Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/588

 576 FEDERAL REPORTER. �laws and designed to evade them. In such cases, the legal consequences of such an agreement must be decided by the law of the place where the contract was made. " �In Tilden v. Blair, 21 Wall. 241, the accçptance in con- troversy was executed in New York, and made payable there, but was negotiated in Chicago, at a rate exceeding that allowed by law at either place, but the consequences were different. It was held that the contract was made in Hlinois, and was to be governed by the law there. These cases are sufficient to govern the ruling of this court in this case. As this was a Massachusetts contract, nô reason is seen why so much of the law of that state as relates to the security itself should not be applied to it. That law was that "when, in an action brought on such contract or assurance, it appears that a greater rate of interest than is allowed by law has been directly or indirectly reserved, taken, or received, the defend- ant shall recover his full costs, and the plaintiff shall forfeit threefold the amount of the interest unlawfuUy reserved or taken, and no more, and shall have judgment for the balance remaining due af ter deducting said threefold amount. " Under this statute, when unlawful interest is reserved on a note and the amount is carried by renewal into other notes, the three- fold amount is to be deducted in an action upon the last note. Upham V. Brimhall, 11 Met. 526. So, in this action, three- fold the amount of such unlawful interest as was brought forward into these notes is to be deducted as of the dates when these sums were brought in. The amount is shown by the report to be the amount reserved on Nos. 1, 5, 8, and 9, on page 4, and might be readily computed, except that the length of time for which No. 9 was diseounted does not appear. As the two notes in each suit are of the same date, and alike, one-half the amount to be deducted should be applied to each. The recovery of costs by the defendant, under that statute, relates to the forum, and cannot apply here in a different forum. �It is àrgued that as the corporation's stock transferred to William Dickinson was a pledge for the security of the notes, a conversion of it to his own use would operate as a payment ����