Article Text
kind. Neb.) was not prepared to Mr. Manderson say that the technical violation of the law by the National banks of Boston. New-York and Philadelphia was not perfectly justifiable in the present deplorable condition of the country. But he did not agree with the Senator from Massachuset tts that It was well to cover up from the knowledge of the people exactly what course was being pursued by the banks. Mr. McPherson (Dem., N. J.) favored the reference of the resolution, and said that if there had been a technical violation of the law by the banks, the Finance Committee would investigate and report it. The arraignment of the Controller of the Currency at this particular time would make the panic worse: and he did not think it proper. The resolution should go to the Finance Committee. Mr. Wolcott (Rep., Col.) opposed the reference of the resolution. because he thought that the Finance Committee would report that it was of the utmost importance to have the information, but that, owing to the condition of affairs and the necessity of inspiring confidence, the Senate should not have it. Mr. Gorman (Dem., Md.) argued in favor of the reference of the resolution. For the third or fourth time, he said, during the present monetary system. a point had been reached where the National banks were a failure so far as their power to relieve the condition of the country was concerned. It had been reached in 1873, 1877, 1887, 1890, and now in 1893. At these periods it was utterly impossible for the banks to comply literally with the law. They had violated it by refusing to pay checks of depositors, and had issued Clearing House certificates. They were doing that to-day. They had done it with the eye of the Secretary of the Treasury and of the Controller of the Currency upon them; but the enforcement of the law on any of those occasions would have resulted in the destruction not only of the financial institutions, but of every interest of the country. Never had there been a period half SO threatening as that which confronted the Senate to-day. Mr. Hoar-Suppose the Controller of the Currency shuts up these banks, will not the result be that every one of these banks will have to be placed in the hands of a receiver, and that nobody will get any money? SENATOR GORMAN'S VIEWS. Mr. Gorman-The Senator states the law. He knows that that is the law: and the mover of the resolution and every gentleman of intelligence in the United States understands that that is the fact. Every one knows that there is a technical violation of the law: but it is the duty of the men in charge of the Government not to add to the distress. Under our present system of finance the banks are powerless unless they act as they are acting. There is no relief to be given to them. On former occasions relief was given by the sale of bonds, by the deposit of Government funds in the National banks, and by the anticipation of interest on the bonds. But now none of these remedies can be applied. The Secretary of the Treasury and his chief find themselves powerless to give relief. Bonds cannot be redeemed, for you have left nothing in the Treasury to redeem them with. No deposit of Government funds can be made in the banks, because the money is not in the Treasury. The adoption of the pending resolution would be understood by the country, and by the executive officers, as an expression of opinion by the Senate that the law must be enforced; and that would mean destruction to the interests of the country. We have come here, not to produce further distress, but to give relief to the country in whatever form we can do SO. The rule or custom of the Senate that any Senator may call upon the department for information ought to be in this case violated and set aside in the interest of the common country Mr. Hill (Dem., N. Y.) replied to Mr. Gorman. The only object of referring the resolution was, he said, not to act upon it. There never had been 80 bad a case in the history of the country that its advocates had not always pleaded that the matter complained of was in the interest of the public welfare. Mr. Washburn (Rep., Minn.)-What does the Senator from New-York propose that the Senate shall do. if the Controller of the Currency reports that there has been a technical violation of the law? Mr. Hill-I have made no proposition. That is a matter for the Senator from Kansas. He must be the judge of what is his duty under the circumstances. Mr. Washburn-It seems to me that. if this resolution be adopted, it will be a notice to the Controller of the Currency to administer the law literally and technically. The result of that will be to close every bank in the country and place It in the hands of a receiver. That is a calamity which we should try to avoid in the present deplorable condition of the country Mr. Mitchell (Rep., Ore.) criticised the resolution as calling rather for a legal opinion than for the facts, and he suggested a modification of it in conformity with his views. A WANT OF HONESTY.' SAYS MR. TLER. Mr. Butler (Dem., S. C.) favored the resolution and opposed its reference. He mentioned a statement made to him by the president of a manufacturing establishment to the effect that, in order to draw out of a bank a portion of his deposit, he had to pay 1½ per cent discount. "We have heard a great deal," said Mr. Butler, "as to the want of confidence in the country and as to its being brought about by the Sherman act. The Sherman act had about as much to do with it as the pebble in the mill pond had to do with the flow of water It is a want of honesty. We may as well speak plainly. The sooner the country finds It out the better It will be for everybody Mr. Cullom (Rep. III.) expresed indifference as to whether the resolution should be adopted or should be referred because he did not think that any information would be given that would disturb public affairs. When all the facts were stated nobody would be hurt. Mr. Cockrell (Dem. Mo.)-Will not the information rather inspire confidence on the part of depositors Mr Cullom-If the banks of the country and the business of the country have been going on in a legal and lawful way, the information, instead of doing injury, will do good Whatever may have been the course of the banks of New. Boston and Philadelphia, there has not been an hour when in the banks of Illinois, and of the whole West, 1 believe. and especially of the great city of Chicago, a depositor could not draw his check and get the money for it. But am not disposed to criticise the action of the New-York bankers on the question of using Clearing House checks, because there might be a condition there which justified it and yet am inclined to believe that if those banks had gone on as the banks of Chicago and St. Louis did, they would have been paying cash on their checks to-day, instead of paying out Clearing House certificates. Mr. Allison (Rep. Iowa) criticised the phraseology of the resolution and suggested a modification of it As to the Clearing House certificates he regarded them as somewhat irregular but yet
