Joint-Stock Banking in the English
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Joint-StockBanking in the English Provinces 1826-1857: To Branch or Not to Branch? Lucy Newton' SchoolofHistory, University ofEast Angh•, UK P.L. Contell DepartmentofEconomic and Sodal History, University ofLeicester, UK From an almostglobal review of bankingstructures, Wilson discerned three trends:a "gradualreduction in the numberof...units"; "a growth in...averagesize"; and "a morewidespread resort to" branching[Wilson, 1986, pp. 1-4]. However,he acknowledgedthat regionaland local bankinghas continuedto haveimportance within Europe. Wilson paid little heedto the state'srole, but Cameronhas emphasizedin an historicalapproach the significanceof legislationfor bankingstructures and their performance [1970, pp. 9-10].This paperaccepts that, with regardto Englandand Wales, joint- stockbanking's early growth was strongly influenced by the timingof liberal- izinglegislation. Yet, otherfactors led to the persistenceof a largenumber of unit banks until the 1880s. Joint-stockbanking, permitted from 1826,involved greater branching thanprivate banking. A minorityof privatecountry banks had branched with, by 1813,some indications of expansionas 761 bankshad at least922 regular offices[Pressnell, 1956, p. 126].However, corporate networks' initial growth from1826 also occurred slowly and, in 1857,the average number of officesper joint-stockbank was only 6.7 (2.1for privatecountry banks) [Nishimura, 1971, p. 80]. Althoughspearheaded by a few, ambitiousbank boards, branching confrontedconsiderable managerial and informational difficulties. Hitherto, the arisinghesitancy has attracted little attention [Munn, 1997]. Thus, the following is an almost exploratoryinvestigation of post-1826English and Welsh corporatebranch banking, which also debates with Munn over shaping factors. It drawsupon the internalevidence of banksthat had considerable longevity and alsoemploys the BankersAlmanac [BA] and the Circularto Bankers[CB]. ' This drawsfrom someof the findingsof a LeverhulmeTrust-funded project "The constituenciesof English and Welsh joint stock banks, 1825 to c.1885"and we aregrateful for the supportso generouslyprovided. We wishto thankSara Kinsey and Edwin Green (MidlandBank Archives); Susan Snell and Fiona McColl (NatWest Archives); Alison Turton and PhilipWinterbottom (Royal Bank of ScotlandArchives); and ThomasBucke for their help in writing this paper.Thanks also to the participantsof the BusinessHistory Conferencesession in Marylandfor theirhelpful comments and advice, and to the British Academyfor providingfinance to attendthis meeting. BUS•XIE$$AND ECONOMIC HISTORY, VolumeTwenty-seven, no.1, Fall1998. Copyright¸1998 bythe Business History Conference. ISSN 0894-6825. 115 116 / LUCY NEWTON AND P.L. COTTRELL Particularattention is paid to Yorkshire,where banking encompassed both unit institutionsand corporate managements which established regional networks. The LegislativeSpur The expansionof joint-stockbanking was markedby promotional waves,each facilitated by reformingstatutes. The draftersof the 1826Act aimedto stabRiseEnglish banking and reasoned that banks were more likely to withstand"runs" with greatercapitals. Consequently, the 1826 legislation allowedbanks with morethan six partners and freely-transferable shares to be establishedbeyond a 65-mileradius of London.It resultedin 117 provincial joint-stockbanks being in businessby 1843,and 98 in 1857.Medium-term economiccircumstances - the mid-1830s cyclical upswing - alsoplayed a part, with the formationrate becoming "manic" during 1836, when at least59 new institutionswere projected. This "mania"had its epicentrein Lancashireand Yorkslake[CB, 407, 6 May 1836]. The 1826Act waspassed after campaigning by supportersof joint- stock,branch banking who pointedto its successin Scotland,a countrywith a differentlegal code and financial system. There branching had been established from the 1770sby both Edinburgh"public banks" and privateprovincial bankingcompanies [Cameron, 1967; Checkland, 1975; Munn, 1981]. However, joint-stockbanks "proper" only began to be formedin Scotlandfrom 1810, not fullydeveloping until the 1830s.Thus, to a considerabledegree, the adop- tionof joint-stockbanking moved together north and south of Hadrian'sWall. Concemsover the ever-growingnumber of Englishand Welsh joint- stockbanks, especially their increasinglyspeculative character, were fixst expressedin 1832.Joint-stock bankers in Liverpooland Manchester called for stricterregulation, involving branches more than 12 milesfrom headoffices beingindependent banks and, thereby under their scheme, having capitals of at leastœ50,000. Rising anxieties led W'tlliamClay, who favouredeven greater regulation,to obtaina selectcommittee for investigatingbanks' affairs [CB, 407, 6 May 1836].• This parliamentaryaction resulted in the bankingboom's feverabating from May 1836.Furthermore, the Northern& CentralBank's suddenand spectacular collapse in mid-1836,after rapidly opening 36 branches to be regardedas the"boom bank," gave all the necessarygrounds for Clay's inquiry[CB, 289, 31 Jan.1834; 291, 14 Feb. 1834;319, 29 Aug. 1834;Jones, 1971]. Its adversecriticisms were reiteratedby a further SelectCommittee during1840-1. Thesetwo selectcommittees' hearings paved the way for Peel's restrictiveJoint Stock Banking Act of 1844.Furthermore, his Bank Charter Act of 1844froze the volume of noteissues of Englishand Welsh provincial banks, corporateand private,and containedmeasures for eventuallyextinguishing • Claywas the LiberalMember of Parliamentfor Tower Hamletsfrom 1832and held the seat until 1857. The son of an eminentLondon merchant,he becamethe Chairman of theGrand Junction Railway, and of theSouthwark and Vauxhall water companies. JOINT-STOCKBANKING IN THE ENGLISHPROVINCES / 117 privatefights to issuebank notes. This legislation, it has been argued, inhibked furtherbranching in Englandand Walesas one majormotive for opening brancheshad been to increaseoutlets for circulatingbank notes. The Transformationof YorkshireBanking Yorkshirewas the largest English county and had a diversifiedeconomy duringthe mid-nineteenthcentury. In manyrespects, it mirroredthat of the nationas a whole,although possibly having a greaterweight of the new, stmcturally-transformed industries. The expandingneeds of commerceand tradehad led to the early developmentof formalizedbanking in Yorkshire[Roth, 1914]. By 1800most townsin thecounty had one, if not several,private banks, amounting to at least 50 in all.These issued notes while their assets came from servicing the trades of the districtsin whichthey were individually located [Hudson, 1981]. However, they sufferedfrom repeatedinstability and failure,especially in industrial districts,and thereby gained an unenviable reputation. The countywas severely affectedby the 1825/6 crisis,particularly marked by significantruns that resultedin substantiallosses for depositors.Promoters of thenew banks seized upon this situation,with the foundersof the HuddersfieldBanking Co. declaringthat joint-stock banking wood be: well calculatedto preventa recurrenceof thoseindividual losses andconsequent distress which this district has so often suffered fromthe repeatedfailures of theprivate banking establishments therebyretarding the growing prosperity of a placeotherwise so well calculatedfrom its localadvantages to becomeone of the firstcommercial eminence [M]3A H4, HBC, 22Jan.1827]. Beginningwith the HuddersfieldBanking Co., 24 joint-stockbanks were formedin Yorkshirebetween 1827 and 1843,with three entirelynew institutionsestablished after the 1836 crisis (see Table 1, below).Consequently, by 1845,both joint-stockand privatebanks coexisted, although the former weremore important, measured by capitaland volume of business.There were 25 privatebanks with 11 branches,and 24 joint-stockinstitutions having 49 branches,but branchingwas restricted to onlysome of theseinstitutions as 19 privateand me joint-stockbanks had no satelliteoffices [BA, 1845]. This gave an arrayin 1845,ranging from local banking, sometimes with a fewbranches, at onepole to, at theother, two "district" banks each with county-wide networks. With thisstructure, Yorkshire provides a meaningfulcase of initialpost-1826 branchingdevelopments. EstablishingBranches The followingsections will examinewhy, and how, brancheswere established;the businessof branches;the problemsof branchmanagement; and,finally, why English and Welsh corporate banks were, on thewhole, slow 118 / LUCY NEW'rON AND P.L. COTTRELL to establishnetworks. These issues are consideredwith regardto both local banksthat characterizedthe nationalsystem and the few larger,"district"/ regionalinstitutions. Points will be augmented with Yorkshire examples. First,it is importantto establishwhat constituted a branch throughout the nineteenthcentre T. But thisis no easytask. There appears to havebeen litfie differentiationbetween branches, sub-branches and agencies.Indeed, all were simplyreferred to as offices,which was also the casein Scoffand.A branchmight be a roomfor businessone day a week,sometimes termed an agencyor sub-branch.Others had dedicated premises, opened every business day,yet wereclassified alongside "rooms" solely servicing market days. The step-upin costsfrom renting a roomto acquiringa specific building was quite considerable.However, the •ypesof business,if not the volumes,undertaken at theselocations wer!•largely the same. Even as late as 1914, this diversity per- sisted:"The proportionof officesnot openeddaily has increased in England and Wales.From beingabout one-twelfth