A provision in the special charter of a state bank that its
business shall be confided to and controlled by its stockholders
under such rules as it may adopt, not in conflict with the
Constitution of the United
Page 250 U. S. 604
States or of the state, is not inconsistent with the exercise of
the general power of the state to cause the affairs of such bank to
be examined and reported on by state official and to exact a
reasonable annual assessment (1/40 of 1 percent of the total
assets) for the maintenance of the state banking department, and a
general law so operating does not impair the contract obligation of
such special charter. P.
250 U. S.
606.
111 Miss. 699 affirmed.
The case is stated in the opinion.
MR. JUSTICE McREYNOLDS delivered the opinion of the Court.
A special act of the Mississippi Legislature approved March,
1872, incorporated the Bank of Oxford and authorized it to
"exercise the privilege appertaining to a general banking, exchange
and brokerage business, with all the power of a body corporate."
Section IV declares:
"That the business of said bank shall be confided to and
controlled by its stockholders under such rules of laws and
regulations as said company may see fit to adopt: Provided the same
be not in conflict with the Constitution of the United States or of
this state."
It was immediately organized, and has continued to carry on
business under the charter so granted.
By a comprehensive act containing sixty-nine sections,
Page 250 U. S. 605
approved March 9, 1914 (Laws 1914, c. 124), the legislature
prescribed general regulations concerning banking. Its scope is
fairly indicated by the title, copied below.
* Section 23
provides:
"Each bank subject to the provisions of this act is hereby
assessed for each year one-fortieth of one percent of its total
assets, and the money accruing from said assessment shall be used
for the maintenance of the banking department."
After paying one assessment under protest plaintiff bank, May
14, 1914, instituted this proceeding in the Chancery Court for
Hinds County. The original bill sets up and relies upon the charter
of 1872 as a contract, protected by the federal Constitution,
which, by confiding control to stockholders, excludes legislative
authority in respect thereto. It alleges:
"That the said bank examiners are threatening to interfere with
the affairs of this bank and to exercise such powers as are
provided for by said statute [of 1914] over this bank, and are
threatening to
Page 250 U. S. 606
make such examinations and reports upon and about, and to
exercise all the other authorities and powers provided for by such
statute, over the affairs of your orator, said bank. And your
orator pleads hereby, and invokes for such, its contract immunity
from such supervision and control, the said contract clause of the
Constitution of the United States, and claims its right exclusively
to control and manage the affairs of its own bank."
And further:
"Your orator protests and shows that it was not subject to the
provisions of said banking law, and by its said contract charter,
the whole scheme so devised, as applied to your orator bank, was
unconstitutional and void, and your orator shows that for such
reason it was not subject to assessment devised and contrived only
for the purpose of maintaining such bank department, and your
orator was protected against the payment of such assessment, also,
by the said contract clause of the Constitution of the United
States."
The prayer is for an injunction perpetually restraining
defendants and their successors from examining or undertaking to
enforce as against the complainant any provision contained in the
Act of March 9, 1914, and for a decree requiring repayment of the
sum assessed and paid under protest.
No argument is required to show that the charter of 1872
constitutes a contract protected by the federal Constitution. But
the construction placed upon § 4 by counsel for plaintiffs in
error is not tenable. It really contains nothing which purports to
take away commonly recognized power of the state to establish such
reasonable and general regulations of banks as may be essential to
public safety, and to enforce them through a board supported by
moderate assessments upon those engaging in the business.
While the bill proceeds upon the theory that the bank's affairs
are wholly exempt from interference by legislative direction, the
only past or immediately probable wrongs
Page 250 U. S. 607
adequately complained of are enforced contribution to expense of
the banking department and threats by defendants to make
examinations and reports. And we think it clear that no impairment
of the corporate charter has or will result from reasonable
examinations and reports by duly authorized officers and the small
prescribed payments. It is unnecessary to consider other distinct
provisions of the statute, and, of course, we intimate no opinion
concerning them.
The supreme court of the state affirmed a decree of the chancery
court dismissing the bill upon demurrer, and its action must be
Affirmed.
*
"An act establishing a banking department for the State of
Mississippi, creating a board of bank commissioners, prescribing
their qualifications, duties, and compensation, providing for the
election of state bank examiners, prescribing their qualifications,
duties and compensation, defining what shall constitute a bank and
banking business in the State of Mississippi fixing the capital
required to do a banking business, and providing for the
examination, regulation, and control of banks and banking business
conducted by corporations, other than national banks and postal
savings banks and fixing the assessment for the revenues of the
department, fixing qualifications and liability of officers,
stockholders, and directors of banking corporations; fixing the
qualifications and liability of persons, firms and corporations in
the banking business; providing for the payment of deposits to
minors and other persons under disability and on joint account;
prohibiting banking except under the provisions of this act;
providing for the liquidation of banks and the distribution of the
assets thereof; providing for giving publicity to deposits more
than five years old, and prescribing penalties for the breach of
any of the provisions thereof, and to provide a system for
guaranteeing deposits, and for other purposes, without expense to
the state."