Bank of America - New York, NY

Bank Information

Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: state
Start Date: December 25, 1869
Location: New York, New York (40.714, -74.006)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini
Short Digest: 8bcfff5d

Response Measures

None

Description

Article (Dec 25, 1869) describes court-appointed receiver in possession of the bank's property and contempt proceedings against parties interfering with the receiver. No run or reopening is mentioned; the bank is under receivership, implying suspension and effective closure.

Events (2)

1. December 25, 1869 Other

Newspaper Excerpt: The motion to punish the defendant for contempt ... the officers of the Bank of America, against whom be now withdrew his motion. Counsel then read papers disclosing the fact that Mr. Bangs, counsel for the assignee in bankruptcy, and the officers of the United States Marshal, had also violated the injunction and interiered with the receiver in the possession of the property.
Source: newspapers

2. December 25, 1869 Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: the officers of the Bank of America, for violating the injunction of this court and unduly Interfering with the receiver appointed by it. ... the receiver in the possession of the property.
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. December 25, 1869 The New York Herald New York, NY

Article from The New York Herald, December 25, 1869

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

SUPERIOR COURT-SPECIAL TERM. The Einninger Case Again-The Contempt Proceedings-Judge McCunn's Opinion of Judge Blatchford's Law. Before Judge McCunn. Clarke US. Binninger.--The motion to punish the defendant for contempt, which stood adjourned from a previous day, again came before the Court yesterday. The motion was to punish Abraham Binninger, William R. Gifford and Philo Gisborne, and the officers of the Bank of America, for violating the injunction or this court and unduly Interfering with the receiver appointed by it. Mr. Compton (with whom was Mr. J. F. Morgan) said he had consented to adjournments heretofore in the hope that the parties would evince a disposition to obey the injunction of the court, but not one of them had done so except the officers of the Bank of America, against whom be now withdrew his motion. Counsel then read papers disclosing the fact that Mr. Bangs, counsel for the assignee in bankruptcy, and the officers of the United States Marshal, had also violated the injunction and interiered with the receiver in the possession of the property. Judge McCmun-Have these parties been notified of the motion? Mr. Compton (for motion) replied that they had not. Judge McCunn said if that were the case he deemed It advisable that the matter should stand over for a few days, and that all the parties should be notified. He was determined, it the facts of the case showed these parties to have been guilty of will ful contempt of the process of this court, to use whatever power the court possessed or could command to enforce its orders and maintain its authorXty. He hoped, therefore, that Mr. Bangs and the other parties concerned would receive notice that IS was the purpose of the court to mete out to them the full letter of the law. Mr. Titus, on behalf of Mr. Binninger, said he thought that gentleman had amply purged himself of the contempt imputed. Judge McCunn replied that he should take the affidavit of Mr. Binniager, for he thought be had gone far towards excuipating himself from auy intentional contempt of the order of the court, and he was, therefore, one of the parties 111 the transaction whose interests the court would endeavor to protect. Mr. Compton thought there was sufficient in the case to show that Bilninger and his creditors had been be collusion in this matter, and that, in fact, Binninger was the figurehead, while they were only the "poop." Judge McCunn said it seemed to him that the whole substance of this proceeding from beginning to end had been simply an attempt by interested parties to get this property out of the hands of the receiver of this court and place It in the hands of an insolvent assignee in bankruptcy. It seemed to him that the charge of Judge Blatchford defining a condision of bankruptcy was one of the most preposterous statements he ever heard. The idea that a firm, admitted on all sides to be possessed of assets sumcient to pay two dollars on every dollar of their indebtedness, could be declared bankrupt and their property treated as such, appeared an utter viola. tion of all reason and all law, and if plaintif's counset would appeal from that charge and carry it to the United States Supreme Court he was confident 11 could not be sustained for a moment. MI. Compton said he had taken steps to appeal it.