The St. Charles herald. [volume] (Hahnville, La.) 1873-1993, 1883-07-14
COMMERCIAL LAW.
Brief DIgosts OF Late DeciaIons.
Compiled Specially for the st. Louis CONNER
cial Gazette.l
OPTION CONTRACTS,

OPTION CONTRACTS.
In an action to recover for the breach
of contract to sell, the defence was
made that the transaction was gam
bling one in options. IL appeared in
evidence that the defendant was deal
ing in options through his broker on
the board of trade, that he failed to
put up the required margins, and that
the transactions were settled at heavy
loss, which was charged to him. The
court said: The evidence falls far
short of what is necessary to establish
illegality in contracts Of this kind.
All option contracts are not illegal,
and the incident Of putting up margins
amounts to nothing unless the contract
itself is illegal. The validity of ''option"
contracts depends upon the material in
tention Of the parties. II II Is the bona
fde intention of the seller to deliver,
or the buyer TO pay, and the option
consists merely in the time of the de-
livery within given time, the contract
is valid. If the contract itself is lawful,
the putting up of margins to cover
losses accruing from the hunctuation OF
prices in the final settlement of the
transaction according to the usage and
] rules of the Board Of Trade, Is entirely
legitimate and proper.--Union National
Bank of Chicago VS.. Carr United States
Circuit Court for the District Of Iowa.
PLEDGNG STOCK.
Where stock is pledged as collateral
security, delivery of the certificates
with blank transfer on the back, signed
by the owner, is good as between par
ties. A Pledge can repledge to the ex-
tent Of the original pledge and may as
sign the principal debt. A national
bank, holding the principal indebted
ness and oil the pledged shares Of stock,
can sell the stock as the readiest mode
of collection, giving the pledgeor and his
successor in interest reasonable notice
to redeem, and of the time and place
Of sale. Where the pledge was stock Of
al, association having no other corpo-
rate property than real estate, the COM
plainant, who had succeeded to all the
rights of the original pledgeor, could re-
cover tho land by suit in equity, on
reimbursing the grantees Of such pur-
chaser, who obtained their title with
notice of his rights and equities, the
amount they are actually out of pocket.
To arrive at such sum, an account must
be had of rents, profits and income re-
ceived by such grantees while In pos
session Of the real estate, -Canfield VS..
Minneapolis Agricultural etc. Associa-
ton, United States Circuit Court for the
District of Minnesota.
RAILWAY NEGLIGENCE.
Where railroad corporation lays
down its track In populous city, not
within any enclosure but upon ground
open to the public, the mere fact that
the rails are not laid over public high
way but upon private property of the
company ought not TO be held TO re-
lieve the company Of the obligation to
observe all reasonable municipal regu-
lations as to the movement Of locomo-
tives within the city limits. Where the
negligence that directly contributed to
the injury to plaintiff was the absence
of any lookout from the forward end of
q running train, contrary TO city ordi-
nance, and the train might easily have
| been stopped so as to avert the injury,
, had brakeman been at his post, the
company is liable, though plaintiff was
. negligent in placing himself on the
| track and not keeping proper look
Q out himself. --Merz vs. Missouri Pacific
Railroad Company, st. Louis Court OF
Q Appeals
! REsoNDINo CONTRACT.
Whenever one party to contract re-
fuses to execute any substantial part Of
: his agreement, he thereby gives to the
: other party the option to rescind the en-
. tire contract and to recover damages foI
! the breach. --Clark ct al VS.. Philadel.
: phia Il Reading Coal and Iron Com.
+ pany, Philadelphia Court Of Common
l Pleas.
. On q contract to furnish railway
/ spikes "freo on board cars or boat al
!; Philadelphia, shipping directions to b
y given hereafter" IL Is the duty Of the
ID vendee to furnish the shipping direc
tions and the place for delivery. Ant
if he refuses or neglects to furnish them
when requested by the vendor, the lat
ter is not bound by the contract aftel
L such refusal or neglect, and IL may b.
L held rescinded. -Marshall VS.. Samuel
e Philadelphia Court Of Common Pleas.
er PRoMIssoRY NOTES.
- The value Of note is not destroye,
+ /; or its negotiability affected by the fac
iv that the payee writes his name upon
y in the wrong place, when the mistak
al is Immediately corrected, the nam
~ written in the right place and 1t Is q
"a terward negotiated. Browning q BrS
ID VS.. Maurer, Philadelphia Court Of Con
a. mon Pleas.
I'd MORTGAGE.
ha Where mortgageor sells a portion (
a ao the land charged with the mortgage,tt
Oh part remaining in his hands, II Of SUI
81 ficient value, must bear the who
~ charge Of such mortgage, and the pa
~ sold can not be made TO contribute uni
NJ that remaining in TIE mortgage is e.
~ hausted. Matter OF Martins Appea
. Supreme Court Of Pennsylvania.
PREsUMPTIoN OF PATMHNT.
Or A legacy unclaimed for more ths