man, then it is the business of these men who desire to transact business in South America to take care of themselves, to put their agents there, to obtain concessions there, and make their acquaintances there. There will be no trouble about it. If these thirteen men will put $25,000,000 on deposit in one bank, and put their agents in South America, and open their branches down there, and inform the people there that they have this $25,000,000 on deposit, there will be no trouble with South America accepting their bills of exchange. If any single man will put $25,000,000 on deposit in a business and will send his agents there and plant them with branch houses to transact his business there and make it known to those people that he has the actual wealth here as a basis for his business, he won't need a bank. His own checks and drafts will pay for the goods he buys there, or pay for the goods anybody buys there.

The bill itself extends the idea that the individual in the United States is not able to do anything unless the Government of the United States incorporates him and some way or other puts a sustaining hand under him and holds him up, while the rest of us engaged in individual business must fight single handed and take whatever profits we may make from our labors and maintain the national life. There is no need of extending the idea. There is no need of teaching the business of America that it is dependent upon the Government of the United States in order to succeed. You have already taught too many people in the United States that their personal welfare depends upon the sustaining hand of the Government, and that it is the Government's business to look after their business investments, their money, and their profits. There is another thing I wanted to get to. I can not recall it at this moment.

Just reconsider for a moment the first objection to it.

Mr. HILL. Would not your same argument that you are making against this apply against granting all corporate powers?

Mr. CALDERHEAD. To a greater or less extent it would.

Mr. FOWLER. I understand your objection is that it is not an act of general incorporate power-so anybody can go into it? Mr. CALDERHEAD. It is a private bank.

Mr. FOWLER. In other words, if it was a general act

Mr. CALDERHEAD. I haven't the least objection to the United States making a general law for the general charter of railroads and telegraphs under the power to regulate interstate commerce, and I say to you freely that I do not see any legal objection to that.

On the other hand, I object to the United States saying you, and you, and you, may own a single telegraph line and you shall have the support of the Government to that extent; that you shall be the Government's agent for the transmission of intelligence, and if that gives you a prestige and a profit that is your benefit, and we will confer it upon you by incorporating you. I object to that.

I object to the Government saying to any thirteen men, or any other number of men: "You may incorporate yourselves into a single bank, and have power to establish branch banks which shall be just like that single bank and be banks of deposit, and banks of discount, and be financial agents, and shall have legal power to become financial agents through the nations of the earth, if they choose to make you so, because of the prestige the charter gives you."

I object to the Government saying that, unless it says it to, and opens the opportunity to, every citizen of the United States, so that any other thirteen men in the United States who also want to become incorporated

for the same purpose may also become incorporated under the same law, subject to the same regulations and have the same opportunities. Mr. BROSIUS. You do not mean to convey the idea that this bill provides for the incorporation of thirteen men. There is no limit to the

number of men in this bill.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. No; there is no limit to the number of men, it is not a general law.

Mr. BROSIUS. It only incorporates this one bank.

but

Mr. CALDERHEAD. I named thirteen men particularly because this bill names them by name. I am giving you the words which will be thundered to the unrest and discontent of the nation-if this Congress by an act incorporates Mr. Bliss, Mr. Morgan, Mr. Coolidge, Mr. Carnegie, and Mr. Armour, and the others, men who may organize into a private bank to make discounts and transact business and to become the fiscal agents of all other nations of the earth, as well as of this nation, with the power to sell exchange, and in that sale of exchange make a profit which amounts to a tax upon the business which is transacted between this country and the other countries

Mr. HILL. Hasn't any one of these individuals the power to do that now without any charter?

Mr. CALDERHEAD. Certainly. What does he need with a charter? Mr. HILL. This: Instead of one man devoting his entire property to the transaction of this business alone the corporate power enables any number of men to go in and each contribute his mite, so that in the aggregate they can do the same thing that one man can do now. Mr. FOWLER. But could you and I do it next year?

Mr. HILL. You have a right to do it as an individual.

Mr. FOWLER (to Mr. Hill). You want me to risk my entire fortune against this aggregation of millions?

Mr. HILL. Where is the difference in the power granted between 50 men with $25,000,000 and one man with a proportionate capital?

Mr. CALDERHEAD. The difference is that you require us to go into competition with these men after they are incorporated, and we are liable for our whole property and they are not liable, except to the amount of their stock.

Mr. HILL. The amount of their stock and as much more.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. I do not see that language there which makes it double.

Mr. BROSIUS. It is in the amended bill. I thought it was there. Mr. Cox. In the argument you are making that the bill should be general and the opportunity should be open to all citizens of the United States I agree with you-in that principle; but not in the bill. If you make that bill general and confer upon all citizens of the United States the right to organize banks under that bill, then so far as that is concerned I would agree with you. You have that law and you organize your bank and we organize ours with the same rights they have. Then we have got a home bank and eight branches. It is a home bank with eight branches and an unlimited number in these foreign countries. What kind of a system have you got in the United States? Here is your national-bank law-and if the gentleman is correct, there is no distinction made between this and the national-bank law, except on the question of note issues. Then you have a curious system of banking in the United States, certainly.

Mr. FOWLER. What is the object of having eight branches?

Mr. BROSIUS. I do not know. I did not draw the bill. Mr. Hitt drew the bill.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. Because there are eight inland commercial cities

in the United States-Pittsburg, Cincinnati, and Chicago, and some others named in the bill--the very centers where business is to be done. There this bank will come into direct competition with the banks already organized, to receive their deposits and make discounts and transact business, and in addition to that have the power of transacting business in foreign countries by selling exchange there and paying the checks of foreign nations.

Mr. HILL. Why should they not have?

Mr. CALDERHEAD. Just because the thing is limited to those eight banks. Let me ask you-you named a little while ago the Park National Bank of New York. Why should you not empower the Park National Bank to do this?

Mr. HILL. I would not hesitate a minute to give them the power if they should come here and ask for it.

Mr. FOWLER. You appoint these men in this one bill to incorporate that bank. You incorporate this bank with that money power behind it and then you try to get another charter through this House, and see what a sweet time you would have doing it.

Mr. BROSIUS. You seem not to have read all that portion of section 15 which is very clear "That the shareholders of the corporation shall be held individually responsible, equally and ratably, and not one for another, for the contracts, debts, and engagements of said corporation to the extent of their stock therein at the par value thereof, in addition to the amount invested in such shares." It is a double liability.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. Yes, sir; I see now that is the language. Now let me say to you, I don't know whether it is requisite that the entire amount of stock shall be paid in before they begin to do business, but I think they commence paying in 25 per cent, and the entire stock is paid for in two years.

Mr. BROSIUS. And in any national bank the stock does not have to be paid in right away.

Mr. HENDRICK. What is the stock?

Mr. BROSIUS. $5,000,000, which may be increased to $25,000,000.

Mr. HENDRICK. Don't you think it would be dangerous to put that power in the hands of nine banks; and could they not with that vast aggregated wealth crush out competition from smaller banks by offering a lower per cent for deposits?

Mr. BROSIUS. If they could the same number of banks, organized as banks of discount and deposit, could do the same thing, and there is no restriction in the right of any man or any set of men to organize a bank of discount and deposit at any time, and any thirteen men could put $25,000,000 in a bank of that kind anywhere at any time. The only purpose in this charter, as I have said, is to give the United States control over it, so it can be kept within safely guarded and suitable restrictions looking to the safety of the deposits, and so on. That is the only object in having the charter granted by the Government of the United States Mr. CALDERHEAD Leaving aside the subscription of stock and the organization of it, it has certain powers after it is organized, as stated in that section-section 7-and in the ninth or tenth paragraph in it. Why not confer those same powers on the Park National Bank in New York and give it the power, which you give to this bank, to subscribe to the stock of banks in Brazil, Mexico, or wherever it chooses to establish branch banks; for it is equivalent to conferring upon it the power to take stock in banks in any country wherever it pleases? Why should you not empower the Park National Bank to do business in South America by establishing branches there which would give it a commercial standing there?

Mr. BROSIUS. It doesn't take stock in any bank. This institution is a unit and the stock is the stock of that unit and the stock may be purchased by anybody on earth. There is no restriction, but the directors appointed by the stockholders, who direct this institution, or two-thirds of them at least, are to be citizens of the United States. So it is always to come under the control of the United States and not be subject to foreigners.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. And if it establishes a bank at Rio de Janeiro in South America will the stockholders in the United States elect the stockholders and president of that bank?

Mr. BROSIUS. That bank will have no directors or president or officers at all except as they may be sent there from the bank in the United States..

Mr. CALDERHEAD. It is simply a part of this bank?

Mr. BROSIUS. Certainly.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. That is the same as if this bank were to move down there and undertake to do business under the charter you confer upon it here-either that or else the branch down there is an additional bank, subject to the legislation of the country where it is located and acting according to the concessions given to it there and according to the legislation of that country-that is equivalent to saying that the parent bank in New York City may be a stockholder in Brazil

Mr. BROSIUS. It is not correct speaking to say any one branch is a stockholder in any other, because the bank is not a stockholder. The individuals are stockholders.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. It is a misuse of terms, but the fact is the same. That is to say, why not permit the First National Bank of Norwalk, Conn., to own stock in the Park National Bank of New York?

Mr. HILL. The law prohibits that. But you can go to other banks and find millions of dollars invested in national banks, and the law of Connecticut says savings banks may invest in stock of national banks, and that is largely done.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. I have no objection to the State of Connecticut managing savings banks as she pleases, but when was it proposed to expose the business of this country to the risk of one national bank becoming a stockholder in another national bank?

Mr. BROSIUS. This bill does not do anything of the kind.

Mr. CALDERHEAD. It practically does. Here are eight branches in the United States, and you call them branch offices. Practically they are banks. They are receiving deposits and making discounts, transacting business, and taking risks.

Mr. HILL. You would object to the Canadian system on the same ground?

Mr. CALDERHEAD. I suspect so. I will not go into that. You incorporate a bank in New York City which is anthorized to own all the stock of eight other banks and all the stock of the banks they will establish in all the countries of the earth, and then say that it is a safe bank because it is chartered by the United States and authorized to receive deposits and make discounts. Any bank is safe that will receive deposits as long as it will keep them ready to pay back again, and it does not need a charter to be safe. But no bank is safe that is authorized to receive deposits in South America and pay them when South America permits them to be paid. All that must follow after you have made an organization of that kind. But enough on this now.

I simply wanted to call your attention to the fact that the bill incorporates, practically, thirteen men with not less than $5,000,000 capital or more than $25,000,000 capital, and it authorizes them as an exclusive

corporation to engage in the business of receiving deposits and making discounts in competition with the existing banking system in the United States-that is, do that thing in the face of the fact that one-half of the people of the United States believe the distress of this land is due to the fact that incorporated wealth already has too much power and that it has received its power by legislation. Whether that is true or not-and I do not admit it is, I make no complaint of the wealthy men of this country, for I have as much appreciation as any man with my knowledge of it of the wonderful development they have made possible and the great opportunities they are opening up in this country-I say you can not in the face of that widespread belief and distress undertake a measure of this kind, and then go home and teach the people to believe in it and to accept it at this time.

Thereupon the committee adjourned.

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY,

Washington, D. C., Wednesday, February 10, 1897.

The committee met at 10.30 a. m.

Members present: The chairman (Mr. Walker), and Messrs. Brosius, Johnson, Fowler, Lefever, Spalding, Calderhead, Hill, Cox, Stallings, and Black.

The CHAIRMAN. We have with us this morning Mr. William R. Trigg, president of the Richmond Locomotive Works, of Richmond, Va. He desires to make a statement concerning the currency situation in the South.

STATEMENT OF MR. WILLIAM R. TRIGG, OF RICHMOND, VA. Mr. Trigg addressed the committee as follows:

Mr. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE: My explanation for being before you to-day is this: The secretary of the Indianapolis Monetary Convention, Mr. B. H. Warner, was sufficiently impressed with a paper that I presented there to bring it to Washington, and through Mr. Fowler arrange that it be read to your honorable committee. It bears in the main upon the unequal distribution of the nationalbank currency, and I trust you will find it interesting and perhaps useful.

I will say now, however, that I come as a patient and not as a physi cian. I tell of the distress, and look to you for the remedy. Any recommendation I make will be only in a broad sense, and my reward will indeed be great if I inspire you with renewed intention to let nothing turn you from the work you have in hand of currency reform. I can not overstate the anxious interest of the business men of the country in your efforts.

I am the president of the Richmond Locomotive Works, of Richmond, Va., and we employ more skilled labor than any establishment south of Philadelphia. We have had upward of 1,100 men employed, and with recent additions to our plant we can handle 1,500 men.

REPEAL OF 10 PER CENT STATE BANK TAX.

The attendance upon the Indianapolis Convention was my first public service, and my appearance here is, to speak truly, simply a wonderment to me, and I ask your kind forbearance. I have concluded to read the paper just as it was written for the convention, with maybe an interpolation here and there. It is entitled "A review of the national