Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-08-25
sURREPTETIOUs ISSUE OF NATION.
Az. NATur-E

sURREPTETIOUs ISSUE OF NATION.
AZ BANK NOTES.
A fact which will be rather alarming
to the business community has Just come
to hight, and is attended with some rather
mysterious circumstances. One of the
prominent banking institutions of New
York city received on deposit, in June
last, fifty dollar note Of the First Ma.
tionai Bank of Jersey City, New Jersey.
In due course of business it was sent 10
the bank from which it purported to issue
for redemption. The officers of that in
stitution at once returned it, with note
informing their correspondent in New
York that the note was genuine but the
signatures were forged. The depositor
was Immediately advised Of the return of
the bill, but inasmuch as he had de-
posted it in good faith, refused to take it
back Here was an unlocked for diem
ma. The plate WIS genuine; the Treasury
stamp was correct; all the mechanical
parts Of the bill were exactly in aeeords
ance with those Of other notes in cireula-
ton, and nothing was apparent on its
face to raise a single doubt of its char.
acter. There WIS no possible way for
the public to guard against the fraud
and the bank holding the note sent on to
the Treasury Department at Washington
to ask who should father the loss. Mr..
Hubbard, the Comptroller of the Cnro
rency, writes in reply as follows H b. 3.
In reply to your request for 40 opinion
from this Office, as TO whom must bear the
loss, can only state that in my Judgment
the loss must rest upon the party who de
posted the note with your bank, until such
party can be relieved through its acceptance
by the preceding holder, and 80 on, from
hand to hand, as prior holders can be ascer-
tanned The fact is established that this
impression of $50 was surreptitiously taken
from this Office. At present, however, no
provision of law, nor money appropriation
exists, to enable this department to redeem
the note or indemnify its holder.
Here is startling disclosure 1t is
distinctly admitted that this impression
Of $50 was surreptitiously taken" from
the Comptroller of the Currency in the
Treasury Department OF course more
than this single note was stolen, but the
number is not stated According to the
Comptroller Of tho Currency, the innocent
holder Of these notes has no redress what
over. If the party from whom he res
coives enc of these notes refuses to take
it back, there is an end of the matter,
and he loses the amount, for the Comp
troller very cOmplacently informs the
New York bank that there is no law nor
appropriation of money to enable him to
REDEEM such notes or indemnify the
holders When the Treasury De-
partment has the custody of the
plates and unsigned notes of tho
National Banks, the government ought to
be responsible for such issues as are
"surreptitiOusly taken" from the custody
Of the proper officer, since the people
have no redress for this species Of fraud
when the notes pass into their hands
The correspondence between the New
York bank and the Comptroller of the
Currency appears to have taken place
two months ago, yet it has just been made
public. In tho meantime the Treasury
Department has taken no steps to caution
bankers and others not to take any $50
notes of the First National Bank of Jer~
Iey City, n j., but has left the public
Sholly at the mercy of the purlOiners of
hese bills. What Kind of system have we
It Washington which can thus afford to
eOpardize the business interests of the
whole country, for if the notes Of one
Dank have been "surreptitiously taken"
rom the Treasury Department, what as
urance have we that the notes Of other
'anks have not shared like fate What |
Ort Of vigilance is it which suffers a thief |
0 break into a department supposed to
e guarded with extra watchfulness, and /
lake way with his booty unchallenged |
md still more grave is the dereliction
7hich has kept this highly important fact
profound secret, thereby enabling the
Dbbers to pluck the traits oftheir villainy |
nrestrained