Case Name: The Aull Savings Bank, Appellant, v. The City of Lexington
Court: Supreme Court of Missouri
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1881-10
Citations: 74 Mo. 104
Docket Number: 
Parties: The Aull Savings Bank, Appellant, v. The City of Lexington.
Judges: The other judges concur.
Reporter: Missouri Reports
Volume: 74
Pages: 104–106

Head Matter:
The Aull Savings Bank, Appellant, v. The City of Lexington.
1. Savings Banks. A savings bank organized under article 6 oi the Corporation Law, (Wag. Stat., p. 329,) has power to purchase and hold city warrants.
2. The City of Lexington has power, under its charter, to issue warrants in payment for work and labor done on a culvert, or for services rendered by an engineer to the city.
3. City Warrants. It constitutes no defense to an action on a city warrant that there is no money in the treasury to pay it.
4. Corporation: pleading. If proper averments be made in the first count of a petition, showing the corporate existence and powers of parties to the action, they need not be repeated in subsequent counts.
Appeal from Lafayette Circuit Court. — Hon. W. T. Wood, J udge.
Reversed.
Alex. Graves for appellant.
Mathbun ‡ Shewalter with'A. J. Hall for respondent.

Opinion:
Hough, J.
This was a suit upon two city warrants issued by the defendant. The petition contained two counts, one based on each warrant. The defendant demurred upon the following grounds : 1st, That said petition does not show any authority in plaintiff to purchase and deal in the warrants sued on; said public law relied on in the petition not vesting it with any such authority or power. 2nd, It does not show any power in the defendant to issue said warrants. 3rd, It does not allege that there was the money or means in the treasury with which to pay the said warrants ; but on the contrary, the petition shows they were not paid for that reason. 4th, And as to the second count, there is no allegation of the incorporated powers or right to sue of plaintiff nor of the incorporated rights and liabilities to be sued of the defendant; therefore, defendant asks judgment. The circuit court sustained the demurrer, and the plaintiff refusing to amend, final judgment was rendered for the defendant.
The petition states that the plaintiff' is a corporation, organized under article 6, chapter 87, Wagner's Statutes, having power to contract and sue, and to purchase and hold the warrants sued- on. Under the chapter cited, the plaintiff has power to discount non-negotiable notes; and by the first section of the general law in relation to corporations, it has power to take, hold and convey any property, real, personal or mixed, in order to retain or secure the payment of any indebtedness or liability belonging to the corporation. 1 Wag. Stat., p. 289, § 1. It was not stated in the petition, nor was it necessary to state, how the plaintiff acquired the warrants sued on. They were, in effect, the promissory notes of the city, and plaintiff had a right to take and hold them. International Bank v. Franklin Co., 65 Mo. 109. The first ground of demurrer was, therefore, not well taken.
Nor was the second ground of demurrer well taken. The petition alleges, in substance, that both warrants were regularly issued in pursuance of the charter and ordinances of the city, to pay, in one case, for work and labor done on a culvert in said city; and in the other case, for services rendered by the city engineer. Section 9, article 4 of the city charter, provides that the city shall have power to appropriate money and provide for the payment of the debts of the city and its current expenses. Acts 1870, p. 374. Both items of indebtedness are prima facie lawful.
The third ground of demurrer is insufficient under the decision of this court in International Bank v. Franklin County, supra.
There is no merit in the fourth ground of demurrer. The petition having sufficiently set forth, in the introduction to ^rs't count, the incorporation and corporate powers of both plaintiff and defend ant, it was unnecessary to restate the same matter in the second count.
The judgment of the circuit court will be reversed and the cause remanded.
The other judges concur.