New-York daily tribune., 1857-04-17
Nsu9nrk DAILY Gribnns
LAW INTELLIGENCE
THE STATE OF MICHIGAN IN COURT.
rR&lD CHARGED IN HIGH PLACES.

SUPERIOR CorRT-Spsol.L rkss-ArSL '"-D~'''
People Of the sts,e Of Mch..n at The PA-A Bank
case Of good deal OF interest, both in financial
and uoliticar point of view has been ON trai before
Justice Hoffman during the past week II involves
serious charges against several pronhneh. persons,
hoth in this city and Michigan. and was made an issue
in IN. late canvass against Mr.. Lothrop who ran tor
Congress against Wm. 4. Howard, OF hansas Com
mit.ee memory. -,
The facts of the case charged in the complaint,
and which the documentary evidence goes TO prove,
are follows:
In the wear 1887, the State of Michigan authorized
a loan of s., ,000, 900, and empowered stevens l.
Mason the then Governor, TO issue the nIate Dohus
to that amount aud to sll them in the Ameucao mar,
ket from time 10 time as the money should be required
for purposes Of internal improvement. Gov. hason
EN- poyed John Delatsld OF this city as his suoaSen'
fer the purpose OF selling the bonds and thus raising
H.. money Deafeld made Intellectual EFFORTS TO this
end in the New-York market, and, falling to negotiate
tie bonds here agreed personally with Mason to al
yauce out OF his own means $loo,oco tor the imine
jat- relief Of the STATE. ~
to the amount of sls00 COO In the course .! the same
veor these drafts d>honored, and John Norton,
IT, Cashier OF the Michigan State BANK, al petron,
who held one of the repaired TO 20 oo
tain reyment He brought with him private letter
from Gov Mason dated 24th Feb, 1888, addressed 70
Mr. Delafeld in which the writer says thar Norton i
his particular friend, fiscal agent of the state ana
Cashier of the Michigan state Bank that ne Is
anxious 10 command funds TO redeem Michigan notes
in the New-York market, and remarks to Mr. Della
field that if he has received funds on the state bonds
in his possession, he may transfer to Norton $Joooo
or $l0O COO taking Nortons certificate oi deposit as
Ca hier of the Michigan State Bank.
Mr. Denfied had as yet received nothing ihe
bonds and il that he was induced to deliver 10
Norton two drafts for the above purpose, one for
IS $40 on the Farmers aud Mechanics Bank at De-
ot the other for s. 800 on the Bank OF the RIVER
Raisin at Noryal, Mich, both drawn by the Ph@nn
Rank Norton received these drafts, carried them to
op6 fooWnp SeutPlnDpr Octi Der col
lected the larger one, but the smaller one was never
collected.
In March 1870 the Phoenix Bank counter1nanded
the smaller draft, that the Bank OF the River Kat
.ip by letter 10 its cashier. In the Summer of the
same wear the Phoenix Bank empowered an agent to
settle both branches ot the claim either wnh the STATE
OF any other party The agent in the Fall OF that year
collected the full amount of the fund against when
the draft for a. 900 was drawn by taking assignments
Of various descrptions OF property from the Bank OF
the River Ra-n aud the full amount OF the draft ior
sS $40 which had been collected from the drawee' oy
Norton as cashier Of the State Bank, a. mentioned
abovel by accepting from the State Bank deed OF
about $500 acres OF land lying in Saginaw County,
Mich This deed was given To the agent III trust tor
the State of Michigan, or the Phomt Bank "n'cn'
ever should assume the debt thereby settled
Thus the matter 81 cd until August, 1850, period
of twelve years when the Phoenix Bank demanded OF
Its agent qutclaim deed of the lands gwen HIM IN
trust which was accordingly inaue anu aen..ieu I W
IT, 1t should be added that when the agent settled the
two branches Of the claim a. above stated, he gave
receipts in full for each OF them to the respective
banks. , :.
In the Spring of 1854, the Phoenix Bank through its
attorney az Detroit presented 10 the Board OF State
Auditors Of Michigan claim, in which payment IN
cash was demanded from the State Of the whole
amount Of the two drafts and interest thereon. The
bank represented 10 the Board that the claim was
wholly unpaid and that il had never been settled III
whole i'll part 10y any party. In December, 1871,
few days before the Board of State Auditors went out
Of oiiice they allowed this claim to the Phoenix Bank
he whole amounting 10 s35, ,O03 "A.
The factS of the above settlements did not become
know to the State authorities until the Spring of otJ
after a new Admnistra4u un had entered upon its duties
After full investigations Jacob NJ. Howard, the pres
ent Attorney General of the State felt il his duty TO
brng this u against the bank to compel it TO refund
the amount which it had thus obtained from the State
Treasury.
The defense so tar yet developed, appears 10 be:
l. That the present Phunix Bank, although admitted
TO be the assignee of the claim and ~ have received
the it, il not the corporation as the old
Phonix Bank, with whom the claim orr ginated, the
charter OF the former bank having expired, and the
present becoming It's successor under the General
Banking law.
2 That the Attorney and Counsel of the Bank who
Iuade the settlements with the River Ral-n and MIchI-
gan State Banks either not fully authorized 40 to
do in the mode in which II was done or that, 1t 40
authorized or his ratified, the facts were knows
to the State when the money was PAID, aud that II
was therefore voluntary payment which concluded
the State. The case is stll FOr plaintiff, y. L..
,Jerpegan and j. NJ Howard, Attorney General OF the
State of Michigan for defendants l.. ;. Van Wrinkle
and +. Is. Cutting.