Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1819-11-09


tnrc Is I0und III the charter OF the bauk OF
hentuckH aud in most other acts of inc"ipu-
ration, which authorize notes In be taken
The hind OF hoie4, where paNahie aud how 4;
when negotiabe, must be expressed on the
face Of the note But the act now under con.
sideraton, describes not the Kind OF Mates in
"hicli the bank may deal OF course, il IL eau
purchase ms one, II may purchase oil notes
anoat In society, whether for money or pro-
perty and the power, ifit exists al all, is un-
restricted The same conclusion is however
NOR foTciblv strengthened by the 18th section,
which enacts or declares that if the said
co. operation or any person OF persons, for, or
10 t!ie use OF The same shall deaf or tpdde IN
Ohy'Hg or selling goods, wares, merchandise
or my commodity Whatsoever contrary 10 the
provisions of this act, all aud every person and
persons, Uy whom any order or direction iof
so dealing OF tradIn. shalt have been given,
aud all aud every person and perscns who
shai' nave been concerned aS parties or agents
therein shall forttit aud lose treble the value
OF Tue goods, wares. merchaudize, and COM
modities, in which such dealing aud trade
SHALL have been" &c.
III, therefore, the plaintiffs were not allowed
10 make The purchase of the note in question,
Set as they have got IL. are they allowed 10
noiu u aud GEORGE Its collection, and be permit
ga 10 alone Tor lie offence by paying the PEE
natiy. 1t II shall ever be inflicted Or, IN other
words, when pusitve " has declared tina;
the act shall not be done-is The act good when
tie penalty IS paid, and can title acquired
'S''iais express uIEtGsiOi oil tAe ldN
valid one The affirmative answer TO these
enquiries has been iTsenioaSiy and ably sup
ported ny Tie counsel Tor The bank, and las
The sanction of high authority on IFS side The
courts OF Westminster Hall seem IL soH.e de-
gree dSfRtc, IN supporting actions U.;.iuating
Ia Illegal transactions. 1t has been Salt by
iheni that where the ilesa! contract is eAsC,,
tory money paid upon it, may be recovered
pack alter lift be eXecntcd-and HAT v,ers
tHe contract Us only a,alHlR prof. i6itLlR aud not
N a r4fr1fr ,,,a
port an action. such are the principles Ofths
cdses-Lowry W.. Borden, Dong. 40, Tap
pendin VS.. Randall, Bos. and Pull. sG7
ralhheys vs.. iteynOus, 4 Bur. 20GJ Bur.
do, Gro. ia. Oi3, I Wilson 22o, Bur. 1917,
ana some cases of Durntord and East. Since
the Revolution. These cases, even with re-
Sain 10 natural persons, whose interest they
ueUipe, are very Questionable but they are
sun more 50 with regard 10 IA corporation, the
ar'incidi creature OF its incorporating act, the
limits which II ought never 10 he permitted 10
udhsCend-ior how an uhld transac 1 on
snould even III any way become the legal ba-
SIS OF all action al iaw-or in OTHER words, tai
the law should ever in any manner lend ITS aid
10 ENFORCE CLAIMS arising out Of it's own princi-
pies, rs TO this court GnaccOuntabie 0 state
me proposition seems TO retute Al. 1t strikps
me mind al once, as contrary 10 reason & law.
IiIis court VIII rather az once lay down and
MAINTAIN thrbroaf principle, even with r.
gard to natural persons, hat " hat the law says
shall not be done, shall not vest "a title or re-
oeive any aid when il is doNe, and is disco
rerable IN any existing or pcadins coniTovsis;,
and tlat title acquired against law shall not
be enforced By law, whatever atoneIaent- tie
offender may b. able 10 make, by paying The
forfeit annexed To the forbidden act This
principle has met v'itk ihe sanction OF many OF
the c0urgS of the United States. and Different
states of high standing. See Maybin vs.. Con-
hn, a Dallas, 29o-Hannay VS. Ewes Cramcn
2i2-hIltcheu vs. Smith / Dali 2G9-Duucau-
son VS.. Mcclure, ibid 3OS, aud snndry other
cases III the New York reports.
These cases, which NAV be consulted at lei
sure, will siIew that the ground now assumed
by the court, wants not the sanction OF antlio.
rity ndprecedenf, as well as the first prilci-
pies of reason, even where natural persons
with natural rights are concerned, ~ of course
corporations, and especially those OF potent.
extensive aud mohopOlizimg character, ought
20 lie as strictly, ii not more so, confined with
in the rules OF reason and good order, and
circumScTIbed within The strict limits of dele
Gated auihority. Upon The whole il seems 10
the court that the law arising on the demurrer
is for the defendant Ii is therefore consideIe ed
nv the court, that tue plaintiffs take nothing
by their bill, but for their false clamOr be in
mercy. &c That the defendant go hence,
without day, and recover OF the plaintiffs his
costa, by ham, about his defence in this behalf
expended.