Mr. Hubbard introduced on Tuesday a Bill to explain and
-modify the law as to crossed cheques, which has recently been so interpreted by the Judges as to make the utility of the crossing very problematic, or at least, very much less than it was believed to be. Mr. Hubbard proposes to make a banker liable again for any crossed cheque which he shall pay otherwise than through the banker to whom it is crossed, and so to do away with the theory of the Judges that the law of 1858 restrained the banker on whom the cheque was drawn from cashing it other- wise than through another bank only while the original drawer of the cheque would be the loser by any neglect,—but that as soon as the cheque changed hands, and came into the hands of another bona fide owner, then the effect of the restriction imposed by the crossing,—which was only a personal warning on the part of the first drawer,—ceased. If Mr. Hubbard's Bill becomes law, a crossed cheque cannot be cashed at all, except through a bank, or at least, if it is, the banker who thus pays it will have to make good the loss himself. This is as it should be. Legal refinements in matters of this nature are mistakes. To make commercial precau- tions useful, their effect must be made even vulgarly intelligible to everybody.
Previous page
