|
IT was not without a
severe struggle that the Bank of Scotland submitted to the encroachment
on its hitherto undisturbed monopoly by the Royal Bank. Most strenuous
efforts were made to prevent the grant of a charter, influence being
made with persons of position in London, and, according to one
authority, even bribery being resorted to. It is much to be regretted
that the early history of Scottish banking should not have found
efficient contemporaneous chroniclers. As it is, we have the merest
glimpses into the progress of the banks even up to comparatively recent
times. Were it not for Sir William Forbes' most interesting and valuable
memoir, which the well-known firm of W. & R. Chambers brought to light
twenty years ago, we would have only a skeleton to study; and as it is,
that record is mainly confined to the development of one bank—and that a
private establishment—and only reaches back to within a few years of the
period we are dealing with. There are two small works, however, of which
a few copies are still extant, one of which is in the library of the
Writers to the Signet, and from which Mr.
Fleming gives some interesting extracts and details of this period. They
were both published in 1728. The first is An Historical Account of the
Establishment, Progress, and State of the Bank of Scotland, and of the
several attempts that have been made against it, and the several
interruptions and inconveniences which the Company has encountered. The
second is a Letter containing Remarks on the Historical Account of the
Old Bank. These are, so far as we know, the only publications by
contemporary writers which treat specifically of this all-important
crisis in our banking history, and they deserve to be better known than
they are at present.
All the efforts of the
Old Bank to frustrate the advent of its rival were of no avail. On the
31st May 1727, an incorporating charter was granted to the petitioning
Equivalent Proprietors, and within the prescribed time stock to the
amount of £ 111,347:19: 10 5/12 sterling was transferred as the capital
of the new bank. As we saw in our last chapter, the charter gave power
to the proprietors to assess the fully-paid stock to an extent not
exceeding 50 per cent. Without this power the company would have been
placed in an awkward predicament, as, although they had a paid-up
capital greatly in excess of that of the Bank of Scotland, it was
unavailable for banking purposes, being entirely in the form of
Government debt. In order to enable them to proceed to business, they
made calls in December, 1727, and February, 1728, amounting together to
20 per cent on the capital. At the former of these dates they appear to
have opened their office, their first notes being dated 8th December
1727. A remittance of £20,000 in connection with the provisions of the
Treaty of Union anent the encouragement of manufactures, to which we
have already referred, seems to have been the occasion of special strife
between the banks. As descriptive of the struggle, we cannot do better
than quote Mr. Fleming's words ;-
"Then came the tug of
war. The Old Bank and the New are now face to face, each with its hot
partisans eager for the fray. I fear not a few hard blows were struck in
those early months of 1728. And yet, what monopolist ever patiently
submitted to the surrender of his privilege, or saw either reason or
public advantage in its sacrifice? And do we ever see, even in our
enlightened days, the new institution welcomed into cordial brotherhood
with the old, until it has not merely deserved but commanded respect? So
it was with our two banks. The Old was jealous and resentful; the New
was aggressive and defiant. Peace was hopeless until they had tried each
other's strength. The struggle was short and sharp. The New Bank
established its footing, and the Old had for a time to succumb under the
pressure of its rival's demands. The warfare culminated in the use by
the New Bank of the legal engines of horning, inhibition, and
arrestment, in the course of which Andrew Cochran, the Lord Provost of
Glasgow, of whom we shall hear more, appeared on the stage. The Court of
Session evidently thought that legal diligence was being run rather
hard, and stretched a point. The Royal Bank, writhing under a supposed
denial of justice, was more forcible than polite; for we find that the
Lords, `taking notice that the terms of a petition were indecent and
disrespectful to the Court, would not allow it to be entered on the
record.' Then followed an appeal to the House of Lords, who, on 9th May
1729, reversed all the decisions of the Court of Session, and awarded to
the Royal Bank and Cochran the costs, which then formed the only
question between the litigants, the sums sued for having been previously
paid."
It was long before
harmonious relations were established between the rivals, almost the
first thing to cause them to coalesce being the prospect of a third
competitor entering the field nineteen years later. But gradually a more
creditable style of rivalry took the place of the deadly quarrel
described. It was through the medium of their note issues that the banks
harassed each other; and as the Old Bank's issue was greater than that
of the Royal Bank, the latter was enabled to operate with more effect
than the former. Arnot, in his History of Edinburgh (1816, p. 411),
says: "Agreeably to the envious policy so frequent among commercial
companies and states, when the Royal Bank was created, that company
purchased up all the notes of the Bank of Scotland that they could lay
hands on, and made such a run upon this bank as reduced them to
considerable difficulties. To avoid such distresses for the future, the
Bank of Scotland, on the 9th of November 1730, began to issue £5 notes
payable on demand, or £5 :2 : 6 six months after their being presented
for payment, in the option of the bank. On the 12th December 1732, they
began to issue £1 notes with a similar clause." [See also Logan, pp.
77-78.]
Thus was initiated the
pernicious practice of inserting an optional clause in bank notes; but,
as we have already shown, the system of deferring payment and allowing
interest to accrue had been commenced long before. This proceeding must
have been effectual for the purpose in view; but, the example being
generally followed in after years by other banking companies, it led to
great abuses, which seriously reflect on the character of Scottish
banking, until the year 1765, when a legislative prohibition was enacted
against such optional clauses, as well as against notes for a smaller
sum than £1. The custom greatly facilitated those excessive note issues
by persons of insufficient means which, in the middle of last century,
weakened public confidence in banks, and endangered the continuance of
the right of issue. A writer in 1787, after describing the erection of
the two oldest banks, says: "Other banking companies quickly followed,
both in Edinburgh and other towns in Scotland, until at last they became
a public nuisance, by issuing notes for the most trifling sums, at the
same time that they were almost entirely destitute of capital for
carrying on the business of banking, or any other." [History of
Edinburgh, Alexander Kincaid, Edinburgh, 1787, p. 82.] One can
sympathise with the harassed directors of the Bank of Scotland seeking
to avert suspension of payments, but it must be regretted that they and
their successors should have so grievously misapprehended the essential
principles of note issuing. Even in our own times, when the development
of financial economy has to a large extent lessened the utility of note
issues, these are of great public service, notwithstanding the
fox-and-the-grapes style of argument of non-issuing bankers. But it is
essential to their character as efficient substitutes for money, that
they should be convertible into specie on demand. Whatever tends to
counteract that condition is unsound in principle.
We may here appropriately
notice the origin of the now well-known and distinctive feature of
Scottish banking called cash credits. The name of the author of the
system is unknown, but the Royal Bank has the merit of inaugurating it.
The directors' minute is dated, we are informed, 12th March 1728, and on
31st May following, the first cash-credit was granted to William Hog,
Jun., merchant in Edinburgh, who afterwards became a private banker on
his own account. The principle of the cash credit was simply as follows.
A trader or other person, not possessed himself of sufficient capital
for the conduct of his business, but who could command the good opinion
of two or three other persons of known position and repute, applied to a
bank to have a current account opened in his name on which he could
draw, on balance, to a fixed amount—say £500 or £1000—aver and above
what he might pay in to his credit. Thus the account might at any time
show that he was due to the bank (say) £500 or £1000, or any less sum;
or, on the other Band, it might show any amount due to him by the bank.
To secure the probable and fluctuating debt, the applicant and the other
persons (he being called the drawer and they the co-obligants), signed a
formal bond by which they, jointly and severally, guaranteed to repay to
the bank, when called on, the amount of the debt and accrued interest.
The bond also covered all other transactions of the principal debtor
with the bank, such as liability on bills discounted; but of course not
exceeding in all, as regarded the sureties, the maximum sum agreed on,
together with accrued interest. Interest ran only on the balance shown
by the account at the close of business each day, not on the principal
sum mentioned in the bond.
The universal adoption of
the system in after years was accompanied by material benefits to the
nation. In a poor but energetic country, such as Scotland was in those
days, there are always many industrious and intelligent people who, from
want of capital, are unable to exercise their powers beyond the limits
of everyday requirements. If they are enabled, by the operation of
credit, to increase their business, their profits are proportionally
increased, and they are supplied with the means of repaying their
creditors, and eventually accumulating private wealth. At the same time,
the wealth of the nation is increased by the greater productiveness of
the national industry. Thus it was that Scotland advanced through the
instrumentality of its banking system, and in that system the practice
of lending money without tangible security, in reliance on the
respectability of the applicant, guaranteed by two or three responsible
persons, has been, perhaps, the most potent element. The superior
affluence of the general public nowadays renders the cash-credit system
of less importance in comparison with other departments of banking than
formerly; but even yet, especially in small centres of population, its
beneficial effects are largely operative.
Following the good
example shown by the Royal Bank, the Bank of Scotland soon began to show
the advantages of competition, by courting the favour of the public by
increased banking facilities. In 1729 they adopted the cash-credit
system, and in the same year they commenced to allow interest at five
per cent per annum on deposits "on the Treasurer's bond." These were
presumably the precursors of the more modern "deposit receipts." In
1730, as we have seen, they took a decidedly retrograde movement; but in
1731 they, with praiseworthy boldness, attempted, in repetition of the
essay of 1696, to establish a branch system. The places selected were
Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Dundee, being the same as formerly, except that
Montrose was not again honoured with notice. The times, however, were
not yet ripe. Two years later the branches were discontinued. In 1731
another change was made in the deposit arrangements, by the introduction
of the system of fixed periods, interest being allowed at four per cent
for twelve months' notice, and at three per cent per annum for six
months' notice.
At this point it is
proper to allude to the origin of the system of private banking, which
forms a prominent feature in Scottish financial history during the
latter half of last century and the first quarter of the present
century. It is probable that the first private banking firm in Scotland
was the house of John Coutts & Co., Edinburgh. Sir William Forbes
[Memoirs of a Banking-House, Edinburgh, 1859. See also Coutts & Co.,
Bankers, Edinburgh. and London, Ralph Richardson, London, 1900.] tells
us that the founder was Patrick Coutts, a native of Montrose, who was in
business as a merchant in Edinburgh in 1696, and who died in 1704. It is
evident, however, from subsequent statements in Sir William's narrative,
that John Coutts, the eldest son of Patrick Coutts, must be regarded as
the actual founder of the house. John Coutts was born 28th July 1699,
and was therefore only five years old when his father died. The latter's
business is presumed to have " been in a great degree discontinued by
himself before his death, and wound up by the tutors he left to his
children." Of the early years of John Coutts' life but few particulars
have been preserved. In 1723 he was engaged in mercantile business in
Edinburgh, but whether of a continuous or intermittent nature is not
recorded. It is evident, however, that previous to 1730 he must have
been a man of considerable importance, as in that year "he entered the
Town Council of Edinburgh [a much more exclusive body then than now] as
first merchant councillor." During two partnerships previous to 1744,
the firm was John Coutts & Co., and subsequently it became Coutts &
Trotter. Again, in 1749, it was changed to Coutts, Son & Trotter, when,
we are informed, the capital was £4000, a much more considerable sum in
those days than it would be deemed now. John Coutts died at Mola, near
Naples, on 23rd March 1750; and when, a few years later, Mr. Trotter
retired from the business, the firm became Coutts Brothers & Co.
There is no reason to
suppose that during their earlier years the firm were carrying on
banking business proper; but, in addition to their ordinary business of
" dealing in corn, buying and selling goods on commission," they were
also engaged—as was usual with mercantile firms of credit in those days
when the domains of commerce and finance were not distinguished so
definitely as now — in "the negotiation of bills of exchange on London,
Holland, France, Italy, Spain, and Portugal." Sir William Forbes
continues: "The negotiation of bills of exchange formed at that period a
considerable part of the business of Edinburgh ; for there were then no
country banks, and consequently the bills for the exports and imports of
Perth, Dundee, Montrose, Aberdeen, and other trading towns in Scotland,
with Holland, France, and other countries, were negotiated in
Edinburgh." The firm's exchange business gradually developed into
banking, and instead of being an adjunct of the mercantile department,
that became subordinate to it. Corn and other speculations continued,
however, to be indulged in until 1761, when Sir William Forbes — then
the senior partner - abolished the practice. The original designation of
John Coutts & Co. was renewed in 1763. After the death of John Coutts
(at Bath on 4th August 17 61) his sons opened a mercantile house in
London, which developed into the banking firm of Coutts & Co. The house
of Herries, Farquhar & Co. was also founded by members of the family. To
the senior partner of the latter firm belongs the credit of the
invention of circular notes (a species of letter of credit generally
considered of recent origin), for which he successfully established a
regular system of correspondence with the principal cities of the
continent of Europe. The outbreak of war seems to have interrupted the
further prosecution of a scheme which, in later times, has been resumed
on an extensive scale. Its present success, however, is more conspicuous
than its profitableness.
Although, like other
private bankers of their day, John Coutts & Co. for long engaged in
operations dangerously inconsistent with legitimate banking, the
business appears always to have been managed with considerable prudence,
so that times of trouble were met with sufficient resources, and
experience gained was always carefully profited by. In consequence of a
quarrel with Messrs. Coutts & Co., of London, it was deemed advisable to
drop the designation of John Coutts & Co. On 1st January 1773,
therefore, it was changed to Sir William Forbes, James Hunter & Co., and
by that name the house continued to be carried on during, and for some
years subsequent to the termination of, its independent career. Under
the direction of Sir William Forbes the firm rose steadily to a high
position of credit and influence. Among Scotch private banking firms Sir
William Forbes, James Hunter & Co. occupied undoubtedly the highest
place. The others were in too many cases habitually addicted to those
speculative transactions, the renunciation of which secured the
permanence of Sir William's business. The firm is gone, having been
merged in the Union Bank of Scotland in 1843, after five years of
practical amalgamation with the Glasgow Union Bank, but the business
still exists; and in virtue of this connection, the Union Bank can claim
to rank as the third oldest bank in Scotland, while its business
succession probably reaches back to the pre-banking era. |
