The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-02-05
THE DECREE AFFIRMED
~ ruy cAsE or TIER IS sATAGE.
..,,.o~ VIRGINIA Case Dccided-West Nir-
einla's Direct T"N-Proeeedings OF
Congress Capital Notes.

w,eu,xeroN. ID. c. Feb. 4-lSpecial J.
rtoTnitel States Supreme Court has decided
,be case Of John Tyler, appellant, VS. Sarah
r Savare appeal from the Circuit Court of
Cha United States for the Eastern district OF
y. snia. This Is a suit in equity, brought by
sarah c. Savage. a citizen of Pennsylvania
who sues for herself and all others, creditors
~ the Virginia Oil Company. who will make
themselves parties 20 this suit on iAe usu',
farms against the Virginia oil COMPANY ", q
Virginia corporation; John Tyler. plesif'JiuS 49,
OF said company and ia his own rsh| .OI"
~ Otev. G. W. Tanner. Isaac DaNeAHol, l, o.
7 II. Montague. c. r. Belvin. late directors
In said company and citizens OF 'Hs.nla, @"v
Joseph ID. Evans and J. +. Crane 0'''N0"' -
The bill which was fled December II, lSS5,
20 far as IL is material % give ils coHsV".' .',
forth that the plaintiff. being ANXIOUS ~ 70
secure business position tor heI = sou, ~ II, -
cavaoe was referred bv William T.. TANNER
of Richmond. Va. with WloI PLY nuN. H"S - &c
ness transactions 10 john IyIeI' Pleslueii' ~.
the Virginia Oil Company, oi "H'ou fca.r.r
C w Tanner q son Of William +. lanueI'
go - ',oLer. tbat through William l.. Ian.
,er a. onened neaOt atlons with lyler. anu
IS inforrne3 that she could secure loI HeI
W ,,cs;.;on equivalent TO that OF assistant
secretary in the company by the investment
ri si0 o10 that she was willing 10 make II1y
sr',-.str,ort I'm the shape of loan We'll
sa',,rs3 bni Tvler declined t. take the sum
as l|an and required that she should
mr. bose of the company that amount 0i us
eqn.tal 81. ok at its par value that. TO lnluce
Ter ~ purchase the stock. Tyler, as president
of Ne company. sent 10 her letter staunS
rhat her son was competent Tor the position
proposed and that III regard 10 the investment
it WAS SD absolutely safe that the company
i.ln no trouble in borrowing all the money 10
wanted. that its capital stock was .l6,3'O
with authority 20 increase 1t 10 s5U,OOJ that
le last dividend was Z per cent. seini-an-
lla.y ,..~ ,,
Ile Court continues that the plaintiff relied
anon tie statements made IN ne letter ana
laia right % rely on them as n Dasis lor ihe
Investment for her money. and that the I'M
f.-.aat statements made therein were as sol
lows. IlI Tho then capital stock OF the COM
..rr was sis 800. with authority from the
stockholders TO increase it, to c3O,OJO % the
l-f dividend declared was per cent. semi
annual and the current fiscal year would emo
I.rN 4. Ia the manufactures of the company
we're paving large profit. and We're iavoran iy
known throu -hOut o VIDE territory North'
South and West ll there had been late
decrease of expenses. and the outlook Tor
Iu.iress WIS better than ever before, lJl by
adding moderately 10 tleil capital. they
could. without much risk. double tneT Dtal,
ness and O6I "a gentleman OF New lork nad
bought thirty shares OF the stock at par within
the last ten Gays
HOW sHE WAS NIS.ID.
The bin further ayerred that, with those
statements from the president OF the COM
panv. che concluded that It's stock was safe
investment and consented 20 take the stock
instead of Oauing tie money. winch was her
preference but which the letter assured her
would not suit the company; that thefeupon.
ou May lg 1884, she pald into the treasury OF
the company 900 and received certificate
t0r one hu.dred shares of stock. which sire
still holds lhnt " accordance with un-
derstandng with Tyler, her son was given
uosltion at q salary of $500 per annum. and
performed the duties assigned TO him until
the suspension of tie Office work. that When
the lst If December. 1854, arrived she was
not informed OI the declaration OF the semi
annual dividend she had been led 10 expect.
and on tho 9TH OF that month she wrote to
TYLER "a letter 0f inquiry concerning II. that
iu reply she received a letter from hlm stating
that the company had followed the example
of other manufacturing ana rmlroad COM
panies and rs "a matter of precautl0n omitted
lbs semi-annual dividend TO avoid weakening
is treasury.
The next dividend was omitted and Mrs.
Savage asceItaiued that the company had
sustained a loss of s3.6O2.47 for the year. BY
vav of retreuchuent Mrs Savages son was
removed .and President Tyler wrote her that
the company owed hm between $4,000 and
SOOOJ borrowed money
The Supreme CouTtin conclusion says IN re-
card 20 representations made 10 Mrs.
savage.
1t must be inferred that if the plaintiff had
been informed that no dividend had reen
declared since June /, 1889, she would net
have subcr.bed fer the stock. Ibis suppres-
sion of "a material ct which Tyler was
bound in good faith TO disclose. was equlva-
lent TO false representation. Stewart vs.
Wyoming Rancho Company. 12S y. y 353
3ss The effect OF the fraud committed by
TYLER enured directly % his personal advan-
tage Not onlywas he as a large stOckhOd-
er and salared officer, benehted by tue
plaintiffs payment into the treasury of the
q mpanv of the $4,000. but. as already
shown. $1,000 of that sum went directly TO
bis benefit aud the remainder. he testities,
went 10 the purchase OF material and Ordl-
nary expenses OF the company. Ihe latter
amount enabled the company to continue
paying to Tyler his salary for some time
longer.
REVERSED THE DECREE.
The United States Supreme Court
has reversed the decree of the United States
District Court of Virginia in the case of the
| uited States against Mltteu ana Ollers.
The suit involved a dlstiliers bond given.
Tile Government alleged that there were
two breaches in the bond. one for nOn-pay-
ment Of tax on thirty-nine gallons Of whisky
and the other for nOn- payment on ninety
three gallons The defense claimed that the
whisky was stolen from the dist;lery 10y rea-
son of the negligence Of the Government
officials. who did not have the distillery doors
securely locked. The lower court decided
for the defense. The Supreme Court re-
verses and remands the case for q new trial.
WEST vIEGNIA's DIRECT TAX.
On motion of Senator Faulkner the Senate
several days ago passed the joint resolution
hitherto explained IN THE TINES dispatches.
directing the treasury TO pay 10 West Virginia
its share of the direct tax refund. which was
withheld on the ground that West Virginia,
as part of the N ther State, owed the Gov
eminent for Virginia bonds which were issued
prior T. the dismemberment OF the state and
which were purchased by the Government
The resolution has reached the House and
las been referred to the Judiciary Committee.
At the request Of Senators Daniel and Bar
bOur Mr.. Faulkner has moved TO reconsider
the vote and recall the resolution TO the SEN
ate. The Virginia senators were absent when
The resolution passed. and they want TO care
July examine into the matter and ascertain
how it may Affect Virginia. if at all.
The Lighthouse Board has sent TO Congress
a recommendation that the sum of So. l05 be
aDUr0priated for lighting Cane Fear river