Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1869-12-28
THE PLANTERS BANK CASE.
Why the Act Of December IL, 1866, is De-
Clarsd Unconstitutional.

The following is the concluding portion
of Chancellor East's decision in the Plant
ers Bank case. whereby be establishes
the unconstitutiOnality of the act under
which 10 was claimed that the notes not
presented for payment before January !,
1869, were barred from collection:
The Legislature says to all persons
having claims against the bank, You
must present your claims to such trustee
within such time as the trustee may spe-
city; provided, the time so specified be
not less h two years, or you shall be
forever barred Now, this is more than
the Legislature has ever said TO claimants
OF the estates of deceased persons, solvent
or insolvent. The limitation laws appli-
cable TO these, like the general limitation
laws, refer the creditors to the courts,
and not TO the personal representatives.
A law limiting the time within which
demands may be brought against banks,
solvent or insOlvent, or their trustees
or assignees, provided IL allows a reason
able time TO do so, l not only believe
not TO be unconstitutional, but impOr-
tant and necessary; and the Legisla-
ture should fix the time within which
the SUIT should be commenced. But the
Limitation should relate to, and Dc based
upon, a SWig in Il court, nOt because OF a
failure to do something else; otherwise
the Legislature may compel every credi-
tor, in addition TO commencing q suiI in
court, to perform some Other superadded
requirement. Before ~. could sue b., il
could require hin 20 present his note to
B.. a specified number Of times, or to BIS
assignees, or some third party, occupying
some or no relation to b. or the debt. This
would be practically abOlishing the judi
cial department, or, if persons sought its
aid, cramp their rights Of recovery, by
the doing or performing something else
r,1a- fla nau.1r- nF com ,1afa onN a,FTra
loss of the demand. IT'S true the act
does not say, you shall 1origit your de-
mand if you sue; but 10 says, in effect,
that, having sued, you shall withdraw
your suit, and present its sutjecJ-matter
TO the trustee, or your recovery shall
amount to nothing; or, if you have not
sued, you shall so present your demand
and surrender its evidence, or be forever
barred. This act wears the appearance,
to my mind, of establishing, outside OF
the courts, means whereby "A man may
lose his property and the benefit of his
contracts. Il may be said tina. the Legis-
lature might have enacted, that, if the
creditor failed TO present his demand
to some competent court INSTEAD OF
trusted within two years, he should be
barred, and then the act o have
avoided the objection l have been urging
against il, and been merely an act of Iimi-
tation, and that it is a small difference,
whether the act requires a SUif il court or
representation and surrender ofthe claims
TO the trustee, and that in the one case the
condition of the bar is: Failure TO sue in
the other, the condition is; Failure to
present the claims to the trustee, and that
so slight a difference could not conse-
quently e~flectsso much. The creation OF
a judicial department by our constiJu-
ton. and granting to it judicial powers, is
an exclusive grant, covering the UhOte
power, and the Legislature must regard
this power, in all legislation relative TO
debtor and creditor. 1t cannOt ignore IL
and dispose of contracts or property, or
affect the interest of parties, regardless OF
the settled course of judicial proceedings,
1t cannO destroy the relation OF
debtor and creditor, or injure or defeat
either, without the interference and jul
dicisl determination Of the Question. 1t
would be yielding up the judiciary Of the
people TO the Legislature TO allow the
latter to determine rights between par
ties. and forever close all Inquiry into
them, without any reference to the courts.
Probably the nearest approach to this Is a
statute OF limitation, but of this the
whole matter is referred 20 the court. The
Legislature may well demand Of a party
having a claim thai he snail go 10 the
other coordinate department of the
Government with it and prosecute it,
- tHN t3tt0t pOP"ltAiCN' NiSe'SN nv
Constitution for that purpose alone, but il
cannot elect in the place of the latter some
other tribunal or outside party before
whom the creditor shall go, OF allow him
to 90 into court on the condition that be
has or will present his claim also TO the
trustee within some specified time.
EVERY man has the right 10 60 into
court Internationally, and the judgment
of the court is the measure of his claims,
and no other fact or thing can be substi-
tuted or allowed to embar;ss him. l,
therefore, sustain the demu -rer, on the
ground that the act is unconstitutional