Mercantile Bank - Memphis, TN

Bank Information

Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: state
Start Date: February 1, 1914*
Location: Memphis, Tennessee (35.150, -90.049)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini
Short Digest: 4b9cd254

Response Measures

None

Description

Article (1921-10-03) refers to the receiver of the Mercantile Bank of Memphis and litigation arising from actions tied to the bank president's failure in February 1914. The text indicates the bank had a receiver (i.e., was closed/in receivership). There is no mention of a depositor run in the provided excerpt, so I classify this as a suspension leading to permanent closure/receivership. Dates: president failed Feb 1914; receiver referenced in 1921 petition (1921-09-29).

Events (2)

1. February 1, 1914* Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: Raine was president of the bank in 1912, and when he failed in February, 1914, his accounts were alleged to have been overdrawn approximately $1,000,000.
Source: newspapers

2. September 29, 1921 Other

Newspaper Excerpt: A petition was filed today with the supreme court asking the review of the case in which the receiver of the Mercantile Bank of Memphis, Tenn., sought to recover from Hubbard Brothers and company of New York, $200,000 alleged to have been paid that firm by Hunter Raine in cotton speculations.
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. October 3, 1921 The Abbeville Press and Banner Abbeville, SC

Article from The Abbeville Press and Banner, October 3, 1921

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

BANK SEEKS TO RECOVER MONEY LOST ON COTTON Washington, Sept. 29.-A petition was filed today with the supreme court asking the review of the case in which the receiver of the Mercantile Bank of Memphis, Tenn., sought to, recover from Hubbard Brothers and company of New York, $200,000 alleged to have been paid that firm by Hunter Raine in cotton speculations. Raine was president of the bank in 1912, and when he failed in February, 1914, his accounts were al_ leged to have been overdrawn approximately $1,000,000. The United States district and circuit court of appeals at New York City decided against the receiver, the former on grounds he had proved no cause of action and the latter because he was without legal capacity to sue.