Bank of New Hanover (Wadesboro, NC)

Article Text

THE BANK OF NEW HANOVER

Not a Bad Failure -Depositors - will be Paid in Full. Details of the failure of the Bank of New Hanover, at Wilmington, are contained in the dispatches. The cause of the suspension is that $320,000 of deposits were drawn from the bank last week and notices were on file of over $150,000 to be withdrawn this week. Owing to the stringency of the times the bank could not realize quickly upon its assets, and hence there was nothing to do but close its doors. The cashier, in a published card, announces that depositors will receive dollar for dollar. The assets of the bank are estimated at $1,250,000 with liabilities of only $800,000. The failure of the Bank of New Hanover caused a run on the Wilmington Savings and Trust Company, but as all demands were promptly met and the president assured depositors that the bank was perfectly solid and solvent, the run soon ceased. The general impression is that, with a little time to get its affairs in shape, the Bank of New Hanover will not prove a bad failure, neither depositors nor stockholders losing anything. The Bank cf New Hanover in Wadesboro, a branch of the Wilmington bank but conducted as a separate institution, closed its doors as soon as notiffed of the Wilmington failure. No statement as to its condition is made, except that it would have continued but for the other failure.

Article Text

E Judge Boykin has given a peremptory order on Judge Bennett to turn over the affairs of the Wadesboro branch of the Bank of New Hanover to Mr. Leak, who was appointed receiver by JudgeConnor.

Article Text

THE SUPERIOR COURT

THE SPRING TERM REACHED AN ADJOURNMENT YESTERDAY. Judge McIver Decides in Favor of the Wadesboro Branch of the Bank of New Hanover-The Assets Seperated From Those of the Parent Dividends for the Depositors of Both Banks. Pursuant to adjournment for recess on Friday evening, the superior court of New Hanover county, met yesterday at 10 a. m., His Honor Judge McIver presiding. The following cases were disposed of: Junius Davis, receiver of the Bank of New Hanover, vs. L. Vollers, et al judgment for defendant. The plaintiff made a motion for a new trial. Motion was overruled, whereupon the plaintiff took an appeal to the supreme court. Singer Manufacturing Company vs. H. Merritt, judgment for plaintiff for $40 and interest. Carolina Central Railroad Company vs. Wilmington Street Railway Company, 30 days allowed to file complaint, and 60 days to file answer as of this term. John S. Watters vs. the American Manufacturing and Export Company, receiver continued as to the assets of the company. Frank Swift vs. W. H. Howe and the Wilmington and Weldon Railroad Company judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appealed to the supreme court. Junius Davis, receiver of the Bank of New Hanover vs. H. G. Smallbones, judgment for plaintiff signed. The following cases were continued: Alex. Sprunt vs. William C. Peake; Homes & Sutton vs. W. C. Peake; Samuel Blossom and wife vs. M. G. Chadwick et al; Lula M. Clayton vs. Carolian Central Railroad Company; Joseph Silvy vs. The Inter-State Telephone and Telegraph Company; Mary McNeill vs. Robert McNeill. On motion of the attorneys for Junius Davis, Esq., receiver of the Bank of New Hanover. at Wilmington, the court ordered a dividend of 2 per cent. to be paid June 20, 1897, to depositors and creditors. On motion of the attorneys of Mr. James A. Leak, receiver of the branch bank of New Hanover, at Wadesboro, the court ordered a dividend of 2 per cent. to be paid to depositors and other creditors, May 1st. In the case of Holmes and Waters and S. McD. Tate, treasurer of the state of North Carolina vs. the Bank of New Hanover, Junius Davis, receiver, of the Bank of New Hanover, at Wilmington, and the branch of the Bank of New Hanover, at Wadesboro, in relation to the petition of W. A. Smith, the court rendered a decision separating the assets of the two banks. The following is a part of the judgment. "It is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed by the court that the assets of the branch at Wadesboro now in the hands of James A. Leak, receiver, be applied to the payment of the debts contracted at, and due by said branch bank at Wadesboro. as distinguished from the debts contracted at, and due by the Bank of New Hanover at Wilmington, the parent bank, and that any surplus remaining after paying the expenses incident to the management of the trust by the received at Wadesboro, and the said branch be turned over to Junius Davis, receiver of the Bank of New Hanover at Wilmington, to be applied as the court may direct. It is further ordered that the costs incurred in this reference and adjudication be paid by Junius Davis, receiver of the Bank of New Hanover."

Article Text

The April term of New Hanover superior court adjourned sine die yesterday afternoon at 1 o'clock.

Probably the most interesting case taken up was that in which Mr. H. E. Bonitz was called upon to show cause why he should not be adjudged guilty of contempt of court in falsely representing that he was ill on the day previous and could not therefore attend the court, thereby procuring continuance of the case entitled H. E. Bonitz vs. F. T., Mills, Thursday afternoon. It was alleged that the sickness of Mr. Bonitz was not of such a serious nature as to prevent him from attending court.

Dr. Andrew H. Harriss, the physician attending the defendant, was called to the stand and after his testimony Judge Brown ordered the case dismissed, Dr. Harriss testifying that Mr. Bonitz was much too ill to attend the court on Thursday and was no better yesterday and could not even then appear to answer the charge of contempt. J. O. Carr, Esq., and John H. Gore, Jr., Esq., appeared for the defendant, and Bellamy and Peschau and Herbert McClammy, Esq., were for the prosecution. The case of Bonitz vs. Mills stands continued until the September term, in accordance with the order issued on Thursday. The Messenger was aware of the contempt proceedings against Mr. Bonitz on Thursday, but did not refer to the matter for the reason that it would have been unfair to herald the proceeding before Mr. Bonitz had an opportunity to exonerate himself of the charge, which he did to the complete satisfaction of the court.

In several cases in which Mr. W. E. Worth, receiver, was the plaintiff, and R. J. Fisher and others were the defendants, sixty days was allowed the plaintiff to fill amended complaint and sixty days for the defendant to answer.

There was a short discussion in the matter of fixing an allowance for Jas. A. Leak for services rendered as receiver of the Wadesboro branch of the Bank of New Hanover, but no order was issued. The case will come up at the next term or Judge Brown will hear it at Chambers.

In the case of S. H. Fishblate vs. Wallenstein & Klee for malicious prosecution in wrongfully serving out an attachment against plaintiff in 1898, a motion to set aside the service of summons upon Klee was made; motion argued and denied by the court on the ground that Klee was personally present in court in the conduct of the case and so subject to process. This suit is for $20,000 damages. The case is set for trial during the September term of the superior court.