The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-10-18
TILLU Ito DnIEf.
Attorneys for State Make Ar
gument for Guaranty.
All Testimony in Judge Pol
locks Hands.
ARE MANY REASONS.
These Are Advanced in Support
of Law.
Decision Expected This Week
on Injunction.

Attorney General Jackson today filet
his brief in the bank guaranty case
now before Judge j. C. Pollock of the
federal court. Although the brief con.
talns Isl pages of printed matter, il
covers little new territory, and is takel
up in the main by a repetition of the
oral argument made before Judge Pol
lCck two weeks ago by ATTORNEYS
jackson, Buchanan and Mitchell, the
defending attorneys.
i The case in full. now before the first
division of the United States circuit
court, district Of Kansas, consists OF
| three separate attacks on the state
| guaranty law, which were punched and
| argued collectively before Judge Pol
| lock some days ago.
They are. Frank S. Larabee against
J: N. Dolley, Mark Tulley and the State
| Exchange bank of Hutchinson, in
which Larabee is a stakeholder; the
| Assaria State bank of Assaria and
forty-slx other state banks against the
| same defendants. and the Abilene Ma
tional bank against the same defend
ants.
The first is an attack on the law from
the standpoint of stakeholder in a
state bank, over whose head the bank
| agrees to enter into the state guaranty
scheme The second is a complaint by
state banks who do not wish to enter
into the guaranty plan and contend
that their business will be injured un-
less they do. The third is an attack
from the standpoint of a national bank
which cannot enter into the guaranty
rold, on account Of national laws and
contends that the national banks will
surfer by reason of the state law.
The brief filed today by Attorney
General jackson. who took the docu-
ment before Judge Pollock in Kansas
City, Kansas, personally, covers all the
cases in general One of the new ideas
in 10 hr-inf t.
The bank guaranty fund does not be- !
long to the state, and therefore the
state does not in any way engage in the |
insurance business"
Under this head the defendants
argue thus:
Much has been said in the oral |
argument and also in the briefs rela- |
1--WE to the fact that this law is about !
TO plunge the state of Kansas into an
insurance business, that such business
Is private in its nature and therefore |
the law would be invalid for that rea-
SIN; We deny that the insurance |
the many decisions of the courts of Il
To-Day" Mr.. jackson then cites a II
ruling by Justice Peckham, in which
ne brands a large insurance comoanv
as I'm It's nature a public institution %
In the concluding remarks of the II
ortef, thirty-four reasons are given
why the state guaranty law should not |
De declared unconstitutional Most of |
II gument before Judge Pollock One II
d the new ones. is that none of the \
banks complaining have shown their
'lght to complain of the 8 per cent in
crest feature, because none of the 8
banks have specifically averred that
hey belonged to that class, or paid
rore than 8 per cent interest on such
deposits.
Another is that none of the banks
ave a right to complain of the feature
Il the act which permits a new bank
n town where the established bank
ias Ialled TO participate for more than
TX months, to enter at once in the
feature, as none of the banks
ave specifically complained on such
rounds, or proven that they have
cen SO injured
The twenty days time set by Judge
c liock expires tomorrow and an
ar1y decision is expected on the bank
warranty case. The size of the de-
is ion