Please cite to the original publication
THE testing of the institutional method outlined in the second article of this series by its application to the cases of Callahm v. Bank of Anderson, requires the ascertainment of the established banking patterns as to debiting of direct discounts in the jurisdictions in which those cases were decided. In preparation for the work in South Carolina, New York, and Pennslyvania an investigation was made in Connecticut and the third article is a report of that inquiry and its results. This article reports the studies made in South Carolina and Pennsylvania in the attempt to find the sequences with which "the facts" of the Delano v. Equitable Trzst Co. Goldstein v. Jefferson Title & Trust Co., Callaham and of the Goldstein cases should be compared.
Date of Authorship for this Version