There are instances where the existence of the right to enforce the liability is made dependent upon a fact other than insolvency, such, as in the case of national banks, failure to redeem circulating notes,1 and in state banks dissolution.2 Insolvency may be proven in any of the ways permitted by law. Certain facts are conclusive proof of insolvency, such as a failure to redeem notes in specie,3 or failure to discharge claims upon it in the due course of business, or the fact may appear by proof that the bank is notoriously insolvent.4 It is needless to point out that in a suit to enforce this liability such condition to the liability must be alleged and proven. The liability is single in the sense that the stockholder can be compelled to discharge it but once. If he pays in part, the payment is a discharge pro tanto. The claim is barred by the statute of limitations in equity as at law.5 The statute begins to run from the accrual of the liability,6 and whenever the creditor's debt against the bank is barred, his claim upon the stockholders is also barred.7 Interest on the liability in national bank cases runs from the order of assessment,8 and in cases under state laws runs either from the commencement of the action9 or from the date of the decree.10

Sec. 42, supra. Washington Nat. Bank v. Eckels, 57 Fed. R. 870, is contra.

17 Delano v. Butler, 118 U. S. 634,

18 Sowles v. Witters, 39 Fed. R. 403.

19 Welles v. Stout, 38 Fed. £ 807.

20 This follows from the nature of the action.

21 Stanton v. Wilkeson, Fed. Cas. No. 13,299.

22Wadsworth v. Hocking, 61 111. App. 156.

23 Price v. Yates, Fed. Cas. No. 11,418.

24 In re Stockholders' Cal. Nat. Bank, 53 Fed. R. 38.

1 See Sec. 43, ante.

2 See Donelly v. Hodgson, 14 Mo. App. 548.

3 Lane v. Moms, 8 Ga. 468; Terry v. Culnan, 13 S. C. 220.

4 Terry v. Tubman, 92 U. S 156;. Terry v. Anderson, 95 U. & 628.