Can anybody have the hardihood to say that if a note broker in New York ships a million dollars' worth of commercial paper to purchasers in the west upon a commission of a quarter or a half per cent, and receives his payment, for the sake of the argument, let us say, by a shipment of gold coin, that such broker is not engaged in Interstate Commerce? Does this transaction become a different transaction, forsooth, because it is carried out by a banker?
Will anybody deny that checks and drafts and bills of exchange are property?
Will anybody deny that a bank has property, although it may be the owner of one million dollars' worth of promissory notes?
Will anybody declare that a bank has no property when it has a million dollars' worth of gold coin in its vaults?
If a bank in Chicago should by any chance own one million dollars' worth of wheat, and should sell and ship the same to a New York bank, and the New York bank should ship the Chicago bank one million dollars' worth of gold, will anybody deny that they are engaged in interstate commerce? Now, suppose that the Chicago bank should sell the wheat in Chicago to Mr. Armour, instead of shipping it, for his promissory note for one million dollars, due in thirty days, and that the Chicago bank should then sell, and mail the note to the same New York bank, and the New York bank should ship the Chicago bank one million dollars in gold, in payment for the note, will anyone have the hardihood to assert that this transaction is not interstate commerce?
Will anyone deny that the sale and shipment by note brokers of billions upon billions of promissory notes from one state to another every year is not interstate commerce, but that to ship eggs, apples, potatoes, chickens, grain, cotton and live stock is interstate commerce?
I assert that it is just as proper and important that the National Government inspect this paper, and the banks that create it, or ship it, or buy it, as it is to inspect the sheep, hogs, cattle, slaughterhouses and the meat they turn out in order that it can protect the people of the United States. If the paper so shipped is infected by the hand of a rotten maker, commercially speaking, and the bank sending it out and responsible for it is not carrying an adequate reserve to meet the paper, should the maker fail to pay it, the harm done is vastly greater than that resulting from slightly infected meat. How much infected meat would it take to do the harm, the damage to the American people that resulted from the panic of 1907? And yet, if we had had a wise, national financial and banking system, we need never have passed through that harrowing, wasting panic that resulted in destroying property values into the billions; in the death of thousands of the people directly and indirectly; in the ruined health of tens of thousands more; in the non-employment of hundreds of thousands; and in the unknown and immeasurable suffering that ensued.
Such a national system must be supported by every banking unit; by every individual bank carrying its part of the commercial burden, and providing its proper share of the insurance of commercial safety by contributing its proper proportion of the necessary reserves, both local and national.
Mr. Merchant: Mr. Banker, I heartily approve of every word that you have said, and there can be no possible doubt about the result of a discussion of this phase of this question by the American people.
There is one question, however, that I desire to ask you before we pass on, as we may overlook it. Is it not true that our National Banks are now carrying 20 per cent reserves of which 17 per cent are cash? Are not these reserves large enough to meet all emergencies?