Hanover Bank (New York, NY)

Episode Information

Episode UID
5345114791274
Episode Type
Suspension β†’ Closure
Bank Type
state
Bank ID
534511479 hash
Start Date
February 7, 1906
Location
New York, New York (40.714, -74.006)

Metadata

Model
gemini-3-flash-preview (chosen from majority vote of a three-model LLM ensemble)
Short Digest
08779ba1ef7b8d65

Response Measures

None

Description

The articles describe the Hanover Bank of New York facing a receivership appointment in February 1906 following its involvement with the failed State Banking and Safe Deposit Co.

Events (2)

1. February 7, 1906 Suspension
Cause
Bank Specific Adverse Info
Cause Details
Involvement with failed/fraudulent bond issues and absorption of the State Banking and Safe Deposit Co.
Newspaper Excerpt
it could not be learned here whether there would be any opposition tomorrow to the appointment of receivers for the institution.
Source
newspapers
2. February 8, 1906 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
appointment of receivers for the institution. The exact number of depositors of the bank will not be known until tomorrow.
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (2)

Article from The Sun, May 11, 1905

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

TIE UP HAIGHT & FREESE CASH YESTERDAY'S MAIL.THOUGH.GOT AWAY FROM RECEIVERS. Nuggets of Good Size Said to Have Been Found In Several Places-Exchange Firms Named by Turner as Having Done Business for the Concern In 1902 The Haight & Freese Company of 53 Broadway, whose pretended transactions in buying and selling stocks and bonds were held recently by Supreme Court Justice Dowling to be mere bookkeeping entries, got into more trouble yesterday. A receiver appointed by the Federal courts of Pennsylvania took possession of its large office in the Bourse Building in Philadelphia, and simultaneously in this city, Boston and Philadelphia counsel for the receivers and creditors began a search for the assets, employing Pinkerton detectives In Philadelphia the concern began at 8 o'clock to pay off depositors. They kept paying for an hour and then announced that they had received word from the New York officers to stop payments. According to the counsel for the receivers, the daily receipts of the offices have been as much as $100,000 a day. Roger Foster and W. P. Maloney. the counsel for the receivers. believe that large sums of money have been deposited in safe deposit vaults in the three cities in the names of inembers of the concern. Turner and Lillis. the chief members. it was said, came here vesterday. but they couldn't be found. In all three cities copies of the injunction order tying up the assets were served on practically every safe deposit company. Mr. Maloney said in the afternoon that $200,000 had been found in one safe deposit concern in Philadelphia Copies of the injunction were served here on the Hanover Bank. the Colonial Bank. the Columbia Bank the Bankers' Trust Company. the National Park Bank and the Seaboard SEM About ou that pics SUM 71 Bank found at most of these banks. At the Seaboard the concern recently had $150,000. Yesterday only $25,000 was found there. At the Colonial Bank $3,000 was found. It was also found. the leaders said, that members of the concern had several checks certified at the latter bank yesterday beforethe injunction was served. Mr. Foster said that he understood that a stop order had been put on the checks. It was reported that the concern had $200,000 in the Long Island Trust Company, and a law clerk hustled over there in an automobile and tied up whatever there was. An attempt to vacate the receivership here was made before Justice Lacombe vesterday by Franklin Bien representing the company. Justice Lacombe refused to grant any of Mr. Bien's motions but gave him leave to renew them on Friday on the argument over a permanent receivership. Charles H. A. Dougherty, a custom house broker. of 68 Wall st reet, through James C. Lenny filed a petition in involuntary bankruptey against the company, stating that he was a creditor for $1,656 and alleging on information and belief that the creditors of the company were less than twelve in number. If they are more than twelve in number more than one must petition. Counsel for the receiver say they don't believe the application will be granted. According to the testimony of Charles G. Turner in the Haight suit upon which Justice Dowling decided that the concern was a bucketshop the Haight& Freese Company has been doing business with several New York Stock Exchange houses. Turner refused to name these, giving as his reason business Sujop really SEAL the 1941 as a competitor of the New York Stock Exchange and that he didn't want to get the firms into trouble with the exchange. Justice Dowling, however. compelled him to name the Stock Exchange firms, and he testified that in 1902. when Haight had his account with the company the company I'll M Owens P Beers 47TM business PIP Stow & Co., Cohen. Green & Co., S. V. White, Hunter & Schumacher and George 1 Landon & Co. Several of these concerns -OJ 10 JO not euo? easy organized since 1902 Yesterday the lawyers for the receiver served copies of the T ΠΈ a (Wems) y Beers uo Stow & Co. Beers & Owens admitted that the company had an account with them state B have pToM Seq: pres pue MOTE ment of it prepared W. L. Stow & Co., which is a reorganization of the firm of f902. denied ever having done business for the company It came out yesterday that the Haight MOJ SR e root Β₯ as $10 to huy 10 shares A majority of its customers were tradesmen and mechanics dollars. perpuny mej R dn person peq our Claims from such persons aggregating $70,000 have been filed with Mr Maloney. em clients (hese Time business Sujop UI company had them sign a contract read1201 When stocks are purchased this order may be executed in any city or place, whether on any exchange. through a member pus sept su 01 pum Joesey or by private purchase, as the Haight &


Article from Daily Kennebec Journal, February 7, 1906

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

# BY COURT'S ORDER (Continued from Page One.) ed with the Trustees Co. and the State Banking and Safe Deposit Co. which was absorbed by the Hanover Bank, was one of these institutions. Hooper claims that a $1,500,000 issue of the bonds of the Scranton, Factoryville & Tunkhannock Railroad, guaranteed and underwritten by the Imperial Trustees Co. had been turned over to the State Banking and Safe Deposit Co., to be put on sale. According to Hooper the franchise of the railroad company had expired and therefore the bonds could not be put on the market. On account of the fact that practically all the officers of the Hanover Bank lived in New York it could not be learned here whether there would be any opposition tomorrow to the appointment of receivers for the institution. The exact number of depositors of the bank will not be known until tomorrow.