I don't know what happened after that because they moved off toward the house. . . They say the chances are that I will live, but I wish I were dead. . . Pain, pain, ever since. My head is swollen to double, my sight in one eye may be gone. I still bleed at the nose. . .My mental anguish is unbearable. I know that which I had in abundance and have ample living proof of is gone from me, never to return. I have lost my social standing in the community in which I reside and my wimmen folks are laughing at me and at this time of the year. . . Oh, grave, where is thy sting. . .
If you care to apologize for your hasty remarks about bull mental
pain and anguish, you may address me as:
Respectfully,
The Bull
STAMP OUT SMALL BANKS?
June 3, 1933
Honorable Virginia Jenckes
Member of Congress
Washington, D.C.
My dear Madam:
I should appreciate your sending me a copy of H.B. #5661, (the
Steagell Bill) as re-written by the Senate. I am informed the
Senate struck everything out of this bill after the enacting
clause, and substituted a bill of their own—probably the Glass
Bill, with some amendments.
If the bill as passed by the Senate reads as I am informed it does, I am very much opposed. . . It would drive all small country banks out of business at least for the one reason that it requires a capital of not less than $50,000. Small country banks cannot stand a capitalization of $50,000 and pay dividends on any such amount. Small banks have small ways, limited deposits, limited territory—and consequently limited earning powers. . .
I desire to say I have been connected in one way or another with a small country bank, the Russellville Bank, of Russellville, Putnam County, Indiana, since childhood. I was sort of raised in that bank. I own the majority stock in it. I worked in it for years. It represents the life work of an older brother, now dead. It has a capital of $15,000 and a surplus of $47,500. . .
In times like these, all proposed bank legislation should be carefully considered—to say the least. There are not so many of us left, and those that remain deserve some consideration for having weathered what we have.
I am cognizant of the fact that something serious ails, or has ailed, the banking business. . . I am also aware that banking, with its attending care, custody and handling of other people's money, takes on a public nature that some other businesses do not have. . . And please do not form the opinion that I, in the slightest degree, desire to block sound, reasonable, safe and sane banking legislation. Absolutely the contrary. But . . . I insist that a small community is entitled to a small bank for its small business in the same arithmetical ratio that a large or populous community is entitled to a large bank. . . Viewed from the angle the Senate seems to have, I should think it would be better to fix a minimum of capital and surplus combined (for as far as security to depositors is concerned, there is no difference between capital and surplus) for a maximum of deposits.
Suffice to say, I am utterly and unqualifiedly opposed to an arbitrary fixed minimum capitalization of $50,000 for small banks. . . To me it means mighty, mighty few banks in towns of less than 2,000 people.