16060. Knickerbocker Savings Institution (New York, NY)

Bank Information

Episode Type
Suspension → Closure
Bank Type
state
Start Date
January 11, 1855
Location
New York, New York (40.714, -74.006)

Metadata

Model
gpt-5-mini
Short Digest
86596a2e

Response Measures

None

Description

Articles from Jan–May 1855 describe insolvency of the Knickerbocker Bank and the United States Trust Company acting as receiver; a receiver for the bank was appointed by the court (reported May 8, 1855). No newspaper text describes a depositor run; the bank was placed in receivership and wound up, i.e., permanently closed. OCR errors in articles corrected (e.g., 'ENICKERBOCKER' -> 'Knickerbocker').

Events (3)
1. January 11, 1855 Other
Newspaper Excerpt
The New York Trust Co., of that city, as receivers of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, have sued the Directors of the Knickerbocker Bank for $115,000, the amount held by them on deposit for Savings Institution. This will force the bank to wind up its affairs.
Source
newspapers
2. May 8, 1855 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
The Trust Company being lawfully appointed Receiver... The Receiver of the Bank was to act for all the creditors of the Bank, and was disinterested, except as to the case of the one claim of the Savings Institution.
Source
newspapers
3. May 8, 1855 Suspension
Cause
Bank Specific Adverse Info
Cause Details
Bank was insolvent; large disputed claims between Knickerbocker Savings Institution and Knickerbocker Bank; receiver appointed to wind up affairs.
Newspaper Excerpt
In the matter of the application of the United States Trust Company, of New-York, receiver of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, for the appointment of a Receiver of the Knickerbocker Bank... The Bank became insolvent, and application was made... The Trust Company was appointed Receiver.
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (8)
1. January 11, 1855 Worcester Daily Spy Worcester, MA
Article from Worcester Daily Spy, January 11, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

The New York Trust Co., ofthat city, as receivers of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, have sued the Directors of the Knickerbocker Bank for $115,000, the amount held by them on deposit for Savings Institution. This will force the bank to wind up its affairs. The mortality of the past week in New York, has been 471, an increase on the previous week of 25; an excess of the general average at this season of the year. The unseasonable mild and damp weather proves very unhealthy. A desperate fight came off Saturday in a saloon in Broadway, New York, between Tom Hyer and Jim Turner, the latter from California. Both drew pistols and discharged shots without serious damage. Hyer how. ever, was sevetely injured during the fight. They were arrested. Senator Norris of New Hampshire is suffering from neuralgic affection of the heart, at Washington,and it is feared that the attack will have a fatal termination.

2. January 23, 1855 The New York Herald New York, NY
Article from The New York Herald, January 23, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

LEGAL INTELLIGENCE. United States Circuit Court. Before Hon. Judge Betts. ALLEGED OFFICIAL MISCONDUCT-A MARE'S NEST. JAN. 22.-The Judge met the United States Grand Jury in their roem this morning, pursuant to adjournment, to receive from them the complaint against an official, (the District Attorney,) as intimated in the proceedings before the Court on Saturday. Having perused the communication, the Judge said that he wished to state to the Grand Jury in answer to the recommendation and to their inquiry on the paper that there not appear to be in this matter any criminal offence against the laws of the United States. There is no offence in the District Attorney refusing to prosecute. If there was any evidence of extertion, then the statute provides for such offence. If the District Attorney has been inattentive to his public duties, he is amenable to the government. The statute subjects the public officers to criminal indiet. ment for certain offences, but mere neglect of duty, if there has been any, is not punishable as an offence. Mr. John McKeon, United States District AttorneyMay it please the CourtJudge-1 cannot hear you, sir. It is not right that this matter should be discussed. The District Attorney-Is not this an open court, and would it be proper to allow insinuations of this kind to go abroad without some explanation from the District Attorney Judge-It is certainly an open court, but it is not necessary that the case should be discussed here. The District Attorney-I would merely state that everything 1 have done have done under the instruetiens of the department at Washington, and the foreman of the Grand Jury has seen the correspondence. For everything I have done I have the sanction of the department. The Judge again said that it did not appear that the District Attorney had done anything to render him amenable, and that discussion was unnecessary. The District Attorney-I may be permitted to say that 1 have never prosecuted a man unless I saw there were good and sufficient grounds for placing him on trial. In my judgment every man acquitted presents the case of an innocent man unjustly presecuted, or a guilty man escaping Either position brings discredit on the crimimal jurisprudence of a State, or of the United States, as the case may occur. As presecuting officer of this State, $ have acted on this principle, and have, so far as could. applied it in the execution of the duties of my present office. I have investigated every case which has come before me, and the result has been that every man that I have prosecuted, with one exception, has been convicted; and during the time I have been in office there has been no verdict rendered against the United States in any contested case. Judge Betts-The presumption in that everything done by the District Attorney has been fairly and honestly done. The District Attorney-In this particular case I know net what the specific charge against me is, but I feel that I took every reasonable measure to discover the facts, and acted after proper examination. It was a case for the violation of the revenue laws. found that the informer could not be substantiated; that he sould be contradicted, in fact, by the government officers. I addressed a letter to Mr. Odell, the Deputy Collector, informing him that I was investigating the case, and required certain information. I personally applied to Mr. Odeli for information in relation to the accused. I also applied to Mr. Willis, one of the appraisers. After receiving such information as I could, reported to the proper department at Washington, and received their authority to exorcise my diseretion in the matter. I disposed of the case as deemed just to the accused and to the interests of the United States. Whatever I have done has been by the authority of those whose directions I had a right to obey. Mr. Sperry, foreman of the Grand Jury, said that witmesses state that his books are in the hands of the District Attorney. The Court said the discussion must cease. The District Attorney said all the books were still in his office, and he would send the whole correspondence before the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury then continued in deliberation on other matters, with closed doors, and the District Attorney sent the correspondence before them, for their information. United States District Court. Before Hon. Judge Ingersoll. JAN. 22.-Phe United States US. Fifty-two Casks of Ale -The Same 18. James M. Hill.-In these cases, a motion was made by the District Attorney to set aside orders maying the preceedings on the part of the government. Mr. Joact imssen, for the government, insisted that these orders we e irregular. It was an attempt to enjoin the government from prosecuting for infractions of the revenue laws, when the parties plead guilty to a commismenof the offence. The United States could not be en. joined, and the orders, one of which was in a case in which the defendant might be held to bail, and thus give him the opportunity to escape from the jurisdiction. Mr. James Riegway, in opposition, cited authorities from Dunlap's Practice and Conklin's Treatise in support of the orders. The orders were made on the petitions to the Secretary of the Treasury for a remission of the penalties. and thus prevented an accumulation of costs. The United States District Attorney said that there was no precede for any such proceedings. Judge Ingersoll decided that the orders were irregular. The conc uct of causes for the government was by law emirusted to a sworn officer, appointed by the President, and confirmed by the Senate. The discretion of this of Beer, in br nging suits for violations of law duly reportod to bim, cannot be trolled by the Court. He 14 responsible for his conduct only to the appointing power. The Court is to hear and decide the suit, but there was NO jurisdiction to enjoin the District Attorney from the performance of his duty. The costs of $5 were too small a object to be noticed. The order must be vacated. Supre me Court-Special Term. M. HOPPER MOTT VS. THE RECEIVER OF THE ENICKERBOCKER SAVINGS INSTITUTION. JAN. 22.-Roosevelt, J.-This is a controversy arising ont of the incongruous alliance and subsequent very natural bankruptcy of the Knickerbocker Bank and the socalled Knickerbocker Savings Institution. It illustrates to a manner calculated to strike, and even to shock, all nations of fair dealing, the tendency of the one to prey upon the vitals of the other, and then upon Its own. The plaintiff, it appears, in his character of & member of the Banking Association, on the 21st of March, 1854. obtained from the funds of the Savings Institution-and It will be borne in mind that the chief managers of the former, as the published liste show, were trustees of the latter, and carried on their operations in the same vicinity-a loan, 80 called, of $10,200, payable with interest on demand, substituting in the place of the money 80 withdrawn from the Savings Institution his promissory note and a certificate of 450 shares of the so called stock of the Knickerbocker Bank. This loan he now says his friends in the Savings Institution had no legal right to make, and he, therefore, however muth accommodated at the time, is under no legal obligation to repay it; and he accordingly files his bih in equity -the conjunction can hardly fail to provoke a smilevery modestly praying that the Supreme Court, sitting to its character of Chancellor, and as such, of course, the guardian of charities, will order the receiver, without payment, or any offer of payment, to deliver up the note and certificate-on the pretended faith of which, with the concurrence of the friendly managers of the charity, (anlawfully. as he contends,) he had abstracted of the

3. February 2, 1855 Worcester Daily Spy Worcester, MA
Article from Worcester Daily Spy, February 2, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

INTERESTING VERDICT.-In March last, the Knickerbocker Savings Institution lent to J. Hopper Mott $10 200,on his note and a certificate of 450 shares of the Knickerbocker Bank. Both these institutions subsequently became bankrupt. and Mr. Mott instituted a suit to recover his note and certificate, on the ground that his friends of the Savings Bank had no right to make the loan, because their charter provides that they shall not lend money excepting on sufficient security,, whereas "he had palmed upon them a stock which was comparatively worthless." The case has injunction been discussed before on Judge all informal Roosevelt, motion who yester. for an day decided in the Supreme Court, that th e plaintiff, instead of being entitled to the decree he asks for, will be justly adjudged to pay the whole amount of $10200, with interest and costs to the Receiver of the Savings Institution. The Judge declared that the claim of Mr. Mott "assumed as the law of a Christian people, a principle which would hardly be tolerated in a community of swindlers."-N. y. Mirror.

4. February 10, 1855 The New York Herald New York, NY
Article from The New York Herald, February 10, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Surpao and London, are reported, with heavy liabilities. The political intelligence is of an interesting character. As we anticipated, peace is as far distant as ever, and affairs on the Continent appear to be getting into a snarl not easily unravelled. The plot is evidently thickening, and the probability is that the whole of Europe will, in less than twelve months, be involved in one general war. The Stuyvesant Insurance Company have declared a semi-dividend of four per cent; the Brooklyn Fire Insurance Company six per cent. The Erie and Northeast Railroad Company have deamed it inexpedient to declare its usual semi-annual dividend, cwing to the increased expenditures on the road, occasioned by the troubles at Erie, Penn., last winter. The removal of D. B. St. John, the Bank Superintendent, is forced upon the Governor by the powerful voise of public opinion. The events which have occurred in this State during the past year, growing out of gross neglect of duty on the part of the Superintendent, are alone sufficient to justify his removal; but there are acts of commission, as well as of omission, enough to sink him into the lower: depths of official degradation. There have been within the past twelve months more swindiing banks organized and operated in this city and State than we have ever known before in the same leng of time, every one of which has run is race, and exploded, without any interference on the part of the Superintendent, St. J ohn. He has not in the first instance exercised his powers of supervision, and the first he has heard of any bank failure has been through the press of this city. He hasnot even taken notice of the notes of alarm sounded st different times, and stepped forward to protect the community against the swindlers who were so fearlessly praying upon them. It appears to be his policy to let the banks have their own way, and he is therefore popular among them. This accounts for the anxiety on the part of the banks to have him re-appointed. We understand that the banks are unanimous in his favor, and that the Governor has been flooded with letters from bank presidents and cashiers against Mr. St. John's removal. This fact alone should have great weight with the Governor in his decision. The Superintendent of the Banking Department of this State should hold a conservative position between the people and the banking interest. It is his duty to administer the affairs of his office more for the protection of the public than for the accommodation and benefit of individuals or incorporated banks ; and we want such a man. Mr. St John has been in office four years, and it is time some change was made, if for no other purpose than to bring about a thorough investigation and cleansing of the department. Nearly thirty millions of dollars in public stocks are intrusted to the hands of one man, with out security. All these stocks stand in his name, or are payable to the bearer, making them easily negotiable. The trust is too great, and such checks as the law provides should be exercised. The most effective is rotation in office, and a thorough examination by each new incumbent of the acts of bis predecessor. The annexed statement exhibits the assets of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, which came into the possession of the United States Trust Com. pany, as receiver. The loss to depositors is likely to be large. It will be seen that a deficiency of $55,000 exists, in the event of the full value of the assets being realized. The loans to individuals, secured by stock collaterals, will turnout bad. The receiver Eays there will be a large loss on that item. Of the deposits in the Knickerbocker Bank, probably three. fourths, at least, will be lost. Nearly one-half of the amount is disputed. It is our impressi that of the $452,649 09 of assets, not more than $300,000 will ultimately be realized. This will give the depositors about sixty-five per cent of their claims:KNICKERBOCKER SAVINGS BANK-PAR VALUE OF ASSETS. Cash $3,132 79 Loans secured by mortgage of real estate 225,777 00 These loans are believed, generally, to be good, and it is supposed there will be little or DO loss on them Loans to individuals, with stocks as collateral 90,772 58 For which the following securities are held, to wit:2629 shares Knickerbock Bank stock. $65.725

5. May 8, 1855 New-York Daily Tribune New York, NY
Article from New-York Daily Tribune, May 8, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

SUPREME COURT-GENERAL TERM.-May 8.-DECISIONS. KNICKERBOCKER BANK. In the matter of the application of the United States Trust Company of New-York, receiver of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, for the appointment of & Receiver of the Knickerbocker Bank, &c. In the matter of the adjustment of the accounts between the Knickerbocker Savings Institution and the Knickerbocker Bank, &c. The above were appeals on account of alleged irregularity in bringing the case before the Court below. Decided, that the two orders appealed from should be affirmed, with costs of $10 in each case, saving the right to those interested in the Bank, to apply for leave to act in the defense before the Referee, and in the subsequent proceedings.

6. May 9, 1855 New-York Daily Tribune New York, NY
Article from New-York Daily Tribune, May 9, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

LA W INTELLIGENCE. UNITED STATES CIRCUIT COURT. DECISION IN THE INDIA RUBBER CASES. [Reported for The N. Y. Tribune Charles Goodyear agt. Bourn & Brown. This case was a bill in Equity in which the plaintiff sued the defendants for infringing his Vulcanizing India Rubber Patent, and was commenced in 1853, and injunction was prayed for, and was granted by Judge Nelson, to prevent the delivery of a quantity of shoes worth about $15,000. Pending this injunction the shoes were taken by process from the State Courts in behalf of the purchaser, and the present case came up on a motion by plaintiff to amend the bill-it appearing that other parties had purchased Goodyear's exclusive right to manufacture India rubber shoes before the suit was commenced, and necessarily should be parties to the same. The defendants objected to the other parties being made plaintiffs, upon the ground that it would change the entire cause of action as the amendment showed, and also moved that the injunetion be dissolved. The case was argued by James T. Brady for the plaintiff and N. Richardson for the defendants. The Court (Nelson, Judge) delivered the following opinion: 1. The amendments asked for in this cause cannot be allowed. It would in effect be the institution of a new suit against these defendants, materially different from the preset one both as to complainants and rights of action. This exceeds the province of amendment, as was held by the Supreme Court of the United States after the last term. 2. The preliminary injunction heretofore issued must be dissolved, as the answer supported by affidavits shows that the shoes in question were made under license from the complainant in the suit. The motion also for a further injunction must be denied for the same reasons, His Honor, Judge Nelson, also delivered an opinion in action in which the Ford Rubber Company and others were plaintiffs, joined with Charles Goodyear against Edwin McChaffee, and Bourn & Brown of Providence, R. I., for an alleged infringement of the Goodyear Vuleanizing India Rubber Patent. The plaintiffs moved for an injunction to restrain the defend. ants from the further prosecution of their business, which is carried on in Providence, R. I. The cause was argued by James T. Brady for the plaintiffs, and N. Richardson for the defendants. Judge Nelson filed the following opinion on Saturday: 1. The defendants waived any objection to the service of the subpena, by causing appearance to be entered and putting in an swer. It is unimportant, therefore, to inquire into the regularity of the service. 2. The motion for the injunction must be denied. The case shows that the defendants are residents of another jurisdiction, and also carry on the business which isclaimed to be inviolation of plaintiff's patent there, and consequently beyond the process of injunction; the issueing of it would therefore be inoperative and useless. If plaintiffs desire to enjoin the defendants they must file their bill in the jurisdiction where the business complained of is carried on. The following gentlemen have been drawn as the Petit Jury pannel for the May Term, to commence 14th inst.: W. Reed Adams, W m. D. Meekes, John E. Phillips, Charles H. Phillips, Daniel Phalen, J. W. Pharo, James Ewing, J. Thompson, C. T. illiamson, R. L. Pell, G. W. Reid, J. M. Jackson, John A. Jackson, Earl Douglas, J. Snelling, T. B. Merrick, J. Turner, J. Emery, J. Ernst, m. G. Lyon, Samuel Perry, Titus Merrick, E. O. Halstead, D. S. Halsted. Wm. McKenzie, C. N. Fearing, R. Clearwater, A. M. Clement, G. F. Paterson John Morse, P. Squires, F. Bellows, Ransom Beman, R C. Adams, J. D. Phillips, Wm. Craig, John L. Smith, J. M. Jones, Isaac Wm. Smith, Richard Makin, R. Emmett, Jr. Wm. inslow, J. C. Winne, S. N. Stubbs, A. M. Whitlock, T. L. Van Norden, John Carleton, R. ardell. SUPREME COURT-MAY 8-GENERAL TERM-Before Judges MITCHELL, CLERKE and COWLES. KNICKERBOCKER BANK. In the matter of the application of the United States Trust Company, of New-York, Receiver of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, for the appointment of a Receiver of the Knickerbocker Bank. In the matter of the adjustment of the accounts between the Knickerbocker Savings Institution and the Knickerbocker Bank, &c, OPINION. MITCHELL, P. J.-The Bank became insolvent, and application was made to one of the Justices of this Court for the appointment of a Receiver under the act of 1849, ch. 226. The United States Trust Company was appointed Receiver by an order entitled as at Special Term. That Company had been previously appointed Receiver of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, and in that capacity had sued the Bank, and claimed that $115,000 were due by the Bank to the Savings Institution: while the Bank disputed $49,000 of that amount. The Trust Company, thus being Receiver of both institutions, represented both the debtor and creditor, and applied to the Court for instruc. tions, and the Court ordered a reference to William Kent, Esq. to take the evidence as to the amount due, and to give notice of the reference to the three last Presidents of the Bank. It is objected that the appointment of the Receiver should have been by a Judge at Chambers and not in Court, and that the Trust Company, being plaintiff in a suit against the Bank, could not be a receiver of the Bank. The mere entitling an order, as at Special Term, which by law may be made before a Judge out of Court, or the mak of it by the Judge when sitting at Special Term instead of when sitting at Chambers, does not vitiate the order; he has the power to make the order as a Judge, and it detracts nothing from the force of the order made by him as a Judge that he makes it at the Special Term, or entitles it as made at the Special Term. And if such an order is to be appealed from, it is to be entered as if made at the Special Term. (Code sec. 350). If the appointment of Receiver was only for the purposes of the mit on behalf the Savings Institution, there would be & manifest impropriety in making the Trust Company, acting for that institut Receiver also of the Bank. But this was not the case. The Receiver of the Bank was to act for all the creditors of the Bank, and was disinterested, except as to the case of the one claim of the Savings Institution. is specially created by the Legislature, in part to aid suitors and the Court by as suming the exercise of trusts when it might be difficult to get others to execute them (as in this case) on account of the large. ness of the amount of security that would be required and the difficulty of obtaining persons competent to give such security and to manage such affairs. persons to take charge be of a trust like this, or more trustworthy, probably could not them, found. The papers on the appeal show no objection to un nor that any others were even named; and as there insolvent is no bending rule of law that one who is & creditor of an Reinstitution should not be its Receiver, the objection to the and ceiver falls to the ground. The Trust Company being lawfully appointed Receiver, Justice of the deriving its appointment from the Court or from for instructions, & and Court. it had a right to apply to the Court to make the application than where it was for such inin no case could it be more <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< the both creditor and debtor. It order of It was structions, and the Court made the in the form of the suit comuseless to keep up the litigation be allowed to progress in the menced, for even if that should the Receiver would be bound to act name for of the the bank, bank and as defendant be could in that suit seek for instructions here. Some notice was proper to be given to such such as sought as would be most likely to take care of the rights the persons bank, and none probably could be thought of more suit of able for this purpose than the late Presidents of the bank. If the appellants think that they can name any other persons who

7. May 9, 1855 The New York Herald New York, NY
Article from The New York Herald, May 9, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Supreme Court. SPECIAL TERM. By Hon. Judge Roosevelt. MAY 8.-John Warnick vs. Miner C. Storey, the Mayor, Aldermen, dc., of New York, the Commissiouers of the Sinking Fund.-This suit is another of the numerous litigations which have originated with the alleged irregular action of different branches of the late city government of 1852. The complaint charges the other commissioners of the sinking fund and other officers and members of the corporation with fraud, corruption and illegality in the matter of a certain water grant in which the plaintiff says he was interested both individually and as a taxpayer, and which he prays therefore may be cancelled. After going over the particulars of the case, the Judge concluded by saying-It follows that the proper judgment to be entered on the demurrer is, that the complaint be dismissed with costs, unless the plaintiff within ten days after notice shall strike out his iudividual demand (confining himself to the one single cause of action as a taxpayer) and pay the costs occasioned by the misjoinder. GENERAL TERM. Before Hon. Judges Mitchell, Clerke and Cowies. In the Matter of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution and the Knickerbocker Bank-This wasan application of the United States Trust Company of New York, receiver of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, for the appointment of a receiver of the Knickerbocker Bank, and for the adjustment of the accounts between the Knickerbocker Savings Institution and the Knickerbocker Bank. The Court ordered that the two orders appealed from should be affirmed with costs of $10 in each, sav. ing the right to those interested in the bank to apply for leave to aid in the defence before the referee and in the subsequent proceedings.

8. December 8, 1855 New-York Daily Tribune New York, NY
Article from New-York Daily Tribune, December 8, 1855

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

$385,660 35 $283 936 37 $30,563.63 $700,140 S6 This increase is equal to about 38 P cent. We hear the semi-annual dividend estimated at 6 P cent, but have no official advices in regard to it. The October earnir gs of the Michigan Southern Railroad were about $337,000 against $296,000 in 1854, and for November they will not vary much from $250,000 against $233,700. A letter from an official source at Chicago says that the November earnings of the Galena. and Chic go Railroad will be between $250,000 and $260,000, which is an increase of some $110,000 over November, 1854, instead of $70,000, as was expected. The ia. erease would have been still larger had the lateral roads been in good order for wagons, so that farmers could have drawn produce to the read. A gentleman who arrived from Chicago a day or two since tells us that he passed over the Fulton track from Chicago to Fulton, and cars were running on all but two and-ahalf miles, which the track layers would complete in two days. A large amount offreight has accumulated at Fulton for the East. The earnings of the Chicago and Galena will be largely increased in December by the opening of this new line between Chicago and the Mississippi River. The Pacific Steamship Company having arranged the debt due to Messrs. Howland & Aspinwall for advances, &c., have notified that house toat its agency of the Company will cease on the 31st inst This is in pursuance of the proposition made by Messrs. H. & A. at a meeting of the stockholders of the Company. The United States Trust Company notify the creditors of the Knickerbocker Savings Institution, that they will pay a second and final dividend of fifty and one-half of one P ct. on the 8th of January next, at No. 40 Wall street. From The Rochester Daily Tribune, Dec. 4. We have received from a reliable source the following interesting fac's in relation to the Copper Mines of Lake Superior, for the present year. The total shipments were from the ONTONACON DISTRICT