In general, the rules in force as to presentment, notice and protest of checks are the same as in the case of bills of exchange and promissory notes.5 But there is in this connection, this distinction between a check and a bill of exchange: the want of due presentment or notice of dishonor of a check does not discharge the drawer unless he has suffered some loss or injury thereby.6 It may be said further, that a holder of a check cannot by his mere act of delay lose his right of recourse on the drawer; still it is his duty to present the check for payment within a reasonable time and give notice to the drawer within a like reasonable length of time if it is dishonored, and if he fails to do so, the delay is at his peril.7

4 Norton on Bills and Notes, Secs.

156-157. 5 Merchants Bank vs. State, 10

Wall., 496.

6 Heartt vs. Rhodes, 66 I11., 357. 7 Stevens vs. Park, 73 I11., 387.

The holder by his omission to make presentment, protest and notice assumes the burden of showing that the failure to obtain payment of the check was through no fault of his, and necessarily that no damage had occurred to the drawer by his delay.8

In case the bank on which the check is drawn fails, after the check has been delivered to the holder, and after he has held it and has not presented it within a reasonable length of time, if the drawer of the check had sufficient funds in bank to meet the check, the fault of failing to obtain payment is on the holder of the check. But if the bank has not failed the drawer cannot claim a discharge because the holder has merely delayed presenting the check to the bank for payment.9

As to the question, as to what constitutes a reasonable length of time, that the holder may take to make presentment of a check, or to pass it by transfer to another, so that the peril of the failure of the bank on which the check is drawn shall not be assumed by the holder, the law has declared that time to be only twenty-four hours after the holder has received the check. The holding of the check, therefore, for more than one day, it has repeatedly been held, discharges the drawer, in case the bank on which the check is drawn fails in the meantime.10

But the rule as stated will not be permitted to work too great a hardship on the holder, and a further interpretation of the rule gives the holder of a check who receives it at a point more or less remote from the bank on which it is drawn the whole of the day following the day of receipt in which to forward the check to the bank on which it is drawn for presentment. The time consumed in the process of forwarding the check from the place of the holder to the bank maybe a week or more, and any loss occurring by reason of failure of bank during this period would not fall on the holder.11 The payee of a check has the alternative right to present it to the bank, or start the forwarding of it within twenty-four hours, or he may transfer it by indorsement or delivery within twenty-four hours from the time of receipt to another holder, who in turn has the same right. But it may be said, generally, that a check is not intended for general circulation like a note or bill; it is meant for immediate presentment.12 It may be said, generally, that those things that will excuse a failure to present a bill or note and to protest and give notice on the same will likewise operate an excuse for presentment of a check. The insolvency of the bank will, of course, excuse presentment.

8 Moyt vs. Seeley, 18 Conn., 353;

Daniels vs. Kyle, 1 Ga., 304. 9 Mohawk Bank vs. Broderick, 10

Wend., 309.

10 Bickford vs. First National Bank, 42 I11., 238.

11 Smith vs. Jones, 20 Wend., 192.

12 Mohawk Bank vs. Broderick, 10 Wend., 304.