CUJUS EST SOLUM EJUS EST USQUE, DAMNOSA HEREDITAS, 693.

b. Necessity of Negotiable Words, 7.

c. Coupons Not Payable Unconditionally, 7.

d. Rights of Holder, 8.

(1) In General, 8.

(2) Overaue Coupons, 8.

(3) Stolen Coupons, 9.

(4) Effect of Lis Pendens, 10.

(5) Interest on Overdue Coupons, 10.

(6) Exchange, 12.

e. Diligence Required of Holder, 12.

(1) In General, 12.

(2) Presentment for Payment as Prerequisite to Recovery, 12. (3) Presentment as Prerequisite to Recovery of Interest, 13.

IV. COUPONS SECURED BY MORTGAGE, 13.

V. ENFORCEMENT OF COUPONS, 16.

1. Independent Right of Action, 16.

2. Furisdiction of Federal Courts, 17.
3. Fudgment as Bar, 17.

4. Statute of Limitations, 18.

CROSS-REFERENCES.

For other matters of SUBSTANTIVE LAW and EVIDENCE related to this subject, see the titles BILLS OF EXCHANGE AND PROMISSORY NOTES, vol. 4, p. 76, and references there given; MUNICIPAL SECURITIES; RAILROAD SECURITIES.

I. DEFINITION. A coupon is one of the interest certificates attached to transferable bonds and of which there are usually as many as there are payments to be made; so called because it is cut off when it is presented for payment, the word being derived from the French couper, to cut.1

Not a Bill of Credit. Coupons, or the bonds with which they are connected, though intended for circulation from hand to hand as a marketable commodity, are not bills of credit within the meaning of the prohibition contained in the first clause of the tenth section of the first article of the Constitution of the United States.2

Coupon Bonds. Coupon bonds are negotiable bonds with coupons attached for each instalment of interest.3

A Coupon Note is a promissory note with coupons attached.4 II. FORM AND EXECUTION - 1. In General. It has been said that it is entirely immaterial in what words coupons are expressed, provided they indicate by whom they are due and the amount and time of payment." Thus they may be issued in the form of promissory notes, bills of exchange,7 checks, or interest warrants.9

6

2. Signature-Printed Facsimile of Maker's Autograph. It has been held that coupons may be signed by a printed facsimile of the maker's autograph, adopted by the maker for that purpose, though not expressly authorized by

Immaterial Variance of Signatures on Bond and Coupon. It has been held also that if the bonds to which coupons are annexed are properly signed and sealed by the officers of the county issuing them, it is no defense to an action on the coupons that they are signed by only one of such county officers. 11

1. Coupons Defined.-Worcester's Dict.; Howard v. Bates County, 43 Fed. Rep. 276; McKenzie v. Montreal, etc., R. Co., 27 U. C. C. P. 224; Williams v. Moody, 95 Ga. 8.

Coupons are written contracts for the payment of a definite sum of money on a given day. Aurora City v. West, 7 Wall. (U. S.) 82; Cromwell v. Sac County, 94 U. S. 362.

2. Coupons Not Bills of Credit. McCoy v. Washington County, 3 Wall. Jr. (C. C.) 389. 3. Coupon Bond Defined.-Benwell v. Newark, 55 N. J. Eq. 260.

4. Coupon Note Defined. 95 Ga. 8.

Williams v. Moody,

5. Wording of Coupons Immaterial as General Rule. - 2 Daniel on Negotiable Instruments, $ 1493.

Discussions of the form and execution of coupon bonds and coupon notes will be found in such titles as MUNICIPAL SECURITIES; RAILROAD SECURITIES; and STATES.

Thus,

6. Coupon in Form of Promissory Note. in Thomson v. Lee County, 3 Wall. (U. S.) 327, the coupons were in the following language: "promises to pay to the bearer at the Continental Bank, in the city of New York, forty dollars interest on bond No. 1."

7. Coupon in Form of Bill of Exchange. Queensbury . Culver, 19 Wall. (U. S.) 83; Nashville v. First Nat. Bank, 1 Baxt. (Tenn.) 402; Nashville v. Potomac Ins. Co., 2 Baxt. (Tenn.) 296.

In Moran v. Miami County, 2 Black (U. S.) 722, the coupon read as follows: The treasurer of said county will pay the legal holder hereof one hundred dollars on the first day of September, 1857, on presentation hereof, being for interest due on the obligation of said county, No. 16, given to the Peru and Indianapolis Railroad Company."

Where No Drawee Is Named. - In Mercer County v. Hubbard, 45 Ill. 140, the coupon was in the following form: "Six per cent. stock, Mercer county, state of Illinois, railroad bond No. 20. Pay the bearer sixty dollars on first day of July, 1863, interest to that date. John Cowden, chairman of board of super visors of Mercer county.'

8. Coupon in Form of Check. In Arents v. Com., 18 Gratt. (Va.) 750, the coupon was in the following language: "Duncan, Sherman & Co., of New York, will pay the bearer thirty dollars, the half-yearly interest on the Wheeling bond 269, due 1 January, 1867." 9. Interest Warrant. - In Woods v. Lawrence County, I Black (U. S.) 386, the form was as follows: County of Lawrence. Warrant No. 37. For thirty dollars. for six months' interest on bond No. able on the first day of January, A. D. 1873, at the office of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company in the city of Philadelphia.'

Being

pay

10. Printed Facsimile of Maker's Autograph Sufficient. Pennington v. Baehr, 48 Cai. 565. See also McKee v. Vernon County, 3 Dill (U. S.) 210.

11. Immaterial Variance of Signatures on Bond and Coupon. Thayer v. Montgomery County, 3 Dill (U. S.) 389.

In

Variant Signature Authorized in Bond. Phelps . Lewiston, 15 Blatchf. (U. S.) 131, it was held that where commissioners have power to issue coupons accompanying bonds, the statement in the bonds that they have caused one of their number to sign the coupons is equivalent to a signing of the bonds by all of them.

Also in Blair v. Cuming County, 111 U. S. 363, it was held that where bonds purport on their face to be issued by the board of county