Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1845-10-29


: Judgment Of forfeiture would DO getlin
: something for nothing, what thanks do tn
. banks deserve, who all the time wer
I committing fraudl Their stockholder
l did not give their issues credit and cuI
I rencv! But that much slandered nam
The State Of Mississppi"-ihe peopl
! themselves, who gave the charters TO tn
banks, and authorized their issues to b,
J received in payment Of public dues. Be
sides, many of them loaned the notes o
other banks, fo' which they no@ hold III
notes Of Individuals 10 an immense amour
land the debtors, if discharged, after I
Judgment Of forfeiture, are released by
the law of their contracts. Ii must, also
be taken into consideration, that, of tho
total number Of bank debtors al this time
uot more than one-fourth or one-lhrd o.
them are borrowers. Every borrower was
required, as is well known, TO give three
or -four securities: Hence it may reason
ably be calculated that three-fourths, OF
two-lhiids at least, Of the total number Of
bank debtors, are cndorsers or sureties
Did these get any thing on the contracts
Of their principals from the banks? And
when these endorsers and sureties are re-
leased and discharged by The law of their
contracts, and from all legal liability, by
due course OF law, where is the moral obi
CATION attaching TO lhem2 Take the case
of an endorser on bill Of exchange or q
promissory note: He simply puts his uame
on the back of the instrument-th9 com
mon, mercantile law, requires that de-
mand of payment, refusal of tho drawee
and acceptors TO pay, protest or nonpoy-
ment in due time, must be shown to have
been made and given, or the endorser is
released and discharged from liability; and
after an endorser is discharged for want
of these legal requisites being complied
with, did any man hear of bis being con
sidered under any moral obligation 10 pay.
Just so the law enters into the contract Of
the bank debtors, and when he is legally
discharged, he is morally discharged.
But some Of the opponents of tho mea-
sure contend that even after judgment
of forfeiture against bank--even if the
amendment were repealed, or unconstilu.
tional, the bank OF its creditors could file
& bill in court Of chancery or equity a.
gainst the debtors, and obtain a decree
against them for the amount of their re-
speciiVc debts This opinion receives
countenance from but few Of the legal pro.
fession, and is palpably absurd 10 any le.
gal mind, not given to the vngaries of 10.
gal speculation. If this relief could be
obtained in court Of equity, why was
there any necessity Of passing the amend
ment at all. Why is no such doctrine 10
be found in any law book whatever2 Why
are Kent, Blackstone, Coke, Comyn and
Story, silent on the subject Why do
Kidd, Wilcox, and Ames, in their re-
spective works, on corporations, say moth |
ing of such doctrine2 The latter, the |
work of Angel and Ames, on corporations,
a new and comprehensive work, that, al
ter being approved, both by the bench
and bar of the United States, has passed
to second and improved edition, pub
lished in 1913, and which the venerable
and learned Chan. Kent, TO whom il is
dedicated, in the chapter in the 9th edi-
lion Of his commentaries on corporations,
refers TO containing an able and thorough
examination Of every part of the learning
,ppertaining TO this head, and as being
which deserves, and will re-
,eIye the respect and patronage Ct the
profession. A new and enlarged edition
If that treatise appeared in IS43; and
he work is vastly improved, and admira-
Dly digested"--2 Kent's com, 9Th edition,
}. 3l5, note (d) The only answer is,
hat such a doctrine exists only in the
,rain and imaginations of nero visionary
heorists, and SPECTATORS, or few part-
an lawyers. A court Of equity set at
fought that law, and Judgment of for
eiture regularly obtained, when it is a
eading maxim in equity, that equity
ollows law" A court Of equity relieve
i set Of banking corporations, who have
violated their charters, when
I is maxim in equity, that !" he who does
nquiiy shall not have equityw A court
# equity relieves swindling banks from
he consequences Of their crimes, when il
$ an established principle that suffers must
.one into that forum with clean handsl" [
And the bank creditors could, only, in /
hat view, assert the right Of their debtors,
he bank corporations. Such an opinion
$ almost too preposterous 10 require ar /
for legal men. The condition of
orftiture for violation Of charter--ihel
Judgment of forfeiture and its consequent
;es, we're founded in the timebonored wis
Iom Of the common law, and in wise
nd wholesome public policy, as salutary
estfaini (lhe only one that could be de-.
'iscd) upon faiihIess and fraudulent cor
,orations. 10 deter them ffom d yiolafion