, 1862-07-17
AN IMPORTANT BANK SUIT.
Over 500. 900 in Litigation.
CHARGE OF JUDGE DRUMN0ND.

ourt until its adjournment on Tuesday. IL =
scarcely necessary for us to enter into de-
Ills as to the case, because the charge OF bis :
[onor to the jury (of which which We give 6
erbatim report, with the Judges corrections ,
eloE}, enters very minutely into all the cir
nnstances rs well as into the law Of the case.
+ NAV. however, be well to state that this
3 onlv one Of three cases, Of 4 similar char
cter, In which the Bank Is plaintiff, to be
.eard before the Court during It's present ses-
ion. The second case is now in hearing and
nav probably be concluded tomorrow.
The cases will, combined, involve s3oo,ooo
n their direct Issues. Their indirect ISSUES
8ill ef course be several times that amount.
The verdict Of the jury was delivered yes
terday morning for the plaiatff-danages
sl3a, 100,
Defendant moved for 1 new trial and ia ar
restof judgment.
JUDGES CHARGE.
GENTLEMEN: We have been called upon to In
restisate come transactions. which. even b. the
copEent Of the defendant. are admitted to haVe
cen esPe Jsy i g saa duy f a ook a as
rights Of the parties growing ont Of these
lions. The original charter of the Il Rhode Island
have Be been eontract made by Certain parties r
lie purpose Of becoming stockholders Of the bank,
On the 2lst day Of August, lc05. II which certain
was to be subscribed, sad rufes n relation to the
bank made. The legislature Of Rhode Island iu1
cozporatea these provisions IN the CHARTER, and
gave the bank 8 legal existence as corporation.
One Of The first Of 1heseproyisions WAS ~ 70 the
amount Of the capital stock, and ordered that 1t
shoaa BE- n ba III tss
were to be patt IN gold and silver, except the hrst
which might be in the bank paper Of the state q
he capital Of the bank might be extended. from
time to time, at any time, Lhereattes, to an amount
not exceeding $5tu, ,Qou, under such rules and re-
etrictions as majority Of the stockholders rega"
larry convened for that purpose. might estah-
lish There are come ameudmenta to this char.
ter which it is, however, not necessary Ior n5 to
! ctJlstder, as no question 1h7olFeo III sals easE
| ariees uprn them.
| 1t is to be considered as conceded and proved,
that up to the summer Of 1885, the capital stock OF
The baRk sRat N IT., to M u moEs Gf nsz
| ter, which was not affected by any amendments,
espita1 o s1oeE by he "a addition Of 5000 shares At
| SD each, to be disposed Of by them at not less
1n tnu eHc pas ses Is tsy might tak best oa
the 18th Of November, 1876 al apeciat meeting Of
the board of directors IT vas voted that the capi.
Promisory notes were given by the defendant and
| others TO the bank as go much capital stock
Notes were discounted. and the notes Of the bank
1EEuEu upOu lAAt Q$HtLuEeIS- SOW Il II AoL AS~
essu1y It state, repeat, that all this Ile
gal, and q violation Of the charter, as the cour1
views the question.
been Meesre. Anderson, the defendants in tha:
case Messrs. Sanger. and Messzs Goodell an5
9 T. as o
confederation Of evidence. for US to DOUBT, nade
the facts before 1s, that it was part OF genera
this bank, and TO ciscula2e them as money throug
the ctuntrr,the basis of which was the promlssor
notes which were executed By these parties to
ge1ber with any capital that there might have bee
! actually and previously paid into the bank
; Now, gentlemen, wlilc It is difficult 10. US t
t view a Transaction such as the proof has show
this to he, with any degree Of patience or lotheal
ance, there certain legal rights notwlthstanl
ing. growing out OF transac1ions Of this character
them than the parties who made them then it n1iyt
be the duty oftne court, at once. to stamp them I'LL
gal and declare that NO rights could arse in relatlo
e was an agreement and understanding of these pa
ties, BY which their promissorF notes were to rel
resent the capital upon which the notes Of the ban
were to he issued and circulated IN the comsnun
- ty, then it is NIT question il With the partl
i to the transactions alone were Interested, bnt
rights Of third persons intervene Every man vi
n received q BANK note Of this bank throughout tt
/. community, became interested in them. ard ther
T. fore we csrnot regard them simply TRANSACTION
&c hs ssF sF i sct - nd q ts aets 4
D. th1 judge that there wa7 an arrangement to #hi
d the defendant was patty, by which these pro,
T capital subscribed to the stock Of the bank. a
that in pursuance thereof the bank notes were
10 be issued and circulated as money. 1hroushous
,. community, then there was to all intents q
ID PURPOSES as far as third parties aud the pub
ID concerned an actual Subscription to the c.
"a ital stock Of the bank to the amonnt that was
W deretood and agreed npon, and notwiths.audi
rs the transaction may have been illegal, i ia
ut competent fo1 the parties to deny the validity
dition fast to o' the capta stock of tie bank to
iIc amount that was understood and agreed np3n
ut .we them fey eo5aideEaleas !; ie viii H. IN M
fh9ra S fssd oyfra m tRs @ fr rssfasna1bes
nj capital stock the whole case elbows that to be
I'd Now the parties might use the bank notes in
!. q tile ordinary transactions ofAu=insss, They mi
me pay them ont for uuch money, if the comn1l
t5a Saqe tes q ga g.
ne received value iof them it Vas an illegal tran:
ty t1on, aud therefore they were discharged from tt
bas liability to third parties @ There @ eaa be no d. d.
ero nlent as between the parties but stlll IT may
1to be competent fir them in certain eases to set
NJ. nj. what i have assumed constitute the fl
leg then the defendant in this case, il in that pre-
,ft ament, that is to eay he was parry to the tr
he cd upon to make guod that which be held ou
the world as 80 much capital stock Of the comp
did sas TIT me tranaacilon 'fas Illegal and thus
fSe fSe / believe. gentlemen, it is conceded that
hat p1omisso.5 notes were executed hy the defen'
"a notes that are mentioned in the p1eadings in
gro case are renewals; that is to say the notes Of
aud tembeT szd 1857 were g{ssn as M renewals Of
= Mt | meantime between the di+coanting of these
~ i1al notes, the time When the stock was snbscr
and b.
tics President Of the Bank. and the defendant on
d 9f MaEh t6e asS Rsoe to 1asn5 the oe Ge,
was tas s' BanE purchnsed from J. ). Andersen s1o
to | ofrhe stock Of the bank at par value, being
nan, SANG stoch o!'einay soa fhe ;a,d ATdersa
with payment Of one dollar. the sald Sanger llbel
re- the .aid Anderson from all further liaaiity-'
the apparent that neither Nj. Sanger nor the de
as ant could, by mere stroke Of the pen, chang
him; relations ard obligations Which existed o1
fhan part Of Dir. Audcfsnn the defendant, to third
ay ties So far as the bank il concerned, it 's
him. that an ar'anSement-Wherc the bank alone
rnud lpterestcd-migh ght have been made; but. as al
,sure said, the bank was not alone concerned:
bank. properly speab ing. WIS he mere repres
tiye ndtrusste u this parties Who were tntes
in the bil,s and other indebtelness Of the
when and the hil]holders and creditors were not
cars; interested. but the stockholders After the
Il Ills ard debts were paid. If there any asset
they would so to the stockholders; and
'ndaT therefore, were interested as well as the p
s~alk Therefore, il BY this arrangement. the rig!
n his third parties Il mean tie one Of March g. 1857
! nsen ene that 1hs president Ind no power to ma
alksd far ss it affected the ultimate object Of tn
sts ss ostsat9s os '! = ss sssaas Ct
frrthtr into this case, you will perceive
ent os what The Court has already said, that
,ke in sEall Id the facts to be that this sut
tion to the capital stock Of the bauk-intent
rtd in eucl- upon which tue hills of the bank we're
he t;n - e ,nf co,nnafent ~ him ~ ~ a. ~,
Uvef- obligations arising out OF the subscriptions
Tic circulation Of tho bank, prio7 TO t
hicsso srese a &C. t9e stoeE. amounted y to tle
of III ssPs sioes r. sss1 sasS s1a
In 1nE fhau TYEf1 F1Nf aft FINN
VIZ Mcnt introduced in evidence, to wit: on tt
:, Of December, 1856 the capita stock wa* 5l9G
- IL. ard The c'1cnlutiun at sac, ,659 II this Il
have ,1;, Il sfac nnon arhcb c;rcnlattnn wns
az him NJ sndarsnn n tha .,nin;.,n IF IN,
Il es.tpped from denying its binding etfes
. Assay himself However Illegal it may hare bee
jury 10 0,Hrf cs .n5 NJ nn oT
e still opinion, onsht i permit It..
ec;s;on so that g ntleInen, according to the Vi
~~'s1'" court takes Of this question, it is not 4
| Bhe1he. We regard the notes which are
dence, OF 1ttt. antt l. moment the eiock "
n0 A' Eerihed. ard the consequences which the
.ud the had In yiew actusly took place aud follow
under On ali Ihe tnhecIfhers % to he stock Viii
Of $75 cannot aSoid by asserting that It was an 2
aid not iabs1t1 n.yab1e ali III IN 90 nsny % 1olaEs.
they said b their own acsa, md after hs
oc+ faid, ttcv shall not be permitted to DEM,
LII ooi what the court has said. the court
exhibi- etuse assumed the facts IN this case. for
Eerc iu- Eon inas 9utl1 r. meet fhem II has ,esr
MS we're substantially - question OF law, At t
g to the TINE tae 19fS mas, 80 themsc'ves nnnn
ata1ned. dcnce.
ee days Iatte ~ u q1eson n IN snas g Gaze IN;