'No,' says he, 'his last bills were not accepted.' Or, if he does come to me, then he demands that he should not pay his money till he has advice that my bills are accepted.
But, on the other hand, if bills are right drawn, and advice duly given, and the person has effects in his hands, then, if he refuses the bill, he says to the notary he does not accept the bill, but gives no reason for it, only that he says absolutely, 'I will not accept it--you may take that for an answer;' or he adds, 'I refuse to accept it, for reasons best known to myself.' This is sometimes done, but this does not leave the person's credit who refuses, so clear as the other, though perhaps it may not so directly reflect upon him; but it leaves the case a little dubious and uncertain, and men will be apt to write back to the person who sent the bill to inquire what the drawer says to it, and what account he gives, or what character he has upon his tongue for the person drawn upon.
As the punctual paying of bills when accepted, is a main article in the credit of the acceptor, so a tradesman should be very cautious in permitting men to draw upon him where he has not effects, or does not give order; for though, as I said, it ought not to affect his reputation not to accept a bill where it ought not to be drawn, yet a tradesman that is nice of his own character does not love to be always or often refusing to accept bills, or to have bills drawn upon him where he has no reason to accept them, and therefore he will be very positive in forbidding such drawing; and if, notwithstanding that, the importunities of the country tradesman oblige him to draw, the person drawn upon will give smart and rough answers to such bills; as particularly, 'I refuse to accept this bill, because I have no effects of the drawer's to answer it.' Or thus, 'I refuse to accept this bill, because I not only gave no orders to draw, but gave positive orders not to draw.' Or thus, 'I neither will accept this bill, nor any other this man shall draw;' and the like.

This thoroughly clears the credit of the acceptor, and reflects grossly on the drawer.
And yet, I say, even in this case a tradesman does not care to be drawn upon, and be obliged to see bills presented for acceptance, and for payment, where he has given orders not to draw, and where he has no effects to answer.
It is the great error of our country manufacturers, in many, if not in most, parts of England at this time, that as soon as they can finish their goods, they hurry them up to London to their factor, and as soon as the goods are gone, immediately follow them with their bills for the money, without waiting to hear whether the goods are come to a market, are sold, or in demand, and whether they are likely to sell quickly or not; thus they load the factor's warehouse with their goods before they are wanted, and load the factor with their bills, before it is possible that he can have gotten cash in his hand to pay them.
This is, first, a direct borrowing money of their factor; and it is borrowing, as it were, whether the factor will lend or no, and sometimes whether he can or no.

The factor, if he be a man of money, and answers their bills, fails not to make them pay for advancing; or sells the goods to loss to answer the bills, which is making them pay dear for the loan; or refuses their bills, and so baulks both their business and their credit.
But if the factor, willing to oblige his employers, and knowing he shall otherwise lose their commission, accepts the bills on the credit of the goods, and then, not being able to sell the goods in time, is also made unable to pay the bills when due--this reflects upon his credit, though the fault is indeed in the drawer whose effects are not come in; and this has ruined many an honest factor.
First, it has hurt him by drawing large sums out of his cash, for the supply of the needy manufacturer, who is his employer, and has thereby made him unable to pay his other bills currently, even of such men's drafts who had perhaps good reason to draw.
Secondly, it keeps the factor always bare of money, and wounds his reputation, so that he pays those very bills with discredit, which in justice to himself he ought not to pay at all, and the borrower has the money, at the expense of the credit of the lender; whereas, indeed, the reproach ought to be to him that borrows, not to him that lends--to him that draws where there are no effects to warrant his draft, not to him that pays where he does not owe.
But the damage lies on the circumstances of accepting the bill, for the factor lends his employer the money the hour he accepts the bill, and the blow to his credit is for not paying when accepted.

When the bill is accepted, the acceptor is debtor to the person to whom the bill is payable, or in his right to every indorser; for a bill of exchange is in this case different from a bond, namely, that the right of action is transferable by indorsement, and every indorser has a right to sue the acceptor in his own name, and can transfer that right to another; whereas in a bond, though it be given to me by assignment, I must sue in the name of the first person to whom the bond is payable, and he may at any time discharge the bond, notwithstanding my assignment.
Tradesmen, then, especially such as are factors,[46] are unaccountably to blame to accept bills for their employers before their goods are sold, and the money received, or within reach: if the employers cannot wait, the reproach should lie on them, not on the factor; and, indeed, the manufacturers all over England are greatly wrong in that part of their business; for, not considering the difference between a time of demand and a time of glut, a quick or a dead market, they go on in the same course of making, and, without slackening their hands as to quantity, crowd up their goods, as if it were enough to them that the factor had them, and that they were to be reckoned as sold when they were in his hands: but would the factor truly represent to them the state of the market--that there are great quantities of goods in hand unsold, and no present demand, desiring them to slack their hands a little in making; and at the same time back their directions in a plain and positive way, though with respect too, by telling them they could accept no more bills till the goods were sold.

This would bring the trade into a better regulation, and the makers would stop their hands when the market stopped; and when the merchant ceased to buy, the manufacturers would cease to make, and, consequently, would not crowd or clog the market with goods, or wrong their factors with bills.
But this would require a large discourse, and the manufacturers' objections should be answered, namely, that they cannot stop, that they have their particular sets of workmen and spinners, whom they are obliged to keep employed, or, if they should dismiss them, they could not have them again when a demand for goods came, and the markets revived, and that, besides, the poor would starve.
These objections are easy to be answered, though that is not my present business; but thus far it is to my purpose--it is the factor's business to keep himself within compass: if the goods cannot be sold, the maker must stay till they can; if the poor must be employed, the manufacturer is right to keep them at work if he can; but if he cannot, without oppressing the factor, then he makes the factor employ them, not himself; and I do not see the factor has any obligation upon him to consider the spinners and weavers, especially not at the expense of his own credit, and his family's safety.
Upon the whole, all tradesmen that trade thus, whether by commission from the country, or upon their own accounts, should make it the standing order of their business not to suffer themselves to be overdrawn by their employers, so as to straiten themselves in their cash, and make them unable to pay their bills when accepted.