In days when instantaneous communication by telegraph was not possible, an acceptance supra protest was of far more importance than it is to-day. If a bill were dishonored and the drawer could be reached only by the slow process of the mails, an incalculable injury might be done to his credit should his bills be dishonored. The acceptance supra protest was and remains an acceptance made by some one not a party to the bill. It could be made only after the bill had been dishonored, and if protest were required only after protest. The usual form was for such acceptor to write upon the bill,"Accepted supra protest for the honor of " the person for whom it was accepted, or simply "Accepts s. p." The engagement of such acceptor is to pay if the drawee does not pay at maturity. The acceptance must be assented to by the holder, but need not be notified to the drawer and indorsers for their consent.1 It would appear that since the acceptor supra protest can only accept after dishonor, an acceptance supra protest presupposes that notice of dishonor has already been given to the drawer and indorsers. Therefore the holder is not required to give notice of the acceptance supra protest; yet the acceptor supra protest should notify the person for whose honor he accepted. The acceptor supra protest should state for whom he accepts. If no statement be made, the presumption is that the acceptance is for the honor of the drawer. There may be several acceptances for honor in succession, and the engagement of each acceptor would be the same, but it would be several. Since the engagement of the acceptor supra protest is to pay the bill if the drawee does not, the bill must be presented upon maturity to the drawee, or the acceptor supra protest will be released as well as the drawer.2 It is conceived that any extension given to the drawee without such acceptor's consent would release him. The acceptor supra protest pays for his principal, who is the person he accepts for. But such acceptor may make such acceptance, though he does it under a guaranty from the drawee.3 If he pay, he should notify the drawer or person for whom he accepted,4 and he is entitled to recover the amount he paid and interest, and protest fees, if he paid them.6

3 Gilman v. King, 2 Cranch, G C. 48.

4 This is the presumptive place of payment.

5 Commercial Bank v. Barksdale, 36 Ma 563. And see cases in note 1, supra.

6 Thorp v. Craig, 10 Iowa. 461. The law of the place where draft drawn governs presentment and notice. But see Chatam Bank v. Allison, 15 Iowa, 357; Belford v. Bangs, 15 Bradw. 76. Notice to in-dorser must be according to the place of indorsement. But see Wooley v. Lyon, 117 I11 244; Snow v. Perkins, 2 Mich. 238; Aymer v.

Sheldon, 12 Wend. 439; Musson v. Lake, 4 How. 262; Williams v. Putnam, 14 N. EL 540. But see Bank of Orange Co. v. Colby, 12 N. H. 520; Raymond v. Holmes, 11 Tex. 54. Compare Williams v. Wade, 1 Met. 82. In this last case the note was probably payable where dated.

7 In absence of proof it will be assumed to be, according to some states, the common law, in others the law of the forum.

8Greenleaf on Evidence (16th ed.), Sec. Sec. 43, 486; 1 Chitty on Bills (13th Am. ed.), 344.

9 See last note.

1See 1 Chitty on Bills (13th Am. ed.), 344.

2 Williams v. Germaine, 7 B. & C. 468; Schofield v. Bayard, 3 Wend. 488. This last decision holds that such presentment for payment must be made as against the drawers. The only reason that can be offered for such a ruling is that the holder has accepted the conditional engagement of the acceptor supra protest, and if he release him by negligence he had no right to recur to the drawers.