Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-11-16
GOVERNMENT BONDS.
Government bonds are stronger. tt
The following are the noon Quotat ions:
LOCAL STOCKS AND BONDS.

Tennessee bonds seem to be very firm,
and were quoted in New York at 735.
They would command here 70. Past due
Tennessee bonds are worth about 60 and
the coupons 53c in the dollar.
Bank Of Tennessee notes, old issue, are
very scarce. State warrants are quiet at
86c.
There is scarcely anything doing in county
and city bonds, and may be considered
rather dull sale.
For quot atoms more in detail we refer to
the rates given In another part of this paper
by the National Savings Company, corner
Union and College streets.
FINANCIAL MATTERS.
An enterprising New York firm offers a
premium on notes of broken national
banks. This looks a little singular; but
these notes are as good as any on banks in
fourishing condition. Under the natio n
al banking law each national bank is COM
PEELED to deposit government bonds with
the Treasurer of the United States suffici.
ent to redeem their currency in the event
of failure. Any note, therefore, on these
broken banks is good, and worth even
premium, for, theoretically at least, under
the law, only a certain amount is allowed
W q SCSbiOI3 d4u Luo Oh
bank in any particular section other
parties desiring to go into the banking
business in that section must gather to.
gether its notes, have them redeemed by
the United States Treasury, and apply for
a charter to establish another bank in the
same locality. The premium is offered
from the fact that others want the banking
privilege.
An interesting suit, involving the ques.
ton of negligence in negotiating checks,
has just been decided. In January, 1855,
a firm in New York drew gold check on
the Bank Of New York for S. 1000, and was
duly certified, but was stolen, and pay
ment of it stopped. After time the
payee gave an indemnity bond, and a new
check was made. In the spring of 1858 the
check was bought in New Orleans from a
stranger for 81 900 by woman, who sued
The bank, claiming that the certiication
made the check negotiable paper; the bank
commended that the certiication did not
create permanent liability, and that the
purchaser of so old a check could not
properly claim the protection due to an
innocent holder. What the matter has
been doing during the last four years is not
stated, and there may be an error Of dates
IN the report; but it is clear that the po-
sition of the bank which was sanctioned by
the decision rendered, is correct. Who
ever receives check is presumed to do so
with the intention of converting it into
mon y or bank credit, and every check
is presumed to be drawn for the purpose
of being thus converted as soon as con
venient, not for being held; hence a
check of an old date is looked upon with
suspicion, both at bank and elsewhere. In
this instance, as every person capable of
understanding the nature of check ought
to know that one year or more old is not
easily negotiable, and has something wrong
about it, it is impossible for the plaintiff to
avoid the imputstion either of collision in
fraud or Of gross neglig 4nce; and did not the
rule require the exercise Of reasonable care
In such matters, liability upon a lost or
stolen check would never cease, and who
ever gave an indemnity bond would found
mortgage upon his estate for an indefinite
period. The decision in this case indirectly
justifies the reasoning we employed, some
six weeks ago, as to the culpable negligence
OF sUndry bankers and others who made
advances on Georgia bonds which mere