[455]. As we shall see, the creditor is not always entitled to sue one alone of the debtors; but when he has obtained judgment against all, he can always, by way of execution, obtain payment of the whole from any one.
[456]. Ward v. The National Bank, 8 A. C. 755.
[457]. (1899) 1 Q. B. 840.
[458]. At p. 845.
[459]. For another illustration, see Sadler v. Great Western Ry. Coy., (1896) A. C. 450.
[460]. Morris v. Robinson, 3 B. & C. 196; 27 R. R. 322.
[461]. Supra, § 123.
[462]. It is advisable to point out that the obligation to pay damages for a breach of contract is itself to be classed as contractual, no less than the original obligation to perform the contract.
[463]. A similar relation exists between breaches of contract and crimes. Breach of contract is not in itself a crime, any more than it is in itself a tort; yet by undertaking a contractual duty, a man may often put himself in such a position, that he cannot break the duty without causing such damage to third persons, as will create criminal liability. For example, a signalman’s breach of his contractual duty to attend to the signals may amount to the crime of manslaughter if a fatal accident results from it.
[464]. Salmond’s Law of Torts, p. 5.