┌──────────–┬─────────────────–┬──────────────────┐ │ March 31. │ Number of Banks. │ Paid–up Capital. │ ├──────────–┼─────────────────–┼──────────────────┤ │ 1900 │ 398 │ £2,000,000 │ │ 1905 │ 510 │ 2,200,000 │ │ 1906 │ 505 │ 2,000,000 │ │ 1907 │ 504 │ 1,900,000 │ │ 1908 │ 478 │ 2,800,000 │ │ 1909 │ 492 │ 3,100,000 │ │ 1910 │ 476 │ 3,400,000 │ └──────────–┴─────────────────–┴──────────────────┘ There are no statistics of their deposits. While the capital of these Banks has increased rather rapidly since 1907, the above figures show that it is not yet large. Our interest in these Banks, however, arises not so much out of the banking business which they may possibly transact, as out of certain, almost Gilbertian, characteristics calculated to bring the name and profession of banking into derision or disrepute. These Banks have discovered that there is, or may be, a useful ambiguity in the public mind between nominal capital and paid–up capital, and that nothing is cheaper than to increase the former. When, therefore, a Bank is registered, its promoters may just as well put down as its nominal capital sums ranging from £100,000 to £1,000,000 as anything else. One comic opera Bank registered in Calcutta in 1910 put down £20,000,000, without having at the time of the last return any paid–up capital at all. Apart from this exceptional venture, the 38 Banks registered in 1910–11 had between them a nominal capital of £1,306,000 and a paid–up capital of £19,500. With enormous nominal capitals they combine high–sounding titles—the Bank of Asia, the East India Bank, the Hindustan Bank, the United Bank of Commerce, and so forth. Once established, their activities are not limited. One of these Banks has included in its operations coach–building and medical attendance.