The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1911-06-05
Benedum Responsible
For Wrecking of Bank
cameSon Bank Case is Decided by
Judge Nesbitt in Favor Of the
Depositors.
UNSECURED LOANS MADE
TO MANY INDIVIDUALS
Former President Held 20 Owe $780,
oCo-Sensational Testimony Of
Irregularities.

\ decision against President " /.
Benedum. of the First Citizens bank.
OF Cameron. which failed in Decem-
Der. 1903. was given in the Marshall
county circuit court Saturday by
Judge Franz w. Nesbitt. In Che de-
cision. President Beuedum Is held
responsible for the failure Of the
bank and judgment is given against
him for sums totaling $3.50. 600 with
interest for eight years. which brings
the amount up TO quarter of
million dollars
Howard Was Receiver.
The testimony introduced was of n
highly sensational nature. Mr. Rene-
diUn. and former Cashier A. r. Fox
being accused Of gross mismanage-
ment and unwarranted manipulation
OF funds After tho hanl- failed IN
December. 1903. owing large sums.
President Benedum came forward
with a claim for $4,000 against his
own institution and asked for the an
pOiutment OF a receiver.
John y. Howard was appointed in
this capacity. bUt his actions were
not satisfactory To the creditors OF
the bank. who had an investigation
made and discovered that corpora
tions promoted by President Benedum
owed the bank large sums OF money.
Being unable. 10 is said. 10 get Mr..
Howard 10 proceed in the proper
manner. these creditors were forced
10 file cross bill which precipitated
the long legal fight which has INST
ended.
oVerdrsft Of $4,000.
The capital stock ~ the bank was
$4,000. with deposits averaging
about Sl5O.O00. The Cameron Glass
Company Benedum concern. was az
one time allowed TO carry an over
draft in the bank Of $4,000. or SIS 900
more than the capital stock and TO
negotiate unsecured loans OF from
$2o.OO0 20 $4,000. This company
then sold out 10 tho Marshall Window
Glass Company. also controlled by
Benedum. and this concern was per
mitted 10 discount a note FOR $50 600
Other Benedum companies with
which similar tactics were employed
were the Tpshur @lass Company ana
the Wotzol Glass Company. of New
MartInsville These companies all
fail6I owing the bank over slOO. 600.
and causing the complete ruin OF the
institution
Cashier Overdrawn.
lt was also shown that unsecured
loans had been made 20 many indi-
viduals and that when the bank failed
Cashier Fox was overdrawn s70-OO
on his personal account. As mem
ber ~ the board of directors. prcsl-
dent Uorcdum is held responsible for
this loss ln fact. DO is said that Mr.
Bcnedum was the only real director
~ the bank. the others occupying 20
Hifions but hcing financially irrcspon.
sibic
Tho decision Of the court holds that
MesFrs. Hcncdum and Fox we're re-
gponsIhle for tho wrockinr Of the
bank and thar Ucuedum should repay
the sums duo 90 ali the creditors
Tho creditors were represented ln
fho case hv Attorney Charles Nc.
Camic ~ MouT7sy.lio with offices boz
fhe Schmuiharh building 10 was
stated hr fhc defense that on appeal
would boo taken fo rho supreme court
Must Return Money.
Judge Nofhit Indicated in hts do.
cie.on that monies paid ont by the
receiver in attorney foes. Amounting
20 about $1,000. would have to ba co.
stored fo tho trust fund This matter
o. ia aaid. VIII hc covered iu fhc Tor
NAL order when BE- Del entered upon
tho records ~ haa been said that tho
monies paid ont under Tho receiver
chip FOR lcRal services were paid with
out authority of the court. and for
Coontinusd on sirth ParsD