A matter of principle

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. -- n its face, it appeared an odd decision for a banker, to turn down business on a principle that most people don't think much about.

And so far, the banking giants haven't seen fit to follow the lead of BB&T Corp.'s John A. Allison IV, who declared in January that the nation's ninth-largest bank would no longer make loans to developers who planned to build commercial projects on land seized from private citizens through the power of eminent domain.

"We happen to believe in the fundamental concept of individual rights, and one of those is property rights," Mr. Allison said. "If that is jeopardized, our entire financial system is also in jeopardy."

The prospect of losing out on a few loans, or taking a stand alone, hasn't shaken Mr. Allison's resolve, and has only added to his reputation as a banker whose thoughts routinely stray to the philosophical.

Colleagues probably should have seen it coming from an executive known to quote Aristotle during board meetings.

"John is a student," said Dick Janeway, the retired head of Wake Forest University's medical school, who served as a board member at Winston-Salem-based BB&T for years. "He's a living example of continuing education."

While often overlooked in a state that's home to the nation's second- and fourth-largest banks -- Charlotte-based Bank of America Corp. and Wachovia Corp. -- BB&T has grown from its 1872 founding in rural Wilson into a bank with $109 billion in assets and 1,400 branches in 11 states and Washington, D.C.

Mr. Allison, 57, has led the firm as chairman and chief executive officer since 1989.

"I just celebrated my 35th year with the bank," he said during a recent interview with the Associated Press. "I made a lot of loans in eastern North Carolina to farmers and I can remember praying some years for it to rain more and others for it to rain less."

Such low-profile loans and BB&T's focus on consumer banking had long kept it in the shadow of the bigger banks. Then came last year's decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 that a local government in Connecticut had the power to seize private property for a private development project. A few months later, Mr. Allison said publicly that his bank would forgo any business connected to such taking of private land.