The Sentinel=record., 1910-02-06
ARKANSAS SENATOR'S FIGHT FOR AMENDMENT PROTECT.
 ING THE STATE BANKS.
Believes the New Banking Law Would CentraIlze Money Unless His Amendment Were to Be
 Accepted.

| United States Senator Jeff Davis made a stirring fight in the senate last
 week for an amendment to the new proposed banking law. which the jun for senator declares would prevent Ine centralization of money in big marts of trade to the detriment of the small centers. He said:
 MT. President, I desire to state that if this bill as presented at this time | should become law, no bank in my | state could have the benefits which are supposed to be derived from it ex- cept national banks. The provision of the bill to which the amendment is of ferei is as follows:
 Sec. 8. That postal savings funds received under the provisions of this act shall be deposited in any solvent bank or banks subject to public super vision end examination in the state Or territory and as nearly as practicable in the immediate neighborhood in which the funds are received al rate of interest not less than 2A per cent per annum.'
 MT. President, we have been led to believe by the Senator having in charge this bill that these funds to be collected from the laboring people
 
 the pood people. from the people in the lower walks of life, if you please would be deposited in any solvent bank, and that. too, in the community from which the funds are collected. It was with amazement that discover ed, upon a careful reading of this Dlll that such was not it's intent. In those states where there is no bank super vision and public examination tals bill, as it is now presented means that this vast sum of money collected from the laboring people Of the state by means of these small deposits shall not be deposited in the local banks of the communities in which they are collected, but, sir, that it shall be de- posted only in those banks having public supervision and public exam ination, which means nothing more nor less than the national banks. Sir, in my state
 In a moment. Sir. in my state we have about twenty national banks, and we have something like 300 state banks. The national banks in my state are located in the large cities and larger towns. If this money, col lected from the poor people and from their small earnings in my state, is not to be distributed among the small CT banks in the locality from which it is collected, then, sir, I stand here to give i. my most vigorous opposi- tion. say that this bill ought not to passed if this vast amount of money. lected throughout the United States, the blood of commerce, the blood of trade, the blood of this nation, is to be placed in the hands of the national banks of the country. and by them to be spirited away to Wall street and placed in the granaries of Wall street money sharks and money brabbers. Now yield to the senator from Utah.
 MT. Sutherland Mr. President, suppose the senator from Arkansas agrees that this money should not be deposited in any but solvent bankst
 Mir. Davis. An, MT. President, cer- tainly l agree to that; and the bill it. self safeguards this money by saving that this board of supervisors provid- ed by the bill shall have power to exact security. Then why not say Gin any solvent bank?" The Securities for those deposits being fixed and regulated by this board itself, why so limit 1t as that none but national hanks can reap the benefit of this vast sum of money that is going to be col lected from the American people?