frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/frsbogmimv220487pdf 1/9

X-4371

BROOKINGS STATE B A H

v .

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF SAN MTCISCO.

DECISION ON KOTION TO DISMISS.

WOLVERTON, D . J . M ay 1 9 , 1 9 2 5 .

Thu f i r s t qu e s t io n i n t h i s c a s e a r i s e s

under t h o n e w a c t which w a s approved February 1 3 , 1 9 2 5 ,

a n d which i s "brought in to r e q u i s i t i o n he re f o r showing

that th i s court h a s been deprived o f i t s j u r i s d i c t i o n

t o e n t e r t a i n t h e c a u s e . Two o r t h r e e s e c t i o n s o f that

s t a t u t e a r c r e l i e d u po n f o r t h a t c o n t e n t i o n . I t i s p r o -

v i d e d b y s e c t i o n 1 2 :

" Th a li a? d i s t r i c t c o u rt s h a l l h a ve j u r i s d i c t i o n

o f a n y a c t i o n o r s u i t by o r . a g a i ns t a n y co rpo ra t i o n

upon t h e ground that i t w a s i n c o r p o r a t e d by o r under

a n A c t o f Congress ; Prov ided, tha t t h i s se ct io n sh a l l

n o t apply to Any s u i t , a c t i o n , o r proceeding "brought

b y o r a g a i n s t a co rpo ra t i o n i nco rpo ra ted b y o r under

a n A c t o f Congress wherein t h e Government o f t h e

U n i t e d S t a t e s i s t h e owner o f n o r e than one-ha l f o f

i t s c a p i t a l s t o c k .

1 1

S e c t i o n 1 4 i s a l so c i te d , which reads ;

"That this a c t s ha l l take e f f e c t thr ee months

a f t e r i t s approva l ; b u t i t s h a l l n o t a f f e c t c a s e s

then pending i n t h e Supreme Court, n o r s h a l l i t

a f f e c t t h e r i g h t t o a rev i ew, p r t h e mode o r time

f o r e x e r c i s i n g t h e same, a s r e s p e c t s a n y judgment

o r decree en tered pr i o r t o t h e date when i t takes

e f f e c t . "

Now, t h e r e i s t h o i n c l u s i o n i n t h e f i r s t r a s e o f

cer ta i n co rpo ra t i o ns wh i ch own s t o c k t o ex ceed o ne - ha l f

o f t h e ca pi ta l s t oc k. That must b e read a s ex c l ud i ng

a l l o t h e r c o r p o r a t i o n s . A n d i n t h e seg ond ea se , where

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


- 2 -

X-4371

t h e s t a t u t e i n c l u de s t h e r i g h t o f r e v i e w , o r t h e mode o r t h e

t i n e o f e x e r c i s i n g t h e sruue, a s r e s p e c t s a n y juilgmont

o r d e c r e e e n t e r e d p r i o r t o t h e date when i t t a k e s e f f e c t ,

t h e r e i s t h e i n c l u s i o n o f t h e judgnent a n d d e c r e e , a n d w e

n u s t r e a d i t a s t h e e x c l u s i o n o f a l l o t h e r su i t s p e n d i n g

where t h e c a se s h a v e n o t gone t o judgment o r d e c r e e .

Based upon th at id ea ,

t h e

c o u r t

i s . o f t h e

o p i n i o n t h a t

t h e s t a t u t e i t s e l f i s n o t p r o s p e c t i v e , b u t r e t r o s p e c t i v e .

I have n o t a t t e m p t e d t o g o i n t o t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l q ue s -

t i o n , w h i c h h a s boon ably argued b y t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s c ou n se l .

What h e h a s h a d t o s a y i s q u i t e p e r s u a s i v e i n my mind, b u t ,

f o r n y p r e s e n t u n d e r s t a n d in g and my p r e s e n t o p i n i o n , I

b e l i e v e t h a t t h e s t a t u t e i t s e l f i s n o t p r o s p e c t i v e , b u t

r e t r o s p e c t i v e , a n d t h a t t h a t s t a t u t e , a s i t a p p l i e s t o

t h i s c a s e , w i l l c u t o f f f u r t h e r l i t i g a t i o n .

Tho o t h e r q u e s t i o n t h a t i s p r e s e n t e d i s whether o r

n o t t h e comp lain t shows th at the re i s a f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n

i n v o l v e d .

Mow t h e c o m p l a i n t , i n t h e f i r s t p l a c e , a l l e g e s ;

"That t h e def end ant , Feder al Res erv e Bank o f Sa n

F r a n c i s c o , i s a c o r p o r a t i o n o r g a n i z e d , c r e a t e d a n d e x i s t -

i n g under a n d b y v i r t u e o f t h e l a w s o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ,

a n d b e i n g t h o F e d e r a l r e se r v e sy s t e m o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ,

t h e p r i n c i p a l o f f i c e o f which i s i n t h e c i t y o f S a n Fran-

c i s c o , C a l i f o r n i a ; t h a t s a i d b an k i s d o i n g b u s i n e s s w i t h i n

t h o S t a t e o f Oregon r n d h a s d u l y o r g a n i z e d a branch bank

i n

pursuance

o f t h e

Federa l Reserve

A c t ,

which said branch

bank

i s

l o c a t e d

i n

Po rt la nd , Multnonah County, Oregon,

a n d

t h a t sa i d d e f e n d a n t i s c a r r y i n g o n t h e b u s i n e s s o f a r e -

serve bank a n d i s d o in g b u s i n e s s w i t h i n t h e S t a t e o f Oregon.

11

I n a d d i t i o n t o t h a t , t h e c o m p l a i n t a l l e g e s :

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


- 3 -

X-4371

"That t h o Federal Rvservo Br.nk o f S a n F r a n c i s c o , i n

accordancc with t h o p o l i c y ad op t e d b y t h e Federal Reserve

Board a n d nmzorcus other Federal Reserve Banks o f t h e ,•

U n i t e d S t a t e s , h a s deter mine d upon a p o l i c y o f p a r c l e a r -

ance f i r a l l c e nt er bard's which upon j o i n i n g sa id sy stem

a r e r e q u i r e d t o af;ree t rcr . it a t p a r , a n d t h e Federal

Reserve Bank o f S ? a Fra nci sco , about t h e . l a s t o f 1 9 1 9 o r

t h e f i r s t o f 1 9 2 0 , determined t o f o r c e a l l banl: s throu^out

t h e t w e l f t h F e d er a l R e se rv e d i s t r i c t , a n d p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e

p l a i n t i f f h e r e i n , t o c lear checks a t p a r a n d d o t o m i n e d t o

r e q u i r e t h e p l a i n t i f f brnk t o perform t h e s e r v i c e s a f o r e s a i d

without compensat ion to i t .

And

then

i t

goe s

o n t o

c i t e p a r t i c u l a r i n s t a n c e s .

Those tw e c lau se s c c mor i se a l l tladt i s c o n t a i n e d i n

t h e complaint touching t h e f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n , a n d t h e q u e s -

t ion ar i se s wh e t h e r t h a t i s s u f f i c icbi t t o p r e s e r v e t h e c o m -

p l a i n t a s a good p l ea di ng .

How, t h a t i t m y n o t b e sa id that I have overlooked

t h e pr i nc i p l e upon which t h o p l e a d i n g m s t s tand, I w i l l

q u ot e f r om d e f e n d an t ' s b r ie f .

I n t h e

c a s e

o f

Hul l

v .

Burr,

2 3 4 U . S . 2 7 2 , t h e court says;

The ge n e r a l r u le i s f i r m l y e s t a b l i s h e d t h a t a su i t

does n o t s o ar i se u n d e r t h e laws o f t h e Un i t e d S t a t e s u n le s s

i t r e a l l y a n d s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n v o l v e s a d i s p u t e o r c on t r ove r sy

r e s p e c t i n g t h e v a l i d i t y , c o n s t r uc t i o n, o r e f f e c t ; o f sonic l a w

o f t h e United States , upon t h e d e t e r min at ion o f which t h e r e -

su l t depends . And th is ou st appear n o t b y mere inference ,

b u t b y d i s t in c t ave r me n t s ac c or d in g t o t h e r u l e s o f good

p l e a d i n g ; n o t that matte rs o f l a w must b e p l e a d e d a s such,

b u t t h a t t h e e s se nt i a l fa c t s averred must show, n o t a s a

mat t e r o f mere inference o r argument, b u t c l e a r l y a nd d i s -

t i n c t l y , t h a t su i t ar i s e s u nd er some f e d e r a l l a w .

There

i s

another case which

I

w i l l r e ad f r om

"When

a

su i t does

n o t

r o a l l y

a n d

s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n v o l v e

a d i s p u t e o r c o n t r o v e r s y a s t o t h e e f f e c t o r c o n s t r u c t i o n o f

t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o r laws o f t h e United States , upon t h e d e t e r -

min at ion o f which t h e resu l t depends , i t i s n o t a s u i t a r i s i n g

under t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o r laws . A n d i t nast appear o n t h e

record , b y a s tatement i n legpl, ,->nd l og i ca l form, such a s i s

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


- 4 -

X-4371

r e q u i r e d i n rood plu adi nr , that t h e s u i t i s o n e which docs

r e a l l y a n d s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n v o l v e a d i s p u t e o r co ntro v ers y

a s t o a ri^ht which depends o n t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e C o n -

s t i t u t i o n o r sonc l a w o r t r e a t y o f t h e Uni ted St a t es , b e fo re

j u r i s d i c t i o n c a n b e ma i nta i ned o n thi s ground."

That i s t h e s t a t e n o n t o f Chi e f J us t i ce Ful l er i n western

Union Telegraph Co. v . Ann Arbor Railroad Conoany, 178 U. S .

2 3 9 .

A f u r t h e r r e f e r e n c e i s nade t o t h e r u l e i n F a r s o n v .

Ci ty o f Chicago, 1 3 8 F e d . 1 8 4 . There t h e court says:

The court nust look t o t h e s ubs ta nce o f t h e b i l l

t o determin e whether th ir d i s i n f a c t a f edera l ques t i o n

p r e s e n t e d , o r whether t h e f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n , i f t h e r e b e

o n e , i s b u t i n c i d e n t a l t o t h e c o n t r o v e r s y . . . . The f e d e r a l

co urt s s ho ul d b e s low t o as su r. e j u r i s d i c t i o n , u n l e s s i t

appears that a f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n i s n e c e s s a r i l y i n v o l v e d .

M

What i s ncant there by an inc id en ta l qu est ion maybe

i l l u s t r a t e d b y s u i t f o r t i t l e u nd er a pa te nt , where i t i s

q u e s t i o n e d a s t o whether t h e p a t en t i t s e l f w a s l e g a l l y

i s sued. That i s i n c i d e n t a l - that does n o t i n v o l v e a

f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n .

How, w e a l l understand very

w e l l

what a f edera l ques -

t i o n i s . I t i s a qu est ion that ar i se s "under t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n

o r laws o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , o r t rea t i e s ma de o r which

s h a l l b o na de under t h e i r a ut ho r i ty . Thi s c l a s s i s connonly

c a l l e d f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n s , and a f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n i s i nv o l v ed

n o t nerely when t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a f e d e r a l s t a t u t e i n c i -

d e n t a l l y a r i s e s ,

b u t

when

t h e

ca s e ne ce s s a r i l y turns upon

t h e

c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e f edera l l a ws , a s vdien t h e p l a i n t i f f wo ul d

b e d e f e a t e d b y o n e c o n s t r u c t i o n , o r s u c c e s s f u l b y a no ther ."

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


491

- 5 - X-4371

That i s found a t page 2 3 5 , Heches* Federal Procedure ( 2 E d . )

A nd i t i s s a i d f u r t h e r , a s t o p l e a d i n g s ( p . 3 6 ) : I n order

f o r th is ground o f j u r i s d i c t i o n t o e x i s t , a core gene ral

a l l e g a t i o n t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s c a se r e s t s upon a c o n s t r u c -

t i o n

o f t h e

f e d e r a l C o n s t i t u t i o n

o r

s t a t u t e s

i s n o t

s u f f i c i e n t .

The

f a c t s

i n h i s

p le ad in gs n u s t show t h i s .

A n d i t

must also

appear that t h e p l a i n t i f f ' s ow n ease ne ce ss ar i l y depends upon

t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e f e d e r a l C o n s t i t u t i o n o r s t a t u t e s . "

I h ave r e ad t h ose au t h or i t i e s s o t h a t i t n i g h t h e under-

stood that t h e court i s n o t o v e r l o o k i n g t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f

pleading upon which

a

f e d e r a l q u e s t io n n u s t r e s t b e f o r e

t h e

p l e a d i n g c a n b e pronounced t o i n c l u d e a f e d e r a l q u e s t ion .

How, i n

order

t o

determine whether

o r n o t

t h e r e

i s a

f e d e r a l q u e s t i o n i n e x i s t e n c e h e r o , t h e c a s e o f Farmers and

Merchants Bank o f Monroe, North Carolina, e t a l . v . Federal

Reserve Bank o f Richmond, Virginia, ( 2 6 2 U . S . 6 4 9 ) , o r sone

p a r t s o f i t , n a y b e read K i t h e f f e c t . T hi s , I sh ou ld s a y , i s

a case where t h e S t a t e o f Herth Carolina h a d p a s s e d a n a c t

which w a s thought b y t h e p l a i n t i f f s t o impinge upon t h e C o n -

s t i t u t i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , a n d t h e a c t i t s e l f s e t f o r t h

i t s p r o v i s i o n s t o u c h i n g t h e mat t e r s t h a t a r e h e r e no w in vo lve d .

The c ou r t h a d un d er c on s id e r a t io n t h a t a c t , a s t o whether i t

w a s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , a n d , a f t e r s e t t i n g f o r t h t h e p r o v i s i o n s

o f t h e Federal Reserve A c t , s e c t i o n 1 3 , a n d commenting upon

t h a t , a n d a s s e r t i n g what i s meant b y i t , t h e court goes o n

a n d r e f e r s t o t h e Hardwick Amendment, which declares;

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


X-4371

"That

no

thin,"

i n

t h i s

o r a n y

o th e r s c c t i o n

o f

t h i s

A c t

s h a l l b e c on s t r u e d a s p r o h i b i t i n g a member o r nonnenber bank

from nokin g reasonab le charges , t o b e dctorr. lncd an d r e gu -

l a t e d b y t h e Federal Reserve Board, b u t i n n o c a s e t o exceed

1 0 c e n t s p e r $ 1 0 0 o r f r a c t i o n t h e r e o f , b a se d o n t h e t o t a l o f

chocks a n d d r a f t s p r e s e n t e d a t n a y o n e t i n e , f o r c o l l e c t i o n o r

payment o f chocks a n d d r a f t s a n d r e m i s s i o n t h e r e f o r b y exchange

o r o t h e r w i s e ; b u t n o such charges 4 ha.ll be ma_e a g a i n s t t h e

Federal reserve banks ."

A nd t h a t i s what i s in vo l ve d h e r e ve ry la r g e l y . Af t e r

c i t i n g that anond.:;ont, t h e c o u r t c i t e s t h e o p i n i o n o f t h e

Attorney General i n h i s a d v i c e t o t h e P r e s i d e n t , a s f o l l o w s :

The Federal rese rve a c t , however, does n o t command o r

compel those State banks t o f or e go a n y r if jht they may have

under

t h e

State laws

t o

make charges

i n

c on n e c t i on wi t h

t h e

payment o f checks drawn u ^ o n then . T he a c t m e r e l y o f f e r s t h e

c l e a r i n g a n d c o l l e c t i on f a c i l i t i e s o f t h e Federal reserve banks

u p o n s p e c i f i e d c o n d i t i o n s . I f t h e State banks re fuse t c conply

wi t h

t h e

c o n d i t i o n s

by

i n s i s t i n g upon making chargos ag ai ns t

t h e Federal reserve barks , t h e r e s u l t w i l l s i mp l y b o , s o f a r

a s t h e Federal Reserve A c t i s concerned, that s ince t h e Federal

reserve banks c a n n o t p a y th ese charges they cannot c l ea r o r

c o l l e c t c h e c k s on banks demanding such paynent from then."

Thenthe court goes o n t o s a y , s t a t i n g t h e c o n d i t i o n s

upon which t h i s q ues t io n aros e a n d t h e cause f o r i t :

The Federa l Res erv e Board andthe fed er al r es er ve banks

were thus advised that they were prohibited fro: . : p a y i n ;

-

a n

exchange charge t o a n y bank. B u t t h e y b e l i e v e d t h at i t w a s

• t h e i r d u t y t o a c c e p t f o r c o l l e c t i o n a n y chock o n a n y bank;

a n d that Congress h a d imposed upon then t h e duty o f making

p a r c l e a r a n c e an d c o l l e c t i o n o f c h ec k s u n i ve r sa l i n t h e United

S t a t e s . S o they undertook t c br ing about acquiescence o f t h e

remaining s tate banks t o t h e system o f p a r c l ea ra nc e. Some

o f t h e nonas sont ing s ta te banks made s tubborn re s i s t an ce . To

overcome i t t h e reserve banks hold themselves o u t a s prepared

t o c o l l e c t a t . p a r a l s o c he c ks o n t h e state banks which d i d n o t

a s s e n t

t o p a r

c l ear anc e . This they

d i d b y

p u b l i s h i n g

a

l i s t , "

e t c . (Going o n t o state what w a s done a n d t h e e f f o r t s t h a t

wore made).

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


- 7 -

493

X-4371

2Tow, t h e r e v . t s a f o u r t h c n t e n t i n a r a i n s t t h e c o n s t i -

t u t i o n a l i t y o f t h e iTcrth Carolina A c t , a n d t h e c o u r t , i n

coL- iunt inf upon tha t content ion , h a s t h i s t o s a y :

One c n t e n t i n n i s t h a t S e c . 2 c o n f l i c t s w i t h t h e Federa l

R e s e r v e A c t b e c a u s e i t p r e v e n t s t h e f ed er a l re se rv e banks

f r r* c o l l e c t i n g c he c ks o f such s ta te banks a s d o n o t a c q u i e s c e

i n t h e p l a n f o r g e t c l e a r a n c e . T he argument r e s t s o n t h e a s -

sumpt ion tha t t h e Federal Reserve Bank o f RichnonJ i s o b l i g e d

t o r e c e i v e f o r c o l l e c t i o n a n y check upon a n y Forth Caro l ina

s t a t e b a n k , i f such chec k i s p a y a b l e u po n p r e s e n t a t i o n ; a n d

i s o b l i g e d t o c o l l e c t t h e s ® c a t p a r w i t h o u t a l l o w i n g d e d u c -

t i o n s

f o r

exchrjif-e

o r

o t h e r c h a r g e .

B u t

n e i t h e r

S e c . 1 3 , n o r

a n y o t h e r p r o v i s i o n o f t h e F e d e r a l R e s e r v e A c t , i m o s e s u po n

r e s e r v e b a n k s a n y o b l i g a t i o n t o r e c e i v e c h e c k s f o r c o l l e c t i o n .

T h e a c t v .e r el y c o n f e r s a u t h o r i t y t o d c s o . **** Mor eove r,

e v e n i f i t c o u l d b e b a l d t h a t t h e r e s e r v e b a n k s a r c o r d i n a r i l y

o b l i g e d

t o

c o l l e c t c h oc k s

f o r

a u t h o r i z e d d e p o s i t o r s ,

i t i s

c l e a r

t h a t t h e y a r e n o t r e q u i r e d to do so where t h e drawee h a s r e f u s e d

t.

-

. remit ex cep t upon a l l owan ce o f exchange char ges which re se rv e

banks a r c n o t p e r m i t t e d t o p a y .

Then i n a n s w e r in g t h e f i f t h c o n t e nt i o n o f t h e u n c o n s t i t u -

t i o n a l i t y o f t h a t a c t , t h e court says :

T he f u r t h e r c o n t e n t i o n i s nade that S e c . 2 c o n f l i c t s w i t h

t h e F e d e r a l R e s e r v e A c t b e c a u s e i t i n t e r f e r e s w i th t h e duty o f

t h e Federa l Reserve Board t o e s t a b l i s h i n t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s a

u n i v e r s a l s y s t e n o f p a r c l e a r a n c e a n d c o l l e c t i o n o f c h e c k s .

Cengross d i d n o t i n t e r e s c o n f e r u p on t h e Federa l Reserve Board

o r t h e f e d e r a l R e s e r v e b a nk s a duty t o e s t a b l i s h u n i v e r s a l p a r

c l e a r a n c e n n d c o l l e c t i o n o f c h o c k s ; a n d t h e r e i s n o t h i n g i n t h e

o r i g i n a l a c t o r i n a n y anendn ent fro r. whi ch such duty t o coirpel

i t s a d o p t i o n n a y b e i n f e r r e d . "

A nd t h e n t h e c o u r t d i s c u s s e s t h e n a t t e r g e n e r a l l y :

"Moreover, t h e c o n t e n t n tha t Congress h a s imp osed upon

t h e Board t h e duty o f c s t a b l i s h i n f : u n i v e r s a l p a r c l e a r a n c e e n d

c o l l e c t i o n

o f

chocks through

t h e

f e d e r a l r e s e r v e b a n k s

i s i r -

r e c o n c i l a b l e w i t h t h e s p e c i f i c p r o v i s i o n o f t h e Hardwick Ancnd-

r.'.cnt whi ch de c l ar e s th at e ve n a n e n b e r o r a n a f f i l i a t e d n on -n en -

b e r n a y

r^ako

a

U n i t e d c h ar g e ( e x c e p t

t o

f e d e r a l r e s e r v e b a n k s )

f o r 'payment o f c h e c k s a n d . . . r e m i s s i o n t h e r e f o r b y exchange

o r o t h e r w i s e .

1

The r i r h t t o nake a charge f o r p a y n c n t o f checks ,

t h u s r e g a i n e d b y c e n b e r a n d p r e s e r v e d t o a f f i l i a t e d n on -n en bv r

ban ks, shows th at i t w a s n o t i n t e n d e d , o r e x p e c t e d , t h a t t h e

f e de ra l r es er ve banks would becone t h e u n i v e r s a l a ge n c y f o r c l e a r -

ance o f c h e c k s . "

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


494

X-4371

Hot;,

tha t shows very pe rt in en t l y raid po i nt ed l y tha t

t h e q u e s t i o n i s h e r e , m & i t i s fc dor al que st i on, whether

o r n o t t h e Jtodorel Be se rv e 3nak n a y co npe l p a r c l e a r a n c e by

st-- t o banks «.'ho a r e n o n - a f f i l i a t e d b an k s. That i s t h e q u e s t i o n

upon which t h is ca se i s founded, a nd i t i n c l u d e s t h e a t t eqpt

o n t h e p a r t o f t h e Federal Reserve Bank t o d o a n a c t t h a t i t

w a s u n a u t h o r i z e d to do - that Congress d i d n o t a u t h o r i z e i t t o

d o ; a n d i t p e r s i s t e d i n th at . This cas e that I have read

frcn shows tha.t, a n d t h e ca s e I have "before n o shows i t , -

t h a t t h e Federa l Beserve Bank p e r s i s t e d upon i t s a l l e g e d r i g h t ,

power an d a u t h o r i t y t o pro ceed t o c o l l e c t , a n d t o corjyel t h e

s t a t e "banks, no n - a f f i l i a t e d "banks, t o c l e a r a t p a r . I t i s a n

a u t h o r i t y i t d i d n o t ha v e , a n d t h e court h a s s o h e l d . A nd t h i s

court h a s s o he ld .

Now, the crucial test i n this case , and the crucial

question - and i t i s a federal question - i s whether or not

t h e Federal Reserve Bank c a n enforce such collection. I t i s

a l l f o l l y f o r a person to say that that question is no t a

question i n this case . The only question i s a s t o whether

i t h a s been suf f ic ient ly a l l eged so as to base .a complaint

upon i t ; that i s , s o a s to make t h e complaint suff ic ient i n

i t s a l l e g a t i o n s . I think, taking t h e complaint a l l together,

that i t i s s u f f i c i e n t . I t s t a t e s , f i r s t , th at th e Federal

Reserve Bank i s a n organization under the Act of Congress;

and then i t s ta t es , second, that that organ izat ion h a s

7/17/2019 frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf


- 9 - X-4371

entered upon a c e r t a i n p o l i c y , m l tha t i t i s proceeding

t 4 ca rry o u t t h a t p o l i c y ; a n d t h a t s p e c i a l l y i n th i s ea s e

i t i s

p r o c e e d i n g

t o

e n fo r ce c o l l e c t i o n

o n a p a r

b a s i s ,

So

t h e r e i s y o ur f e de ra l ques t i o n . I t i s i nv o l v e d here . I t

i s n o t s t a t e d s p e c i f i c a l l y a n d p e r t i n e n t l y t o that e n d , b u t

I th ink there i s enough i n t h e complaint t o e s t a b l i s h t h a t

i t i s good - e s p e c i a l l y a t t h i s t i n e . I f t h e p o i n t h a d been

r a i s e d o n denurrer t o t h e c o n p l r i n t , a s t o whether th is c o n -

p l a i n t s t a t e d a cause o f a c t i o n on t h a t p o i n t , t h e court would

probably have sus t a in ed t h e d e m r r o r . B u t th i s ca s e h a s rone

o n , a n answer h a s b e e n f i l e d , i t h a s b e e n t r i e d p a r t i a l l y , a n d

now a new t r i a l i s coning u p , a n d t h e complaint i s e n t i t l e d t o

a l i b e r a l c o n s t r u c t i o n . I jan r i v i n g i t t h a t c o n s t r u c t i o n now.

•

T

. -

I t swens t o n o that , under t h e c ircur . s tances , th i s case ought

n o t t c f a l l s imply because t h e j u r i s d i c t i o n o f t h e co ur t h a s

been taken ssray fron i t t o t r y c a s e s o n t h e uinple ground that

. n o o f t h e p a r t i e s i s a cor porat ion incorp orate d under a n A ct

o f Congress .

This

i s z y

c : n c l u s i o n ,

a n d I

w i l l o v e r r u l e

t h e

n o t i o n .

I w i l l s a y t o co uns e l f o r p l a i n t i f f th a t, i f i n t h e i r

a dv i eenent , they des i re t o ar.end t h i s compla int , t hey n a y have

a u t h o r i t y t o d o s o .

frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf

Documents

Transcript of frsbog_mim_v22_0487.pdf