Aspinwall v. Butler

Citations

• 133 U.S. 595
• 10 S. Ct. 417
• 33 L. Ed. 779
• 1890 U.S. LEXIS 1936

Syllabus

<p>This case differs in no material fact from Delano v. Butler, 118’ TJ. S. 634, • and is governed by it.</p> <p>When the previous proceedings looking to an increase in the capital stock of a national bank have been regular and all that are requisite, and a stockholder subscribes to his proportionate part of the increase and pays his subscription, the law does not attach to the subscription a condition that it is to be void if the whole increase authorized be- not subscribed; although there may be cases in which equity would interfere to protect him in case of a material deficiency.</p> <p>The provision in Rev. Stat. § 5142, that no increase of capital in a national bank shall be valid until the whole amount of the increase shall be paid in, and the Comptroller of the Currency notified and his consent obtained, was intended to secure the actual cash payment of the subscriptions made, and to prevent watering of stock; but not to invalidate bona fide subscriptions actually made and paid. - The Comptroller of the Currency has power by law to assent to an increase in the capital stock of a national bank less than that originally voted by the directors, but equal to the amount actually subscribed and paid for by the shareholders under that vote.</p>