Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1893-03-18
ln.portant DECISION.

] iss"h '"' Ni'oSi ~ "HtS' PAiSiS SSiN
appeals from DEGREES of the Circuit
Court of Lynchburg, were docided ip
the Court of Appeals in Richmond on
Thursday. IN them The court con-
strudcd for the first time section 9s2l OF
tie Code of Virginia which provides
that
Any )udgmon; creditor who apprc-
hcnds that lie is in danger of loss by
reason of usurious dealings on the part
Of his debtor may exhibit his bill OF
equity, verified by affidavit, against the
party with whom the dealings were
had and compel him to discover, on
oath, ali bargains, contracts, or shifts
relative 10 such dealings; and if it ap-
pear that more than legal interest has
been received the excess above that
rate, or so much thereof as may be nee
essary, shall be applied TO the satisiac-
ton Of the plaintiffs demand. Such
bill ghal! be fled within five years af-
ter the receipt Of the illegal interest"
The court held this to be remedial
statute, giving a Larty a mode of rem
cdy for a wrong when he had none or
different one before, and that the
usuVer forfeited 10 the Judgment credit
or, irrespective Of the state of accounts
between the usurer and the judgment
debtor, the judgment debtor, in the
opinion of tie court, under the section
above referred to, not being ncccs-
sary party to the judgment creditors
snit.
The court says in this opinion
"The reason of The law-that is, the
motive which led 10 the making Of it
is one of the most certain means of es-
tablshing the true sense. As soon as
we know the reason which alone has
determined the will of him who speaks
we ought TO interpret his words and
apply them in a manner suitable to
that reason. 1t is Il well-established
American rule Of construction that it
is not permitted to interpret that which
has no need Of Interpretation. When
an act is expressed in clear and precise
terms-when the sense IS manifest and
leads to nothing absurd-therc can be
no reason not 10 adopt the sense which
it naturally presents"
Judge Lacy delivered the opinion of
the court, Judges Fauntleroy and Hin
ton concurring and Judges Lewis and
Richardson dissenting.
Ryan and Clark filed their bills in
the Circuit Court of Lynchburg under
the statute above referred to against p.
A. Krise, n Lynchburg banker, alleging
Il ~, tI,a af ~;
with their judgment debtors, and pray
ing that the usury charged by Krise
should be applied on their judgments.
The usurious dealings were not denied,
but krisc cIaimed that, notwithstand
ing the usury, the Judgment debtors
still owed him BALANCE on state
ment of their accounts between krisc
and said debtors.
This was fact, and the Circuit
Court of Lynchburg dismissed the bills
of the plaintiffs in error, applying the
usury received by Krise from the judg-
ment debtors on the debts of said debt
ors to Krisc, but not to the satisfaction
of the plaintiffs (the Judgment credi-
tors demands. From these DEGREES
appeals were taken.
This tribunal reversed the decisions
of the Circuit Court and ordered that
the appellee, Krisc, pay the appellants
costs, and remanded the causes 10 the
Circuit Court with instructions to
further proceed in the causes in order
to final decree in accordance with the
opinion of the Court and the views
therein expressed
The amount of usurious interest
charged is approximately $1,000 or
5000.