The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1878-12-25

main in tho First National Bank
for two plausible reasons: First, because
the bank had earned the favor by sccur-
ing subscriptions TO the new loan equal in
amount to the moneys on deposit; and,
secondly, because IL had lodged ample So
curity for those deposits with the Treas
urer. But these grounds of defence or
apology are merely minated They are
nowhere broadly and boldly alleged and a
close scrutiny of SHERNfAN's words will
disclose why he darcs not make such a state
mcnt in plain terms
Tho enormous balances reported rs held
| by the First National Bank arc confcsscdly
far in excess Of the subscriptions procured
| by that institution to the four per cent. loan.
They arc due In much greater proportion to
the deposit of the proceeds of bonds sold
through the so-callcd syndicate How
does it help the Secretary, or shift
by one hairs breadth the responsible
ity from his shoulders, TO remind us that
the bank named is member OF that
financial clique All men at all convcrsant
with financial affairs know well enough how
the fiscal Ring known as the syndicate was
organized, and under what suspicious cir
cumstanccs the First National Bank Joined
1t. The fact OF membership does not Justify
or palliato SHERMAN's violation Of tho
spirit and the letter OF the law.
Tho act Of Congress under which he
assumes to proceed, provided by way Of in
duccmcnt To efficient action I'm placing the
loan, that the national banks might hold on
call the amount Of any subscriptions actu-
ally made or obtained by them. How does
this provision authorize the First National
Bank to become the depository for an indef-
mite period OF all the moneys collected in
Europe and all over the United States
through the efforts Of syndicate TO which
special privileges are known to have been
conceded Certainly, II such a state OF
things had been contemplated for moment,
the act referred TO could never have passed
the lower House Of Congress, nor would the
financial complot Matched between the Sec
rotary and the syndicate have been suffered
to mature without vehement protest on the
part of the great majority Of the banking
associations Of the country.
Not only does SHERMAN fail to show
any warrant in the intent or even in the
wording of the law, for his astonishing favor
toward given institution, but his statement
AZ to the security furnished by that bank for
its huge deposits Is dcplorably vague. We
are told that the balances reported as due
from the First National Bank are. "to
some extent, nominal" because some OF the
bonds forwardcdas security are" callbonds."
ana therefore constitute constructive
payment. But the precise ratio Of the call
bonds to the whole sum left on deposit with
the bank Is not stated. nor can even these
be credited TO the bank until they have been
carefully examined. and the amount due on
them ascertaincd. 1t is not pretended that
any such examination has yet been made.
JOHN SHERMAN posed before a knot OF
gentlemen the other night as the guardian
OF the national honor; but we can assure |
MIN that Congress and the people will exact |
from him very much clearer and more |
satisfactory account OF his stewardship |
than he has given In the letter quoted. |
They will insist ON knowing by virtue Of |
what arrangement the First National Bank |
received on deposit one dollar of the peoples |
money In excess Of the subscriptions due TO |
its own eXcrtions. They will insist on know.
ing precisely what security tho nation has
had during the past six months for |
the vast sums left in the control Of
that establishment. They must know. too,
on what principle and among what parties
the profits accruing from these deposits are
divided. And perhaps. too the fifteen hun
ired national banks will ask on what
grounds their hearty and united co6pera.
ton Is demanded by n Secretary who turns
oyer to one favored institution valuable
tights and privileges which ought to receive
he widest distribution among themaIl