Louisiana, a surety had, and has, a right to compel the creditor, first to enforce compulsory proceedings against the debtor and his property before calling upon him.

Our common law, as administered in our States (other than Louisiana), does not recognize this right; but a creditor may proceed against and enforce his remedies upon all persons and property liable to him, at the same time limiting him, of course, to a single satisfaction.

Courts of Equity in this country (as in England) have sometimes given relief; as, where a creditor has in addition to his personal remedy against the surety, a fund, a mortgage of realty, or personal collaterals, to which he may resort. A court of equity will, generally, upon offer of the surety to indemnify the creditor against cost and the risk of delay, compel the creditor, first to apply the fund towards the payment of his debt, or to allow the surety to do it in the name of the creditor.

Similar to this equitable right of the surety is his right of subrogation, to which we have before alluded, and which consists in the right, upon payment of the debt, to demand and receive from the creditor an assignment of all collaterals, securities and remedies, which the creditor has against the principal debtor, or any other party whose liability is prior to that of the paying surety.

This right has been sometimes recognized in cases, where there has been no contract fixing the relative rights and liabilities of the parties.

For example: a party, whose buildings being insured are destroyed by fire, upon being paid the amount of his loss by the insurers has been held, impliedly, to have assigned his claim against a railroad corporation, by whose negligence the fire was occasioned.

And where the insurers, in a case of this kind, without special assignment or license from the owner of the property to sue in his name, commenced and prosecuted such suit against the railroad company liable for the loss, the court disregarded a release from the owner of the buildings, and held

that the insured was, notwithstanding such attempt to discharge the action, entitled to recover.

Second, against the principal.

Against the principal a surety has no right, till he is in default.

He may see that he is approaching bankruptcy, and that delay will render his loss certain; he can take no steps till the debt becomes due, and the debtor fails to pay as stipulated. Then he may immediately pay, and take by subrogation whatever collaterals or other advantages are in the hands of the creditor, and proceed at once to secure, by suit or otherwise, his indemnity. He need not actually pay money. If he has made the debt his own, by his note accepted by the creditor in discharge of the principal debtor, or in any way discharged the liability of the debtor, he may proceed for his indemnity. He may compromise the debt, and discharge all parties, by paying a less amount; but, in that case, he will be entitled to recover only the amount actually paid by him.

SECTION 6.

Rights and Remedies of Sureties among Themselves.

Where several are equally bound, as sureties, to pay, and one has discharged the entire liability by payment, he is entitled to rateable contribution from his co-sureties.

This right is implied;-originally equitable in its character, and enforced in the courts of chancery, it is now recognized and enforceable at law; and, being an implied right and not depending upon contract, it may be enforced, not only where there was no such understanding between the sureties, but where they were unknown to each other, and even where the paying surety, at the time he assumed his liability, was ignorant that he had any co-surety. The real question being, whether they are equally removed from the principal debt and debtor, or are without priority against each other.

I have said that this right is recognized and enforceable at law; but it is a claim within the jurisdiction, in most of the

States, of a court of chancery, and sometimes there are clear and decided advantages from proceeding therein.

For example: there are five sureties,-one has paid the whole debt, each should contribute to him one-fifth ;-one is utterly insolvent and unable to pay anything, it clearly is equitable that each of the remaining three should contribute, to the party who has paid, one-fourth.

But the law will not enforce this; in a suit in such a court, the paying surety can only recover the one-fifth, which is the rateable proportion. Equity apportions the burden and, in such a case, so arranges and enforces the contributions, that each of the solvent sureties shall bear it equally with the others.

A paying surety is not entitled to recover interest of his co-sureties upon the money paid by him, nor is he entitled to contribution for the expense of defending a suit brought against him by the creditor.

The reason being, that he might have prevented the cost by paying the debt; and, if his co-sureties refuse to pay their rateable shares, he has an immediate right of suit, and in his suit may recover interest,-it is not due till he demands it, and, when he demands it and is refused, he should sue.

It may always be shown by parol (that is, proof outside of the writing itself), what relation the sureties sustain to each other, with a view to secure, prevent or regulate, contribution.

Several parties may all appear to be co-sureties, equally and without priority liable to pay the debt and to contribute between themselves. It may be proved by any competent evidence that, in point of fact, "A." was to be primarily liable as between themselves, so that, if he pays, he will be entitled to no contribution, and if another or others pay, they may recover the whole amount of him.

SECTION 7.

Letter of Credit, General Form.

HARTFORD, March 31, 1869.

Gentlemen :-Please deliver to Sydney Jones, books and merchandise in your line, such as he may select, to an amount not exceeding, altogether, the sum of Fifteen Hundred Dollars, and I will be responsible to you for his payment for the same, upon such terms as he may arrange; you to notify me of the amount and terms of the credit you may give him, and if default is made in the payment to give me notice without unreasonable delay.

I am, gentlemen, yours faithfully,
JONATHAN GOLDTHWAITE.

To Messrs. O. D. Case & Co.,

Corner Pearl and Trumbull Sts.,
Hartford, Ct.

CHAPTER XI.

OF BAILMENTS.

SECTION 1.-Definitions and General Principles.

"BAILMENT" is the delivery of personal property by one person to another, in trust, for the performance of something in relation thereto.

The person entrusting and delivering the property is the "bailor." The person receiving it is the "bailee."

There is always, upon such delivery by the bailor to the bailee, a condition, either express or implied, that the property shall be restored by the bailee to the bailor, or disposed of according to his directions, as soon as the purpose for which they are bailed, is answered.

There are few men in any kind of business, who do not every week, and very many men every day of the week, contract the obligation or acquire the rights of a hirer or a letter to hire, of a borrower or lender, of an expressman or common carrier or of a sender by the expressman or the common carrier, of an innkeeper or a guest at an inn, of an employer of mechanical services upon personal property or a person performing such service, or of a receiver of a deposit, or pledge, or a pledger or depositor.

It would, therefore, seem to be a subject in which nearly all business men would feel a special interest.

First, let us try to get a clear idea of a Bailment, as distinguished from a sale; for while there is a clear and broad distinction between them, a contract may be so drawn or stated between parties, as to leave, not merely those who made it but, the courts in some doubt to which class it properly belongs.

Take the following: "I, W. B. Willard, agree to take of