Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1878-11-09

On this case, however, the statute of
was arrested by the ming or
the amended bill, except as to the adj
ministrator of VIM. A. Branner, who |
bad died, and the endorseTS against |
whom recovery was notsought till the |
filing of the cross bill by the trustees, |
after the expiration of six years
8. Where the suit against the per
sOnal representative of q stOckhOlder |
on such note is barred, his estate |
will be held liable, without interest, |
paid and uHcalled and so not due, and |
must pay equally with those who are
liable on their notes.
4. II Understanding stock notes are
paid by one set OF stockholders with
interest, they may call upon other
stockholders who have paid nothing,
and have not given notes for pay
ment equal in amount to theirs, for
sum equal to the principal and interest
so paid.
5. Where the names Of eDdOrsers on
notes for stock are concealed from the
notehOlders of the bank who are ac-
lively seeking their remedy in court
of equity, the statute of Limitation g
would not be allowed to defeat their
recovery, if by amendment relief be
sought on that ground.
6. No difficulty seen in the way Of
holding the directors of bank who
conduct business on the basis of notes
not authorized by the charter, person
aUy liable to the note holders aud
creditors, for the whole amount of So
called paid UP capital. The directors
accepting such securities instead Of
coin, would each be liatle for the whole
amount so accepted in breach of his
In E-F,h- =
rectors would be liable upon the same
ground. And for q stronger reason
would the directors be liable, if they
suffered the securities, however infe-
rior to that to which the creditors were
entitled to look for protection, TO be
barred by the statute. And the same
liability would attach TO negligent
trustees, under similar circumstances.
Z. No actual subscription TO stock
necessary TO hold the stockholders liza
bic, if the minutes Of the proceedings,
to which they have access, show the
amount taken by each.
S. In the absence of q clause il
bank charter, authorizing a reduction
of the capital stock to which it has
been raised under discretionary power
to increase it, it would seem that no
such power is conferred.
8. Although as between the stock
holders and trustees who have carried
out their wishes and executed the trust
according TO their policy and intent,
the question of compensation may not
fairly arise, yet as matter o. public
policy it may be refused, and is, under
the facts of this case.
10. An officer of bank buying il
property at execution sale for the
bank debt, for which it was sold, and
Immediately paying to the bank the
amount OF his bid, might, perhaps,
claim the benefit of the purchase for
himself, but it would be otherwise
where he used the debt for q time to
pay his bid, end then, without any
corporate action TO ratify the trans&c-
tiOn, settled the debt with the bank.
II. The case of Mari as. the Bank Of
Vest Tennessee, Jackson, 1877, hold |
ing that ia the adjustment of equities |
between the stockholders, those who |
had paid stock in notes OF the bank, |
should be allowed only what they paid
for the notes, Is adhered TO and fol-
lowed, but not appreciated. The
Special Judge ia criticism of that case,
says: individually, am unable to
answer the position OF the Chancellor
Cooper, or to see any ground for
holding, that 3 stakeholder or director,
is not, rs between himself and the CO.
stockholders or dige:tOrs, at liberty to
buy up the notes with his own means.
and present them foE payment at their
face value. IL lie is entrusted by the
bank with means 10 buy them up, of
course good faith TO the corporation
would preclude him from charging
more than he paid and if the ques.
ton were between him and q note
holder from whom he had purchased
at discount, the rule Of u6Crrin2a
tides would apply, but l do not see,
that directors are under any
trust obligation 10 buy up notes
directors, or TO divide with others !
the pr, fits of their purchase, if made. |
1t seems to me to be dealing outside Of |
the mutual trust.n
y, Compartments counsel fees are |
not charge upon the fund recovered |
in a case of this kind, according TO the |
settled principles in this State.
But for the prosecution Of the bill |
and amended bill, and for valuable ser. !
vices rendered in the general Iitiga-
tor, counsel should be paid out If the
aggregate recovery, all petitionipg
creditors contributing pro rata.
PER M'FARLAND, J
Chandler as. tie ,Stutc.-l. Where a
collector of taxes collects penalties un.
der law afterwards declared u1con-
and void, he and his sure
ties are estOpped to deny the validity
Of the collection, and be can not refuse
to pay over the money.
2. The same principle applies where
the law under which the collection
was made, has been repealed. though
be and his sure.ies would not be liable
If he had failed to collect taxes unlaw-
fully assessed.
8. Under the Code Z 1872, Comptral-
er's statement OF the collectors ac-
count is 2)rinaG Jdcie correct, and is
conclusive in the absence of counter
Gailing proof.
wilson as. the State.-1. The Chair
nan of the County Court has no
power to accept conditional bond, or
delivery.
2. The Act Of 1873, Oh. 1O2, sec, G.
'equires sureties TO appear in open J
court and acknowledge il writing
heir Willingness to remain Liable for ,
he defaults OF their principal; but
heir assem- TO the change of the law, t
( necessary at all, might well be
,iven in any other mode equivalent !
o a common law bond or obligation,
md they would be bound thereby,
Ill ,