Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/556

 542 FEDSBAL BEPOSTEB. �he bas funds in that bank against which he draws that check. If he bas no funds bis cbeck amounts to nothing ; but the bank bas to pay wben it bas funda. It is, therefore, an order to pay bearer so mucb out of my money in your hands. The authorities say it is an appropriation of that mucb money. The nature of the traiisaction is this : I have so mucb money in the bank. To be sure, it is the bank 's money, but is a fund deposited to my credit. I draw a cbeck in favor of A. B. for 1100. That is a direction to the bank to pay A, B. $100 out of that money, and the books call that an appropriation of that mucb money. �Tbe question bere is wbether this is an appropriation in equity of tbat mucb of that fund in favor of the payee. It is said it is not, because the payee or bolder of the cbeck cannot bring suit against the bank for the money, and therefore it is not an equitable assign- ment of that mucb money. But that argument is founded on a mis- conception, or want of proper conception, of the doctrine of equi- table assignments. The very words "equitable assignment" are used because the assignment is only recognized in a court of equity, and not in a .court of law. If it were recognized in a court of law, it could be enforced there, and we would never have beard of any sucb words as "equitable assignment." Tberefore, it is an assignment of tbat mucb of the debt, wbicb a court of equity will recognize and a court of law will not. �Tbe reason of this is obvions. One reason, as was stated in the argument bere, was that there was no privity between the payee of the cbeck and the bank on wbicb it was drawn. And that is true : at law there is no sucb privity. Another reason is that a man may owe another several thousand dollars, wbicb is due or to become due, and the creditor may draw in varions sums and at varions times for tbat money, drawing orders on bim, wbicb between the parties is intended as an appropriation of that mucb of the fund. Now, the drawee, or the man who bolds the fund, says : "I don't want to be pestered with all these drafts. I owe the bank $5,000, due the first of November, and I will go and make the payment now, and not be bothered with 20 or 30 suits." In law that cannot be done; but a court of equity looks at it differently. It says, "Here is a fund that originally belonged to A., but bere are claims of B., C, D., E., and F., and they can have a certain amount of money appropriated to them." That is the difference between the powers of a court of law and a court of equity, and that is wby these are called equitable assignmeDts. Courts of equity say they are a lien upon that fund ��� �