I am ready to admit, however, that a general opinion has long prevailed that the Bank of England ought to be prepared to do much more than this, though I confess my surprise at finding an advocate for such an opinion in the "Economist." If it were practicable for the Bank to retain money unemployed to meet such an emergency, it would be a very unwise thing to do so.

But I contend that it is quite impracticable, and if it were possible, it would be most inexpedient; and I can only express my regret that the Bank, from a desire to do everything in its power to afford general assistance in times of banking or commercial distress, should ever have acted in a way to encourage such an opinion.

The more the conduct of the affairs of the Bank is made to assimilate to the conduct of every other well-managed bank in the United Kingdom, the better for the Bank, and the better for the community at large.' I am scarcely a judge, but I do not think Mr.Hankey replies to the 'Economist' very conclusively.
First.

He should have observed that the question is not as to what 'ought to be,' but as to what is.

The 'Economist' did not say that the system of a single bank reserve was a good system, but that it was the system which existed, and which must be worked, as you could not change it.
Secondly.