Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

* 148 .Vnl xxn rnuBsmr Krtotim, jutr s, iss* Whole Tfo 446s Testimony and Documents, I Accompanying tit* Report of the Special C >m miitee of the House of Representatives on THK MBMOBIAI. OF NINIAN EDWARDS [coxtihoed] IThomas F. Riddiclc. sworn, at the request of Mr. Edwards The Dank of Missouri had a capital of two huudted anil fifty thousand dollars, of which sum 840,000 was placed in an of £ce of discount and depusite ar St. Gen* neve, which said office was entirely under jthe control of the principal Dank, in all respects; the cashier and all the directors and officers were appointed by the mother Sunk, end removed at pleasure* Their fnnal .iperatioityve-* aUu directed by he principal bank, at St. Louis. The of- ice at St. Genevieve loaned money on pfsoual security,| but never on pledge of Block* Stockholders residing at St. Gene* ie»e pledged their stock at St. Louis, if hey wished to borrow on that security; not nore than 80 per cent, waa allowed on luch p* 'dge. which was considered only is collateral security. These loans were ^1 ways considered safe, and better than any hersonal security. 1 believe that the stock as never fallen below 80 per cent. A large amount of public moneys had kccumuiated in bank prior to the 9th Au* (us», 1819, but it consisted, for the most H in notes of the various banks of the tat, which had been received by the and offi d» and could <ot be used by the Treasury dischaige of debts due by the ivernment. TheBunk«>fMi«i80UN,atit8 expense a»d risk, (and fo» which they iv* not as yet been allowed any compen- itinn,) converted those funds to a large amount, say 8600,000. itM^uch funds aa vould pay the Treasurer’s drafts at 8t. jouls. But the government having no occasion to disbui **’ any Considerable tt> nnunt at St. Louis, (as the bank were in i roed,) made a proposition to the. bank i transfer its funds to the Bunk of the U. j5ta.es, and certain of its blanches;and, as i omuensa on for thiu sei vice, agreed that (150,000 should remain in bank as a per* Salient deposite, but which might, never- lieless, be drawn on when disbursements nu Id be made at St Louis; agreeing, ala a, list further compensation should be madp Fthe deposite, should not bo found ade- [uute for the service proposed to.be render. This waa accepted in part on the 9th lugust. 1819, sod a sum, amounting to ear 8450.000, before and af'er that time vas paid to the Bank of the 17. States and (ranches, nr funds worth 4 tier cent, pre nium to the bank. The premanent depoi Itb waa frequently drawn on, and reduced m. I'nount considerably below $150,- '’he bank has been allowed no coiii- sensation as yet for this service beyond yhat the uncertain benefit of this deposite light have been worth to them, which, un er circumstances, ought to be estimated ; a ve<y small sum. Moreover, the Bank bf Missouri had *o eucoun'er the hostility bf nearly all the institutions of the Wrat pom whom the bank of Mia-nuri had to hake demand for specie funds, or such (her funds as would satisfy the Treasu* er’s drafts; and also from gentlemen con. hected with those banks. This fact will be seen by a reference to the printed cor* fespondence with banks. Se>' letters from President of the Bank of Kentucky to be Secretary of the Treasuiy, May 25'h. [819; September 29,1819; tetter from hon. II. Crawford to President of the Bank bf Kentucky, July SO,1819; also, letters root i. .i Ninian Edwards as Senator of i U. States, May lOlh and 12th, 1819, greeted to Thomas F. Riddick, one of the directors of the Bunk of Missouri, which aid letters last named are filed with the Committee of Ways and Mea.,s, in support bf a petition presented by Thomas F. Hid* lick, as agent for the bank. It will, also, be seen, by a reference to ie several agreements made by the Bunk vith the Treasury Department, and the general correspondence; also, the original eriificates of deposite, that the Bank ot Missouri never become bound, until the 9th of August, 1819, to pay over to the Treasury any other or better funds than such as they should receive from the land offices not having it in their power, before Che said 9th of August, to direct what kind of paper should be received inpayment for lands: this was, before that date, regulated, by a list furnished the different Receivers, |by the Treasury Department, and, whether at par or uot, war received from them by the Bank of Missouri, and certificates of [deposite, issued by the Cashier, stating the amount received in par funds, and the a* I mount received in such' paper as had been authorized by the Treasury Department. Tue Bank, tner$forej cjearly had a' .‘right I to pay over such funds as was received by tltein; and the government,' in common justice, is bound to make compensation foi the.risk and loss incurred by the Bank, in- converting those funds into such othpr funds as could bo used by the Treasury, in payment of demands against them. whenevei these fair demands of the bank shpil be liquidated and settled, the amount that will be then found due the U. otatoa will be much lessened, and the a* * M nt that has been transferred by the bank ample, and greatly m ire than s-iffi cient to satisfy every cent justly due by the bank to the United States. The amount that now stands charged on'the books of the Treasury, is the nominal amount «.f all the moneys of every description paid inti bank by tne land offices, without any de duction having been mode for services ren dared, and for risk and loss in exchange. It will also be seen, by reference to the reports oi the bank, and the report of (in committee of Ihe Missouri Legislature,that the Bank oi Missouri did at ail times con* efoci its operations with great care and circumspection, hever having an average discount including notes on pledges of stock (with the exception ot the deposite of 8150,000,greater than the capital stock, and never ftavi;>£ its paper signed fin ci>* culation to a greater amount than 8204,- 938 29, of which suit!,- (if the books of t e bank were within my leuch,) 1 am aatistied it wotild oe found that the average amount in circulation, from the completion df the payment of the capital stock, to the day of suspension, did not exceed 880,000; *he S reatest amount that appears ever to have een in circulation, was 8153.899 50; of which sum 825,000, or near that amount, was specially deposited in the Branch Bank of the U. States at Lexington, and belonged to the Bank of Missouri; at the rime the bank suspended payment, only 886.000, or thereabouts, was in circula. tion. The suspension, in August, 1821. cannot, therefore,be attributed eithe- to excessive I «anv, or to an excessive issue of the paper of the bank; but to the general situation of the western country, whirh rendered it impossible for ti e hank tn collect from i’* debtors, with sufficient promptness, in meet the demand* for specie, created by the pressure that existed at that time, and to the circumstance of this bank being almost the only one who continued to pay specie on demand in the Western country. q bv Mr Conk Were you President of ii-< B». k of Missouri in 1821 ? A I was. i ; q. i»y same. Do you believe that dm ac count and monthly returns made by that bank were correct, just, and *rue? A. I believe they were and that tne state ment made by myself, and forwarded to Mr. Crawford, under date of 30th June, 1821 was also just and'toe. q F< om what Land f >ffire were the lar gest deposites mad*- io the BanknfMissou ri,between the 1st of July, .1818, and 9th Angus', 1819? A. F inn the Land Office at Franklin. Q When did Gen. hmith make his first deposite? . A I believe on the 7th December, 1818. <2 How much larger do you suppose tlioe deoosites were than those from any other offii ■ ? A Something more than twice the a in. urit fom *he office at St ' Louis. q Wh j t was the amount of tien. Smith’s deposited between the aforesaid peri its ? A. 1 believe they amounted to 4uG 966 dollars 76 cents; toisl take from a inemor .inilum in my possession. q. Were any of the dotes received from him refused to'be received as cash, and were they specially entered ? If so, state the circumstances, and whether General Smith was apprised thereof. A. Gen. Smith very seldom made his depositee in person. Hih office being near 2Q0 miles from the bank they were gener ally placed in bank by *omr person in whom the General hud confidence, travel ling to St. Loui9 or to the Eastward, or by s trading un the Missouri river. ( d- not remembei that the bank ever had any difficulty with Gen. Smith or any other person, about his depositee, i believe they were always made in the same funds which he received for lauds, and certificates wen- issued to him by the Cashier, stating the kind of funds deposited, which certificate* were,, no doubt, forwarded by him to the Treasury Department, as vouchers. q What amount of internal taxes were de United, much or little ? A I do not remember of any depositeB being made of that description. Q by M i Foi sy th. When were the de posiies of the Tennessee paper made by the Bank of Missouri, at Louisville? A. I believe in May 1820, having pro missed Mr Crawford to have it forwarded as soon as I arrived at St. Louis, which was done by a special agent. * I was after wards infowned that the agent of the Nash ville Bank received the amount of the Nashville Bank paper but that the agent of the.Tennessee Bank bad left Louisville a short tune before the arrival of th* spe cial agent of the Missouri Bank at Louis ville, and deposited it iu the Branch Bank of the United States. ... Thomas F. Riddick 6ta»es, that, while a Director of the bank, .he had access, at all titries: to the books and papers of the bunk being nominated by-the President to act in hisplace protem, when 'he - Was absent at his farm; or was holding Indian treaties, or otherwise uflable to attend ;'that he coun ted the Tennessee and other paper trans ferrud to the Treasury, before the proppsi tion of the 9th August 1819. was made, and that he took with him, wlwo h? left St. Louis for Washington city, in Dee. 1819, a considerable part of the" funds intended to be transferred and made a depusite at Chillicothe, and in the Branch Bank of the Uni ed States, at Washington, which de pontes made a part of the charge against him as agent of the bank, as contained in the monthly returns made to the Treasury ill the months of January anil Febuary, 18 20. Also, that what I have stated before the committee of my own knowledge is true and what 1 have stated as matter of opi. on. I believe to be true. q oy Mr Cook. Wiren you discounted bores for individuals, in what kind of mo ney did you advance the amount of such notes? ’ A. Those discounts Were Usually left in deposite, and drawn forin small sums at different limes, They were then paid, generally, in notes of the Bank of Missouri, or in such othef funds as. the bank had at the time, or as the party demanded. q. Did not the amount of discounts by the Bank of Missouri always very greatly exceed the amount of its notes, in circula tion? A. It is my impression that it always greatly exc eded that amount. q. Did not so much of the money ad- vunivd for discounts,as exceeded Ihe a mount of the banks own paper, consist, o r moneys deposited ini 1 by the government? A It consisted in pa>t of such moneys, but not wholly, because rome part id those money > were in notes that the batik could lint u e. q Did the bank ever refuse to receive divo&ites uiadp by Gen. emith. as cash ? A. So much ol ihe deposite as was in cash was received as cash; so much of it as consisted of bills was receipted for as such; but the whole amount waa credited logether, without distinction. q. Did you, in receiving deposites from the Land Offices, ever keep a separate ac court ot paper and uf cast,? A. A memorandum of the sort of funds received was kept by the Cashier; but it did not go into the books of the bank.-*-* But. in p ivate accounts with individuals, a separate account was. in some instances, kep; for cash and for notes, by inserting tn ihe ledger, opposite lo the sums paid, the words *‘ca- h,” or 'foreign notes,” as the case might be. , Whei- d<.‘po»ite« were made on account of the UniieJ States, a certificate was issued by the Cashier, stat ing whether the deposite had been made r ish. or io such notes as the Land Ufficet weredirected to receive. $ Was ->ut the principal part of the lurid deposited by government in the Bank of Missouri, transferred to the Bianch Badk of the United States, at Luuisviile, and to other bunks in Kentucky? A. There was no transfer made to any ot'-er bank in Kentucky, but Ihe bank at Louisville. The transfers made by the bank will appear in the cominuoiration of lit* 'Treasurer No. 2, dated March 1st 1823. q. Were not the funds which you say were worth four per cent premium, and paid over by the bank to government, derived f"om the government deposite* ? A. Some part of them might have been; ihe greater part was by tne purchase of bills on the government, sent to the Bank of the United Slates, at Philadelphia, and to the Branch Bank of the United States at Washington city, for collection on the part of the bank. q Were not these bills paid for in the d« that had been.deposited in the bank by the government? A. They were paid for out of the gener al foods of the bank q Did such general fund embrace the public depnsites? A There was no distinct account kept between the public fund and the general fund of the bank. q Was any premium paid by the bank on those government bills in their pur* rhasr ? and if so, on how many, and to what amoum ? A. A premium was frequently paid by the bauk upon such purchase. I cannot say, without a referrence to the books of the bank, to what amount. A premium of two per cent, has in some cases been paid, but it varied from par to one and a half and two per cent. When the* bank sold their own bills on the Bank of the United States, it, sold them at four per cent, premium. Q. By what means did the Bank of Mis souri acquit e funds in the Bunk of the U States, on which it could draw bills? A By collections madeJn the Bank of the 0. States for and on account of the Bank of Missouri, and perhaps in some in stances, by deposites mide there by indt»| viduals to the credit of t|ie Bank of Missou 'Q: AFliat ideec«pti«n jof debts were they which were collected by the Bank of the U. States for the Bank of Missouri. / , A, A, part of them were bills drawn by individuals, and a part of them were hills drawn Sy persons authorized to draw on the Secretary of the Treasury ftv the ex p«nditure of public moneys. Much the S reaver pact, I bplieve, however, were bills rawn by individuals. Q. You stated that the government funds 'in the Bank uf Missouri, at the time it sus* pended* cash payments, consisted of bill* which could not be converted into cash, or _ . , HUdfaiiBpenaion would not have happened Vl’A I wish you now to state what amount »fjt>ou, do do bills deposited on account of ihe govern* !$tl> P h ' ( io j ment was io the Bank of Missouri at the 2 H \n*». i M i, time the suspension uf cash payments took place. A. I was not correctly understood, if it was imposed that I said- that the govern ment funds in bank at the time of Hie ana* pension consisted ur bills. Although o credit then stood »n the books of the bank t the U. States, the money 'corresponding with that credit was ftot actually ip the bank The amount due the government, as nppe.tr* vl un the buuks of the bank, wus vety neat the amount allowed.as a permanent depft»* itt, which was payable six muntha after tin- bank ceased to be employed as an office of public deposite. Q. What sum did then, remain in bank, of bills which had been entered to the cred it of the U. States? A. A very small amount perhaps about five thousand dollars. Q. When the arangemeht was made with ihf 'B ink of Missouri, under which it wfis to retain a permanent deposite, what was smr „ the amount first understood it should so re- 1 lain? A. One hundred and fifty thnusmd dol lars. ' Q. Was there not an arrangement made with the Secretory of the Treasury by let; (era of August and Sept. 1819, by which the same moneys were to have been received by the government, or a considerable por- turn of them, as were received under the .subsequent arrangement of March, 1820? And did not the bunk fail to comply with Hie first arrangement alluded to? df.-The letter of the bank of the 9th of Aug. 1819, and the arrangement made by tne, It- March 1820, will answer that ques tion. Whatever paper, under the first arr • angement, waa not transferred, the bank, of course, was accountable for, in cash. Q. Was notapartoftliesime paper which was to have been transferred under the first arrsngeinsnt, aftei wards received under the second, in a depreciated state? A. No. I be.ieve that all the paper trans ferred to the government «»me vaioewr ine tune uf the trao»fer r 08 ( it was at the time it was agreed to be transferred by the letter of the 9th of August. Q. was not a con'iideiable part oHhe pa per transferred under the arrangement con tain* d in the letter nf the 20th of March, 1820, greatly below par? A. It was. Q. VVnat amount of it, as nearly as you can recollect, was below par? A Something more than one hundred IhnuHond dolfa>4. Q. Did Un- Bunk of Missouri ever recei vc a - answer fr«m the Semeiuiy of the Treasuiy, to 'lie following clause io a idle signed by Aug. -Chouteau, President, and dated 9ih A"„'U«M8l9 vtz; • • "As to the Bunk of E Iwa'dsville, the on ly one near us. we cannot give it our ennfi. •fence. Their paper is received with dis- truct.eveiiio their own neighborhood, and passed from bund to hand a* soon ns possi ble. Owing to the intimate contn-cliiu- which it had with the Bunk of S'. Louis, which cannot pay its debts, and has entif ely discontinued business* the ca* it.al stock of 'hat bank has been taken fur the most part, and is now owned by ft"? or six itidi* iuid*. sotneof them livit gout of the state, ami the direction secured to such persons as they may choose to appoint. 'There are othei objections, which wu fotbeat- tn mention.” A. 1 never saw any answer te this clause and believe that none was ever received bi this bank. Q. Was the opinion here expressed by the Bank of Misiouri, concerning the Bans •<»f Kdwardsvtlle, continued to be entertain ed by the former, for any length nf tim ifter the date of that letter; and how long ? A. Icannotpositivel.ysay.as ioany othe person but my self; but impressions wen- changed after I understood, from common report, that the Bank of EdwardsviHc had determined to forfeit the stock of those persons who should not pay the requisition*' of the batik. 1 understood that Genera 1 Puynj, uf Kentucky,and others, were stoct holders to a larje amoun’, and believed that they would fail to pay for thS stock subscribed, if demanded in ensh. Thi-., I think, was mj impression at the timr. but it was derived merely fom report then prevailing.- TIIOS. F. RIDDICK. EXHIBIT of the Amount, S^c. deposited io-tlie U ink of Missouri, by the Receivers of tin- Land Offices at Kaskaskia, Frank'in, *t. fc.-u is, ami F.dwardsville, as contained in twenty ■ six certificates of depusite, enclosed in a com- mumcaiioo ftom the Secretary of tits Treatii ry, of tne 8th June, 1324,. to the C >nirnitte< Appointed on the Address of N. Edwards Land Offices, and date oftiie Cer tificates vfDe* > posite. v Ktulcatkiii. 4th Sept 1818 3d Oct. 1818 23A Nov. 18J3 1 § - ■ Deposited ill Hie botes ak> batiks designated by the Se* i Cretary of the Trea sury. 830,243 ' 9,8i»r WJ Dept.-si ted in siic'-ie, in tf Siutcs Bank notes ft i-t no'rs of Bank of Mission 1 1st Dec 18t8 <th l-’eb 1819 Frank 'in tlo '?4'h do do ’4th do do 9th Np-ildo '5H- Mn<’,do 19i!i .lunfc,do 33U tlo do <Vr Iwult. 5HI Oct. 1818 3tt$ov. do 2d Dec. do tHih do do I'll P u b 181^ jJ5<ji do do 30Hl March,d.-) "Oth- April, do tthi-dr'Jn’ille. 6lli Sept 1818 20th Oct. do 6.1.19 Ffit 00. 8,129 3,611 Oft 50,448 1R.322 7,078 87 5,'4.5 62 2,776 T9 23.476 1,775 19 -- 14 253 86 73.924 27.078 09 37, >35 20,8m- 09 16.667 2091*4 4 ,854 28,734 30 16.670 44 553-02 2,).8o 19 23,515 3.309 04 10.225 1,775 00 7.802 199 09 15,500 328 43 9.8>5 33.916 8J0 09 23 454 1.415 09 4U,3f ! 4 5,758 59 7,(*80 1,135 09 4.000 8553,490 138,503 29 James L. Anthony, stoorn, at the -request *>f Mr Edwards. I am clerk it\ the ofii c of the Secretary of tlijs Treasury. I first head >of Mr Stg- phen-on’s alleged letter to the Department since Mi Edwards’s memmial waa presen* ted to Congress. 1 have at all times freO access to the room in which the B nk let- teisare kept, and have hud occasionally to io go there to consult tin sc letteis with r<* spect It; deposites by individuals, in pay* ment of.drbts to the goverumenti 1 was not consulted, previously to the Report made by the Treasury to’C,ingress on thd rubject of its conresno'idence with tho banks, as to. toy knowledge of the receipt • f the allcg; d letter fr.itii Mr -Stephenson* I have not heatd that that letter has been found in the Department, since Mr Ed* wards’s memorial was presented, nor huvo ! ever heard from any person in the Dc- parmentr or in any way connected with it # or from any other person, that such o let* tci ever was there, or tile Treasury had. at any time, seen it. J L.. ANTHONY. John Forsyth, of the Hours of Repre*tn» tutivvs. sworn, at the request * of Mr Ad* wards. I fi st heard'of me alleged letter nf Me » - |, .nn-niff li'MtsmjrantT-ih- ._.a- warth’s memorial was presented to C n* gress. A day or two after Mr. Crawford’S report c une into CongreJfA 1 read that re* |Hirt. but had no cutivcrsatipn with any person respecting Mr S eph.*nson's letter until aflerwatdv. 1 never have heard from the Secretary of the Treasury, from any person connected with the Treasury De* partment.Di from any member olCoogi-ess* that such a letter has been found." I was shewn by a pu*mber of the li<>use of Re presentatives a Iciter tiom a gentleman hi Richmond, in which the writer stated ih .t n paSsrn cr on board the steam b >at from AVu-hington down the river, bad said fr-st Mr Conki a menlpfer. of. Con* g>v6S fiom litinnis, hud M Crawfonl’s answer to the tetter of Mr Stephenson early to produce, on which I called up on the Secretary of tho Treastuy and mentioned, to him vvha' I hud braid— Ho ietl - i was possible, but it scarcely could be so ” . JOHN FORSY TH. S4.?"6 M 2.fi9it 8 fi.010 45 Jonathan Jennings, of the House of Rep- resentaiivel, swo n ut the request of Mr, Edwards. question hy Mr Cook In the report n- tie by Hie S- cteta-y ol the Treasury to Congress, I4t!i Feb. 1822, he’states that ••for the public money on deposite in tha B tnk of Yiiicenne-s at the time of its fai lure, collateral security ha- been ohmim-d** I wi-hyou t<> state your knowledge of tha qature of.thkt security , Answer. Tl'e collateral security con- Oomiisti-d of assignments nf certain bonds given to the Bunk of Vincennes, it belt - If f the Slate of Indiana, ami a note »f.n Mr Bint’ and his endixsers, as also, a transfer in tru.-t It the use of ihe U S'ates, of cer tain real properly. The value i f the col lateral security, when given, I should haya .-btunaictl, privitleJ llifpri* h;-ti'bcen no sob* staotial objections to thcchiiracter ond cir* cumsthnees '.ttnlcr which the assignmenta and transfer were mail'*, as being worth a sum no* tnexcecd gSO.CO!'; Hie greater parQ of wliicli, howevei, since the assigumenta and transfer, owing to v;iri/»u« causes, has become untivaiiable to the U. States, and* in my opinion, the reddue will not yield mme ‘hat<-&‘2(>,R00- Q Do y iu know i f ahy steps taken since the arrang nienl of 1824, to get se curity fur tin* ili b ? A. I know of unne, except whlit was obtainnl through G»'n. Nuhle tfl B o-fk* ville, Indiana, ibcihe yea - t822; i>f tho value of when I am ouarqu lintnl. question by M'-Fioi/d. ii>d vmt any a- ger.i'y in prodoriiig'.the Bank ot Vindte nes in h.- made a dopositury of publiqt moneys? Altpsert Among others, l recommend ed that measure, 'j'ue Bank then appear ed, from its quarterly ret unis, submi'teA to me as .Governor bf the HiaU-, ‘ to ba entirely solvent. Tiaigc returns centoia- ed'only ibegenera) acroui ts o| the liaokf •\ar as t^ir-institution nqoirt-d, by at.y proviso;! of it-s ditu tcr, (Q Bnhmit- afiy