8. The present constitution of the Presidency Banks is to be explained, therefore, by their long and complicated history. The restrictions under which they work have in the past contributed, beyond doubt, to their stability. The Bank of Bengal has seen the rise and fall of numerous powerful rivals. Only by virtue of its being absolutely precluded by law from the more speculative forms of business, has this Bank survived the half–dozen or more violent crises by which the Indian financial system has been assailed in the last hundred years. And, in spite of the restrictions, the Presidency Banks have shown great vitality and a power of expansion hardly less than that of the Exchange Banks in the happier circumstances of the last decade. But their constitutions are exceedingly out of date at the present time. The considerations which originally gave rise to them are no longer operative;—since the introduction of the Gold Standard, for example, dealing in foreign exchange has ceased to be a highly speculative business. And they do not play as useful a part in the Indian Financial System, as with a different history behind them they might do. 9. The principal statistics of the three Presidency Banks are as follows[96]:— ┌────────–┬────────────┬────────────┬────────────────┬──────────────–┐ │ │ Capital, │ │ │ │ │Dec. 31. │ Reserve, │ Public │ Private │ Cash. │ │ │ and Rest. │ Deposits. │ Deposits. │ │ ├────────–┼────────────┼────────────┼────────────────┼──────────────–┤ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 1870 │ £2,412,000 │ £3,620,000 │ £4,264,000 │ £6,646,000 │ │ 1880 │ 2,702,000 │ 1,941,000 │ 5,662,000 │ 4,943,000 │ │ 1890 │ 2,984,000 │ 2,395,000 │ 9,842,000(a) │ 8,645,000(a) │ │ 1895 │ 3,267,000 │ 2,218,000 │ 8,747,000 │ 5,131,000 │ │ 1900 │ 3,731,000 │ 1,870,000 │ 8,588,000 │ 3,363,000 │ │ 1905 │ 4,156,000 │ 2,078,000 │ 14,842,000 │ 5,487,000 │ │ 1906 │ 4,266,000 │ 2,052,000 │ 18,301,000 │ 7,300,000 │ │ 1907 │ 4,366,000 │ 2,239,000 │ 18,742,000 │ 6,350,000 │ │ 1908 │ 4,461,000 │ 2,172,000 │ 19,077,000 │ 6,925,000 │ │ 1909 │ 4,521,000 │ 2,132,000 │ 21,767,000 │ 7,770,000 │ │ 1910 │ 4,607,000 │ 2,824,000 │ 21,563,000 │ 7,567,000 │ │ 1911(b) │ 4,650,000 │ 2,640,000 │ 23,250,000 │ 9,430,000 │ │ 1912(b) │ 4,900,000 │ 2,530,000 │ 24,000,000 │ 8,070,000 │ └────────–┴────────────┴────────────┴────────────────┴──────────────–┘ (a) An exceptional year, due to the excessive abundance of money. (b) The figures for 1911 and 1912 are not taken from the same returns as the rest, and are not quite strictly comparable with them in one or two details.