Dolley v. Abilene Nat. Bank

Citations

• 179 F. 461
• 32 L.R.A.N.S. 1065
• 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 4663

Syllabus

<p>1. Constitutional Law (§ 211*) — Equal Protection of Laws — Validity of State Statutes.</p> <p>The provision of the fourteenth constitutional amendment that no state shall “deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws” does not render state legislation, properly confined within its appropriate sphere, invalid because it does not extend to and embrace objects beyond the state’s jurisdiction.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Constitutional Law, Dec. Dig. § 211.*]</p> <p>2. Constitutional Law (§ 240*) — Banks and Banking (§ 4*) — Kansas Bank Guaranty Law — Constitutionality.</p> <p>The bank depositors’ guaranty act of Kansas (Laws .1909, c. 61), which authorizes banks incorporated under the laws of the state and possessing prescribed qualifications to join in contributing to and maintaining a fund for securing certain classes of their depositors against loss in case of the insolvency of any of their number, is not unconstitutional as denying to the national hanks within the state the equal protection of the laws; there being nothing in the statute discriminating against them, and the only reason they cannot accept its provisions being that, because of the duties and obligations prescribed by the laws of the United States under which they are created, they cannot subject themselves to the jurisdiction and authority of tho state. Nor is such act unconstitutional on the ground that its effect may be to attract depositors from the national to the guaranteed banks, and thus increase competition with the national banks, and impair their efficiency as instrumentalities of the national ■government; such effect, if any, being merely indirect and incidental.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Constitutional Law, pent. Dig. §§ 688-699; Dec. Dig. § 240;* Banks and Banking, Cent. Dig. § 3; Dec. Dig. § 4.*]</p>