PRESENTMENT. In Criminal Practice. The written notice taken by a grand jury of any offence, from their own knowledge or observation, without any bill of indictment laid before nein at the suit of the govern ment. 4 Bla. Com. 301.
Upon such presentment, when proper, the officer employed to prosecute afterwards 'frames a bill of indictment, which is then sent to the grand jury, and they find it to be a true bill. In an extended sense, presentments include not only what are prop erly so called, but also inquisitiong of office and indictments found by a grand Jury. 2 Hawk. Pl. Cr. c. 25, s. 1.
The difference between a presentment and an in quisition Is this: that the former is found by a grand jury authorized to inquire of offences gener ally, whereas the latter is an accusation found by a Jury specially returned to Inquire concerning the particular offence. 2 Hawk, Pl. Cr. c. 25, s. 6. see, generally, Corn. Dig. Indictment (B) ; Bac. Abr. Indictment (A); 1 Chitty, Cr. Law 163; 7 East 387; State v. Muzingo, 1 Meigs (Tenn.) U2.
The writing which contains the accusa tion so presented by a grand jury. U. S. v. Hill, 1 Brock. 156, Fed. Cas. No. 15,364.
In Contracts. The production of a bill of exchange or promissory note to the party on whom the former is drawn, for his accept ance, or to the person bound to pay either, for payment.
The holder'of a bill is bound, in order to hold the parties to it. responsible to him, to present it in due time for acceptance, and to give notice, if it be dishonored, to all the parties he intends to hold liable; Townsley v. Sumrall, 2 Pet. (U. S.) 170, 7 L. Ed. 386; Allen v. Suydam, 20 Wend. (N. Y.) 321, 32 Am. Dec. 555; Bk. of Bennington v. Raymond, 12 Vt. 401; Fernandez v. Lewis, 1 McCord (S. C.) 322; Nelson v. Fotterall, 7 Leigh (Va.) 179. And when a bill or note becomes payable, it must be presented for payment, if it is intended to charge endors ers, on default.
In general, the presentment for payment should be made to the maker of a note, or the drawee of a bill, for acceptance, or to the acceptor for payment; 2 Esp. 509; but a presentment made at a particular place, when payable there, is, in general, suffi cient; Hunt v. Maybee, 7 N. Y. 266. A per- , sonal demand on the drawee or acceptor is not necessary, a demand at his usual place of residence; 1 M. & G. 83; Belmont Bk. v.
Patterson, 17 Ohio 78; of his wife, or other agent, is sufficient; Byles, Bills 283; Branch Bk. at Decatur v. Hodges, 17 Ala. 42; or place of business, of the acceptor; 3 Kent 64 ; Stainback v. Bank, 11 Gratt. (Va.) 260. When, on presentment of a bill of exchange at the acceptor's usual place of business, within proper hours, a notary finds the doors closed, he is justified, nothiug further ap pearing, in protesting the bill for non-pay ment, without inquiry for the acceptor at his residence, and without making further effort to find him ; Sulzbacher v. Bank, 86 Tenn. 201, 6 S. W. 129, 6 Am. St. Rep. 828. The term residence • is not used in a strict sense, so necessarily implying a permanent, exclusive, or actual abode in a place, but it may be satisfied by a temporary, partial, or even constructive residence; Wachusett N. Bk. v. Fairbrother, 148 Mass. 181, 19 N. E. 345, 12 Am. St. Rep. 530. See RESIDENCE.
The presentment for acceptance must be made in reasonable time; and what this reasonable time is depends upon the cir cumstances of each case; 9 Moore, P. C. 66; 2 H. Bla. 565; Prescott Bank v. Caverly, 7 Gray (Mass.) 217, 66 Am. Dec. 473. The presentment of a note or bill for payment ought to be made on the day it becomes due; 4 Term 148; Henry v. Jones, 8 Mass. 453; Farmers' Bank v. Duvall, 7 Gill & J. (Md.) 78; Edgar v. Greer, 8 Ia. 394, 74 Am. Dec. 316 ; and notice of non-payment given, otherwise the holder will lose the security of the drawer and indorsers of a bill and in dorsers of a promissory note; The Nereid, 1 Wheat. (U. S.) 171, 4 L. Ed. 63; North Bank v. Abbot, 13 Pick. (Mass.) 465, 25 Am. Dec. 334; Woodworth v. Bank, 19 Johns. (N. Y.) 391, 10 Am. Dec. 239; Glasgow v. Pratte, 8 Mo. 336, 40 Am. Dec. 142 ; and if the money be lodged there for its payment, the holder would probably have no recourse against the maker or acceptor if he did not present them on the day and the money should be lost ; 5 B. & Ald. 244 ; Lyon v. Williamson, 27 Me. 149. The facts being undisputed, the question of reasonable time for presentment of a draft is one of law ; Singer v. Dick neite, 51 Mo. App. 245.