The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-12-06
From the Cincinnati Gazette Nov. ~


From Cincinnati Gazette Nov. a.
UNITED STATES CIRCUIT c0URT.-UNITED STATES
VS.. CITY BANK OF CoLUMBus.-CHARGE OF
JUDGE MCLEAN.
Mr. Ewing closed his speech yesterday morning little
before IL o'clock and the charge of the mme
diately given by Judge Mclean.
He stated first the nature of the claim The plaintiffs
had brought this action TO recover from the City Bank
100000 under contract made by the Secretary of the
Treasury with Mr. Miner by virtue Of power OF attorney
from the cashier of the bank.
The letter OF the cashier says VIM Miner is authorized
IL consistent with the rules OF the Treasury Department
contract behalf this institution for the trans
money from the East to the South and West for the gov
ernment
On the LIST November 1850 at Washington CITY, VIM Mi
signed receipt heletter ofattorney follows This
will certify that have contracted with the United States
Treasury the agent of the City Bank of Columbus,
transfer 100000 from New York to New Orleans to be
deposited in the treasury at the latter city by LIST January
1884, free of charge and have in pursuance of said
tract this day received draft in my own name, for
100000 the United States Treasury at New York,
which is TO be accounted for on said contract
The above letter and receipt purport TO be contract
between the Secretary OF the Treasury and the City Bank
for the transfer of the money in question.
The plaintiffs insist that this contract being in writing
cannot be contradcted by parol evidence This is adj
mtted TO be principle OF law but the defendants counsel
contend that the above contract if entered into,
eriay modified abandoned by the parties subsequent
y and evidence has been given these and other points
He then reviewed ut length the testimony of Mr. Miner
and considered his statement that he did not read the
ceipt and was not acquainted with its contents, but
signed the paper in haste in confidence that it all
right
Mr.. Corwin's testimony was next reviewed. Several
papers were then referred to
l. The letter Of the Secretary dated Nov 10 Mr. Miner
which states "your proposition to transfer, &c, is
ceptedD
2. The agreement signed at the Barnet House. the
10th OF July, 1851, which rccites that whereas VIM.
Miner and Dennis Adams heretofore agreed to transfer
Sl25O00,n and in which Thomas Noodle and John Gra-
ham acknowledged themselves interested and united with
them In an agreement to transfer it by the LIST October
1851. The $4,000 in, addition to the 100000,
ceived by the insurance company 3ls December 1885,
on another agreement to transfer
3. The power OF attorney from the Secretary of the
Treasury TO Robert G. Corwn, reciting the thing
Under this agency threats Of criminal prosecution
made Miner sent the power OF attorney to the Secretary
The had taken it with him after the transaction at WASH
ington,) and demand was made on the bank.
The depostes Of this money placed by the bank to
the credit of the insurance company and checked out by
Mr.. Miner the agent of that company
The president and directors of the City Bank testified
that they had not authorized the agency of Miner and had
knowledge Of it until tho demand made by Robert g.
Corwn.
AS the contract made by Miner as the agent of the
City Bank
The plaintiffs contend that parol evidence is not adis-
sble to contradict The defendants contend that Is
doubtful whether it entered into. Miner the sig
nature his but he neither read understood it. Gov
Corwn says the contract made il appears in the
writing. -
But if the contract was entered into the defendants con-
tend that it materially modified This modification is
found in the statement OF Gov Corwn that he would not
have made the arrangement except on the personal re-
sponsbiity Of Mr. Miner also the letter Of acceptance
which, is said showed that It was given Miners own
responsibility, be addressed in his individual capac
ity, and not rs the agent of the City Bank.
The Secretary had right to fix his terms on hand
ing to Miner the transfer draft and TO modify vary the
receipt and if the draft in fact received, the
agent Of the City Bank bat his responsibility this
action cannot be sustained The defendants contend that
the deposte New York. agent of the insurance
pany authorized by the with the Secretary
n n I'm md nd
applied by the bank the credit of the
company without as far appears in the testimony any
direction from Miner
The defendants further contend that the whole history
of the transaction shows that this money received for
the insurance company, and not for the bank
l. BY the letter Of acceptance given to Miner under
personal responsibility.
D. BY the fact that he and not the bank controlled the
money.
g. BY the acquescence of the bank in placing the depos
lite to the credit of the insurance company.
4. BY the fact that when Noodle and Miner at
Washington the Secretary told Miner in Noodles presence
not to make himself uneasy, that he would let him know
when he wanted the money transferred.
g. BY taking security for Adams Miner and other ind
viduals interested in the insurance company.
g. BY the power Of attorney given to r. G. Corwin to
collect the money from Miner, Adams, and Others
T. BY the fact that until this agency under r. G. Cor
win, claim made upon the bank.
Whether the right of the cashier negotiate bills Of
change embraced such transactions this, point
which there difference of opinion between him and
his associate He would not therefore, charge the jury
it. Yet one point certanthat the cashier could
pledge the bank as security for any purpose whatever
Beyond the limits of his duty the bank not bound by
his action.
He concluded by stating that was for the jury to de-
eide for whom this money obtained, and if they
satisfied that il for the insurance they must
find for the defendant the cashier had no right to use
the credit of the bank for the benefit Of the insurance
pany.
The jury not having agreed on verdict adjourned at
o'clock last evening, to meet this morning at o'clock.