The Forrest City times. [volume] (Forrest City, Ark.) 1871-1919, 1903-10-23
TWO BALTIMORE
TRUST cos FAIL
The Maryland and Union Trust
Companies Close Their Doors.
LIABILITIES OVER SlO,OOO,OOO
Both We're Lnrg. Financial instit,t-
lions, Having Capital Runnia.
tp Into th. MilliOns-ltOth
In ReceiverS' Hands.

Baltimore, Md, Oct 20.-The doors
of the Maryland Trust Co. were closed
Monday to the great surprise of the
general public, though In financial cir
cles 1t was know. for several days
that the company was embarrassed AMI
that its continuance in business would
be dependent on the outcome Of es-
forts that were Under way TO borrow
money in London to tide over pressing
difficulties.
This failure was followed later in the
day by that of the Union Trust Co. The
latter was caused, the officials lay. by
run on 1t. following the collapse OF
the Maryland company. Both concerns
are In the hands OF receivers.
Luckily dozen reports. well cal
culated 20 provoke wholesale run On
banks, did not reach the great army
of depositors throughout the city, thus
leaders OF business to allay popular
apprehension before 1t reached dan
gerous proportions
Spreads Consternation.
The day began with the announce
ment of the failure of the Maryland
Trust Co., and except to only an in
itiated few, the news came like bolt
out OF clear sky. spreading conster-
nation in all directions To these few
1t was known that the Maryland Trust
Co. had long been struggling with "un-
digested securitiel," that 1t sustained
heavy Withdrawals of deposits and
that finally on Saturday last, 1t had
failed in its effort to negotiate a S.
O00, 900 loan in London.
The suspension of the Union Trust
Co., which happened at late hour IN
the day, gave impetus to many base
less rumors as to other financial insii-
tutions, which might well nave ere
ated panic had they been given cLr-
rency earlier in the day.
1t was agreed among the leaders ana
SO given out that there is nothing
alarming in the general financial 1it.
uation in this city. and the mere fact
that temporary difficulties overlook
one or two concerns Is no reason why
other perfectly solvent institutions
should be regarded with suspicion. One
timore said:
Trouble VIII Soon Blow Over
1T all depends on how the peopls
Of Baltimore act. II they don't lose
their heads the trouble will blow over
in time and nobody will be hurt: but il
they become panic. stricken the conse-
quences will be serious. This is time
to use clean judgment"
Allan McLane, third vice-presden-
of the Maryland Trust Co. was appoint
ed to take charge CT the affairs Of that
company. Miles White. Jr, first vice.
| president of the Union Trust Co., was
appointed receiver of that institution.
Mr.. McLane gave bond in the sum OF
81 900 900, and Mr.. White gave bond
in the sum of 100000.
The last statement of the Maryland
Trust Co, issued on June 30, 1903.
showed capital stock of $2,125 900, sur
plus s2,437 500 and undivided profits
of $G77, 1886. The company has de-
mand and time deposits amounting to
$5.773,81715
The Union Trust CO., at The close
of business on March 81, 1903, had cap
ital stock of 81 900 900. surplus OF $780,
900 and undivided profits of $l59. .6S7 55.
The Union Trust Co. has deposits
amounting to nearly two millions. The
filing of the first applications for re-
ceivers for the embarrassed companies
was followed by petitions fer core
ceivers for both companies.
| Total Liabilities Exceed $1O,OOO,0oO.
| The total liabilities of the two COM
panies exceed $10.00O,000 The CAUSE
of the Maryland Trust Cos failure
was due. as Is set forth in the state
ment OF Receiver McLane, to loans ad-
vanced to the Vera Cruz & Pacific rail-
road. Ii is said that these loans aggre-
| gate in excess OF $6,000,000, which
could not be marketed. The Union
! Trust Co. failed because of Jun On
its banking department. about $150,00D
having been withdrawn by depositors
Monday, but the real trouble of the
company had its origin in the organ
ization of the Sol tn & Western rail-
way, in Virginia, in which a capitali-
zation of about Sl1,000,000 vas con-
templated The Union company was
the fiscal agent for the Virginia en-
terprise, just as the Maryland company
was the fiscal agent for the Mexican
railway
Though these two failures followed
sc closely, 1t can be stated on anques-
toned authority that there was no
connection whatever between the two.
The Maryland Trust Co and The Union
Trust Co. were not jointly interested
in any enterprise. Neither company
managed trust estates.