The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1867-02-07

/ years 1858 and 1851, amounting TO about the
sum Of S520, and stated their belief that none
others had been rendered
The objections to the instruction n, thatft
! authorized the jury to allow the plaintiff for
/ the aggregate amount or these accounts. al
/ though the particulars Of several Of them were
\ not specified or proved, which the defendants
i were entitled %, Under their agreement, and
! the several sums between themselves So
4 IL this view be correct, yet IL does not an
i pear, and is not probable, that the defendants
/ were prejudiced by the instruction. 8 - a. i.
! It appears thatsthe balance due the defend
| ants on the first Of JanuJr 1862, on the note
| Of the plaintiff, after deducting credits endors-
| ed, and $780, which should have been credited
on the note for error N in the original amount
| The value Of the Confederate and cot 81 ea
| ton money at the value proved
/ amounted to about $1I00
and the accounts produced s525, 2i25
1925
The verdict was for s21S for the defendants
| 1t Is not clear upon what view Of the several
| items presented, this verdict Is based. But
under the view which the jury should have a.
ken, and which we must presume they did
take, Of the matter of the funds deposited,
their verdict, on that point, must have allowed
credits to the plaintiff, for about 1900. The
accounts produced, 1t must so be presumed,
were allowed, for $685. III they allowed cred
its for the $50, as they might have done on the
evidence, that added to the other credits would
have amounted to more than sufficient to pay
the note set off by the defendants.
Upon the whole 1t appears TO US, from the
evidence, that there is nothing on this point in
the verdict Of which the plaintiff in error can
Tie judgment must be affirmed.
In-this case Mr. Justice Harris delivered thu
following dissenting opinion ue1
J, &T. Green. ] High Court, Dec. Term, 1865.
Jas. s. sizer. Of Kinds County.
do not concur with the majority Of the
court in the opinion that the value Of depre-
ciated bank paper left on special deposit with
a banker, may be recovered of him ia an action
for money had and receiCed By the deposition
as money.
On the contrary hold first, That under the
count, for money had and received, nothing but
what the law regards as money can be reeov-
cred. I 80 ~,
Second, That the word moneg means gold
and silver, or the lawful circulating medium of @
the country; known, approved and used III
the market as cash. Coke Lift. p. POT Gao 1"
John Chy. r. 1885,. Mann VS.. Mann's Exr. So.
Third, That bank notes in legal cOntempla-
ton, are regarded rs money so long only AZ
they represent gold and silver. But when
they cease to be the representative Of gold and
silver and only pass from hand to hand at q
er regarded in law as money, but as COM
modify, or property, fuctuating in price, and
not therefore possessing the quality of money
as standard of value. s -. t.;fe.f ~
Fourth, That IIncurrent bank notes, received
by banker, OH special deposit, as such, and
not on general deposit as money, cannot be re-
covered as money, in anaction for money had
and received, by the depositor against the
banker.
Fifth, That such uncurrent or deprecated
bank paper constitutes "a commodity when it
possesses market value, which Is the subject
of sale or exchange, and its value may be re-
covered like other property, when wrongfully
taken, or withheld from the rightful owner.
But is neither money nor the representative of
money unless made so by agreement of the
parties either expressed or implied. ri ,r07.l b
Sixth, That the refusal to receive uncurrent
or deprecated bank notes on general deposit
by banker, is equivalent to a refusal to re-
ceive or treat them rs money, which cannot be
negatived by the fact that some, or even all
other persons may receive and pass them at q
deprecated rate, in the absence of any other
currency. ss-.-.. f -
Seventh, That such special deposit connot
be construed into an argument to receive OF
treat them as money, but is evidence of con-
trary understanding. A }gEf@ &e@ 3ial
ss concur in the opinion on the other points
discussed and decided.