Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
Gets Off On Wrong Foot The Carson City Appeal tries to manufacture political capital out of the suspension of the First National bank of Goldfleid, Dut for the mouthpiece of Receiver Wildes to engage in such a malodorous attack is to brand the editor either a knave or a simpleton who does not know the first principles of the business he essays to criticise. Here is the statement submitted for public enlightenment: Now comes the story that another bank has gone to the wall in Nevada. The First National bank of Goldfield has closed its doors. Depositors will be shy on their funds and another receiver will be appointed. Just why anyone should lose their money in such a transaction is hard to state, Nevada hires a bank examiner, pays him a good salary and furnishes an assistant. If this Goldfield institution was shaky it should have been known by the bank examiner and so publicly stated. A warning should have been given the public and there would have been less loss. Depositors feel a little more secure on account of the state having a bank examiner, but if banks can be shaky to the failing point without this official's knowledge and without him warning the public then what is the need of this official? With the small number of banks in this state, which are operating, it would seem that it could be possible to keep tab on them. If they are shaky and the money can't be accounted for it should then and there be taken in hand. The matter of allowing a bank to go to the wall when it begins to crumble is serious business. The amount involved in the failure in Goldfield is not stated. It may be possible that no one is hurt, but if the reports from Tonopah be true that checks are unhonored then some one has been hit in the pocketbook and another mess will follow. Nevada has gone through a few experiences that would have shattered other sections, but a new failure, when everything was supposed to be safeguarded by public officials, has a Dad sound that don't help to build confidence. It is to be hoped that this is not such a failure as now seems evident. A bank failure and receiverships make good newspaper stories but don't build confidence in Nevada. The facts of the case are so well known that it seems wholly useless to offer an explanation of the matter, but since the editor of the Appeal chooses to blame a republican appointee simply for the circumstance that he is a republican :s wholly inexcusable. In the first first place the state bank examiner, Mr. Eugene Howell, has no jurisdiction over national banks, and if he were foolish enough to try to assert the power of examining any of these institutions, he would very properly be shown the door and told to go and mind his own business. Any interference would be a rank impertinence and the state bank examiner would be very fortunate if he were not taken by the nape of the neck and slack of the trousers and pitched into the street for being meddlesome fool. National banks are directly under the jurisdiction of the comptroller of the currency who exercises supervision over them and is supposed to watch their investments and operations closely enough to enable him to protect depositors from conduct that would militate against their interests. In the case of Nevada it may further be explained that the bank examiner for this district resides in Oregon and knows very little of the value or nature of securities traded in by the banks of this state. As a matter of fact he is about as useful as the fifth wheel of a wagon, and it stands to reason that he cannot exercise more than a perfunctory supervision of the affairs which he is supposed to be familiar with in every detail. Long range inspection is not always productive of the most good, as even at close quarters, the scrutiny is not always what the public have the right to expect.
