, 1876-05-06
10 Holds that CortiAcation of q Ohook
by a Bank Releaaes tho
Drawer,
But, Mt Ito Same Tfmo, Mnkcs tho Collect
Ing Bank Liable II tho Check
Bo Not Paid.
humorous Creditors Of tho Dofunot Meroau-
tile Insurance Company Want
Fair Divide.
Miscellaneous Suits Before the Blind
Goddess Yestordny.

Tho following IL tho opiHlon In full OF Judge
Hopkins In tho cnsp OF tho Essox County Nation
u Dank VII. Tho Dank OF Montreal, in which no
holds that u bank which has chock or draft fer
collection. and allows II 10 hn certified instead
Of enforcing payment Internationally. thereby
becomes lfablo II tho daft bo not paid. Tho
question aooa not appear to have boon decided
boforo, aud IL Of Rroat Importance to bnnlts anl
bus!neeB mon. Tho caso Hns tried lere somo
tiuo ngo, but takon undor advaomout
This In action to Charge tue defendant with the
tnuunt Of check tEanAmttod to 1t for collection
der tho following circumstances
gust, is75, sent .hcs check ho stato street sav.
ings !'ank to T. u. retdie Il Co., ut Now Yorr, for
s. aud Iy tho plaintiffs wAs iotorse,l to lie uor-
ninnAnerican lhllk Nsw York fer collection. snd by
that hnnk In Tho usual course Of htKiucas In
turtHt 10 tho Ualik of holltraa Of Chuago, tho o-
tenuuni, for collection. It belonged TO tho plaintiff In
shs c7sc, hnt, Tho plaintiff having correspondent
Dsnk to collect IT. that lsnt employed 1ls defond.
ant, according 10 nbagc amon banks located at differ
about IL O'Clock on tic noruiuy of tLo oti Of August
sud aoon thereafter seut 1t Dy tts messenger tho
State. Street sayings ,bank ior payment. Tho
o telisr who Informed lin that the caahsr @aa not
then III, and tat lie could not pay Il III hta absence.
day called again with Il aud presented II 10 tho same
party sgan, ind lie mado tho rerty that tho
IT, he en M asked ths ier it 10 eesy
which he dil u tho usual made Of certifying checks
by Tint institution and hoteupon tho measescr tooK
tue check away will him. Thu teller, Wien Lo certi.
nel the check, charged the amount or 1t up to Ito
drawers account, which lhcn exceeded tho oinous of
saount Of tic aatne Tie defendant also sent "l o
check for payment Oh the next day at nbout II o'clock
lopayit Tho bank kept lis doors open during all VI to
loh Of August, but had not tho funds to pay lie
check, and Jailed 70 afttr that day. Tho tenti.
hony Is not very ccar n4 10 whether tic bank lad
mont laa been insisted upon, but Is ts pon is MT
tsae, shall not stop to settle It; wei. 1t was pro
rented after cettiheaon IT vas not patl because the
Tie defendants hsd tho check 10 collect, II WA
1anamttol to he1n for that PURPOSE md tLcir duty
collecting aRsnts was 10 ptcsent anl domand lnr-
7il uoufy tho proper parties Of lis ishonur that
ala been DONE tho rights and remedies Of parties
hare remained intact II loya by TIC acta or
omissions of the party thus assuming tho duty Of COL
lection, should fn upon the delinquent AGENT not
The State st.eot Savings Bank wno not liable to tbs
holder Of tic check without accop.ace. II Liable
hsaa L s eona nos !.
p the holder Of the check except by ita own cosent
uaual course Of dealing With ta customers waa under
ohligston e ray on demand all checks drawn upon
Ky them eai Iet9as vs. tG do SO would not glve ho
drawer in such would bo Aabic, mid to could sun
tho hank Immediately, without rodeemug tho check
In
poeltor. fOwai!scc, scrsiants link IT, State nanE,
This being lilo lav, tns duty Of tho lufoudapt upon
receipt Of tue check for collection was pa!. II vNs
ds 4 H. fe as 1sa s'S MY tie sd ss w5n g
hsso becn TO liability upou Il. But it did not: i
xrnt farther; asked for and received tho curtinca-
tou Of thu tank upon the check, IIy ths act . now
relation wia created bcsweeu tho parties. The snount
tic clo:k called for was Withdrawn from tho dravora
tcount md cuntrol md thereafter they had right
Of action for II against the bank. TAs tochntsal
operation Of Tho Transaction was transfer 10 thn
action against tAe Gank. Il superseded tho previous
rights and obligations Of tho parties, particularly Of
Delorv that, tho drawers could uayo stoppo1 pay.
checks. After the cer.ncattor thoy lad no control
Il any right to aus Ills bank for il. Nor di.f tho
tant owe them any duty III relation to Il. Il no
nsss 4aa pnsss*ssa , hS claFis'ss Of ehsek Tue
would have besn useless. but AFTER that tncy could
o1y get ths money by AurrenaslinE Il: ralnihles
sheck. fom, what was tho OBJECT upon The leEnl
nghta md liability of the dsawess7 Did 4 not dis
thasge them from gil futar liability upon the check,
t1d such ahoull 10 found to bo tho consequence.
aa 4 not follow That tho aetct'sna arc liable 10 Tho
esssa 81 a e II hs, yS " her
@snl ~ nsao worthless, why allau they not uska
In Smith 7s Mlllard a ~ Y, r. 49, 1t ia said ta.
,sensinR check for payment and accepting cer-
ansata Is good e equivalent to payment ii Morse
10 aceep hc eaks e no 1ae mater a9asr
auit wtoAe convenience, there can 10 ut ot,e re-
ss 81 S nak m On tho
Charges ho debtor, and by tho action lepriyoa
nq o. al furtheF concern u tue lEesntaes. Ths banr
ss.uls Of tho &C. Of tho delen.ans Iii nceetng tho
serhcatlon of tho check Il would too clear for
aaeusuiou that tho defendant hui incurred liability
Ray aho amount Of Il t. ~ prlncina The drawers
1l4tk1 to fnlowH tFrpNlay Inn ip1IrT
entitled to rccoscr Of tho party rclo1a!ug Tho
aN'rs, whereby thu amount ct tic check Il iost to
4 was claimed on tho part Of the defendant on the
I'al that the plaintiff muak show some dpmagca by
the eet II tie act released responsib!e party that
s.m SSula % damage enough. Hut tho law rrcsumes
from the negligence or unaushorizc act of.s
~ .geas ct commercial a rarer s1eby .y
mstcaa hauk OF Ahay Hnghs, u. And II lha prS-
sumption got conclusive but ltnble 10 bo overthrown
saas ssa.y IT. ns ns aas sss s III ss st
% ss,,t the holder Of tho paper from tbelr nugl.
III saa's ot Which a is e. th. sss ths 4ssnds
a.paymsat h.d bcon iu.lstei upon. tbink the Only
ssntsndsnt assumed tho sak OF payment BY tue bank
nt accepted tho eurtatcatlon aud the bank did
f tut Afy H. ssteats IL s0s ssesssd sas w. rue
tss; sGass r.. Or Payment as TO tho drawers. aud
ss nsy we're no longer liable upon the papor. TA,s
Np9n that point NOT forced to rely upon ny own
ttussttnent hud tho precAo question h1a been de-
" tho Court Of Apeais Of Now York tn lhe caaa
t1ss National Hank Of Jersey CITY ". Leach, n
Nv aesk. aso. That Wa MI actton OF check drawn
n oettnlant on tho 2lat Of November, 18Th, on the
lam isea ~ National bank payable Dec. II, ,s7l. Tue
NO plaintiff In that case discounted 1t for tho
10y, Aht A. II oclock \. OH the l3h day OF Do
tosf they presented 1t to the Ocea,, Dank aud got
sbsss - Rool. The dsswer uIon lad an account
tnn satlcens 10 pay IT. which Tie os1tinca-
&,thteu teuAsged up " him the Ocean Bunk hooks.
Ts Tah ~ aour after thAt tho Ocean Utnk auspenlS
n.o eaeek Wa again presented that day Tor Jay
ksnS y ana Nas dniy proteatt1 for nou-paymrat Tia
i taen sued thu drawer to spcoyer Tho amount VI
Sitnns Court upon that state Of facts held tia. tho
es4.A enl4d not recover; th4t the certihcatiou
atixes. 1' - O''"'*"A 'N' lA''ap& ~0o
III n hs opinion II il said that "tho law will not psr-
m"ne e1ec1s when due, to bs presented and tbs
H. hIey !e1t with The bank for ths accommodation OF
H. Gotlcr without dtscharging the drawer" 1hat II
L. III H. seoo.ss 70 hassi certified astsa Of paid
nut thsy say th4t tlhls would net Iiseharas Tho
!Isf III Il check who himself procured II to IL osr.
,pnns III rue would noI .Yply to HIM aud concad. ha
IL 1a ~ " s1ytnR 'that upon principle 1t mlst L.
hC IN $hc ID