The New York herald., 1877-11-22
CLAIRMONr SAVINGS BANK.

News was received by Mr. Samuel Marsh, in this
city, yesterday that Judge Landen. OF Schenectady
had appointed Mr. Clarke Brooks, lawyer OF this
CITY, as receiver OF the Clairmont Savings Bank, In
place OF General Smalley. rho history Of the case
discoscs a very knotty point OF law and may prove
source OF litigation 10 the bank. An application was
made about two months ago by Clarence NJ. Hatton,
one OF the depositors. to have recover appointed
for the bank On his suit Judge wostbrooK appointed
General Smalley, Attorney General Fairchild how.
ever claimed that the exclusive prerogat've OF
the Attorney General acting in the name Of the people
OF the State, have receiver appointed, and that
this could be done At the instance OF single de-
postor. Mr. Samuel Marsh, counsel Tor the bank ar
gued the before Judge Landen, at Schenectady,
nearly two onths ago. and the Judge hs
cis,on The Attorney General had agreed to consult
the representatives OF the bank IN tho mato and The
OF over sixty pcr cont Of the deposits had sig
nltcd their satisfaction at General Smaey's appoint
mept 1t was thought that tho Attorney General was
satisfied with the arrangement aud that the matter
had dropped. But That Mr.. Brooks has been ap-
pointed there are two receivers ana the prospect Is
that good part OF the depositors' money which was
stolen Will have 10 be employed IN deciding which
receiver ~ IN the right
Mr. Vanderveer, counsel for Mr.. SmaIley, ntmates
that politics may have something 70 do With tho Al
torney Generals action, us General Smalley was one
OF his active opponents ut the Albany Conven-
ton. Tho General. he says went 10 Albany week
before the Convention anu .worked against Attorney
General Farchild, doing great deal 70 secure the
latters defeat Perhaps The Attorney Generals anger
has been aroused at this conduct ana ne has brought
himself on his opponent Mr. Vandervecr said that
his caent Mr. Smalley, would DO whatever he thought
interests OF the depositors and whatever
would their money IRON being expended in useless
litigation. He would continue his Investigation OF
the banks affairs until served with notice from Mr.
Brooks ordering him 10 discontinue. Mr.. Brooks
would probably Apply for the removal OF Mr.. Smaiey
and Mr.. Smailey would ask 10 ~ let alone Mr.
Marsh said that he did not believe Mr. Brooks the
legal receiver he s held to tho opinion he had ex-
pressed in mis- argument AZ Schenectady that, one
Judge OF the supreme Court having already ap-
pointed one receiver, co ordinate Judge Of the
Court could not appoint another Mr.. Marsh Is one OF
the original trustees OF the bank and appointed
chairman OF the investigating committee when the
frauds were nrst discovered. Ho said that he was
anxious TO save what It'll e money there was ict.
the important thing for the depositors was 10 save
their money and therefore he did not think II made
much difference as to who was receiver provided
the funds managed economically. IL might do
very well for some large institution with several mill
ions capital TO carry test case 10 the Court Of Ap
pcas 10 tad out whether deposltor has right 10
nave receiver appointed or whether this was the
prerogatve OF tho Attorney General but he Tor one
opposed to any such action in the present case.