Part 20

MR. LAWYER: While Mr. Manufacturer was reading what Secretary MacVeagh said, I have been wondering what the people would do if the United States Steel Corporation, the Standard Oil Co., J.P. Morgan or John D. Rockefeller, or any of the railroad companies, or any other great interest, should collect and hold in safe-deposit boxes hundreds of millions of money, just as the United States Treasury does.

MR. FARMER: I'll tell you what we would do. We would blow them up mighty quick, and hang them to boot, that's what we'd do.

MR. MERCHANT: Gentlemen, just think what it means to withdraw these hundreds of millions of reserve money from the channels of trade, say in the fall, keeping in mind that every dollar that the Government grabs and withdraws, will support from five to ten times that amount of credit. The withdrawal, as Mr. MacVeagh said, of one hundred million dollars, means the contraction of from five hundred million to a billion dollars; this is not only a fool's practice, but it is an actual crime against the commerce of the country; a crime against the producers, a crime against the laboring men of the country.

MR. LAWYER: How long, O Lord, how long, shall we remain the laughing stock of the rest of the world? But, let us see, can any man here give me a single reason why the United States Government should not deposit its money with the banks, precisely as all the other governments of the world do? It seems to me perfectly clear that the United States Government should treat its income precisely as this town does, this county does, this state does. Is there any conceivable reason why it should not act in this matter precisely as New York City, Chicago, New York State and Illinois, and every city and every state does?

MR. BANKER: Not one in the world.

MR. MANUFACTURER: This discussion upon the development of banking in the United States and the present treasury situation brings out the necessary reforms most vividly to my mind from these two points of view, the banks, and the treasury.

_First_: Assuming that we are all agreed as to the result of our talk last Wednesday night upon reserves, that they must be national to be equal and adequate, our conclusions now are inevitable, (1) we must give to the National banks the power to do a Savings bank business, as well as a Commercial business; (2) we must give our National banks the power to do a Trust Company business; (3) we must give our National banks the power to issue a pure credit Bank Note precisely like that issued by the Scotch Banks and the Canadian Banks, and was issued by the five hundred banks in New England before the war. These notes will go to the Clearing Houses every day with the checks and drafts to be cleared at precisely the same time, and precisely in the same way.

_Second_: We must take the United States Government out of the banking business, so that its transactions will cease to be a disturbing factor in the everyday affairs of the commercial world.

MR. BANKER: You have outlined these necessary reforms splendidly, but there are just two more points in this connection that must not escape our attention. They are these:

_First_: All these various forms of banking are distinct in character and economically the funds of each perform a peculiar function that must be recognized and observed or we shall make a great fundamental error in constructing what we hope will prove a sound financial and banking system. We must provide that the commercial function, the savings function, the trust function shall be kept apart by separating the funds arising from each, and keeping them completely segregated, in order that the country may always know just what its commercial fund is, as distinguished from its investment fund.

_Second_: There is such a great demand for Farm Mortgage Loans by those who are pursuing agriculture that I am convinced that some provision should be made whereby the farmers of this country could obtain money upon their lands, as cheaply as our great railroads and other corporations are able to do. I have given this matter much study, and as you gentlemen are aware, I am a member of the Committee appointed by the American Bankers' Association to investigate and report the best method possible to accomplish this purpose. Therefore I think that we had better consider it here.

MR. LAWYER: I am in perfect accord with what you are aiming at, but it is almost eleven o'clock.

MR. LABORINGMAN: I have been waiting patiently to see whether you gentlemen were going to provide in some way for coöperative credit, but up to date, you've not peeped a word.

MR. MANUFACTURER: Both of these subjects are really outside of a financial and banking system, the particular thing we set about creating. However, I am perfectly willing to take a night to discuss them, and if we should find that either or both of them should constitute a part of our plan I am ready to adopt them.

MR. BANKER: All right, I am agreed, and I think we all are agreed that it is not only fair, but advisable, that we take up the whole subject next Wednesday night.

UNCLE SAM: Do you know, boys, I am really proud of the work you are doing; you've gotten on swimmingly. You have shown such fine moral courage in caving in when you found out that you were wrong instead of playing the part of the jackass that has not intelligence enough to discern when he is in error, and too obstinate to change, if he happens to find out by accident that he is wrong.

MR. MANUFACTURER: Uncle Sam, I am a Democrat, and I look upon that as a personal stab.

UNCLE SAM: Just wait a minute, or playing the part of the elephant, that is so turgid, or possibly designedly stupid, or so calm and by self-satisfaction lulled into a conservatism that amounts to reaction, and therefore refuses to move.

MR. MERCHANT: Well, I'm a Republican, and that looks like a slap at me. However, I guess Uncle Sam is just in for a housecleaning tonight.

UNCLE SAM: You're both all right, personally, but your organizations have been in wrong until just now there seems to be a patriotic soul-awakening, and it's up to you to redeem them, or there will be a housecleaning, and don't you forget it. I want men; men who have intelligence and conscience; men who are capable and have convictions; men who have moral courage; men who will fight if necessary to have peace; I mean that peace that rules only when right prevails and justice reigns.

Good Night.

TWELFTH NIGHT

LAND CREDIT BANK

UNCLE SAM: Boys, by unanimous vote we agreed at our last meeting to devote tonight to the subjects that seem to lie close to the hearts of Mr. Farmer and Mr. Laboringman. You will remember that Mr. Farmer insisted that our work would not be complete unless we included in our plan a Land Credit Bank, while Mr. Laboringman declared that he had waited patiently to hear what we had to say about coöperative credit, but in vain.

Since Mr. Farmer is a member of the committee appointed by the agricultural society of his State to investigate the subject of Land Credit Banks, I presume he is loaded to the guards and can tell us all about it, and convince us, too, that he is right in his contention. I suggest that we let him lead off tonight.

MR. FARMER: Well, gentlemen, I can assure you of my confidence of my ability to convince you of the importance of recognizing my contention; but I shall have to ask you all to be patient and agree to assist me in working out the plan that is best adapted to our needs and conditions. In studying this aspect of the banking problem, I think it will be well to follow the steps of development up to date, just as we have in considering other phases of this question, because experience is our surest guide to tell us what not to do as well as what we ought to do.

In the outset, however, I want to call your attention to the fact, that there is no subject of broader interest and more world-wide discussion than the productivity of the soil. You are all aware, no doubt, that there has been established at Rome the International Institute of Agriculture, and that last summer fifty different governments were represented there. Hon. David Lubin, of California, represented this government. The President of the United States became intensely interested and with the help of our foreign representatives, particularly Hon. Myron T. Herrick, Ambassador to France, a vast amount of most valuable information has been gathered, studied, digested and classified. I think that we are now ready to take the matter up and legislate upon it. Our interest ought to be greater and more intense than that of any other nation on account of the number of our people engaged in agriculture and the staggering interest rates they are paying. Think of it.

The 12,000,000 farmers of the United States are adding over $8,400,000,000 to the national wealth each year. They are doing this on a borrowed capital of $6,040,000,000, on which $510,000,000 of interest is annually paid. Counting commissions and renewal charges, the rate averages at 8-1/2 per cent for this country as against 3-1/2 or 4-1/2 per cent for Germany. If the American farmers had a thoroughly organized system of coöperative associations they would not only save this difference of $200,000,000 or $250,000,000 to themselves individually, but in the course of time the entire debt would be transferred to the societies, the interest paid to them, an economic waste stopped, and this stupendous sum restored to agriculture. The assertion is neither fanciful nor extravagant. It is below the actual ratio obtained by a comparison with the German figures.

There is practically no limit to the amount of capital that could be advantageously employed for rehabilitating worn-out and abandoned farms, opening up new areas, and introducing modern methods of cultivation; and it is of vital importance that this capital be obtainable at once in sufficient volume and on easy terms. The world-wide problem caused by the pressure of population upon the means of subsistence now confronts the United States in the very face of its matchless natural resources and vast acreage of arable lands still remaining untouched by the plow. The $385,000,000 of foodstuffs exported last year barely equaled 76 per cent of the annual interest charges on the debts the farmers owe.

The cause of the trouble is the lack of capital, and the remedy lies in financing the farmer and the landowner. This is the indisputable conclusion logically reached from examination into the actual conditions and from comparisons furnished by recent European history. The solution of the problem concerns the general welfare as much as does the currency and monetary reform, and it is gratifying to note that it seems destined to go side by side along with this undertaking. For as soon as the alarm was sounded the best talent of the nation became enlisted, and now bankers, merchants, professional men, legislators, and private individuals in town and country, many impelled purely by patriotic and disinterested motives, have combined their efforts to better the situation before it pass to the acute and critical stage.

The only instrument by which land-mortgage banks can finance themselves, draw money from the public for investment in loans, are the debenture bonds, but these bonds will not circulate freely nor far from the place of issue unless they are known to have the same underlying values and give the same rights to the holder, regardless of whether they be secured by mortgages in Texas, Massachusetts, or in any other State. But possessed of these characteristics as guaranties of law, there is no reason why debentures of large mortgage banks should not be listed in stock markets and sold, negotiated, and exchanged as readily as railway and municipal securities, and thus equalize and reduce interest rates for farmers throughout the country.

For our guidance that we may escape all cost of experience that has been paid for by others, I am going to give you the benefit of my study of the Government report upon this important subject and quote it extensively as the best authority we have.

You must all realize that this almost complete organization of land and rural credit in advanced European nations was not a haphazard and spontaneous growth. It was brought about by the insistence of public and private individuals, philanthropists, scholars, bankers, legislators, agricultural societies, government commissions, and national assemblies, all studying and working in a common cause. The history of their efforts in the middle of the past century reads much like an account of the agitation which has been started in the United States by the American Bankers' Association, the Southern Commercial Congress, the Federal authorities at Washington, and other bodies and individuals, for financing the farmer, improving agricultural conditions, and encouraging the movement back to the soil. In Europe the agricultural banks and credit facilities were created before agricultural or even general education was attempted. The United States began at the opposite end. The American colleges and systems for teaching agriculture are among the oldest and best in the world, and millions of dollars have been appropriated by the Federal and State Legislatures since the passage of the Morrill Act in Lincoln's administration to aid this science in one way or another. Incalculable good has come therefrom, but the results would have been far greater if financial education had gone hand in hand with this work. It would have led to the study and introduction of the rural banking methods of Europe generations ago, and so familiarized the American farmers with the uses of credit that the lack of capital and excessive interest rates would not now be interfering with the agricultural development of the country.

The development and history of Land Credit banks in Germany is most interesting and is as follows:

The land-mortgage banks are either joint-stock corporations or societies of borrowers. These latter are typified by the well-known German Landschaften, and are the originals of all land banks. Before them the private money lender reigned supreme. The organization of land credit, in fact, began with them. They undoubtedly also suggested the coöperative idea to Herr Schulze, because five, with nearly $60,000,000 of mortgage loans, were in existence in 1848, when he was trying to start his personal-credit society at Delitzsche. These peculiar institutions are associations of landowners, and have no shares and pay no dividends, the profits, if any, going to reduce the loans; and since they and their borrowers are identical, and managerial services gratuitous, they have been able to lend money at lower rates than any other kind of companies.

The establishment of the old Landschaften was the outcome of the indebtedness and distress of the nobility, and their membership in Germany is still composed mainly of that class and large landed proprietors. After the Seven Years' War the nobles, who owned nearly all the land, lacked the working capital necessary to repair and cultivate their damaged estates, and so were unable to pay their creditors. Frederick the Great ordered the suspension of interest on all estate debts for three years. The period was subsequently extended. The result was the withdrawal of the money lenders from agriculture, the rise of interest to ruinous rates, and a financial stringency that involved the public welfare. In order to relieve the situation this autocratic King decided to adopt plans that had been submitted by Herr Bühring, a Berlin business man. Accordingly, in 1769, by a royal fiat, he forced the nobles of Silesia to join an association whether they wished to borrow or not, and their lands were made jointly liable without limit for all loans granted by the association. Loans were granted only upon the consent of the directorate elected by the members themselves. Great care was naturally exercised, so no losses occurred, while immense credit came to the association.

This was the first Landschaft. Others were formed in the same fashion. Nine more were formed by the Provinces and one voluntarily. Then two companies were organized on the coöperative principle, so that there are now twenty-five Landschaften. The mortgages held by them, all on farm lands, exceed $500,000,000, and the interest rate runs as low as 4 per cent and 3.5 per cent per annum. The bonds by which the money for these loans were obtained are secured by the mass of underlying mortgages and general assets of the issuing association, and ultimately by the unlimited liability of all its members. The collective guaranty and the fact that loans are made only to members constitute the characterizing features of a true Landschaft; but there is a growing tendency to limit this liability and substitute reserves in place of it.

Originally a Landschaft did not give cash to a member in exchange for his mortgage. It gave him a bond which simply contained a promise to pay in the event the interest and principal could not be collected from the debtor. The bond was of the exact size of the mortgage, primarily secured by it, and made payable to bearer on a few months' notice. In case of default the holder had to resort to foreclosure proceedings, so the bonds had only a limited circulation, and were often sold below par. This was but a slight advance on private money lending. Later the associations undertook to collect the interest and principal. Finally they assumed direct responsibility, and began to give cash to members for their mortgages, raising funds for this purpose by issuing and selling bonds of even denominations for large and small amounts. The practice of requiring mortgages to be paid in lump was abolished, and in place thereof the loans were made repayable by annual installments running through a long period of years, and the installments were set aside for redeeming the bonds. These steps brought about a complete revolution in land credit and marked the beginning of the land-mortgage business as it is known today. The whole theory of the organization of land credit is based upon this debenture bond and system of amortization and sinking funds devised and introduced by the Landschaften. One without the other two is useless. The three must be combined, and also coupled with strong management under wise laws in order to attract a steady flow of cheap money to agriculture. It is remarkable that this truth has never been realized nor applied in the United States to farm-mortgage loans. In spite of the example of practically every nation in Europe for generations, the lending of money on mortgage in America still remains largely a mere brokerage business unrestricted by proper governing laws, either by individuals or corporations, while mortgages continue to be drawn up for three or five years, when experience shows that the average life of a loan is far in excess of that period and needs to be renewed time and again, with added expense to the debtor and trouble for the creditor. Had the European amortization system been employed the companies dealing in western farm mortgages between 1890 and 1894 probably would have escaped the misfortunes that brought them down to ruin.

Amortization is simply a method of paying off a loan by returning a little of the capital each year. These payments are called annuities and are composed of the interest and contributions to the sinking fund and the cost of conducting business. They are calculated for periods of ten to seventy-five years, and at the end of the period the mortgaged debt becomes extinguished and the property returns to the owner free and clear of all encumbrances. The prevailing interest rate on amortizable mortgages in France at present is 4.3 per cent. But by adding a little over 3.2 per cent to this, and paying 7.5 per cent a year, a French farmer can extinguish his debt within twenty years and obtain a satisfaction piece in full from his creditor. Thus, suppose he borrowed $10,000. He pays $750 annually twenty times for the interest, sinking fund and expenses. This makes a total of $15,000, interest included, and his debt is paid off. A farmer in the Southwestern States would pay this much for interest alone, and his debt would still be unsatisfied. Amortization has a two-fold value. It lessens the debtor's burden year by year and increases in an equal ratio the security of the lender, provided, of course, the sinking fund created by the accumulated annuities be properly and honestly kept for the redemption of the debentures. The Landschaften were very particular in this respect. Hence, their debentures obtained the confidence of the public, and through their means they were able to draw capital from all parts of the country for distribution among their members at the lowest rates on record. If a holder of a bond wished his money back he had merely to sell his bond in the open market. In this way fluidity was given to real estate securities for the first time in history and the dream of "mobilizing the soil" accomplished at last. For these reasons the Landschaften hold the most prominent place in the literature on land credit, and everybody who studies that subject must begin with them.

The old Landschaften, however, have many characteristics peculiar to their own localities and dates of their foundation. They are in fact governmental institutions, and their head officers are public functionaries clothed with summary executive and judiciary powers over the property, and, to some extent, over the actions of their associate members. These powers were simply an enlargement of the feudal and manorial rights possessed by princes in early times, and so, in many respects, are contrary to modern ideas. But the new Landschaften, which have adopted the best principles, present points worthy of careful study. A description of these latter institutions is taken from the excellent report of Sir F.A. Nicholson to the Madras Presidency in India.

These new institutions are of different patterns. Several are annexes to the older societies, but most are independent and resemble ordinary mortgage banks, except in the essential point that they have no share capital, earning dividends. They are, as the old societies, simply syndicates of borrowers formed to supply proprietors with capital on the lowest possible terms and repayable in the easiest manner. They are gratuitous intermediaries between the outside capitalists and the borrowers, and while performing services of the highest importance in testing the security offered by the borrowers and in guaranteeing to the public the safety of the capital lent by them, they charge absolutely nothing for their services beyond a small commission, perhaps one-fourth of 1 per cent, or even one-tenth of 1 per cent, to cover actual expenses. It is usual for each association to be restricted to a particular area of operations within which every proprietor, whether noble or peasant, may obtain a loan if he can offer sufficient security. There is always a minimum limit either to loans or to the value of property on which loans will be given. This is usually low. In the new Brandenburg Landschaft, affiliated to the old Kur-und-Neumark Landschaft, loans may be granted on property having a net income of only $25. The minimum limit is seldom even approached.