The Clarksburg telegram. [volume] (Clarksburg, W. Va.) 1874-1926, 1912-03-07
HOLDS
THAT BANK IS
NOT LIABLE
In a Notable Case Going
Up. TO 1t from Mer-
Ger County.
AND RITZ IS LOSER

Bank Presidents knowledge
as a Concern Director
Not Notice to Bank. y.
CHARLESTON, Mar. 1-knowl,
edge of one Of the officials of .
bank, acquired in capacity other
than its representative, relating to
Iinfirmity in commercial paper of.
fered: for discount" says the su.
preme court of appeals in an opinion
Written by Judge Robinson, in the
case Of The American National Bank
!of Blrsfeld VS.. Howard Ritz,
rs 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-
slonable presumption is that he would
not communicate the knowledge to
| it." (.
The case cas- came, up from Mercer
county where a jury, gave judgment
in favor Of the defendant. The
bank, by writ Of error, sought re-
yerssal and the supreme court re,
versed, set aside the verdict and
awarded g new trial. -,s.,sl1 "a,
The president Of the bank, VII,
liam E. Fowler. was, also president
and a director of. the Southern West
Virgins, Fuel Company AS pres;
ident of !, /. the fuel company he
sought to borrow money from the
bank Of which he was president.
Harold A, Ritz, q director of the
fuel company and also a director
with Fowler of the bank, endorsed
1.-THE note, after. Fowler represented tc
Ritz, that the fuel company wa.
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
amonnt-of stock each held. A pa
per to that effect was drawn up By
Ritz and given to Fowler to have al
the directors sign. Fowler, presi
dent of the bank and president O
the fuel company, had the notes dis
counted at his bank, endorsed onl!
Iby himself, Harold A. Ritz ant
William Stands, while the names o
the other four directors, were no
added, nor we're their names Sc
cured to the writing. The defend
ant claimed that at the time tn
notes were discounted, the bank hal
notice of these agreements in tn
premises and was therefore advised
of the infirmity of the paper in re
'lation to the defendant when 1t be
came holder of the same.
Ritz rested his case on the as
sertion that the bank had notice o
the in1rmity of the paper through
the knowledge of Fowler, its presi
dent and managing officer. Th
court holds that that knowledg
was obtained by Fowler as an OF
flcer of the fuel company, and not a
an officer of the bank.
1t was contended that the dc
cision in the lower court was due I,
a certain instruction given by tn
defendant oyer the protest Of tn
plaintiff AZ the instruction itsel
sets out much of the case, 1T is her
given:
The court instructs the jury tina
IT, they believe from the evidence il
this case that William E. Fowle
was president OF the American Ma
tional Bank. the plaintiff in thi
case, and that he agreed with tn
defendant that the notes sued O.
in this case, or the notes for whicl
said notes. or either of them, is
renewal. should not be discounted a
said bank until they had been en-
dorsed by William E. Fowler, WI
: liam Stands, j. Lee Harne, s. II
Smith, w. P. Hawley, Y. L
} Black and the defendant, director
. of the Southern West Virginia Fus
Company, and that said notes shout
not be discounted at said bank un
. til the written agreement Introduce
in evidence in this case had bee
lsigned by all of said directors 0