Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/75

68 PEDEEAIi EEPOBTEB. �The case of Coioper v. Godmoni, 9 Bing. 788, 23 E. C. L. 452, is in principle mucli like this. There the question was ■whether a plea of the statuts of limitations was a bar to an action for money had and reeeived to recover the considera- tion money of a void annuity, when the annuity was granted more than six years before the action was brought, but was treated by the grantor as an existing annuity within that period. "That question," said the court, "depends upon another : at what time did the cause of action arise ? The cause of action comprises two steps. The first is the origi- nal advance of the money by the grantee ; the second is the grantor's election to avail himself of the defect in the memo- rial of the annuity. The cause of action was not complete until the last step was taken." In the present case, also, the warranty contemplated two things — First, the giving of the credit by the United States ; and, second, its continuance. As the first requirement of this undertaking was complied with, no right of action could arise until the second was broken. That certainly did not occur until the United States elected to take back the credit it had given. �It is true that in Cowper v. Godmond the election to disaf- firm was with the party to wbom the payment was origi- nally made, but this does not affect the principle on whieh the right to recover rests. The object is to get back a con- sideration, which has failed, and in such cases it is evident there can be no cause of action until the failure is complete. In Cowper v. Godmond the payment was for the annuity, and the failure did not occur until the grantor of the annuity disafiSrmed his grant. Here the consideration was paid to get a credit with the United States, and the failure was not complete untU the credit which had once been given was \rithdrawn. �This disposes of the case, as it is conceded the action was begnn within three years after the United States gave notice of its election to withdraw the credit. The liabUity of the First National to account for the amount erroneously credited was established by the judgment in favor of the United ����