The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1899-11-01
AN HONEST COURT.
Blocks the Shrewd Rsscality OF Build.
ing and Loan Associations.

ing and Loan Associations.
The Supreme Court OF this State cannot be
used as an aid or shield for tricksters, who
would take advantage of our people. Mr..
Justice Gary OF our own city, We are pleased
to see. takes leading part In defending the
people and will not lend himself to the perver.
sion of law and justice, even at the instance
of the great and rich corporations which set
traps for unwary feet. These foreign gentle.
men will be required to perform their part OF
contracts in this State:
I The Supreme Court of this State has recent
gard to the rights OF the people against foreign
Building and Loan Associations.
The facts OF the case and the ruling OF the
Court will appear from that part OF the opln.
THE appeal herein Is from an order dissolv-
Ing an attachment, which had been issued on
the following affidavit: Bright Williamson,
the plaintiff above named. 6eing duly sworl,
the Eastern Building and Loan Association,
OF Syracuse, n. Y, is corporation duly
organized and chartered under the laws OF the
State of New York, and that the said associa-
tion is Justly and truly indebted TO the depon.
ent In the sum of 81, $3.50, with interast from
the 10Th December, 1897 as follows: on the
day of February, 1891, deponent having
tern Building and Loan Association, OF Syra-
cnse, n, Y, Subscribed for and received twen-
ty-five shares, under contract by which he
was to pay 81 per share membership fee, and
thereafter seven.five cents per share, or $3.50
monthly for seventy.eight months, and upon
his so doing the said association was 10 pay
him 500 for each share sixty days after accep-
That afterwards, on the 10Th OF April. 1895,
depopenI in accordance with the bylaws bor-
rowed from the association the sum OF $987 so,
with the understanding and agreement that
month until the expiration of the said seven
ty-eight months, when his said loan would be
extinguished by deduction from $500, the
value Of the shares. That deponent paid said
on his stock, and the said monthly interest
on his loan until the full expiration Of the
said seventy.eight months, and then with.
drew from said association, gave notice to the
association, furnished the satisfactory proofs
of his compliance with his part OF said con-
tract, and made demand for the sum OF 81, ,t62
so, the same being $500 less 1887 so, the
amount OF bis loan; but that though sixty
days have since elapsed, the said association
has failed and T refused 70 pay deponent the
circular issued by the defendant which
among other statements con tained the follow
ing: For the Investor: This association is
sues three Glasses OF certificates, designated as
Of which are guaranteed to mature in 10
years: amply secured by first mortgage on
real estate paid up stock doubles In 6l.2
years: fully paid up certificates guaranteed
quarterly dividends, seven per cent. per an.
mum. For the borrower: This association
has no auction sales. no bidding for loans,
and definite time for repaying loan: TIE
only ssS0a1n sEns den asas
clearly stated, and never less than the
amount paid in instslments; stock natures
in 7S months. Borrowers know the exact
amount required to cancel their mortage."
After considering other questions In the
case the Court proceeds as follows:
I'VE will next consider whether there was
have a cause OF action on the ground that his
claim was not due and payable. If this cues.
tion had to be decided solely upon. the plain
tiff's affidavit, IL would undoubtedly appear
favor Of the plai intif against the defendant
O. The defendant, however, introduced in
evidence the charter and bylaws, for the pur-
pose Of showing that the shares Of stock are
far below the value OF Sl00. and, therefore,
that the said shares have not matured. The
agreement alleged IN the plaintiffs affidavit
and the bylaws present scenes for maturing
the shares ofstock that are radically different.
the bylaws for maturing the shares OF stock,
are repugnant and In irreconciable conflict
The question is thus presented for this Court
TO decide which shall prevail; 1t IL well
known fact that comparatively few people
who become shareholders in such associations
are familiar with their bylaws. They rely
upon the honesty, Integrity, ana falr deanngs
OF those who manage the affairs of the associa-
tion. 1t is also a we'll known fact that the BY
laws are frequently intricate and almost
| unintelligible TO the average shareholder.
and that those in charge of the affairs of the
association usually become exceedingly
expert In the Interpretation Of them, thus
giving the association decided advantage in
the way ofipfOrmation over the shareholders.
Public policy, in order to prevent the perpetra-
tion of fraud, and to prevent just such case
as we now have before u.s. In which the plain.
| tiff alleges that he was induced by the express
promises, and the literature of the defendant,
10 part with bis money. in purchasing It's
shares of stock, demands that the defendant
should not be allowed to elect whether IT. will
| be bound by It's by laws, or Its express agree
ment as TO the time when the shares would
mature" *HSH
ut Is also argued that the agreement fixing
a definite time for the maturity of the shares
| was ultra Wires. @*"s
If the agreement was ultra wires, and the
association entered into IL knowing II could
not perform its part thereof, and thereby
| induced the plaintiff to part with bis money
| in the purchase OF stock, then 1t was a
| tort, and the defendant would be liable there
| for. Furthermore, even II the agreement was
ultra wires and the defendant could interpose
| this plea, II would not be allowed TO retain
the benefits which 1t derived therefrom, and
this would give the plaintiff cause ofaction.
| 1t will thus be seen that the Supreme Court
OF this State protected our people from the
imposition that was attempted TO be practiced
upon them,