“But it is easy to perceive that a single bank of discount, or bank of aid (_banque de secours_), placed in the capital, in the centre of circulation, would not only animate the commerce of the place in which it is established, but would necessarily extend its influence throughout the whole of the kingdom. “Now, a number of banks of discount, or banks of aid, would not produce the same advantages; for by mutually increasing their credit, they would infallibly injure each other. “In the first place, the multiplicity of these banks would oblige every individual to examine all the different bank-notes presented to him, whilst at present a great portion of the confidence with which these notes are received, proceeds from the circumstance of their requiring no examination, being recognisable at first sight, almost as readily as pieces of coin. “This observation is, perhaps, more important than it may appear. There can be no doubt that a degree of credit would be attached to the notes of a single bank applicable to the whole kingdom, which would never be accorded to the notes of a number of banks, dispersed among the provinces; for, as each of these several banks would enjoy a different degree of credit, the notes of each would require previous examination, before being taken in payment. “But, independently of this consideration, another very grave inconvenience would arise. The embarrassments of any one of these banks would inevitably operate prejudicially on the credit of the rest, from the correspondence which would exist among them. To multiply the places where these embarrassments might ensue, would be to multiply their probability, and it is, doubtless, important not to augment the chances which may compromise the trade and the monetary circulation of the kingdom.