National Mechanics Banking Association

Bank Information

Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: state
Start Date: May 17, 1871
Location: New York, New York (40.714, -74.006)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini
Short Digest: 57fed8f7

Response Measures

None

Description

Article (The New York Herald, 1871-07-20) reports appointment of receivers for the National Mechanics' Banking Association with orders dated mid-May 1871 (receiver appointed May 17, bond approved May 18). No run is mentioned; the bank was placed in receivership by court proceedings, indicating a suspension leading to closure. I corrected OCR punctuation in the bank name (added apostrophe) but retained the provided name.

Events (2)

1. May 17, 1871 Suspension

Cause: Government Action
Cause Details: Court-ordered appointment of a receiver following creditor suits (order made May 17, bond approved May 18, 1871)
Newspaper Excerpt: the receiver in the case of the bank was appointed on the 17th of May, 1871, and the bond approved on the succeeding day
Source: newspapers

2. May 18, 1871 Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: Applications were made in these two cases for the appointment of a receiver, which was granted... the receiver in the case of the bank was appointed on the 17th of May, 1871, and the bond approved on the succeeding day.
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. July 20, 1871 The New York Herald New York, NY

Article from The New York Herald, July 20, 1871

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

SUPREME COURT-CHAMBERS. Sharp Legal Practice Defeated. Before Judge Ingraham. In re the National Mechanics' Banking Association v8. The Mariposa company, and in re samuel B. White vs. The same.-Applications were made in these two cases for the appointment of a receiver, which was granted. Subsequently application was made to set aside one of the receivers, each plaintiff in each suit claiming that his receiver should be retained. This application was made in the White case in March, 1870, when an arrangement was made between the opposing counsel that either might bring it up on a day's notice. Nothing was done until last May, when the receiver in the White suit was appointed. On the same day an order was made that a receiver should DO appointed in the other suit, but the bond was not filed till two days later. A motion was made to set aside the order appointing the receiver in the White case. The Judge rendered a decision in the case yesterday morning, granting the motion. His first ground is that there 18 no propriety in allowing one creditor to make a motion for a receiver, and by stipulation with the attorney for the defendant to allow the proceedings to lie dormant for months, until other creditors proceed to collect their claims. and then by consent of the attorney attempt to gain a priority, which priority should be given to the vigilant creditor. His second reason is that the facts show that there was a collusion in the case of White against the company to defeattn bank. His third reason is because, in fact, the receiver in the case of the bank was appointed on the 17th of May, 1871, and the bond approved on the succeeding day, while the order in the other case was made on the 18th of May and the bond approved the same day. The Judge says, in conclusion, that "the attempt to overreach and defeat proceedings by obtaining a filing of the papers should not be allowed to succeed when it is apparent that the attorney for the defengants knew of both proceedings, knew that the receiver had been appointed on the 17tn of May, and obtained such delay for the evident purpose or advening the other application, with the view of giving priority therein. A Father After His Children. Before Judge Cardozo. In re Julia E. and Charles D. O'connor.-These two children, the former nine and the latter seven years of age, were brought up on writ of habeas corpus. It was represented on the part of Patrick O'Connor, claiming to be their father and a resident of St. Louis, that the children were committed to the Protestant Half-Orphan Asylum by Mrs. Ann M. Turner, his housekeeper, under the names of Julia E. and James D. Turner. The case will be remembered as having been brought before Justice Cox on a charge of kidnapping, and that the complaint was dismissed. For Mrs. Bush, matron of the asylum, it was stated that she did not know the names of the children to be otherwise than those appearing on the records of the institution, and that she was told they were brought there on account of ill usage by their father. Further hearing in the case was postponed till the 26th inst. A Rioter Auxious for Liberty. In re Patrick Hogan.-Patrick is now a prisoner in the Tombs, where he is temporarily confined awaiting trial on a charge of being one of the late rioters. Judge Shandley committed him, the evidence showing, as alleged, that he was arrested with a brick in his hand. Application was made for his release on a writ or habeas corpus. The Judge said he would not interfere in the case, and the prisoner was accordingly remanded. A Fortunate Escape. In re James McAlear.-This party was arrested on a charge of burglary and stealing lead. Owing to some mistake, Justice Cox, before whom he was brought, committed him for vagrancy. He was brought up on writ of habeas corpus, and his release ordered. Decisions. By Judge Cardozo. Lawrence et al. vs. Taylor.-Motion denied. Hellon vs. Mitchell.-Motion granted. Allowance of five per cent. Sarah A. Robins et al. vs. Amelia Robins et al.Motion granted, confirming report of sale. D. A. Clapp vs. Edward WOLF et al.-Motion granted for judgment. Henry H. Buckbee et at. vs. Hannah Crone Order granted. William H. Paulding vs. S. F. Shepard.-Motion denied without costs. John Kinzie et al. vs. Thomas Kinzie.-Motion granted. Tapscott vs. Morgan.-Memoranda for counsel. Kohner vs. Hargousetal.-Motion granted. Esteces vs. Brinckerhoffet al.-Order granted.