Readings in Money and Banking / Selected and Adapted

by Chester Arthur Phillips

Currency Movements Between New England and the Eastern States

[101]... The distance between New York City and the principal New England cities is very small, and there is a great community of financial interest among these cities and New York. Between New York City and Boston the currency shipping points are only about 25 cents premium and 25 cents discount. Single financial deals between New York City and Boston are frequently of sufficient moment to lead to considerable shipments of currency, although exchange rates previously were only moderate. The relations among the clearing-house banks of Boston and among those of other New England cities are close, so that when one bank is in need of New York funds it is liable to obtain them from another which may have more than it needs. For this reason, it is said, much less money is now received from New York City and shipped there than was the case a few years ago....

The Domestic Exchanges During the Crisis of 1907[102]

There is no part of our banking machinery which has received so little elucidation as that of the domestic exchanges. Even for normal times the subject is obscure, and the writer therefore ventures upon an explanation of its course during a period of crisis with hesitation, and he is by no means confident that important considerations may not have been overlooked.

As in the case of foreign exchange, domestic exchange rates fluctuate within limits fixed by the cost of shipping money, and also, in the case of cities distant from New York, by the loss of interest while currency is in transit. The quoted rates apply principally to business between banks, the rates being determined by demand and supply. A Boston bank, for example, receives from its customers New York drafts and also checks drawn on banks in New York and its vicinity. All these items will serve to build up its balances in that city. On the other hand, its depositors have been sending out checks, many of which will in the course of time reach New York and reduce its balances there. The Boston bank will also have received from banks of New York and from banks elsewhere items for collection in its vicinity, and remittance in ordinary course will be made by it in New York funds. Similarly it has sent away items for collection to banks in other cities upon which it expects a like remittance. As a result of all these various influences the balances of the Boston bank may either increase or decrease. If they increase it may be ready to sell exchange to other Boston banks whose balances are running low. It may also happen that the bank is desirous of reducing its New York balances, and in that case it will also appear as a seller of exchange in the market.

Now, if in the course of a crisis clearing-house loan certificates become the principal or sole medium of payment between banks, it may well happen that a bank will be unwilling to sell exchange unless it is unusually well supplied with New York funds. By the sale of exchange it can at best only secure a favorable clearing-house balance, which will be settled in loan certificates, and if this balance should be unfavorable it can meet it by taking out certificates on its own account. Each bank, therefore, to a greater extent than in normal times, is obliged to rely upon itself for means of payment in New York. The loan certificate does indeed yield a return or involve an expense of 6 or 7 per cent., while the return on New York balances is only 2 per cent. This advantage does not, however, seem to have induced the banks to sell exchange as freely as in normal times.

This is, however, not the only disturbing influence. The Boston bank may have remitted to New York upon items collected by it for other banks—let us say those of Philadelphia—but it may happen that the Philadelphia banks delay or even discontinue remitting to New York upon items sent to them for collection by banks of Boston and other cities. The Boston bank can then no longer rely upon what would normally serve to build up its own New York balances. It will be simply acquiring a mass of unavailable credits at scattered points throughout the country. The supply of New York exchange which it might have been willing to sell is consequently diminished, and the premium on exchange must rise to a point at which it will tempt some of the banks to sell exchange, even though it intrenches upon their balances with agents which are available for reserve.

The premium would naturally be especially high in those cities where the banks were most unwilling to reduce their New York balances. Philadelphia seems a case in point, as its deposits with reserve agents, which were $30,995,000 on August 22, were reduced to only $29,389,000 on December 3. At that time the premium on currency in Philadelphia ranged from $1.50 to $3 per $1,000. It is, therefore, a reasonable conclusion that the banks were strongly disinclined to make use of their New York balances. In a few cities it is probable that the premium reached a high level because the banks had exhausted their New York balances. St. Louis may be mentioned as a probable example. Being a central reserve city, its banks would naturally have only such balances in New York as normal business requirements made necessary. The dislocation of exchange elsewhere or the course of payments between New York and St. Louis may have combined to produce such a balance of payments as would have required currency shipments if the St. Louis banks had remitted promptly to New York.

The extent to which banks in different cities delayed or refused to remit to New York on items collected by them for other banks cannot be determined. Banks in one city, very naturally and honestly, were inclined to lay the blame upon banks elsewhere. The banks in other places, however, may not have been able to secure payment of the items sent to them for collection from other banks in their locality with the usual promptness. When every allowance has been made, however, there can be no question that banks in certain cities, in these as well as in other matters, adopted a policy wholly designed to strengthen themselves regardless of consequences.

The general prevalence of the premium on New York exchange is, as we have seen, accounted for in part by the use of clearing-house loan certificates in settling balances between banks and by the delay in remitting in New York funds upon items collected for other banks. It seems probable, however, that, taking the country as a whole, the course of payments was favorable to the New York banks. At the beginning of November withdrawals for crop-moving purposes have in recent years begun to diminish, except to the South, and movements of money from eastern centers are distinctly in favor of New York at that season of the year. If this were indeed the case in 1907, it affords still another reason for thinking that the New York banks might have met the crisis successfully without restricting payments. They would probably have been obliged to meet only withdrawals arising from lack of confidence and not real needs for crop-moving purposes, such as would have increased the difficulties of the situation had the crisis begun at the beginning of September.