Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-05-28

Lag
has already been made In the Pass, but the
following, from Fridays HVening Journal of
that city, gives these interesting particulars:
Adam Van Allen, Receiver Of the Bank Of
Albany, has commenced proceedings in the
Supreme Court against the firm OF Vose &
Co, which firm consists Of Henry Bleecker,
William Il. Bleecker and Samuel d. Vose,
arising out of their. connection with the aG.
fairs Of the bank aforesaid. The complain
ant alleges that the defendants had been in
the habit of largely overdrawing their ac-
counts without offering proper securities;
that Henry Bleecker had used his influence
as director to obtain overdrafts; and that tho
cashier OF the bank had suffered himself TO be
tampeTed with by him. 81 -.--....-.
In proof of these allegations the affidavit
Of f. Z. Kendrick, late. cashier Of the bank,
is produced. Mr.. Kendrick deposes that the
taid Henry Bleecker obtained and exercised
an undue influence over him; that he ap-
Piled TO him for oyerdrafts, which were al
lowed that these transactions were con-
oesled from the President and Directors; that
lie was actuated in yielding by the assur-
ancss of the said Henry Bleecker that it was
necessary TO have these accommodations ex-
tended; that if they did not get il their
Standing would be impaired, and their debts
already incurred TO said bank jeopardized,
that the firm Of Vose h Co. continued 70
make such overdrafts up 10 the time of the
lNolkuhbAJh vi upDOutuhf duu MlkQOut Lle
knowledge of the directors, and without pro-
yiding any funds to meet their liabilities.
The affidavit further recites: --
That in the year 1859, and for some time
previous thereto, the said Bleeckers, for aud
on behalf of said firm, who were aud had
been in the habit Of having their paper dis
counted, and being accommodated with loans
on. their paper by and at said Bank of
Albany, up to a certain amount, were very
anxious that the said Bank should increase
their line of discount, and afford them
greater accommodation and greater facilities
in discounting their notes; that the Presi-
dent and one or more of the Board of Direc-
tors of said Bank, on the application of
the said defendant, Henry Bleecker to afford
them such increased accommodation, de-
clined, and absolutely refused, and persisted
in refusing to comply with their said request
and wishes as aforesaid, though the matter
was very strongly urged by said Bleecker
defendants; that thereupon, and upon the
said Bleeckers understanding that the
Directors of the said Bank could not be
| prevailed upon to accommodate them to the
extent they desired, nor to increase their line
| of discount the said Henry Bleecker and
William e Bleecker privately applied to
| this deponent, and requested him to allow
them, privately, and without the knowledge
| or authority of the Directors Of said Bank.
TO draw the checks of their firm on said
Bank without providing any deposits or
funds to meet the same, and to pay the same
out of the funds Of said Bank, representing
that it was absolutely necessary TO them TO
be relieved in some way, and that they must
in some way have the use Of larger amount
of money from said Bank than they had had,
| or the Directors would allow them to have.
That said deponent was 80 importuned by
said Bleeckers that he at last was induced
and consented TO allow overdrafts by them
without knowledge or consent of the Direct
ors of said bank, and to conceal the same
from the Board of Directors of said bank
and thereupon and thereafter the said de-
PENDANTS Bleeekers did draw at different
times and in different amounts checks of said
finn upon said bank without providing any
deposits, or property, or securities to meet
said checks, and without the knowledge of
the Directors Of said bank or their consent,
and the same were cashed and paid by de-
ponent without the knowledge or consent,
or authority of said Directors, and the same
transactions were concealed, both by depo-
nent and said defendants Bleeckers, from the
Directors OF said bank, and the said defend
ants Beeckers well knew during the whole
time of their making said overdrafts that the
same were made without the consent or
knowledge of said Directors, and were paid
without their knowledge, or consent, or
| authority.
| ANU lulS Q6pOQ6uI IuTIneT SAYS, tuaJ IN
yielding to such opportunities he was actu-
ated by the personal directions by said Henry
of this deponent, as one of the Directors, and
by the assurances of the said Bleeckers that
it was absolutely necessary for the said firm
to have the increased accommodation to
carry on the business of the said firm, and
that they were abundantly able to pay or
secure all such overdFafts when required
| and that, if they could not obtain such in
| pTpapad ananmun01 II Fuidht i'm nair hair
standing and thus leopard their debt already
incurred to the said bank and said defend-
ants Bleeckers, under the private understand
ing and by the consent obtained from said
deponent as aforesaid, continued to make
said overdrafts up to the time of the resigna-
ton Of the deponent, as aforesaid, all the time
coneealing the same from the said Directors,
and without their consent or authority, and
without providing any deposits to meet the
same, or securing their liability incurred
| to said bank thereby in. any way and
without paying to said bank any considera-
ton therefor; that said overdrafts reached
o considerable amount in the year 1859, and
were rapidly increased by them from that
time until the resignation of deponent as
aforesaid; that the amount of the said over
drafts, exclusive of the interest thereon,
made by said defendants upon said bank,
and aid to them by deponert at the time of
| the resignation of deponent as cashier, ex-
cee6ing the sum of 1921, 800 36 that all said
overdrafts were made as aforesaid, under
said private understanding with depouent
and were not known or authorized by the
directors Of said bank, and the said transac-
tions were not communicated TO them by
1 said defendants or deponent; and no funds
or deposits were ever provided by them to
meet said checks overdraWn by said defend
ants, and no part of the funds drawn out of
the said bank by said defendants as above
stated have ever been returned or repaid by
them to depopents knowledge and depo-
nent says that during the time he was cashier
as aforesaid, the, said defendants Bleeckers
also induced and procured him 10 obtain
!. notes signed by the said firm, and payable to
the order of ard indorsed by William E.
4 Bleecker, 10 be discounted for the benefit of
said Blesckers OF said 6rm, IN the name of
said Bank of Albany, by the Bank Of Com
4 merce,. an extensive banking institution
doing business in the city of New York, and
TO pass over 10 them, the defendants, the
avails of said discounts and the deponent
actuated by motives heretofore stated, and
being importuned and pressed by the de-
PENDANTS Bleeckers 30 10 do, did consent TO
procure discounts of said notes in the name
d OF said bank at said Bank Of Commerce, and
Il pass over the ayalg thereof TO said defend
ants, under an understanding between the
defendants Bleeckers and said deponent that
said transactions should not be, eommuni-
! Gated to the said directors of said bank, and
they should be- kept ignorant thereof n
/ And the deponent did indorse the said
notes as Cashier, and thereby so procure the
discounts and pass over the ayailS 10 said
defendants, of o large number ofpotes 50
made by defendants at different times and
for different sums 10 p very large amount,
a all without the, kAoWledge or consent Of
d authority Of the a Directors, as defendants
II BleeckeIs we'll knew; and deponent saws
counted as aforesaid, 10 the amount Of $62,
900, still remain unpaid and outstanding
and the defendants have never provided funds
for the taking up or payment of the sarne or
anv MARI thereoft flat sffne ~ the aaid not tAs