OCR Text |
Show H , THE TSOIIY LAWS OF UTAH. H j ft ivn u nfrlenii Binktr, Mil IS. B j Id Utah there li no abaolule rate of B ( Interest eicetit that when no rata haa H' I been RRtceJ upon tijr the contracting 1 persons tight per cent, la the legal ' ' charge. The law allowa any rate of 1 , lntereit whloh haa been ooutraoteil for B In writing. The National Uank of H Commerce of l'rovo, Utah, wai eueJ H j. for the reeorery of tumi claimed by ,a'! the plalnllfl to be uiurloui. JuJge mP i Blackburn, of the First Dlitrlcl Court H j btardthe cause and docldcd against B (L ) i the lank, holJInRtlietaecordlniJ, to the li ! ' ruling or the United StalM Huiiremo 'ji Oourt III National Hank s. John-oD, ii national banks are mulcted Trim , charging (higher rate of lntereit than m thai filed b the atatulia of the H reapecllre atatei In which the m nkl aire located: and where m (h atatutea of ttie state do not fix a M ,1 r,l8 0f intercil, national banka arc 'T limited to charging 7 per cent. The court waa undecided, It (prvari, at to m v. Whether Ihla "8 per lenf'pf the Utah ," italule oouU be termed a fixed raleul H lnterr.ton.ot. If It were allied rale, J national banka In Utah could charge Mji I per cent, but If It were not fixed m j ! but 7 pr cent tould bo cuirgeoj )i butaaWbttecotton, the plalntlir, hau 4 been charged at a hither rale than H ) either, he waa, In any event, entitled H J to recover double the amouut of In. !ttreatpald. It la natural, In view of Dili declilon, that national banka In Utah and eliewhire abnulJ bo anxloua to know whother thla ruling will be sustained by n higher court. Tbe juJaa Iilmarlf appears t have doubted the corrcctneis of hla conclusions. A little time might therefore be profitably apint In exam-lnlng exam-lnlng tbla lniereitlng ease In aoinewhat further detail. Flra: of all, what doia tba national banking law aay on the ueatlon of InterealT We may auoi up tneolaute covering that point bjr atat lag that natloual bank may tako whatever lntereit the local liw allowa to the atate and other bankt. 'I be exact worJa of tho atalute upon which t the above caie turna are aa followii ' "When no rate li axed by the lawa of the atate or territory or dlitrlot, the 4 bank may take.recaiveorchargearale .4( not exceeding 7 per cent." The Intent l) K of Ihll clauie waa the atone for BJ X atumbllog towblob Judgo lllackburu H' conleaeed. In adopting the clauie re B. latlng tolntereat, Uongretadld notlu-M notlu-M 7 tend to limit the earning power of the B 1 national banka and thereby relrgalo M t them to a dlaaavanlageoui poiltluu H ;; compared to itate banking luitllutlona. H Ita unmlilakable purpoie waa ta r-B r-B r mlt tho national banks to contract for H high a rate of lotereit at that per H mliaablt to banka regulated by the m atate lawa. Thla prlnolple muit not be B l; overlooked In an attempt to find Juit i t and reasonable application of the Hi atatute. Hut Uougreti waa alio In K p fluinced by the m iral Import of Ita attl H.'' tudeonthla queillon. Undor the In B fluenoe of thla lentiment Itcoullnot ( keep wholly allent where the atate B law failed absolutely to provide a for uiurloua underlaalnga. Tb.ua It named 7 per cent aa the legal rate for national banka In atatei and terrltorlia when tba local lawa are allent. W li , aay that fixing a aearale rate aa legal v i Interest fjr national banka waa ex. S preulva of the moral aenie of Cougre.e which waa not to Interfere when the , looallawa allowed a higher rate or expreialjr provided that auy rata mat V be contracted for. Thla, at leait, la M ; our view of tba queatlon, and It re 11 malna ta be area how far It la support- I I Mby IbeoourU. '. Two Judiminta were died by the tp National liack of Commarca ai tup. f- polling Ita caie. They are National ." iiank va liruhu, 74 Texaa 70 page 7U ' and Ulnda va Marmolio Od (Jal. 2J. In tho latter caie Judge Itoni aaldi V j "The true Interpretation the act ol ' Congreaa la, tbat lu thoaa atatei and I terrltorlta having no ataluta upon the aubjectol Intirtit the national banka V are allowed a rale not exceeding 7 ir coot, while In thcie atalea having i atatutea they are authorlied to charge W and reoelve Intereat at the rate allowed V toother banka aodludlviduali. From V tbla view It followa that loaimuch ai V wa have In L'alirornla a Hatute p o. vldlng "that (artlia may agree In ' writing for the piymeut of any luterett and It ahall be allowed according to the W terma of tba agreement untlllheentry V of Judgment," the national bauki are W allowed to charge and receive aucti ratri of lntereit aa may be agried ou." W Tba ruling In the lexaacaielafoun. I, dad on the lame argument that the rato eitabllihed by Uoogrcia blnda a National bank only where the itate j& 1,w ' completely allent. Uoea tbu t law of Utah make any provlilona for Ml the taking of Interest by a bank7 We W; have ahowu that It doea. 'Ihelawaaye , that any rate may be contraoled for. I Hhall wa not aay, then, that whatever j tbamta nominated In the contract S tbat la Ibejllld rate, which tho law o V the itata will enforce upon thepartle1 totheaameT Hut the plalntlll In 111' cue under ooniidrratlon cltca XW Supreme court of the United Htali" . In National banka va.Johmon, In op rltlon to tbla coacluilon. Hut that caie the tourt upheld tba atate law, which provided a j lenalty for charging over 7 V per cent In ulicounla and loana by banki. The bank held that j It waa a natuial parion and m melt came within the ttrmi of the Now j1 York atatute, which allowed natural penona to acquire and I urcbaiu com. merclal paper at any rate above 7 per ji cent. The court lound no etientlal dlflerence belwren purihlie and dll-couut dll-couut aofarai banking oratloni are concerned aud held Ibe bank down to the legal rate. The court denied that where natural permna were allowed to charge over 7 per cent but aiete bank! wete llmllod to thli rale, that a national bank could charge Hie higher percentage. Hut Ihe court did, In tbat caoe, Interpo-o a brief lyp-Ibeili, lyp-Ibeili, In which it laid that II the bank haJ claimed "That the rate li allowed liytha law of Ihe lUle when II pernilla the partita to rrierve and rrcelve w hatover tiny iniy agrre Un, then the lectlou fiirniibFi tho cwnchi- Iveaniwrlt 'When no rlo li flxed ly tba lawa of the Hate, eta, the Uhli may take or charge a rato not exue lug 7 per cent,' io that the tramncllon Inqueilion In either aiprtt li within the prohibition of the itatiilr." Hut If a ci.o dirtctly bearing on tint point, urh ai Ihe one uu leruur baud aliould oometwfuretliatniuil, w ull It uihoid thla dictum? Following Ita rule Io lUftaln itale laaa whin they d not alolutely conflict with tbu Federal ilatutri, would It not make Iho Inteltil law of the itate or territory In which Ihe national hank la aituated tho governing principle princi-ple for nationil banki In dlioountlug and loaning tholr fuud.7 Hhould Ibe coutt'a hypothetical queitlou and Hi liiiuniolenl amwer, luvulvluga point not directly In lnuo and the eipm-locauioii eipm-locauioii whlon are thfhfore to be taken ai miro dictum, bo regarded aa coucluitve? We think not. May we not frel confident then, that It will not put n barrier In Ihe way of the clear purpoiu or the Ptil-eral Ptil-eral alatutu If the Interpretation of It ai we have given II, li direct? That jurKielato placo elate and national baukeon Ibeiarue footing na rejardi iermlulblo lntereit chargra. In Utah that rate la tbv rlxed an I legal ralr, which la contracted ror In wilting, and theiourt will not Interpose to prevent national banka from taking advautagu of a territorial italule which In ro wise Intrrferei Willi the Federal law If there wai a ra Ileal conflict hero between Ihe act of (JjngreM and the law of Utah, Ihe latter would necessarily neces-sarily Income Invalid; but 111 lull queillon of allowable Interest wo have aund no ahnduw of oonlllot. Then, fore wo believe thit If Ilils caie aliould come before IIih Hupreme court lor adudlcatlou, that tribunal willuphoU the territorial law lu quratlonaot lntereit ln-tereit aa Ihe rule ami guidance for national banks. |