Failures of State and National Banks in Oklahoma contrasted, 110. — State banks seemed to flourish during the war; many failures after 1920, 111. — Political complications, 114. — Repeal of the guaranty legislation, 117. — Situation in other States: Kansas, 121. — Nebraska, 124. — South Dakota, 127. — North Dakota, 128. — Mississippi, 129. — Washington, 130. — Texas, 131. — General arguments and conclusion, 134.

Journal Article The Nebraska Deposit Guaranty Fund Get access Thornton Cooke Thornton Cooke Columbia National Bank, Kansas City, Missouri Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 36, Issue 1, November 1921, Pages 162–166, https://doi.org/10.2307/1883785 Published: 01 November 1921

Journal Article Deposit Guaranty in Mississippi Get access Thornton Cooke Thornton Cooke Fidelity Trust Company, Kansas City, Mo. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 29, Issue 2, February 1915, Pages 419–425, https://doi.org/10.2307/1884969 Published: 01 February 1915

Bank Deposit Guaranty in four states, 69. — Upheld by U. S. Supreme Court, 70. — I. Oklahoma; many failures, 71. — Adverse economic conditions, 72. — Politics and the Guaranty Law, 73. — Cases of dishonesty, 74. — Details of certain failures, 75. — Insolvent banks kept going, 77. — Heavy losses in Oklahoma City, 82. — Legislation of 1911 and 1913, 83. — Powers given to State Bankers' Association, 84. — Other new provisions, 84. — The national system now gaining over the state system, 87. — People still have faith in guaranty system; its future uncertain, 91. — II. Kansas; participation optional, 94. — One guaranteed bank fails, 94. — More than one-half the state banks participate, 95. — Legislation of 1911 and 1913, 96. — Commissioner fixes maximum interest rates by counties, 96. — Progress of state and national banks, 97. — Good and bad points of Kansas system, 99. — III. Nebraska; no failures for some years, 99. — Summary of the law, 100. — Progress of state and national banks, 101. — Advantages and defects of Nebraska law, 103. — Its influence on deposits, 103. — IV. Texas, 104. — Some failures; losses relatively small, 104. — Progress of national and state banks, 106. — Most banks elect the guaranty plan, few the bond security plan, 107. — Legislation of 1913, 108. — Charters refused where no necessity for banks, 108. — The future in Texas, 109. — V. General Arguments and Conclusions, 109. — Guaranty alone does not cause failures, 109. — Large single risks and concentration of risks, 110. — Guaranty funds should be larger, 110. — Grants of power to state banking departments, 111. — Is guaranty a public need? 111. — Effect of currency legislation on sentiment for deposH guaranty, 112. — Will plan be continued where now in force, and adopted in other states? 112. — Funds should be available only in final liquidations, 113. — American banking will remain individual, 114.

Oklahoma (continued). Failure of Columbia Bank and Trust Co. Payment of depositors begun at once, 330. — Outcome of the liquidation, 332. — Other failures, 334. — How far deposit insurance caused the failure, 336. — How far politics entered, 338. — A serious question: the size of single risks, 340. — Desirability of postponing payment until after liquidation, 341. — Few conversions into national banks, 342. — Conclusion as to Oklahoma, 343. — Kansas. Unsuccessful bill of 1898, 344. — Act of 1909, 346. — National banks, not being allowed to participate, form a Guaranty Company, 349. — Legal complications: the constitutionality of the act questioned, 352. — Working of the act thus far, 355. — Nebraska. Act of 1909, 356. — Held unconstitutional by Circuit Court, and not in effect pending appeal, 357. — South Dakota. Abortive act of 1909, 359. — Texas. Act of 1909. Nominal option between guaranty and an indemnity bond, 362. — Other provisions, 363. — Guaranty plan generally followed, 365. — General regulation of banking, 366. — Effects of the act, 366. — Colorado. Unique and interesting bill, but no law enacted, 368. — Missouri. Attempts at legislation failed, 369. Deposit Insurance by Private Corporations, 370. — Proposals and possibilities, 371, 372. General arguments and conclusions, 373. — Chief purposes of deposit insurance, 373–376. — Objections: unnecessary? Failures, tho rare, are bad, 376. — Depositors cannot pick good banks, 377. — Would insurance bring impossible conditions? 378. — Undue liberality in interest on deposits? 379. — Fictitious loans? 380. — Undue expansion? 381. — No surplus accumulated? 382. — Unfair in taxing good banks? 383. — Premiums inadequate? 383. — State-administered vs. private insurance, 386. — The immediate future and the ultimate possibilities, 388.

The movement, a result of the panic of 1907, 86. — Provisions of the Oklahoma law, 88. — National banks unable to participate in the guaranty, many become state banks, 90. — Rapid increase in the deposits of state banks, 94. — The guaranty of deposits generally favored by the people outside the larger cities, 103. — Political aspects of the question, 103. — More strict banking laws have in every instance accompanied the adoption of the guaranty or insurance of deposits, 106.

Journal Article The Effect of the New Currency Law on Banking in the West Get access Thornton Cooke Thornton Cooke Bank of Herington, Herington, Kan. Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 15, Issue 2, February 1901, Pages 277–286, https://doi.org/10.2307/1884897 Published: 01 February 1901

Journal Article Distribution of Small Banks in the West Get access Thornton Cooke Thornton Cooke Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Volume 12, Issue 1, October 1897, Pages 70–72, https://doi.org/10.2307/1882309 Published: 01 October 1897