New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1847-10-22
Letter from Judge Dayton.
From the Albany Evening Journ.l.

LocKPoRr. 18th Oct lsi7.
NEssRs. WEED AND Dawson Your paper of
the llth instant contains article in relation 10 me
which, by reference 10 Report Of the Bank Commit
tee OF 1881 attempts 10 with improper prac
tices said 10 have existed la the late IOckpOrt Bank
sultiug In the loss OF ia charter
] csnuot believe you would have published gu article
40 unjust 10 me 10 relation 10 transactions which Oc
CURED more than ten years since II your attention had
been particularly called To the Report Of the Bank Com
mtiea 10 which you alude do not propose 10 inquire
into the truth or justice OF the conclusions which the
committee arrived, acting, they did n pare evil
dence and without giving the officers Of tbs Bank en-
opportunity 10 explsn tho charges made against them
The illegal and improper practices which were nude
the ground Of taking away the charter OF the Bank
charges OF ufury The most careful examination of
the Report will show that II contains nothing which,
directly indirectly. imp icates connects either my
self ms then law partner In any usrrOus transaction
whatever Those who know best Will not doubt my
unqualified averment that nsr,r shaved A note and
received y cent o. usury In any form under any
pretence challenge the proof Of single instance IN
the course ofiny ~hoiolle
An attempt - made 10 awe an undue importance 10
the amount of costs charged by attorneys for business
done for the Bank Ia its name. The Bank Commit
tee In regard n portion Of the assumed amount said
ia their Report II Is believed though not verified by
legal proof They might have said the OF many Of
the matters embraced ia her Report Il IL sufficient SO
fer tina ia concerned 10 say that It embraced
all the business which came through she Bank ncud-
Ing not only what belonged to it, but also large amount
Of collection paper from sbrOad ~ well as from the
neighbOrhOOd which had grown out Of the mad specu.
sons snd excessive business Of 1896 Neither myself
my partner had anything TO do with the financial
management OF the Bank and had nothing 10 say what
paper should, what should not be profecued When
sent 20 ii attended in the regular course OF
business and Ia most instances without knowing
inquirDg whether IL belonged TO the Bank 10
be collected by for tie benefit of Others II Is not al
lodged that Illegal fees charged. The only offence
seems TO have been that the attorneys did the business
OF the Bank when sent to them.
trust you will give ihis communication place in
your paper and that those editors who have copied your
article in their Journals will do the justice 10 Give
this an insertion Yours &c. N DAY TON
~ The reader who is not irresistibly remir ded
by the above Of Fslstaif reply before Prince Hal
to the vehement asseverations Of Mistress Quickly
must have dull apprehension Of nnaloges. The
charges of the Journal were specific and formula
ble-not that Mr.. Dayton had ever shaved note
nor done anything else which he positively denies,
but that he and his lav partner rere Directors and,
first one then the other Of them attorney of the Lock
port Bank during the time it was destroying its
character and violating its Charter by the malprec
tees specified in the Legislative Report thereon
Why not meet the charges or have wit enough to
keep silence AS to Fees, the only imputation is
that Messrs. Dayton & Co. profted largely by the
mismanagement of their Bank. Is this denied p
And if they, being Directors, had nothing TO dc
with the financial management Of the Bank,
which the rapid multiplication of protested notes
in their hands must have shown them was very
bad, it really seems that such ignorance and inder
ence on their part was a glazing violation OF their
sworn duty 10 the public aud the stockholders. Mr.
DAYTON has not mended bis cause in the least.