East River National Bank (New York, NY)

View Charter #1105 on SPMC View balance sheet

Episode Information

Episode UID
110500917
Episode Type
Suspension → Closure
Bank Type
national
Bank ID
11050 national
Charter Number
1105
Start Date
May 26, 1876
Location
New York, New York (40.714, -74.006)

Metadata

Model
gpt-5-mini (chosen from majority vote of a three-model LLM ensemble)
Short Digest
07fb6ff08b50a407

Response Measures

None

Description

Two separate newspaper notices (May and June 1876) report appointment of receivers (different names).

Events (3)
1. May 1, 1865 Chartered
Source
historical_nic
2. May 26, 1876 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
The East River National Bank vs. Murphy.-Frederick S. Wait appointed receiver, &c.
Source
newspapers
3. June 17, 1876 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
The East River National Bank vs. Glover.-Mr. John Henry McCarthy appointed receiver.
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (4)
1. May 26, 1876 The New York Herald New York, NY
Article from The New York Herald, May 26, 1876

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

DECISIONS. SUPREME COURT-CHAMBERS. By Judge Donohuc. Basso vs. Levy.-Order granted. Rhodes vs. Farley.-Report of referee confirmed. Burchell, &c., vs. Forrest-There should be a reference to ascertain facts. Graut vs. Jonas, &c.-Tno order to be entered as heretofore ordered. By Judge Larremore. McKeon vs. Donnell.-In the absence of a bi!l of particulars, and on the authority of decisions ID Martin vs. Gould and McCahill vs. Donnell, this motion must be denied, without prejudice and without costs. Oliver vs. Morrison.-Injunction continued pendente lite upon plaintiff filing security for amount of alleged claim and interest. Brown vs. Kipp.-Default opened on payment of the costs and disbursements of triul and costs of motion. Blessing VS. Reilly.-Application should be made to the Judge who tried the cause. Heilbrun vs. Racey et al. -Motion to strike out proposed case granted, with costs. Josephthal vs. Steffen.-Application granted on payment of costs. Sturtevant vs. Sherassen.-Motion granted on payment of costs. Fitzgerald vs. Ellen, &c.-Application denied, without costs. Prouty vs. Swin.-Motion donied without costs and without prejudice to a renewal thereof before Judge Barrett. In the matter of Schwartzler.-No proceedings have been taken 10 set aside the awards the stay is vacated. Listman vs. Blant-Stay granted upon defendant filing security for $1,000 with sureties, &c. Marquand vs. Denckler.-Motion for reference denied, with costs to abide event, Josephthal vs. Steffen.-Motion granted. Sutphen vs. Lash.-Motion denied without costs. Eybel vs. Phluger.-Motiongranted. Lillienthal vs. Branch-Injunction dissolved. Kelly vs. Scripture.-Motion granted. Dauchy vs. French.-Preliminary objections overruled. McKenna vs. Scriptura-Motion granted. Covert Cockroff.-Injunction continued. Lewisohm vs. Drew.-Application granted. SUPREME COURT-SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Van Vorst. Ham vs. Vilmar.-Findings of fact and conclusions of law settled and an engrossed copy should be presented for signature. SUPERIOR COURT-SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Spetr. Schryer vs. Minger.-0 to amend summons, &c. granted. Wystall vs. Smyth et al.-Order for judgment. The East River National Bank vs. Murphy.-Frederick S. Wait appointed receiver, &c. Lee vs. Lee.-Reference ordered. Shaw vs. Slater.-Undertaking approved. Tyng vs. Marsh et 1.-Motion granted ordering printed case and exceptions on the files of this court, and that the case and exceptions on the part of the plaintiff be deemed abandoned. Aberle vs. Fagan.-Motion for a new trial denied Wheeler, &c., V& Small, &c.-Motion denied, with $10 costs to plaintiff. Hesse vs Bruckell et -Reference ordered. Farley vs. Benedich-Proceedings dismissed, with $10 costs to defendant. Bradford vs. Prentice et al. Testimony filed. Martin vs. Gould et al.-Default opened and leave given to plaintiffs to serve complaint, &c. Martin vs. Gould.-Motion denied, without costs. Jones vs. Rowe et al.-Referee's report of sale confirmed. Karscher vs. Buliner.-Reference ordered to Hon. J. 8. Bosworth. Glaser vs. The Amity Fire Insurance Company.Upon the defendant's delivering the accounts of the plaintiff's loss in his possession, or in possession of his special agent, Winterton, the plaintiff must serve upon detendant's attorney the bill of particulars asked for. Memorandum. In the matter of the application of Henry Metzger et al.-Referee's report confirmed. Poillon vs. Lawrence etal., Rehm vs. The Western Union Telegraph Company, Graham vs. Livermore, Finke VS. The Orient Mutual Insurance Company, Schryer vs. Dettinger et al., Dwyer vs. The Weed Sewing Machine Company, Wheeler vs. Small, &c: Newfield vs. Copperman. Grittin vs. The Broadway and Seventh Avenue Railroad Company, Whelin vs. ihe Third Avenue Railroad Company, Chatierton vs. Mul. ford et al., Weble vs. Conner.-Unders granted. By Judge Curtis The Ball's Head Bank ol New York vs. McFeters ct al.-Findings settled. By Judge Sanford. Daly vs. Wailach.-Judgmentsigned. MARINE COURT--CHAMBERS By Judge McAdam. White vs. Campbell; Cookling vs. Rogers ; Bornard VS. Cleveland.-Opinions filed. The Germania Bank VS. der.-George S. Schuitz appointed receiver. Van Name vs. Van Name-Motion to dismiss pro. coodings, &c. granted. Do Forest vs. Wood. -Motion denied, appearance set aside and admission el service vaested: DO costs. Herrmana V8. Moore.-T issues on this motion will

2. June 17, 1876 The New York Herald New York, NY
Article from The New York Herald, June 17, 1876

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

DECISIONS. SUPREME COURT--CHAMBERE. By Judge Lawrence. Allison vs. The Oliver & Harris Company.-I do not see why an order should be made requiring the witness proposed to be examined to produce the books and papers mentioned in the order. The affidavit seems to state facts sufficient to authorize the granting of an order for the examination of the witness under the provisions of part 3, chapter 7, title 3, article 5, of the Revised Statutes. By Judge Donohue. Dewhurst vs. Bacharach-Granted two and a half per cent allowance. Ryan vs. Ryan.- Reference ordered. In the matter of Dickie.-Report confirmed. Barnett vs. Meyer.-Granted on payment of $10 costs. The German-American Bank vs. The Williams Mower and Reaper Company et al.-Costs as adjusted. Middleton VS. Bowne.-Motion denied. Memorandum. Berger VS. Raymond.--Motion granted on payment of costs of action. The German-American Bank vs. The Pittston and Elmira Coal Company.-Costs ns adjusted. In the matter of Rives, &c.-When the accounting is had think the Surrogate has power to diapose of all asked for. Morgan vs. The Continental Life Insurance Company.-Motion grantad. 1 think the proper place to try the question of right is with the federal court. Brewster vs. Oatley.-No papers submitted on which any question can be passe on. Tracy vs. Arms.-Receiverappointed. Hinadale vs. Heidenheim.-Motion denied, without costs. Bryan VR. The Proli Belt Company.--Motion depied. Walsh VR. Walsh.-Memorandum. In the matter opening 110th street-Ordergranted Maskell vs. Krausse.-Denied. In the matter of Beruheimer.-Motiou denied. Marshall vs. Marshall; Murtha et al. vs. Murtha: Howe vs. Little: Sloane vs. Miller (Nos. 1 and 2).Granted. SUPREME COURT-SPECIAL, TERM. By Judge Lawrence. Gano vs. McCunn et al. -As it appears that certain of the defendants have been served by publication and their time to answer has not expired this case is improperly upon the calendar, and the motion to strike it therefrom must be granted. By Judge Van Vorst. Morris et al. vs. Porter.-Findings of fact and judgment for plaintiff settled and signed. Taliman vs. Taliman et aL-Findings settled and signed. SUPERIOR COURT-SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Sodgwick. The People. &c., vs. Bull--Motion denied, with $10 costs. Crowell vs. Crowell.-Order settled. Wilson vs. Knapp.-$150 allowance. Schertnerhoru vs. Wheeler.-Motion denied, with $5 costs. Lambricht VE. Meagher; Herman VR. Meagher, and Zulick vs. Cook.-Ordered on short calendar. Bartholomew vs. Engler et al.-Judgment vacated. Hess vs. Burckel-Leave to serve supplemental complaint granted. The American Medicine Company vs. Kossler.-Remittitur filed. Anderson vs. Priest.-Orders or the 8th and 12th of June vacated, with $10 costs to abide event. Smith vs. Short.-Complaint to be filed within five days. The Dry Dock Savings Institution VR. Cobb.-Reference ordered. Rogers vs. Rowe et al-Referee's report confirmed, &c. The National Park Bank vs. Bucking.-Decree signed. Struppman vs. Muller.-Order settled. Neher vs. Donough et. al.; Wood et al. vs. Davis; The Webster Loom Company vs. Whittaker; Uhlman vs. Kohner; Holman vs. The Central National Bank: Oberle vs. Fagan; Struppman vs. Miller; Washburn vs. The Dry Dock Savings Institution, and Donohue vs. Johnson.-Orders$ granted. COMMON PLEAS-SPECIAL TERM. By Judge Van Hoesen. Murray vs. Cassen.-Motion for new trial denied. Shaw vs. baw.-Order of reference to Bettle issues Santord vs. Hurd.-Motion donied. MARINE COURT-CHAMBERS. By Judge McAdam. Fluschauer vs. Wortge.-Motion to exonerate sureties deuied. Lanaux vs. Meyer; Raynolds vs. Bramlacht-See indorsement on papers. Bloomingdale vs. Oatman.-Proceedings stayed until costs of former action are paid. Carlislo vs. Davis.-Discontinuance allowed on payment of $50 costs. Simonson vs. Meyering.-Arrest vacated on stipulating not to sue. Black vs. Frey.-Judgment for plaintiff. Thompson vs. Dupont.-Motion denied. Ott vs. McArthur.- -Order settled. Black vs. Freedlander; Harvey vs. Miniszek; Nicholson vs. Conner; The East River National Bank vs. Glover.-Mr. John Henry McCarthy appointed receiver.

3. October 25, 1878 Essex County Herald Island Pond, Guildhall, VT
Article from Essex County Herald, October 25, 1878

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

On the failure of Jay Cooke & Co., a general feeling of distrust was engendered, and the consequence was the utter failure of many of the Nat onal Banks, and the total suspension of all the National Banks in the city of New York. Now this was not suspension of specie payments, but was a suspension of payments in legal tender Lotes or greenbacks. The promises of the government in the form of greenbacks rose to a premium of four per cent. above the value of National Bank notes, and who can tell the extent of the disaster to the whole country if we had been doing business upon a spe ie basis, as it is called? The ruin would have been general, but as it was, everybody knew that there was precisely the same amount of paper money in the country af'er as before the panic, and consequently it was of short duration, and there was comparative-ly very little derangement in the movements of the products of the country. If the banks could not pay in greenbacks when there was in the country more in amount of legal tenders tean the entire national bank circulation, how can it be expected hat they can maintain coin payments? The fact is, his talk about specie payments is simply absurd, whether uttered by Mr. Greeley or the Solons of Congress. Mr. Greeley's saying that the "way to resumption was to resume," is not a whit more absurd than the more elaborate proposition pending in Congress. To maintain coin payments in this count.y, commercial as it is, is simply impossible unti the Almighty has changed the character and habits of the people-until, as a nation and as individuals, we become a frugal and economical people, sp nding, as a whole, less than our incomes; and until our national, state, railroad and commercial debt abroad is paid or largely reduced, we cannot be secure from the effects of the vicissitudes that creditor nations are liable to, and consequently, if our banks are on a coin basis, we are liabl at all times to a foreign drain, which would compel suspension, Allowing the national ba ks to issue any currency is an unmitigated evil, and is the real obstacle to sound, wise a d wholesome legislation, and and they ought to be divested of that power as speedily as it can be done without disturbing values. This real or fanced -interests are antagonistic to wholesome financial legislation. Capital is timid and selfish, and at the same time is influential, and it has been said (by Senator Sprague) that nothing is meaner than one million of dollars except two millions. The circulation enjoyed by the banks is a valuable privilege, ard to protect it they will overlook every consideration of public good. The evils of such special favors do not end with the banks, for to secure and perpetuate favorable legislation for themselves hey must not oppose legislation for the benefi of other interests: so, legislation becomes a matter of special favor to various interests, and not for the general good. Therefore, the sooner Congress is relieved of this insidious and baneful influence the better. We have at this session of Congress ample evidence of the baneful work of men blinded by the supposed interests, r led by those who have se fish interests to uphold. The men outside of Congress who have tendered their advice, and whose suggestions will probably be followed, have intere ts in national banks, and wish to be protected in the privileges they now enjoy; and the mistake that many congressnen make, no doubt honestly, is in treating the interests of the banks as the public interests, while, in fact, the public has no interest in them other than to divest them, as soon as practicable, of the power or privilege of issuing money. But giving to congressmen full credit for honesty and the best intentions, it is, after all, pitiable to see how little comprehension they bring to the consideration of financial questions. They seem to be trying how not to do it. They appear to be in a muddle, or else they are determined to keep matters in a muddle, and we really cannot make up our mind which. It is hard to believe that they are so much at a loss as they appear to be, and yet. t is equally past belief that they desire to do wrong on questions of finance, for upon questions outside of t eir duties as congressmen, they are certainly equal to the average of business men in ability and honesty. We have come to the conclusion that in this matter of finance their appare..t want of foresight comes from the fact that in all uch matters they yield their convictions to the vews of supposed experts, such as the officers, stockholders and attorneys of the national banks in their several districts. Now the banks have a valuable privilege to maintain and protect, every one of them receiving an annual bonus from government of more than 4 per cent. on their entire capital, over and above all national taxation, for furnishing a circulating medium for the country, which is printed and renewed at the expense of government, and which is no better than greenback, and amounting in the aggregate to an annual net bonus to the stockholders of the national banks of over $15,000,000. At the same time government is obliged to maintain a more complicated and expensive system than would be required if the government is-sued the entire currency of the nation. Sensible and honest men out of Congress ask why this is done, when the nation so much needs the $15,000,000 annually to pay current expenses? Of ou senators and representatives, each proposes a different remedy for financial evils and an empty treasury. One wants more "greenbacks;" another national bank notes; another demands specie payments on a day to be fixed by Congress; an-

4. September 8, 1881 Daily Globe Saint Paul, MN
Article from Daily Globe, September 8, 1881

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

ALL AROUND THE GLOBE. The New York produce and cotton exchange, clearing house, and all banks will be closed to-day. The mayors of New York and Brooklyn have issued proclamations calling on all to close their places of business, and trade will be suspended in both cities. Robert Steep, of Manville, Kan., nine miles west of there, while crossing the railroad track in a wagon, was killed by railroad train No. 3. Alex. Grey, of Allegheny City, one of the wardens of the western penitentiary, received serious injuries on the Pennsylvania railroad, at Seaman Place, yesterday, dying several hours afterwards.