[Rezension zu Albert Linder: Die schweizerischen Großbanken; Hans Drechsle: Das schweizerische Bankgeschäft in statistischer und graphischer Darstellung]

Helene Lieser: Review of Albert Linder and Hans Drechsle (1927)

Helene Lieser’s short review assesses two complementary studies of Swiss banking: Linder’s historical dissertation on the large banks and Drechsle’s statistical and graphical account. Her governing distinction is between accumulating evidence and explaining it theoretically. She credits Linder’s extensive research but finds insufficient intellectual independence and conceptual command:

Es ist sehr sorgfältig und mit Heranziehung von sehr viel Quellen und literarischem Materiale gearbeitet, es fehlt ihm aber die selbständige Einstellung und in einzelnen Kapiteln eine über den Stoff stehende theoretische Durchdringung des Materials.

English translation: It is very carefully prepared and draws on a great many sources and literary materials, but it lacks an independent standpoint and, in individual chapters, a theoretical penetration that rises above the material.

Lieser extracts a comparative institutional history from this account. Swiss banking developed along lines resembling Austria’s, beginning with the French Crédit mobilier idea and shaped by industrialization and railway construction. The banks both participated in and financed this development. Their origins explain their continental “mixed” character: deposit banking coexisted with commercial and industrial credit financing and securities issuance, across centralized institutions and banks with domestic and foreign branches.

Drechsle supplies a statistical complement, praised for interesting data and clear presentation. Yet Lieser applies the same critical standard:

Wünschenswert wäre allerdings auch hier eine bessere theoretische Durchdringung und ein Ausbau des beschreibenden Teiles.

English translation: Here too, however, better theoretical penetration and an expansion of the descriptive section would be desirable.

The review’s relevance lies in this paired judgment: historical and statistical documentation illuminate banking institutions, but neither substitutes for theoretical interpretation.