William Strong

Name: Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court
Author: William Strong

Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

Summary

“Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by William Strong. It explores elements such as Pacific Railroad Company, contract and bonds.

Quotes from Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court (William Strong)

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ Rice to borrow money or to make purchases of railroad iron; not merely contracts of purchase, but contracts and agreements that might enable him to effect a purchase. An engagement to give collaterals as a security for money borrowed, or for the payment of a debt incurred for iron, is surely within the limits of such a power. This disposes of the first question raised by the assignments of error. We hold that there is nothing in the agreement of April 21, 1859, transgressive of the power with which the president of the company was clothed by the resolution of the directors. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ It is difficult to see what words would have been more comprehensive for the grant of power to do every thing which, in the judgment of Mr. Rice, was necessary or advisable, either for borrowing money or purchasing iron for the company. A general power to borrow money includes authority to give to the lender the ordinary securities for the sum borrowed. Among these are bonds, notes, or acceptances, and collaterals. But the resolution went further. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ Whether such conditions had been imposed was a question of fact properly submitted to the jury, with the instruction that, if they had been, the contract was not binding unless the company afterwards ratified and adopted it. It therefore became a material inquiry in one aspect of the case whether there had been such an adoption or ratification; and the defendant asked the court to instruct the jury that there had been no ratification by the railroad company, and especially that a certain resolution of the company, adopted May 13, 1859, and communicated to the defendant, was not a ratification. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
This action was trover by Edwin A. C. Hatch against Thomas B. Coddington for the conversion of forty-five Minnesota State bonds. Each party claimed them under the Minnesota and Pacific Railroad Company, to whom they had, on the 3d of February, 1859, been issued by the State, under a provision of its Constitution authorizing the issue of such bonds for the purpose of expediting the construction of certain railroads. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ On the 30th of April Rice wrote to defendant the following letter, which was the first communication he sent after leaving New York for St. Paul:--
'OFFICE OF THE MINNESOTA & PACIFIC R. R. CO.,
'ST. PAUL, April 30, 1869.
'GENTLEMEN,-I found upon my arrival here that the acting president of this company had disposed of the forty Minnesota State bonds, which were to have been forwarded to you by the terms of the contract made between us in New York. You will perceive, therefore, that it is impossible for the company to comply with its undertaking. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ Nelson, acting as president of the company in the absence of the president, to dispose of the bonds; but such authority was not inconsistent with the concurrent existence of the like power in Rice. Two persons may be employed separately to negotiate the sale or hypothecation of bonds, and either may thus dispose of them. If a disposition be made by one, of course the other will be unable to exercise the power with which he was clothed ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

William Strong, Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court

“ And, thirdly, he was empowered to purchase iron rails, locomotives, machinery, &c., for the company, on such terms as he might deem advisable; and, to enable him to carry out these powers and authority, he was empowered to make, execute, and deliver obligations, bills of exchange, contracts, and agreements of the company. ”

William Strong

Summary

Quotes from Hatch v. Coddington — Opinion of the Court (William Strong)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature