| American Government, Seventh Edition
The Money Trust Investigation
|Concentration of control of money, and consequently of credit, more particularly in the city of New York, is the subject of this inquiry....
The resources of the banks and trust companies of the city of New York in 1911 were $5,121,245,175, which is 21.73 per cent of the total banking resources of the country as reported to the Comptroller of the Currency. This takes no account of the unknown resources of the great private banking houses whose affiliations to the New York financial institutions we are about to discuss....
This increased concentration of control of money and credit has been effected principally as follows:
First, through consolidations of competitive or potentially competitive banks and trust companies, which consolidations in turn have recently been brought under sympathetic management.
Second, through the same powerful interests becoming large stockholders in potentially competitive banks and trust companies. This is the simplest way of acquiring control, but since it requires the largest investment of capital, it is the least used, although the recent investments in that direction for that apparent purpose amount to tens of millions of dollars in present market values.
Third, through the confederation of potentially competitive banks and trust companies by means of the system of interlocking directorates.
Fourth, through the influence which the more powerful banking houses, banks, and trust companies have secured in the management of insurance companies, railroads, producing and trading corporations, and public utility corporations, by means of stockholdings, voting trusts, fiscal agency contracts, or representation upon their boards of directors, or through supplying the money requirements of railway, industrial, and public utilities corporations and thereby being enabled to participate in the determination of their financial and business policies.
Fifth, through partnership or joint account arrangements between a few of the leading banking houses, banks, and trust companies in the purchase of security issues of the great interstate corporations, accompanied by understandings of recent growth--sometimes called banking ethics--which have had the effect of effectually destroying competition between such banking houses, banks, and trust companies in the struggle for business or in the purchase and sale of large issues of such securities....
[The committee examines the structure of Morgan & Co. and its related firms and offers the following summary.]
...It appears there that firm members or directors of these institutions together hold:
One hundred and eighteen directorships in 34 banks and trust companies having total resources of $2,679,000,000 and total deposits of $1,983,000,000.
Thirty directorships in 10 insurance companies having total assets of $2,293,000,000.
One hundred and five directorships in 32 transportation systems having a total capitalization of $11,784,000,000 and a total mileage (excluding express companies and steamship lines) of 150,200.
Sixty-three directorships in 24 producing and trading corporations having a total capitalization of $3,339,000,000.
Twenty-five directorships in 12 public utility corporations having a total capitalization of $2,150,000,000.
In all, 341 directorships in 112 corporations having aggregate resources or capitalization of $22,245,000,000....
Your committee is satisfied from the proofs submitted, even in the absence of data from the banks, that there is an established and well-defined identity and community of interest between a few leaders of finance, created and held together through stock ownership, interlocking directorates, partnership and joint account transactions, and other forms of domination over banks, trust companies, railroads, and public-service and industrial corporations, which has resulted in great and rapidly growing concentration of the control of money and credit in the hands of these few men....
To us the peril is manifest. But the remedy is not so easily found or applied, having due regard, as we should, to the encouragement of enterprise.
As the first and foremost step in applying a remedy and also for reasons that seem to us conclusive, independently of that consideration, we recommend that interlocking directorates in potentially competing financial institutions be abolished and prohibited, so far as lies in the power of Congress to bring about that result....
It is manifestly improper and repugnant to the theory and practice of competition that the same person or members of the same firm shall undertake to act in such inconsistent capacities.... When we find...the same man a director in a half dozen or more banks and trust companies all located in the same section of the same city, doing the same class of business and with a like set of associates similarly situated all belonging to the same group and representing the same class of interests, all further pretense of competition is useless....
Return to Wilson Policy Portfolio
| || |