Baltimore Trust Company - Baltimore, MD

Episode Information

Episode UID: 7700674091332
Episode Type: Suspension → Closure
Bank Type: trust
Bank ID: 770067409 hash
Start Date: December 30, 1910
Location: Baltimore, Maryland (39.290, -76.612)

Metadata

Model: gpt-5-mini (chosen from majority vote of a three-model LLM ensemble)
Short Digest: 1135fbb32aadcdf5

Response Measures

None

Description

Article describes a large Baltimore trust company being 'crippled' with suit to place it in receivership but does not name the institution explicitly.

Events (2)

1. December 30, 1910 Receivership

Newspaper Excerpt: suit has been instituted to put it into the hands of a receiver.
Source: newspapers

2. December 30, 1910 Suspension

Cause: Bank Specific Adverse Info
Cause Details: Trust company in Baltimore described as 'crippled' and subject of a suit to place it in receivership.
Newspaper Excerpt: the crippled condition of a large trust company. . . suit has been instituted to put it into the hands of a receiver.
Source: newspapers

Newspaper Articles (1)

1. December 30, 1910 Maryland Independent La Plata, Port Tobacco, Waldorf, MD

Article from Maryland Independent, December 30, 1910

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

MORESTATE BANK FAILURES. The people of the nation and unwise depositors has been startled again and within the last few days with the failure of two state banks and the crippled condition of a large trust company. One of the State Banks was at Brunswick, in this State, "where practically all the deposits were swamped and the other in New York. The New York Bank had nine branches and according to the published figures had on deposit in itsdifferent branches between six and seven million dollars. The Trust company is in Balt/more ity and was capitalized at $750,000 as well as is said to have a large surplus fund. But notwithstanding, it is said to be in a crippled condition and suit has been instituted to put it into the hands of a receiver. The Baltimore Sun in commenting on these failuresshows very conclusively that the National government has greater capacity to handle banks than the states and therefore National Banks are safer than state financial institutions. Here is what the sun says: "The closing of the Northern Bank of New York, like the recent trouble with the Brunswick bank of this State, emphasizes the fact that the State banks should have thrown about them all the safeguards which apply to national banks and which are thoroughly effective in preventing just such occurrences as these. It is a wholly improper and rather scandalous state of things that permits the sacrifice of the savings of hundreds of people through the carelessnes or incapacity or dishonest of a single individual. The thing is particularly unpleasant here in Maryland becau e a banking bill was passed at the last session of the Legislature which was supposed to represent the best thought of the financial interests of this State upon the subject and which was expected to put an end to happenings of the kind. There is a broader side to this matter, too, than the mere question of the safety of the people's money. It is the greater capacity shown by the national Government to handle affairs of the kind that operates most strongly in favor of centralization and against the rights of the State. When the national Government does a thing well and the State Government does it poorly. the people are apt to conclude that the State Government should not be permitted to do it at all. The strongest arguments in favor of centralization are those bred of just such incidents as this. Many persons, however, will not accept good advice or be wise until too late.