The Grand Gulf Railroad and Banking Company, and Alfred Ingraham and George Read, Assignees of Said Company, Intervenors Plaintiffs In Error v. John Marshall

• Decision Date: 01 December 1851
• Citation: 53 U.S. 165,12 How. 165,13 L.Ed. 938
• Parties: THE GRAND GULF RAILROAD AND BANKING COMPANY, AND ALFRED INGRAHAM AND GEORGE READ, ASSIGNEES OF SAID COMPANY, INTERVENORS, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR, v. JOHN R. MARSHALL
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

53 U.S. 165

12 How. 165

13 L.Ed. 938

THE GRAND GULF RAILROAD AND BANKING COMPANY, AND ALFRED

INGRAHAM AND GEORGE READ, ASSIGNEES OF SAID COMPANY,

INTERVENORS, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,

v. JOHN R. MARSHALL.

December Term, 1851

THIS case was brought up from the Supreme Court of the

state of Louisiana, by a writ of error issued under the 25th section of the Judiciary Act.

The facts are set forth in the opinion of the court, to which the reader is referred.

It was argued by Mr. Strawbridge, for the plaintiffs in error.

Mr. Chief Justice TANEY delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a writ of error to the Supreme Court of the state of Louisiana.

The Grand Gulf Railroad and Banking Company was chartered by the state of Mississippi in the year 1833. In 1840 an act was passed by the legislature of that state declaring that it should not be lawful for any bank in Mississippi to transfer by indorsement or otherwise any note, bill receivable, or other debt. And in 1842, after the passage of this act, the bank having become insolvent and its notes greatly depreciated, assigned and transferred all of its notes, bills receivable, and other assets of any value to John Lindsey and Alfred Ingraham, in trust for the payment of its debts, in the order specified in the deed.

Some of the debtors of the bank, whose notes and mortgages were included in this transfer, resided in the state of Louisiana. And in 1843 John R. Marshall, the defendant in error, being the holder of the notes of the bank payable to bearer to the amount of $5,400, obtained an attachment from one of the district courts of Louisiana against the property and credits of the bank, and laid it in the hands of these debtors as garnishees. The bank appeared and answered, and averred that the debts and property in question had been transferred to the trustees above named previous to the attachment; and the trustees intervened and claimed the debts and property as belonging to them by virtue of the assignment of the bank.

The defendant in error replied that the assignment was null and void by the laws of Mississippi and the laws of Louisiana, and that it was without consideration and in fraud of the creditors.

Testimony was taken on both sides to show the object of the assignment, and the circumstances under which it was made; and several questions of law were raised in the District Court upon the admissibility of testimony and upon the manner in which the deed to the trustees had been executed. But it is unnecessary to state either the testimony or the questions raised at the trial, because neither the...