14442. Mckinley County Bank (Gallup, NM)

Bank Information

Episode Type
Suspension → Closure
Bank Type
state
Start Date
July 1, 1927
Location
Gallup, New Mexico (35.528, -108.743)

Metadata

Model
gpt-5-mini
Short Digest
5608adcd

Response Measures

None

Description

The articles describe the McKinley County Bank as being in receivership (multiple references to a receiver, settlements of debts, and hearings about the receivership). There is no description of a depositor run in these items; instead the bank is under court receivership and effectively closed, with a receiver (F. B. Mapel/M. Rouse/Gregory Page) handling assets. Episode classified as a suspension (court receivership) that resulted in closure/receivership. Dates of original suspension/closing are not stated precisely in the clippings; articles from July–August 1927 discuss ongoing receivership and hearings.

Events (3)
1. July 1, 1927 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
the receiver of the McKinley County bank ... F. B. Maple (Mapel) ... loans of the money Charles Ilfeld company ... settlement of notes due the depositors of the bank ... receiver has loaned large sums of money ... in the hands of the receiver, F. B. Maple, as such; ... records of the receiverships of the McKinley County Bank ... produce and permit to be examined all records, books, papers and documents in their custody touching receivership of the McKinley County bank (New Mexican, July 1, 1927).
Source
newspapers
2. July 1, 1927 Suspension
Cause
Government Action
Cause Details
Bank placed in receivership by district court; receiver appointed (references to receivers F. B. Mapel, Gregory Page, C. M. Rouse) and handling settlements of debtors and sales of assets.
Newspaper Excerpt
the receivership of the McKinley County Bank and Gallup State Bank at Gallup
Source
newspapers
3. August 11, 1927 Other
Newspaper Excerpt
receiver for the McKinley County bank of Gallup, on the witness stand ... was asked ... about settlement ... reduced the indebtedness ... without any examination or investigation of the worth of Mr. Lawrence ... loans to the Charles Ilfeld company ... purchase of the Shanklin Hardware company ... used the funds of the trust ... (Albuquerque Journal, Aug. 11, 1927).
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (9)
1. July 1, 1927 The Santa Fe New Mexican Santa Fe, NM
Article from The Santa Fe New Mexican, July 1, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Hannett Wants to See Records Of Receiverships; Holloman Objects to "Fishing" Trip Ex-governor Asks Bar Board to Make Gallup Bank Receivers Turn Over the Records in Order that He May Attempt to Find Evidence to Support General Charges Against Judge; Let Him First Make Charges Specific, says Court's Attorneys. Having made the general charges among others that District Judge Reed Holloman has in his court for political purposes, Former Governor 4. T. Hannett was cited by the bar to appear July 15 and produce bill of particulars. He now asks the commissioners to Issue an order or ask the supreme court to issue an order, on the receivers oft he McKinley County Bank and Gallup State Bank at Gallup, requiring them to produce records of the receiverships for examination by auditors agreeable to Holloman, paid by Hannett. Mr. Hannett alleges that Judge Holloman has refused to give access to the records. The petition was received today by Secretary Jose D. Sena of the bar commissioners, properly signed by Mr. Hannett, but without the signatures of Hanna and Wilson, his attorneys. It was returned for their signatures. MUST BE SPECIFIC Counsel for Judge Holloman say they will be willing to have the audit made when Mr. Hannett and makes specific his general charges, but are meanwhile opposed to letting him go on "fishing expedition" in an initial search for something on which to Base charge. The Journal states that Chairman A. H. Hudspeth of the bar commission has said he will call a meeting of the to consider the petition. The petition in full follows: Before the Board of Bar Commisstoners of the State of New Mexico. In the matter of the charges against Arthur Hannett, a member of the State Bar. and of the Bar of the Supreme Court of the State of New Mexico. PETITION Comes now Arthur T. Hannett. and shows to this Honorable Board of Bar commissioners, that copy of certain charges prepared by the committee on ethics, grievances and discipline, was served upon him on the 17th day of June, 1927. That attached to the said charges was an order made under the seal of said commission and the signature of the president of said board of commissioners, directing said Arthur T. Hannet to "file with said board your answer said charges on or before the 15th day of July, A. D., 1927. and to likewise file with said board on or before said date a bill of particulars setting forth particularly and in detail any specific charges falling within or tending to prove the truth of any of the general charges alleged in said complaint to have been made by you against Reed Holloman upon which propose to offer proof before said board. DESIRES TO COMPLY That said Arthur T. Hannett desires to comply fully with the order of said board. and has now in the course of preparation his answer to said charges specified by said committee on ethics, grievances and discipline; that he desires likewise, as he was commanded, to file with said board on or before said 15th day of July, bill of particulars setting forth particularly and in detail certain specific charges falling within and tending to prove the truth of general contained in the complaint of the committed on ethics, grievances and discipline. That in addition to the specific charges made in the articles referred to and quoted by the committee on ethics and discipline, said Arthur T. Hannet has made the following general upon which he is required to file bill of particulars setting same forth particularly and in detail: is working the receivership overtime.' 2. "The receiver of the McKinley county bank was appointed several years ago. The receivership has been used as part of Holloman's political machine "Holloman's authorized settlement in full of notes due the deposit tors of the bonk (referring to MeKinley county bank) on perfectly solvent debtors for mere fractions of what they owed, in return for political "It was not the fault of the writer that Judge Holloman is engaged in politics and active in political lobbying with the leg islature, dabbling with receiverships, and threatened receiverships, for political purposes." SAYS MONEY LOANED That in addition to the foregoing, said Arthur T. Hannett shows this that he is informed and verily believes that the réceiver of the McKinley county bank has loaned large sums of money with the knowledge and consent of the said district judge, Reed Holloman, to certain business in the town of Gallup. without security. and in the furtherance of strengthening his political organization, said sums of money be. ing then and there the property of the of the McKinley county bank and in the hands of the receiver, F. B. Maple, as such; and said Arthur T. Hannett is Informed and verily believes that there are many and diverse transactions which will be disclosed from an of the books of the Gallup, State bank and said Me. Kinley county bank, which will prove or tend to prove the charge that said receiverships have been manipulated for political purposes: and further, that the best evidence proving and tending to prove the charges. both general and specific. made concerning said are in possession of said Reed Holloman through his receivers. F. B. Maple and C. M. Rouse, and that in order for said Arthur T. Hannett to fije said bill of particulars as required by the citation heretofore served upon him, it is necessary that the books and accounts kep by said examined by auditors: and the said Arthur T. Hannett further that heretofore made a request to said Reed Holloman. district judge of the First Judi- clal District, through his attorney, Fred Wilson, for permission to have the books and records of the said receiverships examined by certified public accountants agreeable to the said Reed Holloman and his attorneys, Simms & Botts: that said Arthur T. Hannett's attorney, Fred Wilson, made his request for such permission to said attorneys, Simms & Botts and that said Simms & Botts, after taking the matter under and after communicating with said Reed Holloman district judge of the First judicial district, informed said Fred Wilson that said Reed Holloman, judge of the First judicial district, refused to permit any such examination until after the and bill of par ticulars by the citation served upon the said Arthur T. Hannett shall have been filed: and said Arthur T Hannett further shows to the commission that he informed said Reed Holloman through said attorneys as aforesaid, that he, said Arthur T Hannett, would be responsible for the cost and expense of said audit, and should this petition be granted, said Arthur T. Hannett assumes sole and entire responsibility for the financial burden of causing such audit to be made. ASKS ORDER Wherefore, said Arthur T. Hannett prays that this honorable commission issue an order directing the receiver of the M Kinley County bank, F. B. Maple, and the receiver of the Gallup State bank, E. M. Rouse, to forthwith produce and permit to be examined all records, books, papers and documents in their touching receivership of the McKinley County bank and the receivership of the Gallup State bank, for examination by any firm of certified public accountants authorized to do business under the laws of this state, or that the said make application to the supreme court of the state of New Mexico to Issue such order, all with the express understanding and condition that the expense of such audit shall be borne by the said Arthur T. Hannett. ARTHUR T HANNETT, By Fred Wilson. Summers Burkhart, attorneys.

2. July 7, 1927 The Santa Fe New Mexican Santa Fe, NM
Article from The Santa Fe New Mexican, July 7, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

HOLLOMAN THROWS OPEN BOOKS OF GALLUP BANK RECEIVERS TO AUDITORS OF HANNETT Simms Says Hannett's Position Amounts to Admission He Didn't Know What He Was Talking About in Making Charges Against Judge; Bar Commission Takes no Action in View of Agreement; Holloman Wants no Exoneration by Default. The hearing on T. Hannett's petition asking them to order Gallup State and McKinley County bank receivers to permit an of their records came sudden and unexpected finish bethe state board of bar commissioners today when Judge Reed Holloman voluntarily offered to to open their to Mr. Hannett's auditors on a single condition. In view of this, the former governot's counsel. assenting to Judge's terms, there was no necessity of the board's taking any action on Mr. Hannett's petition. as worded by John of Simms Botts, counsel is that Mr. Hannett's judge, gentleman's agreement in his answer, and attempt charges against Judge Holloman quoted from Mr. Hannett's colin the Albuquerque Journal petition taken up by today. THE CHARGES charges working the receivovertime." receiver of the county bank was appointseveral ago. The rehas been used as part Holloman's political machine.' "Holloman's settiement in full of notes due the of the bank (referring bank on perdebtors for mere fractions of what they owed in for political support." was not fault of the writer that Judge Holloman is engaged in polities and active in conventions, lobbying the legislature, dabbling with and threatened for political puragree to this you can have today," said Mr. Simms. WANTS NO DEFAULT charges were made against newspaper, said Judge HolloMr. Simm's statethe gentlemen will agree them here before this board, Hannett's answer, they can the books today. don't want cleared these charges by deoffimanner by Mr. Hannett and to attempt to prove them." as these charges are conin the boar's complaint against said Fred E. Wilson, of for the former they have to be included in his He was to Judge Holloman's proposal respect to one charge, in Mr. Hannet inand believed the McKinley bank receiver has lent large of money certain business in the Town of Gallup" with Holloman's consent and without As to this Mr. said was not embraced in which Mr. Hannett to answer. AGREE ON AUDITORS suggested Burke of Albuquerque as the Mr. Simms consented, proMr. Stephenson Mr. StephenMr. Linder jointly have charge audit. Zinn. who was beside Mr. Wilson, raised some to whether Mr. Stephenson able to undertake the work. need to make order matter, shall wire the Judge Holloman told the questions arise to carrying out the James Hervey, of was appointed umpire by the as to the personthe auditing force NOT THERE members of the board were H. Hervey, Carl H. Gilbert, D. and Percy Wilson. Hahnett did not appear. we're hear Hudspeth the attorneys were summoned the supreme court room followshort executive session by the Wilson then read the former petition (which was printthe New Mexican July have the board order the bank to allow Mr. Hannett's audimake an examination of their HANNETT NEEDS INFO. want the information before of particulars filed: not Mr. Wilson, com the stand hereofore taken Holloman that once Mr. filed his him against open up the books to his be said, these sources of information facts and figures and other data bearing on his newsallegations against the judge. your contention that has the to power subthe them their books before Wilson. any event replied Mr. Wilson commission could summon them Aug the date set with their and continue the hearing until had chance to go over The commission could could not order the to appear he Mr. Hannett was required by the board to file bill of particulars, listing the charges he has made the Journal, together with his swer to the Ethics committee's complaint against Mr. Hannett by July 15. KNEW WHAT WAS TALKING ABOUT? "Mr. Hannett wrote (in the Jour nal) not as what he thought but as statements fact," said Mr Simms. "Now he says that certain of bis charges such that Judge Helloman is working receivership business over time. The commission is now proof of this by July 15, but asking Mr. Hannett to specify be meant by this-what particular receiverships and what he meant by working them over time. Either he knew what he was talking about when he wrote that, or he didn't All he has to by 15 is tell what he meant by this: not to prove time for proof comes later at the hearing on August "Their position amounts to this: We didn't know what we were talking about in making these yague charges, but if we can examine all the records we might find something to criticise. Mr. Hannett talking about audit when he these charges his newspaper? He couldn't have been. "Their position is like man who threatened with indictment by grand jury for sheep stealing insists upon being present in the grand jury room when the investigation of his case is made, saying it won't fair unless he "They can have those books not for the purpose of finding some_ thing to charge, but for the purpose of what they charge when they file their "HUNCH" CHARGES? not going to say Hannett didn't know what he was talking about when wrote these artireplied Fred Wilson "because not authorized to and wouldn't be true might make charge that man is confirmed horse thief. just because have hunch when he walks across the street. If, brought to trial on libel charge, prove that he is, that would be ample justification. Mr. Hannett might prove his charges, from what he had in mind when wrote, from his notebook or by facts he had never heard

3. July 15, 1927 The Santa Fe New Mexican Santa Fe, NM
Article from The Santa Fe New Mexican, July 15, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

HANNETT HAS HIS CHARGES AGAINST HOLLOMAN READY TO FILE WITH BAR BOARD Concern Seeking Franchise in Santa Fe Paid Judge $500 Influence; that Bank Receiver Lent Ilfeld Company $31,000 Political Support; that He Conspired with Others to Control Mulct Gallup Water Company; that Receiver Used ReceivFund to go Into Hardware Business. Albuquerque, July Gov. A. T. Hanhis answer prepared for to the citation the of bar commissioners charges against Judge Holloman of Santa Fe, althe articles written and by him in his daily colthe Albuquerque Journal and he offers to furnish the board of the truth of set forth in the artihearing scheduled bethe board on Aug. 2. in of particulars filed with the forth in detail accusations receiverships of two Gallup alleging irreguthe settlement of notes for favor and the loans of totaling $31,000 by on an employe of the Charles to the company withevidence of Indebtedness, the loans on the books and charging an average interest of per cent and political support the $500, CHARGE particulars also alleges Holloman accepted $500. promised $1,000 more stock for his support and utility interest that was electric light franchise in charges are that Holloman to perform the function judge: that Holloman has the his for political purposes; that used his judicial power to force the payment of $675 he knew to be illegal Joseph Peterson, teacher Juan county and from carrying out his by force of an in San Juan county. CONSPIRACY further says that Holloman entered into conH. Denny and H. Gallup attorneys, Arthur Gallup and Francis E. attorney. to gain control municipal works mulcting the water attorneys and receivership of the patronage the operation of the plant the plant an instrugain control of the plant and use Hannett's property interest Electric Light Power Co. LAUNDRY DEAL Mapel, receiver of County bank, appointed arranged sell himone Henderson, the laendry for when an offer for $6,000 for the from Martin Murphy and offer was not accepted transaction had been in Hannett's column in the Mapel has never filed required law, although received upwards of receiver; that laundry to be worth than as he has purmachinery and supplies costof $4,300 for the plant receivership funds, but short and had stated that he sell the laundry for less ACCUSES MAPEL rring to the authorization of of debts by the receiversolvent debtors for less than Hannett alleges that two the K. M. Drug aggrewere settled for two notes aggregating $3.two years and John Chapman for settled for $250. to the alleged manipulafor political purHannett, charges that B. appointed Holloman McKinley County bank, guilty of malfeasance. in directly chargeable and that the assets of the bank for the highest depositor's POLITICS receivership has been loss and that the operat for years and nine been $63,460.15 while revenue was bought the property bankrupt appraised for out of ceivership fund for the purpose of operating hardware store in competition with Vidal, political That Mapel is engaging in business with the funds of the and far as can be ascertained, continue the receivership That the late Gregory Page, close political and personal friend of Holloman, was appointed receiver of the closed Gallup State bank of which he had been president in spite of motion by the attorney general protestIng against the appointment. ATTACKS DEAD MAN That Mr. Page transferred 500 shares of his stock in the bank to Botems prior to its failure and that Page withdrew $5,239.43 of his personal funds from the bank on the day It closed. That Page, Sharp Hanson and H. Morris, officers of the bank. endorsed notes aggregating sold to the First National bank of Los Angeles and then paid these notes funds to protect them. selves from liability their guaranty. That property worth more than the amount of their savings deposits the closed bank was transferred McDermott and Floyd and to McDermott in cancellation of their savings deposits and that this was done for the purpose of concitiating McDermott. prominent Republiand strengthening Holloman's political organization. RECEIVER POLITICIAN That large sums money from Gregory account were transferred to the account Gretchen H. Lyon prior to the closing of the bank and that this was done for the purpose of the money from of the bank and that Page, nor his successor, M. Rouse has ever made any tempt to recover this money. That Rouse, appointed by Holloman to succeed Page is an active politician without banking experience and owed the bank when closed and still though he has received approximately $1,000 for acting receiver.

4. August 3, 1927 The Santa Fe New Mexican Santa Fe, NM
Article from The Santa Fe New Mexican, August 3, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

SUMMARY OF HANNETT CHARGES AGAINST JUDGE HOLLOMAN In brief the Hannett charges Holloman as developed in against of particulars are follows in addition to the Gallup telephone case: POLITICAL ACTIVITY That Holloman too active specifically that he was the 1922 Republican state delegate to was candidate for govconvention, before president the ernor Manuel Otero for Governor club, lected and disbursed money in advocacy Otero's candidacy: made speeches the 1926 for Republican state candidates; member state executive committee; political boss of Santa city and county: lobbyist at the legislaand took part in the caucus on ture, senate ratification Hannett pointees during pendency Otero contest. alleged Holloman has "openly boasted' his power political boss. That refused disqualify himself in the McKinley county election cases, certifying that he had not election of the Republican conurged alleged that Holloman's is ties and judicial functions impartial That he told civil service would get him fired if he employe voted for Hannett. told Dr. Luckett the That he officer levy be McKinley but that Dr. M. Washburn would not because he was to close to the ployed Hannetts. BRIBE ALLEGED It is alleged Holloman received $500 in cash and the promise 000 more promise his influence with the Santa Fe city council in the matter the electric light and water That he said his fight with Hannett and Magee was not over until they driven of the state.. That Judge Holloman wrongfully his office San county force the of alleged legal claim for teacher salary one Mary Joseph for political purposes. WATERWORKS CASE alleged Holloman entered into with Denny, Yersin, Arthur and Francis E. Wood through the Gallup for fees, control patronage, and use control of the municipal power plant order destroy interest the Gallup Electric Light and Power Co. STEAM LAUNDRY failed to Laundry proper reports his trust, that the partially deal property and that later the receiver for NOTE SETTLEMENT It alleged that to gain political support court fairs insolvent McKinley County bank, authorized settlement notes aggregating 000 note for $399.15 for $250. McKINLEY COUNTY BANK In the case of the McKinley County bank alleged that the has failed to report the condition of his trust, this with the knowledge and consent of the court. That the court refused petition of the sell the bank assets public That the receivership has been erated loss. LOANED MONEY TO HIS COMPANY That Receiver Mapel, while also paid the Charles company, loaned company much without security evidence of indebtedness, to detriment of the depositors, in the political behalf of That with depositors' money ceiver Mapel bought business Bankrupt Shanklin $26,000 punish Vidal. bidder at the and busicompetitor Vidal was political enemy of Hollo- That the has showed months monthly loss of under Mapel, engaged in business with the funds power. That note for property worth only and note for lower interest when rence worth more than and that Lawrence and other debtors the receivership were told by HolDenny and Mapel that obligations would comprised for political support, which they gave. That had over deposited the Gallup State bank, when closed. without bond or security, the loss of the depositors. GREGORY PAGE. RECEIVER alleged and retain Gregory Page, president of the insolvent Gallup Bank receiver despite motion the attorney general to the conPage being close political and personal friend Holloman alleged Page transferred stock certificates from the bank personal liability on them. and withdrew over $5,000 from the bank the day closed its doors alleged Page paid notes the sum the First National Bank Los Angeles of the depositors' and funds protect himself and assoclates from liability on the guaranty Los Angeles alleged with the approval court the receiver state transferred Dermott and Floyd and Dermott property excess their claims settle claims, cillate McDermott and strengthen the "Holloman political organization" alleged that Page sequestered large accounts money failure of the bank, and

5. August 11, 1927 Albuquerque Journal Albuquerque, NM
Article from Albuquerque Journal, August 11, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

GALLUP BANK RECEIVER EASY ON CREDITORS, HE ADMITS; BICKEL NEVER ASKED TO PAY HIS NOTE Tells of Settlement with When Agreed to Avoid Furniture Business SANTA FE. Aug. B Ma receiver for the McKinley County bank of Gallup. on the wit ness stand late Wednesday after noon in the hearing of former Gov. ernor Hannett efore the state bar commission was asked he ever received financial state showing the net worth of debted to the bank for His indebtedness was settled for cash payment of $2,000 and new of Testimony Saturday showed Mr Lawrence was rated to by R. Dun Mercantile agency after his statements to the agency of net worth of around financial statement made him by Mr Lawrence Jan 1924. was exhibited after Mr. Ma. indefinite to statements He Identified showed worth of about $45,000. stated covered only his store Gallup other not shown. Questioned about his roal land Mr. Mapel said he valued at $2. 000 to $3,000. This land he eati mated 200 or $10 and said all was worth financial statement of Nov was exhibited and fied by Mr. Mapel. He said showed Mr. Lawrence's net worth less than nothing. Mr. Lawrence's letter to the receiver few days later offering his Indebtedness was read. Asked what his explanation was to the reason why he did not seek find out what the real assets were. he replied that the coal land the only other asset he knew Lawrence and that he did not consider It worth paying taxes He said he did not Inquire about Mr. Lawrence owned in DenHe said he did not know then does not know that Mr owned any lots Gal- No Court Testimony He taken court the time of the settle. Mr. Asked he was misled by Mr he replied Asked about the significance of provision in the settlement let. saying Mr Lawrence agreed not engage in the wholesale or re. tall furniture business. he replied had no significance. Asked the receiver did not go Into the hardware business and he contemplated going In the fur. niture business. Mr. Mapel replied Asked why the furniture provi*ion was in the letter. he said not know and that should been there. Mr. Mapel admitted the settlement letter was drafted by H. Lawrence owed when the bank closed. He had reduced the debtedness to the time the settlement The final order settlement was then read. for $2,000 cash and new note Threw Off $7,000 Mr the order meant he threw off 000 of the debt of Mr. Lawrence without any examination Investigation of the worth of Mr Lawrence He admitted knowing of coal land and real estate owned by Mr and not shown in his nancial Loan Questioned about loans Charles lifeld company. Mr. Matestimony was: Q "How much did you have one (In the "What period of time did you that in this collected accumulated Q. "What period of time were five or six months." Q "Did have an account any other bank but the Mer ant's bank "No. don't think Q. made effort to de posit that money any other bank New Mexico "How did you come to loan this money Charles lifeld com pany' Did you loan this Did you ask them they could asked them times If they could use the money. Q. "Then It was merely an ac"Absolutely." what fixed rate of Inter per cent." "At the present time there

6. August 11, 1927 Albuquerque Journal Albuquerque, NM
Article from Albuquerque Journal, August 11, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

TO BANK CUT; BUYS EXPENSIVE CAR Gallup Bank Receiver Tells of Settlement of Druggist's Note: Laundry Plans SANTA FE. Aug. Charles lifeld company was building for the laundry provision poned sale the plant Henderson for statement of Frank ceiver McKinley County bank, the Wednesday hearing of Hannett the bar commission for charges reflecting on integrity of Juage Reed Why this alleged Hannett been fell through and the laundry later Murphy and details loans of the money Charles Ilfeld company. were of the first session hearing Wednesday afternoon lowing the from Mr. Mapel, who addition being receiver for County bank, Charles lifeld company visory capacity testified that Moulten, ficer the company of the Gallup tile company. branch the Continued

7. August 11, 1927 Albuquerque Journal Albuquerque, NM
Article from Albuquerque Journal, August 11, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

RECEIVER'S ASSISTANT IN GALLUP BANK JOB SHORTLY HE PREVENTED DEAL could see Mr. Mapel, rather that more likely that could apMr. Mapel in this matter, proach he asked me to pick out some that they could use. After man thinking the matter over told him perhaps could get some one, that could get Mr. Murphy. think he did Mr. Murnext day handle the phy the result you put some to buy the "How Mr. Lebeck Q. "Have you disposed interest in the still have $1,000 worth in the laundry." Q. Lebeck still in the employ of Mapel when or had left his this employ he had not left his employ. Q. "Did Lebeck indicate to you that he was going to leave Mr. Mapel?" he seemed disturbed this laundry Lebeck Left Receiver Q. that following conversation with Mr. Lebeck your that he either discharged connection with Mr. Mapel terminated he "Now then, did you at time tell Mr. Mapel, during negotiation that his clerk, Mr. Lebeck, through your to half and you the going half?" don't know: don't pre"Now at the time when Mapel sold the laundry to Murphy, far Mapel knew, didn't Lebeck and you were the know purchasers don't think he "Did you dispose of your terest laundry soon after?" believe was the next any. profit did you sold my half in that for retaining $1,000 worth "Who did you sell "James McDermott." "Of Gallup?" "What relation McDermott to "Did Murphy have in cash without calling you and Leto buy this "Franklyn, don't know." At the opening of the night ses. Maple, receiver of the McKinley County Bank, was examined by John W. Simms to show that members of the depositors' committee of the McKinley county bank were debtors to the bank greater amounts than their deposits. H. Vidal, Kirk, Hannett and Dr. Cornell were all shown owe more than they had on deposit. Hannett's notes were for $5,900. Questioned about the purchase the Shanklin Hardware company, Mr. Mapel said he estimated, the paid out the trust, he had paid back all but of the cash to the trust. permitted the sale, trust would have lost Shanklin's indebtedness said he knew of no other way to protect his trust expurchase of the hardThe witness denied he bought punish his He said he took no active part politics. Note On Mr. Mapel Mr. Vidal. memdepositors' committee, paid his indebtedness in full. He admitted that T. Hannett paid his notes within week asked no settleHe was asked If he did not know the sale of assets of the bank had stated the depositors' represented the depositors of the bank. He replied he Mr. Mapel was dismissed witness after being the three different of the nearly six hours in all. the board Mr. for utes before he finally left the stand. between Mr. Mapel and the Ilfeld pany relative the loans was and filed. Sale Order Disappears H. W. Brose, county deputy clerk of McKinley county, next witness. He asked about the court records, especially for the proposed the Gallup Steam laundry. said did not when the order his He said he required no record when out unless of the whole file. Mr. Crampton asked what the examination was. Mr. Keleher explained there rumor in Gallup the laundry had been sold and search for the was made and could not found. Mr. Brose explained that the made misof 20 pages indexing the order, which the reason could not be found. Col. W. Hanson was the next witness. He been the laundry business with Payne. For the last six months has been in the hardware business. He testified several conversations with Mr. Mapel regarding the Gallup laundry. the summer 1924 was first time. He said asked Mapel the laundry was for sale. About week later he offered $2,500 for the laundry. In September he said he offered Mr. Mapel $3,500. He testified Mr. Mapel did not accept it. The last offer was the winter of 1925 and 1926. was $4,500. He his offers were all cash. Said Was Price He said after the refusal. he askedMr. Mapel what he wanted anyway. Mr. Mapel, he said, plied was his price. In the meantime, Mr. Hanson had bought an interest in launHe told of later conversations, during one which he said Mr. Mapel stated two laundries in Gallup could not exist. He said knew of one that could not exist. Later, he said Mr. Mapel once remarked to him he knew of one laundry that could exist as long there was any money in the depositors' fund. Holloman Sent Wire Joe Gargan, local manager of the Western Union Telegraph pany was the next He testified to telegram Judge Reed Holloman from Santa Fe Murphy was Frank will be Gallup Friday.' The was in reference to the sale of the laundry. Ralph E. Palmer, Gallup auto dealer, was called. told conversation between Mr. Mapel and Murphy. He said Murphy asked if the laundry was for sale. Mapel replied that Henderson had already bought They looked through the plant, he said. On he said, Mr. Mapel made no statement about building condition to the sale to Mr. Henderson. Mr. Simms put him through severe in an attempt to impeach his testimony.

8. August 12, 1927 Albuquerque Journal Albuquerque, NM
Article from Albuquerque Journal, August 12, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

DENNY SAYS HE DIDN'T STORES BANKRUPTCY Gallup Attorney Says Settlements with Bank Creditors Were Not Based on Political Consideration GOT $2,192.18 FEE IN SHANKLIN MATTER H. B, Jamison Received $1,000 and Harry Wilson $1,500 in Same Action, Stage Offer on Notes (By Special Leased Wire) SANTA FE. N. Aug. of H. Denny in rebuttal of charges that there were any political demands conthe the McKinley County Bank Kahl of the K M. Drug Company. with was offered afternoon the Hannett day hearing previous the W. Lawrence's land very poor. He testified worth cent Lawrence's Denver his mother's Denny Asked did not Kahl. he would receivership drug said furniture his bright rence settlement was The provision enter the wholeLawrence not retail furniture business He said he thought add something to the value might the agreement. insolvent be Shanklin was not fore he made assignment the bank Mr. Denny He Shanklin's assets exceeded his indebtedness. denied any to force signment. He said Mr. Shankjust tired and threw up got the Denny admitted he received of in the bankruptcy fee action of Shanklin. This. addition to his fee as attorney

9. August 12, 1927 Albuquerque Journal Albuquerque, NM
Article from Albuquerque Journal, August 12, 1927

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

1937 DEPOSITORS' WELFARE DISREGARDED The testimony brought out in the Hanwith to the absolute disregard for the depositors' welfare in the receiverships of certain banks, is astounding. Efforts appear to have been directed in behalf of the reduction of fa vored borrowers' obligations and the prolonging of the trust at the expense of the Mapel, receiver of the McKinley County bank, when he states that the vault had was unsafe and he loaned the demoney at low interest rates for safe keeping, instead of declaring a dividend to the needy depositors, shows reason snough why he should be removed forthThere is no safer bank anywhere than the Merchants' bank at Gallup. Albuquerique, Santa Fe and many other cities in the state have safe banks. And, in addition, a receiver as a court officer can secure proper protection for his deposits with a bond. Mapel may say he had a bond on one and lost the money when the bank He did not have the proper kind bond, and he knows it. How long are the people forced to tolerate this sort of Why must they wait until some citizen takes it upon himself to expose these rotten conditions? Can they no longer depend on their public officials to keep an eye on their welfare?