City of Natchez v. Trimble

Mississippi Supreme Court

City of Natchez v. Trimble

1 Miss. 376

DecidedDecember 15, 1830

StatusPublished

This text of 1 Miss. 376 (City of Natchez v. Trimble) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Natchez v. Trimble, 1 Miss. 376 (Mich. 1830).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT — ey the

How. JOSHUA CHILD.

The promissory note, or instrument in writing, upon which this suit is founded, carries upon its face the evidence of consideration upon which it was given, viz: “for port duties to he collected;” which is executory.

The city of Natchez is situated on the bank of the Mississippi river, in this state, and is a port of entry. The consideration of this contract, then, is clearly against the provisions of the act of congress admitting the state ■of Mississippi into the union; and, therefore, the contract is illegal and Void.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT — ey the

How. JOSHUA CHILD.

The promissory note, or instrument in writing, upon which this suit is founded, carries upon its face the evidence of consideration upon which it was given, viz: “for port duties to he collected;” which is executory.

The city of Natchez is situated on the bank of the Mississippi river, in this state, and is a port of entry. The consideration of this contract, then, is clearly against the provisions of the act of congress admitting the state ■of Mississippi into the union; and, therefore, the contract is illegal and Void.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1 Miss. 376, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-natchez-v-trimble-miss-1830.