City of Fairhaven v. Cowgill

Citations

• 8 Wash. 686
• 36 P. 1093
• 1894 Wash. LEXIS 134

Syllabus

<p>OFFICIAL BONDS — ALTERATION—DISCHARGE OF SURETIES — ACTION ON BOND — EVIDENCE — RATIFICATION.</p> <p>In an action upon an official bond, the bond may be introduced in evidence without first explaining an evident alteration in a material part of the instrument.</p> <p>Under the plea of a general denial, in an action upon a bond, evidence is admissible to show an alteration in the instrument after its execution. (Dunbar, C. J., dissents.)</p> <p>Where the bond of a city official has been altered after its execution by erasing therefrom the name of one surety and substituting therefor the name of another person, the sureties who do not consent to the alteration are thereby discharged; and the fact that the bond is entrusted to the official for delivery to the city does not make him the agent of the sureties to such an extent as to bind them for changes made by him, nor charge them with fraud on account thereof.</p> <p>Although an official bond is executed charging the sureties with separate and limited liabilities, in accordance with the provisions of Gen. Stat., §2911, yet such fact does not alter the rule that sureties who do not consent to the release or withdrawal of a co-surety are entitled to a discharge from liability on the bond.</p> <p>The fact that sureties upon an official bond, immediately after the discovery of a defalcation by their principal, unite with a co-surety, who had been substituted without their knowledge in place of another surety, in an endeavor to hold the money of the principal upon deposit in a bank, does not amount to a ratification of the altered bond.</p>