Summary

George McGruder v. The President Directors and Company of the Bank of Washington…

In case of original residence in a State different from that of the endorser, at the time of taking the paper, there can be no question; but how far, in case of subsequent and recent removal to another State, the holder shall be required to pursue the maker, is a question not without its difficulties.
We think that reason and convenience are in favour of sustaining the doctrine, that such a removal is an excuse from actual demand. Precision and certainty are often of more importance to the rules of law, than their abstract justice.
Source: Wikisource

George McGruder v. The President Directors and Company of the Bank of Washington…

Whether the holder had done all that he was bound to do, to excuse a personal demand upon the maker.
On this subject the law is clear: a demand on the maker is, in general, indispensable; and that demand must be made at his place of abode or place of business. That it should be strictly personal, in the language of the submission, is not required: it is enough if it is at his place of abode, or, generally, at the place where he ought to be found. But his actual removal is here a fact in the case, and in this, as well as every other case, it is incumbent upon the endorsee to show due diligence.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature