Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1860-03-08

meet thedemands for knapsacks, belts, cartridge
boxes, primin g.wires, and other military apph-
ances. Gun and Pistol dealers in this city and
elsewhere in the North, also derive large ben
etts from the Southern martial excitement
The Congressional House committee son
Foreign Affairs has under discussion the case
of the barque Adriatic. This vessel was some
time ago seized by the French in the open seas.
It is thought that the result of the discussion
will likely be resolution denying that France,
by her local laws, takes Jurisdiction over open
seas, and the President will be directed to de-
mand Of the French government full indemnity
for losses by the Illegal seizurs of said vessel.
- The news has reached us from the Rio
Grande, that open and avowed war has actually
begun between the people Of Texas and Mexico.
The Texans desire to know whether the United
States intend to protect them against the mer.
ciless and infamous Mexican banditti. This
they desire; but in the absence Of such protec-
ton, they will take their cause into their own
hands, and, if necessary, carry the war into the
enemy's country.
General FORBES BR1TTos has been sent on to
Washington, with dispatches from Gen. Hous-
TON. The President will concentrate large
force along the Mexican frontier. The War De-
partment has ordered battery Of light artillery
to proceed from Fort Leavenwortb toFort Brown
without delay, and to be fully equipped for the
purpose of protecting the Texans.
"A new inferior planet, or asteroid, has
been discovered, revolving round the sun, with
in the orbit of Mercury, in 10 days and II hours
It's distance from the sun is estimated to be ten
million miles-Mercury being 81 millions. y
is thought that there are more than one Of these
planets, or az least one planet and alarge satel.
lite; as, in three instances, two spots have BEEN
seen to cross the suns disc at the same time,
The circumstances attending the discovery Of
this planet are very interesting. NJ. LEvERnER,
who shared The honor Of discovering Neptune
with Mr.. ADAMS, Of England, made calculations
from Irregularities observed in the orbit Of her.
curry, that there was another planet in that re-
gion At the same time, poor physician Of
Orgeres, France, named LrscARBAULr, who had
made most of his instruments himself, and writ
ten his calculations with charcoal on deal board
for want of paper, arrived at the same cdnclu-
sion. Observation brought the new planet TO the
light .Sy%
BENZ. ScoTT, Chamberlain of London, claims
the honor of this discovery for England abo.-
He says, in letter to the Times: ~
'sThe body alluded to was first seen by Mr..
Lloft, (an Englishman, believe,) on the 9th Of
January, 1918, and by myself at or about mid.
I have publicly lectured on the solar system,
have always asserted, as fact known to myself,
that third inferior planet existed in our sys.
tenn"
- An interesting case Of low in relation to
bank checks has just been decided before chief
Justice O'NHAL, and his associates, WARDLAw
and JOHNSON, in the Court of Appeals at Charles
ton. A Mr.. BANCROFT, having deposited funds
in the State Bank, had drawn checks in favor Of
FodARTIEs and STILLMAN and DAVID A. ANBIER.
When these parties presented the checks at the
bank, the bank refused payment; and the eircn 1t
court having denied their right to recover, they
appealed to the Court Of Appeals to reverse that
judgment. The associate judges, WARDIAw
and JoHNsoN-his honor O'NEAI dissenting
decided tha. check is a transfer Of the fund,
not mere power to receive money; and that
there is technical privity' existing between the
assignee of the depositor and the bank in which
the deposit is made. In accordance with this
decision, which is to be the law, assignees have
right of action against banks, in case Of their
refusal to make payment
We make few extracts from the decision on
both sides, which we find in the Courier. Judges
WARDLAw and JOHNSON, say: .'..
"This case one referred to in their argument
stands upon principle, that when fully under
stoodand appreciated, is sufficient for the case
before US and it is this, that where orc in con-
sideration of money to come into his hands,
promises to disburse that money as be shall be
ordered by him from whom he receives it, he
thereby creates contract, negotiable in its very
nature, which puts him in privity With whomso.
ever in the world he may be ordered to make
payment to, so that the promise is, according to
the law.merchant, made to that person, and he
is bound by his promise to pay him." y
ssWhenever q contract is essentially Of circu.
lating nature, going about, as j: were, through
ooo;at,, 20 dro forth Tho aYnrfinna the pr0n-
erty of its members, as it may encounter them,
here and there, on the commercial arena, it car
ries its own consideration and its own obligation
with it, and forms privity with The persons to
whom it comes" "It 3 believed to
be incontrovertibly true that he for whose bene'
fit promise is made, may maintain an action
upon it, though no consideration Except in o
commercial sense, as I have enaeavored to ex-
plain it,) pass from him to the defendant, nor
any promise from the defendant to him. That
ample position fully supports, in principle, the
present case"
Justice 0'NEAL says: "Tht right of action
existing on the part of the depoator, how can the
holder Of the check have similar right
"To sustain assumpsit, there must be privity oi
contract. What privity can there be between the
holder and the Bank? I cannot perceive any.
ne CahcS LIlc CucCh Ou tuo CI0ViI Va shS oho"SA'
Legally, we suppose, the depssitor says, 4 have
funds in the State Bank, and will give you check
for my debt to you.' When this is accepted BY
the holder, on whose credit does he take it =! un'
questionably, on the credit Of the drawer. Ht
believes, if bis statement b true, he will receive
the amount from the Bank But so fer the Banl
has nothing to do with the transaction. Whe1
the holder presents the check and the Bank re
fuses payment, against whom has he right of &C
ton clearly it seems to me against him from
whom he received it. Unless in lap
there is foundation for ai implied contract, th'
plaintiffs have nothing upon which they can stand
There is no such foundation, for the contract ii
express with the deposior, and there cannot bt
both on express and an implied contract. Th'
holder of the check cannot sue on the deposit
That gives right of action to the depositor, and
as we have seen, he may sue and recover.
advertisement
Mes;rs. Editors: Without intending to dispar
age the claims of others to seat in the Legisla