Fayette County IL Archives Court.....President, Of State Bank Vs Kain 1819-31
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarch.org/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarch.org/il/ilfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Deb Haines http://www.genrecords.net/emailregistry/vols/00003.html#0000719 June 4, 2008, 11:09 pm

Source: Reports Of Cases Illinois
Written: 1819-31

NOVEMBER TERM, 1823.


The President and Directors of the State Bank, Plaintiffs in Error, v. John 
Kain, Defendant in Error.

ERROR TO FAYETTE.

The receipt of the cashier of the State Bank, for money received of an 
individual, is evidence of a deposit by that individual, and the cashier had a 
right to receive such deposits.

Opinion of the Court by Justice Wilson. The only question presented in this 
case for the opinion of the court is—whether the receipt of Kelly, the cashier 
of the Bank, is evidence of a deposit in the Bank. It is said that it is not, 
because he was not authorized by the letter of the law, nor by any order of 
the Board of Directors of the Bank, to receive money on deposit. It is 
conceded that he might receive state paper on deposit, but not gold or silver, 
because the language of the law is, that "the Bank shall at all times receive 
money on deposit," &c. The word Bank is not made use of here to designate the 
house, the cashier, or the directors, but the institution generally; and the 
cashier is the officer or agent of the institution, with authority derived 
from the law, and the nature of this, as well as of every other Bank is, to 
receive money on deposit, receipt for the same, enter it upon the books of the 
Bank, and pay it out again when called for, without compensation. The question 
whether the directors can control the cashier is not involved in this case. 
From this view of the case, the court is of opinion that the judgment below 
ought to be affirmed. (a)

Judgment affirmed.

Blackwell, for plaintiffs.

Kane and McRoberts, for defendant.

------------------
(a) The acts of a cashier of a Bank, done in the ordinary course of the 
business actualy confided to such an officer, are prima facie evidence that 
they were within the scope of his duty. Fleckner v. Bank of United States, 3 
Wheat., 338.

Additional Comments:
Reports of Cases at Common Law and in Chancery, Argued and Determined in the 
Supreme Court of the State of Illinois, From its First Organization in 1819, 
to the End of December Term, 1831. By Sidney Breese, Counsellor at Law. Second 
Edition, with Additional Notes, By Edwin Beecher. Chicago: Callaghan & 
Company, 1877.

File at: http://files.usgwarchives.net/il/fayette/court/presiden228gwl.txt

This file has been created by a form at http://www.genrecords.org/ilfiles/

File size: 2.8 Kb