the signature of the drawer or maker may be printed, if it is proven that such printed signature has been adopted by the drawer or maker as his own signature. (Pennington v. Baehr, 48 Cal. 565.) The signature may also be written in pencil as well as in ink. (Reed v. Roark, 14 Tex. 329.) The signature of the maker need not be at the place indicated in the forms given, and is sufficient if it appears on any part of the paper, even the back. (Hunt v. Adams, 5 Mass. 359; Schmidt v. Schmaelter, 45 Mo. 502.) So it is held that the signature is sufficient though only the initials have been signed to the instrument. (Merchants' Bank v. Spicer, 6 Wend. 443.) To avoid ambiguity and suspicion of the validity of the instrument, it should be signed at the customary place, with the full name of the drawer or maker.*

*"A bill of exchange must be signed by the drawer. The drawer's signature may be added at any time, but until it is there the instrument is inchoate and without effect. A draws

A bill or note is usually dated at its commencement, as in the forms given, and this is proper but not necessary. Where the date is not given and the instrument is payable at a certain time after the date, the time is computed from the date of issue, and parol evidence is admissible to show what this date was. (Lean v. Lozardi, 27 Mich. 424.) It may also be shown that there was a mistake in the date as against the maker, but not as against a bona fide purchaser without knowledge of the mistake. (Huston v. Young, 38 Me. 85.) An undated note or bill may be filled up by the payee, and any date inserted by him binds the maker or drawer when the instrument has been indorsed to an innocent purchaser for value; but in the hands of the payee, or holders with notice of the true date, it will be void if the date inserted is not the true date, unless authority has been given to change the date. (Androscoggin Bank v. Kimball, 10 Cush. 373; Goodman v. Simonds, 19 Mo. 106.)

Bills and notes may be antedated or post-dated without destroying their negotiability.

They may be nego

a bill on B, payable to drawer's order but does not sign it. B accepts, and it is transferred for value to C. The instrument is neither a bill nor a note. (Benj.'s Chalmers, Art. 4, et seq.; McCall v. Taylor, 34 L. J. C. P. 365.)

*It has been very generally held that the date is not essential to the validity of a bill or note. (Tiedeman, Com. Pap., Sec. 10. Citing, Michigan Ins. Co. v. Leavenworth, 30 Vt. 11; Drake v. Rodgers, 32 Me. 524; Cowing v. Altman, 71 N. Y. 441; Seldenridge v. Connable, 32 Ind. 875; etc.)

"It is usual but not necessary, to insert in a bill the date on which it is drawn. A bill, expressed to be payable after

tiated before the day of the date without suspicion of invalidity. (Richter v. Selin, 8 Serg. & R. 425.) And where the indorser died before the date set in a postdated instrument, the indorsee was held to acquire the full title of the indorser. (Brewster v. McCardel, 8 Wend. 478.) The rights of the parties are determined with reference to the date actually stated in the note or bill as a general rule, but in case the note or bill would be void if it had been executed on that day, either because the maker was incompetent or the day precluded the making of valid paper, it can be shown in behalf of its validity that it was actually negotiated at a different date. But a bill post-dated or antedated for the very purpose of evading rules of law invalidating paper made on the day the paper is executed and delivered, will be

date, should be dated; but evidence is admissible to show on what day such bill, if undated, was issued, and it takes effect from that time." (Richardson v. Elett, 10 Tex. 190.)

"A bill may be ante-dated or post-dated. Evidence is admissible to show on what day such bill was issued, and it takes effect from that time. A draws a bill on B, bearing date May 1st, payable to C's order. C indorses to D, who sues A. It appears that C died in April. D may show that the bill was post-dated, and that C really indorsed it. He can then recover." (Benj.'s Chalmers B. N. & Checks, Arts. 15-16; Pasmore v. North, (1811), 13 East. 517.)

"Such evidence is not admissible to invalidate the title of a bona fide holder for value.

"A bill is prima facie presumed to have been issued on the day which it bears date. But a bill bearing date on a Sunday is not presumed to have been issued on that day." Id. Dohoney v. Dohoney (1870), 7 Bush (Ky.), 217.

void in the hands of all persons who have notice of the evasion or who take the paper without consideration.*

Sec. 758. SAME SUBJECT-DESIGNATION OF THE PARTIES.-The name of the maker of a note or the drawee of a bill should appear on the instrument. In the case of the note it is important as it is the maker who is liable thereon; and in case of the bill the drawer's name must be written in to bind the party accepting. (Levis v. Young, 1 Met. Ky. 199.)

In a case where the signature of the maker of a note was in the alternative as "A. B. or else C. D." it was held not to be a negotiable note within the statute of Anne, as against C. D., on account of his conditional liability. (Ferris v. Bond, 4 B. & Ald. 679.)

The execution and delivery of a bill of exchange without the signature of the drawer will be valid in

*Tiedeman, Com. Pap., Sec. 12; Pasmore v. North, 13 East. 517; State Bank v. Thompson, 42 N. H. 369.

Note. "A bill issued on Sunday is not void at common law, but by statutes in most of the States, resembling the 29 Car. 2, c. 7, a bill issued on Sunday is void between immediate parties, (Sayre v. Wheeler (1870), 31 Ia. 112) and incapable of ratification, but valid in hands of a bona fide holder for value, if dated on a secular day, either on the ground of estoppel, or because the statute does not declare the bill void to all intents and purposes. That the bill bears date on a Sunday, is immaterial if in fact issued on a secular day. The date of the bill, e. g. "March 6th, 1881, is itself notice to the holder of its issue on Sunday, as the almanac is part of the law of the land." (Benj.'s Chalmers B. N. & Checks, Art. 17 note, citing Knox v. Clifford, 38 Wis. 651; Vinton v. Peck, 14 Mich. 287; Finney v. Callendar, 8 Minn. 41.)