Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-07-24
atniua aud Smtritan.
TUESDAY, July "a 1896.
Opinion by Judge steele.
l.-.-.-rr-


following facts 10 wit: That the Legislature
in 1887, created a corporation by the name
Of the Bank Of TENNESSEE" with a capital
Of $, 100000, furnished and owned eXclu-
siyely BY the State and thereby she became
the sole stakeholder. Said Bank consisted
Of a Principal Bank, located in Nashville
and seven Branches in different parts Ct the
State with the usual banking privileges
That one Of said Branches was located al
Shelbyyille, composed Of twelve Directors,
one Of whom was President, and also a CASH
Ter, and that said officers gave bond in large
sums for The safety Of the assets Of the Branch
Bank, &c. That in 1851 a Rebellion was
commenced by portion Of the citizens OF
the State against the Government Of the
United States, which continued and was in
force at the time Of fling the bill in this
case, august, 1861 That the officers and
most Of the directors Of the Branch Bank at
Shelbyville, Joined in and became active
promoters Of the Rebellion and that in Feb
ruary, 1862, the defendant, THOMAS LIPS
COME, was President, X. n. WALLACE was
Cashier, aud defendants RANSOM, WHIT
THoRNE, BAnKsDALE, BERRY, TAULLY and
Goodrich, were Directors Of said Branch
Bank, and that the Cashier with defendant,
JANIS W. BUCHANAN, carried off the en-
tire assets Of the Bank, Except what was in
the hands Of the Attorney of the Bark, }
amounting in the aggregate, to over the sum
Of $685. GOO. That said assets were carried
of ont ofthe State by the direction and pro-
curement ofthe President and Directors, and
IN violation Of law and their solemn duty as
officers aad Directors, and for the express
purpose Of aiding and carrying on the exist
ing Rebellion against the Government Of the
4 n. Al IL
came entirely lost 10 the complainant.
Il is further alleged by complainant, that
The defendants, PARKER, MCCLELLAND,
Laws, Mostly and Wilson, were members
ofan assemblage that met in Nashville in
1861, who STYLED themselves the Legislature
of the State, and assumed TO make laws,
when in fact they were but rebels against
the government That during their sitting
at Nashville and Memphis they passed the
form Of a law OF resolution authorizing the
removal Of the assets Of the Bank OF Tennes-
sec, and thus o8uised the officers and direct
ors to do the unlawful act complained Of
That defendant, GEORGE w. BUCHANAN,
was the attorney and legal adviser Of the
President and Directors Of the branch at
Shcibvvilie, and he eounseled and advised
the act Of removal, and that the assets would
not have been removed but for this advice.
Ant that as attorney for the Bank, he has a
considerable sum in his hands belonging 10
the Bank, consisting Of notes, &c, and that
he has collected large sums and paid il over
20 the Bank in CoatcdsT0te money, and seeks
n discovery as 10 what is in his hands, and
that he deliver il up, &c, and that he be
held liable for what he had paid 10 the Bank
in Confederate money.
That Robt. MATTHEWS was not connected
with the Bank, but adrised the directors to
move the assets and that A. J.. lands, was
a director, did not assist in, or direct the re-
moval. bat afterwards sanctioned and approved
ihe act. and that the common object of all
the defendants was 10 deprive the complain
ant and her loyal citizens Of these assets and
60 apply them in aid of the Rebellion, then
In progress against the Government Of the
United States.
The bill prays for discovery, and pro
duction Of the books Of the Bank and for an
aocoBui Of the assets on hand at the date Of
the removal, and that the defendants be held
liable 90 complainant, &c.
These are the material facts, or the sub
stance OF them, contained in the bill. All
the defendants demur 10 the bill, and speci
fy several causes for demurrer. Substan
TALLY as follows, to-wit:
lst That there is no priritg between com
plainant and defendants, and if complainant
has any interest in the subject matter Of this
suit, it must be sought through the "BaRk O
IeaRc8et'
2nd. That the case made out by the bilti
0alv cognizable in a Court of iow
81. That the complainant has no right L
bring this sui! by her Attorney General, bu
must do so by some person as Rclat0r, VIII,
is responsible for costs.
4th That the bill - mulfiiariOUs in this
that IL joins parties, defendants having M
connexion with each other in the acts don,
or committed by each.
9th. That there is no equity on the fac
Of the Bill.
LIST. The Legislature Of the State create,
the corporation of the Bank Of Tennessee
and hy the act of It's creation, IL was mad
the fiscal agent and trustee Of the State, &
whose care and management, through II
officers. was committed the funds of tn
State iH large part, as well as n large fun
held hy the State in trust for Commo
Schools; the corporation itself had no capi
Ia. the State furnished the whole. Tn
several Branches Of the Bank were creature
of the lap creating the corporation, an
component parts of the corporation. An
10 them, by the law, was committed paI
Of the capital Of the Bank-the property &
the State Il is true, the directors Of th
principal Bank located the Branches and al
pointed their directors, but they did not ere
die them, nor had they, by any means, ga
limited control over them, but only 60 tn
extent, and that quite limited, that the Ia
creating them both, authorized. The Brancht
of the Bank, were not only created by Oh
State, and her funds placed in the hands (
their directors, beyond the control Of the d
reciors Of the principal Bank, but the oihcel
Of the Branches were required TO give larg
bonds and security payable to the chief exc
cutive officer of the State for the safety
the trust fund thus placed in their hand
and hence the officers and directors Of Ii
branches are responsible directly TO the con
plainant for any failure 10 perform any dui
reouired of them by law, or for the commI
sion Of any act In violation Of the duti'
imposed on them by their position.
2nd. As TO She jurisdiction Of Court
Chanccrv In a case like the one presented
the Bill. (which is taken 10 be true on d
n,urrer) cannot be doubted / think for
moment. The assets Of the Bank az
branches. are trust funds, belonging 10 q
complainant rs the S5ic stakeholder an
beneficiary; and such % the defendants
were officers or directors in the Branch
Shclbvvillc. were trustees Cor the complain
ant. and the assets were placed in their han
hv the complainant 20 be managed by the
for specified object, and being trust tsae
Il Is peculiarly the subject Of equity J'r'sa
hon. Courts Of Chancery may always c
force a trust, not only against the trGslC
bat against any party who may have u
possession Of the irug property, or any OF
who has nodded with It, in way to MAJ
himself liable 20 the beneficiary.
sd. Can the complainant sue by the \
torney General, or must suits be brought
her. in the name Of some person as Toai0
The Code Of Tennessee, section 2SO6, pi
yides that "The State shall commence a.
prosecute suits according 20 the laws Of {
land in the cases Of individuals, except IA
no security shall. in such cases, be relu
cd This section does not apply To su
for or against the Bank OF lennes5e'
This suit not being against the hSiA
tennessee bat against the officers and s -.
Of the directors Of one Of the branches Oh !,
Bank. a. indiriaudls, itlollows therefore y
no roiafar is necessary, and no security
cost Is required IN this case.
sih. The Bin IN this case Is not MAS,
ri0Bs. "rhe rule Of equity is that t@9
more disadi subjects, cannot be embraces
fhn aar.n asFtf aar,frsaf raa.rerH HntHnUuflA1s