President & Directors of Franklin Bank v. Harris

• Decision Date: 21 April 1893
• Citation: President & Directors of Franklin Bank v. Harris, 77 Md. 423, 26 A. 523 (Md. 1893)
• Parties: PRESIDENT & DIRECTORS OF FRANKLIN BANK OF BALTIMORE v. HARRIS ET AL. HARRIS ET AL. v. PRESIDENT & DIRECTORS OF FRANKLIN BANK OF BALTIMORE.
• Court: Maryland Court of Appeals

26 A. 523

77 Md. 423

PRESIDENT & DIRECTORS OF FRANKLIN BANK OF BALTIMORE v. HARRIS ET AL.

HARRIS ET AL. v. PRESIDENT & DIRECTORS OF FRANKLIN BANK OF BALTIMORE.

Court of Appeals of Maryland

April 21, 1893

Cross appeals from Baltimore city court.

Trover by W. Hall Harris and Lennox Brickhead, assignees of Thomas J. Wilson, against the president and directors of the Franklin Bank of Baltimore, for the conversion of stock pledged to it by plaintiffs' assignor. There was a verdict in plaintiffs' favor for $259.55, and from the judgment entered thereon both parties appeal. Affirmed.

Argued before ALVEY, C.J., and ROBINSON, BRYAN, FOWLER, ROBERTS PAGE, and BRISCOE, JJ.

J. J Donaldson, for plaintiffs.

C. J Bonaparte, for defendants.

BRISCOE J.

These are cross appeals. The action was one of trover, brought by the assignees of Thomas J. Wilson against the president and directors of the Franklin Bank of Baltimore, to recover the value of certain securities deposited by him as collateral with the defendant corporation. There was no dispute about the facts, and they are as follows: On May 14, 1890, Thomas J. Wilson borrowed of the bank $2,000, for which he executed and delivered to it a demand note, depositing at the same time, as collateral security for its payment, 80 shares of Bellaire, Zanesville & Cincinnati Railroad Company preferred stock, and $2,000 of Oskaloosa water bonds. The note contained this provision: "It is also agreed that if I shall come under any other liability, or enter into any other engagement, with said bank, while it is the holder of this obligation, that the net proceeds of sale of the above securities may be applied either on this note, or any other of my liabiities or engagements held by said bank, as its president or cashier may elect." Wilson afterwards became insolvent, and made an assignment to the plaintiffs for the benefit of his creditors, who qualified as trustees. These trustees tendered the amount of the note, with interest to date of tender, and demanded the note, and the securities which had been deposited as collateral. The bank, however refused to make a surrender of the securities, claiming to hold them as collateral for a note of one Charles D. Gaither dated December 30, 1889, for $1,451, which was indorsed by their assignor, Thomas J. Wilson. The judgment of the court below being in favor of the plaintiffs, for the sum of $259.55,--less than the plaintiffs claimed,--both parties have appealed.

The first question, then, that presents itself for our consideration, is a construction of the provisions of the collateral note, which was raised by the plaintiffs' first...