Freeland v. . Edwards

Haijtoood, Justice. The rule is fixed, that bonds payable without any certain time mentioned, are payable itistanta, and bear interest immediately from the delivery. Davie. — I wish we could have the reason upon which these determinations have been founded, that we plight examine theta and see whether they be good or not. A bond payable on demand, is payable immediately, and may be sued upon immediately, without any previous demand made for that purpose The same in the case with a bond payable on no certain day mentioned in the bond. I believe the British determinations have concurred with ours on this subject, bet really I can perceive no good reason for die distinction ; Our own act directs that bonds payable on demand shall bear interest from the demand ; by the came act. an account stated and signed, bears interest immediately from die signature. Haywood, Justice. — The reason of the distinction is this ; in cane of a bond payable without saying when, the obligee has not to do any act either to entitle himself to the action, or to the interest ; in caso of a bond payable on demand, he undertakes to to make a demand/otherwise the words, on demand, have no meaning j and if a demand is to be made it is for some purpose % it is not to entitle himself to the action; therefore it must be to give a right to demand interest. The act of Assembly proceeds upon this very principle 5 it says a note payable on demand shall bear interest from a demand made. When speaking of an account signed, it sayo, interest shall accrue from the signature ; yet on both instances an action may be brought immediately without any formal demand ; but if we could not give the reason of the decision, yet we know the rule is so established 5 ife is therefore far better to make it the standard of our adjudications than to render the law again uncertain by departing"from it. There was a judgment accordingly for interest from the date.