Tiffany v. National Bank of Missouri Tiffany v. National Bank of Missouri

Tiffany v. National Bank of Missouri

85 U.S. 409, 1873.SCT.0000064

    • $0.99
    • $0.99

Publisher Description

Mr. S. Knox, for the appellant; Mr. J. O. Broadhead, contra. In an action like the present, brought to recover that which is substantially a statutory penalty, the statute must receive a strict, that is, a literal construction. The defendant is not to be subjected to a penalty unless the words of the statute plainly impose it. The question, therefore, is whether the thirtieth section of the act of Congress of June 3d, 1864, relative to National banking associations, clearly prohibits such associations in the State of Missouri from reserving and taking a greater rate of interest than 8 per cent., the rate limited by the laws of that State to be charged by the banks of issue organized under its laws. It is only in case a greater rate of interest has been paid than the National banking associations are allowed to receive that they are made liable to pay twice the interest. The act of Congress enacts that every such association 'may take, receive, reserve, and charge on any loan or discount made, or upon any note, bill of exchange, or other evidences of debt, interest at the rate allowed by the laws of the State or Territory where the bank is located, and no more; except that where, by the laws of any State, a different rate is limited for banks of issue, organized under State laws, the rate so limited shall be allowed for associations organized in any such State under the act.' What, then, were the rates of interest allowed in Missouri when the loans were made by the defendants that are alleged to have been usurious? It is admitted to have been 10 per cent. per annum, allowed to all persons, except banks of issue organized under the laws of the State, and they were allowed to charge and receive only 8 per cent.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1873
October 1
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
6
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SELLER
Innodata Book Distribution Services Inc
SIZE
59.9
KB

More Books by United States Supreme Court

Folsom v. Dewey. Stringfellow v. Cain (99 U. S. 610) Affirmed Folsom v. Dewey. Stringfellow v. Cain (99 U. S. 610) Affirmed
1880
Alexander Rankin, Cunningham Smith, George C. C. Thurger, And John Mccall, Plaintiffs in Error v. Jesse Hoyt Alexander Rankin, Cunningham Smith, George C. C. Thurger, And John Mccall, Plaintiffs in Error v. Jesse Hoyt
1846
Provident Institution v. Massachusetts Provident Institution v. Massachusetts
1867
One Hundred and Ninety-Nine Barrels of Whiskey v. United States One Hundred and Ninety-Nine Barrels of Whiskey v. United States
1876
James L. and Samuel L. Taylor, Administrators of Robert Taylor, Deceased, Plaintiffs in Error v. Nathan T. Carryl James L. and Samuel L. Taylor, Administrators of Robert Taylor, Deceased, Plaintiffs in Error v. Nathan T. Carryl
1857
Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold Benjamin F. Morgan, Plaintiff in Error v. Alfred G. Curtenius and John L. Griswold
1857