|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
610 THE CAPE SABLE COMPANY'S CASE.
as they know, on the part of any other person; so far from it, they
positively aver, that the whole amount for which the judgment
was entered was, at the time of entering the same, and still is justly
and fairly due. The answer states, that at the instance of Richard
Caton, he being legally constituted president, they loaned to the
company, at different times, several sums of money, amounting in
the whole to the sum of |17, 000, on the 20th February, 1822,
under an engagement entered into by Caton with them, he being
fully authorized to make such engagements, that the said company
would render them secure by giving them a judgment against the
company. That the pecuniary embarrassments of the company,
at the time when the advancements were made, were such, but for
them, an entire stop must have been put to their proceedings, to
the great loss and injury of all concerned. The only likely way to
better their condition was to procure loans on the faith of the pro-
perty; that they authorized their president to enter into such loans,
and to pledge, if necessary, the funds of the company; that the
loans never would have been made if such security had not been
obtained; or some other good and sufficient indemnity; without
the loans the company must have come to a stop.
Several questions present themselves, arising from the facts dis-
closed by the bill and answer. First. Admitting that the whole
sum of money was loaned, could the defendants Robert and John
Oliver have supported an action of assumpsit at law, and obtained
a judgment, if the claim had been contested, and the opinion of
the court taken thereon? Second. If it was competent for the
defendants Robert and John Oliver to have sustained a suit on an
action commenced and conducted in the usual manner, is the
authority, that was given by Richard Caton such as to authorize
the entering of the present judgment? Third. Ought the in-
junction to be dissolved without the answer of Caton, supposing
the opinion in the two preceding points to be favourable to the
defendants ?
In forming an opinion in this cause I deem it unnecessary to
review the various decisions, how far a Corporate body can con-
tract; except under the corporate seal. That subject was fully
and maturely considered in the case of The Bank of Columbia
against Peterson, and is ably treated in the opinion of the Supreme
Court of the United States, as delivered by Judge STORY, (c) It
(c) 7 Cran. 299
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
