Camden Bank & Trust Company (Camden, TN)

Episode Information

Episode UID
3708074491201
Episode Type
Run → Suspension → Closure
Bank Type
trust
Bank ID
370807449 hash
Start Date
January 18, 1900
Location
Camden, Tennessee (36.059, -88.098)

Metadata

Model
gpt-5-mini (chosen from majority vote of a three-model LLM ensemble)
Short Digest
42fb0e8084f6c7f8

Response Measures

None

Description

Later reporting alleges the receiver D.G. Hudson misappropriated funds; receivership/assignment followed the closure.

Events (4)
1. January 18, 1900 Run
Cause
Bank Specific Adverse Info
Cause Details
Heavy withdrawals reflecting the bank's shortage of cash and declining deposits (cash reportedly under $500; deposits fell from $70,000 to $40,000).
Newspaper Excerpt
it is known that a run aggregating $3,000 was made on the bank the day before it closed.
Source
newspapers
2. January 19, 1900 Suspension
Cause
Bank Specific Adverse Info
Cause Details
Bank failed to open due to insufficient cash and insolvency pressures leading to closure and attempts to sell controlling interest.
Newspaper Excerpt
The Camden Bank and Trust Co. has closed it doors...the first intimation the public had that anything was wrong was when the bank failed to open its doors as usual last Friday.
Source
newspapers
3. January 24, 1900 Other
Newspaper Excerpt
On January 24, 1900, the Camden Bank and Trust Co. made an assignment and D.G. Hudson was appointed as assignee.
Source
newspapers
4. January 24, 1900 Receivership
Newspaper Excerpt
Clerk and Master D. G. Hudson, the assignee, made his bond as such Friday to the amount of $70,000. ... the assignee, D. G. Hudson, will continue to collect as ... receiver appointed for the property ... the late Camden Bank and Trust Company trouble.
Source
newspapers

Newspaper Articles (11)
1. January 26, 1900 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, January 26, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

ITS DOORS CLOSED. 'The bank has busted!" Shorn of all details, the above statement, which passed from one to another on the streets of Camden last Friday is a plain statement of a fact. The Camden Bank and Trust Co. has closed it doors, and nearly every business man in town and scores of others were "caught" for various amounts, not a few for large sums, aggregating up in the thousands. The first intimation the public had that anything was wrong was when the bank failed to open its doors as usual last Friday morning. But it seems that Nashville parties, headed by F. O. Watts, were here Thursday night figuring on a deal in which they proposed to purchase a controlling interest and continue the business. Their proposition was .to take $15,000 of the stock at 20 cents on the dollar. This, we understand, was raised to 25 cents by Brownsville and Huntingdon parties, but the stockholders were not willing to accept it, only a few agreeing to make the sacrifice. Capable and influential citizens here offered to buy a controlling interest and assumes the liabilities, but for some reason the bank officials declined this proposition, and SO far all negotiations for a transfer of stock and reopening of the bank have failed. Many reasons have been advanced as the cause for failure, and many rumors have went the rounds, some of them positiveiy startling, but it would be useless to attempt to give details, and we feel safe in saying that it was mainly due to the fact that the concern was short on cash. It has been asserted by those who claim to know, that the available cash at the close of business on Thursday evening, January 18, was less than $500. Be that as it may it is known that a run aggregating $3,000 was made on the bank the day before it closed. In a published interview in the Nashville Banner last Friday the president of the bank, W. E. Mc Rae, states that he knew that the bank was rather hard up, its depos its having fallen away from $70,000 to $40,000 within the year. To bad management may be at tributed some of the present troub les of the bank. It is alleged tha the bank holds paper now that ha passed maturity from one to ever four years. We have endeavored to obtain tangible statement of the actua condition of the bank, but withou success. We are informed, howey or, that the liabilities are abou $41,000. As to the assets, they ar difficult to estimate, but are said be about $50,000 in notes, etc., no including real estate. We are tol

2. February 1, 1900 Oxford Eagle Oxford, MS
Article from Oxford Eagle, February 1, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

A Tennessee Bank Assigns. The Camden (Tenn.) Bank and Trust Co. assigned a few days ago, with liabilities of $48,000 and assets of $58,000, including notes.

3. February 2, 1900 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, February 2, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

THE BANK TROUBLE. The bank trouble remains unsettled. It was thought last Friday that the bank would change hands and business would be resumed at once, but we learn that the pending legal proceedings : interfered with the carrying out of the deal. Clerk and Master D. G. Hudson, the assignee, made his bond as such Friday to the amount of $70,000. It was reported Saturday that the assignee and officers and directors of the bank have been enjoined from entering the bank, unless accompanied by an officer. The application for a receiver in the cause of Lawrence Lanier and all other creditors vs. the Camden Bank and Trust Co. was heard by Judge W. H. Swiggart at Paris on Tuesday. Judge Swiggart overruled the motion for the appointment of a receiver. There is a motion pending for the dissolution of the injunction, which will be heard by Chancellor A.J. Abernathy at Pulaski next Tuesday. THE CHRONICLE : has been relia bly informed that the assets of the bank, including building, real estate, etc., is about $70,000; of this 'amount about $8,000 is considered doubtfuk The liabilities are abou $41,000. According to this statement, th depositors have the assurance tha they will receive every dollar du them, though it may be some tim before they are paid in full.

4. February 3, 1900 The Van Buren Press Van Buren, AR
Article from The Van Buren Press, February 3, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

A Tennessee Bank Assigns. The Camden (Tenn.) Bank and Trust Co. assigned a few days ago, with lia. bilities of $48,000 and assets of $58,000, including notes.

5. February 3, 1900 The Greenville Times Greenville, MS
Article from The Greenville Times, February 3, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

A Tennessee Bank Assigns. The Camden (Tenn.) Bank and Trust Co. assigned a few days ago, with liabilities of $48,000 and assets of $58,000, including notes.

6. March 23, 1900 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, March 23, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

CHANCERY COURT. The following are the proceedings of chancery court, which met here Monday, up to the time we go to press: E.M. McAuley and wife vs. A. Barnes et als.; continued upon application of complainants. Bullock & Rushing Bros. vs. V. V. Nichols; retired from docket. E.J. Nunnery VS. George Nunnery; sale of land ordered. Guy Hall, administrator, vs. S. W. Bullock, administrator; ordered that insurance company pay the money into court; all other questions are reserved. J.L. Thompson et als.vs.Frank Thompson; decree to sell land. U.R. Harris VS. J. E. Holmes et als.; decree to sell land to enforce lien. Capps et als VS. Meyers et als.; plaintiff's bill dismissed. R. L. Nance et als vs. H.W. Akers et als.; decree to sell land. .F. Stockdale VS. Sallie Stockdale; decree for divorce. R.L. Mitchell vs. Waverly Bank and Trust Co.; pro confesso taken, and cause continued. George W. O'Bar et als VS. J. M. Spicer et als.; order pro confesso taken. W.T. Morris VS. Warren, Neeley & Co.; cause tried, and receiver ordered to pay amount in his hands to complainant less receiver's fees and cost of suit. E.M. McAuley et als vs. Horace Rushing et als.; judgment on note for $17.90 against F. P. Wheatley and decree for sale of land. A. H. Pritchard vs. G. C. Council; compromised and dismissed at cost of complainant and security. L. E Davis vs. J. Townsend; the cause dismissed, etc. M. S. Holland vs. J. B. Florence als.; cost paid and bill dismissed. W. G. Roberson et als vs. W. H. Hyatt et als.; continued by consent. Sol Barnes et als vs. E. G. Flowers et als.; decree for sale of land. J.R. Hatley vs. A. Adams et als. continued on affidavit of the complainant. Addie Barnes vs. H. G. Barnes decree for divorce; complainant's name-changed to Alice Nowell. Lawrence Lanier et als. VS. the Camden Bauk and Trust Co.; the motion to appoint a receiver was disallowed, and the assignee, D. G Hudson, will continue to collect as

7. December 7, 1900 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, December 7, 1900

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

R. Henry Fryer, of Huntingdon, senator elect from the counties of Carroll and Henry, is over to-indulge in the sports furnished by Benton County to Povers of the chase. Rev. J. M Pickens, the new pastor.of the Methodist Church here, made his first appearance before his new congregation last Sunday forenoon. He made a very favorable impression on his hearers. Mr. Pickens is a good preacher and a excellent christian geatleman, and we join in welcoming him and this family to our little city. At. the regular monthly meeting of Camden Lodge, No. 179, E, & A. Masons, Saturday the following of ficers were elected: F. M. Greer, W. M.; C. H. Cowell, S. W., W. L. Thompson, J. W.; D. J. Allen, secretary; H. B. Bridges, treasurer; R.J. Bomar, S. D.; L. Thomp. son, J. D.; L. E. Davis and T. J. Lowry, stewards, and Alvin Jordan, tyler. Rev. G. W. Banks, formerly elder of this district, made a good talk at the Methodist Church Sunday evening. He solicited a thank of e fering for the benefit of the theoe logical department of Vanderbilt e University, and a very nice little sum was subscribed. His talk was along the line of the educational interests and work of the Metho1'. dist Church, and its great need in is Quba, China, and elsewhere. )The electric plant was closed e. down Saturday night indefinitely. to It is thought as soon as a receiver isappointed for the property, which e is in litigation on account of the er late Camden Bank and Trust Com any-trouble, the lights will again is beturned on. Itis hoped the plant will become the property of the y town in the near future, and then this hide-and-seek game going on a between light and no light on our streets will come to an end. th ve A friend wanted space in THE en CHRONICLE this week for an article ll on the condition of Benton County roads. The columns of the paper are open for the discussion,pre con, of all questions and matters 10 st pertaining to the public good, but when we look back over the past er eight or ten months and consider or the vast amount of rain that has ch fallen, we think our friend should on be thankful that he is able to find Swhere the roads have been or really ought to be at the present time. re J. E. Swindle, who has been re to G. siding in the State of Texas for I' number of <years, has returned en old Benton, where he will make his as home in the future. Mr. Swindla d. will be remembered by many of rn the older citizens of the county and especially by the old ex- Con W federate veterans. He informed us as that lie was wounded while in the ly service of the Confederacy, and fo nthirty-eight.years the bullet, which il. he-still carries in his anatomy, ha ss been a constant reminder of the dark-and bloody days of the civi by war. of

8. August 21, 1903 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, August 21, 1903

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

RECEIVER D. G. HUDSON. D.G. Hudson, receiver of the defunct Camden Bank and Trust Co., about whose absence grave rumors gained circulation here last week, returned home last Sunday, after an absence of about two weeks. Mr. Hudson was appointed receiver of the bank about three years ago, and has made payments to depositors to the amount of 75 per cent of their claims. At the July term of chancery court he made a report showing assets of $13,000, and the court ordered that $6,000 of this sum be paid to attorneys in the case, and that the balance of $7,000 be distributed among the depositors. Mr. Hudson left Tuesday after the adjournment of court, but his absence created little comment until last Friday. When appointed receiver Mr. Hudson secured bond from the Fidelity Deposit Co., of Baltimore, and when Mr. Charles Merriweather of Louisville, Ky., an agent of the above company, arrived here last Friday and began his investigation, rumors more or less startling became rife, and it was whispered about that Hudson was probably a defaulter. When advised of the situation and rumors in circulation here Mr. Hudson returned home Sunday. Mr. Merriweather is still here. No settlement has yet been made, but Mr. Hudson informed us yesterday that settlement would be made Saturday and not later than next Monday. There are rumors of a compromise being arranged, and the friends of Mr. Hudson feel confident that matters will be arranged to the satisfaction of all parties.concerned.

9. August 21, 1903 The Bolivar Bulletin Bolivar, TN
Article from The Bolivar Bulletin, August 21, 1903

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

Reciver Missing. Camden, Tenn., Aug. 14.-Camden is excited over the supposed embezzlement of $13,000 of funds of the defunct Camden Bank and Trust Co., by D.G. Hudson, receiver. At the July term of Chancery Court, the court made an order allowing Hudson to make settlement within ten days. The ten days have expired, Hudson has made no settlement and his present whereabouts is unknown. The Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland at Baltimore, is Hudson's bondsman. Charles Meriwether, of Louisville, Ky., representing the above company, is here looking into the Datter.--Commercial Appeal. D. G. Hudson is well known in Tennessee, especially among politicians. He will be remembered here as having figured considerably in the Jackson-Tuten campaign.

10. September 4, 1903 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, September 4, 1903

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

There must be "something in the air" with reference to the old Camden Bank and Trust Co. matter, and further developments in connection therewith may be looked for shortly. Ex-Mayor Watkins of Chattanooga, general councellor for the State of the Fidelity Deposit Co. and Hon. E. L. Bullock of Jackson, also councellor for the above company, have been here this week looking into the matter, and they have intimated that under the circumstances the company is not li. able for the bond of Receiver D. G. Hudson. Mr. Hudson has made no settlement with the depositors, and it is intimated that he will be asked to resign the receivership.

11. September 18, 1903 The Camden Chronicle Camden, TN
Article from The Camden Chronicle, September 18, 1903

Click image to open full size in new tab

Article Text

THE BANK RECEIVERSHIP. Surety Company Asks for an Injunction in the United States Court. The following is clipped from Tuesday's Memphis News, which shows the recent action taken by the Fidelity and Deposit Company in the Uuited States Court against D. G. Hudson, assignee, and the creditors of the defunct Camden Bank and Trust Company: The Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland, through its attorneys, Watkins & Thompson of Camden and Bullock & Timberlake of Jackson, yesterday filed papers in the United States circuit court instituting injunction proceedings against D. G. Hudson, trustee for the defunct Camden Bank and Trust Co. of Camden, Tenn,, the Bank of Huntingdon and the creditors of the Camden Bank and Trust Co. to prevent them from instituting individual proceedings against the complainant for losses growing out of the alleged misappropriation of over $13,000 assets of the trust company, by D. G. Hudson, while acting as assignee. On January 24, 1900, the Camden Bank and Trust Co. made an assignment and D.G. Hudson was appointed as assignee. The Fidelity and Trust Co. of Mary!and became the surety of Hudson in the sum of $70,000, payable to the State of Tennessee. conditioned that Hudson should faithfully and honestly execute all duties imposed upon him by law and the deed of assignment, and that he should make a complete inventory of all assets of the defunct institution and return to the court a complete record of the sale of any and all such assets. It is also claimed by the complainant that the filing of a general creditors' bill in the chancery court of Benton County, on January 24, 1900, by Lawrence Lanier, a creditor of the trust company, caused the court to interfere with the authority vested in Hudson by the deed of assignment, to which Hudson as assignee and all the creditors assented, and the proceedings were thereafter conducted under the orders of the court. Hudson, however, according to allegations, continued to make all transactions as assignee. By acting under the title of assignee and winding up the affairs of the bank under the proceedings as a general creditors' S bill, instead of the deed of assignment, it is alleged that Hudson and the court departed from the directions in the original n assignment, resulting in Hudson being 1 short in his accounts with the estate in S the sum of $13,068.55. 1 The bill also alleges that Hudson, as assignee, distributed $29,649.37 of the S $39,611.80 due to the creditors of the e bank, leaving a balance due of $9,962.53. S In addition to this there was due in attorneys' fees about $3,550, making a total indebtedness of $13,512.53. S The Maryland company prays to be discharged from any and all liability as surety for the defendant, D. G. Hudson, upon y the bond executed by him as assignee under the assignment, and enjoin any and all creditors of the Camden Bank and Trust Co. from in any wise holding the Fidelity and Deposit Co. of Marvland liable as surety upon said bond. It also It asks that writs of injunction issue reS, straining all parties from bringing any 'S action against the complainant company We understand the argument in