Samuel Freeman Miller

Name: National Bank of Washington v. Texas — Opinion of the Court
Author: Samuel Freeman Miller

Summary

“National Bank of Washington v. Texas — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Samuel Freeman Miller. It explores elements such as Chiles, bonds and the State of Texas.

Quotes from National Bank of Washington v. Texas… (Samuel Freeman Miller)

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ It was the duty of the cashier to inquire at the Treasury Department. He did so, and learned that there was no objection to any of the bonds but those which had been delivered to White and Chiles, and he became satisfied that those involved in this controversy did not belong to that class. It was impossible for him to find and consult all those through whose hands they might have passed before they were offered to the bank.
If negotiable paper, underdue, be in the hands of a bon a fide holder, any subsequent holder may avail himself of that fact against the equity of the maker. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ The former was examined at much length, and gave it as his opinion, from certain calculations made by him, based upon papers in his office and information received by him from officers of the State of Texas, and other sources, that these bonds were of the White and Chiles issue. He says that it is only an opinion, and it is evident from his deposition that the data on which he bases that opinion are far from conclusive. It is not worth while to waste words in proving that such testimony is wholly incompetent to establish any fact, or rather to show that it is not evidence at all. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ Every holder is presumed to have acquired his title before the maturity of the instrument and bon a fide. The burden of proof rests upon the party alleging the contrary. [15] It is only in case of dishonor that the equities of the maker, or obligor, can be set up against a bon a fide holder. It may be doubted whether these bonds belonged to that class. [16] I have preferred to consider the case in this aspect, upon the hypothesis most favorable to the complainant. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ On the 11th of January, 1861, the provision requiring his indorsement was repealed. On the same day a military board was created and authorized to prepare the State for defence, and for that purpose to use the bonds still in the treasury to the extent of a million of dollars. This action was taken by the State with the view of engaging in the war of the rebellion, then impending, against the United States. On the 12th of January, 1865, the military board entered into a contract with White and Chiles, in pursuance whereof $135,000 of the bonds were sold and delivered to them. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ This throws the burden of proof upon the complainant, and the denials are conclusive unless overcome by the testimony of two witnesses to the contrary, or the testimony of one witness, and circumstances established otherwise equal in effect to the direct testimony of another.
The effort of Texas to leave the Union was revolutionary. All her legislative acts for the accomplishment of that object were void. Her position has been aptly resembled to that of a county in rebellion against the State. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ The United States made them payable 'to the State of Texas, or bearer.' Delivery passed the title. Texas could not restrain their transferability in the markets of the world, according to the law merchant, in any case without bringing home notice to the party sought to be implicated or putting upon the bonds something which must necessarily operate as a notice to every buyer. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Samuel Freeman Miller, National Bank of Washington v. Texas…

“ A debt due to the maker from the payee at the time of the transfer cannot be set off in a suit by the indorsee of the payee, although it might have been enforced if the suit had been brought by the latter. ”

Samuel Freeman Miller

Summary

Quotes from National Bank of Washington v. Texas… (Samuel Freeman Miller)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature