The Windham County reformer. (Battleboro, Vt.) 1876-1897, 1881-02-18
Mr.. Davenport,s Letter.

a | defending INC uicctois Wy w ioof hoh
! the charge OF. inefllciency or dishonesty
1t is an able piece of special pleading
cogently written as might be expected from
: its source, but as complete or satisfactory
!, defense of the old directors, we must can
, didly say it seems to us failure. Mr.
, Davenport is man of deep-moving feel
ings-sloves, hatreds and ejudices-whicl
/ in such cases as this seem to overwheln
J his power of fair judgment.
, His argument is of the q pri0ri kline
with which the monks met Galileo's theory
OF the earth's motion 800 years ago The
, earth can't be whrling round every day,
they said, because if it did we should be
thrown off into space. Calico must stoT
, proving this, or we will kill him. Walte's
bank must have been sound in 1864, Mr..
Davenport says, because Waite has spent SC
much money since. If any one proves II
was. not. he is knave or a fool Mr. DAY.
export sharply arraigns Mr.. Price and the
REFoRMER for guessing so much, and then
goes to guessing and assuming that the
bank was all right himself. The only diff
ference is that Mr.. Price, at least, had some
knowledge of the facts and details to base
his guesses on, while Mr.. Davenport had
none.
But all this has no direct bearing on
the question. M. Price rests his asser-
ton that the capital of the old Windham
county bank was exhausted before the
conversion into national in 1864, on
these facts: (D A discrepancy OF $74,0oO
between what Waite reported as due from
city banks July 9Th 1864, and what the
books of those banks show, (2) worthless
paper 0! $66 500 from w III. Waite at
Chicago and (3) at least $4,000 OF other
worthless and unbelievable paper.
| The.e is no guess work at all about
the first item. Waite reported i69,348
IS as "due from citybanks His books
or the books Of the FIRST National bank,
show Just about that balance against the
Bank of Commerce. Boston. and the
American Exchange Bank, New York,
and NJ others. The books of these
banks show that on that day there was
only 1914 900 due Here was a daliber-
ately false and fradulent report, with incon
testibleproof that the books were FRAUD
ulently kept as far back as then, and
com parison of Waite's books with those
of these Other banks shows series
Of discrepancies and false en-
tries extending back for years. rlr.
Davenport says he does not know how
much of tle circulation or bills redeemed
in Boston but not reported, is represented
in thiskSl68, 348. Mr.. Price does know
it was not over Sll, 900. The Boston bank
rendered its account and report twice
week, and its books show that reports
were made on the 23d and 26 h of July,
1864 which included Sll 900 of bills re-
deemed. which might possibly be includ-
ed in the $l6S 34S Making allowance
for all remittancGs and drafts in transit,
Of which the books Of The correspondent
banks of course contain record, Mr..
Price asserts that this item must have
been falsified to the extent of $4,000
and the facts back his statement.
(?) As to the VIM H. Waito debt the
books show that the bank was carrying
a heavy line OF discounts aggregating
hundreds of thousands of dollars for him
from 1853 to the time of his exposure as
thief and defaulter in Chicago. Up to
November, 1862 apparently, the notes
were all paid or taken care of; otter that
the banks show that a part were not
From November go to September '64
there are $40 600 of DISCOUNTS, and only
Sl2 500 paid, leaving SOC 800 " nicb was
overdue and still unpaid July 27, 1861,
lust as Mr.. Price sta.es. This is ex tctlg
as the affair would naturally be expected
to stand VIM. II. Waie had robbed
and plundered the Chicago institution
which he was managing, so that 1t had
10 fail in October. 1864 (Mr. Daven-
port denies the date. but Price finds a |
letter in the bank proving it.) He was
on his last legs, and could not pay. The
hooks prove that he did not pay, and the |
money was lost from the capital stock, or
else they were keps in such shape that |
nothing could be told from them. Oae
of these conclusions is unavoid sblo, and I!
either proves that the directors were not I
doing theirscuty-
(3) MIR. Prices statement was that"there /
is evidence 10 show at least $40 600 of |
worthless paper among the remaining |
notes.. The fact is that there are now IN
the bank several patches ofnotes between
1857 and 1864 part protested, and
none of them paid, so far as they them
selves or The books show, amounting to
$4,000
The first lot consists of notes of Geo.
Kendall, o. De Forrest and Henry
K Foote, a part protested, $ls 1893 96
I,
clude notes of |. b. Taft, Thos. Ma
son (slSsg.04 prOtested) Wilder Har-
ris, H. h. Carpenter, Geo. Kendall,
John Morey, etc s6,6s332
Note signed by S. NJ. Waite and j. F.
Burrows (bears entry, interest paid 49,.
Three notes of David ii IL, $500 90 |
Note of Jarvis +. Burrows, 1880 90 |
One note OF the "Windham Co. Mining
Co )" signed $. NJ Waite, Treas s5,4s5,OO
Lot Of small notes, signed w. w. Lynde, ,
A Spencer, Asa Miller, Horace Taft, ,
$. b johnson, and others, Si4g2 56
Notes which matured before tue con.
version in 1861. but have always been
counted among asSels-those OF Joel
Hammond, Ii. A. Pratt, j. j. Gran |
dali. Eugene Tasting, e Phelps,
w. Eason, f. +. Holbrook, and
9th RS, S3i67. IS .
Total si7,1494O
1t is conceivable that some of these '
notes are paid, and the parties neglect t
ed to take them away or see them re-
ceipted. But that is a thing which
would not occur once in thousand
times, and it eau account for but q small v
part of the $4,000. There is not a trace t
on the books of one of them being paid
1t resolves itself again TO the alternative. a
either the money was sank or the books I
were falsified, and in either case the a
directors, whose duty it was to direct
One other false statement which Mr.. Ii
Price did not allude to. shows that the Il
report of July 81, 1864, was cooked 10 a
for the occasion, and that Waites bank.
ng has always been a systematized fraud. i
He states the amount due the First Ma Il
ional Ibank, which is ofcourse for the r
new capital stock paid in, at $4,000. ?
The books of the old Windham County g :,
bank at thst date show only 500, 900 paid \
n. This of course swells the liabiltie, A
instead OF The assets.
The whole OF it in nut shell is thia /: 4
fraud of from $50, 600 TO $4,000 in y,
tatemeut of account with CITY banks, n
md worthless paper of about Sll7 900. b
1 these items do MOTTO some extent,rep- G
rsent the same losses they show de- Fl
cit of between $4,000 and Sl75. 600 N
nd afford ample ground for the suspic- al
On that the original capital of $4,000 il
vas all gone. W
We will not quarrel with Mr.. Ddven- OF
ort that the directors of 1861 were good III
men So were the di- q
ectors of 1879. hut they didn't do their j.
uty inst the same Mr.. Davenport @
nows better than TO say that the Re- /,
oRMER .fastens the imputation of dis Al
onesty" on the old directors The RE. u,
oRMER stook especial pains to say that
did not believe they Snew the c0udi-
on of the bank. But they ouqhL 10
1ve knoaUn, and The fact that they didn't su
Iakes them slip shods and incom petcB Is W
lst as the later directors were, IA
Neither will we quarrel with him
8 FL