§ 3.

Bill not invalid for reason

specified.

3. An order to pay on account of wine had of the drawer: Buller v. Cripps, 6 Mod. 29 (1703).

4. An order to pay £9, "as my quarterly half pay, by advance": Macleod v. Snee, 2 Str. 762 (1728).

5. A promise to pay £50, being a portion of a value as under deposited, deposited in security for the payment hereof: Haussoullier v, Hartsinck, 7 T. R. 733 (1798).

6. A promise to pay £16 "by giving up clothes and papers, etc."; these latter words being merely equivalent to "value received": Dixon v. Nuttall, 6 C. & P. 320 (1834).

7. An order to pay £600 "on account of moneys advanced by me for the F. Co.": Griffin v. Weatherby, L. R. 3 Q. B. 753 (1868).

8. An order for £3,374 "against credit No. 20, and place it to account as advised": Banner v. Johnston, L. R. 5 E. &. I. App. 157 (1871).

9. An order to pay £200 out of moneys which would become payable on the completion of a contract: ex parte Shellard, L. R. 17 Eq. 109 (1873). Disapproved in Buck v. Robson, 8 Q. B. D. 686 (1878).

10. An order for £7,000 “which is on account of dividends and which charge to my account according to a registered letter I have addressed to you": Crofton v. Crofton, 33 Ch. D. 612 (1886).

4. A bill is not invalid by reason—

(a) That it is not dated: Imp. Act, s. 3 (4) (a). A bill without a date is irregular, although not invalid. If issued undated and payable at a fixed period after date, any holder may insert the true date of issue and it shall be payable accordingly: section 12. It is presumed to be dated on the day it is made: Hague v. French, 3 B. & P. 173 (1802); Giles v. Bourne, 6 M. & S. 73 (1817); and

proof of this may be made by parol: Davis v. Jones, 17 § 3. C. B. 625 (1856). Although not an essential part of a bill the date is a material part, and when altered without proper assent renders the bill void: section 68. In France a bill must be dated or it is invalid: Code de Com. Art. 110.

(b) That it does not specify the value given, or that any value has been given therefor: Imp. Act, s. 3 (4) (b).

Formerly the words "value received" or some words implying consideration were necessary: Byles, p. 95; Randolph, 159. By the Civil Code of Lower Canada, Article 2285, when a bill contains the words " value received " value for the amount of it is presumed to have been received on the bill and upon the indorsements thereon: Larocque v. Franklin County Bank, 8 L. C. R. 328 (1858); Walters v. Mahan, 6 L. N. 316 (1883). Even when these words are in a bill, parol evidence may be received to prove the contrary: Davis v. McSherry, 7 U. C. Q. B. 490 (1849); Baxter v. Bilodeau, 9 Q. L. R. 268 (1883); Abbott v. Hendricks, 1 M. & G. 791 (1840). In an accepted bill, payable to the order of the drawer, these words imply value received by the acceptor: Highmore v. Primrose, 5 M. & S. 65 (1816). If the bill be payable to a third party they imply value received by the drawer: Grant v. Da Costa, 3 M. & S. 351 (1815). In England these words have long been unnecessary: Hatch v. Trayes, 11 A. & E. 702 (1840).

(c) That it does not specify the place where it is drawn or the place where it is payable: Imp. Act, s. 3 (4) (c).

The place where a bill is drawn is usually placed at the top before the date. If no place is specified the holder may

§ 3. treat it as an inland bill, even although drawn abroad: section 4. In France the place must be stated on the bill: Code de Com. Art. 110; Nouguier, §§ 93-105.

Inland and foreign bills.

If no place of payment is specified it is payable generally. It may be payable at either of two places at the option of the holder: Pollard v. Herries, 3 B. & P. 335 (1803); Beeching v. Gower, Holt N. P. C. 313 (1816). An acceptance may name the place of payment: section 19 (2) (a). A change in the place of payment or the addition of a place of payment without the acceptor's assent is a material alteration, and may render the bill void section 63, s-s. 2. In France the place of payment must be different from that where it is drawn, and there must be a possible rate of exchange between the two places: Code de Com. Art. 110; Nouguier, §§ 93-105. The tendency in France is towards a relaxation of this rule.

4. An inland bill is a bill which is, or on the face of it purports to be (a) both drawn and payable within Canada, or (b) drawn within Canada upon some person resident therein. Any other bill is a foreign bill: Imp. Act, s. 4 (1).

This clause is taken from the Imperial Act, the only change being the substitution of Canada" for the "British Islands." Prior to the passing of the Act, the different provinces were, as a rule, considered to be foreign to each other; but a note made in Upper Canada, payable in Montreal, was held to be payable generally under 7 Wm. 4, c. 5, and treated as an inland note: Bradbury v. Doole, 1 U. C. Q, B. 442 (1841). In a later case, however, a similar note was treated as a foreign note and proof of the Lower Canadian law received: McLellan v. McLellan, 17 U. C. C. P. 109 (1866).

In Quebec the Civil Code, Art. 2336, provided that bills § 4. drawn upon persons in Upper Canada, or any other of the British North American Colonies, and returned under Damages. protest for non-payment, were subject to four per cent. damages. Most of the other provinces had similar provisions. See Con. Stat. U. C. c. 42, s. 9; Rev. Stat. N. S. (3rd Series) c. 32, s. 1; 1 Rev. Stat. N. B. (1854) c. 116, s. 1; and Acts of P. E. I., 17 Geo. 3, c. 5, s. 2. These damages were abolished by the Dominion Act, 38 V. c. 19, and only the amount of the bill with the cost of noting and protest, interest, exchange and re-exchange were to be recoverable after the 1st of July, 1875, on a bill drawn upon any person in the Dominion or Newfoundland.

The following are inland bills:

1. A bill drawn in Canada upon some person resident there and payable in Canada.

2. A bill drawn in Canada upon some person abroad but payable in Canada.

3. A bill drawn in Canada upon some person resident there but payable abroad.

4. Any bill which on its face purports to come within any of the foregoing classes but which was actually drawn. abroad though dated in Canada.

The place of payment in any of the foregoing cases may be determined by the acceptance: section 19, 2 (a). If no place of payment is specified in the bill or acceptance it is payable at the address of the drawee or acceptor: section 45, s-s. 2 (d) (3). Forms of inland and also of foreign bills will be found in the Appendix.

It is sometimes of importance to determine whether a bill is an inland or a foreign one. The latter when dishonored in any part of Canada by non-acceptance or non

§ 4. payment must be protested: section 48. In any other province than Quebec an inland bill need not be protested: section 51. The drawer, acceptor, and each endorser of a bill is a several and distinct contracting party and the rights, duties, and liabilities of these parties respectively may vary according to the law of the place of issue, or of the place where such contract was made, or where it is to be performed. On this point see section 71. As to inland and foreign promissory notes, see section 82, s-s. 4, and 88, s-s. 4.

In the United States the different States are considered to be foreign to each other for the purposes of bills of exchange: Daniel § 9.

ILLUSTRATIONS.

1. On a bill drawn in London, England, on defendant in Toronto, but accepted by him on London and payable there, plaintiff was allowed the current rate of exchange on the day it became due, and not merely 24s. 4d. in the £ sterling: Greatorex v. Score, 6 U. C. L. J. 212 (1860).

2. A bill written and accepted in England and sent abroad to the drawer, who signed it there, is a foreign bill: Boehm v. Campbell, Gow 56 (1818).

3. A bill in blank signed and endorsed in Ireland, sent to England where the blanks were filled up and the bill negotiated there, is a foreign bill: Snaith v. Mingay, 1 M. & S. 87 (1813).

4. A bill drawn in London upon Brussels and accepted there, but payable in London is an inland bill: Amner v. Clark 2 C. M. & R. 468 (1835).

5. A bill payable to order, drawn, accepted and payable in England, but endorsed in France is an inland bill: Lebel v. Tucker, L. R. 3 Q. B. 77 (1867).

6. A bill drawn and payable in England upon a Boston house, and accepted in England by a partner of the Boston