OCR Interpretation


New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, May 25, 1919, Image 25

Image and text provided by Library of Congress, Washington, DC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83030214/1919-05-25/ed-1/seq-25/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for

HARRISBURG, Penn., May 24.
_In the history of feuds,
public and private, the one
between the Hon. John Skelton
Williams and the Hon. Louis T. Mc
Fadden takes a preeminent place.
}{r. Williams happens to be Con?
troller of the Currency of the United
States. Mr. McFadden is president
of the First National Bank of Can?
ton. Perm., representative in the
lower house of Congress from the
14th Dictrict of nnsylvania and
3 member of the riouse Committee
on Banking and Currency.
Xhe perennial right was in
the District Court of the United
State? in this city this week. It
has been on the floor of Conprress,
and will be brought there again.
The P'irst National Rank of Canton
in its bill of complaint?for it is the
bank, ami not Mr. McFadden, which
jppei.rs. formally in court as plain
jjff?charges that Mr. Williams has
nsed public officials under his direc?
tion to help him crush his foe. In
fact, the purpose of the present suit
k to get a permanent restraining
order to prevenl o Controller from
performing alb -. acts which are
??i? to be ruinous to the bank,
judge Charles B. Witmer, before :
whom the case was argued, has con
tinned the temporary injunction of
May 1.
Dispute Has Persisted
for Three Years
It seems too early tn tell the full
taie of the struggle. It began more
than three years ago, and who can
say that it is approaching an end?
Although the time for ultimate judg?
ment has not yet come, an im?
portant contribution to the record
has just become available. It is the
hi'.', of complaint, a document of 174
pape?, which, though ex parte in ori?
gin, contain? a wealth of documen?
tan.' cvidcr.ee and vi1 id detail about
the famous dispute.
After enumerating countless inci?
dents which the plaintiff believe?
show Mr. Williams's hostility to the
bank and its president, the bill pre?
sents the following analysis of what
the Hank regards as the Controller's)
f - ?? alleged actions.
"The pe? t persecution of
complainant," 3ays the bill, in for
:r. "has continued
fir a period of over three years, and
becomes m ppi 3ive and sinister
and n is time goes on. The
?itl' rn ina f fondant to
n? - : estroy the complainant as
a mea : g the said Mc
Faddei I rought to its final
height ? ? tivith of said Mc
Fi erress in the months
of Ff ru .-; a '. Mar . 1919, and
by his .. md 1 * that
upon the reconvening of the next
Congress said McFadden will, in the
performanci f hi public duties,
continue to press the matters, to
led the at
E the House of Representa?
tives, the office of
th Curi-ency, and
'?'? ? ?rpose and intention
of th? t to ' nue to use
and abusi ? . powers of his office
o?erthe complainant for the purpose
of bri: - g . the destruction of
sa:d McFat that his useful?
ness and prest . member of
Congre- ? me to an end before
be is able t( press these matters fur
tber upon the attention of the House
of Re] - and it is the in?
tention of the defendant, in violation
?f the power? and duties of his office,
te continue to make public confiden?
tial information acquired by theuse of
toe great inquisitorial powers of his
?ace, for the purpose of distracting
public attei tion from himself and in
order to make it appear that said
McFadden is attacking him for mo?
tives other than his. public duty as
lnjerobei ongress.
the pursuit of his
?nlawfi (proper and mali
. the defendant is
Ferent as to the fate of
'?', complainant, its depositors and
?tockholders and is willing that they
a i, provided only that
".ion of said McFadden is
pliahed, and that unless the
? receives the protection
re is great and im
- - that the defendant
? ie, by the abtue of th?
office, to injure the
reputation of the com
J''' ? ' ' ' a will cause to the corn?
ea nant, it? depositors and it?
?oeichoidert! irreparable I
i?*prt* Controller
AM Violated Lau
? The complainant further averi
?**'? the aforesaid actions of tbi
?ridant'hr< fe?"-nt8 an'1 Bubor
j****?i in demanding special re
N?a and information from th?
?gqpUmatit and it? officer? in ex
PJ*| of th? powers conferred upor
:? bylaw and in violation of th?
?jPr**? -prohibition? of the statut?
??th? Vnite? Stetes and in threat
*^RS? to aese*? r^nalt?ea a^ain?
?? complainant in the ?vont o
*?n-<ompl?anc* with hi? unlawfu
f^a*nd?, and in disclosing to th?
2?i*-?s competitor? of the com
?ffcwaat and the pernonai enemic
?V
of its officers confidential and of?
ficial information with respect to
the private business and affairs of
the complainant, and in disclosing
private, confidential and official in?
formation with respect to the busi?
ness and affairs of the complainant
to other bank3 and bankers and
members of Congress and repre?
sentatives of the press and the pub?
lic generally, and in inciting litiga?
tion against the complainant and its
officers, and in publishing and dis?
seminating to the depositors and
stockholders and to the public gen?
erally information with respect to
the affairs of and business of the
complainant, and to cause panic
among its depositors and the with?
drawal of funds on deposit with it,
and in attempting to compel com?
plainant and its officers to be wit?
nesses against themselves in any
proceedings intended to be insti?
tuted against them for any alleged
offence, penalty or forfeiture, are
in gross and flagrant violation of
the complainant's property rights
and of the rights vested in it by
the Constitution and laws of the
United States, in that the said ac?
tions by the defendant and his
agents and subordinates subject the
complainant to the deprivation of
its property without due process of
law, compel the complainant and its
officers to be witnesses against
themselves, and subject the com
plainant to unreasonable search anri
seizure, contrary to the Fourth and
Fifth amendments of the Constitu?
tion of the United States, and sub?
ject the complainant and its off!
cers to visitorial and inquisitoria
powers in violation of the specific
provisions of the laws of the Unitec
States, and the complainant has n<
remedy or redress and is unable tc
prevent the continuation of the saic
unlawful acts except through th(
intervention of this court.
What Injunction
Is Designed to Do
''Wherefore, complainant pray:
that the defendant may answer th<
premises according to law, answe
under oath being hei'eby waived
and that he, his agents and subor
dinates and each of them, includ
ing ail national bank examiners
may, by writ of injunction, to b<
issued out of and under the sea
Gf this honorable court, be enjoinec
as follows:
"1. From calling and continuing
??i cal! for, or attempting to enforce
his call for, the alleged special re?
ports mentioned in the defendant's
letters of Apr.: L?, 1919; April 16,
and April 21, 1919, and in the
letters of Bank Examiners Roberts
and Stauffer, dated April 10, 1919,
respectively, and from assessing or
collecting, or attempting to assess or
collect, penalties against the com?
plainant for failure to file such al?
leged special ? epi rt? ,
From calling for any special
re? :'* "r report ; from the complain
; ? ' "?'_- the private and personal pur?
poses of the defendant or for the de
?? or for the purpose of har
? g or persecuting the com] lj
ont in the manner alleged in the
complaint, or for the purpose of ob?
taining information for public dis?
tribution with a view to injuring, im?
pairing or destroying the reputation
and credit, of the complainant or ;-?
president for allowed offences, or foi
the purpose of instituting prosecu?
tions against complainant or its sait:
president for alleged offenses or foi
the collection of penalties pursuant
to the defendant's plan and purpost
to destroy the reputation, credit aro
business of said Louis T. McFaddeT
and the complainant as alleged in th<
complaint herein, and from callinj
for or attempting to enforce his ca!
for any other special report or re
ports from the complainant when thi
same are not bona fide within th<
meaning and purposes of Section:
5211 and 5212 of the Revised Stat
utes of the United States, ant
reasonably necessary to a full ant
complete knowledge of the com
plainant'? condition and express!;
authorized by said sections, and fron
exercising any visitorial or inquisi
toria! power over complainant or it
officers, except as expressly author
?7.1 d by law.
"3. From disclosing to the officer;
directora, agenta or employes o
i Farmers' National Bank, of Cantor
i'enn., any information with respec
i to the private business and affair
of the complainant or its officers.
"4. From disclosing the privat
business and affairs of the complain
ant or it3 officers to banks, bant
; ers, members of Congress, represei
: tativea of the public press or to th
public generally, for the purpose r
; injuring the complainant or its 'o!
; ficcrs and of impairing or destroj
ing its or their credit and reputr
| tion or for any other purpose o
: cept pursuant to law;
"5. From disclosing to the gtocl
! holders, depositors or creditors <
, th?> complainant, and to the men
bers of the community in which tr
complainant is established, informi
? tion with respect to the affairs an
business of th<- romplainant or i'
officers intended and caioulated t
create alarm or apprehension wit
! respect to the credit and solvency i
; the comp'airmnt or any of its 0
?rr-rn intended or calculated to caui
the withdrawals of deposits from tl
complainant by its depositors;
"f?. From inciting or attempting i
Indue? any person or person? whn
soever to present and pre?? clain
?ifaiast complainant or any of i
officers and from inciting litigation
against it or them;
"7. From demanding, or attempt?
ing to enforce, the compulsory pro?
duction or exposure of the private
books or papers or affairs of the
complainant or its officers for the
: purpose of attempting to subject it
? or them to any penalties or forfeit
; ures or criminal prosecutions or of
' compelling them to be witnesses
against themselves;
"8. From using the powers of the
office or (ontroller of the Currency
over the complainant or its officers
for the private and personal pur
poscs of the defendant, without ref
' erence to the proper duties and func?
tions of the Baid otfice, and in par?
ticular for the purpose of impair?
ing or destroying the credit and
reputation of said Louis T. McFad
den and the complainant, and its and
his property and business in the man
', nor set forth in the complaint;
i i_,_
1
j vice from merchants, attorneys and
i others. The said feeling of alarm,
i apprehension and doubt was inten
! sified by the newspaper publication
given out by the defendant in con?
nection with the letter of March 1.
1919 (Exhibit C), which had been
widely circulated in the press
throughout the entire community,
as well as by the act of the defend?
ant in continuing to circulate from
time to time throughout the month
of March, to stockholders, deposi?
tors and neighboring banks, the
said letter dated March 1, 1919.
Run on Bank
Followed Alarm
"As a result there began what
was in substance and effect a run on
the complainant, and the depositors
began to withdraw their deposits foi
no reason whatsoever except theii
'tended to continue to foster and in
! cite the alarm and apprehension al
I ready existing in the community
and, if possible, by this means to
? ruin the complainant, and being un
; able to ascertain from the said ex
; aminers, although inquiry was re
: peatedly made, when they would
finish their examination and leave
Canton, the complainant's president
was obliged, on April 7, 1919, to call
upon counsel, C. La Rue Munson, of
Williamsport, Penn., for legal advice
1 and assistance.
"On that date Mr. Munson, ac?
companied by said McFadden, inter
' viewed the said bank examiners,
Roberts and Stauffer, and Mr. Mun
l son inquired of the said bank exam?
iners as to the transactions which
said McFadden had had, or in which
I he was interested, to which they ob?
jected. Said McFadden then stated
I then proceeded for a period of about
1 ten days, and although they were
fully aware of the dangerous and
menacing condition resulting from
their presence and activities in Can?
ton.
"Although on April 7, 191P. said
bank examiners had been unable to
call the attention of said McFadden
and his counsel to any irregular or
objectionable transaction, although
requested so to do under the most
pressing circumstances, they, never?
theless, on April 11, IP 19, broadly
charged the complainant and said
McFadden with irregular and unlaw?
ful acts and with resort to evasive
methods and subterfuges in order
to conceal the real character of
transactions-, making claims with
respect to conditions and facts as
to which they could not possibly
"9. From calling or attempting to
enforce any c:.M for any special re?
port or reports from the complain?
ant or any of its officers as to any
i ative to the filing
of thi i suit or to any privileged coni
munical tween the complain
; ? ' o its i fficers and its or their
attorneys relative hereto or for the
pui o '. dei ? ling the same.
' And ? i" complainanl prays that
it may have such relief in the
;..-? n he nature of the cir
tanci of the cause may re
quire and to this court mav seem
? '
High Pnlilic Official
\Vs. Country Bank
The bringing of Mr. Williams,
whose office places him in control
of all the national banks of the
Ui ited State?, in court by the First
National Rank of Canton almost
1 suggests the combat between David
i and Goliath. Canton is a small in?
dus:, rial city of 2,200 population,
? surrounded by a farming commu?
nity. As is the custom in places of
such compactness, the inhabitants
mingle freely together and news
: spreads with great, rapidity.
In calling attention to these con?
ditions the bill of complaint says:
"The extraordinary protracted
; visit of the bank examiners, their
unusual activities at the complain?
ant bank, their constant association
and conferences with the competi?
tors of the complainant, who are
well known in the community to be
inimicable to complainant and its
. president, and their disclosures oJ
the confidential business of the bant
, to them and to others, the questions
' raised by them with respect to th<
: assets of the bank and their en
deavors to stir up litigation in th(
ma::iit-r aforesaid, and their appar
i ent malice and hostility made evi
: dent by them on all possible occa
| sions, became noised throughou
i the town of Canton and the sur
: rounding community, and these mat
: tors became the subject of common
| and discussion among the resident
thereof during the time that th
; said examination was being con
ducted, and the entire communit;
j became alarmed and the depositor
of the complainant became intensel;
apprehensive with respect to th
safety of their deposits.
"Ft became prominently rumore*
j and reported nmong members of th
I community that tho cornplainan
1 was in some serioua difficulty an
that drastic action by the Controlle
of the Currency was imminent, an
the advisability of tho withdrawn
of deposits wa? tho subject of com
mon discussion, with respect t
' which many depositors sought ad
I
alarm and apprehension aroused in
the manner hereinbefore mentioned.
Beginning immediately after the
publication by the defendant of his
letter of March 1, 1919, and up to
the time of the departure of the
said bank examiners from Canton
on the 7th day of April, 1919, there
was withdrawn by depositors from
the complainant the sum of about
S 100,000, and 129 depositors closed
their accounts during said period.
Most of said deposits were with?
drawn dur;:... tl time of and im?
mediately after the said examina?
tion of the complainant. Dunne: all
of this time complainant was abso?
lutely solvent and in thoroughly
sound financial condition, and there
was no possibility of loss to any de?
positor or creditor and no real rea?
son whatsoever for alarm or appre?
hension, except such as was fos?
tered by the wilful, malicious and
destructive conduct: of the defend
1 ant and the said bank examiners.
"During the said time the said
John A. Innes, president of the riva!
: bank?the Farmers' National Bank
--was spreading information to the
effect that large numbers of per
: sons were drawing their deposits
out of the complainant bank and
! depositing same in the Farmers'
? National Bank of Canton, which re
: ports added to the fears and appre?
hensions of members of the eom
: munity, already incited by the ac?
tivities of the defendant and the
i said bank examiners.
"The activities of the defendant
, and the said bank examiners were
directly calculated and intended to
: cause a panic among the depositors
and customers of the complainant
and their wilful and deliberate ef?
fort to 'promote and foster such
panic succeeded to the extent here
; inbefore mentioned, and, had it not
: been for the fact that the complain
j ant enjoys the highest reputation
! throughout the community for hon?
or, soundness and integrity, and had
the members of the said community
\ not had implicit confidence in the
1 management of the complainant
bank, and had the complainant not
? been in sound and strong financial
condition, it would have been un?
able to withstand the consequence
of the acts of the defendant and
his agents.
Mr. McFadden and
The Bank Examiners
"The situation became so acute
\ and the danger to the complainant
i so imminent as a result of the con?
tinuous activities of tho Bald bank
| examiners, and it becamo so evident
1 that the Bald bank examinara in
to the said bank examiners that if
they would inform him of any paper
in the bank which they regarded as
objectionable he would remove it,
and that he desired to remove it.
Said bank examiners refused to
state a single transaction or a single
paper to which they had objection,
claiming that they had not com?
pleted their examination, although
at that time they had been con?
tinuously engaged in an examina?
tion for about ten days.
"Mr, Munson and said McFadden;
stated to saii examiners that the
reason why complainant desired im?
mediately to rectify any matters
which were the subject of criticism.
was that the withdrawals at the
bank were becoming very serious and
that it was necessary to prote<
bank and its depo iti ? Mr. Mun?
son stated to said Roberts that he
and his associates had seriously in?
jured the bank, that they had caused
depositors to become uneasy, that
they had distributed' information
through the town, and that he was
there as counsel to ask what paper
they objected to, stating that they
must have this information if they
had done their duty, and that he de?
sired to know what paper they ob?
jected to, to which said Roberts re?
fused to reply.
Charge Rival With
Soliciting Depositors
"Both Mr. Munson and said Mc?
Fadden stated to said Roberts that
on the previous Saturday, the presi?
dent of the Farmers National Bank
had stood the entire day in front of
the complainant bank soliciting de?
positors; that his attitude and mo?
tives wTere well known; that said
Roberts and his associates had met
with Innes in their room at the
Hotel Packard and discussed the
assets of the complainant bank. Said
', Roberts did not deny any of these
charges and refused to give any
explanation of the connection be?
tween him and John A. Innes. Mr,
Munson and said McFadden pressed
; said Roberts again and again fot
j a statement of the paper at the bank
\ to which they objected, stating thai
! conditions were becoming most seri
i otis on account of the activities oi
? the examiners, and that they desirec
i to protect the interest of tho do
t positors and stockholders of th<
bank and to provide any amount oi
; cash necessary to meet the demand:
of depositors, and said Roberts ant
| the said StaufTer absolutely refus?e
to give any information whatsoever
; claiming that they had not yet com
pleted their report and had not yo
determined what they would objec
to, although tho examination hat
have had any personal knowledge
whatsoever. It was the duty of the
said bank examiners themselves to
specify what paper and what trans?
actions, if any, were found to be
objectionable. Even in the said
letter of April 11, 1919, they did
not point out a single objectionable
transaction on paper. On the con?
trary they called upon said McFad
den, without legal right or author?
ity, to take up and pay notes which
were to be specified and described
by him and not by them, entirely
without reference to the character
of the paper, the collateral by which
it was secured or the financial re?
sponsibility of other persons or
corporations primarily or secon?
darily liable therefor, the mere fact
of his interest, direct or indirect,
proximate or remote, being deemed
to be a sufficient reason for requir?
ing the immediate payment of said
obligations.
"Complainant alleges and charges
that the real reason for the de?
mand contained in said letter was
to cause it and its president finan?
cial embarrassment through the ne?
cessity of . g 'dp such paper.
The pretext n which the demand
was based was that said McFadder
had volunteered to take up sucr
paper, although, as it was wel
known and thoroughly understood
he did not volunteer to take uj
such paper because of the leas
doubt as to its value, but solely foi
the purpose of relieving the banl
of the criticisms of the defendan
and his agents, however arbitrary
in order that the bank might h
freed from the dangerous situatioi
which had been brought about b;
the activities of the defendant an<
his agents, the said bank examiners
Said letter, like many letters there
tofore written, constituted a part o
the scheme of the defendant t
build up a record which he migr
subsequently rely upon and us
against complainant and its pr?s
dent, whether reply was made then
to or not.
"T'pon receipt of this letter coui
sel of the complainant stated on i
behalf that the ?3t of paper calle
for would be gladly furnished. /
a matter of fact, substantially a
of tho said paper had already bee
taken up and paid and said papi
had been paid prior to the tin
when the bank examiners left Ca
ton, so that they were well awa:
of that fact when said letter i
April 11, 1919, was written. Coi
plainant's counsel stated to the su
examinera tho fact that tho sa
paper had been paid and that thai
for? their inquiry could have i
I
relation whatever to the present ;
condition of the bank.
"The said Roberts, nevertheless, ;
insisted that said information should
be furnished, and it was agreed that
the said information should be de- j
livered during the following week.
Complainant's counsel thereupon .
asked the said Roberts to specify
the unsatisfactory conditions re?
ferred to in said letter and to name
the irregular and unlawful acts
which it was therein claimed had,
been committed by the complainant ?
and by said McFadden. stating that
in view of the fact that an answer ;
was called for, it was oniy fair that
these general charges sho\ild be
made specific in order that it might
be possible to make reply thereto.
"The said Roberts, who was
throughout the spokesman for the
said examiners, absolutely refused
to make any specification whatso?
ever or to state any item subject
to criticism or to specify any unlaw?
ful or improper or irregular act
committed by the complainant or
by said McFadden.
McFadden Submitted
List of All Paper
"Thereupon the said Roberts sub?
mitted to said McFadden a list of
all the paper held by the complain?
ant bank on March 27 containing
the name of the maker and indorser
of each paper, a statement of the
amount thereof and the collateral
securing the same and stated that
he desired said McFadden to go
through this list in the presence of
the examiners and to state what he
knew with respect to the financial
condition of the makers and the
indorsers and the character of the
collateral or other security. This
he agreed to do and. for a period of
about six hours of continuous ex?
amination, he made a full, frank
and detailed statement with respect
to each and every note held by the
complainant bank on March 27 con?
tained in the said list furnished by
said bank examiners.
"As he proceeded with said state?
ment said bank examiners checked
the statements made by him with in?
formation which they had before
them with respect to each and every
of said obligations, and made notes
of the statements made by him and
compared the information which he
gave to them with information which
they aiready had, having before
them sheets bound together, each oi
which contained the facts with re
spect to each note or loan. It was
clear from the full and complete lis1
which said examiners handed to him
as well as from their questions anc
the records before them, that the^
had gathered together the mos'
minute, detailed and complete in
formation with respect to each anc
every loan of the complainant, al
of which must have been in ther
possession on April 7, 1919, at whicl
time they have stated that their in
vestigation was not completed, am
upon that ground refused to give th?
information which was then re
quested.
How the Treasury
Officials Worked
"The real purpose and motive o
the said examination, as shown b
the character of the questions pre
pounded and the matters inquire
into, was not to obtain informatio
with respect to the condition of th
bank, but to obtain evidence of in
proper or unlawful conduct on th
part of the complainant and th
said McFadden and of trapping hh
into admissions on the basis of whic
1 the charges made by the defendai
against him might be supported ar
new charges made and prosecute
The said examiners asked practical
no questions with respect to tl
transactions of the complainant e:
? cept those transactions in which sa
McFadden was interested directly <
. indirectly or with which they su
pected that he was identified. Whe
. ever such a transaction was reach?
upon the list which he had befo
him the said Roberts interrupted h
i statement to question him minute
, with respect to the history of ti
transaction, the character and e
! tent of his interest, if any*, t'
character and financial respon
bility of other parties interest
\ therein, and the character and val
: of the collaterals or other securith
: and the trend of his questions w
such as to indicate clearly that th
were directed to the establishmc
of some violation of law. The nu
ner of the said Roberts during st
examination was hostile and insu
. ing, and his questions indicated t
utmost suspicion and constantly
sinuated wrongdoing.
"The said Roberts examined w
minute particularity into the hist<
of the Minnequa Furniture C<
! pany and its reorganization i:
Armenia Furniture Company m
; tioned in the affidavit of Louis
' McFadden, and in this connect
examined from a typewritten mei
; randum containing several pages
previously prepared questions, sh
j ing a premeditated plan with
spect to his inquiry into this t
jeer., and in this inquiry the qi
i tions asked by him related to tri
i actions as far back as th? year 1!
having nothing whatsoever to
with the present condition of th?
bank, and all of these questions were
asked with the full knowledge on the
part of the said Roberts that there
was no paper of the said Minnequa
Furniture Company in the complain?
ant bank at the time of the inquiry?
so that the entire subject was wholly
irrelevant to the purposes of a
proper bank examination. In the
same way said Roberts examined
said McFadden minutely with re?
spect to other transactions which
had been closed, with the plain pur?
pose of establishing some irregular?
ity, impropriety or unlawful act on
his part in connection therewith."
Origin of the
Dispute Described
The genesis of the row between
Mr. McFadden and Mr. Williams, as
it appears to the complainant, is de?
scribed in detail in the bill. "The
defendant," according to the com?
plaint, "has for a period of more
than two years so used and abused
and exceeded the powers conferred
upon him by law as to irreparably
injure and in part to destroy com?
plainant's proper and lawful busi?
ness, and it is his purpose and in?
tention wilfully and maliciously to
continue to inflict irreparable injury
upon it, contrary to law and in vio?
lation of his official duties and pow?
ers and obligations, and by compell?
ing it to submit to his uncontrolled
arbitrary and unlawful demands and
actions and, by the publication of
false and malicious statements with
respect to it and its officers, to vio?
late its rights and to impair and de?
stroy its business credit and reputa?
tion and to bring about its destruc?
tion as a National Banking Associ?
ation.
"That, beginning in the year 1914,
the defendant, without just reason
or cause, has conceived an everin
creasing personal enmity, hatred
and malice against Louis T. McFad?
den, the president of the complain?
ant, which as time has gone on has
increased in intensity and finally
ripened into a determination on the
part of the defendant to bring about
the financial and political ruin of
the said McFadden for his own sel?
fish and personal purposes.
McFadden Started
In Rank as Clerk
"Louis T. McFadden is a citizen
of Pennsylvania and has been in the
complainant's employ as clerk, as?
sistant cafhier, cashier and presi?
dent since 1894. In the spring of
1914 said McFadden, then being
president of the Pennsylvania Bank?
ers' Association, made a public ad?
dress at a convention of said asso?
ciation, in the course of which he
advocated and recommended the
abolition of the office of Controller
of the Currency, contending that,
by reason of the recent enactment
of the Federal Reserve act said of?
fice had become useless and un?
necessary. Said address attracted
considerable public notice and was
quoted and commented upon in the
financial journals and the public
press of the United States, since
which time the reform advocated by
said McFadden has been the sub?
ject of discussion at meetings of
banking associations and among the
bankers of the United States and
among the members of the Congress
of the United States, and said Mc?
Fadden has continued and is pab
licly known to be a leading advo?
cate of the said reform.
"In the fall of 1914 said McPftd
den was elected to be a member o?
the House of Representatives of the
United States from the Fourteenth
Congressional District of Pennsyl
vania and entered the Congress oi
March 4, 1915, since which date h<
has continuously been a member e
the House, representing said dis
trict, and a member of the Com
mittee on Banking and Currenc;
of the House, of which committe
he is now the second member li
seniority. In the course of his pul
lie duties as a member of Con
gress and as a member of said Con
mittee on Banking and Currenc
said McFadden has on many occai
ions opposed recommendations fc
legislation customarily proposed b
the defendant at each session <
Congress, which legislation relate
to the powers of the office of tr
Controller of the Currency and 1
the banking system and currency <
the United States, and on variot
occasions said McFadden has ca
ried his opposition to such propos?
legislation to the floor of the Hous
"The advocacy by the said M
Fadden of the abolition of tl
office of Controller, although tak<
up by him wholly without pt
sonal reference or thought
the defendant, and although su
reform has been indorsed a
approved by many banking as
; dations and bankers and expe
upon such matters, and his oppc
? tion in Congress to measures ad
cated by the defendant constitu'
the beginning of the vindict
I enmity and hatred of the defe
: ant against him and the origi
basis of the determination of the
: fondant to make use of and ab
j his powers over the complainant
I the destruction of the said
Fadden.*'

xml | txt