time before it has been communicated to A, and the bargain closed thus.

81. A firm of commission merchants here order from a commission merchant in an adjoining city a lot of merchandise, such being received by him daily on consignment from his country shippers. This and other orders are given, with instructions to make good selections, bill same at selling price of that day and send bill of lading and make sight draft for same. These orders were filled as above, goods were received and paid for upon representation. Upon sending a similar order the following week the goods were sent forward as before by the same house, but to the charge for goods and cartage is added 24 per cent. upon the amount of bill. This was new, no such charge being mentioned in any prior transaction, the goods shipped being those received by the seller on commission. The reason now assigned for such charge is that if buyers bought the same goods in that market through broker they would have to pay him 24 per cent for buying the same. Is such a charge of 24 per cent. by seller just and legal, the same not having been mentioned in any prior transaction?

A. We are not prepared to say that if the sellers were obliged to exercise any unusual care in the selection, and were actually troubled more to fill such an order than to make the sale of the goods consigned to them in the ordinary way, they would not be entitled to a brokerage sufficient to compensate them for the difference. We think, however, that after filling a similar order for which there was no such charge they ought not now to make it without previous notice. We doubt if it could be legally collected, and it hardly seems equitable, unless, as we have said, the "selection" gave much additional trouble.

82. A orders goods of B for C, A requesting B to send goods and attach bill of lading and draw through a bank. The goods having been received by C, C having paid A and A to the bank, the bank fails after A has paid and before the bank pays B. A does not guaranty B but simply requests B to attach and draw. The question is: Does A or B lose in the above case?

A. The loss will fall upon B unless he can collect of the bank.

83. We order from a house in London some goods, which they ship, and without any instructions from us get insured and charge us with insurance. The goods are damaged on voyage by shifting of cargo. When we ascertain the damage we send the necessary documents to the shippers with which to collect insurance. They present them to the insurance company, who call their attention to a clause in

the policy by which they are insured only in case of the vessel being wrecked or burnt. Now whose loss is it? We supposed by their charge for insurance without any qualification that they were fully insured against any disaster.

A. If the damage resulted from negligent stowage, or from any cause not excepted in the bill of lading, the ship is liable. Without instructions the London house was not bound to insure; and it was not legal negligence on its part, therefore, to take out a policy which, if its terms are correctly stated, excludes various risks usually covered by marine insurance. If, however, cable advices were sent, that the goods were insured, and the consignee was thus led to suppose them fully covered, and to neglect insurance on his own account, this might involve the London house in responsibility for the damage. Otherwise, and the ship cannot be held as above suggested, we do not see but the consignee will have to stand the loss himself.

84. A purchased of B July 1st 50 lambs at $4 per head, paid $20 on them, and agreed to take them away September 1st, and pay the balance. On September 1st A went after the lambs and 20 of them were dead. Now is A or B the loser?

66

A. If there was an actual sale and change of ownership, the lambs being selected or so identified that they became at once the property of the buyer, they remain with the seller at the buyer's risk. Leaving the property in the hands of the sellerif the pledge perish without the fault of the seller-he cannot be called on to return the pledge, but may still call on the buyer to pay his debt."-Parsons on Contracts, volume 1, page 529. "The seller is to keep the thing sold until the time for delivery with ordinary care, and is liable for the want of that care, or of good faith; but if he does so keep it he is not liable for its loss." -Ibid, 532.

SETTLEMENT OF ACCOUNTS.

1. Two parties agree to order goods from abroad, each taking onehalf interest in the importation. One of the parties attends to the ordering, providing funds, etc. The goods arrive, and by agreement an interest in them is sold to a third party at a stipulated price, and the whole quantity then sold on joint account, resulting in a profit. Statements are rendered by the orderer and receiver of proceeds to each of the parties, showing net profits to their credit. It so happens

there is a running account between the orderer and the third party, who, in the meantime fails, and is unable to pay a debit balance against him. What is the proper relation of this credited amount, between the two original parties?

A. If No. 3 has paid for the interest which has resulted in a profit that stands to his credit in the hands of No. 1, we do not see that No. 2 has any further connection with it. The question then is, how far No. 1 may use it as a set off to the debt which No. 3 owes him. If the debt has matured, and both debt and credit are in the same name, we see no reason why this may not be done.

2. In settling account by note is it customary to include the interest on the three days' grace?

A. If the account bears interest it is reckoned on the grace; but if the note matures when the account is due, the debtor obtains the three days' extra time as a bonus for executing the written obligation.

3. If we buy a bill of goods, say $1,000, terms four months or 6 per cent. off for cash, and we pay cash, $500, for what amount should our account be credited?

A. The buyer should be credited such a sum of the principal as at 6 per cent. discount will net $500, and this is $531.91.

4. I buy a bill of goods from a firm and they deduct 24 per cent. from the amount for cash. The goods are delivered without a demand for payment. Two weeks later I voluntarily pay the bill, when they refuse to allow the 2 per cent. Should I lose the discount, when I stood ready to pay at any time on demand? I accept the bill as rendered, and it is through no fault of mine that the terms are not com. plied with.

A. The whole question turns on a single point not stated, viz. : When was the bill payable to secure the benefit of the discount? Our correspondent is mistaken in supposing that because no demand was made for the money, it was not his fault that the terms were not complied with. A debtor who knows where his creditor is to be found is bound to tender him the money to secure the benefit of a discount limited to a given date. Indeed, in all cases, the debtor, whether he owes rent, interest, or principal, is bound to seek out his creditor and pay the money to him, with

out waiting for a demand. While this is its legal aspect, the ordinary custom is to allow the cash discount where payment is made within a few days of the purchase, and on the first demand for it, and it seems as if a little sharp practice had been used by the sellers, unless the time was absolutely and positively limited to the day of purchase, or within 24 or 48 hours of it.

5. A, of Chicago, sells to B, of New York, a quantity of merchandise. The price is made delivery in New York, less 5 per cent. for prompt cash. B pays the freight. In settlement B remits amount of invoice less 5 per cent., and less freight. A claims that the 5 per cent. should be deducted from amount of invoice after deduction of freight. Who is correct?

A. If A had himself paid freight in advance, would he have deducted it from his invoice before taking off the five per cent.? It is clear that he could not, and B is right.

6. We are buying goods from an English house through an agent in this city, and we pay in sterling bills; during the summer the agent called upon us and asked for payment on account in dollars. We gave him $4,000. Some two months later we get an account current and find (for the first time) that the agent had converted the dollars into sterling at the rate then current. To this we objected on the ground that we had not authorized him to buy the exchange and that it takes a mutual agreement for such conversion. We claim that therefore the conversion has yet to be made.

A. If the money was given as a payment, we think our correspondent is wrong, and the price of sterling on the day the money was paid fixes the rate, unless there was some stipulation to the contrary. If the money was lent to the agent, the same to be converted into sterling and credited on the order of the lenders and at their option, then the latter have the right to say when the conversion shall take place.

7. Will you please decide when an open account falling due on Sunday, or on a legal holiday, becomes due? One of your leading , sugar refiners writes that "all bills or debts of any kind (on open ac count) falling due on Sunday or legal holiday, are payable on the next following secular day." Another large refiner of your city writes, "bills falling due on Sunday are payable on Saturday." We think that you have heretofore decided that open accounts due on Sunday are payable on Monday.

A. All drafts, promissory notes, and other negotiable securi

ties, maturing in this State (N.Y.) on Sunday or other holiday, are payable the previous secular day. All interest coupons, rents, and open accounts, falling due on a holiday, are payable the following secular day. We presume that the person above referred to, who wrote that "bills falling due on Sunday are payable on Saturday," used the word "bill" in its English sense, defined by Webster to be "an obligation or security given for money, under the hand, and sometimes the seal, of the debtor, without a condition or forfeiture of non-payment. To give a bill" in England is equivalent to giving a promissory note or acceptance.

SHIPPING.

BILLS OF LADING.

66

1. Last July a ship was chartered for London under a charter containing the following conditions :

It is further agreed between the parties to this instrument, that the said party of the second part shall be allowed for the loading and discharging of the vessel at the respective ports aforesaid, lay days as follows, that is to say, 25 running days for loading at New York, to be discharged with customary dispatch at port of discharge. And in case the vessel is longer detained, the said party of the second part agress to pay to the said party of the first part demurrage at the rate of 28 pounds British sterling per day, day by day, for every day so detained, provided such detention shall happen by default of said party of the second part or their agent.

Bills of lading to be signed as presented without prejudice to this charter. Any difference to be settled before the vessel sails. If in favor of the vessel, cash, at current rate of exchange, less insurance. If in favor of the party of the second part, by draft of captain upon his consignees, payable ten days after the arrival of vessel at port of discharge.

The vessel having laid out her lay days, presented by her agents a bill for one day's demurrage to her charterers, and so continued to do each day for 11 days, when she was loaded and cleared, and bills of lading were presented to the master for his signature by the charterers, they having neither paid any demurrage nor acknowledged in any way the claim. Had the master a right to refuse to sign the bills of lading till the demurrage was paid? What position can the master take in the event of the charterers declining to say anything about demurrage till their bills of lading are signed?

A. The master was bound to sign the bills of lading as presented, but was entitled to his demurrage before sailing.

2. A vessel is chartered to load a cargo of deals for Belfast, London, or Cardiff, as ordered on signing bill of lading. The cargo is loaded and bill of lading signed for Belfast. Subsequently, and before vessel had moved from her loading berth or in any way commenced her voyage, the captain is requested by both shipper and consignee of