In the greater number of States which incorporate both state banks and trust companies the reserve requirement is the same for both classes of credit institutions. Slight differences between the requirements for trust-company reserves and those for state-bank reserves are chiefly of two kinds. In the first place, the provisions for trust-company reserves more frequently permit the counting of bonds as a part of reserve; secondly, the provisions for differing amounts of reserve against time and demand deposits.
In recent years there has been much complaint in some States that the reserves required for trust companies are inadequate.
Branch Banks
The most characteristic feature of American banking is the extent to which the banks and trust companies are independent institutions. The national-bank act makes no provision for the establishment of branch banks except in cases of the conversion of state banks which already have branches. Such banks are allowed to retain their branches on condition that the capital is assigned to the mother bank and the branches in definite proportions, but only a few national banks have branches. Under none of the state banking laws has there been built up an important system of branch banks. This has been partly due to the very general desire of each American community, no matter how small, to have its bank managed by its own citizens, and partly to the fact that in most of the States the establishment of branch banks is either explicitly forbidden or in no way provided for by law. In eight States—Colorado, Connecticut, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wisconsin—the opening of branch offices is forbidden by specific enactment. In a large number of other States the banking laws make no provision for the establishment of branches, and it has been held in most of these States that the opening of branch offices is unlawful.
The States in which state banks and trust companies are definitely permitted to have branches are California, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Virginia, and Washington. In Louisiana, Maine, and Massachusetts trust companies may have branches. In Maryland and North Carolina branches are operated by some banks and trust companies which were chartered by special act. There are in several of these States, however, restrictions on the opening of branch offices. In New York and Massachusetts branches may be established only in the city in which the principal office of the bank or trust company is located. In New York, moreover, only banks located in a city of 1,000,000 inhabitants or over may have branches; but any trust company may have branches. In Maine a trust company may establish branches only in the county in which it is located or in an adjoining county.
In nearly all the States which permit banks or trust companies to establish branches one or both of two conditions are imposed. In the first place, additional capital is required for each branch bank over and above the amount of the parent bank. Secondly, the establishment of a branch bank must be specifically authorized by some state official or officials.
The number of branches of banks and trust companies cannot exceed a few hundred in the entire United States. Compared with the total number of banks and trust companies this is a small development. Moreover, the most important affiliations among banking institutions are among those located in the same city. The "chains" of country banks possess, for the most part, little vitality, and in the total banking business of the country they play an insignificant rôle. The great mass of state banks and trust companies are independent institutions. The most enduring affiliations at present existing among the banking institutions are those between a national bank and a trust company or a state bank and a trust company. The comparatively limited powers of the national banks and in some States of the state banks have made it desirable for many of these institutions to affiliate trust companies with themselves in order that desirable business may not be lost.
Further Reason for the Lack of Branch Banks in the United States
[143]It would seem that there must be a reason for this peculiarity [the small number of branches] in the banking system of the United States. In searching for this reason, the first fact of importance seems to be that, although the organization of branches has been permitted to the non-note-issuing banks in some of the States, they have not been organized, while in other countries they have been established in nearly every case. by note-issuing banks. This seems at once to indicate that in places where notes are the most important medium of exchange a connection of some sort exists between the issue of notes and the establishment of branches.
The inducement to the establishment of branches by banks is, of course, the possibility of profit. But as has already been frequently pointed out, profit can be obtained only by making loans. These when greater than the amount of the capital, as it is necessary that they should be, can be made by the loan of funds left with banks by others or by the issue of circulating notes. It is also clear that, were the possibilities of loaning beyond the amount of the capital wholly or chiefly confined to one of these forms of liability—the other being unavailable, as in the case of the state bank notes whose issue is prohibited by the 10 per cent. tax—and were this other form distasteful or impossible of introduction among the community where the branch was to be established, the motive for the creation of the branch would be absent. This motive has been wanting in many parts of the United States. By the laws of the United States, the issue of notes has been made impossible to all save national banks, and the capital of these banks has been limited to $50,000 as a minimum. Banks other than national must, therefore, be established under state laws, some of which have permitted the organization of such institutions with capitals as low as $5,000 or $10,000. They can, however, make use only of deposits as a means of loaning beyond the amount of their capital. But deposits do not provide a desirable form of currency for use in country districts. It follows, therefore, that the state-bank systems supply the deficiencies of the national system only in so far as they furnish independent banks of smaller capital than $50,000 ($25,000 since 1900).