The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1921-02-12
WILSON CUSTER

shall be taken with reference to re-
storing such reserve. 1t is not con-
trary to law or public policy for
bank commissioner to honestly &C
quire stock in banks which have been
chartered during his term OF office
and whose charters were granted by
the charter board while he was sitting
as a member.
Rights of Bank Commissioner.
Challis further discussed the rights
of a bank commissioner while serving
on the state charter board and de-
clared there was no statute against In
corporation of a company to buy, sell
and hold stock of banks ana that such
a course was not a violation of the
antitrust laws. 1.-The purchase of
pany is authorized by Chapter ISL.
session laws of 1919" says the COM
missioner.
In his formal report Cha1lis held
that there was not "even scintilla OIL
evidence which would tend to prove
that there was anything sordid or dis
honest-iH the actions or the defend
ant"
Commissioner Challis in his concur
SionS after a review of evidence pre-
scented to him during the long drawn
out hearing said:
Records Carefully Examined.
"The record has been conscientious
purpose of finding evidence which
would support the claims Of the plain
tiff. The matter has been considered
by your commissioner as rar as it Is
humanity possible from the viewpoint
which was presented to the defendant
at the time he did or failed to do the
various acts with which he is charged.
Your commissioner has NOT required
nor does he think the law requires
upon the part of bank commissioner
the powers of perfect preseience nor
infallibility in judgement.
1.-The record has been. very closely
scanned without finding any evidence,
even a scintilla of evidence, which
would tend to prove that there was
anything sordid or dishonest in the
actions of the defendant, and your
commissioner is pleased to report that
he has been unable to find wherein
the actions of the defendant have been
prompted by anything other than
desire to promote the banking interests
which were given into his charge. That
in the light of subsequent events, the
defendant might have done some
things he failed to do, or did not
perform some acts he should have
performed, is a conclusion which may
now be easily drawn, depending on the
Individual viewpoint of the one con-
sidering the situation.
at is hard, and in fact it is impos-
sible, for your commissioner to defi-
nitely designate any date when the
commissioner should have closed the
Kansas State bank at Salina. There
were So many other banks interested
in the Broker enterprises that the de-
PENDANT felt, and properly so, that the
whole structure was a house of cards
"a collapse of one meaning the de-
struction of all. Even after Lefferdink
and Broker had distracted the funds
of the Kansas State bank, they still
i II -, q
whereby all such funds could be i'm
mediately and legitimately replaced
Negotiations to that end were con-
tinued by those interested in the bank
even after the bank closed. While IT
is a demonstrated fact that the receiver
who was put in charge of the bank
has not been able to collect enough
from it's assets to pay its liabilities
still the actual insolvency of the bank,
in view of the possible cash market
value of securities which it held, ana
the possibility of the negotiation upon
the New Mexico ranch, might properly
be stated, was far from demonstrated
truth.
He Acted in Good Faith.
'rThe defendant is, by the law, in the
opinion of your commissioners, IN tne
performance of his duties and his Of
fetal acts carry with them the pre-
sumption of good faith. l have not
TOunQ Illdl any lnlI5 Vi dAs dSI "iiANhi
was performed by the defendant. or
any act which he failed to perform,
was prompted by other than the best
of motives, and were not character
lied by a wilfulness which would
justify his custer from office
"Were the defendant a candidate
for reappointment to his present posi-
ton, his official career might be ex-
anined to determine his fitness for
/ the position. 1t may be possible that
others in place of the defendant might
not have taken the action he did, er
might have done something that the
defendant failed to do. but such mis-
takes and judgments-if they were
mistakes-as were made by the bank
comm :ssioner do not, in the opinion
of your commissioner. constitute will
full acts justifying his removal from
office.
Purpose Was Legitimate.
1.-The action of the defendant in
voting to- permit the Kansas Bank
Holding corporation to sell its securi-
ties in the state of Kansas, when he