Seventeen Talks on the Banking Question Between Uncle Sam and Mr. Farmer, Mr. Banker, Mr. Lawyer, Mr. Laboringman, Mr. Merchant, Mr. Manufacturer

Part 29

Chapter 294,103 wordsPublic domain

_Second_: That there was a perfect adaptation of the deposits and note issues to the peculiar and ever changing demands of the people during the panic, and during the depression in trade that followed the panic.

_Third_: That the number of banks in New England in 1856, the year before the panic, was four hundred and ninety-five, and in the year 1858, the year after the panic, there were four hundred and ninety-nine banks, or four more banks the year after the panic than there were the year preceding the panic, an unquestionable tribute to the principle of current coin redemption.

Now, mark this, that the very heart and the very soul of the Suffolk System was in the fact that the notes were redeemed in Boston in coin. So good were these notes considered to be throughout the entire west, that at Buffalo, Chicago, Milwaukee and all commercial points in the then far west, they were always taken at a premium of from 1 to 5 per cent. It was not the size of the bank of issue that made them good and desirable, but the fact that they were redeemed in coin in Boston.

When the soundness of this system is tested by a comparison with that of the national banks, the result more than justifies the assertion that the Suffolk Bank System of New England was incomparably better than the National Bank System; for, when the conditions during the twenty years from 1840 to 1860 are compared with those of the past thirty years, all must admit that argument is futile and the conclusion is inevitable.

Mark this, that while a tax of one-eighth of 1 per cent of all the notes in circulation would have paid all the notes of the banks that failed under the Suffolk System from 1840 to 1860, it would have taken a tax of one-fifth of 1 per cent on all the notes outstanding issued by the national banks to pay the notes of the failed national banks.

In confirmation of what I have said in praise of the Suffolk System let the bank commissioners of Connecticut, Vermont, Maine, Massachusetts and the _New York Courier and Enquirer_ testify.

"The currency of this state is of the first order and can not be improved, being equal to gold and silver. This is strong language, we admit, yet perfectly true, for every bill holder can on demand convert his bills into coin." (Connecticut Bank Commissioners' Report, 1841.)

"The bills of any country bank, redeemed at par in any commercial city, will always be current throughout the extent of region whose business channels flow to that city. Hence, New England money is worth more in the cities of New York and Philadelphia than the bills of their own country banks. Vermont bills have uniformly borne a premium in the eastern cities without loss, while bills of their own states are at a heavy discount." (Vermont Bank Commission's Report, 1852.)

"The 'Suffolk System,' though not recognized in our banking law, has proved to be the great safeguard to the public. Whatever objections may exist to this 'system' in theory, its practical operation is to keep the circulation of our banks within the bounds of safety. No sound bank can have any well-founded reason for refusing to redeem its bills in Boston, and a bank that is not sound can not long do business under that system and ceases to be in good credit when it is 'thrown out at the Suffolk.'" (Maine Commissioners' Report, Dec. 31, 1857.)

"If there was no check upon circulation there might be some danger, but the frequent redemptions at the Suffolk Bank and the rapid communications between different parts of the country will prevent any greater circulation than the natural business wants of the country will sustain.... Indeed, this system of par redemption seems to be a most perfect regulator upon all the New England banks. It would seem somewhat surprising that something has not been adopted in other parts of the country that should produce the same beneficial results." (Connecticut Bank Commissioners' Report, 1848.)

"The charters of the banks have been renewed. If the laws by which they are constituted the agents of the people to provide a currency, and by which their faithfulness in the discharge of such agency is secured, remain unchanged, there is every reason to believe that the currency of Massachusetts will be for the next twenty years what it has been for the twenty years past--as perfect as any in existence, as perfect as in the nature of things it can be. No reasonable man, no practical man, no man who is not bound hand and foot in the fetters of mere theory, can desire for the people a currency better adapted to meet all the circumstances of a business community than that which has been furnished by the banks of Massachusetts for the last quarter of a century." (James B. Congdon, cashier Merchants' Bank, New Bedford, in memorial to Governor of Massachusetts, 1851.)

"We said that the Massachusetts currency was apparently unsecured. In reality their bank paper is well secured. The experience of the last fifteen years has demonstrated that the losses from bank issues in the State of New York are four or five times greater than in Massachusetts. The system of the latter is better than our own." (_New York Courier and Enquirer_, 1854.)

"It is by no means wonderful that a system which has stood the test of time and struck its roots so deep as to have become incorporated with and formed a part of our banking system should be abandoned with hesitation for one which is new and untried." (Maine Bank Commissioners' Report, 1865.)

"The State parts with these objects of her care and solicitude with many regrets, but with a just pride in their career, inspired by the belief that their capital has been highly instrumental in promoting the prosperity of the state, and that they have furnished as good a paper currency, based on individual credit, as any part of the country has ever enjoyed." (Massachusetts Banking Report, 1865.)

MR. LAWYER: _If, as we have gradually come to understand and firmly believe, the true service of a bank is to furnish credit to its customers, as they want it, and in such form as they need it, then these institutions which you have been describing were certainly far better suited to the purposes of their day than any banks we now have in existence._

Two things seem to have been present in all of these various institutions: ample coin reserves, which ranged from 20 to 33 per cent, to meet any demand for credit redemption and perfect freedom in changing bank credits from the form of book credit to the form of note credit, and the form of note credit to the form of book credit, according to the desires and needs of the customers of those banks.

As a result of interchangeability of book and note credits, a bank could always protect its coin reserve, for if the customer was just as well satisfied to take the bank's notes, instead of coin, or its reserves, it must be apparent to all of you that the cost to the bank would only be from one-sixth to one-fourth as great, and that the bank would have several times as much credit to loan, and at the same time be in a much stronger position.

Let me illustrate what I mean by calling your attention to what happens over in New York every fall. Let us suppose that the New York banks owe the country banks, say $500,000,000 and that the country banks call for it from July to January for the purpose of moving the crops. The banks of New York with the right kind of a currency system would not need to disturb the situation in New York at all because they could send their correspondents their credit notes, or cashier's checks, for $500,000,000. You see the New York banks would simply convert a deposit credit subject to check or draft into a note credit. The amount of the debt would remain the same, the amount of the reserves would remain exactly the same; but, instead of the country banks continuing to keep the deposits subject to check at the banks, they would take the notes which would serve their purpose, because they could in turn send the notes into the corn and cotton fields, to help harvest and gather the crop; and, just as soon as the notes had served their purpose, they would be returned to the country banks and by them in turn sent on to the New York banks, and would have been reconverted into book credits. Not a single dollar of actual money would have been used in the whole transaction, and yet the country would have been served just as well, as though every bank note sent out had been a gold certificate.

On the other hand, if the New York banks should continue to be as they are today compelled to ship the $500,000,000, they would have to call loans and shift conditions until they could scrape up $500,000,000 with as little injury as possible to their customers and send it west; nearly every dollar so sent out is reserve money of some form, gold certificates, silver certificates and United States notes. Now mark this, the credit notes cost the bank only the interest on the reserves behind the notes; but when the banks ship out their reserves, the cost must necessarily be four or five times as much, to say nothing of the injury they have done to the business conditions in New York. And so this same principle runs on throughout all of our banking business today from one end of the country to the other.

MR. MERCHANT: Well, Mr. Lawyer, your entire argument goes to demonstrate with mathematical certainty that the country banks would never have any occasion whatever to send to New York for currency, as they would create their own currency by converting bank book credits into bank note credits to meet all ordinary demands, a fact that not only accentuates, but proves more conclusively what you are saying, and reinforces your argument.

Should we be fortunate enough to secure a right kind of banking system in this respect, we could almost double our bank reserves, that is, make them twice as large, and yet make two or three times as much profit on that part of the banking business, growing out of the substitution of credit notes for reserves, and at the same time be vastly better able to protect the balance of our business from disturbance due to the fact that we are compelled to use reserve money for currency purposes. This now seems to me a very simple matter when you once have grasped it.

MR. BANKER: In this connection I want to call your attention to this fact, and I want to note that it is a very important fact which was so obvious in connection with every single statement of capital, specie, circulation and deposit, that has been given, when referring to the banking systems before the war, and that's this: that the note issues did not begin to average one-half the authorized amounts, proving conclusively that the currency of these banks invariably adapted itself to the exact needs of the people.

Notes Outstanding Possible Issue was Per Specie Held Deposits Cent of Possible Issue

Louisiana $11,579,000 No limit except $12,115,000 $19,777,000 33% Coin Reserve

Ohio $9,057,000 $10,000,000 About $9,057,000 $11,697,000 Par

Indiana $5,753,000 No limit but a $1,917,000 $1,186,000 12-1/2% penalty for failure to redeem in coin

Iowa $1,439,000 $2,096,000 70% $389,800 $2,851,000

Virginia $9,821,000 $14,725,000 70% $2,943,000 $7,729,000

Missouri $4,037,000 $10,998,000 38% $3,666,000 $3,434,000

Suffolk System $44,000,000 $131,000,000 30% $10,058,995 $41,208,000

_Can anyone doubt, after noting these figures, that the note issues of the various banking systems kept as perfect pace with the requirements of trade, as checks and drafts do? Certainly it is perfectly evident that the bank notes came and went precisely as all bank credit should._

MR. LAWYER: While all these splendid banking systems were snuffed out by the 10 per cent tax upon circulation, the sound principles upon which they were all founded are still most successfully exemplified by the Canadian Banking System which you will remember took its charter from the statutes of Massachusetts.

There are today 27 banks in Canada, with 2,000 branches. The general principle of the Canadian Banking System is identical with that of the Virginia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Indiana, Ohio, Iowa and Missouri banks. It is true there are some differences in matters of detail. The amount of notes that can be issued regularly is that of the capital of the bank. The notes are a first lien upon the assets of the bank, including a double liability of the stockholders; the bank notes are also secured by a guarantee fund of 5 per cent, which is contributed by the banks issuing the notes; there is a provision that the notes shall bear interest at the rate of 5 per cent until notification of redemption. No holder of a Canadian bank note has ever lost a cent since these provisions have been in force.

You remember that we have a chart which shows very graphically with what marvelous accuracy, year in and year out, month in and month out, day in and day out, the Canadian Bank note currency meets the actual requirements of trade; no more, no less, but always just adequate.

The precision with which the currency rises and falls with the demands of trade is the result of the daily redemption of all bank notes, concurrently with the checks and drafts, through the Clearing Houses, or over the counters of the banks, or at the points fixed by law for note redemption for the purpose of keeping the notes at par, all over Canada.

We want to keep this diagram here on file, because it speaks louder than words possibly can.

MR. BANKER: One striking characteristic of the Bank of the State of Indiana and the State Bank of Iowa was that the parent, or home institution, did no business at all, except for the branches, and examined and supervised them. Hugh McCulloch, the president of the Bank of the State of Indiana, said, "that the soundness of the bank was due to the frequent examinations."

Another feature to be found in both these systems, and so far as I know peculiar to them, was this: that all the branches were responsible for the failure of any one of them; but the branches did not share in each other's profits. The result of this law was to make every branch the watch dog of every other branch; there was only one instance in which the home, or parent institution, took charge of a branch in either state, and that was in 1860. The executive committee of the State Bank of Iowa having heard that one of the branches had made some unsafe investments, "promptly took charge of its affairs, and authorized a reorganization, calling upon other branches for such aid as was required, which was given so that the branch, with no delay, and without loss of a cent to its customers, or note holders, or suspension even of its legal business, was again put on a firm and solvent basis."

Undoubtedly this plan of supervision by the parent, or home institution, which did no business, was a wise precaution. Mark this, it is precisely the same principle put into operation that is now being followed by twenty of our Clearing Houses, and was then, and as I believe it will prove now, a practical guarantee of all the liabilities of all the banks that are subject to such examinations and supervision.

The most significant fact, and the one to be noted particularly, is that the parent, or home institution, like the Clearing House, only acted for the branches, precisely as the Clearing House acts for its members, and examined and supervised them. Economically this principle is absolutely sound. Historically, it is of essential importance because here history is repeating itself, after a lapse of fifty years, and in both instances this protective principle and practice has grown out of precisely the same conditions--the unsound and dangerous methods of certain members of the banking fraternity itself.

MR. MERCHANT: Gentlemen, the astounding thing to me is that when this country had once learned and practiced so sound, complete and perfect a banking system, it should have lost it.

MR. MANUFACTURER: I don't think that that is at all strange when you remember that it only existed in a few states and consider just how we lost it. You will remember that the Virginia banks which were founded upon the old Scotch system started in 1804, and worked perfectly until the war broke out. The other banks, or systems of banks, were established from time to time, some of them as late as 1857, and as Mr. Banker remarked several nights ago, modeled very largely after the two United States banks, the charter of the last of which expired only in 1837.

From a close study one can discover both of these two systems combined in some instances. In this way we were gradually working out a national system precisely as we are today under new and vastly more varied conditions, but the war coming on, destroyed all that had been done.

You will remember that Secretary Chase, desiring to sell Government bonds for the purpose of carrying on the war, secured legislation which put a tax of 10 per cent upon all bank note issues and compelled banks desiring to issue currency to buy Government bonds as a basis of their circulation. As a result, he produced a currency of uniform appearance that was of equal value everywhere and a great blessing to the country. This condition was a very great and most agreeable change in the currency experience of the country, because there had been practically no legislation except in a few states that in any way controlled banking practices, or currency issues. The result was that we had "Blue Pup Money," "Red Dog Money," "Wild Cat Money," "Yellow Dog Money" and every other kind of "Dog Gone Money," that could be gotten up with paint and paper to fool and defraud the people. On top of this situation there arose a terrific political prejudice engendered through political controversy toward a Central Bank. The conditions brought about by the legislation, secured by Chase, have kept up the present régime until it has become so utterly intolerable, because utterly unsound economically, and so disturbing to the general welfare as to compel immediate consideration and reconstruction.

It is really the first time since the Civil War that the finances and banking of the country have become a serious question outside of the acute phases presented in the Government issues, or the Greenback craze of 1875 and the silver hallucination of 1896. Today, the question is not a specific one, or a mere detail, but one of fundamental principles and of a most comprehensive character. It involves the whole subject of governmental finance and banking and it is well that it should; for our business is so vast now, almost 50 per cent of the banking power of the world being within our borders. Our annual productions are approximately thirty-five billions. Our annual clearings will pass the fabulous mark of $170,000,000,000 (one hundred and seventy billions). So that every recurring financial disaster will be worse, if possible, than the one going before it.

MR. BANKER: Right you are, Mr. Manufacturer, and this is true because the principles involved are as fundamental and immutable as the law of gravitation; and if we persist in our folly, when dealing with these enormous volumes of credit, the destruction that is sure to follow will be on a scale with that of worlds in collision.

MR. MERCHANT: That seems to describe the situation somewhat graphically and impressively, but I must say truthfully. We are undoubtedly "up against it" as the boys say. Only the other day I was talking with a president of one of the largest national banks in the country, and he told me that unless something was done very soon, he would get out of the business, because he could not stand the strain; but the bankers' troubles are no worse than those of every business man, and it seems to me as though we were on a perpetual strain, and living in a sort of terror of what may happen at almost any time. The business atmosphere is unnatural. Certainly this cannot be necessary.

MR. LABORINGMAN: Well, I don't see anything very strange or unnatural about this thing, if it is as you have already stated that there have been no changes in your banking laws worth speaking of, since 1863. Look at your railroad development. Fifty years ago the locomotive that weighed thirty-five tons was a whopper, but now they turn them out weighing one hundred and thirty-five tons. We used to have thirty-five and fifty-pound rails, and our ties forty inches apart. Now we have a hundred-pound rail, yes, one-hundred-and-fifteen-pound rail, with the ties twenty-five inches apart. The other day, I counted one hundred cars with one hundred thousand pounds capacity each, every one loaded full in a single train. Now, what would you think of running a hundred-ton engine, and that kind of a train of cars over a railroad built fifty years ago? Ties only eight inches thick and forty inches apart, on a corresponding road-bed. Why, men, I can tell you we don't want a single-track railroad of that character now, with a switch out every ten miles to let trains pass; but we want a four-track road, with twelve to fifteen-inch ties, only twenty-five inches apart, and equipped with signal and block systems of the latest type, and most perfect automatic operation.

UNCLE SAM: Gentlemen, when it comes to getting down to brass tacks, and hitting the thing plump square between the eyes, Mr. Laboringman gets away with all of you. Now, can you beat that as an illustration of our financial and banking needs? If you will construct a banking system up-to-date, and just add to these domestic requirements the necessary provisions growing out of the fact that I am now a world power, I should have said, I am the world power, and prepare an international financial and banking system, we shall meet the demands of this new century; but otherwise I shall find myself wholly incapable of protecting the very foundation of commercial credit, my gold reserves, when the test comes.

MR. BANKER: Mr. Laboringman and Uncle Sam have laid down the right kind of a program in telling terms, if not explicit. It is clearly up to us to work out a plan as comprehensive and perfectly adapted to our needs today, as were the banking systems of Louisiana, Ohio, Indiana, Kentucky, Virginia, Iowa, Missouri and the Suffolk Banking System of New England was to the needs of those various sections of the United States at that time; for they were practically perfect from the standpoint of economic principles and the needs of those times. The principles upon which they were founded are eternal and are just as applicable today as they were then. The principles have not changed, although the conditions have, and that most amazingly.

FIFTEENTH NIGHT

OUTLINE OF BILL

UNCLE SAM: For nearly four months, for this is our fifteenth night, we have been studying the principles of economics and the practices of banking, and we have gone over with the greatest care the experiences of American banking institutions from the beginning.

No body of men could have been more faithful in attendance, nor more sincere in their desire to know the facts, and understand the fundamental principles as they are; nor more determined to get to the bottom of things; nor more ready to yield, and renounce even hoary-headed fallacies when it was demonstrated that you were wrong, than you have been.