City Bank of Jersey City - Jersey City, NJ

Bank Information

Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: state
Start Date: January 1, 1883*
Location: Jersey City, New Jersey (40.728, -74.078)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini
Short Digest: 06a53280

Response Measures

None

Description

Article (New-York Tribune, 1888-01-08) states the City Bank suspended five years earlier and is currently in receivership; receiver asked to settle affairs. No run is mentioned. Suspension appears permanent with receiver handling claims.

Events (2)

1. January 1, 1883* Suspension

Cause Details: Article does not specify cause of the original suspension; only notes it occurred five years earlier.
Newspaper Excerpt: When the City Bank suspended five years ago It owed the Fifth Ward Savings Bank $39,000.
Source: newspapers

2. January 8, 1888 Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: Chancellor McGill gave a hearing yesterday on a rule to show cause why Washington B. Williams should not be required to settle up the affairs of the City Bank of Jersey City, of which he is the receiver.
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. January 8, 1888 New-York Tribune New York, NY

Article from New-York Tribune, January 8, 1888

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

JERSEY CITY. The Commissioners of Adjustment under the Martin Act submitted their seventh report to Judge Knapp, in the Circuit Court yesterday. The report embraced fifty-six cases, involving $55,306 55, and the reduct ons amounted to $19,015 61. The properties, costumes and scenery of the stranded ",She dramatic company were sold at auction yesterday under several attachments and brought $175. Chancellor McGill gave a hearing yesterday on a rule to show cause why Washington B. Williams should not be required to settle up the affairs of the City Bank of Jersey City, of which he is the receiver. When the City Bank suspended five years ago It owed the Fifth Ward Savings Bank $39,000. The Fifth Ward went out of business, and has been ready since last May to declare a dividend to its depositors, but has been unable to do 80 because the City Bank had not made a final settlement. Counsellor Beekman, for the Savings Bank, argued that the receiver should be directed to make settlement at once. Receiver Williams said he had delayed settling because he had obtained a judgment of $1,500 on which he expected to realize something and there was another claim of $500, of which he hoped to get 35 per cent. The Chancellor laid the matter over for two weeks to give the receiver an opportunity to arrange for a settlement.