Western Sun & General Advertiser, Volume 14, Number 46, Vincennes, Knox County, 13 December 1823 — Page 1

WESTERN SUN & GENERAL ABVERTISE15.

Q BY ELIllU STOUT. V1NCENNES, (INI).) SATURDAY, OKCE.MIJKU 13.1823. Vol 14. No. 40.

TUF. irESTER.Y SIZV, IS published at Two Dollars a nd - ft t M

Yifvy iHsis tor riftu- ivo .umntrs

(continued fkom our last) i numerous, sec the cases cited in 2 Bac. Thirdly. As to the rights and ciedits Wc are aware that several sections of Ab 32 ami in the King vs Amery 2 I. of the coi poration. the actol'assLmh.v. dirrr.tiniMhose nro- K-515 For the lorieituic is the same I hese as applyme to the dtbts kc. cine

which ma he discharged by the pay, cccdings against this corporation, are ' noiiuser. when no property has been to the corporation, arc supposed to U of

met f I WO DOLLARS at the time ; predicated on the idea, that it cxcicibcu as ior misuser, cuiimciau,c amount, and nan lutitda of subscription, the corporation had so misused and or abuse afler the possession of much puncipai haturc in tve.y vkw oi it. 13 Payment in advance beinir the mutual abused its franchises as to render them Ppcrty and the exercise ot extensive case. But the impoitanct of the case a-

otercst of both parlies, that mode is so-1 liable to seizure, that a seizure of the rights and credits and thc judgment is thc rising lion, the amouiu in cmuoxtoy,

goods and chattels, rights, credits and ef. ?amc ln 0oU) cases- Consequently the cannot ath ct the principles by which t is fects lands tenements Sec. of the corpor- , judgment could not direct a seizure of governed; and when those piincip t - aie ation would necessarily form a part of lhe corporate possessions, as a forfeiture fixed tht must bt decluitd, lei th, Ul. the judgment: for in the 3d section of the j for thc valuation of its charter. Oris sequence to individuals, or the con mui.i-

I me scinmi ground mar. me properiv tans i oe wnat 11 may.

- - 0

foteri st ol both parUCB

iicitcd. A failure to notify a wish to discontinue at thc expiration of thc time subscribed Tor, will be considered a new engagement No subscriber at liberty to discontinue Until all arrearages arc paid Subscribers must pay thc postage of their papers sent by mail. Letters by mail to ;hc KniTOR on bubiness m 1st be paid, or they will not be attended to. Advertisements inserted on the customary tcrmvi; '7 Persons sending Advertisements, must specify the number of times they wish them inserted, or they will be continued until ordered out, and mut he paid for accordingly

act, they direct them to be seized by the

New-Orleans Vices Current. A'F.ir Orlfass, '.-c obcr II, 1823 Bagging, Scotch, per yd scarce) 26cts Kentucky, per yd. 20 a 22 Bale Hope, Kentucky, per lb. 6 a 7 Northern, 8 a 9 Bacon Hams, per lb (sales) 9 a 12

V Sides bec per lb. 7 a y iBeans, per bbl. - - S3 a 4 J Beef, mes. Northern, per bbl git) prime, per bbl 8 cat go, per bbl - 7 Brandy, Cog per gal. (sale)g 1 12 a l 1 5 Imitation (dull) 50 cts Butter, per lb. - 15 a 18 cts

Cotton, new crop, lb.

2d quality,

labama Sc Tenn. CoflVe, Havana, best, per lb 24 a 25

16 13 12

Domingo

Cheese Goshen per lb. Chocla'e, No. 1, per lb.

No 2, No .3, Cand'cs, Sperm, per lb. mould do. Cordage, per lb - -

Corn, per bbl (in ear) Corn meal, per do. Flour sweet, per bbl. - Gm, Hollan I per gal. merican do. Hides, per lb. I lion wcdcs, per ton, L-vddo. - - (dull) M dasses, per gal (scarce) N iu, cut. per lb. - Pepper, per lb. Pork, mess, per bbl, Prime,

20 a 8 a

cargo, -Porter, London, per doz. -p. 'Valors, bbl.

R n. J 1.0 4 p. per gal. dull) N Orleans 4 p.

17 15 13 25 10 a 12 8 a 10 81 2 50 $8 a 9 45 cts 11

- - $100

8 a 9 15 a 18 7 a 8 20 a 2'

812 a 13

8 a 9

6 a 7 83 a 350

150 a 2

35 a 84 a 4 25

Kmc.

Sa't, T Island per bush Mull) 40 a 45

Liverpool blown per sack 83

ground, do. - 2 75

Shot, per cwt (plenty) g9

Skins, deer, in hair per lb. 12 a 16 cts. Beaver, - - g2 a 2 25 Shaved - - 24 a 27 cts Mear, a piece, - S' a 2 Sugar, La on plantation, lb. none.

10 a 11

execution on thc judgment. But we can

not suppose that the legislature intended to alter the law on this subject; for th ir provisions extended only to this particular case, and even if those provis

ions were of a general nature, we should

m e to give them a retrospective opera ion, to bring this case within them: in as

much as all the forfeitures to which this

corporation was liable were incurred be

fore thc passage of the act. In fact the

act does not seem intended to inci ease the

liabilities of the corporation, or in any

way extend the forfeitures to which thev

were subject. It appears to be enacted

for no other purpose but to have the cor-

porauon called upon to account tortne supposed violation of their frnnchisVv Mul

if they had abued their liber1 icstsinS-

jcxi mem 10 an ine losses ami rorieittires

to vhich bylaw they were liable in ctn

sequence thereof; supposing that sunh r r . , , .1

I'm tenures necessarily lnciuaeci an ineir corporate property, together with their rights and credits ; and so proceeds to di rect the manner in which their property rights credits See shall be disposed of Therefore, taking the whole act together, we cannot suppose that the legislature intended makmg, or declaring the law vhich vvns u govern the re'idition of this judgment- but that the law the object r em ns as beret fore This is ;dso evident from thedi' Ctior th' give that the indnient shall be given according o the course nfthe coonnon law aid the

usages of courts not inconsistent with the laws of this state With this view of the act of assemble we shall examine this judgment by the law as it stood before the passage of the act. The most of the cases to be found in the books, against corporations, are where the corporations have been create 1 for thc purpose of government, and calculated for perpetuity, and where the property of the corporation, whether real or personal has formed a very i iconsidorMc feature in the case. Of course the efTec of' he judgment on the property of corporations has be n but seldom a queition. and is'mich less explained than the T ct of the iudgment on the franchises. There is a tedious labyrinth of cases hrough which vve have to tr.v 1 nn this

subject, and many of the landmarks are

so 'im and uncertain

U at a loss to kno

to the state for thc want of an owner, on I hat the debts aie ncccs-.atily 1. to the dissolution of thc corporation, more the corporation naturaily follows i m tenable as a foundation on which to sus- the principles we h;;ve cxamhtd. I or tain this judgment For the ownership uhtn ciissoucu they huc no txis;.i ce, of the roi poi ation does iu.t ccac umil its andean have 1.0 ciain-s to, m r cn:nuotlissnlution. And whether it is dissolved ver .a y thm vhate.er Ihiy v.i.- ny by the judgment nl seizure, or not until die. i,ut have 1.0 1 1 pri seijta.ic b l u d the state hc.s execution on that judgment tf.eni. J Lis, in 1 ven topict.ib tlu e..sc is not here cry material. For "r : he coi - w ith agt reg;iie coi poiatit-ns. voit c orp(, ration is dissolved by the judgmtnt, yw ;iMui,n d j.t nil, in liis lepttt, upon the judgment must be reguia? l t nu n u, p'iitip.ts somewhat cimier.!; but uith md have its lull efTect before its disM'lu- then wi ha-e now no concern. lint altion takes place, and it is not till then that thrush ti t dtbts luil out ol the lik tss thc property can be said to be without im lantis of the corporation, at il e sane time owner. The less of the propeity to the with its ital and peisonal estate, tti wi.m corporation is a consequnce ofthi jmig- thus out T their hands, tluv aim iy ,ifou nt, and it is a contradiction of th fust ferent in ibt ir natui es from tl e 't;:'i ui.d principles of reason, a compute rcvtisal peisonal estare Lands and ooct.-l . xe ol effect and cause to make such loss of a ncctssaiy 1xista1.ee. aohou'ri, t ( t n,av

Ml rop.nty a part of the judgment That be w iti cut an (wnci in being, or n. x-

"iiiLiiuiiinui cMMuimi uuir i lie Jung- peccancy 1 i.ey conimue in ner g ;.!,d ment, can nev r be the subject matter on n ay bt made tlu su1 jt ct ofpos ..n.n which the judgment is tfhen But the by occuancy But this is not ri c case better opinion seems to be that thc cor- with respect to debts They l-;m no po! ation is not dissolved by the judgment necessai existence, i.nd aie s o 1. Jusof seizure; but that it exists until thc Iran- ively pt isona- that the) cannot cms ith chides are seiz- d by execution on that out an obligor and obtigee in In it g . 1 in judgment. Sec 2 dd on Cor. 409- '0 expectancy And on the dah-.t the and the authorities there cited w)nse- obligor, or obliuet , w ithout fi:e 'ss.bi!y qncntly the least shadow of asup)Oit for ot a 1 epu stutaiie, thc obli. iu. n a-t s. this judgment, on this giound. ntust Such appears to be the cas 1 1; 'tetiis vanish. solution of a cor j. 01 ation ae.gt(-g;.re We have thus far examined the judg- Blackttone says tin. dtb s. t a torporment that directs a seizure ol the goods ation. citi.er to 01 fi om it. at e tot iiy exand chattels, rights and ciedits, lands and tinguished by its dissolution; s- that thc tenements of the corporation on the as- members thereof cannot never, or be turned position that they will necessarily charged with th.m, in then n - uial capa fall to the slate on the dissolution of the cities 1 Bia Com. 484 Kydd on corcorporation. We will now enquire into porations, 2 Bae. Ab 32ada:ces nearly the correctness of this position In or- tlle same doctrine on the authority of 1 dt r to elucidate the suhjtct, we will ex- Lev. 27 Owen 73 and 2 and 107. nd amine it in cK-f -nl; and in the first place this doctrine is cither directly, or indn rt enquire, what becomes ol the lands and ,v supported in a variety of casts. wce tenements; secondly, what becomes of the the bfote mentioned case of Colchester goo Is and chattels; and thirdly, what be- : vs Scaber, also Rex vs Pasmore 3 Rfc comes of the rights and credits of the The '"i.-.yor anci Burgesses of Scarcorporation: and we shall find that each boough vs Butter 3 Lev. 238, 4 Cim.

of those three items is governed by dif- 1 I' l,,is doctrine is correct, and C ....... !ti..Arirli;iirir'rritt"f-li-fr.rl . - ....... C

ferent principles

F'n st as to the lands and tenements. " When a corporation is dissolved," says sir Wm. Blackstone, their lands and ten

ements went to the person or his heir

who granted them to the corporation; for c1oui(l be seized inl the ds ot 11 L sl 1 ' .1 .......1.! 1. -i: 'I-1 . .

the law doth annex a condition 10 1 ve- ; wt utu ni 1 -I... . 1 . . - il

rv such grant, that if the corporation be ' uwc 10 'n? UMranon C,;U!U 1501 !

we find it uncontradicted, the seizure of

the tights and credits of the corpoiation is impossible in the nature ol things; because their existence ceacs as the e)aim of the state commences But even if thev

in that wc arciVcnuent lis".lvetl, tlicKram.)r shall have the lands if1'"10" la principle, In cll.c... hy ow whether wc a'., on aKain. The Kam is only dorins the life j ! ,c satC '' " aTs ,!,el; b,"'R ' ,iv ero.mil It is certain f the corporation, which may endure v ,,f "ntrac . either ... fact or law he-

in town, Ilav ma, brown, . white, . .1 .oaf,

S a 9 13 a 14 16 a 17 8 a 8;

Tallow per lb.

Tea, gunpowder, per lb. (sales) gl 50 imperial do. 1 50 L .young hyson, - 1 a 1 G hvson skin, - 60 a 65 V.x,bees, per lb. (none) 27 a 30 AVImkey, - 25 a 30 Tobacco, choice fine, per lb. 3J a 3 prime, - - 3 a 3$ 2-1. quality, - 2J 2J

te - -.la

T.YFOhWrJTlOV Jl'IYTFJ).

chizes Although the franchises them

selves are not thereby destroyed, for they exist in the hands of the state, and mav be afterwards granted to the same, or other individuals, in the same manner in which they were originally granted. Rut the existence of the corporation is terminated. Its being is so completely lost that it can have no power over, nor connection with, anv thing in existence; of course it can no longer be considered as the oner. or possessor, of lands or goods, rights or credits But it does not follow that those lands and goods, righL and credits necessarily fall into the hands of the state; much less that thev are proper objects to be included in the terms of the judgment There are but two grounds on which it can be contended that the corporate effects fall into the hands of thc state. First, a a forfeiture for abasing its franchises, or secondly, for thc want of an owner, bv the dissolution of the corporation When wc examine the first of those grounds, we find nothing the bonks to supnnrt an idea that the a-

hose of corporate franchises occasions a IK Grind Lodge of Pennsylvania, forfeiture of lands or goods, rights or ivioi" received a rommumra'inn rrfflit;. nr in firt nrT,cninc nnt- mlic r fnr.

fro n the Grand Lodge at Basle in Suit- future but the franchises themselves

x zc-l.md, requesting exertions to be marie The consequence oT a broach of the inv discover the pi tee of residence of an plied conditioo on which their liberties

individual named Fack'nh:fen. of a dis- were iTint d rVas nor that thev should

tinguished familv in dernianv, that feels forfeit their prooertv or possessions if

Tnueh interested in his welfare ami have thev abused fheir franchises, but only that pot heard of him for several years, takes thev should forfeit the franchises That this method of requesting any person who which come out of the hmds of the King jivv have heard of him or knows his pi es- is the proper sub ect of 'he forfeiture: rv p'ace of residence to give inrorma- th Uig 'v the seizure r.-;erviot whv ' f'tfl. to GEOHGFl . RKKU. nrigntiv flawed fiom his bountv. An Crand Secretary, Phii'a. thorities leading to thb coudusioo arc

illl.iflW "V-tl ioiv LI ilini It 13 ( V,i l.tlll I - - t - j 1... -.1.1 1 I. r , forever: hut ivl.rn th.it life U rht.rn,'.M. ,1 tWt cn te an(l 1,1C debtor to the Cor-

'inirt t i , t'liti nit. una't'ir inn ti i ttji mm - - ' f . - . ation is effected by a secure of its fran- by the dissolution of the body politic, the I Pi- II ,s when the pow-

gramor takes it back by levcrsion, asin,;:,ul u" c uo.n.ani ti,p .co ,s r.. th.,r ..ot frsr. iu i , for m.m years, and have altci wauU been

Bia. Com. 484 This i the doctrine advanced bv Lord Coke, Co Lit i3; sec al- j

so 2 Kvdci on Cor. 5 162 Bac. Ab 32 2 C uic 4720 Colchester veabe! 3 iiurr

1866. We see but little in the books

thnt contradicts, or questions those au

thorities and the eases thai look a clifT r ent way maintain that the l.tiida would eschea 2 Bac. Ab. 32. If ehhei of those principles is correct we feel wairanttd in determining that thc corporate lands and tenements cannot be seized into the hands of the state, and certainly not in thc manner contemplated by thi judgment. Secondly, as to the goods and chattels. On this subject thc ho. ); are almost silent. In the aiguo.M't "I Coh Itistri vs

Seaber it is said ! v i' V . :;vr No:ton, on thc authoiitv f ii-ji ,'v 316, that the goods and ciialteis go lo the crown. An English writer who has coileeted together most of the cases on corporations, concludes his remarks on the effect of a dissolution in these words; '4 w hat becomes of the personal estate is perhaps not decided; but probably it vests in the crown. Kydd on corporation 2 ol. p 516 We do not feel under the necessity of resolving anv doubts that may rest on this subject, for if the law was conclusive f at the goods and chattels in this cac would vest in thc state on thc dissolution of the corporation, yet we have already seen that this would not be as a forfeiture, but because they were without an owner, and that the claim or the stae could not ist un'"d after jud en; consequently it is imposs'h'e o include them in tnc trim 01

the judgment.

revived by anew charter, they have bcin considered capable of cclltcting th bis formei ly due to them. f his was the case in Colchester s St;. her. Arid even when the name of the corpoiation has been changed hy letters patten, they Lave collected debts due to tlum bv tluii former name This w..s clone in tin cr ai d Buvgesses ol Scabotoi;gb vs Bo er. But ttosf cases v- i e r4t citlt d (,ii tl i inciple that the icipr tation tlut stud war. virtual!) ;.nd subtan!ially, the sa;i t body that n ud tit tr.ttct, aid low hot! :hc obligation was properly out But mhIi is not the case with the sta'e. It bus n- connection with thc cbligor, or the ilii.:ation; and caniu.t rec over the t cb. by suit. Nor docs the act of assembly at ! sizing thc collection of the rot po? ation c bs, by commissioners to b appointed fov that pui pose, make any alteration 'm the case. I his act was not intended to make a new law to regulate those dtbts, or to alter the principles that governed the corporation contracts; but seems tout did on'he supposition that the debts wv? h become due to th state by the sitzurc of the corporate franchise; and thvrt nc makes provision for havi' g them col!- cted by commissioners There is not'-. ior in thc act calculated to give those deb's u continued cxis'ence after the dissolir .eu oTthc corporation. The act or.lv p-c-sutnes they would by law hue susb an existence, and therefore makes a dis ctin ofthem. The debt must the f jio he considered on common law princ't e$t unifT'cte l bv ,!'e act; and the ''nr svibjec to ex'ifi uiihmentby a Cissolutioa the corporation