Glasgow weekly times. (Glasgow, Mo.) 1848-1861, 1858-09-02
Opinions Of Judge Gamble and C. I
Burnss.
ST.. Louis, Aug. 6, 1858.
JAMES M. HUcHEs, Esq,

Burnss.
ST.. LOUIS, Aug. 6, 1858.
JAMES M. HUcHEs, Esq,
President Bank of the Safe of Missouri:
SrR:-l proceed 10 give my opinion on
the case stated. s.
A Savings Institution. holding a check
drawn upon the State Bank by one of its
dePositors, payable in banksble funds, pre-
sents the same at the Bank and demands
payment in coin. This being refused, the
check is protested, and the question pre-
scented is, whether the Bank has incurred
any responsibility by reason of refusal to
pay coin?
The person drawing the check is one Of
the customers of the Bank, in whose pass
or Bank book there is pasted printed pa
per in the following words: 'This Bank
Twill receive on deposit under the name Of
'Bankable Funds the notes Of her branch
"es, the notes of the Farmers Bank of
Lexington, and the notes OF such other
blanks in the interior of the State as may
'be arranged with, and will pay such de-
"pesltes in the same kind OF funds. Checks
"dIawn against such deposites must be
"narked, .Bankable Funds"
The check IN question was drawn
against such funds on deposit.
The paper offered in payment Of the
check was such paper as the Bank takes
in payment from its debtors.
The Bank is clearly authorized under
section 4, article /, to receive and pay ont
''the notes of any Bank or branches there
'of, established by the authority of this
estate; provided the Bank will receive such
'paper at par in the payment Of debts due
.the Bank"
1t is undoubtedly within the power of
the Bank TO make contract with deposit
tor, by which the Bank shall receive from
him the paper of other Banks chartered by
this State, and shall keep such deposits in
separate account, and pay them out upon
checks drawn upon such fund.
The penalty provided in the 9th section,
upon the refusal of a Bank TO pay IN coin
"any money received on deposit" does not
apply TO case where, by agreement with
depositor, the Bank has received on depos-
it the paper of other Banks, to be paid out
upon checks drawn upon such funds. The
parties in such case have agreed that de-
posts of that description are not emoney,"
within the strict Specification of the word
as used in the 9Th section.
The 44th section declares that checks,
&C., drawn payable in currency shall be
payable Sin coin, or in the notes of specie
'paying banks of the State of Missouri"
The alternative, of coin or notes, must of
course be in the option of the person or
body who is TO make the payment. This
is legislative declaration OF the meaning
and legal effect of an instrument drawn
payable in currency, and certainly the word
''currency" does not more distinctly refer
to kind of funds different from coin, than
the phrase "Bankable Funds" Taking all
the provisions of the law together, have
no doubt that any contract now made pay
able in "Bankcble Funds" would be held
to be payable in coin or the notes of our sps-
Gle paying Banks.
But there is another answer to your
question. A check is drawn upon the
Bank and payment is refused. The holder
Of the check then looks to the drawer o.
the check and not to the Bank as party
to the check. The holder may claim that
the check is an assignment TO him Of ST.
much of the funds of the drawer, and if the
drawer, by reason of the agreement with
the Bank, is not entitled to demand specie
for the branch notes deposited, the holder
Of the check claiming as assignee to the
drawer, cannot claim specie.
think no person would imagine that
depositOr, who has deposited with the Bank
this branch paper, under the agreement that
it was TO be kept in distinct account, and
drawn upon as "Bankable Funds" would
be entitled. when he pleased, to 60 to the
Bank and demand specie. If he could not
do it himself neither can his assignee.
In conclusion, say, that the Bank in
the case submitted, has incurred no respon-
sibility BY refusal to pay the coin.
---I Your obedent servant,
H. r. GAMBLE.