New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-11-05

ton for years past has been entirely nade-
quate in this case. The prejudice against the
banking system is quite strong enough aTeau!'
But nothing else can increase 1t so much rs
evidence that plumber Of the public Is rendered
easy by official complaisance. The Govern
ment virtually pledges itself. in the NatiOhh
BANKING act. to exercise n constant ana ehec-
tive sunervision over the banks, for the pro-
lection of the public. If it appears that the
laws do not now require such supervision
os 10 give reasonable protection, the laws
sbould at once be changed. Either the Gov
eminent should cease to give these institutions
nubIic confidence by pretending to watch ana
inspect them, or it should make us super'lSioH
effective.
When the Examiner wrote to the cashier Oh
fine Mechanics Bank of this city, asking as 10
the balance of the Newark bank he did not
take the surest and safest method at his com
mand. True, inquiries by letter are usually
safe. and in most instances no other mode ot
inquiry is practicable But in this case u
was perfectly easy for the Examiner 10 rloc
into New-York, call at the Mechanics Bank,
and insnect for himself the books showing the
account of the Newark bank. Had he done
this. he would have avoided the possibility
that the cashiers of the two banks might be
IN Ioa,uc IN defeat the law. As it happens,
Baldwin was enabled to defeat the law quite
rs easily and surely, in this instance, as Ii
there had actually been such an improper m
derstandine with the NeW-IOrk cashier. But
what right has an Examiner to assume, IN any
case. that no su.h understanding exists!
What right has lie to rely upon inferior evil
dcnce. when the best possible proof Is easily
obtalnahlc?
Investigation was defeated in this case, as II
has been IN mary others, because the tx
omincr gave notice to the bank when an
examination was to be made. 1t VIII
seem TO the public that it ought to be
made penal offence for public Examiner to
give warning in advance to the institution thai
he is about to inspect, or to disclose TO II any
part of the information about 1t that he may
have received. The daty of an Examiner
ought to be, il it is not, to enter bank WIFI
ont the slightest warning OF his intention 10
take on the spot, and before leaving the buiId-
inc. memoranda of so many OF the more III
portant items that subsequent alterations
or fraudulent entries could hardly he made
with success rs to any large amount; and as
soon ms possible to obtain the best evidence that
is within his reach MS to the correctness OF the
more important items. But il Is frequently as
serted, and by the public sometimes believed
that Examiners in May places receive more
money for giving notice that they are going
to examine a bank than they are paid Tor
making their examinations. Every event like
the one just disclosed at Newark, every bank
failure which shows that the official cxamlna-
tons have been imperfcctly or improperly
made, shakes public confidence in the system,
and inciines people to believe the worst regard
Ing the corporations aud the officials. There
ought to be, if there is not, severe punish
ment awaiting every Examiner who dsrcgdrdT
the obligations OF his Office