LEADING LAW SCHOOL TEXT BOOKS Andrew Stephen's Pleading, 2nd Ed., 1901.... 4.50 Cooley Blackstone Commentaries (2 in 1) 4th Ed.... 9.00 4.50 Cyclopedic Law Dictionary, 2nd Ed., 1922.. 6.50 Elliott on Municipal Corporations, 3rd Ed., 1925. 4.50 3.25 4.50 Kales Restraint of Trade Summary, 1918. 2.50 3.50 5.00 Mechem Elements of Partnership, 2nd Ed., 1920. 4.50 4.00 2.50 5.00 4.50 4.50 Reynolds Evidence, 1911..... 3.75 Rood on Wills, 2nd Ed., 1926.. 5.50 Rush on Equity Pldg. and Practice, 3rd Ed., 1919. OUTLINES OF. SURETYSHIP AND GUARANTY BY EARL C. ARNOLD PROFESSOR OF LAW IN GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL CHICAGO PREFACE One acquainted with the number of reported cases involving the law of suretyship and guaranty would not expect to find them all cited in a book limited in space such as this one. Nor would he expect to find consideration given to all the problems which might be treated in an exhaustive work. The object has been to give an outline of the subject which will be helpful to students of law, and, it is hoped, will be found of value to the active practitioner. The author has purposed to consider the problems presented by cases which are landmarks, both in England and the United States. Many of the recent cases, indicating the present trend of the courts, will be found quoted and cited. In the footnotes have been placed references to discussions in law journals which in recent years are exerting an influence upon the courts. In citing cases, the idea of referring to leading cases, containing representative views of all jurisdictions, has been kept in mind. Believing that the student desires the original sources, quotations from leading judicial authorities have been made both in the body of the text and in the footnotes. It has been the author's purpose to point out the conflict of authority where it exists, and, in many instances, to call attention to criticism of the views of the court. Where the surety on a negotiable instrument is affected differently from one on a non-negotiable undertaking, a discussion of the Negotiable Instruments Law, and the cases interpreting it, will be found. This uniform act, now in force in all the states, the District of Columbia, Alaska, Hawaii, and the Philippine Islands, has changed materially, in some respects, the view of the law merchant as to the liability of the surety on negotiable instruments. The age which revolutionized transportation has changed entirely methods of writing surety bonds. Until near the twentieth century, when a bond or surety was required, the principal requested a relative or friend to sign with him. The experience |