(N. S.) 1130, n. A demand is also required before action to recover a deposit in a bank; Johnson v. Bank, 1 Harring. (Del.) 117; Sickles v. Herold, 149 N. Y. 332, 43 N. A. 852; Tobias v. Morris, 126 Ala. 535, 28 South. 517.
A demand is not necessary before suit for rent, whether payable in money in advance; Clarke v. Charter, 128 Mass. 483; or in labor or property payable at a fixed time and place ; Packer v. Cockayne, 3 G. Greene (Ia.) 111; and in a suit for rent the demand need not he proved even where pleaded; Grubn v. Gudebrod Bros. Co., 21 Misc. 528, 47 N. Y. Supp. 714; for articles charged on land de vised to and accepted by residuary devisee.; Wiggin v. Wiggin, 43 N. H. -561, 80 Am. Dec. 192; for boatding a man under a con. tract; Chappell v. Woods, 9 Wash. 134, 37 Pac. 286 ; for fees of an attorney; Foster v. Newbrough, 66 Barb. (N. Y.) 645; Gibbs v. Davis, 11 Or. 288, 3 Pac. 677 ; but in New Jersey the rendering of an account is a con dition precedent to a suit ; Truitt v. Darnell, 65 N. J. Eq. 221, 55 Atl. 692. ' In cases arising ex deLicto, a demand is frequently necessary. Thus, when the wife, apprentice, or servant of one person has been harbored by another, the proper course is to make a demand of restoration before an action brought, in order to constitute the party a wilful wrong-doer unless the plain tiff can prove an original illegal enticing away; 2 Lev. 63; 5 East 39; 4 J. B. Moo. 12.
So, too, in cases where the taking of goods is lawful but their subsequent detention be comes illegal, it is absolutely necessary, in order to secure sufficient evidence of a con version on the trial, to give a formal notice of the owner's right to the property and pos session, and to make a formal demand in writing of the delivery of such possession to the owner. See TROYER; ComEasiox. And
when a nuisance has been erected or con tinued by a man on his own land, it is ad visable, particularly in the case of a private nuisance, to give the party notice, and re quest him to remove it, either before an en try is made for the purpose of abating it or an action is commenced against the wrong doer; and a demand is always indispensable in cases of a continuance of a nuisance orig inally created by another person; 2 B. & C. 302; Cro. Jac. 555; Poll. Torts 314; 5 Co. 100 ; 5 Viner, Abr. 506; 1 Ayliffe, Pand. 497; Bac. Abr. Rent, I.
In cases of contempts, as where an order to pay money or to do any other thing, has been made a rule of court, a demand the payment of the money or performance of the thing must be made before an attach ment will be issued for a contempt; 1 Cr. M. & R. 88, 459; 4 Tyrwh. 369; 2 Scott 193.
Demand should be made by the party hav ing the right, or his authorized agent: 2 B. & P. 464 a; West v. Tupper, 1 Bail. (S. C.) 193; Watt v. Potter, 2 Mas. 77, Fed. Cas. No.
17,291; Clough v. Unity, 18 N. H. 75; Sebrell v. Couch, 55 Ind. 122; of the person in de fault, in cases of torts ; 8 B. & C. 528; Shot well v. Few, 7 Johns. (N. Y.) 302; Bridgeport Bank v. R. Co., 30 Conn. 237; in case of rent; 2 Washb. R. P. 321 and at a proper time and place in case of rents ; Jackson v. Kipp, 3 Wend. (N. Y.) 230 ; Jackson v. Harri son, 17 Johns. (N. Y.) 66; McMurphy v. Minot, 4 N. H. 251; Mackubin v. Whetcroft, 4 Harr. & McH. (Md.) 135; Bradstreet v. Clark, 21 Pick. (Mass.) 389; Pay v. Shanks, 56 Ind. 554; in cases of notes and bills of exchange; Pars. Notes & B.
As to the allegation of a demand in a dec laration, see 1 Chit. PI. 322; 2 id. 84; 1 Wms. Saund. 33, note 2; Bunn v. Lett, 65 Hun 43, 19 N. Y. Supp. 728 ; Com. Dig. Pleader.