St. Clair County IL Archives Court.....Snyder, V. President & Directors Of State Bank Of IL 1826
************************************************
Copyright.  All rights reserved.
http://www.usgwarchives.net/copyright.htm
http://www.usgwarchives.net/il/ilfiles.htm
************************************************

File contributed for use in USGenWeb Archives by:
Deb Haines http://www.genrecords.net/emailregistry/vols/00003.html#0000719 February 9, 2009, 12:44 am

Source: Il Court Reports, 1819-1830
Written: 1826

June Term 1826

Adam W. Snyder, Appellant, v. The President and Directors of the State Bank of 
Illinois, Appellees.

APPEAL FROM ST. CLAIR.

The debtors to the state bank can not raise the objection that the bank is 
unconstitutional. (2)

An averment in the scire facias issued to foreclose a mortgage given to the 
state bank, that "S." made his note to plaintiff for $760, is sufficient to 
show that he borrowed and received that amount.

Judgment will be rendered against him who commits the first error in pleading. 
(3)

Opinion of the Court by Justice Lockwood. The plaintiffs below brought a scire 
facias in the St. Clair circuit court, on a mortgage, executed to them under 
the act incorporating the state bank. The defendant below pleaded that the 
consideration of the mortgage was the paper of the state bank, and that the 
incorporation of said bank was in violation of the constitution of the United 
States, and that therefore he is not bound to pay said mortgage. To this plea, 
the plaintiffs below demurred. The circuit court sustained the demurrer, and 
rendered judgment for the amount due on the mortgage. From which judgment the 
defendant below has appealed to this court.

The errors assigned are, 1. That the incorporation of the bank, and issuing 
the paper, are contrary to the constitution of the United States: 2. That 
there is no averment of money received by Snyder: 3. That there is no breach 
set out in the scire facias. As to the first point, the court are of opinion 
that the debtors of the bank can not raise the objection that the charter of 
the bank is a violation of the constitution. After having borrowed the paper 
of the institution, both public policy and common honesty require that the 
borrowers should repay it. It is, therefore, unnecessary to decide whether the 
incorporation of the bank was a violation of the constitution or not. As to 
the second assignment of error, the court are of opinion that the averment 
that Snyder made his note to plaintiffs for $760, is sufficient to show that 
he borrowed and received that amount.

The court, however, are of opinion that no breach has been assigned, and that 
the plaintiffs below by demurring to defendant's plea, have opened the 
pleadings, so as to authorize the court to decide who committed the first 
error. For want then of a sufficient assignment of a breach of the note or 
mortgage, the judgment must be reversed with costs, and the cause remanded, 
with directions to permit an amendment of the scire facias, &c. (a) 

Judgment reversed.

Reynolds, for appellant.

Cowles, circuit attorney for appellees.

-------------------
(2) This is overruled by the case of Linn v. State Bank, 1 Scam., 87, which 
see and notes.

(3) Phoebe v. Jay, post. Davis v. Wiley, 3 Scam., 236. McDonald v. Wilkie, 13 
Ill., 22. The People v. M. & A. R. R. Co., 13 Ill., 66. P. & O. R. R. Co. v. 
Neill, 16 Ill., 269.

But the rule that a demurrer must be carried back and sustained to the first 
defective pleading, does not apply to a plea in abatement. If a plea in 
abatement is bad, although the declaration may also be defective, the demurrer 
will be sustained to the plea, and the defendant ruled to answer over, Ryan v. 
May, 14 Ill., 49.

A demurrer to a special plea can not be carried back to the declaration, after 
a direct demurrer to it has been overruled, and the general issue pleaded. 
Brawner v. Lomax, 23 Ill., 496.

(a) Vide Craig v. The State of Missouri, where the constitutionality of the 
loan office of Missouri is discussed. 4 Peter's Rep.

Borrowers of loan office certificates are liable to pay the sum contracted 
for, and it is no defense to say that they are bills of credit. Missouri Rep., 
452. Mansker et al. v. The State of Missouri.

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/stclair/court/snyder251gwl.txt

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

File size: 4.8 Kb