New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-05-17
the advice of local bankers who have interests

the advice of local bankers who have interests
of their own to serve.
The amendment which the States rights
Democrats favor provides that Il Nauonai
bank shall not have the right to bring or
@maintain any action in the Circuit Court OF
q the United States against any citizen, or be
alable TO any action in such Circuit Court in
afavor of such citizen" but shall be compelled
to sue and be sued in State courts. Yet the
banks are organized and protected by laws Oh
the United States. Wherever there Is local OF
sectional hostility which peryades courts ue-
pendent upon the popular vote, these banks
have the right to seek justice IN courts Oh 'ho
United States. In great many localities such
hostility does exist. 1t is the same sort OF
feeling that makes it utterly impossible Tor
railroad companies to get just decisions, in
some localities, unless they can go 10 Ohiteu
States courts. If the banks are exposed to the
full force of such prejudice and popular nos
tilitv. wherever it exists, will not that prove
exceedingly costly and OnerOus to them Is IL
not probable that many OF them will on that ac
count wind up business as National banks, and
Withdraw from the system 1t is not pre-
tended by anyone that the courts of the United
States refuse to do justice between the banks
and individuals. What reason is there, then,
for subiecting the banking system in any State
to be stung to death by the insects" OF local
prejudceY
Mr.. Randall's amendment is partial revival
of the outrageous Carlisle section, WHICH
caused the panic Of February, 1881. IL re-
cnacts sections 5, 159 and 5,1G0 of the Revised
Statutes, thus requiring all banks whether
they have use for much circulation or little, or
for none at all, to keep constantly on deposit
United States bonds in par value equal to one
third of their capital. The provision was
originally useful to make market for Govern
ment bonds in time of public danger. 1t had
some pretext, as part of bill to refund the
debt at 3 per cent, because it would force some
banks to buy $15,OOO,O0O or $2O,OOO,OOO OF
the proposed bonds. In the present circum-
stances it has no apparent object except 10
force q number of banks to withdraw from the
National system.
The same amendment prohibits any surren-
der of circulation by National bank without
ninety days notice. This would prevent. banks
taking out and issuing circulation to meet any
Temporary need of commerce, because, II once
issued, it could not be withdrawn until three
months after the fact had become apparent that
if could no longer be profitaby used. The effect
might be to influence some banks to surrender
at once circulation which they judge Will be
found improbable through the summer
The question for candid and honest members
is whether these provisions would serve the
public interest. Is it not evident that, II
adopted, they might turn the scale with many
banks, which are even now in doubt whether 1t
pays them to retain circulationf over
ST. 600 900 was surrendered last week by
hanks enjoying all the privileges of the present
law. Very many more are hesitating. Is it for
the public welfare to drive any banks out of
the National system, and thus cause more
or less sharp contraction of currency7