Readings in Money and Banking Part 74

In the height of the period of exaltation or prosperity, something happens to disturb confidence. A chance occurrence, a mere rumor, may suffice. Some bank considers its credit too heavily engaged, or suspects the adequacy of the collateral. Just at the flood of the tide, when new demands are constantly being made, it finds itself unable or unwilling to respond. Its refusal starts or intensifies the feeling of insecurity, and with the inability of some important concern to meet its obligations, a failure occurs and the crisis is precipitated. If, on the other hand, the situation is well handled, and if the readjustment of the overcapitalized values to actual earning capacity can be brought about more gradually, we have, in lieu of a crisis, a liquidation and a period of depression which lasts until the up-grade movement again sets in.

Crises, therefore, are not necessarily the result of increased technical production. The important point is not production, but capitalization.

There may be overcapitalization, without overproduction. Overproduction of particular things may indeed accompany overcapitalization, but the stress must be laid, not on the relation between production and consumption, as the old writers a.s.sumed, but on the discrepancy between the investment and its returns.

While the general features of a crisis are thus everywhere the same, the details differ in each case. Sometimes it is the banks that fail first, sometimes the general business enterprises. Sometimes it is the railway securities that first feel the strain, at other times "the industrials,"

and at still other times the raw materials. Sometimes the bolt comes out of the clear sky with prices at a maximum, sometimes it is only the last stage of a period of liquidation with progressively lower prices. But however unpredictable and seemingly inscrutable the actual course of events, the fundamental explanation is always the necessary readjustment of capitalization to actual earning capacity.

That this is true of all our crises can be seen from a hasty review. The crisis of 1817 was the result of the first utilization of modern capitalist methods in America. The period of the War of 1812 was marked by three facts: first, the industrial revolution in New England and the introduction of the factory system in the textile industry; second, the great development of internal improvements through ca.n.a.l and turnpike companies; third, the sudden multiplication of banks to finance the new enterprises. The consequence was the so-called "Golden Age," which lasted for several years, until checked by the immense imports from England after the war, and destroyed by the collapse of the overcapitalized undertakings. It was well into the twenties before the country recovered from the industrial depression, and then came the second up-grade movement, which culminated in 1837. This was primarily a land and transportation, rather than a purely industrial, phenomenon.

The ca.n.a.ls and turnpikes in the East were now being replaced by railways, and the spread of slavery caused a rush of cotton planters, not only to the black belt, but to the pine barrens and hill country of the South. It was primarily land values that were being overcapitalized, and the process went on to such an extent that the annual land revenues of the Government now exceeded the total governmental receipts from all sources of a few years before. Finally, to finance this land movement there were called into being hundreds of the "c.o.o.n-box" banks, that found a champion in President Jackson in his war against the Bank of the United States. As the period of exaltation had been unexampled, so the collapse was proportionally great. The crisis of 1837, followed as it was by those of 1839 and 1841, was still more serious than that of 1817.

It was again well-nigh a decade before the readjustment of values had been completed. The following decade was in turn marked by five striking facts: first, the gold discoveries of California and Australia, which soon initiated a general rise of prices; second, the consummation of the revolution in the media of transportation by land and water, and the settlement of the entire Mississippi Valley, the most fertile portion of the continent; third, the abolition of the corn laws in England and the opening up of a market for our incipient surplus of wheat; fourth, the era of industrial invention which resulted in the application of capitalistic methods to new cla.s.ses of enterprise besides the old textile industries; and fifth, the development of free banking with the "wild-cat" inst.i.tutions to provide the credit facilities for this prodigious overcapitalization. The crisis of 1857, which was the inevitable result, was perhaps still more acute than its predecessors.

The continuance of its depressing influence on industry, however, was checked by the economic effects of the Civil War, which gave an artificial stimulus to many forms of enterprise.

In the period immediately succeeding the war, great changes again occurred. The transcontinental roads were completed and the Eastern trunk lines consolidated; the great wheat fields of the country were opened up under the new homestead laws, and the period of large exports began; the Bessemer process revolutionized the iron industry, and the factory system was now applied to boots, sewing-machines, and agricultural implements; the great copper and silver deposits were developed, and the petroleum output grew apace; while the greenbacks and the greenback movement fomented the process of inflation. The discrepancy between the capitalization and the actual earning capacity of the country's business enterprises again became so overwhelming that the necessary readjustment took the form of the convulsion of 1873--a convulsion the depressing effects of which were felt with almost increasing severity for six years.

The crises of 1884 and 1893 were both less intensive and more short-lived than their predecessors, for reasons which it is now not difficult to explain. The resumption of specie payment in 1879 was rendered possible, and was followed by a series of abundant crops which revivified enterprise, and which were aided by the use of agricultural machinery on a large scale. The energy and the capital of the nation, however, were devoted in increasing measure to the transportation industry. This resulted in a perfect orgy of new railroad construction, the entire mileage of the country increasing in five years by 50 per cent. As the overcapitalization was primarily a railway overcapitalization, the resulting reaction of 1884 was essentially a railway crisis, leading to but indirect and temporary disturbances in industry at large. Within a year or two recovery was general, and the prosperous years from 1886 onward were reflected in the existence of a huge surplus of governmental revenues. The live-stock and meat-packing business attained its high-water mark; the textile industries made great progress in the finer grades, and the ready-made clothing industry a.s.sumed vast dimensions; the iron and steel industry was revolutionized anew by the invention of the open-hearth process and the utilization of cheap ore from the Lake Superior region; the South was being quickly developed by the Northern capital that poured into the cotton mills and the coal and iron mines; electricity was applied to industry on an increasing scale, and the country took rapid strides in its evolution from an agricultural to an industrial community.

The movement of overcapitalization, however, was somewhat checked by two important facts: the downward tilt of world prices in general, which had been falling since 1873 and which were fast reaching their lowest point; and the relative shrinkage, not only in the amount of the wheat crop, but also in the value of both the wheat and the cotton crops. The resulting reaction of 1893, which was itself partly due to the ill-timed experiments with silver legislation, was as a consequence neither so profound nor so long-continued, since the discrepancy between antic.i.p.ated and actual values turned out not to be so excessive.

When we come particularly to the crisis of 1907, we find that the general causes were very much the same. The last decade has been characterized by the most unexampled prosperity in our history. The most striking initial cause is the prodigious increase in the gold supply.

Whereas the annual average value of the output of gold was under one hundred millions in the first half of the eighties, and only a hundred and twelve millions in the second half, it has grown with such enormous strides that during the past two years it has reached an annual value of about four hundred millions. The result has been a constant rise of prices from the minimum level of 1896. The rapid acc.u.mulation of gold, much of which went into the bank reserves, enabled the financial inst.i.tutions to expand their credit facilities many fold, and as a consequence enterprise flourished in every direction. During the last decade the record crops of cereals and cotton, the extension of dry farming, the effects of irrigation on fruit culture, the development of truck farms, and the unparalleled increase of immigration led to a remarkable enhancement of land values throughout the length and breadth of the land; the output of coal doubled, that of petroleum more than doubled, and that of pig iron, as well as of steel, actually trebled; the huge combinations of capital, now spreading to every form of enterprise, effected prodigious economies and revolutionized business methods; and the transition from the agricultural to the industrial phase of economic development proceeded with unlooked-for celerity.

Values were pushed up on all sides and the hopes of a prosperous community were capitalized with a recklessness born of unbounded faith.

The pace was too rapid; the reaction was bound to ensue. In the late autumn of 1907 the revulsion was precipitated, with all the familiar accompaniments of an acute panic such as the collapse of several financial inst.i.tutions, the sudden curtailment of loans, leading to the failures of some prominent business concerns, the h.o.a.rding of money, the appearance of a premium on currency, going to over 3 per cent., and the frantic efforts of the financiers to relieve the situation by the importation of gold, the issue of clearing-house certificates and the interference of Government through the dubious expedients of the placing of a new bond issue and the emission of Treasury loan certificates.

The crisis of 1907, however, is on the whole not comparable either to that of 1857 or to that of 1873, for reasons which have thus far perhaps not been adequately discussed. These reasons may be cla.s.sed under five heads.

In the first place, the very magnitude of the country's resources has been a favorable factor. The unparalleled prosperity of the past decade has made possible the acc.u.mulation of a vast reserve in the case, not only of the great corporations, but also of the average business man.

This reserve has acted as a buffer to the shock of reaction, and has softened the impact through a speedy restoration of confidence in the excellence of the country's a.s.sets and in the real solvency of business.

Secondly, the crops, while not those of a b.u.mper year, have been large and valuable. It is significant that almost each of our great crises in the past has been preceded either by the failure of the harvest at home or by the existence of such a bountiful output abroad as greatly to reduce prices. It must be remembered that, notwithstanding all recent developments, this country is still primarily agricultural, and that upon the varying extent of our great staple crops depends in large measure the effective demand which sets and keeps in motion the wheels of business activity. By a fortunate coincidence, the crisis was attended by a phenomenon which in ordinary times would have spelled prosperity, and which in this extraordinary conjuncture helped to bring back normal conditions.

In the third place, the overcapitalization of values was somewhat less conspicuous than hitherto in our greatest industry--that of transportation. Some of our former crises have, as we know, been brought on primarily by the speculative building of railroads. But whereas in the early eighties the annual increase of construction reached ten and eleven thousand miles, during the past five years, with a railway system three times as large, the annual increment of new construction was only four or five thousand miles. The consequence has been that with the rapid upbuilding of the country the railways have grown up to their capitalization, until it is now reasonably certain that there has been for some little time scarcely any actual overcapitalization. A striking proof of the absence of any real discrepancy between normal values and the capitalization of actual earning capacity is afforded by the congestion of traffic of a year or two ago; and even with only normal business activity it is computed that, in order to prevent this congestion in future and to maintain the railways at a reasonable standard of efficiency, there will be required an annual investment of over a billion dollars.

Fourthly, the crisis of 1907 was preceded by a period of gradual liquidation. General prices of commodities, with a few notable exceptions like that of copper, were indeed high until well-nigh the outbreak of the panic. But the prices of securities had for some time undergone a marked shrinkage. Some, quite mistakenly, attribute this shrinkage to lack of confidence engendered by the governmental policy toward industry; others, with equal readiness and no less extravagance, ascribe it to the distress caused by the exposure of the methods of "high finance" in positions of trustees.h.i.+p. In reality, however, the depreciation in securities was caused chiefly by the rise in the rate of interest. In fact the one phenomenon is really the other; for where earnings remain unchanged, the capitalization of the earnings depends on the rate of interest. If it be objected that the price of stocks fell because of the apprehended decrease of future earnings, due to lack of confidence, the retort is obvious that this would not suffice to explain the equal or still greater fall in the capital value of bonds, private or public, with a fixed rate of interest. The depreciation was not national, but international, in character; and it applied not only to our railway and industrial securities, but to the English "Consols" as well.

The rise in the interest rate, which explains the fall in the capital value of securities, was due to several causes. First and foremost is the increase in the gold output. For, as is now well established by economic theory and reinforced by the observations of practical men, while any increase in the supply of loanable funds on the call-money market temporarily reduces the "money rate," an increase in the general supply of standard money in the community, on the contrary, raises not only the price level of all commodities, but the price for the use of capital, which we call the general rate of interest. The increase of money as the standard of value inevitably tends to increase the general rate of interest. Again, since the rate of interest is always adjusted to the earnings of the fund of capital at the margin of its employment, the rate of interest has risen because there has been relatively less capital available for employment. The fund of free capital has been rapidly diminis.h.i.+ng during the past few years. Hundreds of millions were destroyed in the Boer and j.a.panese wars; hundreds of millions more disappeared through the destruction of San Francisco and Valparaiso; and countless millions in addition have been utilized to finance the more or less dubious schemes which have sprung up in all countries during the years of prosperity. Even though there was no great overcapitalization of railroads and even though many of the industrial enterprises were really legitimate, the discounting of the future was not quite ample, and the capital was invested more rapidly than the immediate returns would warrant. The replacement fund, in other words, was neither quite large enough nor quite active enough; and with the gradual exhaustion of the available free capital, interest rates necessarily rose and security values as a consequence fell.

The period of liquidation was thus a fortunate event. By checking the movement of exaltation and preventing the level of prices from being so extreme, it kept the reaction from being so great. Where the crest of the wave is lower, the shock of its break is less. Had the ascent of prices and values gone on unhindered, the convulsion of 1907 would have been far more severe. From this point of view, even those who mistakenly persist in ascribing the lack of confidence to the President ought in reality to be grateful to him; for to the extent that he may be said to have superinduced the liquidation of the spring and summer, he a.s.suredly contributed to mitigate the shock of the inevitable reaction in the autumn.

The fifth and final cause of the lesser magnitude of the crisis is the development of trusts. Until we attain the right perspective, it is always difficult to get a correct view of the far-reaching changes which are taking place under our very eyes. Especially true is this of such a veritable revolution as is typified by the modern concentration and integration of industry into the vast combinations known as trusts.

There are indeed many disquieting and untoward symptoms in the development of which this is not the place to speak. But as against the undoubted perils of what we are all now coming to recognize as an inevitable process, we sometimes forget to put at least one countervailing advantage which is of especial importance in this connection. The modern trust, as typified in its most developed form by the United States Steel Corporation, is apt to exert an undeniably steadying influence on prices. Precisely because of the immense interests at stake, and the danger of a reaction, the trust with its consummately able management tends toward conservatism. As compared with the action of a horde of small compet.i.tors under similar conditions, it is apt during a period of prosperity to refrain from marking up prices to the top notch, and is likely to make a more adequate provision for the contingencies of the market. With this greater moderation is apt to be a.s.sociated a more accurate prevision, which succeeds in a more correct adjustment of present investment to future needs. The drift of business enterprise in its newer form is thus toward a relative checking of the discrepancy between estimated and actual earnings, or, in other words, toward a r.e.t.a.r.dation in the process of overcapitalization. The history of trusts is still too recent, and in not all of them are we yet able to discern the working out of what ultimately will come to be recognized as the real laws of their evolution. To those, however, who comprehend what this revolution in business enterprise really implies, it can scarcely be doubted that the fruit of this steadying influence and of the better adaptation of the present to the future is already perceptible. Notwithstanding the quite unexampled prosperity of the last decade, the tempo of overcapitalization has been relatively less rapid and the process of readjustment throughout the world of enterprise has therefore been less extreme. Industry has slackened rather than collapsed, and the disturbance itself has been comparatively short-lived, with the prospects of an early rebound. The influence of trusts in moderating crises and in minimizing depressions will doubtless become more apparent with each ensuing decade in the history of modern industry.

While the general causes which are responsible for the crisis of 1907 have been recounted above, there still remains one point of fundamental importance. If we compare our economic history with that of Europe, we observe that acute financial crises have there almost pa.s.sed away.

England has had no severe convulsion since 1866, and in France and Germany also the disturbances are more and more a.s.suming the form of periodic industrial depressions rather than of acute financial crises.

The responsibility for the continuance in this country of a phenomenon which is in large measure vanis.h.i.+ng elsewhere rests beyond all peradventure of doubt on the inadequacy of our currency system.

CURRENT THEORIES OF CRISES

TWO POINTS OF AGREEMENT

[233]Wide divergences of opinion continue to exist among competent writers upon crises; but in recent years substantial agreement has been reached upon two points of fundamental importance.

Crises are no longer treated as sudden catastrophes which interrupt the "normal" course of business, as episodes which can be understood without investigation of the intervening years. On the contrary, the crisis is regarded as but the most dramatic and the briefest of the three phases of a business cycle--prosperity, crisis, and depression.[234] Modern discussions endeavor to show why a crisis is followed by depression, and depression by prosperity, quite as much as to show why prosperity is followed by a crisis. In a word, the theory of crises has grown into the theory of business cycles.[235]

This wider grasp of the problem has discredited the view that crises are due to abnormal conditions which tempt industry and trade to forsake their beaten paths and temporarily befog the judgment of business men and investors, or to misguided legislation, unsound business practices, imperfect banking organization, and the like.[236] As business cycles have continued to run their round decade after decade in all nations of highly developed business organization, the idea that each crisis may be accounted for by some special cause has become less tenable. On the contrary, the explanations in favor to-day ascribe the recurrence of crises after periods of prosperity to some inherent characteristic of economic organization or activity. The complex processes which make up business life are a.n.a.lyzed to discover why they inevitably work out a change from good times to bad and from bad times to good. The influence of special conditions is admitted, of course, but rather as a factor which complicates the process than as the leading cause of crises.

BEVERIDGE'S "COMPEt.i.tION THEORY"

Among these theories which seek to account not for crises but for the cyclical fluctuations of economic activity, the "compet.i.tion theory"

tentatively advanced by Beveridge is one of the simplest.

In most instances, he begins, production is carried on by several or many establishments, each acting independently, and each seeking to do as large a share of the business as possible. Whenever the demand for their wares increases, each compet.i.tor tries to engross a larger portion of the market. "Inevitably, therefore, all the producers together tend to overshoot the demand and to glut the market for a time. This is a result not of wild speculation nor of miscalculation of the total demand; it must be a normal incident wherever compet.i.tion has a place at all." Such activity among producers const.i.tutes the period of prosperity. But sooner or later the glutting of the market becomes apparent, and then the crisis comes, because the goods cannot all be sold at a profit. Prices fall, production is checked, and a period of depression ensues. Gradually, however, the slackened rate of production allows the acc.u.mulated stocks to be cleared, perhaps below cost price, perhaps by waiting until demand grows up to supply. When this excess of demand over supply has once again become patent, business recovers.

Depression yields to prosperity, compet.i.tors again vie with each other to increase their shares in the output, after a few years the market is glutted again, and a new crisis comes, to be followed once more by depression. Thus business cycles are due in the last resort to "the simple and well nigh universal fact of industrial compet.i.tion."[237]

MAY'S THEORY OF THE DISCREPANCY BETWEEN WAGES AND PRODUCTIVITY

Like Beveridge, May conceives crises to result immediately from the glutting of markets for industrial products. But May offers a quite different a.n.a.lysis of the cause of gluts. The continually growing productivity of industry makes necessary a corresponding growth of the market, if disaster is to be avoided. But to enable producers to sell their growing output promptly prices must be reduced and wages must be raised in proportion as the supply of goods increases. For it is only by combining an increase in the money income of the ma.s.s of the population with a decrease in the cost of commodities that a country's home markets can be kept expanding with the progress of industrial methods. Periods of prosperity attended by rising prices necessarily violate this condition of business hygiene and inevitably end by glutting markets.

Then come crises, which restore the body politic to health by forcing down prices to the point where consumers can purchase the supplies which are offered. The germ of the trouble, then, is the tendency of prices to rise during periods of increasing productivity. Accordingly, May urges as remedy a legal limitation of the rate of profits, in order that producers may be forced to reduce prices as they increase output.[238]

HOBSON'S THEORY OF OVER-SAVING

A third explanation of how markets come to be glutted periodically is offered by Hobson's theory of over-saving. Hobson holds that at any given time "there is an exact proportion of the current income which, in accordance with existing arts of production and existing foresight, is required to set up new capital so as to make provision for the maximum consumption throughout the near future." Now, if in a period of prosperity the rate of consumption should rise _pari pa.s.su_ with the rate of production, there is no inherent reason why the prosperity might not continue indefinitely. But in modern societies, a considerable portion of the wealth produced belongs to a small cla.s.s. In active times their incomes rise more rapidly than their consumption and the surplus income is perforce saved. There results for the community as a whole a slight deficiency of spending and a corresponding excess of saving. The wealthy cla.s.s seeks to invest its new savings in productive enterprises--thereby increasing the supply of goods and also increasing the incomes from which further savings will be made. This process runs c.u.mulatively during the years of prosperity until finally the markets become congested with goods which cannot be sold at a profit. Then prices fall, liquidation ensues, capital is written down, and the incomes of the wealthy cla.s.s are so reduced that savings fall below the proper proportion to spending. During this period of depression the glut of goods weighing upon the market is gradually worked off, and the prospect of profitable investment slowly returns. Saving rises again to the right proportion to spending and good times prevail for a season.

But after a while the chronic impulse towards over-saving becomes fully operative once more, and soon or late begets another congestion of the markets and this congestion begets another depression. Proximately, then, the cause of alternating prosperity and depression is the tendency toward over-saving; ultimately it is the existence of the surplus incomes which lead to over-saving.[239]

HULL'S THEORY OF THE CHANGING COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION

An American business man, George H. Hull, has recently drawn from his experience of practical affairs conclusions which resemble those drawn by [a German] Professor Spiethoff, from his theoretical a.n.a.lysis of economic records. High prices of construction, runs his thesis, is the hitherto "unknown cause of the mysterious depressions" from which the industrial nations suffer.

In demonstrating the thesis, Hull contends that agriculture, commerce, and finance fluctuate within relatively narrow limits. Agriculture provides the necessities of life, commerce distributes them, and finance adjusts the bills. The volume of all this business is fairly constant, because the demand for necessities is incapable of sudden expansion or contraction. Industry, on the contrary, may expand or contract indefinitely--especially that part of industry devoted to construction work. For the sources of "booms" and depressions, therefore, we must look to the enterprises which build and equip houses, stores, factories, railways, docks, and the like.

Of the huge total of construction, which Hull believes to make over three-quarters of all industrial operations, at least two-thirds, even in the busiest of years, consists of repairs, replacements, and such extensions as are required by the growth of population. This portion of construction is necessary and must be executed every year. But the remaining portion is "optional construction," and is undertaken or not according as investors see a liberal or a meagre profit in providing new equipment.

Now, when the costs of construction fall low enough to arouse "the bargain-counter instinct," many of "the far-seeing ones who hold the purse-strings of the country" let heavy contracts, and their example is followed by the less shrewd. The addition of the resulting new business to the regular volume of "necessity construction" plus the provision of ordinary consumers' goods creates a "boom." But, after a year or two, contractors discover that their order books call for more work than they can get labor and materials to finish on contract time. When this oversold condition of the contracting trades is realized, the prices of labor and of raw materials rise rapidly. The estimated cost of construction on new contracts then becomes excessive. Shrewd investors therefore begin to defer the execution of their plans for extending permanent equipment, and the letting of fresh contracts declines apace.

As they gradually complete work on their old contracts, all the enterprises making iron, steel, lumber, cement, brick, stone, etc., then face a serious shrinkage of business. Just as the execution of the large contracts for "optional construction," let in the low-priced period, brought on prosperity, so the smallness of such contracts, let in the high-price period, now brings on depression. Then the prices of construction fall until they arouse "the bargain-counter instinct" of investors once more, and the cycle begins afresh.

While Hull grants that panics are often caused by strictly financial disorders, he holds that all industrial depressions are caused by high prices of construction, and foreshadowed by high prices of iron.

Consequently he believes that depressions could be prevented from occurring if the Government would collect and publish monthly "all pertinent information in relation to the existing volume of construction under contract for future months, and all pertinent information in relation to the capacity of the country to produce construction materials to meet the demand thus indicated."[240]

SOMBART'S THEORY OF THE UNEVEN EXPANSION IN THE PRODUCTION OF ORGANIC AND INORGANIC GOODS

Sombart, like many of the recent German writers, finds ill-proportioned production the chief cause of crises; but he thinks it inaccurate to say that the overproduction is in industrial equipment. For during the German "boom" which collapsed in 1900-01, overproduction was quite as marked in industries making equipment for electric lighting systems, telephone plants, street railways, dwellings, bicycles, etc., as in industries making machines. The real lack of proportion he sees in the unlike degree of expansion in industries using organic and inorganic materials. The inorganic industries, typified by steel, can expand to an enormous extent within a brief period without being seriously hampered by scarcity of raw materials. The organic industries, typified by cotton-spinning, on the contrary, are always in precarious dependence upon the year's harvests. In the organic industries, one may say, the condition of business is determined by the harvests; in the inorganic industries the condition of business determines the production of raw materials. The modern crisis, then, following upon a period of prosperity, is substantially the result of the different rhythm of production in the organic and inorganic realms. The organic industries dependent upon harvests cannot keep pace with the inorganic when the latter are being rapidly extended by heavy investments of capital.[241]