Year: 1877

AAVAs


Asa matter Of interest to large num-
Der Of our readers, we publish this morn
ing the decision of the Supreme Court o
Appeals of West Virginia in the case O
Peter Zinn, representing many Of the dc
positors OF the Wheeling Savings Insti
tuition, against the Directors of that un
fortunate concern. The decision wa
rendered last fall, but il has never beer
made public before, and we are indebted
to Mr., o. s. Long, Clerk Of the Court
for the full text as published this morn
ing.


For ourselves we never had doubt al
to what ought TO be the decision in the
ease referred to, on the basis Of facts as
We understood them, which were, in {
word, that the Directors had procured the
usual prescribed examination into the
affairs Of the bank only few weeks be
fore the default Of the cashier was dis
covered and found nothing wrong. But
the Court OF Appeals took much broader
ground than this in their decision, and
hold that directors can not he held liable
for simple negligence of duty, but only
for fraudulent conduct.


This to many may seem untenabl'
ground. We are not going to argue wheth
er iii is or not. The court gives its reason,
for taking such ground and we refer all
who feel interested in tho subject to the
argument as presented. Il certainly
throws avery wide mantle Of protection
over bank directors-wider perhaps thar
many OF them would ask for-but moi
perhaps wider than well ascertained con
alterations Of public policy demand. The
position OF bank director is generally
speaking thankless and unenviable po,
Hition, and if it was once understood tc
carry with it personal liability to the
stockholders, or, to the public, for what
might be construed as negligence Of duty
few men-in fact none at all-would be
found to accept such position.


Asa rule, it ought to be considered q
fair discharge OF duty on the part of q
bank director when he takes the same
care Of other peoples stock or deposits
that he takes of his own. II he loses by
over confidence in the Cashier, or by mol
looking sharply into the affairs OF the
bank, and other people lose likewise, and
there is no faint Of fraud attaching to hi.
neglect, the verdict should be that all are
in the'same boat and all should share
alike.


Few bank directors have much time tc
give to watching bank officers, or bank
business in general. They have their
hands and heads full Of their own private
business, and when they come together
once week to hear cashiers statement
they must OF necessity take a great deal
for granted. 1tcannot be otherwise. The
average bank director hus only dim
sort ofa comprehension Of what Is really
going on allweek in his bank. Heknowr
considerable about il and yet not very
much after all. Heia always on the sur
face, and has neither the time nor the in
clination, and perhaps not the ability, tc
go deep down into the recesses OF The
vaults and the books. He know
the cashier and the clerks, ant
has confidence that things ART
going on honestly and intelligently, and IL
willing to risk his interests in theil
hands, and this is as far as majority ol
Directors attend 10 the so.called
running Of bank. They come
in and go out, and see things going
on as usual from day to day, and do moi
eel called upon TO learn the business and