Mr. EDMUNDS. I will answer. the laws of all the States and the laws of the U.S. require that these banks shall keep accounts that their oi’ficers shall swear to, and make monthly returns. Any bank that would not blow up in 60 days knows and is obliged to communicate to the public in some wayjust how its circulation is, how it stands every day; and all banks that ought not to blow up do know every night just how much new circulation has gone out and how much old has come in. N ow, as to keeping out the circulation, according to the intervention suggested by my friendfrom Ohio, through the medium of a broker, that, like any other criminal and wrongful act in violation of the statute, is to be met by proof, of course. If the Comptroller of the Ciirrency finds that from the sworn monthly returns of any bank it appears that the old circulation has not diminished, or if he has the least suspicion that a bank is using indirect means to kee its circulation out, the means are in his han s to meet the case. Indulge me, sir, a moment further in order to reply to the Senfrom Kentucky, for whose jud cut I have great res set. It is true that the anks got a consideration, but the consideration is only like the consideration for its circulation under the national currency act of 90%. This old State circulation i a part of the 90%. when it is below 90, and they cannot get any more until they get that in. I am entirely satisfied with taxing just as you do tax/the 90%.; but in order to meet the banks that have doubled upon the community and are reissuing their cir culation, as the Senfrom Maine has said, I think it is wrong in order to punish themand they ought to be puuished lo also punish those banks who in good faith and in truth and justice are endeavoring to get in their circulation all the time, and who cannot get the‘new national circulation for it. If they violate the law punish them, and it is easy enough to find out whether they do it or not, because they are obliged to make returns every month.