early as 1847. She made her debut in London in 1856 with Charles Dillon at the Lyceum theatre as Henri in Belphegor. Her brilliant career as an actress, from the time when in 1865 she went into management at the Prince of Wales's theatre, and married Mr. (afterwards Sir Squire) Bancroft in 1868, came to a close in 1885, when she and her husband retired from the stage; but Lady Bancroft reappeared with him in the Diplomacy revival of 1893, and twice subsequently made a single appearance at a special matinee, the last occasion being the benefit performance for Miss Nellie Farren in March 1898.
BANDELIER, ADOLPH FRANCIS ALPHONSE (1840-1914), American archaeologist (see 3.311), died at Madrid March 19 1914. His last published works were The Islands of Titicaca and Koati (1910) and The Ruins of Tiahuanaco in Bolivia (1912).
BANERJEA, SIR SURENDRANATH (1848-), Indian orator, political reformer and journalist, was born Nov. 10 1848, a member of the Rarhi sub-caste of Kulin Brahmans, and the second son of a medical practitioner in Calcutta. Passing for the Indian civil service at the open competition of 1870, he was posted to Sylhet as assistant magistrate but, at the expiry of two years, was compulsorily retired on a small compassionate pension, on account of a technical irregularity—a decision since admitted generally to have been unduly harsh. He then opened a small school in Calcutta which soon expanded into the well-known Ripon College. His work as a political reformer began in 1876 when he founded the Calcutta Indian Association, and three years later he became editor of the Bengalee newspaper. In subsequent years he became the centre of many stormy episodes. He was one of those who established the Indian National Congress in 1883, and presided over the Poona session of 1895 and again at the meeting at Ahmedabad in 1902.
From 1876 to 1899 he served on the Calcutta corporation, when he resigned with 27 other leading commissioners as a protest against the changes introduced by the Calcutta Municipal Act. In 1893 he was elected to represent the corporation on the Bengal Legislative Council, and was twice returned to the central Legislature as member for Bengal. He gave evidence in 1897 before the Royal Commission on Indian Expenditure and frequently visited England in connexion with deputations and political missions. Vehemently opposing the administrative partition of Bengal effected by Lord Curzon in 1905, he supported the boycott of foreign goods and the movement in favour of “national” education which arose from the upheaval. He always exhibited, however, a preference for constitutional agitation, and was among the first to welcome the Montagu-Chelmsford reforms. Severing his association with the Congress, which had passed under “extremist” control, he formed an “Indian Liberal” organization, and came to London in 1919 to present the case for his party before the Joint Parliamentary Committee, subsequently accepting office as Minister for Local Government and Sanitation in Bengal. A knighthood was conferred upon him in Jan. 1921. Possessed of a remarkable knowledge of the English language and literature, he had earned by his eloquence the title of the Gladstone of India.
BÁNFFY, DEZSÖ [Desiderius], Baron (1843-1911), Hungarian statesman (see 3.315). In 1906 Banffy, who had joined the coalition in opposition to the Government, broke with it on the military questions at issue with the King-Emperor, which he wished to eliminate, and in 1908 he became leader of the progressive elements and, as president of the Franchise League, began an agitation for universal, secret and equal suffrage (see 13.920, 921). In 1910 he became president of the Reform Club. He died May 24 1911.
BANG, HERMANN JOACHIM (1858-1912), Danish author (see 3.315), died Jan. 29 1912. In 1910 a volume of essays appeared, Masker og Mennesker, followed in 1911 by a volume of short stories, En deilig Dag. His collected works were published in six volumes in Copenhagen and Christiania (1912).
See F. Poppenberg, Nordiske Porträts—Hermann Bang (1912).
BANKING (see 3.334).—I. United Kingdom.—British banking during 1910-21 underwent vast changes, not the least of which was seen in the direction of amalgamation. But even apart from that, the banks had grown in size, in importance, and in the extent of the territory covered by their branches. During this period, the great joint stock banks, which had generally been considered ultra-conservative in their methods, threw off to a large extent their mantle of aloofness; they even carried competition into foreign countries which a few years earlier had been thought to be closed to them for the establishment of branch banks. Whether their action is wise remains yet to be seen; for in some cases it was found necessary after a few years' experience of foreign banking to form separate companies for carrying out the operations of the foreign branch banks.
Amalgamations.—Amalgamation of banks or of finance houses was, of course, no new phenomenon; it dates back to the days of the old goldsmiths, when it was not unusual for a man to break adrift from one firm of goldsmiths for the purpose of joining forces with another more enterprising competitor, and slowly, but surely, the desire to strengthen their position by absorption or alliance spread to the private banks and later to the joint stock banks. However, it was not until the period between 1891 and 1896 that we find anything in the nature of a rush to create bigger banks through the process of absorption or amalgamation. During those five years a very large number of banks in the United Kingdom ceased to be separate entities, and the policy of amalgamation was steadily pursued up to the outbreak of the World War. There was then a slight pause in what we might call the race for supremacy among the larger joint stock banks; but the great and perplexing financial problems which arose during the war kindled afresh the desire for larger and yet larger banking concerns. Gradually, the lesser banks were drawn into the pool; then important institutions which had previously been regarded as free from the temptation to amalgamate, succeeded in persuading their shareholders that the time had come to incorporate their resources with those of the premier banks, and between 1917 and 1919, scarcely a month passed without the newspapers recording the merging of one large bank into another. The earlier absorption of local banks by larger and more widely spread joint stock banks had created little more than passing interest among the public, but the policy of combination between the large joint stock banks themselves, many of them already possessed of enormous funds and branches spread over a wide area, caused a certain amount of concern in various directions, doubts being expressed as to its being to the public advantage, and in powerful business quarters the action of the banks was keenly criticized.
To investigate the matter a Treasury Committee was appointed on March 11 1918, and as the result of the deliberations of that committee the Government were recommended to pass legislation requiring that the prior approval of Government be obtained before any amalgamations were announced or carried into effect. Further, it was recommended that the approval both of the Treasury and of the Board of Trade should be obtained and that legislation should be passed requiring the two departments to set up a special statutory committee to advise them. These recommendations were carried into effect, and the new statutory committee set up; but either the objections of this body were easily met, or they found nothing to criticize in further unions, for by 1918-9 almost the entire banking strength of the country had become centred in five great combined institutions, the London Joint City & Midland Bank, Ltd., Barclay's Bank, Ltd., the London County Westminster & Parr's Bank, Ltd., the National Provincial & Union Bank of England, Ltd., and Lloyd's Bank, Ltd.
The date of the establishment of the London County Westminster & Parr's Bank, Ltd., is usually given as 1836, though as a matter of fact the London & Westminster Bank, which was the first joint stock bank established in London, was formed in March 1834. The London & County Bank was established two years later—in 1836. The actual date of the formation of Parr's Bank is not quite certain: there are records of its doing business as a private firm about 100 years ago, but as a joint stock bank it dates back no farther than 1865. Before the final amalgamation, each of the banks had obtained
