National Republican., 1883-04-10
The Claim Of the United States Against the
Cook County Bank Disallowed.
An Interesting Case From Wisconsin In
volwng Less Than Four Dollars
he Washington Market Case Decided as i Has Been
Decided Several Times Before.
The Last of the st. Louis Bank Cases
Miscellaneous Opinions.


against the United States.
This was q suit brought by the United
States against the insolvent Cook County Ma
tonal bank and its receiver to recover out of
the assets of the bank the sum of $4,000 be-
longing to the United States, which had been
deposited therein by the postmaster of Chi
cago. The government maintained in its
bill: First, that under the preference act of
1877 (section 1886 Revised Statutes) IL was
preferred creditor of an insolvent corporations
and second, that it had an equitable right to
set off its claim against the proceeds of the
unused surplus of the bonds deposited by the
bank in the treasury to secure circulation.
The bank demurred to the bill ON the ground,
first, that the United States was not pro-
forred creditor; and second, that IL could not
lawfully reimburse itself out of the bonds of
the bank remaining in its hands.
This court holds in n carefully prepared
opinion by Justice Field--first, that the pro-
visions of the national bank act (section 1896
Revised Statutes) have the effect of withdraw
ing national banks that have failed from the
class of insolvent persons out of whose estates
demands Of the United States are to be paid
in preference to the claims Of other creditors
under the law OF 1897. The United States,
therefore. in this class of cases, stands upon
IAN equality with other depositors second,
the United States has no right to set off its
claim against the surplus bonds belonging to
secure the banks circulation. Bonds so de-
posted constitute trust fund, and trustee
cannot lawfully set off against funds held by
him in that capacity his individual claim
against the grantor of the trust. The decree
of the circuit court must, therefore, be re-
versed and the cause remanded, with direc-
tions to sustain the demurrer and dismiss the
bill.
A decision was also rendered in the last of
the Missouri bank cases, viz: The United
States against Edward p. Curtis, cashier Of
the National bank of Missouri, ut st. Louis.
This cases arises out of an indictment for per-
jury, in which 1t is charged that the defend
ant Curtis knowingly swore to the truth Of
certain false statements contained in the re-
ports made by the bank to the comptroller Of
the currency. The defendant demurred to
the indictment on the technical ground that
under the laws of the United States the no.
tary public before whom the oath was taken
was not an officer or person competent to ad-
minister such oath. This court is of opinion
that the demurrer should be sustained, and
the certified question of the court below Is
answered accordingly. Opinion by Justice
Harlan.
decision was also rendered in an interest
ing customs case involving less than $4,
brought here upon writ of error from the
circuit court of the United States for the
eastern district of Wisconsin. This case,
which is entitled Magdalene Won Cotzhausen
against John Nazro, collector, and Henry @.
Payne, postmaster, arises out of the facts
below stated. In May, 1877, Mrs. Won Cotz-
hausen received by mail through the Mil
waukce -postoflice sealed envelope contain
ing a small knit shawl or scarf, sent to her by
her daughter-in-law in Germany as a token
of affection. The envelope was duly regis
tered and bore an Endorsement stating the
nature of the contents. The collector of
customs was notified by the postmaster Of
the receipt Of the envelope, and it
was delivered to Mrs. Cotzhausen
and opened by her in the collectors
presence. No attempt was made to evade the
payment of,the proper duty, or to conceal the
nature of the contents of the envelope. Mrs
Cotzhausen was willing to pay the duty, but
the collector promptly seized the shawl and
confiscated it as smuggled goods. He in
formed Mrs. Cotzhausen, however, that she
could petition the secretary of the treasury for
leave to pay the duty and take the shawl, and
that the extreme penalty of the law would
probably be remitted. The seizure, however,
had given rise to bad feeling on the part of
Mrs Cotzhausen, and, acting under advice of
counsel, she declined to take the course sug-
gested and brought suit against the postmas-
ter and collector for unlawful conversion of
the property. The jury returned a
special verdict in tho nature of a
finding of facts substantially as above stated,
and judgment was entered for the defendants
upon the ground that they had acted strictly
within the limo of their official duty. The
circuit judge said however, in concluding his
opinion that il did not seem quite consonant
with justice and right in such case as this
that the property should be virtually confis-
Gated where there was evidently no intent to
avoid the payment of duties. Il do not see
however," he said "but that we are bound
down by the strict letter of the law, which
must, necessarily, operate with severity upon
some cases where we could wish 1t did not, If
we were permitted to indulge in any wish
upon the subject"
An appeal was taken to this court, and
Justice Miller rendered the courts decision
this afternoon, as follows: at is violation
of the law to introduce dutiable articles at
all in this manner (by mail), and articles so
introduced are liable to seizure for such vio-
lation. We think that in making the seizure
the defendants only did their duty, and, what
ever the hardship to the plaintiff, they are
not liable to this action on the facts found in
the verdict of the jury"
A decision was also rendered in the case of
the District of Columbia against the Washing
ton Market company. This was suit brought
by the district government to recover the sum
of $53, 500 with interest, alleged TO be due as
rental from the market company by virtue of
the terms of its charter. The market conf
pany set up in defense an agreement and a
final settlement between the district and
rental to be paid by the market company from
$500 to 81 800 per annum The district gov
ernment disputed the validity of the agree
ment and settlement on the ground that they
were made without proper legal warrant.
This court holds that the respect
i've parties had due legal authority,
under the act Of Congress incorporating
the market company to make the agreement
and settlement which they did make reducing
the rent, and that by tho terms of that agree
.ment and settlement the District of Columbia
IS bound. The Judgment of the supreme court
of the district is affirmed. Opinion by JUS
tice Matthews. BY this decision in its favor
the market company gains about 100000.
The other decisions rendered yesterday
were as follows:
No. 222. Emanuel Hahn, appellant, vs. the
United States appeal from court of claims.
Judgment affirmed. Opinion by Mr.. Justice
Blatchford.
No. 200. Samuel T. Williams, appellant, VS.,
Jackson Bros. & Co., and No. 4S2, Jackson
Bros. & Co., appellants, VS.. JEANNE X. Stick
ney, administrative, sc. Appeals from su-
preme court of the District of Columbia.
Decree reversed and cause romanded for
further proceedings, in conformity with the
opinion of this court. Costs in this court to
be paid by Jackson Bros. & Co. Opinion by
Mr., Justice Gray. Mr.. Justice Harlan was
not present at the argument and took no part
in the decision of this case.
No 900, the township of Urbana, plaintiff
In error VS.. Matthew M. Bolles; No. $40, the
. IT..l.. Il Iii H..