The daily telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1901-1926, 1912-03-01
In a Notable Case Going
Up to 1t from Mer-
Ger County.
AND PITT IS IOcEp
Bank Presidents knowledge
as a Concern Director
Not Notice to Bank.

E CHARLESTON, Mar 1-Rnowl-
edge Of ono OF the officials Of q
bank, acquired in a capacity other
thar its representative, relating to
infrnlty in commercial paper Of
fered for discount says the su.
preme court Of appeals in an opinion
written by Judge Robinson, in the
ease of The American National Bank
Iof Blutfeld vs.. Toward Ritz.
is not notice to the bank when that
Official is also an officer OF the cor
poration seeking the discount and
has an interest in the transactions
so adverse TO the bank that the rea.
sonable presumption is that he would
not communicate the knowledge to
it,"
The case came up from Mercer
county where jury gave judgment
in favor Of the defendant. The
bank. by writ of error. sought a re-
versal and the supreme court re-
versed, set aside the verdict and
awarded u new trial.
The president of the bank, WI.
liam L. Fowler, was also president
and a director of the Southern West
Virginia Fuel Compare. AS pres
ident Of the fuel company he
sought TO borrow money from the
bank of which he was president
Harold a. Ritz, director of the
fuel company and also director
with Fowler of the bank, endorsed
the note, after Fowler represented to
Ritz that the fuel company was
sorely in need of money Ritz en-
dorsed the notes with the under
standing that other members of the
directorate of the Southern West
Virginia Fuel Company also en-
dorsed the notes and that they should
be liable in proportion to the
amount of stock each held. A pa
per TO that effect was drawn up by
Ritz and given to Fowler to have all
the directors sign Fowler, presl-
dent of the bank and president Of
the fuel company, had the notes dis
counted at his bank, endorsed only
by himself, Harold a. Ritz and
William Stands, while the names OF
the other four directors were not
added, nor were their names Sc
cured to the writing. The defend.
ant claimed that at the time the
notes were discounted, the bank had
notice of these agreements in the
premises and was therefore advised
of the infirmity of the paper in re.
lation to the defendant when it be.
came holder of the same.
Ritz rested his case on the as
sertion that the bank had. notice of
the infirmity of the paper through
the knowledge of Fowler, its presi
dent and managing officer The
court holds that that knowledge
was obtained by Fowler as an Of
ticer of the fuel company, and not as
an officer of the bank.
1t was commended that the de-
cision in the lower court was due to
a certain instruction given by the
defendant over the protest of the
plaintiff. As the instruction itself
sets out much of the case, it is here
given:
THE court instructs the jury that
lit they believe from the evidence in
this case that William E. Fowler
was president of the American Ma
tional Bank, the plaintiff in this
case, aud that he agreed with the
defendant that the notes sued on
in this case, or the notes for which
said notes, or either of them, is a
renewal, should not be discounted at
said bank until they had been en-.
Idorsed by William E. Fowler, Will
liam Stands. j. Lee Harne, S. 81.
Smith, w. p. Hawley, v. Il.
Black and the defendant, directors
of the Southern West Virginia Fuet
Company, and that said notes should
not be discounted at said bank un-
It'll the written agreement introduced
in evidence in this case had been
signed by all of said directors of
the Southern West Virginia Fuel
Company. and If the pury further
believes from the evidence in this