The banking situation before 1860, the growth of the business of the country since and the development by the slow processes of evolution of that great mass of practices without the aid of law, and to some extent in absolute defiance of law, constitute the condition to which we must apply those great fundamental principles of economic law, if we would be wise, and hope to succeed in so great an undertaking by convincing the people, not only of our sincerity, but of our wisdom as well. It is estimated that there was in the United States in 1860 approximately $300,000,000 of gold, and that our banking resources were approximately three billion dollars ($3,000,000,000); in other words, that the gold represented about 10 per cent of our banking resources. Today we have banking resources in excess of twenty-five billion dollars ($25,000,000,000) and our gold is only one billion eight hundred and fifty million dollars ($1,850,000,000), or our gold represents only about 7 per cent of our banking resources. In other words, our gold reserves today are not as strong as they were in 1860 by at least 33 per cent. Another matter of importance about which I am sure we all agree is this: that there were in several of the states in 1860, banking systems which were vastly superior to anything we have today. This was particularly true of the banks of Virginia, Indiana, Iowa, Ohio, Kentucky, Missouri and the Suffolk System of New England. As a proof of this contention, which no man who knows anything about the subject will attempt to controvert, I have only to state that identically the same banking principles are in operation in Canada today that were in operation in those states. Canada, you will remember, took her system from the statutes of Massachusetts. Will any man in the United States deny that Canada has a vastly superior banking system to anything we have in the United States? Will any man assert that any country in the world has a better banking system than Canada has today? If so, let him name it. All the Canadian people, and all the Canadian bankers, so far as I have been able to learn, are completely satisfied, indeed, proud of their system. Is there one single business man, or one single banker, in the United States, who would have the audacity to expose his ignorance by stating upon a public platform that we have any banking system at all in the United States? And if he did, would he not be compelled to admit that it was one of the worst in the world, and as a panic breeder that it easily stands in first place? MR. MERCHANT: I do not see how it could be otherwise, when you recall some of the facts brought to our attention during these talks.