17434. Farmers & Merchants Bank (Lake City, SC)

Bank Information

Episode Type
Suspension โ†’ Closure
Bank Type
state
Start Date
October 1, 1926*
Location
Lake City, South Carolina (33.871, -79.755)

Metadata

Model
gpt-5-mini
Short Digest
90eb95ddd53db95b

Response Measures

None

Description

Articles report the Farmers & Merchants Bank of Lake City, S.C. failed in October 1926 and a receiver was involved; later Supreme Court decision (reported 1930) upheld the Richmond Fed's application of the failed bank's deposit to pay checks collected after failure. OCR in the clippings is garbled: one line refers to 'Farmers and National Bank' but context and provided bank indicate Farmers & Merchants; bank appears to have failed (receivership) rather than experienced a run or temporary suspension and did not reopen.

Events (2)

1. October 1, 1926* Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
When the Farmers and Merchants Bank of Lake City failed in October 1926, had $22,088 on with the Federal Reserve Bank at Rich--- (OCR garbled). The receiver contested this ruling ... the failed bank became part ... at the expense of the creditors of the failed bank (Richmond Times-Dispatch, Mar 13, 1930).
Source
newspapers
2. March 12, 1930 Other
Newspaper Excerpt
The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond ... was sustained by the Supreme Court in applying funds it had on deposit to the credit of the Farmers and National Bank of Lake City, S. C., to the payment of checks drawn on the latter bank received for collection after the South Carolina bank had failed.
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (2)

Article from Richmond Times-Dispatch, March 13, 1930

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Reserve Bank Of Richmond Wins Decision WASHINGTON March 12-(P)-The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Va., today was sustained by the Supreme Court in applying funds it had on deposit to the credit of the Farmers and National Bank of Lake City, S. C., to the payment of checks drawn on the latter bank recelved for collection after the South Carolina bank had failed. When the Farmers and Merchants Bank of Lake City failed in October 1926, had $22,088 on with the Federal Reserve Bank at RichThe on whether the Federal Reserve Bank could use this deposit balance towards the payment checks drawn on the Lake City Bank, which it had recelved for collection from customer banks, whether the deposit balance was an the failed bank which must be turned over to the The Federal District Court decided in but Circuit Court of Appeals held that under the contract with the Lake Cit: Bank the Federal Reserve Bank had the to use the deposit balance in payment checks it had received for collection drawn against the failed bank The receiver contested this ruling that the collection contract did not give the Federal Reserve Bank the apply the deposit balbut that returned must be the failed become part the decision of the Circuit Court of would result of the Reserve Bank being given at the expense of the creditors of the failed bank


Article from The Clarks Enterprise, January 30, 1931

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Reserve Bank Of Richmond Wins Decision WASHINGTON March 12-(P)-The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, Va., today was sustained by the Supreme Court in applying funds it had on deposit to the credit of the Farmers and National Bank of Lake City, S. C., to the payment of checks drawn on the latter bank recelved for collection after the South Carolina bank had failed. When the Farmers and Merchants Bank of Lake City failed in October 1926, had $22,088 on with the Federal Reserve Bank at RichThe on whether the Federal Reserve Bank could use this deposit balance towards the payment checks drawn on the Lake City Bank, which it had recelved for collection from customer banks, whether the deposit balance was an the failed bank which must be turned over to the The Federal District Court decided in but Circuit Court of Appeals held that under the contract with the Lake Cit: Bank the Federal Reserve Bank had the to use the deposit balance in payment checks it had received for collection drawn against the failed bank The receiver contested this ruling that the collection contract did not give the Federal Reserve Bank the apply the deposit balbut that returned must be the failed become part the decision of the Circuit Court of would result of the Reserve Bank being given at the expense of the creditors of the failed bank