Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1840-04-20
For tho Vermont wsrchman and Journal

Bank of Montpelier, it is difficult to devise, ana
deserves inquiry. Was it because his c0nduct or
motives had been impugned by me- CeI'a'ny
not tor both had been indicated. was u 10 aeny
any fact which hnI stated, in when ne had any
CONCERN No, for he admits every thing nliegeu
by me. Then what could have been his object I!
Was it to claim share with the Patriot IN the
contempt of the public; or was II TO make nm
self contemplate on his own individual account
II so, it is the duty ofirendshp TO SHOW him how
eff,,ctually he has accomplished his object This
Office cl,eerfuly undertake. But TO fulfil II III
the most satisfactory Manner it is necessary that
! make short statement OF the circumstances that
preceded and probably occasioned his appearance
before til. public.
The Patriot had distinctly charged on more
than one occasion that the stockholders and OH
GERS OF the old Bank of Montpelier, lad rejected
the act Of rechancr granted in 1888, for The Pnr
Pose Of depriuing The community Of banking tdclt-
tiles; FIR the purpose Of expressing The people 1or
Whig party purposes; and also tfat they hah us
ell their efforts to prevent the stock OF the new
bank being taken for the same vicious purpose
TO lie first charge OF the Patriot replied in my
former communication that it was absurd, for the
reason that the vote TO reject it was undn nous,
and that Mr.. Baldwin, its own candidate for State
Treasurer, and Messrs. BAYLlEs and Daggett aud
Bancroft its own partiZalls, were aiming those 80
voting and that the Patriots charge was conse-
quently an impeachment Of their integrity ana
lnerted their contempt. And IN order u make
the Patriot appear the more despicabe IN making
the charge stated what, it now probably contes-
SEES, that opposed the act OF recharter with all It's
power and influence, when before the Legsla-
ture and that by condennlng others Tor accom-
plshing what it tried to do was exhibiting IN it
self the disgusting spectacle OF satan rebuking SIN
To the second charge of the Patriot replied
by challenging 1t to anle any act vi opp0sltloh 10
the new bank on the part of those interested in the
old, unless the act Of its own pariIans, Messrs
HI. NI..l HIM
down their names for shares, without paying III
the specie. as required by the charter, should be
go considered.
In this state ofthe case and at this point Of time,
MIR. BnyGes appears before the public with his
statement And why did he find il necessary TO
appear at all Was it Mt The promptngs OF Il
wounded reputation, to denonnce the Patriot for
charging him with n conspiracy with his fellow
stockholders TO abuse and iulure the public, by
depriving them of banking facilities? ., no -
for no such manly object. On the contrary,i it was
to vilify his fellow stockholders of the " hlg par.
~, for dongs in which he and his locoioco friends
were Joint actors and approvers; and ull for the
low and unworthy purpose of giving seeming
countenance and support of the false charges OF
the Patriot But in this act of self degradation
and AMUSEMENT, he manifes,s ingenuity worthy OF
admiration. In all his statements wherein he i'm
pues evil to the actions and motives OF the stock
holders or directors Of the bank, he studlously
conceas the fact OF his being sto ;kholer or d.
rector himself, aud voting and rOncurrng in the
nets lie condemns; thereby expecting TO escape
the censure he wishes TO have visited upon hs
associates. lie always refers TO the dolngs oi the
stockholders and directors 10y the expression,
"they" lid aud so-noi we. Ard ! wish
the reader to drag him from his lurking place
and keep constantly i'll mind, while he fol ows me
step by step through his statements III It MI Is is
director and stockholcr and parcipalor in all
the acts of his associates VIII ch he censures.
Let us notice, in the first place, what he states
in relation to HE stockholders OF The oil bank re-
iectng their act OF rcchar,er, for The purpo u
injuring The community to subserve Wing party
PURPOSES He commences by minimizing, ralhe
Than saying, that tie stockholders were pledged IL
advance to accept the recharter Tor various rea'
sons.
|. Because it was granted by tho Legislature OF
The npnlica,ion of the directors. Aud yet Ia
knows very well, being himself II director, that NJ
such recharter was applied for. An egg was aske'
for and Il stone was given, through Tie istiSanol
of the Patriot and the lOcOoco members OF III
Legislature But il thus constituted p'e"se "
his estimation why did he vote to reJectltf AM
could not Wings do the same without censur
from HIM?
q Because lin his own Words "aiter it's fina
passage there was much rejoicing among IT
friends, in electng The directors, and some win
drank on the occasion." But ne was drecto
and pres nj and snlo the wine yet he voted to re
ject it (recliarter, not lcine) Notwithstanding th
hedge And were the Wing stockholders unde
higher obligations 10 regard it than he'
3. Because, he says, that he never once hear
but that the recharer was acceptable to the 'liret
tors, till just before the meeting OF the slockhol.
ers called for the purpose of considering the SUI
,ect (which was afis. the Freeman's meeting. AZ
hitting the fact what had the director. to do wit
accepting or re lecting the rechnrter: They cou
neither do the nor the Other. This was II
business ofthe stockholders only, in meeting III
cessurily to he held for that pnrpos., which TO
sure, happened in This case, after freeman NEE
ing But if this silence of the directors, of whic
he speaks, constitut Il pledge 10 accept it, no
came he who was both director and sOckhold
10 vote against it when the proper Time to talk al
act arrived? Aud could not v big directors al
stockholders vote as he did, even alter freeman
meeting without any imputa,lUn against their m
lives from him Thus, in every instance,
bellies by his own acts what he wishes to have ri
derstood viz: that any pledge existed, wherel
the stockholders, wing or locofoco were eth
morally, legally or implicitly bound in advance
accept the recharter.
| come now to consider what he intends ms
knock down piece of testimony against the VIII
portion OF the stockholders. But before ilrodt
ing it will prepare the way,by quoting whit
says of the reasons for the rejection of the rechi
ter. Hear him A few days previous to I
n meeting, 1.-THE Stockholders Ting for decidi
upon the subject) learnt the objections to
new charter, which were, the requirements
publishing The amount Of specie on hand quartz
ly, and bringing the bank under the safety iu
system The first believed quite oleciiond!
and the latter detrimental to safe banking ins
tutinil." And again: "Thc stockholders ht
three meetings and gave up the bank for the rel
ons aboue siated.' Here we have from his O,
mouth his own opinion ofthe reasons for reject
the recharter But the fact that he was a stoc
holder, and voted with the rest for the rejection
kept out Of sight; but let it not he forgotten.
Now we are prepared for his broadside; h
it comes: 1t is my firm opinion, however,
ever has been since the aforesaid meeting, had
Wings carried the fall cleo ions ms they had Al
cipated, the Objectionable features of the
would have been overlooked"