Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1830-02-19
che GoaatttuttomaI SaIbt9.
WEDNESDAY, MoRNINe, FEB. "a, 1850.
THE BANK OF VIRGINIA

1s Z,
THE BANK OF VIRGINIA.
The bill re-churtering the Bank of Virginia is, in
Northern phrase, in state Of "betmeenity-that is
to say, it is hung up between the two Houses, who
Disagree upon ncertan amendment. Che history of
the matter is follows: The House of Delegates
passed the bill, with this, among other conditions:
that the Commissioner Of the State Ito be appointed
by law} should have vote at meetings of the Stock
plders on all questions equal one-third Of oil the
votes given at such meeting. The argument in favor
Of the condition was, that the State owned than
third Of all the shsres in the Bank, and nearer
half than thirdand this being she case it was rea
srnahle, It vas bur right, to give the owner of SO
muck of the capital of the Bank, vote onet third
as great Is those who did NOT own two-thirds of that
capital Another argument was, that the State kent
large depoetsin the Golfers Of the Bank, and by her
ownership Of so much of its capital, sua thu favonrs
Whrch she had 1t m her power to DISPENSE aud did
Nspense contributed greatly its credit and success
aud was equitnby entitled upon this and every other
scure, to an agency in its governments as regulatsd
BY the Stockholders.
ibis reasoning appearsto minds, of that kind
which. is called self evident. Upon what possible
grouAd, Is the representation of the stock of the
State objected to, at the meetings of the Sookhol-
dasrs' Having stake in that Institution approach
g half Of the capital is it possible believe that
the interests Of the people shall pull one way aud
trdse OF the private stockholders another Is not
pansfest that what makes for the interest ofbe one
hust equaiy IN profit e. loss view, oonduce to the In
farest fthe other and oice 0ersa? Why then should
the proposition to give the State power equal TO her
great and serious involvement in the fate of the Bank
OF Virginia, be objected too How any man OBJ
Ject to 1t, whose determination to protect the pub
lie interest, is paramount to all other considerations
which may influence his public conduct? Halt
awhile, reader, and we will explain this matter. a
thte hangs by It, of which you have as yet received
np intfniafion. To the Bank of Virginia there is
aetached President, whose salary is $4,000 per
annum. Attempts have been made by individual
stockhoiders, to curtail this salary, which Mey es
reemeu enormous, whether considered in regard to
the saar1es of other officers, none of whom, the
uoVernor and Civil Engineer excepted, have 80
great salary-or in regard to the duties required,
%hfcn Principally We're, to sign notes and Ltink for
the Bank, IN the policy of emitting and curtaiing,
and buying Bills of Exchange-for these embrace its
whole polleg.--Some wished this salary reduced,
because as Republicans thay thought there ever
ought to be correspondence between the dutias
rendered, and the money paid-others because of
this, and for the farther reason, that the profits OF
the Bank, In which many t'widows and orphans u
tpoor things!( were concerned did not Justify the
Iavfshing of enormous salaries Attempts to reduce
the Presidents salary having proved abortive, from
the fact, that almost all the 81 oekholders were repre-.
scented by Bank Oftesrs. Pro1ies-who, their sal
aries being touched, unanimou SLY took in each
others defence-we say private Stockholders having
attempted in win. to reduce the President't salary,
though they succeeded, no doubt by the aid of the
Prores, in reducing that of ths other officers, and
even Of the porter, who had hundred dollars taken
from his pittance-thfs being the state of things,
when the bill for rechartering the Bank of Va was
under consideration, Mr.. Rives OF Campbell, moved
to insert clause, reducing the Presidents salary to
1900, and that of the Presidents of Branches
whose duties are confined to presiding and to sign
in9their MINES to bank notes,) to 500 each. The
motion WIS negatived by not very large majority
because it was deemed best to leave 1t TO the stock
holders-but the House of Delegates, to prove their
sense of the matter, Immediately adopted the amend
uient of which we have spoken, clothing their COM
missioner with power to give the vote, which they
wished given in the character of stockholders, and
not in that of Legislators.
Vhe Senate returned the bill, With an amendment,
denying the State the power of voting on her shares
by her commissioner but giving her the right to a,
bout 80 votes!-on number of shares exceeding one
third of the whole capital of the Bank. The House
of Delegates yesterday dtsagyeed to the se6ute's
amendment--fhe Senate Insisted upon their amepd-
ment-aHd tho House insisted upon their disagree
nrent. And thus the matter rests.
In respectto the Bank officers, we respect them all
and love many of them; but viewing Banks as iBsti-
tulions that ought to be watched, and the power
claimed for the State, to which its great in
terest in the Bank justly entities it, it prepos-
ferrous to that it should be withheld, because a
possible consequence may be the reduction of an
ovorgrowa and disproportionate salary.
THURSDAY MORNING, FEB. 10, 1880.