1. The contract case discussed in Osborn was presented by the companion case of BANK OF THE UNITED STATES v. PLANTERS’ BANK OFGEORGIA, 22 U.S. (9 Wheat.) 904, 6 L.Ed. 244 (1824). The Bank of the United States had purchased notes issued by a state bank, which refused to honor them. The Bank of the United States sued for payment, and the state bank contested the federal court’s jurisdiction. The Supreme Court held that the295question had been “fully considered” in Osborn, and that it was “unnecessary to repeat the reasoning used in that case.” Id. at 906, 6 L.Ed. at 244. In what respect was the dispute in Planters’

Bank different from that in Osborn? What was the federal “ingredient” that provided the constitutional basis for jurisdiction in both cases?