TENANTS IN COMMON are such as hold an undivided property, with a unity of possession, by several and distinct titles. Tenants in common should be distinguished from JOINT TENANTS, for they properly take their common ownership by distinct parts, and have no entirety of interest ; and therefore there is no survivorship between tenants in common. A tenant in common may devise by will, or assign, alienate, charge, or mortgage during his life, his undivided part in the common property ; and he may do this in the same manner as if he were solely possessed of the whole property.
offer to deliver something, made in pursuance of some contract or obligation, under such circumstances as to require no further act from the party making it to complete the transfer. " Legal tender " is money of the character which by law a debtor may require his creditor to receive in payment, in the absence of any agreement in the contract or obligation itself. What money is a legal tender is stated in the article on COINAGE ; but to that statement it should be added that a tender of a note or notes of the Bank of England is, except in the case of a tender by the bank itself, a legal tender to the amount expressed in the note or notes, for all sums above £'5, so long as the bank continues to pay its notes, on demand, in legal coin (3 Sr 4 Will. IV. c. 98, s. 6). Though, strictly speaking, a legal tender must either be in certain current coin or Bank of England notes, yet a tender of a country bank-note or bill, or of a draft or cheque on a banker, or in some other manner not strictly constituting a legal tender, if not objected to by the creditor on that account, or if objected to by him on some other account, will be sufficient ( Wright v. Reed; Lockyer v. Jones; Jones v. Arthur).
By and zb whom.--A tender must be made on behalf of the person who owes the money. But, on the authority of the following case, it would seem that the agent of the debtor may exceed his instructions if he does so at his own risk. The agent of a debtor tendered the whole sum demanded by the creditor, by pulling out his pocket-book, and offering, if he would go into a neighbouring public-house, to pay it, which the creditor refused to take ; the tender was held to be good, although the agent was only authorised by the debtor to tender a sum short of the whole sum demanded, and offered the rest at his own risk (Read v. Gouldring). A tender to an authorised
agent is a tender to his principal (Goodland v. Bkwith). So a tender to a managing clerk is good though he should have received orders not to accept it (Meat v. Parsons). And if a solicitor sends a letter demanding payment, and the debtor makes a tender to that is a good tender unless the solicitor disclaims his authority at the time ; and if the solicitor is absent, he is bound by the acts of those whom he allows to represent him at his office (Wilmot v. Smith). But it has been held that a tender made to the ma.naging clerk of the creditor's solicitor, who at the time disclaims authority from his master to receive the debt, is insufficient (Bingham v. Allport); though, in the subsequent case of Finch v. Boning, there was a difference of opinion by the Court as to whether a tender of a compounded debt due to a solicitor was good when made to a clerk in the office who said that the solicitor was out and that he, the clerk, had " no instructions." As a general rule, how ever, where a person demands payment of money at his office, such demand amounts to a special authority for his clerk there to receive it ; therefore, in his absence, a tender to the clerk is a good tender, although he states that he is not authorised to receive the money (Kirton v . Braithwaite). A tender to one of several joint creditors is a tender to all. Thus, if A., 13., and C. have a joint demand on D., and D. offers A. to pay him the debt, which A. refuses, without objecting to the form of the tender on account of his being only entitled to the joint demand, D. may plead this tender in defence to an action for the joint demand, it being, strictly speaking, a tender to A., B., and C. jointly (Doug,rlas v. Patrkk). And if A. is indebted to several persons in different sums of money, and when they are all assembled together tenders them one gross sum sufficient to satisfy all their demands, which they refuse to receive, insisting on more being due, this is a good tender (Black v. Smith). But where a party has separate demands for unequal sums against several persons, an offer of one sum for the debts of all will not amount to a tender in respect of the debt of one (Strong v. Harvey).