101 Mass. 281 | Mass. | 1869
This action is brought by the plaintiffs to recover the amount of a check drawn upon them and paid by them through the agency of the Boston Clearing House, there being no funds of tb 3 drawer in their hands at the time of the pay ment.
It is plain, in the case here presented, that if the plaintiffs had paid this check at their own counter under a mistake of fact, they could have maintained this action to recover it back. . Is there anything in the manner in which the payment was in fact made, or in the relation of the parties to each other as members of the Clearing House Association, which prejudicially affects this right ?
It is declared by the articles, which were signed by the plaintiff and defendant banks, to be the object of the association to effect at one time and place the daily exchanges between the several associated banks, and the payment of the balances resulting from such exchanges. An early hour is fixed for making these exchanges, and a later time in the day for the receipt and payment of balances from the debtor and creditor banks. These settlements are made, not from an examination in detail of the vouchers presented, but from memoranda and tickets accompanying them. And any mistakes resulting from this mode of settlement are to be adjusted directly between the banks which are parties therein. It is further provided that “ whenever checks
We cannot adopt the theory that a failure to present a bad check, before the time named, to the bank sending it through the dealing House, works an absolute forfeiture, and is in itself a perfect bar to any action to recover the amount of such check. The whole arrangement, in all its provisions and declared purposes, is to be construed together. And the law will not construe any portion so as to subject parties to a penalty or forfeiture of their rights, where other reasonable interpretation can be given which will give effect and consistency to the whole. The parties have in terms affixed no penalty or forfeiture to the stipulation under consideration, and a failure to comply with its terms must leave the parties in the same position and precisely as they would stand when a payment is made under a mistake of fact in the ordinary way. After one o’clock, the defendants, upon the failure to return the check, had the right to consider it paid, and to treat it so in their dealings with others. The report finds that the delay in its return was occasioned by a mistake or the part of the messenger, a mistake which was quite as much a mistake of fact as if it had been produced by the false time of a
We have considered the case as if the agreement required the return of the check to the bank from which it was received before or at one o’clock; but it will be noticed that the stipulation is, that the check shall in no case be retained after one o’clock. If it were necessary to save a penalty or a forfeiture, it might be held that the delivery of it to a messenger before one o’clock, to be returned to the bank depositing it, with sufficient time, in the absence of any accident or mistake, to reach the bank before that hour, would be a compliance with its terms, although it was not in fact delivered until some minutes after.
Judgment on the verdict for the plaintiffs.