New-York daily tribune., 1861-08-25
COURT or APpEALs-AUa A.-Before al tbs i,s;,.s
POWERS or THE TAX COMMISSIONERS IA "sssvss


and County of New-York for the purpose Of reyiew-
ing their proceedings IN assessing shat Corporation In
1859. It appeared froLH she aomiasons in the reyure
of the Commissioner, @s. .ns banx Of !ns Cor-
the General Barking law, With capital actually paid
in Of $75OO0O out Of which sbey bad paid 81 81
for real estate consisting Of their ban kng housess
leaving 1851 los Is, of which H0 900 was invested
In the stock OF the United States OF 1855 The Bank
claimed that the stocks were exempt ffoGs TAXATION
under the Federal Constitution, bs the commissioners
OF Taxes held differently and assessed the esceks ~
personal estate The Supreme Court anrmed sne as.
sessment, and an appeal was taken. The Cent Of
Appeals affirmed the Supreme CoN dectionj the
opinion Of Justice DEMO for the Court being very
elaborate.
A. w. Bradford for the Bank; Greene G. Bronson,
Counsel for the Corporation for the CcSnissione
Taxes.
sUPREME CoyRT-cHAsBsrs--Auo.a aG-Rsfsrs Justice
SuTHSkJsSp.
DEcIsIDHS. ,
Milton 8. Weston ct al. sst. Thomas Bearett.-At.
tacbment granted.
In the matter of the estate Of Geo. Dohrman.-Sub-
pena granted.
Mens Elite, &C., agt. CbsrEee Ette.--Repor COO
firmed, and judgment Of divorce granted
THE Farners' Loan aud 1rllss Sompany agts james
ID. Strong. Same against PhiBp Htzpatdek.--Judg-
ments ordered.
5. b. Peterson ct al. agt. Leroy w. Sbear.-Motios
denied, without costs.
Alpheus Reynolds agt Joseph Rsed ct al. Charles
Tracy ct al ast. the Lake Ontarie and Hudson kiver
Rsiiroad.-Order granted.
OFFICERS OF THE CANLRoS RIFLzs IN TROUBLE.
Counsel for Charles w. Schsfer applied for an or
der TO Robert j. Bette Colonel OF the Cameroa
Rifles, ON affidavit alleging that defendant had stated
TO plaintiff that he had been authorized by the Secrc-
tary Of War 70 raise regment thas he had pssses
his exam ination as Colonel in Washington, aud was
authorized by the War Department to purchase cup
plies and borrow money for the regiment; that be
appointed plaintiff Quarernaster, ana on these rePfe-
senations plaintiff gave defendant e235 for tue uss
of the regiments that these representations were uh,
true; that Col B. had not passed exaaniatloo, and
had no authority TO borrow money; asd had refused
plaintiff repayment OF the money.
The Judge granted an order for the arrest OF Col
Bette, baable ia 800, and returnable on "wednesday
next. But the regiment being under marching orders,
it is not likely the Sheriff execute the writ, The
Colonel beng by law exempt from civil psOoess.
DRusKEs RECRUIT.
Thes. Sheridan, recruit OF the u >. Cbaseurst
claimed his discharge on the ground that bs was iotox
icated when he enlisted but as the fact did not clearly
appear, the Judge remanded him.
Before Justice isGalHAx.
Tx GREAT HoP CAsE.-ls u charge OF i've pee
cent for accepting drafts the deposit OF gsods whers
there is no loan OF mobey, nsuriols!
Il. W. Ryckman agt. Wm. ). Coleman 81 Cc.-rhis
case has been already noted Motion was made TO dis-
solve an injunction restraining defendants from ceiling
$4,000 worth Of bops, plaintiff claiming that In al
dtion TO lawful interest, five per cent had been de-
manded Of him under the name OF commissions on sls
and guaranty. Defendants insisted that the fve pss
- = -"
Ex-J adgs Dean for plaintiff, Mr. Lord for defend.
| ants 80
| option.
1. The security given the granting Of this iniune-
ton was altogether too small 10 justify retaining IL
The damages that might be sustained by It's continu.
snce could not be satisfied in any wise by that under
taking
H. The answer deiies positively s the equities set
up in the COMPLAINT II shows that the defendants
told an advance Of money was not required, bus
simply Of cfedit-and in the rst case, In addition 10
the commission charged the acceptaDces, it states
that the charge made for sale and guaranty. IL 10
not u-ua retaE njunctil where the answer de-
nes ell the allegations on which the claim therefor u
based.
iii. The agreement TO deduct two-and-a.half per
cent from the commissions of seyenanda-haf per cent
If no sale took place aud if the paiuif plaed In
funds TO pay the drafts in fact leaves all the different
transactions the same in principle, vi an advance OF
credit by way Of acceptance, and charge Of hve pee
cent therefor
w. There Il nothing in any of the papers to warrant
tie conclusion that this form of acceptance was re-
sorted TO to up what the parties knew and under
stood intended 10 DO usurious CONTRACT and the
only question therefore remaining Is, Whistler ebarRs
of i've per cent for accepting drafts the deposit of
goods where there Is no losn Of money Is usaiioas
independent Of It's being an attempted cover 20, an
usurious loan, understand the phnntin counsei 70
concede that il is luxurious IL war mere advance
of an acceptance, with charge for sucb advance aps
for n sale and guaranty. In Scheme rbon sgt. Tall
man IA n. Y. Rep, p. 93l, Jnsie Seiien says; "hD
pIaio that the giving OF ones own pronis1 70 pay
within the definition OF ,ae In inpossibie to call
such transaction transfer oil properly
Tn More egt Rowland "A Dso, pol, 1t was held thas
guaranty or inGorsenent oi paper Tor TWO NO, ~
at % per cent commission, was not usnrio ols in.es
Justice Bronson says: man has as goots rignt tq
sell his credit to sell Lis goods or bis Lands ana
deal fairly he may take as large prize as ne can sss
for them (See also Hill, 49,, 472i Hilton, o3lh
Tie Of Suydsm ag Westsil Hill, &iil, i an
express authority that commission Tor accepting =
draft does rot make il usurOus. know thai seSer1
Judges have expressed different opinion, and III some
of the cases referred to- which the Judges have di
sented such opinions have been stated oet 90 Dos
feel willing to old that mere commission plid iof
accepting !. draft, where hero l. no loan OF money!
and where t does not appear TO have been cover Tor
usurious contract, is, OF iseb usurioas AID void.
If IL il So then In case. can q msn who loans
his credit accepts for another his bii OF excnan9e
make charge therefor. la all cases he would receive
more than the law allows, II he makes aay charge
whatever and bis contract founded thereon would be
void. Admitting, however, that there Is doubt rpoo
this question STILL for the rs stated by ne,
the Injunction should he dissolved. Motion granted
As the amount involved in this is large, aud
may be desirable for the psiniif 10 take the opinion
Of the General Term the questions inyovei stay
of proceedings may be had the order granted heren
provided. the plaintiff increases the security given on
issuing tie Injunction by undertaking IN SlOUU0, 70
be approved Of by u Justice Of the Court.
SPECIAL TsRM-B,fors Mr. Jostics SUTHERLAND.
THE cHREyEu CHURCH DISPUTE.
In the maj er OF the dispute relative 10 tie once OF
Church Trustee In the Church Of the Puriisns Justice
Sutherland has delivered the following opinion;
II ia true that the complaint 10 this case ssss fes
compensaton in dsmag for the alleged arcpgfui Win.
holding Of the certi icae and keeping ne piahns oas
Of Office and also that tue certificate OF che oeiendaat
10 SlaraJ ul and vnia. bn IL il perfectly plain thAk