Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-04-05


Under the foregoing facts. we concur
with the trial court that the Boaunan ;
bank was suhroeated. hs regards the ludg'
ment1 against Smith. Reed and Ihurnond,
| e. the rights Of the original owners I'D
/ those judgments, Henderson, DauDs nnl
others, principals IN the Judgment. and Oi
Rollins. the Stone Cattle and asture com
Il psny and others who were sureiies therein.
I Coiehruoke kn collateral secunuos see.
i iion 2lI and section ~ These collateral
| Judgments against Smith and others were
/ held by the BOatmnn's bank as n pledge
60 secure the payment Of the original iudg.
ment against Dabbs and others. a. a
| pledge they were Nn incident TO the debt
| evidenced by the main judgment aud were
30 transferable with the latter. Colsbr0oke
on collateral securities. section ~. D. 100 3
Freeman on Judgments. section 49, the
Lateuvlle, Inst vs. Kaufman u al, IS
We fai 20 appreciate the distinction.
IN thls respect, sought 10 be drawn ~
appellants counsel between q pledge and
a mortgage. The thing pledged ~ Us Guar.
acter as a security is uR much nu lucl-
dent Of the debt Intended "a rsby 20 be
transfer " the main judgment 20 Smith
operated as a trunsfcr 81 the collateral
and, Eulng this baud Ia hand. 50 20 speak,
must be held 10 have operated ns a cancel
lutiOn ~ the former Otherwise. it win
have altogether lost its character as
questioned that had Smith paid 20 the
Boatnun's Savings bank the amount Of
the collateral Judgments against himself
such payment would 70 the extent there0f
pave discharged the main judgment. tn.
less the converse be true tho purpose with
which the BOatman's Savings bank held
the collateral Judgments would be defeat
ed. and nubbs With the remaining prnc
pals and the stouu Cnttlo ana Pasture
company and the remaining 5ursilcs on the
main Judgment. would be deprived Of all
benght rom the cpllaiefals held f0r them
by the BJutmaL's Savings bank h would
seem that payment under such clfCun-
slhhcta on the one Judgment would operate
pro taniO 10 extlnguish the others. audi
wee versa Freeman on Judgments sec.
ton &GI
When smith took transfer from the
Boaimanh savings bank of the Judgment
against Dubbs Henderson and others as
principals aud the Stone Cattle ana Pas.
lute company ~ vndOutis, 10 cannot be so |
accurately said that he purchased the ]
true because be- owed the amount wdich /
40 rald. not indeed. Tor the REASON that 4
he was directly a party 10 tie Judgment /
winch was Transferred 10 him. but Tor the /
reason that ho was u debtor ln tW1 iudg. 1
mcnta hVld by the trnnHfcfrpr as IA sreur- 4
~ ana pledge FOR the judgment .fnns. |
Terrell, ana that as between himself ana /
the stone Cattle and Pasture compnny he .
was primarily liable. lis OBLIGATIONS rc. /
uuc"l % Judgments were held hy tho Hoat. /
i'lii,9iinls Hn'lsss Ignk as a security Tor the
@n! which he purp0rts 90 have purchased
When le with J. u. Reed aud b. a. Thur
thgud executed the notes Ou which were
Iuuhutd the Judgments against him DC
CONTRACTED that these notes might be- rs.
Hl8ucl W their holders MS "a pl,sIrp ur la. l
.nuil gt "a debt which might BE- iur los [
lhem' nc muat Dc held then 90 have con.
iuclyd their payments iu concentration
OF tuc TACT that they might ur tuuId hD
s-lEhcd 10 ihr boatmaus Savings bank
'tH 10 amy other person. natural or nrUn.
giuh to whom their pnypes mislt become
Indebted. lie d not under the facts stated
tg De regarded as occupying thc attitude
~ y hWanfrr taking. uH such au assign.
4thl OF lhe Judgment Tie dil NOT pur.
yLtso lt hv paid g. Otherwise the very
purpose Tor which his primary obligations /
nay been ieaumntcly pledged would be-
depreciation or the transaction pruiuCrs
q Result which VIII operate as a hnr,ishiu |
upon smitA The money paid boy him upon
lht pliheipW Judgment viii have been |
applied TO- The payment OF his own obugu-
luhs, ana Ia a manner which might be- !
silcfcd a. within Ills contemplation ut
iue lime De bound himself by the prunlis. /
.ey notes afterwards pledged 20 secure
'hr dcoi 81 thclr holders The luttor viii !
nave secured thr benefit OF the collateral
securities. lpgltimntyly obtained and pIcdu. |
~ by them 10 the payment of their obugs.
Il1u, uud the Houtinuu's Savings bank !
NE Pledge, viii have collected the nmuuut |
.buy due IT, THUS, 'ul things" between
he several parties "Will have been made
The fact Insisted upon by appellant that
!
mans bank 90 smith the iattrr held other
lotva OF thu Stone Cattle and Fuaturc com.
ilhY uoga not Affect The conclusion above
Aplcas,d Those notes cannot az we
MINK, he used 10 titus defeat Tie sperldr
iufpusc With which the Judgments nenlust
,nhln were pledged, not only Ia the inter.
200 OK the Stone Cattle and Pasture com.
iany. but also " rs co.urctiss ani otAcrs
principals la the main Judgment
The iurthrr fact which appellants sought
10 prove that Ia 1855. r. NJ uaugherty
Al ~ I'd. ]
mans Savings hautl OF the collateral Uig
hruidt Drought suit uLulust smith to Ia. !
we iho,e Juifmgnld. ~ alike ln our opln
9h imwutoriul That suit and the issues
herein Involved must Dee regarded as "rcs
utvr alios aCtA.'
Nor 10 We uul merit Ia the contention
hv testimony ut thr witness l,oiiiua wfpre
o. ne rcfvts TO the notes auulust Smith
seed aa Ihurmond. giving Tie names u
hose Who sigupd them aud stauuu their /
late AMI amounts uud the particular notes
pa which the Judgments against Suiltu
tteu ana lhurmuud were rendered The
nat9y,'r OF These notes as pledges was the
aauheiv Tact Ia ihh connection. This fact
tstti 10 pnrol n could not be otherwise
lrorci because 10 did not otherwise pxigt
Ae notes themselves were merged ~ iudg
violence We do not think that IL WINS
mp oper that rho witness should be par
mued Ia explanation " this issuamc TACT
o state without producing the notes thein-
elves, the date aud amount thereof ana
ne Nuwta OF the siguors und 10 trace
lem 60 the judgments which We're them.
selves introduced. This testimony sDe.ns
. w 10 have been but collateral TO the
hMn Issue. 1 Grvcnleaf, section 81
Inc FURTHER fact that ut the date OF
ne transfer TO Smith the collateral iudy.
hehts were not mature ls also in our
'plnlun, immntcrial, since they were mntuTe
"a June 1850, the date of his purchase
Y me sheriff sale. As In our upluion
ne judgment ON which this sale rrsttd haI
irtn ~ smith, In the manner Alioyp indI |
area PAD on aud satisfied there wns thon
'nd ~ now, no basis for appcllants utp
Tie Judgment Is affirmed
TAl.LrON,
CHEF Justice.
SAN LUIS VAllEN