Click image to open full size in new tab
Article Text
Connellsville Bank Receiver Wins Suit
Judge McVicar of the District Court of the United States for the Western District of Pennsylvania has Just handed down a decision in the case of George H. Smith, Receiver of the Citizens National Bank of Connellsville, against the BaHimore and Ohio Railroad Company, sustaining the contention of the receiver. As a result of this decision. various securiUes, aggregating $54,000 in par value, will be added to the assets of the bank and depositors in the bank will benefit proportionately. In February, 1928,-the old First Na(Ional Bank (later taken over by the Citizens National Bank) pledged these securities in order to protect a deposit account of the railroad company. The bledge continued until the closing of the Citizens bank, when the railroad threatened to sell the 88qurities In order to pay the balance ***$40,000 then on deposit to the credit of the railroad. The Receiver thereupon instituted an injunction proceeding to restrain the sale of the securities and to compel their return to him. In the decision now made, the pledge agreemnt was held to be illegal and void, and the pledged securities were ordered to be returnd to the receiver, without the prior payment of the railroad's deposit balance. The court's reasoning was that the power to pledge was contrary to the spirit « the acts of Congress "which have for their primary purpose the sufekeeping and protection of the deposits of all the depositors of a bank. If the act, under consideration is construed 80 that national banks possess implied power to pledge all their assets, or a material portion thereof, as security for a few private depositors, it takes away from the great major. 11y of the depositors the greatest security which the law intended that they should have, and it violates the public policy of the nation as declared in its national banking laws Public policy will not, therefore, tolerate a practice which might, sooner or later, in the event of financial trouble with the bank, enable It to pay and protect the favored few at the expense of the equally deserving many. The case is attracting wide Interest since this is the first time in the history of American banking that this question has been raised as respects a national bank. There are a num. ber of similar cases now pending in other states, but the Comptroller of the curency has decided to let the fate of those cases depend upon the decision in the local case. Attorney H. Eastman Hackney, of Uniontown, presented the case for the receiver, and Attorneys Smith,, Buchanon, Scott and Gordon of Pittsburgh represented the railroad. It is understood that the railroad intends to appeal the case.