Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1908-09-23

| be a hot time in old KeWaunee Wnen
Billy comes marching home.
..----------
IS UNCLE sam PRIVILEGED?
Raymond a talented writer in the
| Chicago Tribune has attempted to give
us the A B C's Of this deposit insur-
ance issue. He begins by explaining
| that it should never be a political is
sue at all. that it is purely question
in governmental finance, and should be
SO considered. He says:
"The truth is the question of insur-
ance of bank deposits is an economic
tissue which really has no place in pol
| itics at all. IL it is a good thing there
| is no reason why both parties should
not be in favor of it, and If 1T is a bad
thing wise men who have the interests
/! of the people at heart and who want
| to see the country prosper ought to
!; discuss the subject without the slight
est regard to whether it has been de-
clared for by democratic national
! convention or by republican state
| convention. If there is any scheme
by which a man who puts his money
/ in a bank can always be abs olutely
certain he will get 1t out again on
demand, 1t is worth consideration"
Raymond then tells us that there is
no parallel in the fact that's the state
and federal governments always de-
| mand security guarantees for the
money they deposit in banks. Some
people are so superficial. according to.
Raymond's view, as to argue that what
lis correct for the safety of public
money should be correct for tho safety
of private money. This, Raymond
says, is entirely wrong. He argues:
whatever people may thinl. about
the bank guarantee plan, they should
not become confused because the gov
eminent wisely requires individual
banks to put up bonds to secure its
deposits, just as it requires the same
banks to put up bonds to secure the
circulation which the government
guarantees. In neither case is there any
Joint guarantee by the banks, and the
government deposits in the national
banks are not to be considered for
moment as ordinary deposits, but are
in effect call loans secured by coilat-
eral In every case. With his own i'm
I3pregnable vaults and with his own
complete banking system, 1T would be
fantastic folly for Uncle Sam to take
This money to bank without security,
or to leave it there for a moment ex-
cept for the sole purpose OF enabling
lit to continue to serve as money for
the benefit of the people, Whole trus-
tee the wise old gentleman is.
According to Raymond's wisdom,
then, any individual who wants to-
put money in a bank for safe keeping
should rent a safety deposit box and
lock up the gold securely, just sls Uncle
Sam could do If he were not so kind
an old gentleman. Whenever too much
currency should, become retired from
circulation in this manner the depositor
should then make an open deposit IN
the bank, sort of call loan, you
know, and ask the bank to secure him
with bond and collateral. Some de-
positors have tried to do business in
this manner, when times were a little
panicky, but they have not been as
popular as Raymond would make them.
No: viewing this question econom-
ically rather than politically, there is
little to be gained by arguing against
I the depositor's right to be guaranteed,
Banking legislation for centuries has
ALWAYS been constructed upon the pri-
mary purpose to guarantee the depos-
itor We have government examination
for the sole purpose of guaranteeing
the depositor. We require a cash re-
serve to be kept on hand SO as to
guarantee him. We require stock
holders in bank to assume a double
liability to guarantee him, and we have
almost succeeded in giving him an
absolute guarantee. 1t is only a very
small per cent Of deposits that are
ever lost, but there is yet some rlsK
and for this reason public money is
never deposited without additional COL
lateral guarantee. The individual IS
entitled to the same security if the
law can give 1t to him. and that is
the only question involved in the
scheme to insure bank deposits. Ray
mond admits that IL there is any
scheme whereby "a man who puts MS
money in a bank can always be abb
solutely certain he can get 1t out
again." we ought to have it. II
the insurance scheme would give us
this absolute guarantee without cover
ing banking rascality with a cloak
at the expense OF honest bankers, it is
correct economy. The question now
is "Can this be done?"
Tonnes Of the Times.