Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1841-05-22

dsSurssd by tho officers OF tho Bank ,si,hou, nc.
ssn ance tho recharter, Is to lie added this sum OF
msS;.s expended ON OF about that very period
",s""s IN all tho sum OF 81 ,0is go rs 100.
IN regard to these expenditures, the objects OF
rh'eh they did not find stated on the books. the
N1"hhtee addressed the PRECEDENT of the Bank for
| ~. "''uon. Ills answer was, in substance, that as
| 20 'nos. amounts which had been expended before
ne period OF his Pre- sidency, he could not furnish
u.a Sommttee with any Information; that as TO
S'',<vo, charged in March and April, 1910, il had
osen asoIrsed under the directions OF n Committee
boatd, appointed under a resolution OF March
80, $50. Similar letters were then addressed to
VT Vt o'uuie and MIR Cowperthwaiie. From Mr. hid
u'e no answer was received Mr.. Cowperthwaite,
as mas oeen stated, called on the Chairman Of the
committee, and informed him that he had been ut
the Bunk, where access 10 the vouchers had been re-
'uSeu TO him. This the chairman wrote upon n small
P.eee OF paper, and requested MIR Cowperthwaito to
auo any thing further he wished; upon which he
W'o'e mat he was willing to furnish the Committee
any information he possessed OF. This was not
SrS"cu oy him, nor addressed To the Committee
nc oniy variance between this statement and OF
r Cowper'hwate is, that he says that he stated to
Nir. Lppncoit, what "his recollection was" re-
sPeeung the vouchers; that he (Mr LippincotD re-
quested u might be put down IN writing, and a short
ne'no'andum was accordingly made" Yet MIR.
CowPefthwaite does not communicate that which IL
Is most important to know-what IL was which he
uu recollect about these vouchers.
Inc simple question was and still is-For what
purposes were these sums expended An answer
10 TINS question has not been given from any quar-
er' ether 10 the Committee, TO the stockholders, or
Tue puonc. Were they legitimate and proper pur-
Po,esf u so, why not disclose themf
u at all crcduable that after the lapse of so short
period. the officers in question "hnd 1t difficult to
,eeau what were the objects of these large dis
onrsements7 Is il enough for Mr. Bidd,e again to
en'reneh hImse behind the formal report of Dvi.
uenu committee, which after all, simply states the
,aet that there was charged To Bonus and Permanent
Expenses an amount OF So $40 69i 80 100 in which
was included part Of these sums Yet this is re-
any he only authority Tor the assertion, that "with
regard To these disbursements made during "his,,
administration, the whole Of thom WE'RE Duly Ex-
AHMED; REPORTED UPON nj COMMITTEES AND
cosFihNEp nj rHg BoIRp BEFORE "uE" LETT rur !
BANK Even supposug 1t were so, that fact GER |
tany ought no, to preclude the Stockholders from
such information rs was requested. But the fac, is |
mat not only was that report according to the state
ment OF the Chairman OF that Committee, made with
out any examination of the vouchers of the Permn.
nent Expense account, but the sum Of Sos, 1928 25 |
paid out, while Mr. Biddle wos President was not |
charged until subsequently.
MIR Bddle complains that the e. penditures OF this
KIND made during his administration were not dis
eliminated from those OF his successor The impor.
lance OF this to his character the object of the re-
port did not occur TO the Committee but il is here
stated as he appears to desire.
The amount charged rs expended prior
TO March %, 1889, is SS59.24lIO
To this must be added this sum which
though charged various subsc-
quent dates had all been expended
prior TO March 20, 1899, 6s.323.25
And this iIl ther sum being money paid
the President, on Cashiers vouchers,
which was AT FIRST charged to Parent
Bank note account, 400 600 90