FREDERICK DOUGLASS TO AUGUSTUS H. GARLAND¹Augustus Hill Garland (1832–99) began his career as a Whig politician in Little Rock, Arkansas, before representing his state in the Confederate Congress. He was elected to the U.S. Senate in 1867, but was not seated, since Arkansas had not yet been readmitted to the Union. Garland served as governor of Arkansas (1874–76) and was elected as a Democrat to the U.S. Senate in 1876 and again in 1883. From 1885 to 1889, he served as Grover Cleveland’s attorney general. Garland then returned to Little Rock and private law practice. William B. Hesseltine and Larry Gara, “Arkansas’ Confederate Leaders after the War,” , 9: 259–69 (1950); , 4: 150–51.

Washington, D.C. 19 February 1880.

HON. A. H. GARLAND:

SIR:

I have the honor to inform you that I have carefully read and duly considered your bill for amending the charter of the Freedman’s Savings and
Trust Company, and for other purposes.²Garland introduced Senate Bill 711 on 21 June 1879 to amend the charter of the Freedmen’s Savings and Trust Company. It substituted a single commissioner, the comptroller of the currency, for an existing panel of three. Despite Douglass’s suggestions in this letter, the initial bill required a majority of the bank’s trustees to approve the commissioner’s appointment and required that officeholder to post a $25,000 bond. Oversight for dispersing the institution’s assets was vested in the commissioner, not the federal government. Garland’s bill retained provisions for potentially bringing criminal and civil proceedings against trustees and managers, possibly including Douglass. Senator Blanche K. Bruce, chair of the select committee, introduced an amended version of the bill on 2 April 1880 to reduce the commissioner’s bond to $20,000. U.S. Senate, (Washington, D.C., 1880), appendix, 46–47, 67–68. It is in my judgment a wisely-drawn bill. It covers the whole ground of the present situation of that institution. Its enactment by Congress would be a credit to the national sense
of justice, and would bring speedy though small relief to a class of persons
to whom the nation cannot be too just or too generous. Many of the newly-emancipated class put their money into this bank, believing it to be—like
the Freedman’s Bureau—a government institution, and about as safe as
the government itself. Though the misapprehension of these poor people
cannot be entirely cured by any present action of Congress, it does appeal
to Congress to exert what power it may to help them and to restore their
broken confidence.

In respect to the details of your bill, I am not sure that you have made
the commissioner’s bond quite large enough. The property is large and his
power over it is large, and while I do not attach great importance to bonds
as a guarantee of honest management, the bond in this case should be
large. I see, too, that the approval of a majority of the trustees of the company is required in the appointment of the commissioner. I do not know
that any positive harm can come of this feature of the bill, but I think it an
unnecessary provision of the bill. There has been no regular meeting of
the trustees, as required by the charter, this five years, and it may be fairly
questioned if to-day any such an organization as a board of trustees of the
Freedman’s Savings and Trust Company exists.³There are no records of a board of trustees for the Freedmen’s Savings and Trust Company after the comptroller of the currency, John Jay Knox, took control of liquidating the bank’s assets and reimbursing depositors. The comptrollers who succeeded Knox continued in this line until the bank’s affairs were settled in 1920. Knox apparently initially planned to try to prosecute the trustees, but no legal action was ever taken. Abby L. Gilbert, “The Comptroller of the Currency and the Freedman’s Savings Bank,” , 57: 125–43 (April 1972). If the thing can be legally

done, I would for my own part prefer to have the government, in form as
well as in fact, take the assets of the defunct institution into its own hands.
I believe the creditors will have nothing to lose by this absolute possession. If the clause is retained, it may cause some delay in getting the approval of the trustees, and for one I am anxious that the depositors shall
get something out of this institution without delay.

Your bill recommends itself strongly in substituting for commissioners, for while I esteem the three present commissioners as honest
and honorable men, I cannot think there is work enough to justify their retention.⁴Managing the bankruptcy proceedings of the Freedmen’s Savings and Trust Company were the commissioners John Angel James Creswell, Robert H. T. Leipold, and Robert Purvis. Creswell (1828–91), a Maryland politician, served in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, as U.S. postmaster general, and as U.S. counsel before the Alabama Claims Commission (1874–76). Leipold (1841–1921), a German immigrant, was a Washington, D.C., attorney and possibly a former clerk in the Treasury Department. Purvis (1810–98), the only African American commissioner, was a prominent Philadelphia abolitionist. U.S. Senate, , 1–2; F. Colburn Adams, “White Man Bery Unsartin” (Washington, D.C., 1878), 22; 1900 U.S. Census, District of Columbia, Washington, 13; George W. Williams, , 2 vols. (New York, 1883), 2: 509–10; Washington, District of Columbia, City Directory, 1914 (Washington, D.C., 1914), 1874; Bacon, , 7; , 4: 541. At the outset, when the affairs of the bank were much entangled,
there may have been work for them all; but I think it is to their credit that
they have in five years placed the affairs of the Freedman’s Savings and
Trust Company in a condition to be easily managed by one commissioner.
I have been informed that neither of the present commissioners wishes
to be retained in his position, and this is well, for since there has been
some want of harmony between them I am inclined to think that your bill
should be so shaped that a new man shall be put in charge, and this without prejudice to either of the outgoing commissioners. It was not supposed
when they were placed in charge of the Freedman’s Bank six years ago
that they were to continue there indefinitely. Their continuance, in part or
in whole, will lead to unfriendly comments. Economy here is sufficiently
strong to commend your bill at this point.

I see that you make it the duty of the Solicitor of the Treasury, under the direction of the commissioner, to institute civil and criminal proceedings against trustees and managers of the bank for mismanagement
and fraud. I hope this will be found unnecessary. The assets of the bank
should not be further diminished by litigation from which no money can
be recovered. The trustees who may be charged with mismanagement
are poor, and nothing could be got out of them. Mind, however, I do not
object strongly to this feature of the bill. On the score of justice, I should
like to see the guilty exposed and punished; but in the interest of saving
something from the wreck, I am for keeping out of the courts.

Suffice it to say in conclusion that I like your bill as a whole.

Respectfully yours,

FRED’K DOUGLASS

PLSr: U.S. Congress, Senate, Select Committee to Investigate the Freedman’s Savings and
Trust Company, Report, 46th Cong., 2d sess., 2 April 1880, Senate Report 440 (Serial 1895), appendix, 45–46.