Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

“ The facts certified are simple. One Dooling, being required to give an official bond, applied in Springfield, Illinois, to an agent of the plaintiff in error, a bonding company having its home office in Baltimore, Maryland, was informed that the company would become his surety only on condition that he furnish indemnity, and was handed a printed form of indemnity bond. The defendants in error, at Dooling's request, signed and sealed this bond for the purposes therein expressed, and authorized Dooling to deliver it to the company through its Springfield agent, which Dooling did. ”

“ Wickham, L. R. 2 H. L. 296, 36 L. J. C. P. N. S. 313, 16 L. T. N. S. 800, 16 Week. Rep. 38, 13 Eng. Rul. Cas. 422; Pollock, Contr. 8th ed. 7, 8) , and we see no commercial reason why the principles ordinarily governing contracts under seal should not be applied (Bird v. Washburn, burn, 10 Pick. 223) . In Davis v. Wells, F. & Co. the guaranty was an open, continuing one up to $10,000, but it was under seal, and was held binding, although additional reasons were advanced.
We answer the first question: Yes. ”