Source: http://openjurist.org/17/f1d/506
Timestamp: 2017-07-23 10:55:19
Document Index: 373934635

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 4', '§ 2', '§ 233', '§ 5231', '§ 629', '§ 563', '§ 1', '§ 4']

17 F1d 506 | OpenJurist
17 F. 506 - HomeFederal Reporter, First Series 17 F.
17 F1d 506 class="ad-unit">
,PRICE. V. ABBOTT··
the currency. to provide the money necessary to pay the debts and liabilities of the bank, under, section 5151 of the Revised Statutes. The amount of the assessment sued for in the first action is $2,000; and in the second action, $300. Each of the defendants has moved to dismiss for want of jurisdiction: First, because the plaintiff sues only in the capacity of receiver of a national bank, organized under the laws of the United States, and heretofore doing business within the commonwealth and district of Massachusetts; second, because the plaintiff brings the action, as receiver for and in behalf of the bank, to enforce an alleged liability of the defendant to the bank, and has no personal or individual interest in the action, or in the cause of action; third, because the action is by the bank, and is not a suit by or between the bank and the United State3, or any of its officers or agents; and, by force of the act of congress of J uly 1882, c. 290, § 4, the jurisdi.etion of the action is confined to the courts of the commonwealth of Massachusetts. We are of o])inion that the motions cannot be supported upon either III the grounds assigned. The congress of the United States is authorized by tlle constitution to vest the appointment of such inferior officers as it may think proper in the president alone, in the courts of law, or in the heads of departments. Article 2, § 2. By tlle statutes of the United States the secretary of the treasury is the head of the department of the treasury, and the comptroller of the currency is the chief officer of a bureau in that department, charged with the execution of all laws passed by congress relating to tl18 issue and regulation of a national currency secured by United States bonds, and he performs his duties under the general direction of the secretary of the troasury. Rev. St. §§ 233, 324. Appointments of receiYcrs of national banks, made by the comptroller of the currency, as prodded by those laws, are to be presumed to be made the concurrence or approYal of the secretary of the treasury, and are made by the head of a department, within the meaning of the con'ltitution. By those laws a receiYer of a national bank is required, under the direction of the c':lmptroller of the currency, to take possession of all the property, boo:,s, and records of the bank, and to collect all dAbis oue to it; is authorized, upon the order of a court of record of competent jurisdiction, to sell or compound bad or doubtful debts, and to sell all the real and personal property of the bank, "and may, if necessary to pay the deLts of such association, enforce the individual liability of the stockholders;" and he is required to "pay oyer all money so made to the treasurer of the United States, suLject to the order of the comptroller," and to make report of all his doings to the comptroller, by whom the money is to be divided among tlle creditors of the bank. Rev. St. §§ 5231, 5230. The receiver, indeed, in one aspect represents the bank, its stockholders, and its creditors; and neither he nor the comptroller of the
currency represents the government, so far as to have to waive its exemption from liability to suit. Case v. Terrell, 11 'Vall. 199. But being appointed pursuant to an act of congress to execute duties prescribed by that act, he is, in the execution of those duties, an agent and officer of the United States; and actions brought by him to recover assessments duly laid upon stockholders, and necessary to provide for the payment of the debts of the bank, are suits at common law brought by an officer of the United States suing under the authority of an act of congress, of which this court has concurrent jurisdiction with the district conrt, without regard to the amount sued for. Hev. St. § 629, cl. 3; § 563, cl. 4. This view of the case is supported by the direct adjudications of Judge BENEDICT in Platt v. Beach, 2 Ben. 3U3, and of Judge Br,ATcHFORD in Stanton v. Wilkeson, 8 Ben. 357; and by the opinions of the supreme court in Kennedy v. Giuson, 8 Wall. 498, in Bank v. Kennedy, 17 Wall. It), and in U. S. v. Hartwell, 6 Wall. 385. The defendants contend that the jurisdiction of this court, at least over the second action, in which less than $500 is sued for, has been taken away by the act of March 3, 1875, c. 137, § 1, by which it is enacted "that the circuit courts of the United shall have original cognizance, concurrent with the courts of the several states, of all suits of a civil nature, at common law or in equity, where the matter in dispute exceeds, exclusive of costs, the sum or value of $500, and arising under the constitution or laws of the United States, or treaties made, or which shall be made, under their authority, or in which the United States are plaintiffs or petitioners, or in which there shall be a controversy between citizens of different states," etc. But the purpose of the act of 1875 is to define the jurisdiction of the circuit courts, as between them and the courts of the stater:.; not to alter the distribution of jurisdiction, as between the circuit court and the district court, of cases which, by reason of their subject·matter, have been committed by congress to the determination of the federal courts; nor to repeal the special provisions of former laws conferring on the circuit and d'.3trict courts jurisdiction of cases without regard to the amount in dispute. The construction contended for would, as has been observed by Judge LOWELL, deprive the federal courts of jurisdiction of suits upon patents and copyrights, and of a great variety of other cases arising under the laws of the United States, whenever the matter in dispnte does not exceed $500. U. S. v. JIoolley, 11 FED. HEr. 476. The ,1efendants further contend that this court has no jurisdiction of these actions, since congress has provided by the act of July 12, 1882, c. 290, § 4, that----..
"'the jurisdiction for suits hereafter brought by or against any association established under auy law providing for national banking associations, except suits between them and the united States, or its olficers and agents. shall be the sallle as, and not other than, t!le jurisdiction for suits by or against