This section is from the book "The Law Of Banks And Banking", by John Maxcy Zane . Also available from Amazon: The law of banks and banking.
General business customs of notoriety are presumed to be known to the business community.1 Such a custom not to do business on particular days has made Harvard commencement day a holiday in a portion of Massachusetts ;2 but a custom not to do business on New Year's day must be brought home to a party by actual or constructive knowledge.3 The half-holiday on Saturday may become another instance of such business usage.4 Again, upon notes made payable or negotiable at a bank, the usages of that bank are a part of the contract, such as to demand payment on the fourth day of grace,5 or to send notes for collection in packages once a week,6 or to allow days of grace quiries. Bank of Utica v. Phillips, 3 Wend. 408.
15 Ex parte Heidelback, 2 Low. 526.
16 Wolf v. Jewett, 10 La. 384
17 Farnsworth v. Mullen, 164 Mass. 112.
18 See also Bank of Utica v. Phillips, 3 Wend. 408 (as to notice).
19See Sec. 257, ante.
1 See Sec. Sec. 113-117, ante.
2 City Bank v. Cutter, 3 Pick. 414 3 Dabney v. Campbell 9 Humph.
680. This decision is wrong. The custom was notorious. 4 But the cases are on statutes.
See Sylvester v. Crohan, 138 N. Y. 494
5 Renner v. Bank of Columbia, 9 Wheat. 581; Mills v. Bank of U. S., 11 Wheat. 431; Bank of Washington v. Triplett, 1 Pet. 25. Contra, custom does not bind an indorser unless he knows of it. Pierce v. Butler, 14 Mass. 303. But see Blanch-ard v. Hilliard. 11 Mass. 85; Whit-well v. Johnson, 17 Mass. 449. The rule does not apply without knowledge as to note merely left there for collection. Hill v. Norvel, 3 McLean, 583.
6 Bridgeport Bank v. Dyer, 19 Conn. 136.
7 Bowen v. Newell 13 N. Y. 290.
8 Patriotic Bank v. Farmers' Bank, 2 Cranch, C. C. 560.
9 Adams v. Otterback, 15 How. 539.
11 Bowen v. Newell. 13 N. Y. 290.
12 Morrison v. Bailey, 5 Ohio St 13.
13 Mechanics' Bank v. Merchants' Bank, 6 Met. 13.
14 Barnes v. Vaughn, 6 R L 259; Moore v. Waitt, 13 N. H 415. And see Farmers' Bank v. Duvall, 7 Gill & J. 78. So of a usage to take a check in payment of a collection by the collecting bank, and to protest the collection if the check should be dishonored. Strong v. King, 35 111. 9.
15 Whitwell v. Johnson, 17 Mass. 449.
 
Continue to: