The Camden weekly journal. [volume] (Camden, South-Carolina) 1853-1861, 1854-08-01
To our Town Subscribers.
Our Branch Bank-Again.

Our Branch Bank-Again.
We are obliged to notice the following from the
Sumter Banner:
"The subject of the removal Of the Branch Bank Of
the State from Camden to this place is exciting some
attention and discussion here. There is no doubt but
that in Sumtervle we stand greatly in need ofmoney
facilities, for legitimate business transactions, and the
establishment Of Branch Of the Bank OF the State IN
this place must be considered desideauna and will
add new impetus to trade. Camden with declining
trade has two banks one of these she could spare or
Weld up to the stronger claims of Sumtervie, which
impartial judgment must pronounce the better ana
more central location. bank established here would
be called on supply the demands darlington Ma
ron, and Williamsburg, while Camden with the two
banks to divide the business is surrounded all sides
by banking facilities. Our intention is not however
to discuss the expedepcy proprety of the change
at present. but only to call attention to the subject"
We cannot take time at present to enter into de-
tailed discussion with brethren upon this subject
and in answer to our friends of the Banner, we have
only to say, that whilst we cannot condemn their zeal
in aganting Bank yet we do not admire the spirit
getting one. Arethey following outthe good old gold.
en- rule? We think not They want bank at the
expense of Camden. They pretend as a reason why
they ought to have our Branch that the declining trade
of Camden does not require two Banks. There is o
strange error Of Judgment committed by our brethren
Of the Sumter and Darlington papers in putting the
reason or the removal of the Branch Bank from Cam
den to Sumterville on tho ground Of the declining trade
OF Camden. They assume that Camden alone is bene-
ted by its banks, they forget that these banks have
been and are, ofimmcnse service to- not Camdenalone
but Lancaster, Fairfield, Sumter and DarlngtoT now
Which is best to remove the Bank to Sumtervie, out
of tho way Of Lancaster, and Fairfield and Kershaw
too or let it remain where it is to the further accom-
modation of Lancaster Fairfield and kershaw.
Why do not our friends in Sumter get bank ifthey
are so anxious for one What have they done with
that charter granted them by the Legslaturc2 We
have no idea of giving up either Of Banks, so the
matter had just we'll drop whereit is So much for
our answer to the Sumter Banner at present
Here is an extract from the Darlington Flag:
I'VE extract from the Black River Watchman an
article urging the proprety of transferring the Branch
Bank of the State, from Camden to Sumterville- We
have understood for several years. that its transactions
have been chiefly with Sumter and Darlington Dis
trcts The private stock Bank at Camden is owned
by its merchants who deal exclusively with it, and it
must be equal to all the wants Of that Town with its
diminished trade. We believe Bank is an unmitga-
ted curse to agricultural community and have no
desire to sec one located in our District. But if a
- ~, &c nod IN
the eastern section Of the State Sumterville is more
appropriate location than Camden"
| We are surprised at the errors contained in the
above statement The transactions ofour Branch Bank
are not and never have been chiefly with Sumter and
Darlington Districts" and whilst it is true that they
have had liberal accommodations there, their business
we assume has not exceeded twenty-five per cent of
the transactions of the Branch Bank Lancaster and
Fairfield particularly, have been among the best GUS
toners to tue institution and yet among its liberal
customers "Thc private stock Bank at Camden is'
not owned by its merchants" nor do they IDEAL ex-
clusively with it" the contrary not seventy-five
shares are owned by the whole merchants of Cam
den two or three only stockholders and these own
seveny.hrce shares, which, at fifty dollars per share,
makes the enormous sum OF three thousand six hun
dred and fifty dollars lS3,65O) x
The merchants of oaaisn, as any and all of thea1
will affirm, have been largely and literally accommo'
dated by the Branch Bank, and the assumption that
their dealings have been exclusively with the Bank Of
Camden very great mistake, and we are confident
has arisen altogether from misapprchension on the
mind four esteemed contemporary of the Flag The
tt,. L.
of special remark by cotemporaries Of Sumter and
Darlington. We beg, however, to assure them, that
Camden is doing pretty we'll yet. Our friends must
produce other before they hope to effect
the removal Of our Branch Bank