The United States, Appellants v. the Saline Bank of Virginia, John Webster, and Others, Appellees
| Decision Date | 01 January 1828 |
| Citation | 1 Pet. 100,7 L.Ed. 69,26 U.S. 100 |
| Parties | THE UNITED STATES, APPELLANTS, v. THE SALINE BANK OF VIRGINIA, JOHN WEBSTER, AND OTHERS, APPELLEES |
| Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
THIS case came before the Court, on an appeal by the United States, from the decree of the District Court of the United States, for the western district of Virginia; in which Court, the District Attorney of the United States, filed a bill against John Webster, Cashier, and a number of others, as stockholders of the Virginia Saline Bank, to charge them, in their private capacities, for certain deposits of money made with them, and also to subject their joint funds, &c.
The bill charges, that about the year _____ a company was formed by a number of persons, citizens of Virginia, within that district, to carry on the usual and ordinary business of banking. That they established a banking house—assumed the name and style of the 'President, Directors, and Company of the Saline Bank of Virginia.' That they issued notes, or bills, purporting to be payable out of the joint funds—to make discounts and exchanges, whereby circulation and currency was given to their notes and bills. That in discharge of public dues, 10, 120 dollars of their notes, were paid into the Treasury of the United States, before the 21st of October 1819; and, on that day, 5,831 dollars, in said notes, were deposited by an agent of the Treasury, with John Webster, Cashier of the said association, who demanded payment therefor, after obtaining a certificate of deposite; which payment was refused by Webster, who said he had no funds.
At the same time, the agent presented a draft drawn by the Treasurer of the United States, for 4,290 dollars, being also for their notes received in the Treasury, which was the balance of the said sum of 10,120 dollars. This draft was refused also, for want of funds. The bill charges, that Webster possessed funds of the company in specie and notes of solvent chartered banks, and combined with individuals of the company to refuse payment, by fraudulently secreting these funds. The bill prays an account of the funds of the company, and also, to subject the Cashier and stockholders to a personal decree.
There was filed with the bill, the following documents mentioned therein:——
1. 'Virginia Saline Bank, October 21st 1812, William Wham has deposited in this bank, 5,831 dollars, in notes of the same, for safe keeping—to be returned to him, or his order.'
J. WEBSTER, Cashier.
2.
J. WEBSTER, Cashier.
J. DAWSON.
No. 9079, Dr. 4,290.
Treasury of the United States,
Washington, March 18, 1818.
Sir: At sight, pay to Jonathan Smith, Esq. Cashier Bank United States, four thousand two hundred and ninety dollars, value received.
T. T. TUCKER, Trea. U. States.
JOHN WEBSTER, ESQ.
Cashier Virginia Saline Bank.
To the bill of the United States, the defendants filed the following joint and several plea, with the usual affidavit:——
These defendants, by protestation, not confessing or acknowledging all, or any of the matters and things in the complainants' said bill of complaint contained, to be true, in such manner and form, as the same are therein alleged, and set forth, for plea thereunto say, that the company which assumed the name and style of the 'President, Directors, and Company, of the Saline Bank of Virginia,' whereof mention is made in the said bill of complaint, had not, at the time of the issuing, or of giving currency or circulation to the notes or bills in the said bill of complaint mentioned, or at any time hitherto, any charter incorporating the said company with authority to deal or trade as a bank, or any charter whatsoever; and these defendants further say, that all the notes and bills issued by the said company, and to which circulation and currency was given, as in and by the complaints' bill is supposed, were entitled and offered in payment by the said company, to wit: at the time of the issuing of the said notes and bills, as charged and supposed by the said bill of complaint, to wit, at the western judicial district of Virginia; and these defendants aver, that all the matters and transactions in the said bill of complaint stated, and whereof discovery is sought, relate to the emission of the said bills and notes by the said company, and to the offering the same in payment as aforesaid, all which matters and things, these defendants are ready to aver, maintain, and prove, as this honourable Court may-award; and these defendants are advised, and insist, that they ought not to be compelled to discover, or set forth any matters, whereby they may impeach or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
US v. Gecas
...common threads that shed light on how the issue in this case should be resolved. In the very early case of United States v. Saline Bank, 26 U.S. (1 Pet.) 100, 7 L.Ed. 69 (1828), the United States, as creditor of the defendant unincorporated bank, filed a bill in equity against the cashier o......
-
Murphy v. Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor
...... 12 L.Ed.2d 678 . William MURPHY and John Moody, Sr., Petitioners, . v. . The WATERFRONT ... must be deemed fully applicable to the States through the Fourteenth Amendment. Malloy v. ...1302, 2 L.Ed.2d 1393; Feldman v. United States, 322 U.S. 487, 64 S.Ct. 1082, 88 L.Ed. ... . B. The Saline Bank Case. . It was ...Saline Bank of Virginia, 1 Pet. 100, 7 L.Ed. 69. The Government, seeking ......
-
Hutcheson v. United States
...that both Hale v. Henkel and United States v. Murdock were founded on a misreading of an earlier decision of this Court, United States v. Saline Bank, 1 Pet. 100, which was delivered by Chief Justice Marshall. It is argued that Saline Bank stands for the proposition that the constitutional ......
-
Irvine v. People of State of California
...322 U.S. 487, 494, 64 S.Ct. 1082, 1085, 88 L.Ed. 1408. 3. 284 U.S. 141, 52 S.Ct. 63, 76 L.Ed. 210, and see United States v. Saline Bank of Virginia, 1 Pet. 100, 7 L.Ed. 69; Brown v. Walker, 161 U.S. 591, 606, 608, 16 S.Ct. 644, 650, 651, 40 L.Ed. 819; Ballmann v. Fagin, 200 U.S. 186, 26 S.C......
-
DENYING FIFTH AMENDMENT PROTECTIONS TO WITNESSES FACING FOREIGN PROSECUTIONS: SELF-INCRIMINATION DISCRIMINATION?
..."118 S. Ct. 9218 (1998). (13) "Murphy v. Waterfront Commission, 378 U.S. 59, 54 (1964). (14) United States v. Saline Bank of Virginia, 26 U.S. 100, 104 (15) Id. at 100. (16) Balsys, 118 S. Ct. at 2295 (citing Saline Bank, 2(5 U.S. at 104). (17) Saline Bank, 26 U.S. at 104. (18) See, e.g., U......