ART. 13] PROTEST. 269

1904, art. 13, sec. 6. 1888, art. 13, sec. 6. 1860, art. 14, sec. 6. 1837, ch. 253.

6. A protest, duly made by a notary public, of a promissory note
for non-payment, or of a bill of exchange, whether foreign or inland,
for non-acceptance or non-payment, shall be prima facie evidence of
such non-acceptance or non-payment, and of the presentment of such
note for payment, or of such bill for acceptance or payment, at the time
and in the manner stated in the protest.

This section must be strictly construed, and the protest is prima facie evi-
dence of non-acceptance or non-payment, and of presentment at the time and
in the manner stated only. Collateral and independent matters contained in
the protest are not evidence. Reier v. Strauss. 54 Md. 286; Weems v. Farm-
ers' Bank, 15 Md. 239.

The protest is only prima facie evidence, and may be overcome. Howard
Bank v. Carson, 50 Md. 27; Staylor v. Ball. 24 Md. 199; Bicketts v. Pendleton,
14 Md. 329.

If the protest states that "notice of protest" was sent to the endorser and
the manner of such notice, it implies a demand and refusal, unless the pro-
test itself shows no sufficient demand. Nailor v. Bowie. 3 Md. 257.

The protest should designate or identify the note—usually the original or a
copy is attached. The signature of the notary may be printed, if it appears
to be his act. Fulton v. Maccracken, 18 Md. 541.

This section does not exclude other evidence of non-acceptance, etc. Sasscer

v. Farmers' Bank, 4 Md. 419; Nailor v. Bowie. 3 Md. 258.

The design of this section is to place foreign and inland bills on the same
footing. The protest or authenicated copy must be received in evidence
according to the lex fori, and there need be no proof of the signature or seal.
Crowley v. Barry. 4 Gill, 201; Whiteford v. Burckmyer. 1 Gill, 129.

A check Is an inland bill of exchance, and therefore protestable under this
section and section 7. Hawthorn v. State, 56 Md. 534. See also, Moses v.
Franklin Bank, 34 Md. 579.

For the purpose of securing the benefit of this section, banks receiving bills
of exchange for collection, should place them In the hands of a notary for
protest, If necessary. Citizens' Bank v. Howell. 8 Md. 547.

This section does not alter the law in regard to the necessity of notice, or
the character of the notice. Graham v. Sangston, 1 Md. 66.
This section applied. Nailor v. Bowie, 3 Md. 255.
Cited but not construed In Farmers' Bank v. Bowie. 4 Md. 295.

Ibid. sec. 7. 1888, art. 13, sec. 7. 1860, art. 14, sec. 7. 1837, ch. 253.

7. When such protest shall state that notice of such non-payment
or non-acceptance has been sent or delivered to the party or parties to
such note or bill, and the manner of such notice, such protest shall be
prima facie evidence that such notice has been sent or delivered in the
manner therein stated.

If no sufficient demand was made, the protest is not evidence to prove
notice. Farmers' etc.. Bank v. Alien. 18 Md. 478.

This section does not alter the law in regard to the necessity of notice, or
the character of the notice. Graham v. Sangston. 1 Md. 66.

A check is an Inland bill of exchange, and therefore protestable under this
section and section 6. Hawthorn v. State. 56 Md. 534. See also, Moses v
Franklin Bank, 34 Md. 579.

See notes to sec. 6; also, sec. 171, e1 seq.

As to the power of notaries public to take protests, see art. 68. sec. 4.

Ibid. sec. 8. 1888, art. 13, sec. 8. 1860. art. 14. sec. 8. 1825. ch. 35.
8. No judgment of any court of this State rendered in any suit on
a bill of exchange, promissory note or other negotiable instrument, shall
be reversed, or in any way set aside, on appeal or writ of error, because