The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-07-15

tested the check and sued the defen-
dants to collect the amount.
The court finds in favor of the de-
PENDANTS and orders judgment to be so
entered. In his conclusions of law
Judge Bum says:
The presentation of said check for certif-
cation by the plaintiff and the certifcation
thereof without demand being made for the
payment thereof at the same time, here
inbefore described, operated to discharge and
release the defendant from all liability upon
said check.
The rule adopted by the members Of said
Clearing House association to the effect that
payment of checks held by member thereof
when drawn against another member there
of should not be demanded made except
through the clearing house, as hereinDefore
described, is void against the defendants
in this action.
The memorandum is as follows:
1t is probably the law of this case that
presenting a check for certification by the
payee and the certification of the check after
the bank on which 1t was drawn is closed for
the day, does not discharge the drawer, for
the reason that payment of the check could
not have been demanded. The order of Judge
Brill overruling the demurrer to the COM
plant was not appealed from, but the de-
PENDANT answered and went to trial. The
question involved in that demurrer is there
fore res adiudicata in this court.
But a different state of affairs was pre-
scented at the trial. The check was presented
for certifcation by the plaintiff and certified
by the Bank of Minnesota before o'clock
on Dec. 81 1t was not paid nor was pay
ment demanded, but the amount of the check
was Immediately charged to defendants ac-
count in the Bank of Minnesota. The check
Itself was presented by plaintiff through the
Clearing house on the POD, and payment re-
fused, the Bank of Minnesota having that
morning suspended
Were these the only facts appearing, it is
perfectly clear that the drawer be discharged.
But the plaintiff pleads. and there was evil
dence to prove the existence of a custom
among the banks of St. Paul belonging to the
clearing house association to the effect that
checks. received by one of them in payment
OF collections and drawn on another bank,
should only be presented for payment through
the clearing house; that if received on any
day too late to present to the clearing house
that day, they should be held over for pre-
sentation on the following day; in the mean
time the bank receiving the check might,
and usually did, If the slightest doubt exist
ed as to the makers responsibility. send the
check to the bank on which it was drawn for
certilication. It was then held by the holder
clearing house the next day. The testimony
was even to the effect that it rule that
a bank would not pay such a check except
through the Gearing house. even though pay
ment was demanded These customs and rules,
plaintiff claims bring the case within the
spirit. If not the letter, of Judge Brll's decis-
ion, in this: Plaintiff could not have pro-
cured payment of the check even had pay
ment been demanded, not appeared when
the demurrer was argued because it was af-
ter banking hours, but because of a rule
adopted by the banks that payment would
not be demanded or made except through the
clearing house.
l am unable to adopt this, view. The custom
of presenting checks for payment through
the clearing house instead of to the payees
directly, is a reasonable custom, and defend
ant, as a business corporation and customer
of members of the clearing house, would prob
ably be bound by the custom. But the rule
that checks presented for payment directly
to the bank on which they are drawn will not
be paid is, one that contravenes a settled
principle Of the law, and cannot be binding On
those who are not parties to the agreement.
1t is an unreasonable rule and cannot be in
voked to take this out of the rule that
procuring a check to be certified instead of
demanding payment releases the drawer.