The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1901-01-18

for other business. Neither side showed
the amount OF such deposits and checks
and no other funds were suggested.
Tie contract OF January !. 1892. pro-
rided 'if from any cause such collections
do not sufficiently repay said second
party tNoi:.ns) al that he has advanced,
si:r, deficit shall be repaid him by said
first parties There Is nothing In the
record contradicting the claim that Davis
& Co. are indebted TO Noting for more
than the sum in controversy. and the Cir
cut Court so held. There is nothing to
the credit Of Noting. Cashier which
does not bslcng to Noting under the
terms o. the contract.
Noting recovered judgment in that suit,
and same was affirmed by this court, see
Bank VS.. Noting. 81 Va. 263
The bank then flied a bill in the Cilan-
Gerry Court of Richmond. seeking TO en-
join the collection by Noting of the
judgment, ella inning that the recovery be-
longed TO Davis x Gregory, who were in
debted to the bank in larger sum than
the amount of judgment, were insolvent.
and asking that the judgment be applied
10 their ,tedness TO the bank. Mott
ing defended. claiming the recovery by
reason of the contrac. of July 4. 1882, and
of an assignment to him dated Dec. II.
1924
The Chancery Court perpetually en-
which that appeal was taken.
The determination was, can bank
which has received money on deposit for
an aren't ntlo has a beneficial interest
therein, disregard that interest and sup
ply the money TO debt due il from the
agents principal Tic court held that
by accepting the deposit the bank as
sumed the relation of a debtor 10 w. o.
Noting. and promised to pay the amount
according 10 his check. This contract is
between the depositor and the bank alone,
without reference to the beneficial inter
est of the money deposited. Even wnere
the beneficial interest is wholly in { mother.
il is doubtful whether the beneficial owner
can maintain an action at law for the
money. j seems certain he cannot do
SO unless he shows clearly that the
money belongs 10 him, and that he is
entitled 10 receive it.
The decree of The Cnancery Court IS
set aside. the injunction dissolved, and
judgment entered according 10 this opn
ion.
QUALIFICATION OF PRIVILEGES.
Norfolk and Western Railway Com
pary vs.. Cd Dominion Baggage Co. From
Corporation Court Of the city Of Lynch
burg. Opinion by Judge Harrison.
The bill in this case filed by the
DC Dominion Baggage Company, aileS-
ing that it was engaged al LSnchburs IN
the baggage transfer business; that the
Lynchburg Baggage Transfer Company
was engaged in a rival business at the
same place. and that complainant and
its rival had both heretofore been al
lowed TO enter the grounds of the APP
pellant attached to the Union Station,
for the purpose of soliciting baggage from
persons a1ighting from the trains at
that point. That the appellant had since
leased TO its rival, the Lyncilburs Bag
gage Transfer Company. the right to so
licit baggage at said station. and had
refused to allow complainant 10 enjoy the
same privi.,ge: that in consequence of
being excluded by appellant from lis sta
ton prem ises the private business CT
complainant had been practically de-
stroyed.
The prayer OF The bill is that the n.
& w. Ry. Co may be restrained from
giving and the LynchhurC Transfer Com
pany from receiving the undre preference
and advantage complained Of and that
The appellant may be required TO furnish
appellee the same or equally as good ia
ciities' as are furnished the Lynchburs
Transfer Company in the conduct of its
business.
From a decree granting tue relief asked
by the appellee this appeal is taken
Il was leic that the right to exclude
certain persons and permit others TO en-
Joy the privileges of a railroad station
has been incorporated into section 3 of
the act OF 1892. when that act was adopt
ed 10y the Legislature in 1897. and that
the principle was decided forty years ago
By the English Court of Common Pleas,
in the case of Barker vs.. Midland Ry. Co..
Common Law Report &C. 3D. Vol. Sc, p.
- CS56).
Decree Of lower court is reversed and
appeilees' bill dismissed
ATTORNEYS LIEN.
j P. Fitzgerald's 1Ixecutrix vs. John L.
Irby CT ais. From Circuit Court of Henrco
county. Opinion by Judge Phlesar
John /. Irby and Thos. W. Epcs and
wife employed ]. p. Fitzgerald, at
torney at wv, TO bring suits against the
representatives and sureties of 7. c. VIII
liams, deceased. TO recover amounts due
from him as their guardian an the exc
cutor OF their grandfather They agreed
in writing 10 pay Fitzgerald for his ser
vices a specified percentage OF the amount
collected, Ito be paid out OF the said col7
lectious'
Fitzgerald brought the suits and DEGREES
were rendered in favor OF the plaintiffs.
Some money was paid Fitzgerald on these
DEGREES, from which he retained his per
cent.ls,c thereof The lands OF T {. Viii
and were purchased by lrby and Epes and
wife. The court directed Fitzgerald. as
lis commissioner, TO convey the lands to
the purchasers. and to surrender the bonds
which they had given. Several years after
Fitzgerald filed his petition in the suit,
one against Irby and one against Epes
and wife, asking to be made party, and
setting up his contract. and averinS that
when the decree was entered directing
him TO surrender the sale bonds and make
the deeds he expected to collect certain
debt due by Thos P. Bland. to Irby and
Epes and wife, and to get his fees there
from. but that Irby and Epes had assigned
SAID debt to others; that he had withheld
the deeds so as to secure his fees and Ger
tain costs. He prayed that the court
would set aside the decree directing the
deeds To be made, and that it would
either sell the land for the amounts due
hin, or decree that the purchasers take
the deed with Z i'm retained on the land
The principal objection 10 the petition
WIS on the demurrer. which contcndcd that
his claims should pc settled in an indepen-
dent sc:t.
On May. 1899, the cause was heard on
the petitions. commissioners reports and
exceptions thersto. when it was decided
The court had no jurisdiction to consider
no -,,atrsrs set M in the petitions, dis