Agricultural Credit Conditions in the United States
[198]The United States, although the leading country of the world in the amount of its agricultural products and in the extent of its banking business, is behind nearly every other progressive country of importance in the development of agricultural credit, i. e., short-time non-mortgage credit. Our manufacturing and commercial businesses are financed largely by means of such credit, and the capital invested in these industries is thereby rendered manifoldly efficient; not so with agriculture. Most farmers apparently make little or no use of short-time credit. There seems to be a wide acceptance in this country even among the farmers themselves of the dictum of Louis XIV, that: "Credit supports agriculture, as the cord supports the hanged." Is this a correct description of the situation? If so, what is the explanation, and what remedies if any are needed? The object of this paper is to throw light upon the answers to these questions.
First, as to existing banking facilities for agricultural credit, and their utilization by farmers. It is well known that the banking capital of the country is concentrated to a great extent in our large cities—to a greater extent than it would be if we had a well-developed system of branch banks like Canada—and that the banks of these cities are prevented by reason of their location from making many agricultural loans, even if they were so inclined. Of the 7,301 national banks in the United States September 1, 1911, 191 or 2.6 per cent. were located in the dozen largest cities of the country.[199] The national banks of these twelve cities, representing but 14 per cent. of the population of the country, had 37 per cent. of the national banking capital (capital, surplus, and undivided profits), 33 per cent. of the individual deposits, and 40 per cent. of the loans. It should be noted, however, that since the act of 1900, authorizing the establishment of national banks with a capital of less than $50,000 in small towns, there has been a continual and rapid increase in the number of national banks in small communities. On September 1, 1911, out of the total 7,301 national banks there were 1,966 with a capital of $25,000, and therefore presumably located in towns of less than 3,000 population, 372 with a capital between $25,000 and $50,000, and therefore presumably in towns of less than 6,000 population, and 2,297 with a capital between $50,000 and $100,000. Except for banks in towns not exceeding 6,000 population, the law as amended in 1900 does not permit any national bank to be organized with a capital less than $100,000.
Are the national banks which are accessible to farmers in a position under the law to meet farmers' needs? The answer to this question must be in the affirmative. Aside from the fact that national banks are not permitted to make loans on real estate security,[200] there is no restriction in the national banking act which would interfere with loans to farmers for agricultural purposes. Personal security alone is legally acceptable; the range of possible collateral security is practically unlimited; and there is no limitation fixed by law as to the period of loans. National banks therefore have a very free hand in regard to loans to farmers.
When we inquire concerning agricultural credit in banks under state charters we find conditions varying with the different States, but, with a few minor qualifications, it may be said that the state banking laws are free from restrictions that would hamper state banks and trust companies in extending credit liberally to responsible farmers. They are in a much better position in one respect to deal with farmers than are national banks, that is, in the matter of accepting real estate security. No state denies state banks this privilege, and such restrictions as exist upon its exercise are generally not onerous.
If commercial banks are comparatively unhampered by law in making short-time loans to farmers, it may be asked: To what extent are such loans made? Unfortunately practically no information is available on this question. In answer to an inquiry the Comptroller of the Currency wrote, under date of May 27 of this year, that no information with reference to short-time loans made to farmers by national banks had ever been compiled by the comptroller's office. The writer has found no trace of any investigation of this subject by state banking departments. For about a year he has taken occasion to inquire at every opportunity of individual bankers concerning their experience with regard to loans to farmers in different parts of the country. The replies received are so divergent that no conclusion can be drawn from them, except that the practice varies widely in different sections of the country and even in different communities in the same section, and that probably the farmers of the North Central and Western States borrow of commercial banks more than do those of the Eastern and Southern States. There is not sufficient evidence, however, for this latter inference to make it much more than a guess. In the absence of any comprehensive data, I shall resort to the unsatisfactory but representative replies from different parts of the country.
Neither of the two national banks in the city of Ithaca, N. Y., makes any appreciable amount of loans to farmers. Both claim to be willing to do so, but say there is practically no demand. In some of the neighboring cities, however, such loans by national banks are more common. The cashier of a national bank in a town of about 800 population in an agricultural section of northeastern Pennsylvania writes:
Our farmers as a rule are not large borrowers and want loans only in small amounts for short periods.
Farmers in general will not go on each other's paper no matter how good the parties are, for they have been so often taken in by wild-cat schemes that they are shy when their names are required to be placed upon paper. They realize also that they are not familiar with business methods in the commercial world and dare not trust themselves.
There is a moderate amount of borrowing by farmers in western New Jersey. Estimates made by bankers in Princeton as to the proportion of farmers in that neighborhood who borrow for short periods of local banks vary from 15 to 40 per cent.