
    Howe v. Selby et al.
    1. Surety: promissory note. A surety on a promissory note can only be held liable thereon to the payee, or some one claiming through him.
    
      Appeal from Clarice District Court.
    
    Thursday, June 10.
    Action upon a promissory note drawn payable to the order of II. M. Hale, and signed by the defendants I. N. Selby, I). Webster and T. A. Morrow. The two last signed as sureties, and with the agreement that Selby was to secure the note by a chattel mortgage before lie should deliver it. Eo mortgage was ever executed, nor was the note ever delivered to Hale. It ivas delivered to the plaintiff Howe, who advanced money upon it to Selby, or for bis benefit. Webster and Morrow alone defend. There was a trial without a jury, and judgment was rendered in favor of Webster and Morrow. Plaintiff appeals.
    
      Mclntire Bros., for appellant.
    
      Stuart Bros., for appellees.
   Adams, Ch. J.

Eo liability upon this note as against Webster and Morrow could accrue except to Halo, the payee, or to some person claiming through him. Dewey v. Cochran, 4 Jones (N. C.), 184; Southerland v. Whittaker, 5 Id., 5. We have seen no case where a different rule has been held. The plaintiff does not claim through the payee, and the judgment must be

Affirmed.  