Changes in the date of the instrument,1 either antedating2 or postdating3 it; or a change in the period of maturity, making maturity come earlier4 or later5 than that fixed by the original contract; changing the period for which interest is to run, either making it begin earlier,6 as by changing the period of interest from "from maturity" to "from date,"7 or by delaying it,8 adding "fixed," which excludes days of grace;9 or adding that certain orders should be filled in thirty days,10 are all material alterations. A change of the time of performance from a certain number of days to "a reasonable time," is a material alteration,11 apparently without regard to the question of the actual change in the time for performance.12 Inasmuch as the original contract was to be performed according to its terms in a certain time, and the question of a reasonable time is a question of fact, such an alteration should be regarded as material, even if in the particular case the two different periods of time happened to coincide.

4 See Sec. 1164.

5 Mathewson's Case, 5 Coke 22b (except as to mutilation of seal of several obligor); Seaton v. Henson, 2 Show. 29; Rittenhouse v. Levering, 6 Watts & S. (Pa.) 190; Piercy v. Piercy, 5 W. Va. 199.

1 White Sewing Machine Co. v. Saxon, 121 Ala. 399, 25 So. 784; Brackett v. Mountfort, 11 Me. 115; Homer v. Wallis, 11 Mass. 309, 6 Am. Dec. 169; Adams v. Frye, 44 Mass. (3 Met.) 103.

Contra, Blackwell v. Lane, 20 N. Car. (4 Dev. & B. L.) 113, 32 Am. Dec. 675; Foust v. Renno, 8 Pa. St. 378; Henning v. Werkheiser, 8 Pa. St. 518; Marshall v. Gougler, 10 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 164; Shiffer v. Mosier, 225 Pa. St. 552, 24 L. R. A. (N.S.) 1155, 74 Atl. 426; Swank v. Kaufman, 255 Pa. St. 316, L. R. A. 1917D, 826, 99 Atl. 1000; Fuller v. Green, 64 Wis. 159, 54 Am. Rep. 600, 24 N. W. 907.

2 White Sewing Machine Co. v. Saxon, 121 Ala. 389, 25 So. 784; Swank v. Kaufman, 255 Pa. St. 316, L. R. A. 1917D, 826, 99 Atl. 1000.

3 Homer v. Wallis, 11 Mass. 309, 6 Am. Dec. 169.

4 Sharpe v. Bagwell, 16 X. Car. (1 Dev. Eq.) 115.

1 United States. Wood v. Steele, 73 U. S. (6 Wall.) 80, 18 L. ed. 725.

Alabama. Lesser v. Scholze, 93 Ala. 338, 9 So. 273.

Maryland. Mitchell v. Ringgold, 3 Harr. & J. (Md.) 159, 5 Am. Dec. 433.

Michigan. Johnson v. Johnson, 66 Mich. 525.

Missouri. McMurtrey v. Sparks, 71 Mo. App. 126.

Montana. McMillan v. Hefferlin, 18 Mont. 385, 45 Pac. 548.

Nebraska. Brown v. Straw, 6 Neb. 536, 29 Am. Rep. 369.

New Jersey. Bodine v. Berg, 82 N. J. L. 662, 40 L. R. A. (N.S.) 05, 82 Atl. 901.

New York. Rogers v. Vosburgh, 87 N. Y. 228.

Ohio. Newman v. King, 54 O. S. 273, 56 Am. St. Rep. 705, 35 L. R. A. 471, 43 N. E. 683.

Pennsylvania. Stephens v. Graham, 7 Serg. & R. (Pa.) 505, 10 Am. Dec. 485.

Texas. Boll v. Boyd, 76 Tex. 133, 13 S. W. 232.

Vermont. Barton Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Stephenson, 87 Vt. 433, 51 L. R. A. (N.S.) 346, 89 Atl. 639.

2 Seebold v. Tatlie, 76 Minn. 131, 78 N. W. 967.

3 Boulton v. Langmuir, 24 Ont. App. 618; Wood v. Steele, 73 V. S. (6 Wall.) 80, 18 L. ed. 725; Newman v.

If a date is marked out, and another date is written above it, it will be presumed that such change is intended as an alteration of the instrument, and not merely as a memorandum showing the time from which interest is to be computed.13

Change of a date in a renewal instrument is material as to the parties who do not assent thereto, at least if they were not liable on the original instrument, although such date is changed for the purpose of making the new instrument bear interest from the time to which interest had been paid on the original instrument.14

King, 54 O. S. 273, 56 Am. St. Rep. 705, 35 L. R. A. 471, 43 N. E. 683.

4 Hartley v. Corboy, 150 Pa. St. 23, 24 Atl. 295; Crockett v. Thomason, 37 Tenn. (5 Sneed) 342.

5 Stayner v. Joice, 82 Ind. 35; Bank v. Payne (Ky.), 42 S. W. 736; Flani-gan v. Phelps, 42 Minn. 186, 43 N. W. 1113; Bacon v. Theiss, - Mo.-, 208 S. W. 254.

6 Brooks v. Allen, 62 Ind. 401. 7 Sheley v. Sampson, 5 Kan. App.

465, 46 Pac. 994.

8 Coburn v. Webb, 56 Ind. 96, 26 Am. Rep. 15.

9 Steinau v. Moody, 100 Ga. 136, 28 S. E. 30.

10 United States Glass Co. v. Bottle Co., 81 Fed. 993.

11 Robertson v. Southwestern Co., 136 Ark. 417, 206 S. W. 755.

12 Robertson v. Southwestern Co., 136 Ark. 417, 206 S. W. 755.

13 Barton Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Stephenson, 87 Vt. 433, 51 L. R. A. (N.S.) 346, 89 Atl. 639.

14 Barton Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. Stephenson, 87 Vt. 433, 51 L. R. A. (N.S.) 346, 89 Atl. 639.