§ 47. Sir J. BUTCHERasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he can give an assurance that, as soon as all the assets of the German banks in London which can be got in during the War have been got in and placed in safe custody and the debts which can be paid during the War have been paid, the premises of these banks will be at once closed, leaving the final distribution of the surplus assets to be dealt with after the War?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe procedure indicated in the question correctly represents the policy of the Government, and I should be perfectly prepared to give the assurance suggested by my hon. and learned Friend if I were satisfied that it would be physically possible to reach the position which he contemplates while the War is still going on. A good deal, however, still remains to be done. Some time will necessarily elapse before that position is reached, and I am obviously not in a position to give an undertaking that it will be reached before the War ends.
§ Sir E. CARSONCan my right hon. Friend tell us what amount would be lost to this country if we shut up these banks altogether?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI think it would be very difficult to tell the amount, but, as I pointed out before, the loss would be to the creditors, British and Allied, of these banks. I do not see that any object would be gained from such a course, because the continuance of the banks does not mean carrying on business. The fact that they are being liquidated under Government control does not give them any goodwill.
§ Sir E. CARSONWill not these banks be there ready to pounce upon this country when the War is over?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWWe have tried to destroy their goodwill as far as we could without loss. We have sold the premises of a number of them. The real question, whether or not they should be allowed to continue to do business, must depend upon the action taken by the House on this question.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERDo I understand my right hon. Friend to say that as soon as we get the British assets in safe custody there is no reason to keep the doors of these banks open?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWNo, Sir; I do not understand that to be the question. They will not be kept open a day longer than when the assets are in a position to be realised.
§ Sir J. BUTCHERWhat, in the case of assets which cannot be realised during the War, and which will have to wait until the War is over to be realised, is the object of keeping the banks open? Is it not quite sufficient to keep the assets in safe custody?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWIt really depends upon the method of doing business. It is done now entirely under Government control; it is not done by the banks as banks. The object of the Government is to close them the moment that can be done without loss.
§ General CROFTIs there any reason why the business, if under Government control, should not be carried on by the Bank of England or some other bank, and so get rid of all the suspicion?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWI wish we could get rid of the suspicion. So far as I can judge, and I have looked into the question, it could not be carried out by any other method so cheaply and without loss as under the method we have adopted.
§ 48. Sir J. BUTCHERasked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the agreement recently entered into for a lease of new premises in London for the Deutsche Bank for the duration of the War and six months thereafter contains any provision for terminating the lease as soon as all the assets which can be got in during the War have been got in and placed in safe custody, and the debts which can be paid during the War have been paid?
§ Mr. BONAR LAWThe answer is in the negative. The existence of the lease will not be an obstacle to the closing of the bank's premises during the War, if that course prove to be practicable.