Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-02-24
Forged Checks-Importaut Dee,.,on.

Eorged Checks-ImpOrfant DeeIsiOus
Judge Barrett, of New York, has JUS
; rendered an important decision in relation
to forged check, which materially differ
from former decisions in analogous caser
IL appears that a swindler bought from
the Ridgely National Bank of Springfield
Illinois, genuine bill Of exchange foI
$40 20 on the National Park Bank of New
York. The name of the fictitious psyee
the words and figures Twenty 20-100,"
and the name of the drawer were erased
by acids. The draft was then filed up by
inserting other names, and the amount Of
S6,4OO filled in. The sWindIer then went
to Nashville, Tennessee, where the bill was
accepted By the Third National Bank of
that place, who Endorsed it to the Fourth
National Bank of New York. The latter
presented II to the National Park Bank.
which inuocently accepted the draft. Upon
discovering the fraud the National Park
Bank demanded repayment of the Fourth
National Bank. The court decides that
the latter is responsible to the Park Bank,
and that a subsequent action may be
brought against the Nashville bank which
first accepted the forged DRAFT.
The Court of Appeals of Maryland, in
recent opinion given in the case of the First
National Bank against the Commercial
and Farmers Bank, on an appeal of the
latter from the Superior Court, has decided
that "the law has fastened the obligation
of knowing the signatures of its customers
upon the bank which receives their money
on deposit and undertakes to pay il out on
their checks"
The facts Of the case, says the Baltimore
San of the 18th, as presented on the trial |
below, it will be remembered, are as fol-
lows: On the twentieth of December,
1866, stranger, calling himself John s.
Hillan," opened an account with the Com.
mercial and Farmers Bank, and deposited
with it a check Of the First National Bank
OF Baltimore, purporting to be drawn BY
Horace Abbott for $500 Is, payable to
Hillan's order. The check was sent
through the clearinghouse for collection
the next dey, and the First National Bank,
without inquiry, paid the check by credit
ing the Commercial aud Farmers' Bank
with the amount, and charging the account
OfMr. Abbott (who was one Of the custom.
ers) with the same. On the 22d the man
lillian called at the Commercial and
Farmers Bank with his bank book and
illed up a blank check for $4,000. The
'ank not having heard from the check, &C.
'ording to the usage Of the clearinghouse
Issumed it was good or had been paid, and
ashed Hillan's check.
1t was not until the 18th that the First
National Bank discovered the check was a
OrgerY, upon balancing Mr.. Abbott's bank
'ook, when it paid Mr.. Abbott the amount
nd brought suit against the Commercial
nd Farmers Bank and obtained Judgment
Or the amount. from which the latter APP
'ealed upon the instructions given by the
ourl below.
The Court Of Appeals reversed the
alignment Of the court below, and says
There is no reason why the loss, as be-
Neen parties equally innocent and equally
eceived, (but where ole is bound to know
nd act upon his kuowledgs and the other
az no means of knowledge should be
brown upoa upon the latter 10. exonera-
ion OF the former The safesi rule for the
commercial public, as well as that most
onsistent with justice, is to allow the loss
} remain where, BY the course of business,
has been placed. The law casts the duty
knowing the makers signature upon the
lainti6, upon whom it purported to be
rawn. Greater safeguards and precau-
ous must be devised and adopted by
anks to ascertain, before payment, the
enuineness of checks drawn upon them"