4. The sender may cut the notes in halves, and send one set of halves the day after he has received them, and the second set the day after that (c). 5. The time for the receiver to present the notes for payment does not begin to run until he has received the second set of halves (c) the sender has not parted with the property of the notes until he has sent the second set of halves: and until he has done that he may reclaim the first set of halves (d). 6. Sunday, Christmas day, Good Friday, a public fast or thanksgiving day; or a day on which a man is forbidden by his religion. to transact secular business (f); but not a bank holiday (g); are not counted therefore, if a man receives a bank note on such a day, he has till the second day after to present or transmit it for payment (h). (a) Parker v. Gordon, 7 East., 385. Elford v. Teed, 1 M. & S., 28. Jameson v. Swinton, 2 Taunt., 224. Whitaker v. Bank of England, 1 C. M. & R., 744. (b) Manwaring v. Harrison, 1 Stra., 508. Medcalf v. Hall, 3 Doug., 113. Appleton v. Sweetapple, 3 Doug., 137. Robson v. Bennet, 2 Taunt., 388. Rickford v. Ridge, 2 Camp., 537. Beeching v., Holt, N. P., 315. Williams v. Smith, 2 B. & Ald., 496. Boddington v. Schlencker, 4 B. & Ad., 752. Pocklington v. Sylvester, Chitty, 9th ed., p. 385. Moule v. Brown, 4 Bing., N. C., 266. Hare v. Henty, 10 C. B., N. S., 65. (c) Williams v. Smith, 2 B. & Ald., 496. (d) Smith v. Mundy, 2 E. & B., 22. (f) Lindo v. Unsworth, 2 Camp., 602. (g) 34 Vict. (1871), c. 17. (h) Tassel v. Lewis, 1 Ld. Raym., 743. 39 & 40 Geo. 3 (1800), c. 42. 7 & 8 Geo. 4 (1827), c. 15. ON CHEQUES. 54. 1. The relation between a banker and his customer on an ordinary banking account is that of simple debtor and creditor: and not that of trustee and cestui que trust. 2. Money paid by a customer to a banker belongs absolutely to to the banker; it is a Mutuum, or Loan, and not a Depositum, or Bailment. 3. In exchange for the money the banker gives his customer a Credit, or a right to demand an equal sum of money with or without notice. Vernon v. Hankey, 2 T. R., 113. Carr v. Carr, 1 Meriv., 541n. Sleech's case, 1 Mer., 560. Sims v. Bond, 5 B. & Ad.. 392. Bank v. Campbell, 8 Q. B., 1. Marten v. Sedgwick, 9 Beav., 333. Swayne v. Swayne, 11 Beav., 463. Elder v. Maclean, 5 W. R., 447. Pennell v. Deffell, 4 De G. M. & G., 372. Clayton's case, 1 Mer., 572. Bodenham v. Purchas, 2 B. & Ald., 39. 60. For the purpose of notice no particular form of words is necessary. Any words are sufficient which shew an intention of transferring or appropriating the chose-in-action to or for the use of the assignee. Yeates v. Grove, 1 Ves., jun., Row v. Dawson, 1 Ves., sen., 332. 281. Howell v. Maciver, 4 T. R., 690. Smith v. Everett, 4 Bro. C. C., 63. Heath v. Hall, 4 Taunt., 326. Er parte Alderson, 1 Mad., 53. Crowfoot v. Gurney, 2 Mo. & Sc., 473. Smith v. Smith, 2 Cr. & M., 231. Ex parte Carlis, 4 D. & Ch., 357. Ex parte South, 3 Swans., 393. Tibbits v. George, 5 A. & E., 107. Hutchinson v. Heyworth, 9 A. & E., 375. Macfadden v. Jenkyns, 1 Hare, 458. L'Estrange v. L'Estrange, 13 Beav., 281. Riccard v. Prichard, 1 K. & J., 277. Rawbone's bequest, re, 3 K. & J., 300. Jones v. Farrell, 3 Jur., N. S., 751. 61. But the notice given must be legal. An instrument not "lawfully" stamped is void and of no effect; if notice be given by such an instrument the holder of the fund must not regard it: if he pays on such an instrument the payment is void, even though he agreed to do so. But if the notice be given by an instrument not “duly” stamped, the notice is valid. Emly v. Collins, 6 M. & S., 144. Butts v. Swan, 2 Bro. & B., 459. Lord Braybrooke v. Firbank v. Bell, 1 B. & Ald., 36. Parsons v. Middleton, 6 Hare, 261. Mac gowan v. Smith, 26 L. J. Ch., 8. Pott v. Lomas, 6 H. & N., 529. 62. 1. Notice given to a person who has not yet received the fund is null, void, and of no effect. 2. If, therefore, several assignments of the fund have been made, and notices given to a person before he has received it, they are null and void, and the priorities take effect according to the order of the assignments (a). 3. But if the person who expects to receive the fund promises the assignee that he will hold it when received for him, he is bound by that promise (b). (a) Rodick v. Gandell, 1 De G. M. & G., 763. Buller v. Plunkett, 1 Johns. & H., 441. Webster v. Webster, 31 Beav., 393. Somerset v. Cox, 33 Beav., 634. Earl of Suffolk v. Cox, 36 L. J., Ch. 591. Stephens v. Hill, 3 Esp., (b) Clark v. Adair, cited 4 T. R., 343. 247. Kilsby v. Williams, 5 B. & Ald., 815. 2. As soon as the assignment of the chose-in-action is completed, so that nothing more remains to be done by the assignor, the property in the chose-in-action is transferred to the assignee. 3. The assignee has a good and effectual title against the assignor and all persons who claim by, through, or against him, such as his executors, administrators, assignees in bankruptcy, judgment creditors, or an extent at the suit of the Crown. 4. But the title of the assignee is not final and complete against all the world until the debtor has received notice of the assignment. 5. Until this notice has been given the chose-in-action is still in "order and disposition" of the assignor, and in the event of his bankruptcy or death passes to his assignees or representatives. 6. Immediately the debtor receives the notice, he is fixed with the trust, and is converted into a trustee for the assignee: if he makes any payment to the assignor it is no discharge to him, and he is still liable to the assignee. 7. If he has good reason to dispute the assignment, he may pay the assignor until the point is settled in equity (a). Ex parte Byas, 1 Atk., 124. Row v. Dawson, 1 Ves., sen., 332. Tate v. Hilbert, 2 Ves., jun., 111. Casberd v. Att. Gen., 6 Price, 411. Ex parte Burton, 1 Gl. & J., 207. Williams v. Thorpe, 2 Sim., 257. Ex parte Tennyson, M. & Bl., Buck v. Lee, 1 A. & 690. Macfadden v. N. W. Ry. Co., 15 Beav., Gibson v. Overbury, 7 M. Cr., (a) Aplin v. Coates, 30 L. J. Ch., 6. 36 & 37 Vict. (1873), c. 66, s. 25, § 6. 59. If several assignees have a right to the fund, the assignee who first gives notice to the holder of the fund acquires the first charge over it, and the other assignees according to the order of their assignments. Dearle v. Hall, 3 Russ., 1. Leveridge v. Cooper, 3 Russ., 31. Hulton v. Sandys, 1 Young, 602. Greening v. Beckford, 5 Sim., 195. Foster v. Blackstone, 1 My. & K., 297. Foster v. Cockerell, 3 Cl. & Fin., 456. Atkinson, in re, 2 De G. M. & G., 140. 1 A. & E., 804. Etty v. Bridges, 2 Y. & C., Ex. Eq., VOL. II. Buck v. Lee, 486. Belcher 2 K 72. Colyer •. Faica, I. & R.. 459. Lori Braybrooke v. Pirions v. Middletom, 6 Hare, 21. Mac goran v. Smith, 28 L. J. Ch., 8. Pitt v. Lomas, 6 H. & N., 599. 62. 1. Notice given to a person who has not yet received the fund is nul, void, and of no effect. 2. If, therefore, several assignments of the fund have been made, and notices given to a person before he has received it, they are null and void, and the priorities take effect according to the order of the assignments (a). 2. But if the person who expects to receive the fund promises the assignee that he will hold it when received for him, he is bound by that promise (b). (a) Rodick v. Gandell, 1 De G. M. & G., 763. Buller v. Plunkett, 1 Johns. & H., 441. Webster v. Webster, 31 Beav., 393. Somerset v. Cox, 88 Beav., 634. Earl of Suffolk v. Cox, 36 L. J., Ch. 591. (b) Clark v. Adair, cited 4 T. R., 343. Stephens v. Hill, 3 Esp., 247. Kilsby v. Williams, 5 B. & Ald., 815. 63. The Purchaser of a chose-in-action takes it subject to any prior trusts, equities, claims, or possibilities of such, at the time of the assignment. Coles v. Jones, 2 Vern., 692. Turton v. Benson, 1 P. Wms., 496. Davis v. Austin, 1 Ves., jun., 247. Matthews v. Wallwyn, 4 Ves., 118. Hill v. Caillovel, 1 Ves., sen., 123. Mer., 626. Hamil v. Stokes, 4 Price, 161. 86. Morris v. Livie, 1 Y. & Col., C. Beav., 357. Moore v. Jervis, 2 Coll., 60. 115. Cockell v. Taylor, 15 Beav., 103. Beav., 163. Manningford v. Toleman, 1 Col. C. C., 235. Daubery v. Cockburn, 1 Priddy v. Rose, 3 Mer., C., 380. Ord v. White, 3 Smith v. Parkes, 16 Beav., Cavendish v. Greaves, 24 2.-Order given by a Creditor to a Debtor to pay a third person. 64. If a creditor gives an authority or order to his debtor to pay a third person, then 1. If the debtor pays the money to the third person in pursuance of such authority, the payment is good (a). 2. If the debtor assents to make such payment and communicates such assent to the third person, a trust is created, irrevocable, except by the consent of all parties, and the third person has an action against the debtor for the money (b). 3. An agreement to pay funds which will only be received at a future time is equally binding as one to pay funds in actual possession (c). 4. If the third person becomes informed that the debtor has been directed to pay him a sum of money, he may sue him for it (d). 5. Until the debtor has actually paid the money or entered into a binding agreement to do so in pursuance of the authority, the creditor may countermand the direction and demand repayment of the money (e). (a) Gibson v. Minet, 2 Bing., 7. Brind v. Hampshire, 1 M. & W., 365. (b) Williams v. Everett, 14 East., 582. Hodgson v. Anderson, 3 B. & C., 842. Humphreys v. Briant, 4 C. & P., 157. Lilly v. Hays, 5 A. & E., 548. Hutchinson v. Heyworth, 9 A. & E., 375. Walker v. Rostron, 9 M. & W., 411. Hamilton v. Spottiswoode, 4 Ex., 200. Farley v. Turner, 26 L. J., Ch. 710. Noble v. National Discount Co., 5 H. & N., 225. Griffin v. Weatherby, L. R., 3 Q. B., 753. (c) Walker v. Rostron, 9 M. & W., 411. Hamilton v. Spottiswoode, 18 L. J., Ex., 392. Griffin v. Weatherby, L. R., 3 Q. B., 753. (d) Burn v. Carvalho, 4 My. & Cr., 690. 66, s. 25, § 11. (e) Whitfield v. Savage, 2 B. & P., 277. 7. Brind v. Hampshire, 1 M. & W.. 365. 601. Morrell v. Wootton, 16 Beav., 197. 36 & 37 Vict. (1873), c. Gibson v. Minet, 2 Bing., |