The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1838-06-16

The presiding Judge directed the Jury, " they
were satisfied that the transaction occurred ia Mo
bile TO bring verdict for the delendanl-which ac-
coIdngly they did.
The District Judge, Mr. Crawford, was on the
bench but declined 10 take part in the cause on the
ground Of personal interest In a similar question
though, as we learn after the decision was pro-
bounced, he said he could not refrain from ex-
pressing his entire concurrence in the law, laid
down by his associate How far Judge Crawford
may have influenced the opinions and the law Of his
associate on the bench, must al this distance, be
merely matter Of conjecture; but Of the morality Of
the defence ITSELF there should seems TO us, be but
one opinion. Perhaps too, there will be- no differ
ence Of opinion, as to the extreme indeeorum of
Judge crawfords sitting at all on the bench on this
occasion--even though he had not intimated any
opinlon--when We state the fact that he himself is
endorser ofa bin Of erehange purchased by anotaer
foreign corporation payment 81 lrhieh he resias upon
similar grounds
The other case involving similar point Of
law, is thus reported by the Mobile papers:
Bank Of he United States VS.. VIM ID Primrose -
Case agrced-Tne following case, by agreement, was
submitted to his Honor, Judge Mckinley The presiding
Judge, viz The plaintiffs body corporate, exist
ing under, and by virtue Of law Of the State OF Penn
sysania authorized by It's charter TO and be sued
by the name Of the President, Directors and Company
OF the Bank Of the United States, and 10 deal IN Bills Of
Exchange-and IS composed Of citizens Of the State
Of Alabama The defendant is citizen Of the State
Of Alabama George Poe. jr was agent Of the plain
TIL resident OF Mobile, and in possession Of funds be-
longing to the plaintiff entrusted TO him for the sole
purpose Of purchasing Bills Of Exchange. The SAID q.
Poe, Jr as such agent. the l4th day Of January,
eighteen hundred aud thirty seven, purchased at Mobile
the Bill declared upon and paid for the in the
notes Of the Branch Of the Bank Of Alabama Mobile
The defendant is the payee, OF III, Bill and endorsed
it to plaintiff the present holder, The bill was pre-
scented at maturity 10 the accepor and duly protested
for nonpsyment and due and legal notice given the
defendant The question for the opinion Of the Court
on the foregoing statement Of facts whether the pur
chase Of the said Bill Of Exchange, by the plaintiff as
aforesaid valid contract under the State of Ala
bama.
II the Court be of opinion that said contract was
valid, and that the said plaintiff holder Of the said
Bill acquired the legal tile thereto by the said pur
chase then judgment to be rendered for the plaintiff
for the sum Of $3.50 with interest at per cenium
since Both May, 1887, and ten per cen,um d images,
with two dollars cost Of protest. But if the Court
beof opinion that the said purchase was prohibited
by the laws OF Alabama, and the contract therefore
was invalid and void, then judgment TO be rendered
for the defendant. The above case is submitted to
be part fthe record (signed) /. Griffith Fisher,
for Plaintiff; (signed) John III. Jones' attorney for
Defendant; wherenpon, il seems TO the Court that
the said contract or purchase was and is Id and Of
no effect and that The said plaintiff ought not further
10 have or maintain their aforesaid action thereof
Court that the said President Directors and Com
pany Of the Bank of the United States take nothing
by their said writ and that the said Defendant 60
hence without day and recover his costs
The novelty and importance Of this decision
to those who have commercial intercourse
with the Southern States, naturally elected
much inquiry in New York, which has resulted
IN the publication Of the opinion Of Chancellor
Kent, which we have transferred to our CO.
lumns. That opinion is fair epitome of the
reason, the common sense, the law and the
constitution, on the subject, and supersedes
the necessity of any technical disquistion of
our own. 1t would have been easy for US,
as il would have been for the merest tyro in
law, without the aid Of the learning and expe-
renee Of Chancellor Kent, to have exposed
the " baseless fabric" upon which these extra
Ordinary. not to say outrageous, decisions are
founded. Will the war against the defunct
Bank Of the United States never be ended
Will it be permitted, that the social compact
and the laws which bind it together, shall be
tramped and dissolved, merely for the pur-
pose Of gratifying the unmanly spleen and
stupid prejudice ofpartisans against the person
Of Nicholas Biddlel Has the right Of cor
poration duly authorized by the Legislature,
to make contracts, TO sue and be sued, ever
before been disputed from the Magma Charta
down to this time? Look at the chartered
companies, of domestic and foreign origin, that
have been scattered over this continent in pur-
suit OF various objects from the Arctic Sea to
the Isthmus of Darien, from Cape Cod to the
Columbia River, from the times Of Elizabeth
to the reign Of Queen Victoria! Has any Mr..
Justice lgnoramus ever before dared to at
tempt to obstruct their rights of suing or being
sued for the attainment Of justice, under any
pretext Of law, policy, or privilege? What
then has dictated the understandable and de-
structive innovation Of Judge Mckinley
The party spirit of Loco Focoism, which, be-
ing repudiated by the people, seeks the ac-
complishment of its diabolica purposes, by
summary process The Pennsylvania Bank
of the United States, whose charter, we be-
lieve, embraces the right to deal in merchan-
disc, is sought to be driven by Justice Nc
Kinley oui Of The cotton markets Of alabama!
usurping the right to cut off the entire external
commerce of that State For he has struck
a blow at those " rights of PERSONS by the re-
cognition of which foreign commerce can only
be sustained.
The blow will fall most heavily upon Ala
bama herself The Justice who can make
such decisions respecting the rights Of corpo-