Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1883-11-23
Ghe c6rrr I)rrss
LrAr OF sSUHET HISTORY.
How tho brandon Bank Lost siaO..
OO0-Thc Relations Betvccn Batch
elder and Bascotn.


OOo-Thc Relations between Batch
elder and Bascoun.
The suit of the directors of the Brandon
National bank VS.. John A. Conant and 9th.
ers, their predecessors as directors, has come
t. an end Ivy the withdrawal Of the suit by
the plaintiffs. Tie suit was brough,
by the directors to recover 100000 nj.
legged TO have been lost by the bank
through the negligence of the defendants
while they were acting as directors, and L.
Il. Hard OF this city, John w. Stewart,
briggs Il Ornisbee OF Brandon aud Prout
u Walker of Rutland appeared for the
plaintiffs Henry Ballard appeared for Pres
ident Cnant aud Il. J. Phelps, Luke p.
Poland, James Barrett and A. p. Topper OF
Mddlebury represented the other deicn-
dants. From the magnitude of the suit and
the eminencc of the legal talent employed
the case attracted wide attentijn and its
trial was awaited with interest. Ii has now
come to an end, however, witha result which
specifically vinlicltlon of Mr.. Conant aud
his brother directors. In the proceedings,
however, M interesting chapter of secret
history has been brought TO light, which we
n)w lay before our readers.
For some years prior to 1878 James H.
Batchcdcr was engaged in the lumber bust
ness on large scale, having extensive in
terests III the towns of, Middlebury Lincoln
and Ripton. 10 thsspring OF 1878 he failed,
with Misunderstanding $1,000 and it was
then discovered that he had obtained of the
Brnadon National Bank, through its cashier,
ID. G. Bascom, $4,000 on forged aud
worthless securities. Bascom left the State
soon after the explosion. Batchelder was
nd ind ictr Mt
against him by the grand Jury OF Rutland
county, and seven by that of Addison
county. One of the last named batch of in-
dictmcnts was dismissed on technical
grounds On another Batchelder was tried,
with the result of a disagreement Of the
jury; and the remaining indictments were
then mol. pros'd. In the meantime and just
prior to Batchelder's failure a new board of
directors of the Brandon bank had been
chosen and these directors, at the September
term of Rutland county court, 1880, began
the suit against their predecessors 10 which
we have referred, and which has been drag
ging along ever since that time.
In its course defendants counsel discover
cd that Bascom, the cashier Of the bank, and
Baicheldcr were in partnership, and the
articles of co-partncrship are now in their
possession. This was of coure secret
document. 1t was not dated, but was evil
IDENTIFY drawn up in 1876 and large part
OF it is in Bascom's handwriting. The con.
dilions are, in brief, that Batchcder shall
give Bascom one-third of all the profits of
his business during the year 1877 (his rents
in Lincoln excepted and that Bascom shall
take charge Of the finances and furnish the
money for the prosecution of the business (;
and the agreement was to continue until
such time in 1878 as Bascom should be able
to, ..1,nr.. ~ ..
was well understood on both sides how the
money was to be obtained and Bascom i'm
mediately proceeded 10 advance Bachelder
large amounts of the ba nks money
on forged and worthless paper and to
manipulate the banks books and COM
ceal the fraudulent paper from the
directors. This sort OF thing was kept up
for about two years, and then the explosion
came. In January, 1878, Bascom wrote
Batchelder that new board of directors had
been elected that committee would he APP
pointed to investigate his (Batcheldcr's
transactions with the bank and that he
must not "lisp "A word' about the secret part
nership. The next day Bascom again wrote
Batchelder, giving the names of the inves,i-
eating committee and warning him to be
on his guard. In both, Bascom charged his
partner to be sure and burn his letters i'm
mediately. From this and much other evil
dcnce of an equally convincing character it
was made perfectly evident that the bank
lost its money through corrupt conspiracy,
carefully concealed from its officers, between
its cashier and Batchclder; and hence the
suit to which We have alluded has been with
drawn.
Batchelder, 1t appears, claims that las.
com robbed him OF $50, 1000 in the course of
their partnership that the Indebtedness OF
the concern was increased about 800, 900 10 Il
single year, and that of this sum $50, 900 did
not go into the business but remained in Bas-
CONS hands.
The exact relations between Bacheldef
and BascOm have always been mystery
the above facts, which until yesterday vert
known to only one or two persons, make The
whole matter perfectly clear.