The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1868-05-27

From the fredericksburg Ledger.
An Emp0rtant Decision.

L ~
| AIN lmpOrtant Decision.
Judge Critcher on Monday rendered the
following important decision in what are
known as the bank cases. twill be seen
that those owing unpaid notes can pay them
in notessof the bank ~ 80 = ~, 80
| Farmers Ba,ak Of Virginia Us. q. B.
Hooms etSGl.-This is ON action in the name
of the Farmers Bank OF Virginia for the
benefit Of the trustees under the deed Of
January 10, 1867. made in pursuance Of
the act Of February IL, 1866, TO recover the
amount Of negotiable note due in June,
1862, and conveyed in said deed of trust.
The defendants, having rendered the notes
of the bank prior to the service of the sum-
mons in the sui, pleaded tender Of the said
notes, set-of, and payment. To these pleas
the plaintiffs demurred. = ssl5 13ss /.
Great research and reflection have been
displayed by counsel in this case yet, the
longer I reflect on their arguments, sthe
more clearly do the points involved resolve
themselves into the single inquiry Can q
debt to the bank, Notwithstanding this
convey vance, be paid: in the notes Of the
banks 81 5-s.JE I.z ss4.g "a 3: 81 I
/ 1t is admitted, / presume, that if the con-
veyance of the assets Of the bank, author
lied by the act of February 12th,s had not
been made, any debt to the bank might be
paid in the notes of the bank. Ftfss rs !
Is the debtor deprived Of the right to pay
ance of the assets as is authorized by this
act?
The act requires, first, that the banks
Of the Commonwealth shall go into liqui-
,dation. p ~ s.ts 80 ~ 10 1s.''ssaE
2.sIt empowers the President and di-
rectors of any bank Of circulation to con-
'vey2 to such person as they, may select
all the assets (real and. personal of the
4 bank, provided the proceeds of such assets
shall be distributed among all persons, cor
porations, and associations entitled to share
in such distribution according to their legal
rights and priorities at the time such deed
shall be executed.
8. It so provides that no creditor shall
gain precedence over another creditor at
law. 5s II; g 4 y {, $50 .
The object and effect of this act, there
fore, is not to vary or change the liabilities
.or,rights Of parties, butto preserve and en-
force them. No creditor thereby acquired
a right that did not ,preexist no debtor in
CURED q new liability or lost IN existing
| right. !, = 49, ss>.ssv7fgfgs- sf1...st q.
II the Legislature, instead Of authorizing
the president and directors to select per
son to collect the assets and pay the debts
4 in the mode prescribed by law, had au-
thorized the president and directors them
selueS to collect the assets md pay the debts,
can any one be of the opinion that such an
/ |, fa1 {ba ,,So fc nd 1fo-
bilities of the creditors and debtors Of the
bank lSi.is Fs,t s:s & s r..ss-
IF the Legislature had directed the
sheriffs of the counties or the sergeants OF
the corporations where the banks were sitn-
ated to collect these assets and pay these
debts rs prescribed by law, would such an
arrangement affect the rights and liabilities
of parties? !? ass G es- -.
For no other purpose, with no other
power, is this trustee interposed.
| If the President and Directors had been
empowered by this act to prefer creditors
or dispose of the assets, possibly new rights
and liabilities might have arisen. Nego-
table paper, after maturity and protest, is
still negotiable, although gh not SUBJ bject, when
thus negotiated, to the, law of general set
off, but such equities only as attach to the
note itself, as illegality, or want, or failure
of consideration, or o release or payment,
or a counter-claim agreed to be set-of,
/ (which is equivalent to payment). IA
Graft. l6, Here the law declared at the
time of the contract that the debt to the
bank might be paid ns.the notes of the
bank; and IN assignee even of q dishonor-
ed note, knowing this feature of the origi-
nal contract (for every one is presumed to
know the law of the land may well be re-
garded as taking the note with notice OF
the agreement, and subject thereto.
But be this as it may, the peculiar con-
veyance under the act of February, 1866,
varies neither the rights nor liabilities OF
parties but the trustee stands on the same
ground as an assignee in bankruptcy in
| England. .lt-f -
The Court of Appeals Of Maryland have
decided an analogous case. The Virginia
act, Code of 1860, page S43, section 16, and
the act of February IL, 1856, together make
| q law nearly identical with the thirteenth
section of the statute of Maryland.
4 The authority therefore is Of importance
here. The president and directors of the
Bank Of Maryland in 1884 conveyed 1.-the
| effects of the bank to certain trustees fol
the purpose Of paying all the debts ratably
The Court of Appeals Of Maryland decided
Iunanimously that g antecedent to the exc.
Icution of the deeds of trust it was the
right and privilege Of the debtors re.
spectively of the Bank Of Maryland, Sc
/ cured to them by the provisions of the act Of
1918, to pay and discharge their debts te
the said bank In the notes of the bank at
the par or nominal value of such notes
which right and privilege were not ex,
| tinguished or lost to them by operation Of
either of said deeds, but remained unim.
| paired And that sthe trustees were moi
only. authorized, but bound by the ,proyi-
sions of the act Of 1878, to receive such
notes in payment Of debts to the bank af
the bank itself would have been bound te
receive them whether obtained before OF
after the execution of said deeds by ths
/ debtor or debtors to the bank offering them
| in payment of their respective debts"
Gill & johnson, 1854 z.s ygg
For these reasons, and on this authority
and others furnished me by the learned
counsel for the defendants, the demurrer
are overruled. -: asssE ,s.ss
| HEAVY Loss BY FIBE.-Neao York, May
4 25.-The loss ut the fire yesterday of the
Neptune Steamship Company was s6f2 900
nla-.Y,:.up 1S-.-n,r.,, croop a fou