Western Reserve chronicle. [volume] (Warren, Ohio) 1855-1921, 1858-03-31
Important Bank Decision-Hon. II.
Sutlif.

The Columbus correspondent of the
Commercial writes on the 25ih:
The Supreme Court have decided to
day that section Gu of the charter of The
Safe Bank of Ohio is not q contract,
within meaning of the Federal Constitu-
ton, and that the General Assembly have
the same right 10 tax Banks, (notwi.hstand
ing any-seciion like the one referred io)
that they have 10 tax other corporations.
In giving the decision, Judge Barley re.
viewed the decision of the Supreme
Court of The United States, denying the
doctrine there laid down, as against The
settled policy and uniform decision of our
Courts. Judge Barley was sustained by
The opinion of Judges Sutlif and Brinker-
.hoff, Judges Swan and Scott dissenting.
Judge Sullif delivered the opinion Of
a majority of The Court. The facts, IS
we understand them are these:
The suit was brought by the Bank OF
Sandusky, 10 recover back the money col
lecied from it by The Treasurer of San.
dusky County, in violation of the terms
of its charter. and in accordance with
the law passed March 2Ist, 1851, which
taxes Banks and bank stocks the same as
other property.
The Bank Of Sandusky, by its Char
Ter is bound 10 pay q tax of six per cent
per annum on its dividends, for a term Of
years, and in consideration of this pay
meni, the Bank is exempted from all
other taxation. Now it seems to US, that
it does not matter in the least, whether
the amount of tax agreed upon, is Too
heavy or too light, so far as the right of
further taxation is concerned. The Char
ter is a contract between the Legislature
of Ohio, and The Stockholders of the
Bank, the terms CT the contract being
fixed by the Legislature, and moi by the
stockholders. With those conditions, The
Bank has complied in every particular.
Must the great State of Ohio be less
honorable than an incorporated Company2
Can The Legislature, at pleasure, violate
one portion Of the contract, and let the
Others stand intsci7 II It can abroga,e
ono section, it certainly can this whole.
If il can do this with a Banking Com
Pany, then any charter, any grant, any
contract, given, or made by it with any
individual or association of individuals,
or any Stale, Or the General Government
itself, is not worth the paper upon which
it is written, because some new legal
light in the future may pronounce il
void, and annul il.
We cannot account for the course pur-
sued by our fellow-citizen, Hon. Milton
Sutliff. 1t will be seen, by the extract
at the head of this article that he held
The casting vote; that without him the
eCoort was equally divided, that he viriu.
i y'decided the case, and he delivered
the opinion Of a majority of the Court.
Had be at any former period Of his life
been a ran,ing, hard money demsgogue,
we should moi have been surprised; but
that he-an old whig, a free s%oiler, should
follow precisely in the footsteps of hi.
political opponents; an experienced, able
lawyer, We, should make q decision di.
recily in the teeth of decisions made by
the U. S. Court again and again; a eau.
tious and conservative man, yet give the
weight of his influence and official posi-.
lion, to crush out the banks, derange the
currency and upse, contracts, this doe.
surprise US.
We hope be can explain, FOR We can
not.