Article Text
eth to his own hurt yet changeth not.' When his part in the Lorimer bank incident is cited, as it is eited by the State Federation of Labor, Mr. Dawes might truthfully say, "I still continue to stand for and by the courts though I haven't fared particularly well at their hands." For the rest the incident is not to Mr. Dawes' credit. The facts as stated in the declaration adopted by the state federation are correct. It contains the thought, if not the language of the supreme court. What the Central Trust Co., Mr. Dawes' bank did, was o furnish William Horace Lorimer $1,250,000 which was counted by a state bank examiner as the property of the La Salle Street Trust and Savings bank which Lorimer organized when his La Salle Street National bank was going on the rocks. The law requires that to begin business a state bank must have capital stock and surplus on hand with no liabilities. Mr. Lorimer did not have the money to he resorted to the simple expedient of getting it from Mr. Dawes, Taking with him Rife, the bank examiner r the state auditor and one of the directors of the new institution Lorimer, went to the Central Trust company. The supreme court record tells the rest: There $1,250,000 in currency was delivered to Lorimer by the cashier of the Central Trust Co. Rife counted the money and returned it to Lorimer together with the auditor's certificate authorizing the trust and savings bank to commence business as a bank. Lorimer handed the money back to the cashier, who returned the enshier's check, indorsed by the Cen. ral Trust Co. without recourse. When the La Salle Street Trust & Savings bank was closed by the state auditor, as it was two years later, with assets insufficient by $2,000,000 o meet the claims of depositors and creditors the receiver brought suit gainst the Central Trust Co., Mr. Dawes' bank, on the grounds that it ad received funds belonging to the lefunct institution and retined them without authority of law. The case went to the circuit court which found the Central Trust Co. lable to the amount of $1,487,854.16. The defense set un the plea that the whole transaction was done and carred out by William R. Dawes, casher of the Trust company under the authority and direction of Charles G. Dawes without the knowledge of the oard of directors and that the acts lone by them, the Daweses, were be ond their authority. The Supreme court took a different iew, and held the Trust company responsible. It swept away the technial defense that the auditor had counted the money and had satisfied himesif that it was all there, the drily remarking that "of agent was there to satisfy pinion course, rought the auditor's himself that not here was that much money in some ank in Chicago, and of course noody thought so.' However, the supreme court held hat the Central Trust Co. was only iable for the amount to which the capital stock of the National bank vas impaired at the time of the transer to the state bank and the case vent to a master in chancery for a determination of the value of assets. The only possible moral defense hat Mr. Dawes could offer was that e did not know the law of the state, i plea that the court said was immaterial, or that he did not know the it condition of the Lorimer bank, and would be a libel on Mr. Dawes ability as a banker to say that he did lot know what everybody knew. can be of fascism harge Mr. Dawes which relieved him. the of state His the federation brings against mniute men's" organization was, as e explained it, an attempt by nonartizan effort to get good men into unions conceived it to be in to establish open ffice. attempt The the disclaimed. shop, thing which Mr. Dawes i Dawes enjoys no As a candidate munities. But Mr. reciting special he must im- the attacks, and in fedbank incident the Lorimer expect vulnerable state ration has hit him in a return Decatur Herald.
