A holder, to be a bona fide holder, must take the instrument before maturity. If he takes after maturity he gets no better title than that of his indorser as against defenses which the maker may interpose, and which arise out of the instrument itself.1 A note indorsed over on the second day of grace is indorsed before maturity.2 An extension of time indorsed on a note prolongs maturity.3 For the purpose of determining the rights of the holder, a check is not overdue until a reasonable time has elapsed. Thus five days,4 six days,5 or ten days,6 have been held not unreasonable intervals. A demand note is overdue after a reasonable time has elapsed, as a year and a half.7 A certificate of deposit payable when returned is not overdue until it is returned.8 There is a conflict of authority as to iean whether one who takes after maturity takes subject to collateral defenses, such as set-off and counterclaim. Some courts holding that such defenses cannot be interposed,9 and others that it can.10 But even where set-off cannot ordinarily be asserted against a transferee after maturity, such set-off may be asserted against a transferee where the note is assigned fraudulently to defeat the set-off.11

20 Louisville Banking Co. v. Howard, 123 Ala. 380; 82 Am. St. Rep. 126; 26 So. 207; Crawford v. Spencer, 92 Mo. 498; 1 Am. St. Rep. 745; 4 S. W. 713; First National Bank v. Fowler, 36 O. S. 524; 38 Am. Rep. 610.

21 American Exchange National Bank v. Packing Co., 148 N. Y. 698; 43 N. E. 168.

22Kingsland v. Pryor, 33 O. S. 19.

1 Morgan v. United States, 113 U. S. 476; Marshall v. Shiff, 130 Ala. 545; 30 So. 335; Risley v. Gray, 98 Cal. 40; 32 Pac. 884; Har-rell v. Banking Co., Ill Ga. 846; 36 S. E. 460; Freittenhurg v. Rubel, - la. - ; 98 N. W. 624; State Trust Co. v. Turner, 111 la. 664; 53 L. R. A. 136; 82 N. W. 1029; Loewen v. Forsee, 137 Mo. 29; 59 Am. St. Rep.

489; 38 S. W. 712; First National Bank v. Bank, 34 Neb. 71; 33 Am. St. Rep. 618; 15 L. R. A. 386; 51 N. W. 305; Koehler v. Dodge, 31 Neb. 328; 28 Am. St. Rep. 518; 47 N. W. 913.

2Haug v. Riley, 101 Ga. 372; 40 L. R. A. 244; 29 S. E. 44.

3 Whitney National Bank v. Cannon, 52 La. Ann. 1484; 27 So. 948.

4Fealey v. Bull, 163 N. Y. 397; 57 N. E. 631.

5 Rothschild v. Corney, 9 Barn. & C. 388; Estes v. Shoe Co., 59 Minn. 504; 50 Am. St. Rep. 424; 61 N. W. 674. (Especially if the parties are a considerable distance apart.)

6 Ames v. Meriam, 98 Mass. 294.

7Guckian v. Newbold, 23 R. I. 553, 594; 51 Atl. 210.

8Tobin v. McKinney, 15 S. D. 257; 88 N. W. 572; affirming, 14 S-D. 52; 84 N. W. 228.