If an instrument be entitled to days of grace, and the last day of grace falls upon Sunday or a holiday, demand should be made upon Saturday, which would be the second day of grace;1 but if that

1 See Sec. 206, note 3.

2 It is a common custom.

3The bank draft upon another bank may be a sight draft, but no business man would take such a draft if he had looked at the face face of the draft. It would be entitled to days of grace.

4 See note 6 to the preceding section.

5See Sec. 150, ante.

6See Sec. 150, ante.

7 He would be simply the indorser of an ordinary check put into circulation. See note 6 to the preceding section.

8 See note 6 to the preceding section. Roberts v. Wold, 61 Minn. 291.

1 Kuntz v. Temple, 48 Ma 71; Brennan v. Vogt, 97 Ala. 647. See Doremus v. Benton, 5 Biss. 57. In computing time by days, the day of making either of note, bill or acceptance is excluded. Fisher v. State Bank, 7 Blackf. 610; Broddie v. Searcy, 7 Tenn. 183; Bradley v.

Saturday is also a holiday, demand should be made upon Friday.2 If the third day of grace falls upon Saturday, and there is a banking custom known to the parties that allows demand on the fourth day of grace, and if that fourth day should be Sunday allows demand upon Monday, such custom, it appears to be inferentially held in one case, would be valid, although it was held in the particular case that there was no sufficient proof of the custom.3 But instruments that are not entitled to grace, which fall due upon Sunday, may be demanded upon the following day.4 If the instrument is entitled to grace, and the day of its maturity without allowing grace is Sunday, it is demand able upon "Wednesday, the third day of grace after the date it is made due. It cannot be demanded upon Tuesday.5 Statutes are now very common upon the subject of holidays, but those statutes govern, of course, only instruments made after the passage of the act.6 These statutes are sometimes declaratory of the common law and sometimes change that rule.7 Cases will be found in the note; a discussion of them would simply be confined to questions of statutory construction. It should be remembered that holidays may exist by custom as well as by law.8

Northern Bank, 60 Ala. 252. In adding by months the rule is to use calendar months. Roehner v. Knickerbocker Life Ins. Co., 63 N. Y. 160. But February 29th is a day when it comes into the computation. Helphenstine v. Vincennes Nat Bank, 65 Ind. 582. See Wagner v. Kenner, 2 Rob. (La.) 120.

2 Sasscer v. Farmers' Bank, 4 Md. 409. This must not be confused with the rule as to notice See Hitchcock v. Hogan, 99 Mich. 124

3 Adams v. Otterback, 15 How. 539. Compare Thornton v. Stod-dert, 1 Cranch, C. C. 534.

4Sanders v. Ochiltree, 5 Port 73;

Salter v. Burt, 20 Wend. 205 (postdated check). Contra, Barker v. Parker, 6 Pick. 80.

5Bartlett v. Leathers, 84 Me. 241; Roberts v. Wold, 61 Minn. 291.

6Toothaker v. Cornwall, 3 Cal. 144. This decision is wrong on the main point

7Homes v. Smith, 20 Ma 264: First Nat Bank v. McAllister, 33 Neb. 646; Hagerty v. Engle, 43 N. J. Law, 299; Hershfield v. Fort Worth Nat Bank, 83 Tex. 452. And see note 1, supra,

8 City Bank v. Cutter, 3 Pick. 414; Dabney v. Campbell, 9 Humph. 680.