against subsequent mortgages without notice. If the $5,000 mortgage was actually delivered last, with full notice of the other, the decisions justify the opinion that prior registry would not give a preference, and we incline to the belief that under the circumstances a court of equity, in which mortgages are foreclosed in New Jersey, would give the preference to neither, but require them to be satisfied pro rata.

NATURALIZATION.

1. Can an alien who declares his intention to become a citizen, and to whom is denied the privilege of a passport until he is fully admitted, obtain any other papers to enable him to enter any countries where passports are required? or if not, what expedient is left to him?

A. In many countries a passport is necessary. Where one is needed, the traveler may obtain from the resident consul of the country to which he is going a pass that will answer his purpose.

2. 1. Can American parents residing abroad claim American citizenship for their child born there? If so, on what conditions?

2. Can a resident not naturalized, own real estate in this country? If so, can he or she, in case, of death, bequeath the same to relatives here or abroad?

A. 1. A child born abroad of American citizens formerly residing in this country, can claim American citizenship without any conditions. If that child never comes to reside in this country, his children cannot assert the claim; but if he ever does reside here, then his children are citizens, although born abroad.

2. By declaring an intention to become a citizen, resident aliens in New York may hold and bequeath real estate for six years thereafter.

3. I am an Italian by birth, and at the age of 19 I left my country for New York, where I have been residing ever since (nearly five years), consequently failing to present myself to serve my town in the Italian army, as required by the laws of that nation. Should I get my papers out as a citizen of the United States, and then go to Italy to settle some private business, to return afterward to America, could the Italian government then cause my arrest while there, and punish me in accordance with the law as a deserter? I shall become an American citizen, but am I protected if I am compelled to go back to Italy for a temporary stay?

A. If you become a citizen of the United States, and visit Italy on temporary business, with an American passport, you will be protected by our government. You will do well before you start to have your passport countersigned by the Italian Consul at this port.

4. I have been in the country four years. If I wish to become a citizen how long must I wait before I can get my papers? I am now 18 years of age, but my father is not a citizen? If I were a citizen, could I go to Europe without any risk of being taken for military

services?

A. Our correspondent cannot become naturalized by his own act until he is of age. When this occurs, and he has taken out his papers, he will be protected by our government while traveling abroad.

5. I was born in November, 1847, came to this country in October, 1867, went to the West Indies in 1869, whence I returned in 1871, and have lived here ever since. Suppose I should, with witnesses testifying to time of my sojourn here, apply for and receive my first papers to-day, how soon would I be entitled to my second papers, making me a full fledged citizen of the United States? cite the law.

Please

A. The applicant must wait two full years from the date of his first papers before he can become a citizen. Only a minor who resides here three years before obtaining his majority can, after five years residence, take the second papers at the same date he makes his declaration. U. S. Rev. Stat., sec. 2,165-6.

NEGLIGENCE.

1. I have a store on Broadway. The windows on the lower or first floor are of plate glass for which I paid $150 a pane. Through an accident one of them is broken by a passer by. Can I collect through law $150 for it?

A. The responsibility of the "passer by" will depend on the nature of the accident. If a mad steer tossed him through the window he could not be required to pay; but if the accident occurred through his fault or carelessness, he can be held to pay the damage, whatever it can be proved to be.

NOTES.

HOLDER.

1. A note for $600 was due and presented at G Bank on December 31st; funds being there to pay said note, it was certified and amount taken from maker's account. January 1 the G Bank sus. pended, and now the bank holding the original note looks to maker of it for payment; but bank book being balanced up, shows this $600 as being paid and charged against us. Are we liable again to pay this

note?

A. The holder who takes a certification instead of the money thereby relieves the maker. In the above case the bank holding the paper must stand in the gap.

2. A borrows an accommodation note from B (giving him his own for same amount as memorandum receipt) and discounts it at a bank, stating that it is not an accommodation note. He fails; must B pay the note, or, if he refuses, can the bank proceed criminally against A?

A. B must pay the note if he is solvent, the fact that it is an accommodation note being no defense to it in the hands of a third party. A might be held liable perhaps for obtaining money under false pretenses, but the note is just as good to the bank as if the representation was true.

3. A is in debt to B for merchandise and gives a check for the amount, dated on a legal holiday, but unnoticed on the day of signing it. B, on presenting the note at the bank for discount, is told to change the date, which he does, for example, from the 6th to the 5th, but informs A of the alteration a week after, who (A) expresses himself sat. isfied with it. A not paying the note when due, the 5th, it is protested. Can B collect the amount through the court, as A pretends not to be responsible for the note in consequence of the change in the date, although he consented as stated above?

A. The bank officer gave the holder very bad advice. In the first place a note dated on a legal holiday is just as good as if dated on any other day, and no alteration was required. But if such alteration had been essential, it should not have been made by the holder. "The alteration of the date, of the amount, of the rate of interest, or by adding the words 'with interest,' or of the time of paying interest, voids the note." Fay v. Smith, 1 Allen, 447; Wade v. Worthington, 1 Allen, 561; Irving v. Michael, 33 Mo., 398; Story on Promissory Notes, 408 a.

There is a question whether the drawer's acquiescence in the alteration is not a renewal, but under the circumstances this is of no account. As A has not paid his debt to B for the merchandise, a suit will lie for that, as well as for the note, and B has his legal remedy in this way. If the note is void or not paid, the liability of A for the merchandise is still the same. If the statement is true in all its parts A is a rogue, and B should collect his debt.

4. A gives his note to C with C's indorsement. The note is drawn to order of B, C indorsing. At maturity the note is not protested and B sues C, and recovers judgment against him; it was in evidence that C was to indorse as surety, and notwithstanding its non-protest, counsel held that it was in the nature of a joint note, judge so ruling, and the jury rendering a verdict for B.

A. The decision is good law, and presents nothing novel in its application. The lawful possessor of the note has the right to hold C as either indorser or surety; and proof that he signed as surety will render him liable without protest under the laws of any State.

5. A makes a note as treasurer to order of himself individually, indorses it "Pay B & C and D & E," two separate firms. B & C indorse, but by some neglect D & E do not. D & E have since failed. B & C now say, through their lawyer, that they are not liable because D & E failed to indorse. B & C received notice of protest, and since the failure D & E verbally promised to pay it. Under these circumstances are B & C liable, and within what time must an action be commenced ?

A. The lack of D & E's indorsement was in itself sufficient reason for non-payment and protest, and if that were the cause it appears likely to have been the holder's fault, and B & C could not in reason be bound to stand in the gap. Their verbal promise, without some new consideration, would not bind them. As the case appears above, therefore, we do not think that B & C could be held as indorsers. An action against them, to test the question, would need to be commenced within six years from the date of protest.

6. We sold some goods to a party doing business in Indiana, for which we received his two notes. One note we sold before maturity, and the holder of the same accidentally omitted to send it for collec tion. The makers having failed in the meantime and gone through

bankruptcy, settled with all their creditors except with the one spoken of, who never received notice of bankruptcy or of any of the meetings of creditors. Can this party collect full amount of his claim, or must he accept compromise?

A. The holder of the note lost if any, by his failure to present it. a legal compromise, that is all the collect.

all recourse to the indorsers, If the settlement made was holder of the note can now

7. A gave a note to B on the 28th of November, payable on the 1st of January. B sold the note. A went to B to buy the note, not knowing B had sold it. B would not own he had sold it, but tried to make out he did not have it with him. A afterwards found out that he had sold it. Now if on the day it becomes due B does not state that he has sold it, and cannot produce it, is A obliged to pay it?

Is there any law that unless the words "with notice the note, it is not entitled to notice?

are written in

By answering these two questions, you will greatly oblige.

A. If the note is negotiable, B is not obliged to notify A that he has sold it.

And A must pay it when due, if presented properly indorsed. The allowance of three days' grace upon promissory notes is established by custom in this State, and need not be mentioned in the document itself.

8. The payee presents for discount a note in which the day of the month is left out of the date; has he or any person other than the maker a right to insert the same, there being no evidence of the intention of the maker as to the precise date the note should bear? The note being forwarded to the payee by mail, would the date of the letter of the payor be proper evidence as to his intention as to the date of the note, so that the payee could insert it?

A. If the date is omitted, the holder, if he does not know the figures intended, may assume that the true date is the date when it was made or issued (Chitty on Bills, ch. 5, p. 169); or if that cannot be ascertained, from the day when its existence can first be established (Com. Dig. Fait B. 3; Bayley on Bills, ch. 7, sec. 1, p. 248). Or the holder may fill it up with an arbitrary date (even after the maker is dead), and the fact of such insertion is no defense to the demand for payment. Story on Prom. Notes, sec. 48; Usher vs. Dauncey, 4 Camp., 97; 22 Eng. Law and Eq. R., 516, and a host of other authorities.