Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1902-07-21
Daily kennebec Journal
THE LADD CASES.
Banks Must Pay Principal and
and Interest to Plaintiff.
Cases Grew Out of Alleged Forgeries
of. /. lngham.
Two Able Rescripts Received From the
Supreme Bench.


cases Of Ladd VS.. The Augusta Savings
Bank and Ladd VS.. The Androscoggin |
County Savings Bank. A verdict in |
favor of the plaintiff for s2,O97.17 with
interest is given in the former case
and for s1,02+.03 with interest in the |
latter, thus sustaining the case pre-
scented by Ladd. These civil suits
grew out of the alleged forgeries of
John L. Ingham. The cases were tried
at the October term of the Supreme
Court for Kennebec county and went
to the full bench upon report
The reScriptS are as follows:
kennebec County. Philip S. Ladd VS..
Augusta Savings Bank. Rescript by
Wiswell, c. ].
If depositor in a savings bank re-
ceives from the bank bank book con-
tanning rules, regulations and condi-
tons which affect his contractual re-
Iatons with the bank and its liabilities
to him, clearly printed therein, and
reads them so that he knows of their
existence, and continues to leave his
deposit in the bank and to make addi-
tional deposits and to hold the bank
book as his voucher, he must be pre-
sumed to have agreed to be bound by
lHtUl, 50 THAT tHty Will DetOIIe IL part
of his contract with the bank.
The adoption of such rules, regula-
tons and conditions may be shown by
their long use with the knowledge and
approval of the trustees as well as by
the record of former vote.
The defendant bank issued to the
plaintiff deposit book containing
printed rules and regulations, among
which were the following:
Deposit Books.
All deposits are entered in the Books
of the corporation, and a Bank Book
given to each depositor, in which every
deposit made and every sum withdraw
will be entered. This book will be the
voucher, and the evidence of the de-
positor's property in the institution,
and of the same validity as Il note of
hand. Applications for withdrawal of
funds, whether in person or by order,
must always be accompanied by the
Deposit Book.
IL case of the loss of Deposit Book.
notice of such loss should be immedi-
ately given at the bank. AS the Off
GERS of the institution may be unable
to identify every deposition transacting
business at the bank, the institution
will not be responsible for loss sus-
tanned, when the depositor has not
given notice of his book being stolen Or
lost. if such book be paid in whole or
in part, on presentmcnt-
Signature of Rules.
ON making the first deposit, the de-
positor will be required to subscribe
his name to the rules, regulations and
bylaws of the Institution, and thereby
agree to be bound by them.
Between July I, 1884. and Jan'y 3,
1898, the plaintiff made numerous de-
posits in the defendant bank, which
aggregated on Aug. /, 1900, with divi-
dends credited to the same, the sum Of
s2y4717. OF this amount he withdrew
$3.50. No part of the balance has ever
been repaid by the bank to him, or up
on his genuine order. But on June 10.
1895 the bank paid to Il person, who
falsely personated the plaintiff and
presented his bank book, the sum of
s1250, and it subsequently paid on two
occasions, upon what purported to be
the orders of the plaintiff and now ad-
mitted to have been forgerieS, the sums
of $500 and $22717. The plaintiffs
bank book was presented upon each of
these occasions.
The foregoing regulation in the de-
post book relating to the identity of
the depositor contains language which
shows the reason and necessity for its
existence, and at the same time con-
tains a limitation upon its effect and
meaning. The reason given is be
cause the officers of the institution
may be unable to identify every de-
positor transacting business at the
bank, and this shows that the rule is
only applicable to cases where the OFF,
GERS of the institution are unable, by
the exercise of reasonable diligence, to
Identity the depoSitor. or to perceive
the want of identity between the de-
postor and the person presenting the
book for payment.
In other words, this provision does
not relieve the officers of the bank
from the exercise of such care as
would be reasonable. under all the cir
cuinstanCeS of the case in order to pro-
toct the interests of the depoSitor and
to prevent loss to him by reason of a
payment made to a person not entitled
to it.
The following facts appear in the
reported testimony in relation to the
$3.50 payment:
That the bank did not have the
plaintiffs signature upon its deposit
tors book, nor upon any book, so that
1t could be permanently preserved, and
easily and speedily referred to for the
purpose of comparison. The bank had
in its possession the genuine signature
OF the plaintiff on an order for the pay
ment of money given in 1892, but this
was not preserved for reference and
comparison: and the treasurer, at the
time of making the payment, did not
know of its existence.
When the payment of this sum of
$3.50 was made by check drawn on the
First National Bank of Augusta, the
plaintiffs bank book had been taken
from his possession without his
knowledge, but the fact was unknown
to him at that time. and the bank had
received no notice that it had been lost
or stolen.
In an action to recover the amount
of his deposit, less the amount with
drawn by him. held: as to the payment
of this sum of $3.50. that officers of a
savings bank of the magnitude of this