De Butts Vs. Bacon

De Butts vs Bacon

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1810

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/78508

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/78508
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1810
Case Number: 10 U.S. 252
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

De Butts

Respondent

Bacon

Excerpt

..... error to the circuit court for the district of columbia in a suit in chancery brought by samuel de page 10 u. s. 253 butts against james bacon and others, the object of which was to foreclose a mortgage made by bacon to de butts. the condition of the mortgage was that if the defendant, bacon, should pay to the complainant the interest of eight percent upon $1,000 of eight percent stock of the united states, loaned by the complainant to the defendant, and should further pay to the complainant "the said sum of $1,000," &c.;, the deed should be void. the defendant, bacon, pleaded the statute of usury, alleging that it was a loan of money, and not of stock. the facts of the case appeared to be that the complainant, samuel de butts, intending to speculate in a voyage with captain elias de butts, authorized the latter to sell $1,000 of eight percent stock of the united states, which he did through the agency of the defendant bacon, who received the money. the plan of the voyage not having been prosecuted, the complainant wished to get his stock back again, but could not get either the stock or the money from bacon. it was, however, finally agreed that bacon should be considered as answerable for the stock, and should give a mortgage to secure the repayment of the stock and eight percent interest. the court below decided the contract to be usurious, and decreed the mortgage to be void. which decree this court, after argument, by swann, for the appellant, and youngs, for the appellees, affirmed.

Full Judgment

De Butts v. Bacon - 10 U.S. 252 (1810)
U.S. Supreme Court De Butts v. Bacon, 10 U.S. 6 Cranch 252 252 (1810)

De Butts v. Bacon

10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 252

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

SYLLABUS

If an agent, who has, by permission of his principal, sold eight percent stock, applies the money to his own use, and being pressed for payment gives a mortgage to secure the payment of the amount of the stock with eight percent interest thereon, it is usury.

Error to the Circuit Court for the District of Columbia in a suit in chancery brought by Samuel De

Page 10 U. S. 253

Butts against James Bacon and others, the object of which was to foreclose a mortgage made by Bacon to De Butts. The condition of the mortgage was that if the defendant, Bacon, should pay to the complainant the interest of eight percent upon $1,000 of eight percent stock of the United States, loaned by the complainant to the defendant, and should further pay to the complainant "the said sum of $1,000," &c.;, the deed should be void.

The defendant, Bacon, pleaded the statute of usury, alleging that it was a loan of money, and not of stock.

The facts of the case appeared to be that the complainant, Samuel De Butts, intending to speculate in a voyage with Captain Elias De Butts, authorized the latter to sell $1,000 of eight percent stock of the United States, which he did through the agency of the defendant Bacon, who received the money. The plan of the voyage not having been prosecuted, the complainant wished to get his stock back again, but could not get either the stock or the money from Bacon. It was, however, finally agreed that Bacon should be considered as answerable for the stock, and should give a mortgage to secure the repayment of the stock and eight percent interest.

The court below decided the contract to be usurious, and decreed the mortgage to be void. Which decree this Court, after argument, by Swann, for the appellant, and Youngs, for the appellees,

Affirmed.

Same Parties De Butts vs Bacon Same Subject Land Acquisition