The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1894-01-10
1T WILL BE FINAL.
There Will Probably Be no New Trial
in the Demere Case.


1t is the opinion of the counsel for the
defendants in the suit Of r. M. Demere
VS.. the Merchants National Bank, that
the judgment rendered by the supreme
court will be final.
Hon. F. G. duBignon said yesterday
that there was no disagreement as to the
facts of the case. and the question before
the supreme court was one of law. In
this the judgment of the lower court was
reversed, and he judged from the head
notes that the decision Of the supreme court
would be final, though this cannot be
positively known except from the text of
the decision which has not yet been re-
ceived.
The facts are that Mr.. Demere gave
Mr.. Gordon an accommodation note for
$4,000. Mr.. Gadsden drew the money
and agreed to place the collatarl to Sc
cure it. Mr.. Demere had other notes in
the bank for which he rendered the
money after Mr.. Gadsden,s death, and
asked for his collateral. The bank re-
fused to give up the collateral
unless he gave security to protect the
note on which he allowed Gadsden to use
his name, and for which no security had
been placed. MIR. Demere rendered the
money for his notes, and demanded his
collateral. The bank refused to give it
up unless he protected the other note, and
he sued for it. The supreme court de-
cides that, under the law, Mr.. Demere
must secure the bank for the $4,000 note
given Gadsden before he can demand and
get his collateral. The head notes of the
decision are as follows:
Where one, on a promisory note executed
in his own name, borrows money
from bank for It's cashier, the cashier put
ting up collaterals belonging to himself the
OtuCerS REPRESENTING hank he
loan not being aware that the money was not
for the use OF the cashier or that the collat-
erals belonged to him. and not acquiring this
information until after the cashier had
fraudulently Withdrawn the collaterals and
applied them to his own use, the bank is not
accountable for their value In settling its
claim against the borrower for this loan and
for other transactions giving rise to gen
eral balance against him IN favor Of the bank
The agency Of the cashier of a bank to
assign its assets, OF which he is the immedi-
ate custodian, does not extend to assets held
as collateral security for a loan made to
another person for his benefit, and secured
not by collaterals belonging to that person,
butfurnished by the cashier himself
When one borrows money from a bank, and
in the note given therefor pledges certain col
iaterals for the payment of that note and for
any general balance due or to become due"
the bank, the borrower has no right to with
draw the cOllateralS without the consent of
the bank, on payment or rendering payment
OF the note only, il the bank is the holder Of
OtllCI uob uGlllduuS dBdluSG ulDl HOb IuIly Sc
cured otherwise according to sound business
principles and the rules of practical banking.
Under the evidence act of 1889 the plaintiff
could not testify to conversation between
himself and the president of the bank, who
had since died, unless it was heard by some
third person, alG th5 burden was on the
plaintiff to show that it was.
Judgment reversed on the main bill OF ex-
ceptions and affirmed on exceptions pendente
lite, filed by the defendant in error.
The bill of exceptions in the case, fled
by Mr.. Charlton for Mr. Demere, was on
q ruling of the city court to which the
plaintiff had objected. Under the law a
man cannot testify in court as to a con-
versation between himself and another
man. or an officer of a corporation, repre-
senting a corporation as such, who has
since died. Mr.. Charlton claimed that
| Mr.. Demere could testify as to a con-
! versation between him and Capt Ham
| mond because other parties had heard
| the conversation. The defense objected
that such must first be proven to be the
case, and the city court held that such
proof must first be rendered. On this
| point bill of exceptions was filed by Mr.
| Charlton, and the ruling of the lower
court which was in the defendants favor
| was sustained.