Mr. JOHNSON. Your people would accept with alacrity and satisfaction, would they not, such a revision of the national-bank system as would overcome these objections?

Mr. TRIGG. Yes, sir. We have no objection to that

Mr. JOHNSON. And you are not contending so much for State banking as you are for relief by some properly devised system. Am I right? Mr. TRIGG. Yes, sir. Let me say

The CHAIRMAN. The only relief, you say, is to repeal the 10 per cent tax.

Mr. TRIGG. Yes, sir, in my judgment; with or without qualification. Mr. JOHNSON. And you would just as lief have that relief from a national authority as State authority?

Mr. TRIGG. Oh, yes; we do not care where we get it?

Mr. BROSIUS. So you get enough of it.

Mr. TRIGG. And we want it to be good. I was going to cite an experience.

Mr. Cox. Right there, Mr. Trigg

A RAILROAD TICKET CURRENCY.

Mr. TRIGG. I wish to say this, Mr. Cox. Going to South Carolina in 1873 to collect some $3,000 due the Richmond and Danville Railroad by the Charlotte, Columbia and Augusta Railroad, I found the people along the line of the road "fattening and battening" on what they called a "fare ticket." It looked exactly like a greenback and read, "The bearer of this is entitled to ride 20 miles over the Charlotte, Columbia and Augusta Railroad" and "Good for $1 in payment of freights and fares to the company," and was signed by the president.

Now, as crude as this was, it was the best the people had, and they were making and marketing their crops with it, and a suit from the Government under the 10 per cent tax law only stopped it. From that day to this the people have had nothing but silver offered them, and it is no wonder that they espouse it.

Mr. HILL. But a judgment day would come after awhile.

Mr. TRIGG. Possibly. I am speaking of the extremity of the people. Mr. BROSIUS. You mean to illustrate the necessity for money in that country.

Mr. TRIGG. Yes; the South Carolinians would in time, and in a very short time, have substituted something much better for the "fare ticket," had they been permitted to do so. I carried one of those notes home-two, in fact, a one-dollar and a five dollar note-to show Colonel Buford, who was president of the Richmond and Danville Railroad, thinking to use them ourselves; but he said, "The Government will not allow that; they will jump on them for a 10 per cent tax." And sure enough they did; they made the Charlotte and Augusta Railroad perspire on account of putting this money out, and they have never had any money to speak of in South Carolina since.

AMOUNT OF CURRENCY NEEDED IN RICHMOND.

Mr. FOWLER. I want to ask a question in line with what Mr. Johnson said, and it is this, Will you tell me how much bank capital there is in Richmond?

Mr. TRIGG. I think not as much as before the war. make it $5,000,000, capital and surplus.

Suppose you

Mr. FOWLER. How much money, assuming that all the rest of the State was supplied in the same way-how much money, currently issued in Richmond, if you have a capital of $5,000,000, do you think would supply your need?

Mr. TRIGG. I think if we had $1,000,000 of currency in that vicinity it would make us blossom like the rose.

Mr. FOWLER. So that 20 per cent of your capital would virtually supply your local needs?

Mr. TRIGG. Oh, yes, and all the country. You understand that is in the Richmond neighborhood; I will tell you what I mean about that. The CHAIRMAN. That is what I wanted you to do.

Mr. TRIGG. I maintained in some other papers-I hunted up everything when I found I was coming here, and you can understand my consideration for you, gentlemen, in withholding some of them-that, of course, agriculturists need more money than others.

Mr. FOWLER. Do you understand the question? I said if every other part of the State, through its banks, gave to the different communities the same proportion of currency as Richmond itself was giving to its own people-you have $5,000,000-would 50 per cent of that banking capital furnish you ample means for transacting your business? Mr. TRIGG. Oh, I should think so.

EFFECT OF REPEAL ON THE SILVER QUESTION.

Mr. Cox. I want to go back to another subject. I am with you on the 10 per cent repeal, understand.

Mr. TRIGG. You are not going to get it without qualification.

Mr. Cox. Let me draw your attention now to a question I have in mind. I see in some of the States, from your statement that you have made, that the per capita circulation-for instance, take Tennesseeruns down to about 72 cents.

Mr. TRIGG. Seventy-five cents.

Mr. Cox. Yes. Take our people in the South. Your country is very much like mine. It has the same class of people in business and all have been through the war. If we were to repeal the 10 per cent tax on State banks, what is your judgment as to the effect it would have on the public mind in the South in regard to the free coinage of silver? Mr. TRIGG. My first use of that statement was to send it to a New York paper and say that I did not believe there would be a corporal's guard of silver men in the South if we had currency relief.

Mr. FOWLER. What, in your judgment, would be the effect on the Southern States in regard to their views on the silver question if you repeal the 10 per cent tax on State banks? Would it not, in your judgment, make the silver sentiment largely die out?

Mr. TRIGG. I wish to say that when I first prepared this statement showing the unequal distribution of currency, as already stated, I sent it to one of the New York papers, stating that I believed if the 10 per cent tax was repealed there would not be a corporal's guard of silver men in the South

Mr. Cox. Now, if the 10 per cent tax was repealed and the people knew that the currency would be good, with proper limitations on it, would not that afford the people of the South and West the opportunity to use what property they have as a basis for banking?

Mr. TRIGG. It would.

Mr. Cox. Now, then, are not the South and the West almost entirely destitute of Government bonds and things of that sort that form a basis of banking now?

Mr. TRIGG. Yes, sir.

Mr. Cox. Now, Mr. Trigg, the trouble here in all these contentions is about the different legislatures adopting different laws. What objection would you have, if any, to incorporate in an act of Congress the proper limitation to put upon these State banks?

Mr. TRIGG. None.

Mr. Cox. You have no objection?

NO OBJECTION TO A QUALIFIED REPEAL.

Mr. TRIGG. I have no objection to having a qualified repeal. Mr. Cox. Have you ever put yourself to the trouble to investigate, say for any period of six months or three months or any time, what was the amount of rediscounts that go out of the Southern States to New York for the purpose of getting money? Have you ever made that calculation?

Mr. TRIGG. I have made no calculation, but I have felt the drain. Mr. Cox. We have all felt that.

Mr. TRIGG. But the accommodation is necessary.

I will state this. I got last year an order from the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad for 25 locomotives. It was reported over the wire.

The CHAIRMAN. What was the value?

Mr. TRIGG. About $260,000; and I got two telegrams and a letterthree communications, two from Boston and one from elsewhere, one a most valued correspondent, the others I didn't know-offering to handle the receiver's certificates, knowing as they did that we had but meager facilities at Richmond to handle the paper. Of course the negotiation carried the interest, all interest involved in it going away from our community.

Mr. Cox. Unless it is a matter of calculation made you could not get at it well, but the point I was trying to develop is the amount of notes. We put them in the banks at home. Your note goes in, and my note goes in. They are satisfied with the security, but haven't got the money. Thereupon they indorse the note and send it to the money centers and get the money. But what I was trying to get at is the amount. Take the old Southern States, and what amount goes out of them every year for rediscount to bring the money back in that way? Mr. TRIGG. I made a calculation once to see what I thought the drain had been on Richmond since the war. I would be afraid to answer now, but it is terrific.

Mr. FOWLER. Is it not your opinion that if the national banks are reorganized, giving to them the power of issuing credit money against their assets, it would serve your purpose just as well as State banks? Mr. JOHNSON. He has already answered that question.

The CHAIRMAN. He says he doesn't care how the relief comes so he gets the relief.

Mr. FOWLER. I would ask whether the same latitude is given to the national banks as ought to be given to the State banks?

Mr. TRIGG. Yes; I think relief would be quicker for our people, because the different State legislatures would have to amend the charters of State banks, and this would take much time.

The CHAIRMAN. Your position is that unless the currency is issued in the neighborhood where it is desired and returned there, as soon as it gets into a bank-returned to the bank issuing it-the people won't get the use of it in that locality?

Mr. TRIGG. I am afraid to answer that. I don't know that it is

absolutely necessary. My idea is that as long as it goes away and stays away it is profitable. If the bank in Richmond-I have just thought of it-issued $100,000 in notes, and somebody chooses to keep them in New York, and the bank was making a profit on them as long as they are out, we would issue some more, provided the bank had in its vault the proper basis of gold or its equivalent.

The CHAIRMAN. You know that you can not keep a note good unless it is returned.

Mr. TRIGG. It would return anyhow, in time.

WEALTH OF VIRGINIA NOW AND IN 1860.

The CHAIRMAN. You have practically answered the first question. Have you in your mind the wealth per capita of old Virginia to-day as compared with the Virginia of 1860. It is given as $497 in 1860 and is $521 per capita now. You claim it is not for the lack of wealth that you have not banking facilities?

Mr. TRIGG. No.

The CHAIRMAN. That is, the wealth is greater now than in 1860? Mr. TRIGG. It is mighty hard to make the "old-timer" think that. The CHAIRMAN. In 1866 Virginia had a capital of $13,000,000.

Mr. TRIGG. Are you speaking of bank capital or wealth of the people?

The CHAIRMAN. I am speaking about one thing when I am speaking about it, and am speaking about another thing when I am speaking about it. Now, I say the total bank capital in 1856 was $13,600,188. In old Virginia to-day it is $11,037,665. So that the banking capital only lacks $2,500,000 of what it was in 1860. While your circulation per capita was then $10.67, to-day it is only $1.14. The percentage of your loans and discounts to your capital and deposits in 1856 was 112.8 per cent. To-day there are only 83.2 per cent, showing you have 35.6 per cent loanable funds on the same banking capital, on the same banking funds, that you had in 1856, which would make your loans and discounts 35 per cent higher to pay the same interest on your bank capital that you did then. Is that a reason why you do not need more bank capital than you have got now?

Mr. TRIGG. Well, I do not know.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me go a little further. If your banks had to-day issued and put in circulation the same percentage of notes as they did in 1856 you would have $10,596,158 in circulation, while you only have $1,891,145; that is to say, you have $8,705,013 less actual working capital in Virginia on the same bank capital to-day than you had in 1856.

Mr. TRIGG. I am not absolutely familiar with those figures, but I believe that is true.

The CHAIRMAN. That is the fact. And furthermore, if you had the same circulation per capita to-day you would have $13,000,000 in circulation. So the people can see the operation of this system.

Then, again, in a 4 per cent locality, in New York, on the circulation they take out, having bought bonds for 104.5 they would make 2.06 per cent, while in Richmond, an 8 per cent locality, they can only make 1.35 per cent, and in the South you would have to buy them and pay 24 per cent, and in New York on that they would make 0.52 per cent. You would lose in Virginia 1 per cent on every dollar you took out, and then if you repealed the 10 per cent tax and allowed them to issue to the par value of their bonds, they would make in New York 1.18 per cent, and

in Richmond, an 8 per cent locality, 0.027 per cent, which would make it a loss in Virginia to take out circulation, because it is impossible to keep out all the notes in circulation.

If you can have this thing eliminated from the national-bank act and have national banking that will be as liberal, and maybe more liberal, than your old State banks, allowing you to issue on your capital and surplus and undivided profits, you would accept that as quickly as you would the repeal of the 10 per cent bank issue?

Mr. TRIGG. Yes; anything that would bring relief.

UNIFORM CURRENCY.

Mr. BROSIUS. Do you think it desirable to have a currency throughout the country uniform in value and safety-every dollar as good in one place as another?

Mr. TRIGG. I do, sir.

Mr. BROSIUS. You do not think it is necessary, in order to have suf ficient money in any locality, that that money should be at a discount in other localities?

Mr. TRIGG. I do not think it is necessary at all. I think that would likely occur. I believe there would be some slight difference, but very much less than under the old order of things.

Mr. BROSIUS. Don't you think that if the 10 per cent tax were repealed and the State banks were permitted to issue currency against their assets, that that money would necessarily be at a discount away from home; that is, supposing your Virginia banks issued to an unrestricted extent-say, limited to the amount of their capital? Would not that money be at a discount in New York and all the other States outside of Virginia?

Mr. TRIGG. I think so.

Mr. BROSIUS. Don't you think it would be more desirable if we could establish a system that would make the money of uniform value in all parts of the country?

Mr. TRIGG. Of course, any kind of money, if it was at a discount, would be sent back to us, and we would have to pay the discount in the end. If we had a million dollars of currency and sent it out and it came back, we would pay it, but I believe that we could afford to pay that, and more, as opposed to the higher rates of interest, and it would be a very much less charge than we have to pay to the Government to use the present bank currency. Although it is true there may be a discount on it and it would be charged back to us, we could pay it ten times with the facilities you would give us thereby, and very few notes would stray, as a matter of fact.

Mr. BROSIUS. Any system that would enable the banks to have a currency that they could afford to keep on hand when not needed, so as to be ready when it was needed, would meet your necessities, would it not?

Mr. TRIGG. I am sure, Mr. Brosius, that any bill that would be prepared here that has in view the relieving of the conditions in our country which I have described would be satisfactory.

DISPARITY OF RESOURCES IN VARIOUS SECTIONS.

Mr. BROSIUS. You will understand the difficulty is that the disparity of resources, not only in wealth but in banking material and in all kinds of resources, in the Southern States and extreme Western States,