Another example of strict construction of the surety's contract is in the holding that the amount named in the surety's bond is the maximum sum that could be recovered in a suit instituted on the bond.8 This being in accordance with the obligation of the surety's agreement, the penalty in the bond must therefore be considered as the limit of promissor's obligation. Where, however, after the surety is in default, he delays meeting his obligation, he must answer, in addition, for the legal rate of interest on the money due on the obligation and withheld from the creditor.7 The rule is sometimes stated that, when the obligation matures on the default of the principal, then the surety being also in default, he must answer for the consequences of his own delay in meeting the obligation thereafter.8

Some courts hold that interest runs from the date of breach, others from the date of demand. But it is held, nevertheless, that the doctrine that the surety is not to be liable beyond the penalty named in the bond does not apply where the bond is conditional for the performance of a covenant other than the payment of money. In such a case, quantum damni-ficatus is the issue.9

A surety, or guarantor, is likewise liable for stipulated damages to be paid in case of breach, and this may include the expense of suit, attorney's fees and additional damages. This would be the case, for instance, where the surety agrees to answer "for all legal or other expenses, or for collection." 10

6 Leggett vs. Humphreys, 21 How.

(U. S.), 66.

7 Harris vs. Clap, 1 Mass., 308.

8 Frink et al. vs. Southern Ex. Co., 82 Ga., 33.

9 Beers vs. Shannon, 73 N. Y., 292.