Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1883-08-17
THE ST. ALBANs FAILURES AGAIN.

We asked the question In our last issue,
Is there no way by which the State lnspec-
tor Of Finance can prevent the wrccking of
trust company as that Of st. Adams appears
10 have been wrecked? The question de-
serves little further consideration, which we
propose to give 1t at this time.
The St. Adams Trust company was char
tered in 1sGS,lts original name being the Ma
tional and its present name being adopted in
1874. One section of its chatter contains
this provision: mo loan shall be made
directly or indirectly to any director or Off
Ger or employee of said corporation" Anoth-
er section provides ANY president,
director or other officer of said corporation
who shall msapply or divert the moneys,
funds or other trust property conaded to and
accepted by said corporation from the
purposes and objects prescribed by this
act, or who shall participate in
such msappication or diversion, shall
on conviction thereof be punished by
Imprisonment in the State Prison not to ex-
coed five years and be fined not to exceed
five thousand dollars or either of said pun
ishments In the discretion of the court" The
prohibition and penalty are pretty distinct
and explicit, it would appear Now from ali
that can be learned-for no exact information
about the trust companys affairs can be as
certaincd-thc company not only violated this
provision of its charter, but went at least to
the verge of insolvency in doing so. And
yet the State Inspector of Finance, Hon.
Charles Dewey of Montpelier, is quoted as
saying that he made an examination of the
company's affairs so late as July last and
found them in satisfactory condition. 1t is
to be remembered that the Inspector Of FL
nance is not restricted to the figures furnish
ed him by the managers of a trust company.
1t is both his right and duty to make
q searching and thorough examination of its
affairs, and to this end he can exam
inc its officers under oath and use other
means for asccrtaining ''the true inwardness"
of all its transactions. And law passed in
1874 provides that if on his examination he
finds that the officers have violated any pro-
vision OF their charter he may institute pro-
ceedings in chancery 10 restrain them from
the collection, disposition and distribution OF
the effects and property of the company
Now, then, did Mr.. Dewey, in this case
make such an examination And II so was
he entirely satisfied with the result? And
If he did nat do so, was he not derelict in
his duty? AS the thing looks on its face, Mr..
Dewey has not fulfilled the responsible duties
of his office in manner at all satisfactory.
We should be glad If he could furnish such a
statement of his official course as would
vindcate him in the eyes of the unfortunate
depostors whose rights he was bound TO pro-
tect, and of the people OF this State, whose
good repute is impaired by such failure as
that of the Trust company.
Open to equally severe criticism as things
appear on their face, is the conduct of the
National Bank Examiner, Hon. George W.
Hcndee. Mr.. Hcndee, it appears did not
approve of the loan of $4,000 on Mr..
Barlow's railroad securities and ''insisted
that it was too large and ought 10
be reduced" In the first place, the
law forbids loans by bank to any person,
corporation or firm of a greater amount, all
told, that one-tenth The amount of the capt.
tai stock of the bank. The capital of the
Vermont National bank was only 5000, 900,
and therefore the largest loan which Mr.
Barlow could legally have obtained of it