The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1897-06-25
OF GRANTING TT TO CERTAIN
CRIMES.
GRAND JURY ENDS ITS WORK.
RETURNS THREE MORE INDICT-
MENTS AGAINST BICKEL AND
SCHEFFER.
IN PUBLICITY THERE'S SAFETY
SeGuestratiOn of Reports of ROtteT
Banks Is vigorously Con-
demned.

At last the May grand jury has ad-
iourned. Yesterday afternoon that
body filed into the criminal court room,
handed in three indictments, submitted
its final report and was duly dis
charged.
The report, which is published here
with is not a rib rooster, as many an
ticipated. The bankers and their
methods Of doing business are critt-
cised, the public examiner, who is so
unpopular with the Hennepin county
grand jury is treated with solicitous
consideration, it being suggested that
he needs a large force Of assistants.
and amendments of the existing bank
ing laws are recommended, that will
impose greater responsibilities upon
the directors and trustees of banks.
The grand jury is also convinced that
the law against gambling is being vio-
lated in st. Paul and that saloons are
| open on Sundays, but they say that
no evidence was at hand to warrant
any specific indictments for these Of
fenses.
OF the three indictments returned
| yesterday, two are against William F.
Bickel and one against Albert Schef-
| fer. Grand larceny in the first degree
! is the crime charged in each instance.
While the indictment against Col.
! Scheffer was not made public, it is
understood that it is based on the
same charge as the former Indictment
which was quashed.
But in the case of William F. Bickel,
both indictments make new charges.
! of thaT1o OH DIV 40 IL
by the G be, charges Mr. Bickei
with committing perjury in giving his
testimony in the garnishment proceed
irgs instituted by creditors Of E. J.
Lucius against the Minnesota Savings
bank. Upon the hearing in disclosure
proceedings before Referee George
Hiilman, it is alleged that Mr.. Bickel
falsely testified that a deposit of
$1,94O.58 belonging to E. j. Lucius, was
/ drawn out of the Minnesota Savings
bank on Nov. 9, 1896, the day before
| the garnishment papers were served
The ether Indictment charges Mr..
! Bickel with the larceny Of the sum Of
| $5,9S3.67 from the Minnesota Savings
bank on the 10th day Of June, 1896.
! No Overdraft is alleged, but simple,
plain larceny as Mr. Bicl1el had 10 &C
count in the bank at that time. The
witnesses whose names appear on the
back of the indictment are T. D. Shee-
han, E. F. Heinlein, E. J. Dewitt, F..
]. Lucius and Charles H. Schade
1t is understood that On the 14th Of
June last, the grand jury voted to in
dict John F. Baker, one of the trustees
of the bank, on the charge CT grand
larceny in the second degree, and that
this indictment is among the three re-
turned a few days ago, the other two
being against A. S. Kittson and ". F.
Bickel.
THE JURY'S REPORT.
We have examined into The condition
Of all the banks which have recently sus-
pended and we find in all want of the
ercise Of prudent Judgment and in some
much absolute dishonesty.
Banking institutions, aside from their use
fulness in facilitating exchange, are so in
timately connected with the habits of saw
ing, and saving has much to do with the
material and even the moral life of the
great mass of the people, that risks which
might be permissible in many other lines
of business should not be tolerated in them.
Absolute safety, not a desire for large
profits, should be the rule of conduct for
bank officials We find none of the banks
examined to have followed this rule.
few of them discovered their mistake
some time before they suspended; but not
until it was too late to themselves. In
/ some of the banks, whose books were before
/ us, dishonesty was prevalent; the officials in
many ways unlawfully converted money to
party. They overdrew their accounts; be-
/ came liable in amounts in excess of the
statutory, failed to maintain the reserve re-
/ quired by law, made false reports to the
public examiner and evaded complying with
his requests.
In one case our efforts to secure the facts
were more or less obstructed by the actions
of the witnesses who, though they occupied
positions in the bank which qualified them
! to give US all information in relation to its
| business, suffered from lapSeS of memory at
times which seemed to amount to special
desire to conceal the facts.
In all other cases brought before us we
| found an evident willingness to tell the
truth, even though the witnesses told it re-
, ! luctantly.
1t appears to this grand jury that the
| public examiner of this state, owing to the
recent hard times, has evinced a disposition
to show leniency in many cases, which
course, under certain business conditions,
! might possibly be commendable, but, when
the interests of the depositors are jeopardized,
lie or the chief executive should take prompt
and decisive action. This is especially true
| in cases which have come under our notice,
where bank oficers-who held few shares of
stock in their respective institutions-were
permitted to become liable to their banks
for sums of money much in excess of the
statutory limit.
The examinations of the public examiner
of this state are too infrequent, and though
they are apparently thorough, of little
value as protection to the depositcr, owing to
the fact that his reports are filed in accord
ance with the law in the chief executives
office. and not made the property of the
public.
Since the chief executive of this state
does not make public these reports, and as
there is evidently nothing IN our statutes re-
curing compelling him to do So we feel
it duty to recommend that the law be
amended so that this end may be attained,
that the depositor may know, as nearly as
may be, the exact condition of each bank
which law could become operative say in
nine months or year after its passage.
We feel that the chief executive of this
state should elso accept more or less re-
sponsbiity for Withholding information from
the public, and for neglectng to insist upon
the prompt enforcement of the law; though
we also believe that both he and the pub
[ lie examiner did so, acting under the be-
r lief that. with the advent of better times
the affairs of these institutions could be
Strengthened out.
Should our law however, require this dis
closure to the pubic of the financial stand
ing of every state banking institution, the
depositor could judge for himself as to it's
condition.
1t is evident. also, when we take into con-
sideration that the public examiner has, to-
day about 155 banks az which are saw
ings banks), and trust companies under
his supervision, that these, together with
those which have dropped out during the
past year, required larger force of exam
liners than he has had at his disposal. We
| would. therefore, recommend that he be pro-
vided with an adequate force with which to
properly administer the duties of his office.
Summing up the banking question as it
| has been placed before us, would say
that we condemn detrimental to the in
terests of the depositors, the practice that has
obtained by permitting officers of banking IN
situations and trust companies to become
| liable to their corporations in sums in excess
of those prescribed by the statute. That a
| closer scrutiny should be kept by the public
| examiner of all institutions of this character
md hot f6nr ch0,rld no rod 20 1,,1I,,