In re White River Bank
Supreme Court of Vermont
Petition for a writ of mandamus. The petitioner, Augustus P. ■Hunton, represented, that the legislature of this state, by act approved November 13, 1850, incorporated the White River Bank, and therein provided, that the place for the location of the bank should be designated by a committee, who were named, and that books for receiving subscriptions to the capital stock of the bank should be opened, at the place designated by said committee, under the direction of Chester…
Read the full summary
Petition for a writ of mandamus. The petitioner, Augustus P. ■Hunton, represented, that the legislature of this state, by act approved November 13, 1850, incorporated the White River Bank, and therein provided, that the place for the location of the bank should be designated by a committee, who were named, and that books for receiving subscriptions to the capital stock of the bank should be opened, at the place designated by said committee, under the direction of Chester Baxter, Solon Danforth, Edmund Weston, Phinehas Pierce, Augustus P. Hunton and Edward H. Prentiss, or a majority of them,…
1Opinion of the CourtKellogg, J.
The application for the writ of mandamus is based upon the facts set forth in the foregoing motion, verified by the oath of Mr. Hunton. The facts are to be treated as satisfactorily established, in the absence of any opposing proof, and more especially as Mr. Weston has been duly notified of this application and has neglected to appear and deny or disprove the same. It appears by the act incorporating the White River Bank, a copy of which was produced at the hearing, that Mr. Weston was appointed one of the commissioners to open books for receiving subscriptions for shares in said bank, and…
2Cited by2 opinions
- American Railway-Frog Co. v. HavenMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1869
- State v. HareOregon Supreme Court · 1916