View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

5T C O N G R E S S \

<ST? TJ A T w

DOCUMENT

2d Session

SENATE

No. 406

/

NATIONAL MONETARY COMMISSION

AN ADDRESS
BY

SENATOR NELSON W. ALDRICH
BEFORE THE ECONOMIC CLUB OF NEW YORK
NOVEMBER 29, 1909
ON

THE WORK OF THE NATIONAL
MONETARY COMMISSION

Washington : Government Printing Office : 1910




NATIONAL MONETARY COMMISSION.

NELSON W. ALDRICH, Rhode Island, Chairman.
EDWARD B. VRBELAND, New York, Vice-Chairman.
J U L I U S C. BURROWS, Michigan.

J E S S E OVERSTREET, Indiana.

E U G E N E HAI^E, Maine.

J O H N W. W E E K S , Massachusetts.

PHILANDER C. K N O X , Pennsylvania.

ROBERT W . BONYNGE, Colorado.

THEODORE E- BURTON, Ohio.

SYLVESTER C. SMITH, California.

J O H N W . DANIEL, Virginia.

LEMUEL P . PADGETT, Tennessee.

HENRY M. TELLER, Colorado.

GEORGE F\ BURGESS, Texas.

HERNANDO D. MONEY, Mississippi.

A R S E N E P . P U J O , Louisiana.

JOSEPH W . BAILEY, Texas.

ARTHUR B . SHELTON, Secretary.




A. PIATT ANDREW, Special Assistant to Commission.

T H E WORK OF T H E NATIONAL
MONETARY COMMISSION.
Mr. A L D R I C H . Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Economic Club:
I shall ask your attention to an examination, which must
necessarily be incomplete, of some of the methods employed
in modern times in the great commercial nations of Europe
to prevent financial panics or to relieve congestion and
dangerous pressure in the money markets.
Credit furnishes a vital element in all healthy economic
life. Credit is based upon confidence; and confidence in a
monetary system rests upon belief in the strength, stability,
and efficiency of financial institutions. T o secure an
organization of capital and credit by which confidence can
be firmly established, and credit maintained under all circumstances and conditions, is the task committed to the
National Monetary Commission.
T h e immediate occasion which led to the appointment
of the commission was the financial crisis of 1907, whose
disastrous results can never be measured, and whose
destructive influences were felt throughout the world.
T h e shrinkage in the value of property and securities
which then took place, together with losses arising from a
paralysis or suspension of business, amounted to thousands
of millions of dollars. T h e country escaped by the narrowest possible margin from a total collapse of all credit and a
wholesale destruction of all values.
T o the great majority of the people of the country the
blow came without a warning. Most of our banking institutions were in excellent condition, business of every kind
was prosperous, labor was fully employed at satisfactory




3

National

Monetary

Commission

wages, industries of every kind were flourishing. Our people were full of hope and confidence for the future. Suddenly the banks of the country suspended payment, and
acknowledged their inability to meet their current obligations on demand. T h e results of this suspension were
felt at once; it became impossible in many cases to secure
funds or credit to move crops or to carry on ordinary
business operations; a complete disruption of domestic
exchanges took place; disorganization and financial embarrassment affected seriously every industry; thousands of
men were thrown out of employment, and the wages of the
employed were reduced. The men engaged in legitimate
business and the management of industrial enterprises and
the wage-earners throughout the country, who were in no
sense responsible for the crisis, were the greatest sufferers.
As an indication of its effect upon the business of the
country I will refer to the falling off in the production of
pig iron, it being understood by economists and students
that in a certain sense the production of iron and steel is a
barometer of general business conditions. T h e production
of pig iron in 1907 was, in round numbers, 25,000,000 tons,
and in 1908 it was 15,000,000 tons, or a reduction of 40 per
cent.
Possibly a corresponding reduction did not occur in all
industries and in all kinds of business, but the blight which
this crisis created was felt in nearly every household. T h e
farmer, with his crops unsold and for the time unsalable,
the men employed in all industries, alike felt its injurious
effects.
T h e crisis of 1907 was one of a series. I remember very
well—although probably few of you do—the financial crash
of 1873. I a m s u r e y ° u a ^ remember that of 1893, from
the effects of which the country did not recover for many
years. Between 1900 and 1907 we had recurring periods
of depression, of dangerous perturbations in the money




4

Address

by

Senator

A Id r i ch

market, when the Secretary of the Treasury was frantically
called upon for assistance, and felt obliged to adopt the very
questionable policy of making large deposits of public
money in banks to relieve threatening situations.
If we should undertake to measure in dollars and cents
the effects of these recurring periods of depression and of
crisis, it would be an extremely difficult task. It is evident x
however, that while our country has natural advantages
greater than those of any other, its normal growth and
development have been greatly retarded by this periodical
destruction of credit and confidence.
I believe that no one can carefully study the experience
of the other great commercial nations without being convinced that disastrous results of recurring financial crises
have been successfully prevented by a proper organization
of capital and by the adoption of wise methods of banking
and of currency.
Of course, until human nature is changed, it will not be
possible to prevent, by legislation or otherwise, periods of
overspeculation, with undue inflation of values and overextension of credit. When we consider the characteristics of
the American people, whose unrivaled energy and enterprise are not always confined by the limits of prudence, it is
certain that we in the United States shall always have
periods of speculative inflation, with the evil results which
are sure to follow. Other countries, however, have been
able to prevent disastrous panics and to confine the evil
results of overspeculation and inflation in the main to the
people directly interested—that is, to the people who have
violated the fundamental laws of business and to their
financial backers and supporters.
There has been no general suspension of banking institutions and no general destruction of credit in any of the
leading countries of Europe for more than half a century.
There have been periods when great financial institutions




5

National

Monetary

Commission

or great merchants have failed and great losses have resulted,
but at no time has there been any general suspension. It
is now believed by competent authorities that the authorized
suspension of the English bank act in 1847, I 857, and 1866
could have been avoided by the use of the modern methods
of treatment. These suspensions permitted the issue of an
unlimited amount of notes by the Bank of England, but on
only one of these occasions were any additional notes issued.
In the other cases the mere announcement of the suspension
restored confidence, and the business of the country went on.
Coming to the events of recent years, which have greater
interest for us, there has been but one occasion of serious
financial trouble in England since 1866—-the Baring failure
in 1890. T h e Baring Brothers were, as you know, one
of England's greatest merchant houses, with connections
extending throughout the world, and they had become interested in operations and speculations on an enormous scale in
the Argentine and elsewhere, which resulted in the failure of
the house. T h e prompt action of the Bank of England, in
connection with the Bank of France, the Bank of Russia, and
certain financial institutions in London, prevented any wide
extension of the difficulties. T h e Barings and their associates were the principal sufferers, and the business of the
country and of its industries and institutions went on as
usual.
T h e strength of the French system was tried in 1882
by the failure of the Union Generale, one of the great
joint-stock banks of Paris, and in 1889 by the collapse of
the copper syndicate, and the downfall of the Comptoir
d'Escompte—the oldest of the great French joint-stock
banks. But the prompt and efficient action of the Bank
of France in both cases prevented any spread of the
troubles, and the business of France went on as usual, the
only sufferers being these institutions and their immediate
friends.




6

Address

by

Senator

A Id r i ch

In 1901 the Leipziger Bank—one of the great institutions
of Germany—failed, creating consternation in Leipzig and
giving rise to trouble within an important but limited
circle. In that case the prompt and efficient intervention
of the Reichsbank prevented any spread of the difficulty,
and German interests and industries did not suffer as ours
did in the recent panic.
In calling your attention to the experience of these countries in this respect I do not wish to be misunderstood. I
do not believe, and I do not think any member of the Commission believes, that we could adopt for the United States
the system of any of these countries; certainly not without
very many material modifications. But in view of the facts
to which I have alluded, I believe that the experience of
these countries, with centuries of economic life, and where
human nature is much the same as in ours, where every
financial problem receives careful and intelligent consideration, and where vast financial transactions are constantly
taking place, should certainly be suggestive and valuable
to us. These countries—Germany especially—are second
only to the United States in industrial development and
material progress. Preliminary to an investigation of the
banking methods of the three great commercial nations,
it is necessary to consider the character of their banking
organizations. I will make my statement in this respect
as brief as possible.
T h e English system consists of the Bank of E n g l a n d ; a
number of important joint-stock banks, which do most of the
commercial business of the country; discount houses, which
occupy a unique position in the English system, being intermediaries between borrowers and the commercial banks
and between the commercial banks and the Bank of England;
merchant houses, or financing institutions; and trustee and
postal savings banks. T h e credit institutions of France
are composed of the Bank of France, the great joint-stock




7

National

Monetary

Commission

banks, like the Credit Lyonnais (which, by the way, is in
certain respects the greatest commercial bank in the world)
and the Comptoir d'Escompte; a mortgage bank, the Credit
Foncier, which is under government control, issuing its own
obligations against mortgages held by the b a n k ; promoting
or syndicate banks, like the Bank de Paris et des Pays Bas;
and cooperative, agricultural, and savings banks.
T o my mind the system of Germany is for us the most
interesting of any, because the German Empire has very
largely the same industrial and commercial interests that
we have in the United States. T h e German was the last
of these great financial systems to be reorganized, and her
financial legislation has been recently modified as a result of a
very impoitant inquiry made by a commission appointed in
1908.
We have, it is true, conditions that do not exist in Germany. For instance, we make a much greater use of checks
and other credit instruments. T h e Germans, however, realizing the importance of giving to their financial institutions
this great element of credit elasticity, are trying to encourage
their increased use. T h e German system includes the Reichsbank, and a considerable number of large joint-stock banks,
like the Deutsche Bank, the Dresdner Bank, and the DiscontoGesellschaft; the latter are commercial banks, but they also
do more or less of an underwriting or syndicate business.
T h i s syndicate or promoting business is limited to a reasonable percentage of the capital of the bank, and so far as I
have been able to discover has not produced any injurious
results. Germany has also banks of many descriptions that
were novel and very interesting to me. For instance, she
has thousands of cooperative credit societies (Genossenschaften), which have different functions from those of any
other banks that I know of elsewhere. They are something
like our mutual savings banks in that they are established
and managed by the leading citizens of the locality—farmers,




8

Address

by

Senator

A Id r i ch

teachers, or lawyers—who usually serve without compensation. They are conducted for the benefit of the members,
who are usually the small borrowers and small depositors of
the neighborhood. They take very small deposits and make
loans of very small sums. If a man wants to buy a cow, for
instance, or wants money advanced upon his crops, or for any
of the great mass of minor wants of men, a loan is made by
one of these cooperative societies. T h e y do not compete to
any great extent with the commercial banks.
In addition to these, Germany has land-mortgage banks
of different classes, some that take mortgages on urban properties and issue securities against them, and some that
perform a like service in the case of land in the country.
Germany has also a class of communal and county savings
banks, which are unique in their character. Germany has
several other classes of banks—parts of her general system—
but I shall not have the time to-night to take them up and
consider them separately. Inasmuch, however, as we propose to give an accurate description of all of them in the
literature which we shall soon publish on this subject, I
hope they will receive your careful consideration.
T h e Germans have given great attention—as they do
to every detail of all subjects of public interest—to the
character and organization of their various financial institutions. These different institutions are all parts of a comprehensive system, and all depend absolutely upon the
Reichsbank for reserves and for assistance in time of
trouble. T h e continued existence of the entire financial
structure of each of these countries depends upon the
strength of its central institution and upon the wisdom of
its management.
T h e suggestions which I shall make to-night with reference to methods employed to relieve conditions of panic
do not involve any examination of the functions of any of
these different institutions, except the central banks and
the joint-stock banks of deposit and discount.
30657—10




2

9

National

Monetary

Commission

I will first ask your attention to the character of the central institutions. T h e central banks of these countries are
not altogether alike, yet they are not unlike. They have
many characteristics in common. T h e principal functions
of these banks are not defined by legislative acts. T h e y
are the outgrowth of centuries of experience, and have
been essentially modified from time to time through a
process of evolution to meet existing requirements, until
it may be fairly said that their most important features are
such as it has been found necessary to adopt within the last
generation, to answer the demands of modern conditions.
For instance, many of the great functions of the Bank of
England to-day concern matters not referred to in the discussions which preceded the adoption of the Peel Act in
1844. T h e position occupied by the great central banks,
their duties and obligations (which they are not always
willing to acknowledge in a public way), with reference to
sustaining public credit, and their responsibilities to the
public and to other banks, in always having available an
adequate gold reserve, are of recent origin. To me by far
the most interesting phase of our foreign examinations was
the personal inquiry made of the actual managers of these
great banks, for the purpose of ascertaining the precise
details of the practical workings of their institutions. And
I must say, in passing, that the representatives of the commission received the greatest possible courtesy from the
managers of all these great banks; especially from the Governor of the Bank of England, Mr. Campbell, now retired,
and his associates, and from M. Pallain, the Governor of the
Bank of France. T h e Bank of France has been extremely
fortunate in the past in the character of its managers, but
never more fortunate than in the person of the present
incumbent of the office of Governor. M. Pallain was most
courteous to us, helping us in every possible way, not only
in his own country, but through his influence with the
representatives of other countries. T h e official managers of




10

Address

by

Senator

A Idr i c h

the Reichsbank in Berlin also furnished us with the fullest
information as to the practical workings of their bank, and
of the German system.
T h e central banks of these countries are all private
banks—that is, the governments have no ownership or
interest in their shares. T h e provisions for the control
and management of the respective banks differ widely.
T h e management of the Bank of England is in the hands
of 24 directors, selected largely from merchants—no bankers, in their sense of the word, being eligible for the position—and these, including the governor and deputy governor, elected by the directors from their own number, have
control of the business of the Bank.
With regard to the Bank of England, I have frequently
been asked why such an institution, serving as it does a
limited territory, and doing the business of a small island,
should require one hundred millions of capital, and why
the success of this bank could be construed as a guaranty
of the efficiency of a similar bank in a country with a greater
area and more extensive business. I think the answer is
obvious. T h e Bank of England not only sustains the credit
and holds the reserve of the banks and the people of England, but it is the center of the financial system of the entire
British Empire, with its four hundred millions of population and with connections and affiliations extending around
the world. Not only this, but its friends say, and I must
confess with great truth, that the Bank of England is to-day
the financial center and clearing house of the world. We
know that sterling bills drawn on London are still the
highest form of commercial credit. These bills sell at a
lower rate in Paris, in Berlin, in Amsterdam, and New
York than any other form of commercial credit. T h e Bank
of England reaches a larger territory than any other institution in the world and serves financial interests that are
exceeded in importance and amount only, if at all, by those
of the United States.




11

National

Monetary

Commission

T h e governor and the two deputy governors of the Bank
of France are appointed by the chief of state. T h e governor
of the Bank of France directs the general policy of the bank.
T h e two hundred largest shareholders elect eighteen regents
and censors who have functions of limited importance.
T h e Reichsbank is managed by the directorium, consisting
of a president, vice-president, and 7 directors, appointed by
the Emperor. T h e stockholders elect a central committee
of 15 members with limited advisory powers. Except as to
its ownership, the bank is in effect a government institution
under the control and management of expert bankers.
T h e earnings of these banks are not excessive, and as
their charters have been renewed from time to time, conditions have been imposed for the purpose of bringing
about a greater restriction of profits or a more satisfactory division with the state. In Germany, after 3 ^ per
cent is paid to the stockholders, the Government receives
three-quarters of the net earnings, so that the net income is
divided between the state and the proprietors of the bank.
Neither the Bank of England nor the Bank of France is
required to divide directly its profits with the state, but an
indirect division takes place. T h e amount of payments to
the Government by the banks for franchises, and for taxes,
direct or otherwise, varies greatly. T h e Bank of England
pays for these purposes annually about $1,200,000. In
France general and special taxation for various purposes is
levied by an intricate system, but the figures furnished
to us show that it amounts to practically one-third of the
net earnings of the bank, and this has been true for a series
of years. In Germany about two-thirds of the actual profits
go to the Government on the division to which I have
referred. In 1907 the German Government received as its
portion of the profits about $8,400,000. All of these banks
have close fiscal relations with their respective Governments.
Each is made the sole depository of government funds, and
all payments of public moneys, for ordinary expenditures or




12

Address

by

Senator

A Id r i ch

interest on the public debt, are made through the banks.
They are also required to render further service to the Government by acting as agents for the various departments.
In the main, it may be said that the relations of these institutions to the financial operations of their respective Governments is largely similar to that occupied by the United
States Treasury with reference to our Government. These
services are rendered, in the case of France and Germany,
without compensation; I mean without direct compensation.
Each of these institutions is, in a large sense, a bank of
banks. About 65 per cent of the business of the Reichsbank comes through other banks. T h e Bank of France
receives about 70 per cent of its entire business from other
banking institutions. T h e statement of the Bank of England does not furnish any information upon this subject.
As a matter of fact, as I have already stated, whatever business comes from the banks to the Bank of England, except
deposit accounts, comes through the discount houses, and not
direct. T h e banks also differ greatly in the average amounts
of their deposits and in the amount of their discounts and
loans. T h e direct commercial business of all the central
banks is comparatively unimportant.
T h e banks also differ as to the character of the commercial paper, or bills of exchange, which they accept for discount. T h e Bank of England requires at least two good
British names, of which one must be the acceptor. T h e Bank
of France requires three solvent names, of which two must
be residents of France. T h e Reichsbank requires the names
of at least two solvent persons. In France, collateral is
accepted in place of the third name. Generally speaking,
these bills represent actual transactions and are not what are
known as finance or accommodation bills.
T h e average duration of bills discounted in England is from
forty to fifty days; in France, twenty-four days; and in Germany, thirty-three days. T h e maximum duration of bills
discounted in England is four months, and in exceptional




13

National

Monetary

Commission

cases six months; in France, three months, with a possible
renewal in exceptional cases; in Germany, three months,
with renewal in case of farmers. Foreign nomenclature for
paper of this kind is entirely different from ours. They do
not use promissory notes in their usual banking transactions.
In the case of a sale by a merchant or manufacturer on credit
or time, the seller makes a draft on the purchaser upon the
terms agreed upon, usually thirty, sixty, or ninety days, and
the purchaser accepts the draft. This acceptance becomes a
domestic bill of exchange, or a domestic bill as it is usually
called. A bank may arrange with a merchant or an operator
to accept his bills for a commission. This acceptance becomes a prime bill, and is discounted at the lowest rate by
other banking institutions. All drafts drawn upon or by
foreign houses or banks are known as foreign bills. Trade
bills cover ordinary commercial transactions and finance
bills cover accommodation loans. Domestic bills, which
answer the requirements I have named of the central banks,
are known as bankable bills, as they are accepted for rediscount under proper conditions.
No one of these central institutions is a commercial bank
in the ordinary sense of the word; and usage is bringing
about a further delimitation of their powers in this respect.
They pay no interest on deposits. They are not in any
general sense competitors with the banks of deposit and
discount.
These central banks hold practically the entire specie
reserves of all the banks and other financial institutions of
their respective countries. T h e Bank of England holds on
an average a reserve of about 45 per cent of its entire liabilities, the Bank of France holds about 70 per cent of its
demand obligations in specie, and the Reichsbank holds a
specie reserve of from 40 to 50 per cent of its current deposit obligations. With an annual gold production approximating $440,000,000, and with a constant increase of the
world's stock of gold, there is a marked tendency to increase




14

Address

by

Senator

A Idr i c h

the specie reserves of all the great banks of the world.
When we consider the rapid growth of the world's business
and the extent of the banking transactions based upon these
reserves, the necessity for their protection and maintenance
under all circumstances becomes apparent.
T h e great difference between foreign banking systems
and our own is found in the concentration and mobilization of reserves, which is the distinctive feature of the
European systems. Confidence that the management of
these great central banks will at all times, in prosperity
and in adversity, maintain reserves adequate to protect the
interests of all their people, and to sustain public and private
credit, gives to these foreign systems impregnable strength.
In this connection it is important to examine the methods
adopted by the central banks to protect their reserves and
to increase their holdings of gold when necessary. T h e
means usually and successfully relied upon for these purposes is to advance the bank rate of discount high enough
to attract gold from other countries. As in the case of
commodities, gold follows the law of supply and demand;
and if England bids more for gold than France or Germany she secures it. For example, in 1907 the Bank of
England rapidly raised its rate of discount from 4 to 7
per cent. Mr. Campbell, the Governor of the Bank, told
us the result was that gold came into the vaults of
the Bank from 24 different countries, including British
colonies. This enabled the Bank of England to protect its
reserves and to furnish a large amount of gold for shipment
to the United States. T h e power of the Bank of England
to afford relief in all cases is extraordinary when we consider
that the specie reserves of the Bank do not usually exceed
$160,000,000. I asked the question, " W h a t would have
happened if the 7 per cent rate had not been effective ? "
T h e answer was, " We should have advanced the rate up to
10 per cent if necessary and 10 per cent will bring gold out
of the earth."




15

National

Monetary

Commission

T h e answer was intended, of course, merely as an indication of the power of a country that has credit and unlimited resources to bring gold to its coffers.
In recent years—certainly for nearly half a century—there
has been no failure of this method to protect and increase
the gold reserve of the great European banks.
It is true that use is made at times of collateral influences.
It is now the policy of the central banks, which, I think, is
very generally approved, to hold short-time foreign bills to a
considerable amount, and this custom has been found very
helpful in protecting gold reserves in emergencies. T h e
central banks also allow interest on gold in transit from
distant points. But the main reliance has been upon an
advance of the bank rate, and this method has been found
uniformly successful in recent times. T h e policy of charging a premium for gold or of refusing to pay gold on demand
by indirect but effective means is no longer defended by
leading authorities.
In this connection we should also consider the practice
of the joint-stock banks with reference to their own reserves.
T h e question of the character and extent of the reserves of
these banks, as well as those of the central banks, is left
entirely to the judgment and discretion of the managers of
these institutions, and no attempt is made by legislation to
exercise any control over this important feature of banking
practice.
T h e joint-stock banks do a very large proportion of the
ordinary commercial business of the several countries. T h e
Bank of England, for example, rarely holds over $ i 50,000,000
in bills discounted and securities of all kinds. When we
consider how small a proportion this is of the vast business
of Great Britain we shall realize that the large commercial
joint-stock banks control practically the entire commercial
business of that great kingdom.
T h e joint-stock banks hold practically no specie reserve.
In making statements of their condition they report the




16

Address

by

Senator

A Id r i c h

amount of their "cash in hand and at b a n k " in one item,
which represents the only cash reserves of the institutions.
T h e cash on hand is not stated separately, and no amount
of persuasion would induce them to segregate these
amounts. As a matter of fact all of these banks hold in
their own vaults only what we would call "till money,"
and this sum rarely if ever exceeds 3 or 4 per cent of their
deposit liabilities. T h e men who manage these banks
assert that a credit at the cefitral bank is better and safer
for their purposes than a corresponding amount in their
own possession. W e were told that it is the habit of the
large banks to estimate the amount of money needed in their
ordinary transactions from day to day, and this amount is
withdrawn from the central bank and constitutes practically
the only amount of cash on hand in any of the institutions.
T h e amount of "cash in hand and at the bank," taking the
two together, averages about 14 or 15 per cent of the
current liabilities of the London Clearing House banks
which report once a month.
T h e joint-stock banks, however, have a secondary reserve
in " money at call and at short notice." In London this
money is largely loaned to discount houses on bankable bills
and to merchants and others on stock exchange and similar
securities. T h e banks usually hold on an average about 15
to 20 per cent of their liabilities in this secondary reserve.
In addition, the English banks usually hold for investment
purposes government securities equal at least to their capital
and surplus. T h i s rule does not apply to continental banks,
however. All the joint-stock banks hold a very important
reserve in their short-time bankable bills. T h e fact that
these can always be used for rediscount gives to them the
greatest possible value as an available reserve. In fact,
usage has given to them almost a legal-tender quality.
It is the policy of the joint-stock banks in times of stress
to strengthen their reserves by increasing their balances
at the central bank. T h i s is usually done by direct or




17

National

Monetary

Commission

indirect rediscount of their bankable bills. By this process
they are enabled to transform at once into a reserve an
asset which otherwise has no value in this regard. It enables
these institutions to extend credit to deserving customers
to the amount of four to ten times the sum thus added to
their reserves.
T h i s description of the functions and processes of the
European central and joint-stock banks will enable us to
arrive at a better understanding of the methods employed
by these institutions to furnish relief when financial trouble
is apprehended or panicky conditions exist.
T h e general policy adopted in times of apprehension or
distress is for the central institution to strengthen its
reserves by the use of methods which I have described and
at the same time to extend credit liberally to everyone
whose solvency and condition entitles him to receive it. It
is this simultaneous strengthening of reserves and extension
of credits which gives potency and effect to the modern
system of dealing with periods of distrust. T h e fact that
in modern times the means which I have described have not
failed to afford relief, to allay excitement, to restore confidence and credit in times of threatened or real trouble can
not but create a profound impression upon all who are
honestly seeking a solution of our monetary problems.
In this country we have adopted precisely the opposite
policy. For instance, we have a law governing national
banks, which requires, in central reserve cities, a lawful
money reserve of 25 per cent of outstanding deposit liabilities. Although we may assume that these reserves were
created for emergency purposes, when the emergency arises
and a bank seeks to use its reserves it is forbidden to do so.
Under no circumstances may it reduce its reserves below
25 per cent. If the reserve is 2 4 ^ per cent, not only is
further use prohibited, but the bank must stop all discounts, all extensions of credit. It makes no difference
how much a customer needs a loan, what his credit is, or




18

Address

by

Senator

A Idr i ch

what his collateral may be. Possibly his business salvation, the savings of a life, or the accumulation of generations are imperiled. I think it is not necessary for me to
enlarge upon the absurdity of this system.
T h e success of the European systems is based upon the
policy of using reserves promptly and fully in cases of
emergency. T a k e the case of the Bank of England. It
matters not whether the use suggested is in London, Birmingham, Liverpool, or in Australia; the reserve can be
drawn upon, as water is drawn from a great reservoir in
order to put out a fire before it becomes a conflagration,
and before the time when the application of water would
be as useless as if it were poured into the ocean.
T h e European banks take these matters at their inception,
and, by means of a concentration of reserves, they are ready
at any minute to furnish the necessary means and the necessary credits to prevent disasters such as those we have suffered, and from which we shall continue to suffer unless we
do something to reorganize and strengthen our financial
system.
T h e question of note issues, the manner of their issue,
and their use in the extension of credits and to meet unusual demands is an important one in this connection.
T h e Bank of England is allowed to issue notes against
government securities to the extent of about $90,000,000,
and any further issue must be covered by specie.
The
note issue of England has varied but little from 1844
to the present time. While the business of England and
of the British Empire has doubled and quadrupled and
multiplied, I do not know how many fold in that time, the
amount of note issues has remained substantially the same.
T h e great use of checks and other instruments of credit,
to which the people of England are accustomed, seems to
render the enlarged use of notes unnecessary. I n France
notes are issued without any restriction except as to amount;
but under the policy and practice of the Bank of France its




19

National

Monetary

Commission

notes are practically coin certificates. For the ten years
ending in 1908 the Bank of France held in specie an average of 83.5 per cent of its outstanding note issues. Against
an uncovered issue of, say, $100,000,000, the Bank of
France held in round numbers one hundred and forty
millions of bankable bills. T h e Reichsbank is authorized
to issue untaxed notes, first to the amount of specie and
government notes and notes of other banks which it holds;
second to the amount of an arbitrary sum, known as the
" contingent," which now is fixed at about $130,000,000.
This contingent has been recently increased upon the
recommendation of the bank inquiry commission from
$118,000,000 to $130,000,000, with a further increase on
settlement days at the end of the quarters to $178,500,000.
T h e amount of this contingent, you will notice, is at most
only about $3 per capita for Germany, a rather inconsiderable sum when you think of the $35 per capita
which we have in the United States. Any notes issued
in excess of the aggregate of these amounts are taxed
by the Government at the rate of 5 per cent. All notes
issued by the Reichsbank, taxed or untaxed, must be covered
by one-third of the amount in specie or government notes
and two-thirds in bills of exchange of the character I have
described. T h e redeemability of the notes in each of the
great banks is amply secured by legal provisions and limitations. Perhaps I should say in passing that there are a few
banks in England which have retained the right of issue
since 1844. Their notes, however, amount to but a fraction
of 1 per cent of the total issues of the Bank of England.
There are also certain state banks in Germany—the Bank
of Bavaria, the Bank of Saxony, and two others—that have
retained the right of issue given them under the bank act
of 1875. But the outstanding notes of these banks amount
to only 3 ]/2 per cent of the total note issue of the Empire.
I n each of these countries we found that the monopoly of
note issues by central banks meets with universal approval




20

Address

by

Senator

Aldrich

from all classes. I think there can be no dissent from the
statement. In the discussions which recently took place in
Germany, and in those in Belgium at the time of the last
extension of the charter of the Bank of Belgium, all classes,
socialists, agrarians, and others, approved fully the policy of
confining note issues to one central bank of issue.
T h e average fluctuations in the amount of notes outstanding from time to time differ considerably in these three
countries. In England, where the volume of note issues is
practically constant, the element of elasticity of issue, which
in Germany and France is met by recurring enlargements
and contractions in the volume of notes, is met by changes
in the volume of checks and other credit instruments, and
the amount of credits given by the Bank of England and
other banking institutions.
It is apparent that if we are to profit by the experience
of other countries, if there is anything in their methods
that may be of advantage to us, there are only two systems
of note issue to be considered—one, by a central bank under
government control or restrictions, and the other the Scotch
system, the main features of which have also been adopted
by Canada.
T h e uniformity of opinion with reference to the wisdom
of a unification of issues is not shared by the Scotch bankers,
nor, I think, by Scotchmen in general. Those who believe
in a central bank of issue insist that the Scotch system of
eight banks with 1,200 branches is not adapted to the
wants of a great commercial country, and is of necessity a
provincial system.
T h e Scotch note issue is at present based first upon a fixed
amount of uncovered notes equal to the outstanding issues
in 1845. ^ n e total amount of these is about ^2,700,000, or
$2.76 per capita, and beyond this limited uncovered issue the
law provides that all emissions shall be covered by specie.




21

National

Monetary

Commission

T h e Scotch banks depend upon the Bank of England for
their specie and for support in times of trouble, as fully as do
the English banks.
London sends to Scotland periodically a considerable
amount of gold, which is often held there only long enough
to enter into the accounts of the Scotch banks, and is then
returned to London, sometimes in the original packages.
A considerable proportion of the large Scotch industrial
houses keep regular accounts in London, and the principal
Scotch banks have branches in London.
I do not mean to underrate the merits of the Scotch
system. It has been impressed upon me there are no better
bankers in the world than the Scotch; they have an individuality and vigor in expression and action which are
admirable. Nowhere does the personal equation stand for
more. Aside from the manner of note issue the distinguishing feature of their system is a method of cash credits
by which a farmer or small trader in any part of Scotland,
with one or two of his neighbors as guarantors, can establish a banking credit for a fixed sum. T h e bank honors
his drafts for any amount within this limit, and the customer pays interest only upon the sums actually drawn.
There can be no question that this system has been of
benefit in developing the rural communities of Scotland.
T h e development of this system, however, has been
along lines that are unlike any that appeal to American
spirit.
It is conceded that the Scotch system depends largely upon
an elaborate system of branches, which is not applicable, in
my opinion, to the United States. T h e eight banks of
Scotland are practically one bank. T h e managers of the
principal banks, living in Edinburgh or Glasgow, meet
frequently to fix the rate of discount on loans and the
amount of interest to be allowed on deposits. Every
particular of importance in banking operations or with




22

Address

by

Senator

A Idr i c h

reference to note issues is fixed by agreement of this
informal organization for defense and protection.
T h e rate of interest charged by the Scotch banks is
one-half of i per cent higher, on an average, than for the
equivalent service in England.
Scotch methods, while admirable in their surroundings,
have little value in considering the requirements of this
great country.
T h e Canadian system, which is largely based on the
Scotch idea, has many intelligent and persistent advocates
in the United States. It is certain that this system should
and will receive careful attention. Members of the commission have made personal investigations in Canada, and
these have been supplemented and extended by the valuable
information contained in the volumes referred to in our list
of publications.
Canada has 29 banks with about 2,000 branches. They
are practically controlled by the Bankers' Association, a
legalized institution with certain definite functions. T h e
control of the banks, however, is not always under authority
conferred by law, or even by the constitution and by-laws
of the association, but by agreements for mutual protection,
which are equally effective. Through this efficient business arrangement the banks of Canada are controlled as
thoroughly as the Scotch bankers control the banking system of Scotland. T h e Bank of Montreal is practically the
central bank of Canada, but Canadian banks also habitually
carry large balances in New York and London, and in times
of need rely for support upon those financial centers.
Canada has an area about equal to that of the United
States. Out of her 29 banks, 19 are located in Toronto or
Montreal, and the whole system is controlled by the bankers
of these cities. There are but 3 banks, and those not
important, in the vast country west of Ontario. T h i n k what
the American system would be, and how it would be
regarded, if we had but two or three banks west of Buffalo,




23

National

Monetary

Commission

and if the bankers of New York and Boston should decide
upon the policy and the rate of discount of the whole
system of the United States!
Competent authorities base the success of the Canadian system upon their extensive use of branches. Of
course, I realize that there are in this country a great
many intelligent men who think we ought to have a
system of branch banking like the Canadian; but unless
I greatly mistake the character of the American people
that will not be possible. In my judgment any system
which is to be adopted in this country must recognize the
rights and the independence of the 25,000 separate banks
in the United States.
Of course, you realize that in banking, as in everything
else, the personal equation must always remain one of the
most important elements to be considered. T h e men who
deposit in or borrow from small country banks, or banks
in the large towns, who have been accustomed to dealing
with men who are their neighbors and friends who have
a sympathetic appreciation of their wants, will not be
willing to consent that legislation shall authorize the displacing of such banks by agents sent from the banks of New
York or Chicago to conduct the business of these smaller
communities; men whose first interest—I am almost tempted
to say whose only interest—would be the earning of the
most money they could for their principals, and who would
naturally have very little, if any, concern for the development of the communities in which they were located. So
I think I may say with certainty that any new system or
organization we may adopt must be engrafted upon that now
existing. We can not impair the usefulness of existing
banks, or take away from them any of their functions. If
we are to have an organization outside of them, and outside
of the present organization of clearing houses, it must be
one that will be the servant and not the master of existing organizations. We must first consider existing condi-




24

Address

by

Senator

A Id r i c h

tions. We must remember that after all monetary science
is not an exact science. Political economy has no laws
applicable to every community and under all circumstances.
T h a t system is best for any country which best responds to
the needs and requirements of its people.
Your President has alluded to the fact that he is not sure
whether I have a plan or not. I have a plan which I will
mention a little later; but at present I may say that the
Commission has not yet taken up or considered the question
as to the proper system to be adopted by the United States;
and they will not take up that question for consideration
until the case is fully presented to the American people, and
we can secure their judgment and their cooperation in the
adoption of a plan which we trust will be for the benefit of
the entire country.
I have had occasion to say a number of times in the last
two weeks that so far as I am concerned, if I were given a
blank sheet of paper, with absolute authority to write upon
it the terms and conditions of a banking and currency bill
which I thought should be adopted by the United States, I
could not do it. Eighteen months ago I thought I had
some knowledge of this subject. I had been studying these
questions for thirty years; but the subject is so vast; it
involves so many collateral questions, which are intricate
and complex in their character, that it would not be possible
for me, or for any man, without more careful study than I
have been able to give the question, to determine what
plan should be adopted.
I have approached this question—and I know that in this
regard I speak for every member of the Commission—with
an absolutely open mind. And I have only one request to
make of the people of the United States—that they also
keep their minds open until this case can be fully presented
to them.
I have been greatly gratified by the fact that on every
hand thoughtful men have refrained from expression of




25

National

Monetary

Commission

opinion upon this subject, and have been willing to await
an examination of the information which we are to furnish,
and which is included in the printed list of our publications submitted to you to-night.
I realize, perhaps more fully than any of you, the difficulties which will confront us in the construction of any
plan. I think it was McLeod who said that the study of
monetary questions is one of the great causes of insanity.
We shall have to deal with men reasonably sane on other
subjects, but whose insanity on this is apparent to all. W e
shall be confronted with objections from different classes
of men; one cocksure that they know now just what
system should be adopted and equally certain that no other
plan is possible; another, demagogues who are attracting
public attention to themselves by their incoherent utterances made expressly for self-exploitation.
We shall also be confronted with people who will insist
that this subject is so great and surrounded by so many
difficulties that it is impossible to do anything with i t ; that
we must sit down and meekly submit to whatever evil
results may follow from obsolete methods. Now, I greatly
mistake the temper and intelligence of the American people
if a decision and settlement of this question can be long delayed. It means too much. It is of too vital interest to every
person in the United States to tolerate unnecessary delay.
It is said we will not be able to solve this question on account
of differences which will arise with reference to claims of
localities; for instance, as between New York and Chicago,
or Chicago and the large cities of the Mississippi Valley.
Now, this question will not be settled satisfactorily until it
is settled from a national standpoint. I believe fully in the
solidarity of interest between all sections and all the people
of the United States. You can not have continuous prosperity in New York and adversity in Chicago, or prosperity
in Chicago and adversity in New York. W h a t affects one
section necessarily affects another.




26

Address

by

Senator

Aldrich

It is said we shall encounter political objections, that no
organization which we may suggest can be adopted on
account of political prejudices of the past or of the present.
Criticisms are made of the First and Second banks of the
United States. I know of no one who would for a moment
think of suggesting a system or look to the adoption of
an organization at all like either the First or Second Bank
of the United States. Conditions have entirely changed
since their day. There are a dozen banks in New York,
and many in other parts of the country, that are more important in their operations and in their character than either
of those banks. Present conditions necessitate entirely
different treatment. I have the utmost confidence in the
intelligence and ultimate good judgment of the American
people, and I believe if it should be thought wise by the
commission, supported by the consensus of intelligent opinion of the people of the United States, to adopt any system,
that neither the political prejudice of the past nor the ghost
of Andrew Jackson, that great man who died many years
ago, will stand in the way. T h e best interests of the people
of the United States are more important than political
memories.
T h e task in which we are engaged, and in which you
must be engaged, is too important in its results—it means
too much for us to think for a moment that any organization could be adopted or would be adopted that might be
subject to political manipulation at any time.
No one of the great European banks I have described
has ever been influenced in its action by any political party,
and no such charge has ever been made. T a k e the case of
the Bank of France, for instance. T h e Bank of France was
organized by the first Napoleon, and a provision was put into
its charter that the governor of the bank should be appointed
by the chief of state ; not by Emperor or K i n g or President,
but by the chief of state.




27

National

Monetary

Commission

Now, the Bank of France has always been from that day
to this the Bank of France indeed—the bank of the people
of France—sustaining her credit, upholding her honor. N o
ministry and no party could afford to ignore for a moment
this great fact. It would result in the dismissal of any
ministry or the overthrow of any party which undertook
for a moment to influence the action of this great institution adversely to the public interests. T h e Bank of France
has gone on under emperor, under king, under revolutionary government, and under the Republic—always the
bank of the state and the bank of the people of France.
Why, in the time of the Commune notes of the Bank of
France were current, and the premium on gold in Paris
was less than the premium on currency in New York in
1907, showing something of the character of this great institution, which has a place in the heart of every Frenchman
that is absolutely unique.
When I was in Paris last year I met a grandson of one of
Napoleon's great marshals, who was then investigating the
early history of the Bank of France, and who had in his possession a dispatch sent by Napoleon from the field of Austerlitz, just after the battle, in which he called the attention
of the representative of the Bank of France to the fact that
the success and permanence of that institution were of
equal or even greater consequence, in his opinion, to the
people of France than the victories he was achieving on the
field of battle.
I realize, however, that it is already sought by means of
political influences to discredit any action of this Commission. I know also that professional writers are busy erecting creatures of shreds and patches in this great field of
discussion for the sole purpose, apparently, of furnishing
themselves amusement in pulling them apart, limb by limb,
and calling attention to the fact that after all they are not
men of life and action.




28

Address

by

Senator

A Idr ic h

I have said I have a plan. I have a plan which was suggested by the ambassador to France, who has just addressed
you—a plan, or I should more properly say a firm purpose
to find a plan, to make the United States the financial
center of the world, a position she is entitled to by virtue
of her resources, her vast accumulations of wealth, and her
surplus capital.
We shall, of course, expect criticism of any plan we may
recommend. Honest criticism is the best thing we can
possibly have if we are to secure wise results. I am confident that when we do reach a conclusion—which can not
be for many months yet—we shall have the cooperation of
the economists and business men of this great financial
metropolis. If we do not have it, it will be because you
fail to respond to our earnest appeal to you for your assistance in the solution of this great problem. I shall be
greatly disappointed if your response is not along the line
of a sincere and patriotic cooperation.




29