Order

In ageneral sense, includes almost any command, direction, or mandate, emanating from authority. The kinds of orders most frequently drawn in question in jurisprudence are two: 1. As a commercial insti'ument, an order is a brief note, resembling a single bill of exchange, drawn by one person addressed to another, and directing the payment of money, or delivery of money to a third person, by whom it is borne to the individual addressed. An order drawn on another, payable in government scrip, is merely an authority from the drawer to receive the scrip; and, if it is not delivered, the holders can only resort to the drawer to recover the consideration paid.

Wilamouicz v. Adams, 13 Ark. 12.

An executor placed the amount of certain legacies in the hands of A, who thereupon gave the executor a writing acknowledging the receipt of it, and promising to pay the same with interest to the legatees, by an order from the executor, when the legatees should become of age. Held, that the word order, mentioned in the writing given by A, did not import exclusively a written instrument, but that any express direction by the executor, though merely verbal, was sufficient.

Treat v. Stanton, 14 Conn. 445. " Order," as used in N. H. Eev. St. ch.

14, § 3, making the protest of any bill of exchange, note, or order, duly certified, &e., evidence of the facts stated in such protest embraces a draft not negotiable, and payable only on a certain contingency. Dakin V. Graves, 48 N. H. 45. " Order " does not ordinarily mean a cash draft.

Hlnnemanu v. Eosenbaok, 39 N. Y. 98. 2.

In the practice of the courts, in order is the formal paper embodying any direction of a, court or judge other than a judgment or decree, and made to be entered of record, as one of the proceedings in a cause. The distinction between order and requisition is that the first is a mandatory act, the latter a request. Mills u.

Martin, 19 Johns. 7.

An order is any direction of a court or judge made or entered in writing, and not included in a judgment.

N. Y. Code of Pro. § 400.

The words, all previous orders, in the Md. Code, art. 5, § 22, are as comprehensive as the words, all previous orders and decrees, employed in acts 1830, ch.

185, and 1845, ch.

367; their meaning is the same. The design of the section is, as final decree, all previous orders and decrees constituting a part of the preliminary proceedings leading to tiie passage of such final decree.

Bull v. Pyle, 41 Md. 419.

Order of filiation. The usual name of an adjudication in bastardy proceedings, declaring the defendant the father of the child, and prescribing what maintenance he shall provide. Orders of the day. Any member of the house of commons who wishes to propose any question, or to " more the house," as it is termed, must, in order to give the house due notice of his intention, state the form or nature of his motion on a previous day, and have it entered in a book termed the order-book; and the motion so entered, the house arranges, shall be considered on particular days, and such motions or matters, when the day arrives* for their being considered, are then termed the " orders of the day." May Pari. Prac. •'' ORDINANCE. May mean a law, statute, or decree of almost any nature; but in modern usage is most frequently applied to the laws of a municipal corporation. Some state papers, operative as fundamental laws, but not precisely describable as constitutions or acts, have, however, been termed ordinances; such as the ordinance of 1787, for the government of the north-western territory. Older authorities in English parliamentary practice draw a distinction between acts and ordinances, like this: that an ordinance was but a temporary act, not introducing any new law, but founded on acts formerly made; an act was a perpetual law, not to be altered but by queen, lords, and commons. This distinction is not now observed. Sir Edward Coke says that an ordinance of parliament is to be distinguished from an act of parliament, inasmuch as the latter can be only made by the king and a threefold consent of the state, whereas the former may be ordained by one or two of them. At the time that the right of the commons to participate in legislation was yet only in growth, a distinction was taken, for the first time, in the reign of Edward III., between ordinances and statutes, the former being experimental acts passed for a time only, and, as it were, on trial, and which might afterwards be, and often were, converted into statutes, i.e. permanent acts, or else might be continued for a time, or discharged altogether.

Brown.