In other jurisdictions a regular indorsement is treated as an incomplete contract, or as some courts express it, only evidence that some contract has been entered into. Where such view obtains extrinsic evidence is admissible to show the terms of the contract.1 Thus a parol contract that the indorsement was without recourse,2 or that the indorser was a joint maker,3 or that the indorsee is to exhaust certain collateral before he looks to the indorser for payment,4 is enforceable where this rule obtains.

Even where a blank indorsement is held to be incomplete, a memorandum over the signature may show a complete written contract. Extrinsic evidence of the terms of the contract is then inadmissible.5

22Plumley v. First National Bank, 76 W. Va. 635, 87 S. E. 94.

23 Meyers Co. v. Battle, 170 N. Car. 168 [sub nomine, Myers Co. v. Battle, 86 S. E. 1034].

24 Young v. Sehon, 53 W. Va. 127, 62 L. R. A. 499, 44 S. E. 136.

25 Clark v. Sallaska, - Okla. - , 4 A. L. R. 746, 174 Pae. 505.

1 Georgia. Winnebago National Bank v. Woodliff, 145 Ga. 239, 88 S. E. 973 (under Sec. 5796, Code of 1910).

Iowa. First National Bank v. Crab-tree, 86 Ia. 731, 62 N. W. 559.

Kansas. Northrup National Bank v. Yates Center National Bank, 98 Kan. 563, 159 Pac. 403.

Louisiana. Ragsdale v. Ragsdale, 105 La. 405, 29 So. 906.

Maine. Roads v. Webb, 91 Me. 406, 64 Am. St. Rep. 246, 40 Atl. 128.

Nebraska. Holmes v. Bank, 38 Neb. 326, 41 Am. St. Rep. 733, 56 N. W. 1011; Corbett v. Fetzer, 47 Neb. 269,

66 N. W. 417; Jaster v. Currie, 69 Neb. 4. 94 N. W. 995.

North Carolina. Coffin v. Smith, 128 N. Car. 252, 38 S. E. 864; Sykes v. Everett, 167 N. Car. 600, 4 A. L. R. 751, 83 S. E. 585.

Tennessee. Taylor v. French, 70 Tenn. (2 Lea) 257, 31 Am. Rep. 609.

2Pritchett v. Hape (Ky.), 51 S. W. 608; Cake v. Bank, 116 Pa. St. 264, 2 Am. St. Rep. 600, 9 Atl. 302.

By statute. Dickinson v. Burke, 8 N. D. 118, 77 N. W. 279.

3Barger v. Farnham, 130 Mich. 487. 90 N. W. 281.

4 Sykes v. Everett, 167 N. Car. 600, 4 A. L. R. 751, 83 S. E. 585.

5 Harrison v. McKim, 18 Ia. 485; Leary v. Blanchard, 48 Me. 269; United States National Bank v. Geer, 55 Neb. 462, 70 Am. St. Rep. 390, 41 L. R. A. 444, 75 N. W. 1088 [reversing on rehearing, 53 Neb. 67. 41 L. R. A. 439, 73 N. W. 266].