Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 6.djvu/822

 810 FEDERAL REPORTER. �without the knowledge of defendants Lee and King. Defend- ant Lee had, on the sixteenth of March, 1876, written to plaintiff a letter in which he says : "Mr, Norton's prospects are very good, andjust as soon as he can get the money out of his logs he will pay you. I hope y ou will not make any expense, as it is about impossible to get money here now:" The presumption that Norton was pecuniarily responsible and good for this debt in the spring of 18Y6 bas not been rebut- ted by proof, but that he became insolvent iu 1877 appears. �THE LEGAL QUESTIONS. �The case presents, first, the question whether one or more joint and several makers of a note, ail of whom are at the making of the debt principal debtors, can change their rela- tion without consent of the creditor, so as to deprive him of the right he had to treat ail of them as principal debtors in any transaction touching the debt. This does not involve the question whether paroi evidence is admissible to show that one who signed as a joint and several maker was only a surety for his co-maker. On that question the authorities are far from uniform. They are cited in Parsons on Bills and Notes, (2d Ed.) 233-4. See, alao, 64 N. Y. 467; 5 Dillon, 140. �The relation of principal debtor and surety arose in this case subsequent to the execution and delivery of the note, and after the plaintiff became the holder of it. The evidence which bas been introduced does not, therefore, tend to con- tradict the written contract, but to show the changed relation between the makers Lee and King, and Norton. The ques- tion as to the effect produced upon the rights of the parties under such circumstances bas aiisen most frequently in reference to partnership indebtedness, when one partner retires and the other retains the business and agrees to pay the firm debts. In this state it is held that if a creditor, after being informed of the new arrangement between the partners, enters into a valid agreement by which the time of payment'is extended without consent of the retiring member, ��� �