Year: 1875

VS., Fred A Brady, forgery Same Bartley Devne,
petit larceny.


UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT
LIABILITY OF sTocKHoIDER on coNDI-


TIoNAL SUBSCRIPTION or A


BILL or LADNe AFTER ACCEPTANCE or a


DRAFT.


WASHINGTON, Nov l, 1875.


The Supreme Court to-day delivered opinions in the
following cases.


No. 4s2 Upton vs. Trebcock Error 10 the Circuit
Court for owa-This was an action by the assignee in
bankruptcy to unpaid subscription by the
plaintiff in error TO the stock Of the lnsovent
Great Western Insurance Company 30 which
the defence that the subscription had been
obtained by the fraudulent representations OF the agent
Of the company the effect that eighty per cent OF the
amount not paid in was worcestershire and would be
paid by the profits, &c twas also alleged as defence
that the agent represented that the note given for the
twenty per cent paid would not be parted with by
tho company, but would be eniently held TO
suit the convenience OF the subscriber and that alter
ward the transferred bank for collection,
and that thereupon the subscriber had rcpudiaed the
subscription and asked 70 have the contract rcscnded
The Court hold that the defence viii not avail
levc the subscriber from his contract that he
became stockholder under certificate emitting
him 30 the shares Of stock named therein and





face OF the certificate did not import more at most than
that he would not be liable TO assessment after he had
paid the full amount of the subscription and could not
in any event destroy the contract II was said in this
connection that the Idea that the capital of corpora
tion is TO be treated like a football TO be
thrown into the market for purposes speculation that
its value may be elevated depressed to advance the
interests OF its managers, Is q modern and wicked in
vention which will not be tolerated by the courts.
Upon the question OF the alleged recession of the con-
tract in consequence of the violation of the agreement
the note is held that II was not before the jury
that the only question of fraud submitted was that In
reference to the eighty per Cent OF unpaid subscription
and that could not avail by reason OF the want OF
diligence the subscriber in not ascertainng his LA
bity respecting il under the regulations of the COM
pany untl it demanded. Reversed. Mr. Justice
Hunt delivered the opinion; dissenting Mr. Justice
Miller, with whom concurred the Chief Justice and Mr.
Justice Bradley.


No Is. National Bank Of Commerce Of Boston vs.
The Merchants National Bank Of Memphs.-Error TO
the Circuit Court for Observation-Disclosures pre-
the question whether bill Of ading Of merchan-
disc made deliverable to order when attached 70 time
draft aud forwarded with the draft TO an
agent for collection without any special in
structions may be surrendered TO the drawee
upon his acceptance Of the draft, whether
the agents duty is to hold the bill of adng after the
acceptance for the payment of the draft and the Court
hold that the agent be held liable to the owners OF
the draft for breach of duty in surrenderng the bills
of adng acceptance of the draft only after special
instructions to retain the bills until payment Of the
acceptances. Reversed, Mr.. Justice Strong delivering
the opinion.