1 N.H. 179 | Superior Court of New Hampshire | 1818
This motion involves questions of some difficulty. The definitions of the words “ interest,” and “ annually.” when disconnected, are very obvious. But their peculiar meaning, as employed in the note in this case, is by no means clear; because they may be construed to mean either that interest is to be paid “annually” on the principal alone, or on the principal and the annual interest. Upon examination, however, we are inclined to think that the meaning of the expression, “interest annually,” does not,extend to interest on any thing except the principal sum named in the note. It is the principal, which the subscriber of the note promises to pay with interest*; and there is no settled usage on which to found an inference that the parties intended to employ the words in any other sense. The practice as to allowing interest on the annual interest, in eases like this, has been different in different parts, and in different courts of this state. The cases on this subject, also, reported in Massachusetts, directly conflict with each other.(IV
. It any interest can be allowed on the annual interest, tt must be allowed by virtue of some general principles, and
Nor do we apprehend that to justify the allowance of interest in this class of cases, a profit must actually have been
These positions, arising from the nature of the subject tinder examination, are, we believe, fortified by most of the authorities on the allowance of interest.
That large class of them, permitting it to be cast upon money after due, though interest be not named in the contract. can be supported only on the principle that interest is allowable as damag'e from the time a debt due is neglected to be paid. 7 Tm. R. 124. — -1 Camp, 54,— Tidd 484.-4 Es. C. 147. — Am. Pre. 114, 261.
Vide the cases of interest on judgments, 1 East 436. — 5 Es. C. 114. — 4 Mass. R. 171. On Verdicts r 1 John. C. 27. — John. 343.-6 Mass. R. 262.-8 Do. 246.-2 Bos. & P. 219, nt.
Interest is also allowed, for the causes and in the manner before enumerated, on money after payable, though no express contract exists as to either the interest or the principal^ — as on money loaned, and on money paid, laid out and expended. 1 Bin. 488 — 3 Wils. 205. — 1 H. Bl. 305. — 1 Dal. 349. — Burr. 1077. It should be cast in the same mode on money had and received. The authorities in regard to this appear somewhat contradictory.
As three centuries have not elapsed since interest was legalized in any case, it is not surprising that such a state of public sentiment should for some time afterwards continue, as to prevent it from being cast in instances where not expressly promised. This would be less irrational than the
On the principle that money must be due and the debtor neglect payment, in order to allow interest on it as damage, it is not cast on bank bills till presented :
These and many other cases, though variable in appearance, all illustrate the general principles before mentioned, and must control the question under examination.
The only remaining objection, which has occurred to us, arises from the circumstance that the creditor will thus receive on his whole debt something approaching compound interest. But whatever may have been the prejudice once felt not only against compound but also simple interest, the intelligence of modern times has in a great measure dissipated it.
•Compound interest, whenever promised or whenever justified by the nature of the case, would probably at this time be deemed lawful.
Interest is therefore to he cast accordingly.
2 Mass. Rep. 568. 8 do. 465.
¿1) Burr. 1088.
andmCilnlp'S'P'
Burr. reís,
8 John. 213. 9 do. 71. 3 caines 266. 11 M. R. 217, Channey & vs. Yeaton, Roc., Feb. 1818, p. 151.
p. 151.
Singleton vs. Bank of S. C., 1817.
10Mass.Rep.
dsd. & e. 553_ | Bio, 1fi5. 2 Mass. Rep.59s! 3 do. 231.
9) 4 n. & b. mis!3ohn'