The Ohio Democrat. [volume] (Canal Dover, Ohio) 1840-1900, 1842-03-17

bond hundred aud fifty dollars, part which was In
their all OF which was positively and perempOy
refused,
Tais embraces a. we unders and the sub
stance of the articles referred TO, 'that tho
bank refused 10 receive It's own paper in the
payment of debts.
The above testimony is further sustained by
Samuel l. Lorah, and in confirmation Of The
whole, we have the adm ssIons Of Mr.. Bent
ley himself, to Mr. ReIder, 10 these words:
Bentley told him that il would have been bet-
ter for the bank TO have lost The face or amount
called for in the bond, rather than have refus-
ed to receive their own paper; aud that the con
sequence Of the representation, and their re.
fusal TO receive their own paper, would be
lose 10 them; or It would have been better for
them if they bad lost thousand dollars.'
The only construction the above is suecep~
tible of receiving, is, that Bentley was con-
scious of the ualh of the arhcIes referred 90.
and his alarm arose from the effect which il
was calculated to produce on The public mind,
preventing larger issues of the paper Of the
bank, before the catastrophe which took place
Of the 9Th September lS4l.
In reviewing all the facts which have come
10 light, in the Progre 8 of this examination,
revived for the public good, aud for The pur-
pose of giving good currency; but, on the
contrary, every measure taken carries with It
the appearance Of fraud, and most selfish and
corrupt design.
The PROVISIONS contained in ts charter, a.
We can discover, have never been Coneuted
but for the purpose OfeVaslOn. One or two
persons were the active and sole agents en-
pIoyed IN reviving and resuscilaing this insii>
tuuon; and their desigOs appear, so far as can
be Judged fom lis rise, progress, and end, 10
have been fully realized.
Its true that Mr.. Bentley had number Of
individuals associated with him as directors;
bu, with what estimate Of character for hones-
ty and respeciablity they are 10 be regarded,
We leave the community to judge, after we
have presented the fact that they were all, or
nearly all, accommodation directors, without
holding, by purchase and payment, one dollar
ofcapltal stock.
The business Of discounts, exchanges and
the safe management Of a banking institution,
i, Is generally understood. requires care, pru-
dence, and mature consultation; but in this
instance The whole business, by resolution
of the board, was ultimately entrusted to one
man, and from him we would not remove the
credit, which he has so richly earned.
10 summing up the foregoing facts, which
have been eliclied from this examination, we
have come to The conclusion, although it does
not become US 10 express legal opinion:
Frs.: That the resuscaton of the bank
was illegal, and wholly Imperative; and that
all the acts and doings Of those concerned in
said bank, from It's commencement to it's in>
solvency, we're un warranted, and therefore,
that each and every person concerned has rem
dered himself personally and Individually LA
BILE.
Under this head we might recount the tes-
tmony of its total bankruptcy, in 1918, its DOR
NANCY for 20 years, and the illegally of the
appointment of each board Of directors, &C.,
Second: That design Of the managers of
this institution was freud upon The country,
and in supper, oftbs opinion, we are SUSTAIN
ed by the facts of there being no permanent
capital on which 10 base banking institution.
The constant efforts It's officers to augment
it's circulation; the sale of all OF lis specie; the
mutaton of lis books; and total disregard
of the charter unde: which its existence was
claimed.
Third. Should the legality of the resuscita-
ton be admitted we come to the conclusion,
that The assignment Of all the assets of the
bank, after its insolvency, was made for the
purpose ofdefrauding the bill holders, and
screening the persons concerned from suits
being brought against him or them, and in
paIpable violation Of the law passed March
%, 1910, entitled, San act 10 amend an act en-
titled, IAN act providing for the appointment Of
board of bank commissioners. and for the
regulation ofbanks within the State Of Oho,'
passed February 25, A. d. 1889, which reads,
section 6, III shall be unlawful for any banking
institution, or any company or society exer-
cisjng banking powers in this state, 10 make
an assignment or transfer Of any ofits real es"
tate or personal property, or ofany ofiis rights
credits, moneys or effects whatsoever, with ln~
tent 10 hinder OF prevent such Institution, ccm
pany or society, from being closed up by the
bank commissioners, under this act, or The
act to which this is an amendment, or for the
purpose of eVading any of the provisions Of
said acts; but all such institutions, companies
or societies, shall be subject TO the operations
and provisions of said acts Notwithstanding
such assignments or transfer, with intent, or
for the purpose aforesaid, shall be held abso-
lutely VOID, against the operations and provis-
ions ofsaid acts