The Banks at Norfolk — spirited action of the Directors.A copy of "The Virginian," a Yankee sheet published in Norfolk. Va., has made its way through the lines. The excitement in Norfolk just now is the bold and determined refusal of the Directors of the Banks there to recognize the State Directors appointed by the bogus Governor Pierpont, or allow them to take seats at the Board. The Virginian gives the following account, with indignant comments upon the action of the "Rebel Directors." Under the caption of "Secession Rule in Norfolk — The Authority of the Governor of the State set at Defiance by the Rebel Bank Directors:" On the 15th of May, 1862, the Legislature of Virginia passed an act amending a previous act concerning the banking institutions of the State, the first sentence of which in as follows: "There shall be nine Directors of a Bank, and seven for each of its branches — whereof, five of the former and four for each Branch, shall be elected by the stockholders, other than the State, in general meeting, and the residue shall be appointed by the Governor. on behalf of the State; Provided, however, that five of the nine Directors, for each parent Bank, and four of the seven Directors for each of the Branches, shall hereafter be appointed by the Governor on behalf of the State, for the Bank of Virginia, the Farmers' Bank of Virginia, and the Exchange Bank of Virginia, and the Bank of the Valley of Virginia." In accordance with this act, His Excellency Gov. Pierpont, appointed on the 4th day of June last.-- W. W. Wing, Samuel Patterson, D. C. Crowell, F. Zantzinger, and W. R. Jones, Directors of the Exchange Bank in this city. Peter H. Whitehurst, John T. Daniels, T. P. Crowell, and William Ward, Directors of the Bank of Virginia in this city. In addition to the persons mentioned in the following commission, one similar to which was received by the Directors just named:
The Commonwealth of Virginia.To all to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting: Know ye that our Governor, in pursuance of authority vested in the Executive by law, hath constituted and appointed John Fisher, Wm. H. Brooks, Col. Simon Stone, and William Pettit, Directors on behalf of the Commonwealth in the Branch of the Farmers' Bank of Virginia, at Norfolk, to execute the duties of that office according to law. In testimony whereof, these, our letters, are sealed with the Less Seal of the Comonwealth, and made patent. Witness, F. H. Pierpont, Esq., our said Governor, at Wheeling, this fourth of June, in the year 1863, and in the eighty-seventh year of the Commonwealth.
Accordingly, on the 27th ult., the Directors first named, armed with this authority, proceeded to the Exchange Bank and demanded their seats. The rebel Directors asked for time to consider the matter, which was granted, and which was employed by them in concocting the insulting letter below:
Norfolk, August 1, 1863.
Messrs. W. W. Wing, D. C. Crowell, Wm. R. Jones, T. Patterson, and F. Zantzinger:
G. W. Camp, Cashier.
Copy of resolution, &c.The President laid before the Board a letter signed by W. W. Wing, D. C. Crowell, Wm. R. Jones, T. Patterson, and F. Zantzinger, dated July 31st, 1863. and addressed to W. W. Sharp, Esq., President Exchange Bank, and enclosing two printed papers, dated respectively on the 4th and 12th of June last, at Wheeling, signed "F. H. Pierpont," as Governor of Virginia, appointing them "Directors on behalf of the Commonwealth in Exchange Bank at Norfolk," in which said letters the writers "demand the rights and privileges of Directors on behalf of the State, in said Bank, by virtue of their State appointment." Whereupon it was. Resolved, That this Board does not recognize the rights and privileges claimed by Messrs. Wing, Crowell, Jones, Patterson, and Zantzinger; and it was. Ordered, That the Cashier deliver a copy of this resolution to Messrs. Wing, Crowell, Jones, Patterson, and Zantzinger, in reply to their letter. A true copy from the minutes.
The Directors next mentioned proceeded to the Bank of Virginia on the 28th ult., presented their credentials and demanded their seats as members of the board of officers. They were requested to wait a little. In the course of the day they received from the Bank the following impudent and treasonable communication: Copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Directors at the office of the Farmers' Bank of Virginia, at Norfolk, at a meeting held at their banking house on the 30th day of July, 1863. Whereas John Fisher, W. H. Brooks, and W. Pettit, this day presented in person to the Board of Directors a paper dated June 4th, 1863, purporting to emanate from the Executive Department of Virginia at Wheeling, and signed by F. H. Pierpont, as Governor of Virginia, which said paper appointed the above-named persons and Simon Stone Directors, on the part of the Executive, for this office, and they having claimed the right by virtue of said appointment, to take their seats at the Board as Directors, thereby displacing the Directors now holding their seat. at this Board by the appointment of the Governor of Virginia, and those who have been regularly elected to fill vacancies which have occurred among the appointees of the said Governor, and also one of the four Directors elected on the part of the stockholders, in conformity with the charter of this Bank, and who are entitled by law to hold their seats until their successors shall be appointed by the Executive and elected by the stockholders in general meeting assembled at Richmond: Therefore. Resolved, That this Board cannot, will their sense of their rights and duties, recognize the claim of the said John Fisher, W. H. Brooks, W. Pettit, and Simon Stone to take seats at this Board as Directors, and that they be so notified by sending them a copy of this resolution.
A. Tunstall, Cashier.
The Directors last named went to the Farmers' Bank on the 29th ult., and requested to be recognized as members of the Board. Wait a little, was the answer they received, and the next day the postman brought them this response — a palpable plagiarism upon the treason of Governor Letcher's friends in the Bank of Virginia:
Office of the Bank of Virginia, Norfolk, Va., July 28, 1863.Whereas, P. H. Whitehurst, Thos. P. Crowell, and J. T. Daniels, this day presented in person to the Board of Directors a paper dated June 4th, 1863, purporting to emanate from the Executive Department at Wheeling, and signed by F. H. Pierpont as Governor of Virginia, which said paper appointed the above-named persons and William Ward Directors, on the part of the Executive, for this office, and they having claimed the right, by virtue of said appointment, to take their seats at this Board as Directors, thereby displacing the Directors now holding their seats at this Board by the appointment of the Governor of Virginia, and one of the four Directors appointed on the part of the stockholders, in conformity with the charter of this Bank, and who are entitled by law to hold their seats until their successors are appointed by the stockholders in general meeting assembled at Richmond and by the Executive: Therefore, Resolved, That this, Board cannot, with their sense of their rights and duties, recognize the claim of the said P. H. Whitehurst, T. P. Crowell, J. T. Daniels, and William Ward, to take their seat at this Board as Directors, and that they be so notified by sending them a copy of this resolution.
Wm. D. Bagnall, Cashier.
The "Virginian" reaches the climax of indignation in the following paragraph: An outraged public and the insulted Bank Directors appointed by the Chief Magistrate of this Commonwealth desire us to ask "whom it may concern," whether one John Letcher, traitor, or His Excellency F. H. Pierpont is to be recognized as Governor of the territory of this State reconquered by the United States forces? Here are officers in this nominally loyal community who profess openly to recognize the authority of a bastard Governor, now in arms against his Government and his God, and are permitted to retain their places and publicly proclaim their treason without molestation! Who is to blame? This state of things cannot, must not, shall not be permitted to exist here a day longer without an emphatic and indignant protest on our part in behalf of the Union men of this section of the State. Is the policy of retaining Secessionists in office, to the exclusion of loyal citizens who have suffered for the Union cause, approved by the authorities at Washington? That is what we want to know — and know as soon as possible.