Where a demand has been made upon a promissory note or due diligence has been used in trying to make a demand, and the note has not been paid, or where a bill of exchange or a check has been presented for acceptance and an acceptance has been refused, or where a bill has been presented for payment or due diligence shown in the attempt to present, and the bill has not been paid, the indorser of the note and the drawer and in-dorser of the bill or the indorser of a check are entitled to notice of the dishonor, and a failure to use due diligence in order to give such notice discharges the drawer and indorser of a bill or the indorser of a check or note except in those cases which will be hereinafter noticed. The anomalous case of an indorser of a certificate of deposit has been already noticed.1 This discharge that results from a failure in due diligence in giving notice of dishonor is as absolute as the discharge that results from a failure in due diligence in making a demand. As it has been pointed out, certain bills of exchange require no demand of payment as against the drawer, because they are the drawer's promissory notes.2 But the indorser upon such bills is in the attitude of an indorser upon a promissory note as to notice.3 Again, certain kinds of indorsers stand in the position either of drawers of bills or makers of notes.4 Their right to notice of dishonor is to be determined as to bills by the fact as to whether they have the right to claim a demand.5 As to such indorsers of notes they are as makers not entitled to notice of dishonor.6 Certain other indorsers are treated as guarantors.7 Not being entitled to claim a demand, such indorsers are not entitled to notice of dishonor.8 Therefore the rule may be said to be that whoever is entitled to claim that a demand of payment should be made or due diligence shown therefor, on penalty of his discharge, is entitled to claim that notice of dishonor should be given to him or due diligence shown therefor, on penalty also of his discharge;9 and the converse need not be added that the holder looks to him for payment, for that is the irresistible and necessary conclusion from the act of giving notice.7 Thus notice to the indorser of the commencement of an action upon an overdue note is notice of non-payment,8 or service of process on the maker notified to the indorser is sufficient in form,9 or the presentation of the dishonored draft for payment,10 or the presenting of an account charging the person to whom notice is to be given, with the amount of the paper, protest fees and interest.11 The notice may be printed or written;12 the signature of the notary may be written or printed.13 The notice itself need not be addressed if the envelope in which it is contained is addressed.14

3Proof may be offered, but it should be for the court.

4 The existence of a state of war is necessarily a question of law.

5 See the cases in note 1, and the first case cited in the next note.

6 United States v. Barker, Fed. Cas. No. 14,519. See Citizens' Bank v. Pugh, 19 La. Ann. 43.

7SeeSec. 291, post.

8 Berry v. Southern Bank, 2 Duv. 379; Gayarre v. Sabatier, 24 La. Ann. 358.

9 Lane v. Bank of West Tennessee, 9 Heisk. 419. But compare Peters, v. Hobbs, 25 Ark. 67.

10 See last case in last note.

1 See Sec. 243, ante. 2SeeSec. 208, ante.

3 He is the indorser of an accepted bill or a promissory note. 4 See Sec. Sec. 236, 240, ante.

5 See Sec. Sec. 236, 240, ante. 6 See Sec. 240, ante. 7See Sec. 241, ante.

8 See Sec. 241, ante.

9 Thus if the maker has abof the rule is also true, except that if a demand is actually made and payment refused notice must be given. The drawer of a check can only object for want of notice where the failure to notify him of the dishonor causes him actual injury, and then to the extent of his injury. Subject to the foregoing qualifications, we proceed to discuss the rules of law as to notice of dishonor.