Yellowly v. . Commissioners of Pitt County

Rea.de, J. The statute provides that “ all bonds, bills, notes, bills of exchange, liquidated and settled accounts, shall bear interest from the time they become due ; provided such liquidated and settled accounts be signed by the debtor, unless it be specially expressed that interest is not to accrue until a time mentioned in the said writings and securities.” Bat. Rev., ch. 10, sec. 4. The plaintiff’s claim is evidently such a security ; it is not expressed in the writing that interest is not to be paid until a future time; and therefore it bears interest from the time of dema/nd upon the county treasurer, as we think it just to hold as against the county; as the treasurer is not presumed to know of the claim until presented to him for payment, and as it was the duty of the plaintiff to present it, but interest from the date of the writing, if it were against an individual. It is insisted, however, that a county ought not to pay interest. *167 We see no reason for this. A county, like an individual, may enter into contracts and sue and be sued. And if there is any difference between an individual and a county, it would seem to be the greater obligation on a county to keep its faith. The reason most urged why this should not be, is the alleged faet, that persons dealing with the county do not expect prompt payment, and therefore they get a higher price, which stands in the place of interest; so that, in effect, they take interest in advance. If such is the faet, it is a strong reason why the county should change its custom ; for there certainly are cases in which a county pays promptly ; and if in every case interest is taken in advance by way of a higher price than in a case of prompt payment, the advanced price is a total loss to the county. Prompt payment or interest, as damages, is the just rule. We have already said that, as against a county, interest would run from the date of the demand. The jury in this ease do not find the precise date of the demand, but say that it was “ in the fall of 1870.” The order is dated 27th October, 1870. So the demand must have been about, and probably was, just the same date of the order. And we assume it to have been the same. The Clerk of the Court will calculate interest from the date of the order, and there will be judgment here for principal and interest. The plaintiff is not entitled to back interest prior to the order. Admit that there was back interest which he might have claimed ; still we think that it must be understood that the order embraced all that was due at its date. There will be judgment here for the plaintiff for the principal sum of the order, with interest from its date, and for cost Pee Cubiam. Judgment accordingly.'