Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1886-02-05

result than the present Bland law.
Did >. M. Waite "EmbezEIef"
We have no wish or purpose to thresh over
again the straw in S. NJ. wates case. 1t is
evident, however, tina. Waite pretty nearly
fills the bill Of hero in Rutland eyes, and
the absolute Justification of facts which has
got into print there ought not to pass unno-
ticed. From the extracts elsewhere publish
ed it is apparent that the Rutland Herald re-
CARDS Waite as a sort of phenomenal fnan-
cial genius of the eagle type whose pnions
the brutal law and adverse fate clipped most
inopportunely. One would Judge so at least
from the tone of ill-concesled approval in
which it describes the trick" by which he
got $27O, 900 of bonds out OF the govern
ment with only 100000 of money. The
Herald also says that Waite was not guilty of
either theft or embezzlement, and it seems to
find certain pathetic interest in the the fact
that he shouldered the load in 1864 of nation.
al bank with its capital impaired to the extent
of one-half its amount The real surprise
comes, however, in finding supposed level.
headed man like Col A. f. Walker saying
substantially the same things notwith-
standing the facts which were developed in
the hearing before him as referee in the case
of the stockholders against Waite's estate.
Great stress is laid on the alleged fact that
in 1864 Mr. Waite took BANK with its cap.
tal impaired to the extent of one half its
supposed value and then struggled on to
make this impairment good and "ssve" the
concern for the stockholders The actual
fact, as everybody in Brsttleboro knows, is
that, whatever was the condition of the old
Windham county (stste) bank when it was
converted into a national bank, S. NJ. Waite
was the man who was responsible for that
condition. He was the first and only cash
Ter that the Windham county bank ever had ;
he managed that bank in the same reckless
sutocrstic way that he afterwsrd managed
the First National bank, and its directors
with possibly single exception, were never
allowed to know what its real condition was
He took" the First National bank in 1864 in
precisely the condition that he had himself
got its predecessor, the old state bank into
Col. Walker says:
"This fact see his letter. together with refusal to
allow him anything whatever for his services cash-
Ter during the sixteen years more of the bank
existence, accounted, as remember the case for the
entire balance found against him-which, though in
my opinion right upon legal grounds, should not be
taken at all as finding that he had msappropra
the funds of the bank to the aforesaid, to any
tent"
The plain intimation here is that Waite did
not inappropriate the funds of the FIRST
National bank to his own use to any extent,
and it is this idea which the Rutland Herald
and other papers seize upon, when they say
that, though Waite's methods we're crooked,
he was not an "embezzler" lin the ordinary
sense of that term" But what did Col
Walker say in his report to the court as ref
cree? One of its prominent portions is thai
in which he itemizes a list of fourteen drafts
drawn on Mr.. waite's personal account on th G
Fourth and Ninth National banks of New
York and the First National bank of Boston
and paid by them out of the funds of the
First National bank of Brattleboro, but never
charged to his private account. These draft
were distributed over the years from 1865 t.
1877, and varied in amount from $500 t
$4,000. The largest draft was payable Il
Wsite's own brother in New York, as wer,
several others. The aggregate of the four
teen drafts was $50, 2OG. In addition Their,
were personal drafts of 81, 500, and wheI
cash or its equivalent to the amount of $4,000
making a total of SCI, FOG of the funds o
the bank which Col. Walker found that Mr.
Waite had Incorporated to his own us
and never accounted for. To this sum Their
was to be added one item of S24, 6l8 and an
other of S7001 paid by him for coal to New
York dealers when he took up that trade o
got out Of it, making total of 1913, 1926. TIL
amount of all the items which Col Wake
found charged against Mr.. Waite was Sl53,
Oils, and the interest charges which b
added to this made total of 1924, 259 80
In offset he found credit items and interes
amounting to Sl62, 4l42 %, leaving balance
which was the amount of his final findn
chargeable to Waite's estate, of 81, s45 Os
These cold figures taken from Col. Walker
own report inevitably indicate that the state
ment in his letter to the President that Wait
did not inappropriate funds to his own gal
was very carelessly or recklessly made. Eve
S7l 1000 of transportation is an item wort
taking into account
Equally reckless is Col. Walkers allusio
to a refusal" to allow Waite anything for bi
sixteen years services as cashier. Th
amount of the claim which Waite, or his a,
sgnees, put in for services was SIS, 600. Co
Walkers language in his report relative I
this item was as follows;
az do not understand that person standing in
hduciary relation or even ordinary agent, Is eI
titled to compensation for services when the metho
Of performance has been such is disclosed by Il
evidence in this cause, aud as IL heretnbefore q
forth, tFordyce p 16 Fed. Rep. SIC and cAi
cited.l therefore disallow this claim"
In other words, if man wrecks or steals
business or concern with whose managemer
he is entrusted, he Is not entitled to pay fC
doing it. This bit Of sound doctrine seems
have now slipped out of Col. Walkers mind.
The natural inference to be drawn from Ii
arguments of Col. Walker and the Herald
that, because a man does not get rich out {
funds which he missppropriates, the misal
preparation is not misappropriation. tt
fact is that nine out of ten of the ban
wreckers begin by using the funds of the
banks to better their private fortunes an
think to get rich and restore the money
they fail and exposure follows. But b
cause this is so the incorporation is 1
less misappropriation. Comparatively fe
men have stolen bank and then run away
live on the proceeds. Had Waite done Il
latter thing his crime would not have bee
greater and the suffering of the ruined stool
holders would not have been less.
However Rutland and Burlington poop
may view Mr.. Waite's career, the people