Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1815-09-30
FOR TIE E,NQUYRER.
CONSIDERATIONS
On tie subject Of Uncicrfcrcd BG,rk;,
BY i DIsIxTEnEsrEp CITIZEN.

Ite E"ba'7r'ssnenfs cf conIacting' Tie concerns
Of UnsiarFered Banks. crisiNg from A,eir iu-
CAPACITY to s7sc, sc. Sc.
Having exhibited in the last number some of the
difficulties which viii oppose themselves to the cir.
collation. of private Bank Notes, and having shewn
that the Chartered Companies ought not 70 receive
th.ir paper IA the course OF business, | proceed TO
oiersome suggestions IN relation to the legal inc;l-
pacitics under which all Unchartercd Establish
nients must labo-r
one OF the first of these iucapacG1s is an inctJr-
cry 10 sue, whilst 1t the lime they are liable
TO be sued. 1t is believed that an ILLEGAL association
cannot recover the debts contracted will il. and
that Unchartered Banks Will therefore be unable In
sue debtors for the amount Of the notes which
they discount.
The consequences Of this principle cannot fail to
he sooner or later fatal to every such iu,titl,ion-
For although desire preserve credit is the sect
rty upon which all Banks generally rely yet all
are Gee sonaiiy obliged to to the law for its
compulsory sh. These instances are few, in The
case OF Chartered Institutions. The Certainty
ofrecovcrv, and the desire oil preserving credit
Which IS the more important, Banks are less nu-
nerous, conspire teprevent the necessity Of resort
ing to Courts But, wherever suits shall be brought
by unchartsred Banks, the sagacity o:Councii viii
doubtless furnish to the Defendant this principle of
defence. The consequences csnuot be Mistaken
indor:er', on whom the ruin of the drawer is likely
TO bring dcstruction viii readily avail themselves o
every defence, Oh tlie specous and common pre-.
text, that innocent scccrity may morally make
use o!any means OF sef-protec.ion Great los,sy
will thus se sustained by the Banks datrus, ofthe
security OF Endorsement must inevitably ense. with
81. the consequences Oft destruction OF confidence
between the Banks and their dealers.
However unequa. il may appear, it is neyerthc-
less ;Iue, that though Unchartcred Banks will be
incApacitatcd to sue, they may nevertheless be sued
lhcugh prohibited from recovering their demands,
they yet liable to be sued by the hiiler Of eve
ny note they issue, anG CAS- viii be shewn hcrealter)
every Stakeholder Wi Be liable 20 "a. cr.sa. of lis
fyit7le.
Though in this, there is no RECIPROCITY, vet isita
doctrine firmly settled. Il grows out ofthe p.inci-
pie Of the law, that whoever iniIrees its provisions
sl'al not have IFS ail in enforcing their contracts,
thodgh they left TO be prosecuted BY those with
whom they deal
We have, indeed, various analogous instances in
our laws gambler cannot sue for what he has
won, yet loser may recover back losses 4 n,isu-
rcr easnot sue TOR AIS usury, yet the borrower mas
recover back the unlawiulGan. y contract with an
infant is void as to him, yetit good as to the per-
son contract ne with him.
These positions are w.. understood and well set
ted and how much more necessary is 1t that
these rigorous principles should be applied TO body
ct men associated together 10 carry an Illegal oc
euPaton in defiance of express laws, aud 10 the
great hazard OF the community at large.
The doctrine contended for, is supposed to he full
y
See Watson on Partnership, page Al. Furralti's
Plila. Edit. f8O7.
[ But, even though II were admitted that Banks
Without Charter could sue upon disc Junted notes
Tie Inirioacies and cmbarIa sments Of such suit,
kCutd be Infinite Unchartcred Banks are al ,noet
only partnerships IA and in every suit by partner
ship, every partner must be named nc plaintiff. Cb1
ihns, IN oil suits commenced by such Bark, e7ely
iSiOcthodsr. whether infant or adult, AID every
husband IN right Ct his wife, WHO may have been a
Stakeholder, must join, aud ifaDy one be omitted.
and the omission be discovered GE he trial the Rank
must be nonsuted and pay all the accumulated costs
Of this Intricate proceeding. fl Nay this is not
all n Stakeholder who sells ont his interest after
debt has been contracted, is still considered rs Ia
fiat debf partRer, and must join in a suit for it.
and his name be omitted, ard the omission anpcara
Oh Tie trial. the Company must be norsu:tod -
What WI adj more yer 10 the perplcxitT OF cases
nj this description Is, that though a sale Ofl5 Stock
bya Stakeholder Gs'oves the partnership 81 Ear as
questions ar So between the partners themselves il
would not affect third persons so that, wircneyer
STAKEHOLDER sold out his interest, IL would be nc
ccssa'y To- give not ce that he was no lnnctl. part
ner J! Some Of tha consequences OF the rneli md
il-aiviscd attempt n counteract the law thus 40.
pear almost ss riiiculOus others are depcfaHc
An these perplexi,ics and embrrass,nens gre A.
vmdel 10y TIC incorporation Of Bank by tho act OF
tne Log a'nr", but they inevitably gt;eui every
Orclur cred Establishment A rust estimate Il
10 avoi t1eu by the acquisition oC n Chatter. e.
ven % Tie cxpence 81 heavy deduction from their
profits.
Tic advocates for Unchartered Banks will not e.
ven havc the oaton of r. fleeing that Tho q WHO
sne thee sill meet with diicues equal IN their
own when partners are sDei the paintf is uot
supposed necessarily 30 know thcm. If, therefore
ne onits 20 name an individual, no advantage can
be taken oft, unessit be plead in abatement 1d1
But when partners sue, advantage may be- taken
81 omissions, and The plaintiff ponsuted az tic trai
bcsa'cs the incapacity IN sue, issaid tliat a
Ch9rtcr IS necessary to enaide Companies rs eHcf
10 bold lanl. rcl IS partners, hoeevcr, they would
be entitled 10 hold lands on tlc terms, and in the
manner common IN partnership. These prime piles
y hcn applied n numerous Companies must produce
incXtricsbe confusion.
Il 10 lad down, that lands belonging IN partner
s'1p arc held 10 common by parties ri " u,ena
tract Of !snd DC conveyed tosn Unchagicfed Bank