In very early times it may be that a release did not operate as a legal discharge of a specialty,5 since payment6 or judgment 7 did not. Even at the present day a negotiable instrument before maturity cannot be effectually discharged by release.8 Nothing but cancellation, destruction, or surrender of the instrument itself can fully discharge a negotiable instrument before maturity. But this is now the only exception to the efficacy of a release.

3 Thus where a release is executed on Sunday it is effectual since it is an executed transaction. Williams v. Philadelphia Rapid Transit Co., 257 Pa. 354, 101 Atl. 748.

4 St. Louis, I. M. & S. R. Co. v. Hambright, 87 Ark. 614, 113 S. W. 803; Chicago Ac. R. v. Jennings, 217 I11. 494, 75 N. . 560; Reddington v. Blue, 168 la. 34,149 N. W. 933; MaUoy v. Chicago Ac. R. Co. (la.), 170 N. W. 481; Missouri Pac. R. v. Goodholm, 61 Kan. 758, 60 Pac. 1066; Louisville Ac. R. v. Helm, 121 Ky. 645, 89 S. W. 709; Connors v. Richards, 230 Mass. 436, 119 N. E. 831; Wheeler v. Metropolitan Stock Exch., 72 N. H. 315, 56 Atl. 754; Shaw v. Delaware & Hudson R., 126 N. Y. App. D. 210, 110 N. Y. S. 362; Clark v. Northern Pac. R., 36 N. Dak. 503, 162 N. W. 406, L. R. A. 1917 E. 399. See also infra, Sec. 1551.

5 See Fowell v. Forrest, 2 Wms. Saund. 47 n.

6 Ames, Specialty Contracts and Equitable Defenses, 9 Harv. L. Rev. 49, 54.

7 See infra, Sec. 1920

8Dod v. Edwards, 2 C. 6 P. 602; Schoen v. Houghton, 50 Cal. 528.