Edwardsville spectator. [volume] (Edwardsville, Ill.) 1819-1826, 1824-06-29

he
the fact is also relied ON, =. ai'e,. IT VI
proper conduct, or desire to conceal it. pro-
duced the omission.
The committee sees no reason to doubt this
statement, or to attribute anv improner motive
| to the Secretary, in this nattentiop to the d.
rections of the act.
The charges relative to the Rank of Missouri;
are, in substance.
/ That this bank was unworthv of credit at tbe
time the deposites of public MONEYS were suf.
fered to accumulate in it to large and impro-
per amount:
That the permanent deposite allowed it was
illegal, and unreasonably large:
! That those returns and statements of its af
fairs, which The Secretary had himself consi
dered essential, were not exacted:
And finally, that, in payment of its debt. a
large amount of uncurrent notes was received.
some of them not worth twenty five cents in
! the dollar, contrary to the positive iniunctions
of the resolution of 1916.
The committee thinks it very probable that
! the Bank of Missouri did make an improper.
! perhaps an eAceaslve, issue of its paper; al
though the mode adopted in the address of es-
timatlng that excess, appears not altogether
correct, as II onts to menuon the permanent
deposlte OF the government in calculating the
! =
| II the capital OF the bank were, as S stated,
S2lU,OOO, aud its permanent deposite from
government ol50,9OO, supposing it 10 have no
other deposltes, discount to the extent Of
S43oOUO would not have been alarmingly ex-
cessNe. s'Ipposine the loans to have b. en- Ii.
mied to safe hands, and that punctualty of
payment might have been expected. 1t is
probable that failure in this latter respect
was the immediate cause of the bank suspend
| ing its payments.
| The sum Of $4,000. which anpears. at one
time, to have been in this bank. was certainly
a vetv large. sum TO have been suffered to re.
main in a country bank but, whether it was
a greater accumulation than ought to have
been allowed, is question that depends on
many considerations, chiefly on that OF the So
! iidity of the institution, which itself depended
on the solvency of is debtors. OF this the
Committee has no other evidence than thar
arising from the report of the Committee of
the Legislature of Missouri, appointed to ex.
anime the affairs of the bank, who declare that
the debts due on personal security, AS well as
those secured by mortgage, are safe. If this
were well founded, the bank, even at the time
it stopped payment, had in those two items
alone, more than enough to pay all it owed.
What informasion, TO put the Secretary on
monthly returns, the committee canno, deter.
,mine They appear TO have been furnished
only up to the LIST Feb. 1920. Nor has the
committee observed any demand made BY the
Secretary for IA com alliance with this stipula.
ton, at any time between that date and the
time the bank stopped payment. Whether,
however if demanded and complied with. an,
different resalt, favorable 10 the United States,
would have been produced il seems imp5ssi
bic TO determine, because, Judging tloia Inc
last and most uniaporable return made, imme-
diaiciy previous to the stoppage OF the bank,
nothing in those returns would have appeared
to indicate any danger.
a more important part of the charge is, that
the Secretary received from this bank, in part
payment OF its debt, large amount of uncul.
rent notes contrary TO law.
BY the first arrangement made with the
bank, which has been already stated, it was
not responsible, as far as the committee car
perceive, fer the solvency of the banks the
notes of whie, have been deposited in itby
the public receivers. When the new CONTRACT
was made, in August, 1919, it did not form
any part of that contract, as it did with soms
of those of the other banks, that the bills al
ready on hand should be at once passed t.
f the credit of the Treasury as cash, as may BIZ
/, sc en- BY copy OF the contract annexed TO the
report marked b. So that the important ques
ton is, whether those notes were received
before or after the 9th of August, 1919, the
day on which the Bank assented to the new
contract. Ifbe:ore, then they were receives
on account, and at the risk of the government
if after, at the risk of the bank.
The committee think there were sufficient rea
sons TO justify the Secretary in believing then
to have been received before the 9th Of Au
gust, because. by the letter OF the Bank, o
that date, it appears that much larger sun