Page:Economic History of Virginia Vol 2.djvu/531

 secured by the conditional assignment of property in the Colony to the persons in whose favor they were drawn, that the General Assembly determined to impose a heavy penalty upon the drawer of a bill, although he might be able to show that the default of the drawee in England or whatever country the latter might reside in was altogether unjustified. He was required to pay the creditor not only the amount of the protested bill, but also thirty per cent in excess of it. He was, however, allowed, whenever the drawee had ample funds in his hands to meet the call upon him, to secure from any property in Virginia belonging to the drawee the amount which he, the drawer, had been compelled to pay both in principal and damages to the creditor. It was found that the interests of the Colony suffered from the high percentage at which the losses resulting from protested bills were rated, and the proportion once recoverable on this account was lowered to fifteen per cent. This penalty was strictly enforced and no alteration was suffered to be made in it by private agreement, even for the advantage of the creditor. In 1670, John Hungerford of York delivered to Mrs. Elizabeth Napier bills of exchange amounting to nine pounds sterling which he had drawn on an English merchant and bound himself in damages to the extent of thirty per cent in case they were returned rejected. Under the law, his responsibility was restricted to fifteen per cent; the court, therefore, decided that Hungerford was only answerable in this degree when the bills were sent back dishonored. He had, however, to pay the charges of protest and the costs of the suit.

If the drawer of the protested bill was not to be found when he was sought in order to enforce his liability for its