Promissory Note—Execution by Mining Corporation—Indorsement by Payees—.Implied Warranty.—The indorsement by the payees of a note purporting to be executed by a mining corporation makes the indorsers liable to the final payee, whether it was in fact legally executed by the corporation or not. The indorsers impliedly warranted by the indorsement that the note was in all respects what it purported to be, and that the prior signatures were binding.

Id. —Accommodation Indorsement — Joint Liability — Presumption— Contribution. —The fact that the payees who jointly indorsed the note were accommodotion indorsers for the corporation, is immaterial as respects their joint liability to their indorsee, which is presumed to be equal, where the contrary does not appear; and one of them, who pays the note to the indorsee, is entitled to recover contribution of one half of the amount from his co-indorser.

Id. — Action for Contribution — Averment of Accommodation Indorsements— Finding—Surplusage.—In the action for contribution, an averment in the complaint and a finding as to the accommodation character of the indorsements may be disregarded as surplusage.

Id. — Consideration — First Note Renewed—Money Borrowed fob Corporation—Money in Treasury at Date of Loan. — The fact that the mining corporation had money in its treasury at the date when a first note was executed for its use by plaintiff and defendant, which formed the consideration for the new note in question, does not show that the money borrowed on the first note at that date was not obtained for the benefit of the corporation, which it may have needed for additional purposes; and where it appears without conflict that the money obtained on the first note was actually checked out and paid'to the mining company, it is established that the money was obtained for its benefit.

Id. — Plaintiff not Benefited—Settlement with Corporation at Date of First Note. — Where it appears that the plaintiff derived no personal benefit from the giving of either of the two notes, and that a settlement made between plaintiff and the corporation at the date of the first note executed for its benefit did not include that note, his cause of action for contribution upon the new note is not affected by the settlement.

Id.—Statute of Limitations—Accrual of Cause of Action. — The statute of limitations did not begin to run against the cause of action for contribution against defendant, as co-indorser, until the new note was paid by the plaintiff; and if the complaint was filed within two years thereafter, the cause of action is not barred by subdivision 1 of section 339 of the Code of Civil Procedure.