The sum for which the bill is drawn should be written in full in the body of the instrument, as the words in the body govern in case of doubt; 5 Bingh. N. C. 425 ; Mears v. Graham, 8 Blackf. (Ind.) 144; Smith v. Smith, 1 R. I. 398, 53 Am. Dec. 652 ; the marginal figures are not a part of the con tract, but a mere memorandum; Smith v. Smith, 1 R. I. 398, 53 Am. Dec. 652 ; Corn. v. Bank, 98 Mass. 12, 93 Am. Dec. 126.
The amount must be fixed and certain, and not contingent ; 2 Salk. 375; Philadelphia Bank v. Newkirk, 2 Miles (Pa.) 442 ; Story v. Lamb, 52 Mich. 525, 18 N. W. 248. It must be payable in money, and not in mer chandise; Jerome v. Whitney, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 321; Thomas v. Roosa, id. 461; Peay v. Pickett, 1 N. & Mc. (S. C.) 254; Gwinn v. Roberts, 3 Ark. 72 ; Strader v. Batchelor, 8 B. Monr. (Ky.) 168; Hosstatter v. Wilson, 36 Barb. (N. Y.) 307; and is not negotiable if payable in bank bills or in currency or other substitutes for legal money of similar denominations ; Hasbrook v. Palmer, 2 Mc Lean, 10, Fed. Cas. No. 6,188; Collins v. Lincoln, 11 Vt. 268; Kirkpatrick v. McCul lough, 3 Humphr. (Tenn.) 171, 39 Am. Dec. 158 ; Hawkins v. Watkins, 5 Ark. 481; Mc Cormick v. Trotter, 10 S. & R. (Pa.) 94; Ir vine v. Lowry, 14 Pet. (U. S.) 293, 10 L. Ed. 462; Bank of Mobile v. Brown, 42 Ala. 108; held otherwise in Swetland v. Creigh, 15• Ohio, 118; Besancon v. Shirley, 9 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 457; Cockrill v. Kirkpatrick, 9 Mo. 697; Wilburn v. Greer, 6 Ark. 255; Og den v. Slade, 1 Tex. 13 ; Fleming v. Nall, id. 246 ; Chevallier v. Buford, id. 503; Lacy v. Holbrook, 4 Ala. 88; Carter v. Penn, id. 140; Bull v. Bank, 123 U. S. 112, 8 Sup. Ct. 62, 31 L. Ed. 97 ; Laird v. State, 61 Md. 309.
It is not necessary, however, that the money should be current in the place of pay ment, or where the bill is drawn; it may be in the money of any country whatever; Black v. Ward, 27 Mich. 193, 15 Am. Rep. 162; Thompson v. Sloan, 23 Wend. (N. Y.) 71, 35 Am. Dec. 546; King v. Hamilton, 12 Fed. 478; 1 Dan. Neg. Inst. § 58. But it is neces sary that the instrument should express the specific denomination of money when pay able in the money of a foreign country, in order that the courts may be able to ascer tain its equivalent value; otherwise it is not negotiable ; 1 Dan. Neg. Inst. § 58. As to
bills payable in Confederate money, see Thor ington v. Smith, 8 Wall. (U. S.) 12, 19 L. Ed. 361; The Confederate Note Case, 19 Wall. (U. S.) 548, 22 L. Ed. 196; Stewart v. Sala mon, 94 U. S. 434, 24 L. Ed. 275; and that title.
"Value received" is often inserted, but is not of any use in a negotiable bill; Hubble v. Fogartie, 3 Rich. (S. C.) 413, 45 Am. Dec. 775; Mandeville v. Welch, 5 Wheat. (U. S.) 277, 5 L. Ed. 87 ; Lines v. Smith, 4 Fla. 47; v. Ledlie's Adm'rs, 31 Pa. 506; 3 M. & S. 351.
A direction to place to the account of some one, drawer, drawee, or third person, is often added, but is unnecessary ; Comyns, Dig. Merchant, F, 5; 1 B. & C. 398.
As per advice, inserted in a bill, deprives the drawee of authority to pay the bill until advised; Chitty, Bills 162.
It should be subscribed by the drawer, though it is sufficient if his name appear in the body of the instrument; 2 Ld. Raym. 1376; Claussen v. La Franz, 1 Ia. 231; May v. Miller, 27 Ala. 515; and should be address ed to the drawee by the Christian name and surname, or by the full style of the firm ; 2 Pardessus, n. 335; Beawes, Lex Mere. pl. 3; Chitty, Bills 186.
Provision may be made by the drawer, and inserted as a part of the bill, for applying to another person, for a return without pro test, or for limiting the damages for re-ex change, expense, etc., in case of the failure or refusal of the drawee to accept or to pay ; Chitty, Bills 188.
A bona fide holder of a bill negotiated be fore maturity merely as a security for an antecedent debt is net affected, without no tice, by equities or defences between the original parties; Brooklyn City & N. R. Co. v. Bank, 102 U. S. 14, 26 L. Ed. 61.
A certificate,, made and payable in a state, out of a particular fund, and purporting to be the obligation of a municipal corporation, is not governed by the law merchant, and is open in the hands of slebsequent holders to the same defencSs as existed against the orig inal payee ; Indiana v. Glover, 155 U. S. 513, 15 Sup,, Ct. 186,39 L. Ed. 243.
See INDORSEMNNT; INDORSER; INDORSEE; ACCEPTANCE; PNOTEST; DAMAGES; PROMIS SORY NOTE; NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT; FOR EIGN BILL OF EX4IIANGE.