First Nat Bank of Concord v. Hawkins
Decision Date | 15 May 1899 |
Docket Number | No. 187,187 |
Citation | 19 S.Ct. 739,174 U.S. 364,43 L.Ed. 1007 |
Parties | FIRST NAT. BANK OF CONCORD, N. H., v. HAWKINS |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
In May, 1895, Edward Hawkins, as receiver of the Indianapolis National Bank, brought a suit in the circuit court of the United States for the district of New Hampshire against the First National Bank of Concord. At the trial a jury was waived, and the court found the following facts:
After argument, the court, on July 28, 1896, entered judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $11,646.67 and costs. From that judgment a writ of error from the United States circuit court of appeals for the First circuit was sued out, and by that court the judgment of the trial court was on March 5, 1897, affirmed. 33 U. S. App. 747, 24 C. C. A. 444, and 79 Fed. 51. From the judgment of the circuit court of appeals a writ of error was allowed to this court.
Frank S. Streeter, for plaintiff in error.
John G. Carlisle and John W. Kern, for defendant in error.
Mr. Justice SHIRAS, after stating the facts in the foregoing language, delivered the opinion of the court.
The questions presented for our consideration in this case are whether one national bank can lawfully acquire and held the stock of another as an investment, and, if not, whether, in the case of such an actual purchase, the bank is estopped to deny its liability, as an apparent stockholder, for an assessment on such stock ordered by the comptroller of the currency.
By section 5136 of the Revised Statutes a national banking association is authorized 'to exercise by its board of directors, or duly authorized officers and agents, subject to law, all such incidental powers as shall be necessary to carry on the business of banking; by discounting and negotiating promissory notes, drafts, bills of exchange and other evidences of indebtedness; by receiving deposits; by buying and selling exchange, coin and bullion; by loaning money on personal security; and by obtaining, issuing and circulating notes according to the provisions of this title.'
In construing this provision, it was said by this court in First Nat. Bank of Charlotte v. National Exch. Bank of Baltimore, 92 U. S. 122, that
And in the recent case of Bank v. Kennedy, 167 U. S. 362, 17 Sup. Ct. 831, it was said to be
Accordingly it was held in that case that a provision of the laws of the state of California which declared a liability on the part of stockholders to pay the debts of a savings bank, in proportion to the amount of stock held by each, could not be enforced against a national bank, in whose name stood shares of stock in a savings bank; it being admitted that the stock of the savings bank had not been taken as security, and that the transaction by which the stock was placed in the name of the national bank was one not in the course of the business of banking, for which the bank was organized.
It is suggested by the learned circuit judge, in his opinion overruling a petition for a rehearing in the circuit court of appeals, that the question considered in the case of Bank v. Kennedy was the liability of a national bank as a stockholder in a state savings bank, while the question in the present case is as to its liability as a stockholder in another national bank, and that, therefore, it does not follow, beyond question, that the decision in the former case is decisive of the present one. 50 U. S. App. 178, 27 C. C. A. 679, and 82 Fed. 301.
No reason is given by the learned judge in support of the solidity of such a distinction, and none occurs to us. Indeed, we think that the reasons which disqualify a national bank from investing its money in the stock of another corporation are quite as obvious when that other corporation is a national bank as in the case of other corporation. The investment by national banks of their surplus funds in other national banks, situated, perhaps, in distant states, as...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Heylman v. Idaho Continental Mining Co.
... ... Co., 28 Idaho 525, 155 P. 665; Hotchkin v. Third ... Nat. Bank, 219 Mass. 231, 106 N.E. 974; Franklin ... Bank v. Commercial Bank, 36 ... v. Dyer, 125 Tenn. 302, 142 ... S.W. 1117; First Nat. Bank v. Hawkins, 174 U.S. 364, ... 19 S.Ct. 739, 43 L.Ed. 1007; 2 ... ...
-
Harrison v. Remington Paper Co.
... ... within one year after the failure ... Where ... the first action was prosecuted in a state court, a new ... action may be ... would not be remediless. Whitman v. Bank, 176 U.S ... 559, 565, 20 Sup.Ct. 477, 44 L.Ed. 587; Willis v ... amount not exceeding the par value of his stock. Bank v ... Hawkins, 174 U.S. 365, 370, 19 Sup.Ct. 739, 43 L.Ed ... 1007; Deweese v ... ...
-
Anglo-American Land, Mortgage & Agency Co. v. Lombard
... ... CHESHIRE PROVIDENT INST. SAME v. KEENE FIVE CENT SAV. BANK. Nos. 1858-1861. United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit. July 16, ... 88, c. 46. A ... corporation is dissolved-- first, by the expiration of the ... time limited in its charter; second, by a ... Kennedy, 167 U.S. 362, 367, 17 Sup.Ct. 831, 42 L.Ed ... 198; Concord First National Bank v. Hawkins, 174 ... U.S. 364, 19 Sup.Ct. 739, 43 ... ...
-
Investment Company Institute v. Camp
...bank's power in security dealings was reiterated in subsequent decisions of the Supreme Court. Concord First National Bank v. Hawkins, 174 U.S. 364, 371, 19 S.Ct. 739, 43 L.Ed. 1007 (1898); California Nat. Bank v. Kennedy, 167 U.S. 362, 17 S.Ct. 831, 42 L.Ed. 198 (1897); McCormick v. Market......