The Sun.
London, England, 1858-06-05 00:00:00

_
CROSSED CHEQUES.

The bill brought in by Sir Fitzroy Kelly to
amend the law on the subject of crossed cheques is
exti emely concise, and runs as follows :
" Whenever a cheque or draught on any banker,
payable to bearer, or to order on demand, shall be
issued, crossed with the name of a banker, or with
two tianverse lines with the words and company,'
or any abbreviation thereof, such crossing shall be
deemed a mat,-ritl part of the cheque or draught,
and shall be obliterated, or added to, or altered by
any person whomsoever after the issuing thereof ;
and the banker upon whom such cheque o:
draught shall be drawn shall not pay such cheque
or draught to any other than the banker with
whose name such cheque or draught shall be so
crossed, or, if the same be crossed as aforesaid with-
out a banker's name, tc any other than a banker."
Simple as this is, however, it is said to excite dis-
satisfaction among the bankers from the responsi-
bility it will impose upon them. That responsi-
bility, however, would be very slight, and only of
a legitimate character. If they were to suffer
from crossings being obliterated by chynaical
means, it would simply from their own neg-
lect in not having their cheques printed on
paper that would preclude the possibility of
their being tampered with. In other respects
nothing but ordinary vigilance will be requisite,
and if they neglect this it is right that the
consequences should fall upon themselves. Of
course, if their profits will not allow them to make
concessions to public convenience, they can decline
to receive accounts under such a state of the law,
but the joint-stock banks, at all events, are hardly
likely to adopt this plea, since they find it possible
to pursue the objectionable plan of allowing in-
terest to their customers. It would he better for
them to discontinue this practice, and to take the
rhk of facilitating every legitimate banking arrange-
ment fur the benefit and safety of the public, and
thus to extend their general usefulness. It is urged
in some quarters that the pre,ent bill is uuneces-
sary, the Board of Inland Revenue having just
given a decision which allowa the drawer of a check
to secure its being paid only through a banker by
additional
words, after the word " bearer" the lajo
words, "through a banker only."
The
limitation,document,
being thus made part of the o
must, it is said, be attended to byrigtaineabanker upon
whom the check is drawn, and will have a force
which the judges will not allow to belong to a cross-
ing. But the bankers have already contrived to get
exemption from the con sequences of paying checks
to order upon false
signatures, and they would pro-
bably contendthis exemption applies equally
to a wrongful
thatpayment of any kind in the face of
specific instructions. In that case, supposing any
mistake to occur, or the words to be adroitly erased,
the consequences would still fall upon the drawer.
It is apparently, therefore, only by such a bi 1 as
that now introduced that the public can obtain the
complete security they desire. If under the Penny
Stamp Act it should prove that other methods are
available, those methods will be at command.
With reference to the wording of the clause above
quoted from the Attorney-General's bill on crossed
checks it is necessary to direct attention to one or
two technical points that will require alteration.
As it reads at present, the crossing 'and Company"
would be of no avail, unless it were accompanied by
" two transverse lines." Again, it is stipulated