The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-11-04
WON'T TAKE THE BOND
Hoboken Bank Tells the Coun-
ell That the Uneonstitu-
tionality Of the Law
Alone Prevents.

Corporation Attorney James F.. Minturn
of Hoboken presented to the Hoboken
Common Council last night the following
Communication which he received from
President Charles S. Shultz of the Hobo
ken Bank for Savings, explaining in de-
tail the banks reasons for not accepting
the recent POND issue awarded by the
city,
Hoboken, N. J., Nov. 9, 1881.
James F. Minturn, Esq, Corporation az
torney of the City of Hopoken. 40
Dear Sir-Referring to the matter OF 4 tae
800, 900 of ~repaving bonds AWARDED 70 .n ~
hank by the city of Hoboken, L now peg
TO inform YOU. as promised In my COM
mi,nication dated October q, 1897, whether
the bonds will be accepted by this 1nst-
tuition or not. ar. Henry
A. Gaede. make a careful examination OF
the act of 1896, relating to the ponaS -
question and of the various proceeolhsS
connected with the proposed ISSUE "
these securities. We have also naa tns
same things gone over independently ~
in consultation by an eminent New Jersey
lawyer, whose opinions on conStl.u Stnta
law, particularly of cases IN TINS Slale'
are tightly appreciated generally. WISH
ing to forestall my idea OF bias or preJu-
dice that the few members OF our eAeGu-
tive board might be accused OF in the de-
termination of so important a maller. l
therefore. called a special meeting Oh the
full Board of Managers for TINS DAY, NO
yember 3 at three P. M, to have every
thing connected with the bonds, so far as
the bank is concerned, laid before the
Board. and have it settled by this body
at once.
ent, after hearing the opinion OF counsel
and the reason for their pinions ana
after going into the merits of the various
p paF,es t deelslo fuily etc dis presea'e the 70 bond one
award in its various bearings. 1t was
then resolved that the President be au-
thorized to inform the Honorable the
boken, which l do hereby through you as
Corporation Attorney, that this bank re-
spectfully declines to accept the repavlng
bonds awarded to it.
h various reasons given to us by
counse upon which we base the REFUSAL
of the bonds, we do not deem prudent to
state at this time, but will simply men
ton that we are constrained to belleve
that the act under which these bonds are
offered is of very doubtful constitution
atty. This is borne out in our minds by
Judges of the Supreme Court of this State
in a decision handed down by that court
some time ago by the eminent jurist just
mentioned and which decision has an
analogous bearing upon the conditions IN
volved in this proposed issue of bonds to
the bank and others. The officers and all
of the members of the Board OF Man
ayers of the bank sincerely regret that
lllcy DdfO IL iotb
bonds under the present conditions, as the
bank itself and the managers, collectively
and individually, represent large tax pay
ing interests, and as the bank holds Sc
curities of the city to almost one.half of
Hoboken's bonded Indebtedness, l believe,
therefore, no set Of men would be less
likely to wish to impair the financial
credit of Hoboken. Nor has it ever en-
tered the mind Of any person connected
with this institution to refuse the bonds
in question because it's bid was a little
higher than any dealers, as was reported
in the public prints.
For the reasons given as well in my
letter to you of October q, we have no
right to take any chances with the funds
of about 1900 depositors placed in our
care under the savings bank laws, here
to be safely guarded and invested. l have
hoped that we might see the way clear
to be able to inform you at this time that
we could accept the bonds and thereby
relieve the Honorable Mayor and Council
from the embarrassment resulting from
the refusal of the bonds by our bank and
others. Circumstances, however, will not
permit us so to do. I am,
Yours very truly,
CHARLES S. SHULTZ.
1Orocidant