The Fallout of the Columbia National Bank Collapse
Legal wrangling continues as the receiver for the failed Whatcom institution defends his actions against allegations of mismanagement.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
Charges are said to have been made by some of the depositors in the Columbia National bank, of Whatcom, against Receiver Blanchard. Attorney T. R. Shepard, of Burke, Shepard & Woods, who has been advising Mr. Blanchard in legal matters connected with the bank, says the charges are groundless. 'Mr. Blanchard, as an officer of the court, is in such a position that he cannot deny the charges so long as they are a subject of newspaper controversy,' said Mr. Shepard. He denied that Blanchard interfered to prevent the reopening of the bank or that he failed to perfect judgment liens on property. He asserted that in all his actions, Blanchard acted under legal advice and has been exceedingly conscientious in the discharge of his duty.
“Mr. Blanchard, as an officer of the court, is in such a position that he cannot deny the charges so long as they are a subject of newspaper controversy.”
Bank failures were a common source of public outrage and complex legal litigation during the late 19th century. The defense of institutional receivers reflects the era's ongoing struggle to establish transparent financial oversight for failing regional banks.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.