Wheeling times and advertiser. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1839-1849, 1845-09-09
ritsuNIrEDSrArEs DlSrRicr COURT
Al WHEELING .-H,s y \ .h,ri,,

ut ITS sloutaiu'n 10 ~ ~ 81 ~ ras of
INV Tsrsts.s 90 rst BltuoSt BASS 90 ST.
Nt,iRsvittE ~ itGE ChLpwILLs EA.cu.
roRS.
fhis was a~u'scii'n &c d-bt foun.lea ~, .
bon ! tpt anon, ahich Nd Discounted ny ,h-
B,Bk in lanL,ro l1A fs ~ NM. aud .x.
e,r'"'h, hiinwi'h Jam,s Ctis-eH aud u,hers
all acks"~l lodging ,hrm lNc- pnn,ip,ldrb
tn> M the hnnl The Bank wa n..,.i, tel
- ,'s charter rcm taking in,,rc-, a., a gr.,,-
% n'ie than y, rcr cent. r-r anupm. IN all
vance upon it, loans ani discounts. The de.
t"ne" was tia, IL la taken in,.rrs, a, a rr..t
90 rate at the time IT ,he discount. aud sIso
that 1t had rcSeru,d q gTcatrT rate of interest
hy an esrement with NM. and that. in
rurIuancc OF that agrscm'n,, such Interest was
Afterwards ,skeu. Tie material Lscts proved
"'sc, that, Ia tn orlcr Of IN. Bard directing
the Discount, a. was vci,cd tia, the bond was
"a b, pad IN E,stern fum l." Though not 40
expressed in the houi } snl that IL was dis.
counicd IN Psymcn, Of paper uf M'kec then
Sing over ia the hank To the amour, Of abon,
1896. which pipcrth order of the Beard Iii
j'c'ed TO bc given up upon the payment of all
TIA, was due thereon, including costs and al
torn'y's fees, after .dcductins thc discounted
bond Tor 5000. AT tn foot ri lhis hsmi VA.
written in pencil by the President Of IN. bsnL
discounted on condition that when pail To
b. psid IN eastern funds" A similar entry
was made on the books at the bunk. On the
sam day M'Kce pull to Tia. bank S566 10, and
the old paper was given up TAI him. Accord.
nag To the statement made out 10y the cashier,
this ainoun, included the discount ior ninety
days on 5000 (thc time the bud had To NUM-
AT SIX per cent. per annum, also $50. 81 err
change aud Sl7,63 attorneys fees aud
costs, besides costs of rrotcs, und interest on
the old paper la this manner tho amount
due 10 or chargcdby the bank was made equal
10 the amount oi the $1,000 and the sum Of
money paid b. Mkee on the same dsy. A.
bout the time the bond maturcd the Bank e1-
tended the time OF payment for ninety DAYS
Longer, without renewal Of IN, paper, all the
obligors having, in the bonl, waived the rich,
10 object To any such extension. The extern.
sion was given on Mixes paying SIS, the
legal discount for ninety days, and also $50
sor exchange. a similar extension of ninety
Gays was s'vcnat two subsequent periods in
The sam, year upon the sans terms. Al the
anne oil making one Of those extensions the
cashier OF the bank, in acknowledging the re-
ccipt oi Sl2o for discount and exchange, wrote
tom Nee that "our board would agree to none
other equivalent for eastern funds than the first
agreement IL was proved that, at st. Glars
wife. where rnc vnoIc transaction occurred,
Eastern funds have always been at least one
hslioi one per cent. premium, and at the time
oi this discount they ranged from one 10 two
pei cent. premium, and there was then 40 rca-
son 10 anticipate that they would be worth less
than the same rates. The Bank was charter.
ed by tn State Of Ohio, aud the discount was
made ia that State.
The plaintiffs counsel insisted that the
Bank gave full consideration Tor the $4,000
bond by a credit, for the full amount of IL, up-
ON the old paper, and that, whatever agree.
mcnt was made with M'kce about eastern
funds, this agreement was separable from the
bond itself, and asked the court for several in
strnctions, the effect Of which was tina, il there
was an unlawful agreement made with NJ
he8 yet, II that agreement was scparabIe from
the bond discounted, the jury might separate
them AMI render a verdict for the true amount
due on the bond after deducting all payments
whether properly OF improperly made; and al.
81 That no agreement for unlawful interest
would vitiate the bond unless il WAS executcd
tSy taking such unlawful intercsr) at the
time and i'll the act of discounting the bond.
lHE CoUET refused these instructions. and
held that II the whole consisted of one single
transaction aud entire contract, any illcgality
III 1t would yitiatc the whole, although auy
part oil the agreement were capable of being
separated from the rest. The Court observed
Uhat the law OF Ohio must govern the case and
SntcTr"h particularly to the Gases of the Bank
OF ChN'coihc rs. SIp0ync, &c. S Ohio Rem. 257l
an hfomt Exporting Co, rs. Clurke, &c. 10
Ohio Rep. l..
Tie Court also reftsed tu give an instnc.
ton, asked by The plaintiff counsel, to the el
iect that the order OF the Board of Directors.
rs entered on their journal (Which their char
ter required them to keep was the only proper
evidence of what the Bunk ordered To be done
III M king the discount, and that this order.
on It's face, directed the discount to bc made
simply in payment of a former valid debt, and
that the other agreement to pay eastern funds.
&c. wasa separate agreement not entering in.
10 OF forming a partoi the act of d~iscounting
the bond.
InE COURT also refused to instruct the jury
(as asked BY plaintiffs counscl) that taking
an unlawful rate Of interest after the discount.
ing OF the bond would not render the bond
void but instead OF that instruction, instruct
Ell the jury, the taking By the bank, after the
bunl was discounted. Of more than At tho rate