CHAPTER XXXI.

SPECIE BASIS FOR BANKS: ONE THIRD OF THE AMOUNT OF LIABILITIES

THE LOWEST SAFE PROPORTION: SPEECH OF MR. BENTON ON THE

RECHARTER OF THE DISTRICT BANKS.

This is a point of great moment--one on which the public mind

has not been sufficiently awakened in this country, though well

understood and duly valued in England. The charters of banks in the

United States are usually drawn on this principle, that a certain

proportion of the capital, and sometimes the whole of it, shall be

paid up in gold or silver before the charter shall take effect.

This is the usual provision, without any obligation on the bank to

retain any part of this specie after it gets into operation; and

this provision has too often proved to be illusory and deceptive.

In many cases, the banks have borrowed the requisite amount for a

day, and then returned it; in many other cases, the proportion of

specie, though paid up in good faith, is immediately lent out, or

parted with. The result to the public is about the same in both

cases; the bank has little or no specie, and its place is supplied

by the notes of other banks. The great vice of the banking system in

the United States is in banking upon paper--upon the paper of each

other--and treating this paper as cash. This may be safe among the

banks themselves; it may enable them to settle with one another, and

to liquidate reciprocal balances; but to the public it is nothing.

In the event of a run upon a bank, or a general run upon all banks,

it is specie, and not paper, that is wanted. It is specie, and not

paper, which the public want, and must have.

The motion of the senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. BUCHANAN] is

intended to remedy this vice in these District banks; it is

intended to impose an obligation on these banks to keep in their

vaults a quantum of specie bearing a certain proportion to the

amount of their immediate liabilities in circulation and deposits.

The gentleman's motion is well intended, but it is defective in

two particulars: first, in requiring the proportion to be the

one-fourth, instead of the one-third, and next, in making it apply

to the private deposits only. The true proportion is one-third, and

this to apply to all the circulation and deposits, except those

which are special. This proportion has been fixed for a hundred

years at the Bank of England; and just so often as that bank has

fallen below this proportion, mischief has occurred. This is the

sworn opinion of the present Governor of the Bank of England, and of

the directors of that institution. Before Lord Althorpe's committee

in 1832, Mr. Horsley Palmer, the Governor of the Bank, testified in

these words:

"'The average proportion, as already observed, of coin and

bullion which the bank thinks it prudent to keep on hand, is at

the rate of a third of the total amount of all her liabilities,

including deposits as well as issues.' Mr. George Ward Norman,

a director of the bank, states the same thing in a different

form of words. He says: 'For a full state of the circulation

and the deposits, say twenty-one millions of notes and six

millions of deposits, making in the whole twenty-seven millions

of liabilities, the proper sum in coin and bullion for the

bank to retain is nine millions.' Thus, the average proportion

of one-third between the specie on hand and the circulation

and deposits, must be considered as an established principle

at that bank, which is quite the largest, and amongst the

oldest--probably, the very oldest bank of circulation in the

world."

The Bank of England is not merely required to keep on hand,

in bullion, the one-third of its immediate liabilities; it is

bound also to let the country see that it has, or has not, that

proportion on hand. By an act of the third year of William IV., it

is required to make quarterly publications of the average of the

weekly liabilities of the bank, that the public may see whenever

it descends below the point of safety. Here is the last of these

publications, which is a full exemplification of the rule and the

policy which now governs that bank:

Quarterly average of the weekly liabilities and assets of the

Bank of England, from the 12th December, 1837, to the 6th of

March, 1838, both inclusive, published pursuant to the act 3 and

William IV., cap. 98:

Liabilities. Assets.

Circulation, £18,600,000 Securities, £22,792,900

Deposits, 11,535,000 Bullion, 10,015,000

----------- -----------

£30,135,000 £30,807,000

_London, March 12._

According to this statement, the Bank of England is now safe; and,

accordingly, we see that she is acting upon the principle of having

bullion enough, for she is shipping gold to the United States.

The proportion in England is one-third. The bank relies upon its

debts and other resources for the other two-thirds, in the event

of a run upon it. This is the rule in that bank which has more

resources than any other bank in the world; which is situated in

the moneyed metropolis of the world--the richest merchants its

debtors, friends and customers--and the Government of England its

debtor and backer, and always ready to sustain it with exchequer

bills, and with every exertion of its credit and means. Such a bank,

so situated and so aided, still deems it necessary to its safety

to keep in hand always the one-third in bullion of the amount of

its immediate liabilities. Now, if the proportion of one-third is

necessary to the safety of such a bank, with such resources, how is

it possible for our banks, with their meagre resources and small

array of friends, to be safe with a less proportion?

This is the rule at the Bank of England, and just as often as it has

been departed from, the danger of that departure has been proved.

It was departed from in 1797, when the proportion sunk to the

one-seventh; and what was the result? The stoppage of the banks, and

of all the banks in England, and a suspension of specie payments

for six-and-twenty years! It was departed from again about a year

ago, when the proportion sunk to one-eighth nearly; and what was the

result? A death struggle between the paper systems of England and

the United States, in which our system was sacrificed to save hers.

Her system was saved from explosion! but at what cost?--at what cost

to us, and to herself?--to us a general stoppage of all the banks

for twelve months; to the English, a general stagnation of business,

decline of manufactures, and of commerce, much individual distress,

and a loss of two millions sterling of revenue to the Crown. The

proportion of one-third may then be assumed as the point of safety

in the Bank of England; less than that proportion cannot be safe

in the United States. Yet the senator from Pennsylvania proposes

less--he proposes the one-fourth; and proposes it, not because

he feels it to be the right proportion, but from some feeling of

indulgence or forbearance to this poor District. Now, I think that

this is a case in which kind feelings can have no place, and that

the point in question is one upon which there can be no compromise.

A bank is a bank, whether made in a district or a State; and a bank

ought to be safe, whether the stockholders be rich or poor. Safety

is the point aimed at, and nothing unsafe should be tolerated.

There should be no giving and taking below the point of safety.

Experienced men fix upon the one-third as the safe proportion; we

should not, therefore, take a less proportion. Would the gentleman

ask to let the water in the boiler of a steamboat sink one inch

lower, when the experienced captain informed him that it had already

sunk as low as it was safe to go? Certainly not. So of these banks.

One-third is the point of safety; let us not tamper with danger by

descending to the one-fourth.

When a bank stops payment, the first thing we see is an exposition

of its means, and a declaration of ultimate ability to pay all

its debts. This is nothing to the holders of its notes. Immediate

ability is the only ability that is of any avail to them. The fright

of some, and the necessity of others, compel them to part with their

notes. Cool, sagacious capitalists can look to ultimate ability,

and buy up the notes from the necessitous and the alarmed. To them

ultimate ability is sufficient; to the community it is nothing.

It is, therefore, for the benefit of the community that the banks

should be required to keep always on hand the one-third of their

circulation and deposits; they are then trusted for two-thirds, and

this is carrying credit far enough. If pressed by a run, it is as

much as a bank can do to make up the other two-thirds out of the

debts due to her. Three to one is credit enough, and it is profit

enough. If a bank draws interest upon three dollars when it has but

one, this is eighteen per cent., and ought to content her. A citizen

cannot lend his money for more than six per cent., and cannot the

banks be contented with eighteen? Must they insist upon issuing four

dollars, or even five, upon one, so as to draw twenty-four or thirty

per cent.; and thus, after paying their officers vast salaries, and

accommodating friends with loans on easy terms, still make enough

out of the business community to cover all expenses and all losses:

and then to divide larger profits than can be made at any other

business?

The issuing of currency is the prerogative of sovereignty. The real

sovereign in this country--the government--can only issue a currency

of the actual dollar: can only issue gold and silver--and each

piece worth its face. The banks which have the privilege of issuing

currency issue paper; and not content with two more dollars out for

one that is, they go to five, ten, twenty--failing of course on the

first run; and the loss falling upon the holders of its notes--and

especially the holders of the small notes.

We now touch a point, said Mr. B., vital to the safety of banking,

and I hope it will neither be passed over without decision, nor

decided in an erroneous manner. We had up the same question two

years ago, in the discussion of the bill to regulate the keeping

of the public moneys by the local deposit banks. A senator from

Massachusetts (Mr. WEBSTER) moved the question; he (Mr. B.)

cordially concurred in it; and the proportion of _one-fourth_ was

then inserted. He (Mr. B.) had not seen at that time the testimony

of the governor and directors of the Bank of England, fixing on

the _one-third_ as the proper proportion, and he presumed that the

senator from Massachusetts (Mr. W.) had not then seen it, as on

another occasion he quoted it with approbation, and stated it to

be the proportion observed at the Bank of the United States. The

proportion of one-fourth was then inserted in the deposit bill;

it was an erroneous proportion, but even that proportion was not

allowed to stand. After having been inserted in the bill, it was

struck out; and it was left to the discretion of the Secretary of

the Treasury to fix the proportion. To this I then objected, and

gave my reasons for it. I was for fixing the proportion, because

I held it vital to the safety of the deposit banks; I was against

leaving it to the secretary, because it was a case in which the

inflexible rule of law, and not the variable dictate of individual

discretion should be exercised; and because I was certain that no

secretary could be relied upon to compel the banks to _toe the

mark_, when Congress itself had flinched from the task of making

them do it. My objections were unavailing. The proportion was struck

out of the bill; the discretion of the secretary to fix it was

substituted; and that discretion it was impossible to exercise with

any effect over the banks. They were, that is to say, many of them

were, far beyond the mark then; and at the time of the issuing of

the Treasury order in July, 1836, there were deposit banks, whose

proportion of specie in hand to their immediate liabilities was as

one to twenty, one to thirty, one to forty, and even one to fifty!

The explosion of all such banks was inevitable. The issuing of

the Treasury order improved them a little: they began to increase

their specie, and to diminish their liabilities; but the gap was

too wide--the chasm was too vast to be filled: and at the touch of

pressure, all these banks fell like nine-pins! They tumbled down in

a heap, and lay there, without the power of motion, or scarcely of

breathing. Such was the consequence of our error in omitting to fix

the proper proportion of specie in hand to the liabilities of our

deposit banks: let us avoid that error in the bill now before us.

Thirty Years' View (Vol. 2 of 2) or, A History of the Working of the American Government for Thirty Years, from 1820 to 1850 · 第 31 / 202 章