Semi-weekly North-Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1852-1853, 1852-02-28
THE BANK CASD

ne idst neglster contains the-on;,:
Justice Ruftin, inthe' case of the BanL OF Child
against the Bank Of Cape Fear, in ,nh; u The Sat-
that the act of the last session Of ~. 1t is held
lature, making notes redeemabIe at S'e Legs
which they may be presented, witboDt oank
Inc point of issue, is unconstitutional ~ 'efence
be found on page 81, of the acts of lac, act nas
me case is thus stated by the Chief Jns s%loA'
-. 6 ms Is assumpsit on Bank Note for sT
lea OCTOBER lst, 1874, and PAYABLE ~ " SlOO, 4,
bearer on demand at the branch banL oc Rand
al falelgh: pleas, non assumpst and ao CaPe Fs,
case agreed was submitted to the COM gel Off, and
ing effect: The note belonged to the NJ 70 The foor
at Raleigh, and the Cashier, through racIpal BAN
presented 1t at the the branch bank of Cay publ
Raleigh on the 2lst Of March, 1851 GdPe Fear
payment, and the Cashier of the said IT H.. denands
then offered in payment two bank no,as Gsia1ch ba
issued by the plaintiff and payable on tIa soOech
one to the bearer at the plaintiffs uenaAd 4,
Milton, and the other to the bearer a, tS bank
branch bank at Wilmington, and he rs t"e plaintiff
payment in any other way. The pIs;u useG TO naL
refused 10 accept payment In that mode, and Agea
was then instituted. The Superior 80 and hss
ment pro fornG for the defendant, and tIa gVeipds
pealed." -e plaintiff an
The Chief Justice, after DISCUSSING.
and with marked ability, the rule of Conm rs length
applicable to the subject, comes to the maiO lava
volved, and says: 1' P0lntip
{" The defence, however, is mt FAM,
Common law, but upon an act passed At Su on Tie
sion OF me assembly entitled "an Act in r0 Las @
exchanges of notes between the severI III relation
State" Yet, the discussion of the rn odhks of this
law was not the less needful, in ordo- d. Common
Outstanding of the nature of the coptr,o proper
by notes in this form, and of the constituted
tute, if it be effectual Its principal pToya o. The ST.
when bank or It's branch presents fo ' n Is ha
note of another bank, the latter may paw il Pse
hote OF notes OF the former, without regard :, VITO
place where the same may be PAYABLE e T: The
that the case before the court is within ,L cle
that the question is, as 10 its VALIDITY VII pc+ and
sPect to the Legislature and every disnos;""u ali
ry out It's will, If reconcilable with the fnd ca
law, the court is, nevertheless, CONSTRAINED
this enactment to be plainly contrary to the ooH
ton OF the United States, and therefore noO S.s8
Ii is SO both upon the ground, that the act vos
provision of the charter to the plaintiff and na
principle, that it inerferes and violates sUb puu
provisions of the notes of the two parteswbioIu
| no more be done with respect to the contractnF
! poratlon than that of a natural person. Fortba
supposes it to be clear law, that cornor.tis 'u
like an Individual bound by and may take hpnss,
the general laws where it is within the reason ofL
unless there be particular notifications in the r
er. 1t is not doubted, for example, that a ham, y
within the statute avoiding usurious contracts br
no restraint, as to the rate of nernst it NAV take
expressed in the charter. For while thers are s'r
gent prohibitions against oppression on the needy
individuals with their Limited MEANS much more NM
it be supposed to be contrary to the Legislative
tention, that banks with their large associaed we
and the power of making the demand for money sg
or tight, Should be without restraint upon their en-
lions on borrowers. The charters, indeed, usugi
prescribe rate of interest or discount But st L
clauses have their operation in preventing the f
on the bank of change of the rate or interest t
| subsequent general law, in and making the curDn
ton amenabe to the State for violation of its cha.
ter. They do not affect contracts with the banks b.
cause there is provision in them for the avoiding
those on which greater rate is reserved, but thai
left entirely 10 the general law.'
| The Court directed the judgment of the SupanI
Court to be reversed. and judgment to be enlesi ID
the plaintiff, for the principal money and inertf5
the day Of demand.
The decision of the Court, it will be seen by n
following extract from the opinion of the ChiefJsI
tce, also affects the issue of notes by any Bank
the State under the denomination OF three dollars;
| IS It seems certain, that the general Statute pri
| iting the passing of notes under particular deD@
ination applies well to corporate as natural PeNr
| unless there be provision in the charter express
plainly to be implied, to the contrary. For IhsF
hi5ltlon is founded on Legislative policy TO en0-
age the circulation of metallic coins by prevent
the issuing and passing of small notes hereia
therefore the reason of the law extends quite as n&
to banks as to other persons nay, more, since ag
can most effectually defeat the public policy
such case, therefore, the general law aPPes' Hna
it be modified by plain provision of the ChaIa
silence cannot have that effect; since that aOF'a
scope to the general law, and therefore heeze9Pla
from the general law must distinctly appear IN n
charter
The only Bank in this State which has,d IL |
years, issued notes under three dollars, Is the B@
of Fayetteville. The charter OF that Bank Is S-
on the subject-there is no IS exemption from ths?S
eral law - referred to by the Chief Justice