[105]
Again, take the case falling under the
law which lays down that bankers may pay only
half of what they owe, while permitted to recover
the whole of what they are owed. One banker
requires payment of the whole sum owed him by
another banker. The appropriate argument supplied
by the subject to the creditor is that there was
special reason for the insertion of the clause1
sanctioning the recovery of the whole of a debt
by a banker, since there was no need of such a law
as against others, inasmuch as all have the right to
recover the whole of a debt from any save a banker.
1 The argument is far from clear. The case assumes that by a species of moratorium a banker may be released from payment of his debts in full to ordinary creditors. This moratorium does not however apparently apply to debts contracted between banker and banker.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.