View PDF

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

93d Congress, 2d Session

Senate Document No. 93~253

Annual Report 1973
Comptroller of the Currency




The Administrator of National Banks

James E. Smith
Comptroller of the Currency




For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $3.70
Stock Number 048-001-00010-6

Letter of Transmittal
TREASURY DEPARTMENT,
OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY,
WASHINGTON, D.C.,

OCTOBER 1,

1973

SlRS: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 333 of the United States
Revised Statutes, I am pleased to submit the 1973 Annual Report of
the Comptroller of the Currency.
Respectfully,
JAMES E. SMITH,

Comptroller of the Currency.
THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE
THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES




in

Contents
Title of Section

page

I.
II.
HI.
IV.
V.
VI.
VII.
VIII.
IX.

1
3
5
13
15
23
25
27
31

Condition of the National Banking System
Income and Expenses of National Banks
Structural Changes in the National Banking System
Bank Examinations and Related Activities
Litigation
Fiduciary Activities of National Banks
International Banking and Finance
Administrative and Management Developments
Financial Operations of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency

Appendices
A. Merger Decisions, 1973
B. Statistical Tables
C. Addresses and Selected Congressional Testimony of the Comptroller of the Currency

37
199
279

Index

307




Statistical Tables
Table No.

Title

Assets, liabilities, and capital accounts of National
banks, 1972 and 1973
Income and expenses of National banks, 1972 and
1973
.
National banks and banking offices, by States,
Dec. 31, 1973...!
Applications for National bank charters, and charters
issued, by States, calendar 1973
Applications for National bank charters issued pursuant to corporate reorganizations, and charters
issued, by States, calendar 1973
Applications for conversion to Rational bank charters,
and charters issued, by States, calendar 1973

VI




Page
2
4
6
7

8
9

Table No.

Title

7 Branches of National banks, by States, calendar
1973
8 De novo branch applications of National banks, by
States, calendar 1973
9 De novo branches of National banks opened for
business, by community size and by size of bank,
calendar 1973
10 Mergers, calendar 1973
11 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: balance
sheets
:
12 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: statements
of revenue, expenses, and Comptroller's equity
13 Office of the Comptroller of the Currency: statements
of changes in financial position

Page
10
11
12
12
32
33
34

I.

Condition of the National Banking System

National banks' operations in 1973 reflected
the strong economic expansion and the pervasive
inflationary pressures that marked the year. Loan
demand was exceedingly strong, and total loans
spurted by 17.8 percent during the year. Deposit
growth was not sufficient to provide all the funds
needed to support the loan expansion despite
spirited bidding for large-denomination certificates
of deposit. Time and savings deposits increased
by 16.0 percent, while demand deposits experienced
only a 3.8 percent rise. As a result, the former
accounted for 54.7 percent of total deposits at the
end of 1973, compared with 52.0 percent a year
earlier.
Holdings of U.S. Treasuries decreased by $6.2
billion, but that reduction was partially offset by
an increase of $4.4 billion in securities of Government agencies and corporations. Non-deposit
liabilities increased substantially, with federal
funds purchased and securities sold under agree-




ments to repurchase $11.6 billion higher than at
the beginning of the year.
Total assets of National banks reached $489.6
billion at year-end, representing a 12.6 percent
increase for the year. That compared with a 15.5
percent asset increase in 1972. Again, as in 1972,
the loan portfolio grew significantly relative to the
securities portfolio. Loans climbed from 53.0 percent of total assets to 55.5 percent during 1973,
while the ratio of securities to total assets dropped
from 23.9 percent to 21.4 percent.
Total capital of National banks reached $33.1
billion at year-end 1973, representing an increase
of 9.2 percent during the year. Reflecting the high
level of interest rates in the bond market, only a
nominal increase from $2.1 billion to $2.2 billion
occurred in the total of outstanding capital notes
and debentures in 1973. Total reserves on loans
and securities rose 12.8 percent during the year,
to a total of $4.7 billion.

TABLE 1

Assets, liabilities, and capital accounts of National Banks, 1972 and 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Dec. 31, 1972
4,614 banks
Amount

Dec. 31,1973
4,661 banks

Percent
Distribution

Amount

Change, 1972-1973

Percent
Distribution

Amount

Percent

ASSETS

Total assets.

14.45

$3,323

4.93

37,200

8.55

30,966

6.32

-6,234

- 16.76

10,666
52,716
3,154

2.45
12.12
.73

15,072
55,236

3,411

3.08
11.28
.70

4,406
2,520
257

41.31
4.78
8.15

23.85

104,685

21.38

949

.91

16.672
1,073
230,456
7,333
2,007
6,268

3.83
.25
52.98
1.69
.46
1.44

22,091
1,573
271,572
8,144
2,847
7,965

4.51
.32
55.47
1.66
.58
1.63

5,419
500
41,116
811
840
1,697

32.50
46.60
17.84
11.06
4.85
27.07

100.00

489,600

100.00

54,653

12.57

130,376

29.98

136,056

27.79

5,680

4.36

157,663

36.25
1.62
7.69

181,215
6,193
37,072

37.01
1.26
7.57

23,552
-869
3,627

14.94
-12.31
10.84

6,030

5,993

1.00
4.72
1.38

23,379
5,935

1.23
4.78
1.21

1,668
2,853
-58

38.24
13.90
-.97

82.64

395,881

80.86

36,454

10.14

172,565
186,862

39.67
42.96

179,046
216,835

36.57
44.29

6,481
29,973

3.76
16.04

24,349
2,370

5.60
.54

35,975
3,722

7.35
.76

11,626
1,352

47.75
57.05

2,062
12,204

.47
2.81

2,921
13,251

.60
2.71

859
1,047

41.66
8.58

400,413

Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell
Direct lease financing
Loans
Fixed assets
Customers' liability on acceptances outstanding
Other assets

$70,724

359,427

Total securities..

15.50

434,947

U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and
corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities

$67,401

103,736

Cash and due from banks

92.06

451,749

92.27

51,336

12.82

LIABILITIES

Demand deposits of individuals, partnerships and corporations
Time and savings deposits of individuals, partnerships and
corporations
Deposits of U.S. Government
Deposits of States and political subdivisions
Deposits of foreign governments and official institutions,
central banks, and international institutions
Deposits of commercial banks
Certified and officers' checks, etc
Total deposits.
Demand deposits
Time and savings deposits.
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase
Liabilities for borrowed money
Acceptances executed by or for account of reporting
banks and outstanding
Other liabilities
Total liabilities

7,062
33,445
4,362
20,526

Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries.

+1

50.00

RESERVES ON LOANS AND SECURITIES

Reserves on loans
Reserves on securities

4,101
78

.94
.02

4,634
79

.95
.02

533
1

13.00
1.28

2,129
42
7,458
12,717
7,524
482

.49
.01
1.71
2.92
1.73
.11

2,200
37
7,904
13,513
8,998
484

.45
.01
1.61
2.76
1.84
.10

71
-5
446
7%
1.474
2

- 11.90
5.98
6.26
19.59
.41

CAPITAL ACCOUNTS

Capital notes and debentures.
Preferred stock
Common stock
Surplus
Undivided profits
Reserves
Total capital accounts
Total liabilities and capital accounts.

3.'66

30,352

6.98

33,135

6.77

2,783

9.17

434,947

100.00

489,600

100.001

54,653

12.57

NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts less than .01 percent.
The 1972 and 1973 data reflect consolidation of all majority-owned bank premises, subsidiaries, and all significant domestic majorityowned subsidiaries, with the exception of Edge Act subsidiaries.



II. Income and Expenses of National Banks
Both total operating income and total operating
expenses of National banks increased at unprecedented rates during 1973 — 32.6 percent and 35.9
percent respectively. With net securities losses being
only a nominal $13.5 million, net income totalled
$3.8 billion, a 13.9 percent increase over 1972
results. Since the rate of increase of total assets
was slightly less, 12.6 percent, the rate of return on
assets increased by a small amount.
The combination of the 17.8 percent increase in
loans and the sharply higher loan rates led to a 39.6
percent increase in interest and fees on loans. That
item accounted for 67.5 percent of total operating
income in 1973, compared with 64.1 percent in 1972.
Interest received on investments also increased
significantly, except for Treasuries which declined
1.2 percent due to the $6.2 billion decline in bank
holdings. Income on federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell vaulted
from $641.8 million in 1972 to $1.5 billion in 1973,




accounting for 4.7 percent of total operating income.
All of the expense items involving interest payments increased sharply in 1973. Interest on deposits—by far the largest component of operating
expense, accounting for 44.5 percent of the total—
reached $11.7 billion, a 44.3 percent increase. Expense of federal funds purchased and securities
sold under agreements to repurchase totalled $2.7
billion, accounting for 10.2 percent of operating
expense and representing a 174.7 percent increase
over the prior year's figure. While salaries and
wages of officers and employees increased 10.3
percent, to $4.9 billion, their relative importance as
a component of operating expense continued to decline, this time from 23.1 percent in 1972 to 18.8
percent in 1973.
Applicable income taxes increased from $1.0
billion to $1.2 billion, a rise of 21.7 percent. Cash
dividends of $1.4 billion were declared, representing a payout of 38 percent.

TABLE 2

Income and expenses of National banks*, 1972 and 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Dec. 31,1972
Amount

Number of banks.

Total operating income.,
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
•
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities
sold under agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs,
servicing, etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense.

Percent
distribution

4,614

Operating income:
$15,084.9
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased
641.8
under agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
1,844.5
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and
567.2
corporations
2,039.7
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
175.6
Other securities
770.9
Trust department income
718.3
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges,
695.8
commissions, and fees
1,003.9
Other operating income

Change, 1972-1973

Dec. 31,1973
Amount

Percent
distribution

Percent

47

1.02

67.45

$5,969.6

39.57

4,661
64.07 $21,054.5

Amount

2.73

1,454.7

4.66

812.9

126.66

7.84

1,821.8

5.84

-22.7

-1.23

2.41
8.66
.75
3.27
3.05

725.7
2,230.8
203.7
820.4
752.7

2.32
7.15
.65
2.63
2.41

158.5
191.1
28.1
49.5
34.4

27.94
9.37
16.00
6.42
4.79

2.96
4.26

815.7
1,334.3

2.61
4.27

119.9
330.4

17.23
32.91

23,542.7

100.00

31,214.2

100.00

7,671.5

32.59

4,461.0
778.7
8,084.7

23.10
4.03
41.86

4,922.0
905.3
11,666.0

18.75
3.45
44.45

461.0
126.6
3,581.3

10.33
16.26
44.30

976.2
77.9
111.3
903.6

5.05
.40
.58
4.68

2,681.2
304.0
130.4
999.2

10.22
1.16
.50
3.81

1,705.0
226.1
19.1
95.6

174.66
290.24
17.16
10.58

651.2
584.3
2,685.8

3.37
3.02
13.91

718.7
758.1
3,161.9

2.74
2.89
12.05

67,5
173.8
476.1

10.37
29.74
17.73

19,314.7

100.00

26,246.9

100.00

6,932.2

35.89

739.3
212.7

21.66

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses.
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries

4,228.0
982.2
3,245.8
54.1
3,299.9
8.3

4,967.3
1,194.9
3,772.5
-13.5
3,758.9
9.0

526.7
-67.6

459.0
.7

16.23
124.95
13.91
8.43

Net income.

3,307.9

3,767.7

459.8

13.90

Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On preferred stock...

1,307.6
2.7

1,447.0
2.4

139.4
-.3

10.66
-11.11

1,310.3

1,449.4

139.1

10.62

Total cash dividends declared.
Ratio to income before income taxes and securities:
Applicable income taxes
Net securities gains
Extraordinary charges or credits

23.23
1.28
.20

24.06

Ratio to total operating income:
Salaries and wages
Interest on deposits
All other operating expenses

18.95
34.34
11.41

15.77
37.37
10.13

82.04

84.09

14.05

17.49

12.07

Total operating expenses.
Net Income.

-.27
.18

*Includes all banks operating as National banks at year-end, and full year data for those State banks converting to National banks
during the year.
NOTE: Dashes indicate amounts of less than $500,000. Data may not add to totals because of rounding.



III. Structural Changes in the National Banking
System
By the end of 1973, there were 19,415 National
bank offices serving the public in the United States.
That figure reflects the addition of 1,002 offices
during 1973, a 5.2 percent increase. Operating
offices included the head offices of 4,661 banks, a
net increase of 47 over year-end 1972. The total
number of branches at the end of 1973 reached
14,754, an increase of 6.5 percent. California, with
2,660 National banking offices, New York, with 1,675,
Pennsylvania, with 1,470, and Ohio, with 1,071 led
the other states in this category. Two unit banking
states, Texas and Illinois, and the limited branching
State of Pennsylvania led in total number of National
banks — with 550,417, and 264 respectively.
National banks opened 871 de novo branches
during 1973. In addition, 262 branches joined the
National Banking System by way of mergers or conversions, and 177 left the system via closings,
mergers, and conversions.
Over 68 percent of the de novo branches opened in
1973 were located in communities with fewer than
50,000 people. At the other end of the spectrum,




only 18.9 percent of the de novo branches were
placed in cities with populations of 500,000 or more.
Banks with total resources of less than $50 million
accounted for 335, or 38 percent of 1973's de novo
branch openings. National banks with resources of
over a billion dollars opened 218 de novo branches,
or 25 percent of the total.
Ninety-four charters for newly organized National
banks were issued during 1973, a 74 percent increase
over 1972's 54. Preliminary approval was given to
134 applications, compared to 84 in the prior year.
In addition, 82 charters were issued pursuant to
corporate reorganizations and 16 in connection with
conversions of State banks.
Fifty-three merger, consolidation, or purchase and
sale transactions involving two or more operating
banks and in which the resulting bank was a National
bank were consummated during 1973. The comparable figure for 1972 was 57. Further, 88 transactions involving only one operating bank were
completed, pursuant to corporate reorganizations.

TABLE 3

National banks and banking offices, by States, Dec. 31, 1973
National banks
Number

.

Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
.
Missouri
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire

.

.
..

.

..

» .. .

New Jersey
New Mexico .
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands..
Puerto Rico

.

.

..

.

.

..

District of Columbia — all *

19,414

40
0
1
26
7
111
6
3
1
262

51
5
2
46
50
15
18
2
11
0

245
60
253
116
2,603
15
243
4
78
0

336
65
256
188
2,660
141
267
9
90
262

16
1
1
330
41
57
136
31
12
3

45
1
87
81
43
34
49
39
16

283
10
147
87
408
70
40
174
215
116

344
12
153
504
530
170
210
254
266
135

8
14
27
194
5
64
51
94
1
19

31
65
84
7
36
40
3
28
3
30

306
473
657
11
182
45
3
32
68
73

345
552
768
212
223
149
57
154
72
122

127
34
159
25
43
215
194
8
264
5

.

14,754

39
79
111
201
41
104
54
122
4
49

Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida

1,829

61
2
6
417
122
100
170
80
51
19

.

2,831

91
5
3
72
57
126
24
5
12
262

.

Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana

branches

Number
of
offices

4,661

United States
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado

of

With
branches

Unit

Total

22
49
3
31
59
145
1
105
0

105
29
110
22
12
156
49
7
158
5

857
96
1,516
724
12
856
49
281
1,206
113

984
130
1,675
749
55
1,071
243
289
1,469
118

19
32
72
550
11
22
103
24
94
127
42
1
1

4
22
13
550
6
9
17
7
92
86
42
0
1

15
10
59
0
5
13
86
17
2
41
0
1
0

345
65
329
0
89
43
578
491
2
77
0
8
0

364
97
401
550
100
65
681
515
96
204
42
9
1

15

1

14

115

130

5

5

* Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.




TABLE 4

Applications for National bank charters*, and charters issued*, by States, calendar 1973
Received'f

Approved

Rejected

Abandoned

Pending
Dec. 31,1973

United States

357

134

68

151

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia...
Florida

7
0
0
6
12
9
1
0
2
78

6
0
0
3
5
3
1
0
2
17

0
0
0
2
1
1
0
0
0
19

1
0
0
1
6
5
0
0
0
40

Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine

4
0
0
18
1
1
1
1
5
1

2
0
0
4
0
1
1
1
3
1

0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0

2
0
0
12
1
0
0
0
1
0

Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire

7
0
11
4
4
12
0
2
0
1

2
0
8
0
2
6
0
1
0
1

2
0
0
3
0
3
0
0
0
0

3
0
3
1
2
3
0
1
0
0

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

17
7
6
3
0
2
5
0
1
0

7
0
4
2
0
2
1
0
1
0

3
3
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0

7
4
2
1
0
0
2
0
0
0

South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

2
0
5
90
2
0
14
3
6
2
3
0
1

0
0
3
28
1
0
7
1
5
1
1
0
0

0
0
0
25
1
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0

2
0
2
36
0
0
6
2
1
1
2
0
1

* Excludes conversions and corporate reorganizations,
tlncludes 130 applications pending as of December 31, 1972.




Chartered

TABLE 5

Applications for National bank charters issued pursuant to corporate reorganizations, and charters issued,
by States, calendar 1973
Received*
United States.

Approved

Disapproved

106

99

11
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0

10
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
1
0

0
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
1

Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.

1
5
13
0
1
1
0
1
0
3

1
5
11
0
0
1
0
1

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

11
0
5
0
0
4
3
0
1
0

10
0
5
0
0
3
3
0
1
0

South Carolina.
South Dakota...
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia...
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands..
Puerto Rico

0
0
6
26
0
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
0

0
0
6
25
0
0
3
1
2
0
0
0
0

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
,
Delaware
District of Columbia.,
Florida
,
Georgia....
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky.
Louisiana.
Maine

* Includes 8 applications pending as of December 31, 1972.




0

0
3

Withdrawn

Pending
Dec. 31,1973

Chartered

TABLE 6

Applications for conversion to National bank charter, and charters issued, by States, calendar 1973
Received*
United States.

Approved

17

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana....
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky..
Louisiana.
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina.
North Dakota...
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania...,
Rhode Island...
South Carolina.
South Dakota...
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia...
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands..
*Includes two applications pending as of December 31, 1972.




15

Rejected

Abandoned

Pending
Dec. 31, 1973

Chartered

TABLE 7

Branches of National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Existing
branches discontinued or
consolidated
Jan. 1 to
Dec. 31,1973

Branches opened
for business
Jan. 1 to
Dec. 31,1973

Branches
acquired
through merger
or conversion
Jan. 1 to
Dec. 31,1973

13,798*

871

262

177

14,754

225
57
239
100
2,530
14
247
4
74
0

19
3
14
16
81
2
8
0
4
0

2
0
0
0
64
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0
72
1
12
0
0
0

245
60
253

Georgia....
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky..
Louisiana.
Maine

248
10
115
79
381

34
0
5
8
25
6
9
12
13
5

1
0
30
0
2
2
0
1
0
0

0
0
3
0
0
1
1
1
0
1

283
10
147
87
408
70
40
174
215
116

Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.

284
457
625
7
158
35
3

19
21
33
4
14
11
0
5
2
10

3
2
1
0
10
0
0
0
0
0

0
7
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0

306
473
657

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

799

45
11
117
44
0
34
1
12
90
17

15
0
8
8
0
9
0
0
9
0

2
1
6
4
0
2
0
1
21
0

857
96
1,516
724
12
856
49
281
1,206
113

20
2
20
0
6
5
50
10
1
3
0
0

63

1
0
0
4
0
14
13
0
0
0
0

0
0
9
0
1
1
23
2
0
1
0
0

345
65
329
0
89
43
578
491
2
77
0
8

0

0

115

Branches in
operation
Dec. 31, 1973

United States.
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
,
Colorado
Connecticut
,
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida

South Carolina.
South Dakota...
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia...
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands..
District of Columbia —all t .

63
32

162
202
112

27
66
63

86

1,397
676
12
815
48
270
1,128
96
262
62

318
0
80
39
537
470
1
75
0
8
110

Branches in
operation,
Dec. 31,1973

116
2,603

15
243
4
78
0

11
182
45
3
32
68
73

tlncludes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
"Includes eight automated teller machines in operation as of December 31, 1973.

10



TABLE 8

De novo branch applications of National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Received*

Approved

Rejected

Abandoned

Pending
Dec. 31, 1973

l,092t

119

36
7
39
37
152
6
25
1
8
53

29
3
29
33
102
5
18
0
6
13

1
2
4
0
27
0
5
0
0
1

4
2
6
2
21
1
2
1
2
39

50
0
13
10
49
7
27
20
20
9

41
0
10
7
34
6
23
13
18
7

2
0
2
0
4
0
0
2
1
0

7
0
1
3
8
1
3
5
1
2

Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.

35
24
133
7
31
16
1
22
8
17

22
20
55
4
15
11
0
16
7
12

3
0
22
0
4
0
0
0
0
2

9
4
49
3
10
4
1
5
1
2

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina.
North Dakota...
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania...,
Rhode Island...

131
12
173
66
4
66
3
9
112
3

72
8
123
48
3
51
3
8
89
3

6
0
4
4
0
2
0
0
7
0

46
4
39
14
1
11
0
1
12
0

South Carolina.
South Dakota...
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia...
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands..

28
5
39
0
14
10
54
21
9
5
0
0

18
2
27
0
9
8
37
13
7
4
0
0

1
0
4
0
1
1
2
5
0
0
0
0

9
3
8
0
4
1
14
2
2
0
0
0

10

8

0

United States.
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas —
Kentucky.
Louisiana.
Maine

District of Columbia — all t-.

1,627

46

370

0

*Includes 280 applications pending as of December 31, 1972.
f Includes four automated teller machines approved in 1973. One was located in each of these States: District of Columbia; Indiana;
New York; and North Carolina. One was also approved in New Jersey, but the application was withdrawn.
^Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.

 - 75 - 2
550-906 O-LT


n

TABLE 9

De novo branches of National banks opened for business, by community size and by size of bank, calendar
1973
Population of cities
Less than 5,000
5,000 to 24,999
25,000 to 49,999
50,000 to 99,999
100,000 to 249,999
250,000 to 499,999
500,000 to 1,000,000
Over 1,000,000
Total

Total resources of banks
(millions of dollars)

Branches
165
313
119
86
80
31
29
48
871*

Branches

Less than 10.0
10.0 to 24.9
25.0 to 49.9
50.0 to 99.9
100.0 to 999.9
1,000 and over

53
142
140
105
213
218

Total

871=*

*Includes three automated teller machines, beginning operation during 1973.

TABLE 10

Mergers,* calendar 1973
Transactions
involving two
or more
operating banks
Applications carried over from 1972
Applications received, 1973
Disposition of applications 1973:
Approved
Withdrawn
Applications pending December 31, 1973
Transactions completed 1973:
Mergers
C onsolidations
Purchases of assets
Total completed

Other pursuant
to corporate
reorganization

17
54

38
89

54
2
15

84
5
38

40
3
10

83
0
5

53

88

*Includes mergers, consolidations, and purchase and sale transactions where the resulting bank is a National bank.

12



IV.

Bank Examinations and Related Activities

The National Bank Act requires that all National banks be examined twice in each calendar
year, but the Comptroller, in the exercise of his
discretion, may waive one such examination in a
2-year period, or may cause such examinations
to be made more frequently, if considered necessary. In addition, the District Code authorizes the
Comptroller to examine each non-National bank
and trust company in the District of Columbia.
For the year ended December 31,1973, the Office
examined 6,844 banks, 25,400 branches and facilities, 1,762 trust departments, and 292 affiliates
and subsidiaries, as well as conducting 623 special
examinations and visitations. In addition, the Office received 227 applications to establish new
banks; those included 97 corporate reorganizations.
The Office also received 1,347 applications to establish de novo branches, and 15 applications
to convert State banks to National banking
associations.
National bank examinations are designed to
determine the condition and performance of
banks, the quality of their operations, the capacity
of management, and whether the banks are
complying with Federal laws. All facets of an examination have, as their end result, the determination
of liquidity and solvency, present and prospective,
and the determination of whether the bank is
operating within the framework of applicable
banking laws and regulations. The appraisal of a
bank's loans and lending policies, investments
and investment policies, and the ability and capacity of its management constitute the most
exacting phases of the examination process.
As of December 31, 1973, the Office employed
2,038 examining personnel, 1,919 commercial examiners and 119 trust examiners.
A thorough review of examination practices and
procedures is being undertaken in the Office's
constant efforts to improve the quality and efficiency of examinations. The career development
program of examining personnel is placing increased emphasis on various schools for all per-




sonnel, from the newly appointed Assistant National Bank Examiner to the experienced National
Bank Examiner. The National Bank Examiner's
school occupies a key role in this program; it is
attended by all recently commissioned National
Bank Examiners and is very important in the development of our examining personnel. The curriculum
covers all aspects of commercial examinations.
Loans and investment analysis, determination
of asset quality, and evaluation of bank management receive the greatest emphasis. Time is
also devoted to diversification of risk, liquidity,
capital adequacy, earnings, bank operations, investment in fixed assets, borrowings, future prospects, and review of the various laws and regulations
affecting National banks. There are also lectures
on trust and international examining and enforcement responsibilities pertaining to the various types
of consumer legislation. Instruction is provided
by Washington Office personnel and several experienced National Bank Examiners. Knowledgable
bankers serve as guest speakers on topics in their
field of specialization.
All newly appointed Assistant National Bank
Examiners attend a special school held on the Regional level. Instruction is provided by experienced
assistants and commissioned examiners. In-depth
coverage is given to the basic areas of the examination in which the assistants will be performing most
of their work. A broad view of banking is also presented in order to acquaint the new assistant with
the industry.
Ninety-five National banks with 628 foreign
branches require examiners with additional training to examine their international activities. That
training is being provided through week-long
seminars held quarterly in Washington, D.C., and
through frequent, but temporary, international
examining assignments at inter-regional and overseas locations.
National Bank Examiners began attending 5-day
EDP seminars during 1970. During 1973 the Office

13

conducted three such seminars in the regions.
Instruction covered the capabilities and limitations
of EDP systems in commercial banks. The program
will continue until all examining personnel have
received the necessary training. In addition,
examiners from each region have been selected
for specialized instruction in Advanced Electronic
Data Processing. Those examiners generally work
independently of the commercial or trust examiner
and prepare the EDP Report of Examination,
copies of which are sent to the banks examined.

14



During 1973, a trust school was held in Washington,
D.C. in addition to schools for trust personnel held
on the regional level.
Finally, and in keeping with past practices, the
Office encourages its examiners to attend the
various graduate schools of banking and to participate in the host of courses offered by the American
Institute of Banking and Dun and Bradstreet. We
will continue to review and update training programs and examining techniques and to keep
abreast of the ever-changing world of banking.

V.

Litigation

New litigation in 1973 challenging administrative
actions for rulings of the Comptroller continued
the trend characteristic of litigation in 1972 —a
significant increase in cases, 36* new cases were
filed during 1973, 31* cases were pending on
January 1, 1973, 25* cases were terminated by
the end of 1973, and 42* cases were pending at
the end of 1973. The litigation during 1973 was
strongly influenced by a Supreme Court opinion
handed down in March of 1973 which upheld the
administrative procedures by which the Comptroller
processes new bank applications.
The Comptroller's ruling was overturned in only
two of the 25 cases terminated. The more significant
cases involved the following subjects:

A. A dministrative Enforcement
Authority
In Manges v. Camp, Civil Action No. SA-71C^-362, W.D. Texas, the plaintiff sued to enjoin
the Comptroller from enforcing provisions of the
Financial Institutions Supervisory Act of 1966 which
permit the Comptroller's summary suspension of
persons indicted or convicted of certain felonies
from participation in the affairs of an insured bank.
Plaintiff in the Manges case asked that the provision of the Supervisory Act which permits the
Comptroller to exercise summary suspension
authority, 12 U.S.C. tl818(g)(l), be declared by
the court to be unconstitutional as an ex post facto
law, a bill of attainder, an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power, and a denial of due process.
The District Court upheld the Comptroller's
motion to dismiss the case, but on March 1, 1973,
the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed
the District Court dismissal order in favor of the
Comptroller (474 F.2d 97 (1973)) and held that the
Comptroller's order under the Financial Institutions
Supervisory Act summarily suspending the plaintiff
from participating in the affairs of the bank was
invalid because, according to the appellate court,
*Bank Merger Act litigation not included.




the language of the Act did not reach persons, like
plaintiff, indicted or convicted of felonies prior to
their participation in the affairs of the bank. In so
ruling, the court did not reach the constitutional
questions raised.
An additional case challenging the same summary
suspension provision also was commenced in 1973
by a plaintiff indicted while participating in the
affairs of a National bank. Alexander J. Barket v.
Smith, Civil Action No. 1987-73, D. D.C. At yearend the Barket action was pending on the Comptroller's motion to dismiss.

B. Personal Property Lease
Financing
Three cases challenging the Comptroller's
interpretive ruling (I.R. 7.3400, 12 C.F.R. 7.3400),
which provides that National banks may engage in
the leasing of personal property under certain
circumstances were filed during 1973. M & M
Leasing Corporation, et al. v. Seattle-First National
Bank, First Bank Leasing Corporation and Smith,
Civil Action No. 508-73C2, U.S.D.C, W.D. Wash.
(Seattle); M & M Leasing Corporation, et al. v.
Peoples National Bank of Washington, Peoples
Leasing Co. and Smith, Civil Action No. 509-73C2,
U.S.D.C, W.D. Wash. (Seattle); and Cook Ford, Inc.,
et al. v. National Bank of Detroit and James E.
Smith, Civil Action No. 4-70795, U.S.D.C, E.D.
Mich., S.D. Detroit. The complaints, in all three
cases filed by automobile leasing corporations,
challenge the Comptroller's ruling on the ground
that the business of leasing and/or renting personal
property, including motor vehicles, is, according
to plaintiffs, not an activity incidental or necessary
to the business of banking and, therefore, is not a
permissible activity under the National Bank Act.
Each plaintiff requests preliminary and permanent
injunctions against the automobile lease financing
programs of the respective defendant banks. At the
end of 1973, no proceedings had taken place in the
three cases other than the filing of the complaints.

15

C. Receivership Priority Plan
Adopted by the Comptroller
and the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation
In December of 1973, a complaint was filed in
the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia by First Empire Bank in New York and
four foreign banking corporations (Banque Frangaise
du Commerce Exterieur, Interunion Banque, and
Societe Generale, banking corporations organized
under the laws of France; and Credit Generale, a
banking corporation organized under the laws of
Belgium), asking the court to set aside or modify
portions of the FDIC claim priority plan adopted
in connection with the receivership of the United
States National Bank in San Diego {Banque Frangaise du Commerce Exterieur, et al. v. Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation and James E. Smith,
Comptroller of the Currency, U.S.D.C., D.C., Civil
Action No. 2216-73). The plaintiff banks alleged
that, because the purchase and assumption agreement between the FDIC and purchaser Crocker
National Bank excluded letters of credit issued to
plaintiffs from the group of liabilities assumed by
Crocker, while including other letters of credit,
the FDIC and the Comptroller "granted a preference
and a priority to certain other creditors of plaintiffs
in violation of 12 U.S.C. §§91, 194, and 1821(d)."
At the end of 1973, no action had been taken in the
case other than the filing of the complaint.

D. Performance of Data Processing Services by National
Banks
Two cases which allege that the data processing
activities of particular National banks exceed the
authority contained in the incidental powers clause
of the National Bank Act (12 U.S.C. §24) were
pending during 1973: Hallmark Data Systems
Company, Inc. v. Central National Bank, et al.,
Civil Action No. 72C-1586, N.D. Ill; and National
Retailers Corporation of America (NRCA) v. Valley
National Bank, et al., Civil Action No. 71-410PHX-WCF, D. Ariz.
In both cases, independent data processing
service bureaus were challenging the Comptroller's
ruling, 12 C.F.R. § 7.3500, which permits National

16



banks to perform certain data processing services.
In the Hallmark case, the plaintiff contended that
the performance of reader services and subscription fulfillment services by Central National Bank,
in Chicago, 111., was improper. Plaintiff Hallmark
voluntarily dismissed its action in December 1973
without prejudice to a later refiling.
In the NRCA case, plaintiff challenges the authority of Valley National Bank in Phoenix, Ariz,
to perform sales, inventory and accounts receivable
analyses, and processing for businesses. At yearend 1973, the action was pending on plaintiff's
motion for summary judgment.
A specific proposal to revise I.R. 7.3500 was
published by the Comptroller October 25, 1973
(38 F.R. 29479). At year-end 1973, the Comptroller's staff was reviewing extensive comments
received in response to the proposal.

E. Performance of Travel Agency
Services by National Banks
A decision of the United States Court of Appeals
for the First Circuit which had held invalid the
Comptroller's ruling permitting travel agency
services by National banks (12 C.F.R. 7.7475) to the
"extent that it may be construed by the Comptroller as authorizing a National bank to operate a
full-scale travel agency" became final during 1973
when the Comptroller determined that the limited
holding of the appellate court did not warrant
Supreme Court review. Arnold Tours v. Camp,
472 F.2d 427 (1st Cir. 1972). At year-end 1973, the
Comptroller's Office was preparing to publish an
invitation for comment concerning modification of
the travel services ruling to delineate more clearly
the permissible boundaries of bank activity.

F. New Banks
1. Cases brought by competitiors. Twenty-five
actions brought by competitors challenging the
Comptroller's authority to approve new bank
applications were before federal courts during 1973.
American Bank of Tulsa v. Smith, Civil No. 73-C16, N.D. Okla.; Bank of Commerce v. Smith, et al.,
Civil Action No. 5912, D. Wyo.; Bank of Commerce
of Laredo v. City National Bank of Laredo, et al.,
Civil Action No. 72-L-15, S.D. Texas; The Central
Bank v. Smith, et al., Civil Action No. 73—C—576,
E.D. Wise; The Central Jersey Bank and Trust Co.

v. Watson, Civil Action No. 1190-73, D. N.J.; The
Exchange National Bank of Jefferson City, et al. v.
Smith, Civil Action No. 73-CV-141-C, W.D., Mo.;
Farmers & Merchants State Bank of Derby, et al.
v. Camp, et al., Civil Action No. W-5312, D.
Kansas; Village Bank and The First National Bank
of Britton v. Smith and Quail Creek Bank, N.A.,
Civil Action No. 73-483-C, W.D. Okla.; Wood
County Bank v. Camp, Civil Action No. 1277-72,
D. D.C.; First National Bank of Shawnee Mission
v. Roeland Park State Bank and Trust Company and
Centennial State Bank, Civil Action No. 3669, D.
Kansas; Bank of Oregon v. Camp, Civil Action No.
73-C-203, W.D. Wis.; First National Bank of
Fayetteville v. Smith, Civil Action No. F-73-12,
W.D., Ark.; Grenada Bank v. Watson, Civil Action
No. EC-72-119-S, N.D. Miss.; First National
Bank of Homestead v. Camp, Civil Action No.
348-73, D. D.C.; Paul M. Nehring v. Smith, Civil
Action No. 73C 1905, N.D. 111.; City National Bank
v. Smith and Meadowbrook National Bank, Civil
Action No. 73-2132, D. D.C.; First American Bank
of Memphis v. Watson, Civil Action No. 73-203,
W.D. Tenn.; Peoples Bank of Arapahoe County v.
Camp and The First National Bank of Aurora,
Civil Action No. C-4769, D. Colo.; Harold E.
Doley, et al. v. Piedmont Investment Co., Inc., et al.,
Civil Action No. 73-796, E.D. La.; Roeland Park
State Bank and Trust Co. v. Camp, Civil Action
No. 2563-73, D. D.C.; First National Bank of Smithfield v. S. Gerald Isley and Smith, Civil Action No.
4210, E.D. N.C.; First State Bank, Clute, Texas v.
Smith, Civil Action No. 73-G-165, S.D. Texas;
Plaza National Bank v. Watson, Civil Action No.
920-73, D. N.J.; Grant County Bank, Sheridan,
Arkansas v. Camp, Civil Action No. PB73 C-49,
E.D. Ark.; and Proposed Bank of Commerce of New
Jersey v. Camp and United Jersey National Bank
of Cherry Hill, Civil Action No. 143-72, D. NJ.
Four cases resulted in a final order upholding
the Comptroller (Bank of Commerce of Laredo,
First National Bank of Homestead, First National
Bank of Shawnee Mission, and Doley); three cases
were pending on appeal from lower court judgments
for the Comptroller (American Bank of Tulsa, City
National Bank, and Wood County Bank); one case
was pending on appeal from a lower court judgment
against the Comptroller (First National Bank of
Fayetteville); three cases were voluntarily dismissed (Roeland Park, Grant County Bank, and
Proposed Bank of Commerce); and fourteen cases




were pending in district courts (Bank of Commerce,
Sheridan, Wyoming; The Central Jersey Bank and
Trust Company; The Exchange National Bank of
Jefferson City; Farmers and Merchants State Bank
of Derby; First American Bank of Memphis; First
National Bank of Smithfield; First State Bank,
Clute; Paul M. Nehring; Peoples Bank of Arapahoe
County; Plaza National Bank; Bank of Oregon;
The Village Bank; The Central Bank; and Grenada
Bank).
In the Wood County case, the Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit summarily
reversed a District Court grant of a preliminary
injunction preventing the Comptroller from issuing
a charter because the Comptroller's approval was
not issued in conjunction with formal findings of
fact. Upon remand to the District Court, the Comptroller's approval of the charter was upheld. In
the Bank of Commerce case, the Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit upheld a District Court opinion
affirming the Comptroller's approval of a charter
for a new National bank which proposed to be
affiliated with an existing bank. Both courts determined that an affiliate National bank is a distinct
banking entity and not a branch of the existing
bank with which it is to be affiliated. Similarly, in the
American Bank of Tulsa case, the District Court
upheld the Comptroller's motion for summary
judgment when the Comptroller approved a charter
for an affiliate National bank. An appeal filed by
plaintiffs is pending in the Court of Appeals for the
Tenth Circuit. In the Bank of Commerce case in
Wyoming, the District Court dismissed the action
for lack of jurisdiction, stating that the Comptroller's
approval of a bank holding company subsidiary
charter application is not a final agency action, that
final approval on a subsidiary application must come
from the Federal Reserve Board, and that any appeal
from a ruling by the Federal Reserve Board must
be brought in a Federal Court of Appeals rather
than in Federal District Court.
In First National Bank of Fayetteville, the District Court granted judgment for the plaintiff
competitors who challenged the Comptroller's
approval of an application for a new National
bank in Fayetteville, Ark. In granting judgment for
the competing institutions, the court suggested,
inter alia, that $1 million may be insufficient capital
for a new bank in Fayetteville, Ark. At year-end,
the Comptroller had appealed the District Court
ruling to the United States Court of Appeals for the
Eighth Circuit.

17

2. Cases brought by applicants. Three cases
involving challenge by the organizers of National
banks to the Comptroller's denial of their charter
applications were pending before federal courts
during 1973. Sidney Schwartz, et al. v. Smith, Civil
Action No. 4655, S.D. N.Y.; Camp v. Pitts, 411
U.S. 138 (1973); and Meisel v. Camp, Civil Action
No. 71-C-437, E.D. Mo.
In Pitts, the Supreme Court of the United States
filed per curiam opinion {on the Comptroller's
petition for certiorari from an adverse decision of
the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals (463 F.2d 632)),
ruling that the Comptroller is not required to make
formal findings when passing on new bank applications and that the responsibility of a District Court,
when faced with an appeal from an administrative
decision of the Comptroller, is to review the Comptroller's administrative record and to sustain the
Comptroller's action unless the court finds it to be
arbitrary, capricious, or illegal on the basis of the
administrative record before the Comptroller at the
time he made his decision. The Supreme Court thus
reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded the
case for further proceedings. At year-end 1973, the
case was again pending before the District Court.
The Meisel case was voluntarily dismissed by
plaintiffs during the year, while at year-end 1973,
no proceedings had taken place in the Schwartz
case other than the filing of the complaint.

G. Branches
Twenty-two actions challenging the Comptroller's
approval of branch bank applications were before
federal courts during 1973. Driscoll v. Northwestern
National Bank and Camp, Civil Action No. 3-72-42,
D. Minn.; Merchants and Planters Bank of Newport,
Arkansas, and the First National Bank of Newport,
Arkansas v. Watson and)or Smith, Civil Action No.
B 73 C-18, E.D. Ark.; Franklin S. Billings, Jr.,
et al. v. Camp, et al., Civil Action No. 1366-72,
D. D.C.; West Windsor State Bank v. The First
National Bank of Princeton, The Broad Street
National Bank of Trenton, The New Jersey National
Bank, and Camp, Civil Action No. 205-73, D.
N.J.; Old Kent Bank and Trust Co. v. Camp and
Grand Valley National Bank, Civil Action No.
G67-73-CA(6), W.D. Mich.; First National Bank,
Piscataway v. Camp, Civil Action No. 360-73, D.
N.J.; The First Bank and Trust Company v. Smith
and Middlesex Bank, N.A., Civil Action No. 731355-M, D. Mass.; Hudson United Bank v. Smith,
18



et al., Civil Action No. 1015-73, D. N.J.; McDowell
National Bank of Sharon v. Watson, Civil Action
No. 73-440, W.D. Pa.; Community State Bank and
Trust Co. v. Camp, et al., Civil Action No. 296—73,
D. N.J.; Mid-America National Bank of Chicago v.
Watson and Michigan Avenue National Bank of
Chicago, Civil Action No. 72 C 2636, N.D. 111.;
The Fidelity Trust Co., et al. v. Camp, Civil Action
No. B-39, D. Conn.; First National Bank of Fairbanks v. Camp, Civil Action No. 3702-70, D.
D.C.; Dunn v. First National Bank of Cartersville
and Camp, Civil Action No. 2375, N.D. Ga.; First
National Bank of Southaven v. Camp and Coahoma
National Bank, Civil Action No. 7145-K, N.D.
Miss.; The Community Banks of Washington v.
Camp, Civil Action No. 263-72C2, W.D. Wash.;
Alaska State Bank v. Camp, Civil Action No.
A101—70, D. Alaska; The Community Bank and
The Oregon Bank v. Camp and United States
National Bank of Oregon, Civil Action No. 72-703,
D. Ore.; First National Bank of Piscataway v.
Camp and The Peoples National Bank of
Piscataway, Civil Action No. 984-72, D. N.J.;
and Lafayette Bank and Trust Co. v. Camp and
Hartford National Bank, Civil Action No. B-274,
D. Conn.
Branch litigation resulted in a number of final
appellate determinations during 1973. In First
National Bank of Fairbanks, the Supreme Court
denied review and thus left standing as final the
decision of the Court of Appeals for the District
of Columbia which had upheld the Comptroller's
approval of an application by a National bank to
establish a branch in Fairbanks, Alaska. The Court
of Appeals, in ruling for the Comptroller, had
rejected charges that the Comptroller's proceedings
denied due process and the further contention that
the Comptroller was bound to follow the Alaska
State banking supervisor's views as to the application of State law to the branch application.
Just 24 hours after hearing oral arguments, the
United States Court of Appeals for the Second
Circuit issued an order unanimously affirming the
decision of the United States District Court in
New Haven, Conn., which had upheld the Comptroller's approval of an application by the Atlantic
National Bank to establish a branch in Stanford,
Conn. Plaintiffs in The Fidelity Trust Company case
had urged both the district and appellate courts to
overturn the Comptroller's decision upon the
grounds that the Comptroller allegedly erred in
not deeming Atlantic National's branch application

to be a de facto branch application of the Connecticut National Bank because of a pending merger
plan.
In Southaven, the United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit agreed with the District Court
in an opinion upholding the Comptroller's approval
of a branch application. Both the District Court and
the Court of Appeals agreed that the Comptroller
had reasonably construed the branch banking
statutes of Mississippi to permit establishment of
branches in unincorporated areas within 1 mile of
the parent bank, notwithstanding the contrary views
of the State banking supervisor.
In Driscoll v. Northwestern National Bank, the
United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit filed an opinion during 1973 reversing the
District Court judgment for the Comptroller and
remanding the case to the Comptroller for further
consideration. The appellate court opinion did not
hold incorrect the Comptroller's determination,
affirmed by the District Court, that an existing TVteller station of the defendant bank was part of its
main office and not a branch, and that the bank,
consequently, was still entitled to establish a branch
at another location. Instead, the court merely held
that the Comptroller's administrative record contained certain factual "discrepencies" which
obligated the Comptroller "to make a fresh determination." At year-end 1973, the matter was pending
before the Comptroller on remand.
The United States District Court for the Northern
District of California filed an opinion granting
judgment for the Comptroller in Seattle Trust and
Savings Bank, et al. v. The Bank ofCalifornia,N.A.,
thereby affirming the Comptroller's approval of an
application by the Bank of California to establish
an additional branch in Seattle, Wash. The bank
had contended, and the Comptroller agreed, that
the bank was "situated" in Seattle for purposes of
the operative language of 12 U.S.C. § 36(c) and the
bank was thus entitled to establish an additional
branch in Seattle just as were its other Seattle
competitors. At year-end 1973, the case was pending
on appeal by the Washington banking supervisor
and numerous State banks to the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
In the fall of 1973, the United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit filed an opinion in a
long-pending appeal affirming in part and reversing
in part a judgment of the United States District
Court for the District of Alaska which had upheld
the Comptroller's approval of an application by a




National bank to establish a branch in Anchorage
(Alaska State Bank v. Camp). The Court of Appeals
expressly affirmed the District Court's judgment as
to the propriety and legality of the Comptroller's
decision, but reversed the District Court's award of
$5,000 in attorneys' fees in favor of the Comptroller,
finding that the conduct of the plaintiff bank was
not sufficiently "vexatious, oppressive, fraudulent,
unfair, . . . or in bad faith . . ." to warrant the
attorney fee award as a punitive measure.
During 1973, litigation challenging the Comptroller's decision on branch applications resulted
in nine final orders in favor of the Comptroller
(Community State Bank, First National Bank of
Piscataway, Mid-American National Bank of Chicago, Old Kent Bank and Trust Company, Fidelity
Trust Co., First National Bank of Fairbanks, Dunn,
First National Bank of Southaven, and Alaska State
Bank); one case was dismissed as moot (Billings);
one case was voluntarily dismissed by plaintiff
(Lafayette); two cases were pending on appeal from
lower court judgments in favor of the Comptroller
(The Community Bank and The Oregon Bank, and
Seattle Trust and Savings Bank); and nine cases were
pending before lower courts (The Community
Banks of Washington, Driscoll, First Bank and Trust
Company, First National Bank of Piscataway, The
State Savings Bank of Scottsville, Hudson United
Bank, Merchants and Planters Bank, West Windsor
State Bank, and McDowell National Bank of Sharon).

H. Bank Merger Act Cases
The Comptroller's Antitrust Section won two
more district court "potential competition" bank
merger cases in 1972, United States v. Marine
Bancorporation, 1174,496, 1973 CCH Trade Cases
(Jan. 31, 1973) and United States v. The Connecticut
National Bank, 362 F. Supp. 240 (D. Conn. 1973),
thereby bringing the total to eight.
Additionally, the Supreme Court on February 28,
upheld by a split vote of 4-4 the merger involved
in United States v. First National Bancorporation,
410 U.S. 577 (1973), aff'g. 329 F. Supp. 1003 (D.
Colo. 1971). In that case the Comptroller had submitted an amicus curiae brief highlighting the
conflict between bank regulation and the Justice
Department's "potential competition" theory.
Another district court "potential competition"
case, United States v. Bankers Trust of South
Carolina, Civil No. 72-830 (D. S.C.), was settled

19

by a consent decree between the Justice Department and the banks.
The Marine Bancorporation case, filed by Justice
in 1971, was tried in mid-January; the trial took 8 full
days. In that case the Justice Department alleged
that Marine Bancorporation's single bank subsidiary, National Bank of Commerce of Seattle, Seattle,
Wash., was a "potential entrant" into Spokane,
Wash., a city situated 284 miles from Seattle near
the Idaho border, and thus its acquisition of Washington Trust Bank in Spokane was considered violative of § 7 of the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 18. That
assertion was made despite the fact that Washington
State branching law prohibited a Seattle-based
bank from establishing a branch office in Spokane
except by acquiring "an existing bank." (See
Revised Code of Washington, §30.08.020.) The
only other existing bank in Spokane was not
available for acquisition because of a State statute
forbidding State banks to be acquired prior to having
been in operation for a period of 10 years. The Department of Justice nevertheless maintained that the
Seattle bank could somehow obtain a branch in
Spokane. The Comptroller and the defendants
argued that The National Bank of Commerce of
Seattle was not a potential entrant into Spokane in
any realistic sense. The District Court, recognizing
that the Justice Department's case was weaker than
in the six earlier potential competition bank merger
cases which had been tried and lost by Justice,
delivered his opinion from the bench at the close of
trial. The Court concluded that Justice had failed
to prove that the bank merger violated the Clayton
Act by lessening competition and that, in any event,
the procompetitive and other convenience and needs
benefits of the merger clearly outweighed the
Justice Department's alleged anticompetitive
effects. Those convenience and needs benefits were
established by the direct testimony of business and
other banking customers from Spokane called as
witnesses by the Comptroller's trial attorneys. For
example, the Comptroller proved through the testimony of a financial aide officer at a Spokane college
that no banks in Spokane made student loans, that
there was a need for student loans in Spokane, and
that the instant merger would introduce a bank into
Spokane, The National Bank of Commerce of
Seattle, which would make such loans. Also, the
Comptroller established at trial that only one bank
in Spokane offered conventional, VA, and FHA
mortgage financing so critical for the average home
buyer and that The National Bank of Commerce's
20



entry through the challenged merger would provide
a second and competitive source of mortgage
financing.
The Department of Justice appealed the District
• Court's adverse decision in Marine Bancorporation
and the Supreme Court noted probable jurisdiction
on October 15, 1973. The Comptroller and the banks
thereafter filed a joint motion to dismiss the appeal
when the Justice Department had not filed its brief
pursuant to the Supreme Court's rules and that
motion had not been ruled on at the close of 1973.
(The motion was denied on January 7,1974 and oral
argument in the Supreme Court is expected in
April).
In the Connecticut case, also filed in 1971, the
Department of Justice had sought to block the
consolidation of The Connecticut National Bank,
Bridgeport, Conn., and The First New Haven
National Bank, New Haven, Conn., alleging that
the consolidation would eliminate both actual and
potential competition in violation of §7 of the
Clayton Act. The trial in this case lasted from
October 10, 1972, until November 15, 1972. As for
the potential competition allegations, Connecticut
State branching law prohibited each of those banks
from establishing branches in the other's market
except by acquiring an existing bank. Nevertheless, Justice argued the banks could obtain offices
in each other's markets. On June 22, 1973, the
District Court, in a lengthy opinion, ruled against
the Justice Department and stated that Justice had
failed to prove its case. As in the Marine Bancorporation case, the District Court in Connecticut
concluded that even had Justice proven its case,
the convenience and needs of the community to be
served clearly outweighed the alleged anticompetitive effects, again relying upon the testimony from
the Comptroller's banking customer witnesses.
The Justice Department appealed that decision
also, although at the close of the year the Supreme
Court had not decided to hear the case. (On January
7, 1974, the Supreme Court noted probable jurisdiction in the Connecticut case and set both Marine
Bancorporation and Connecticut for oral argument
in April).
On February 28, the Supreme Court split 4—4 on
United States v. First National Bancorporation,
410 U.S. 577 (1973), a case in which the Comptroller had submitted an amicus curiae brief covering the bank regulation issues involved. No opinion
was rendered in that case, which also involved the
applicability of the "potential competition" theory

to banking. The Connecticut and Marine Bancorporation bank merger cases may decide whether
the Justice Department's potential competition
theory should be applied to the banking industry
where new entry is restricted to minimize the risk
of bank failure.

/. Miscellaneous Litigation
During 1973, the Comptroller was a party to a
variety of other types of litigation which defy ready
categorization. Thus, the Comptroller was a defendant in two separate actions (Independent
Bankers of Oregon v. Camp and United States
National Bank of Oregon, Civil Action Number
72-528; and Olin v. Camp, Civil Action No. 72-535,
D. Ore.) brought by a group of banks in Oregon and
the Oregon State supervisor to overturn the Comptroller's approval of certain automated teller units
the bank proposed to install in shopping center
locations. The District Court overturned the
Comptroller's approval, holding that the Comptroller




can permit such facilities in Oregon only if their
operation is authorized "affirmatively and not merely
by implication or recognition by the statute law of
Oregon." At year-end 1973, the case was pending
on the Comptroller's and the bank's appeal from the
District Court judgment. In Skyline National Bank
v. Watson, Civil Action No. C-4847, D. Colo.,
plaintiff sought to enjoin the Comptroller's appointment of the FDIC as receiver of the bank. The
District Court dismissed the action on the Comptroller's motion after hearing oral argument.
The Comptroller was also named as a nominal
defendant in several actions pending during the year
attacking the constitutionality of the Financial
Recordkeeping and Reporting Act and the implementing regulations of the Treasury Department.
American Civil Liberties Union v. George P. Shultz,
et aL, Civil Action No. 1330-72, D. D.C.; the California Bankers Association v. Connolly, Civil
Action No. C-72-1175-WTS, N.D. Cal.; and
Stark, et al. v. Connally, Civil Action No. 72-1045WTS, N.D. Cal.

21

VI.

Fiduciary Activities of National Banks

Continued growth was observed in National bank
trust departments in 1973. During the year, 56
applications for permits to exercise fiduciary
powers were received. Of those applications and
ones pending from prior years, 47 were approved.
Also, during 1973, five State-chartered banks with
trust departments converted to National banks.
Taking into account losses through mergers and
consolidations, the number of National banks
authorized to exercise fiduciary powers stood at
1,988 at year-end. Of that figure, 1,739 operated
trust departments.
Training of trust department examiners continued to receive a high priority. Innovation of new
techniques and subject matter coverage characterized a 2-week school for assisting personnel held
in March. Both Associates-in-Trusts, the intermediate examiner level, and Assistants-in-Trusts,
the entry level, attended the first week, which was
devoted to examination related matters. In addition
to the more traditional subjects of instruction,
special treatment was given to Investments, Portfolio Management, Securities Laws and Legislation,
Control and Letter Stock, and Commercial Department Examination. Each subject was covered first
by an outside expert in the field, and then by an
experienced trust department examiner, thus bringing both technical subject knowledge and a specific
focus upon its examination implications to the students. Examiners from the State banking departments of Oregon, Texas, Michigan, Connecticut,
West Virginia, Wisconsin, Oklahoma, and Wyo-




ming also attended that session of the school.
The second week, for Associates-in-Trusts only,
was devoted to supervisory and management
training and was conducted by a professional in
that field.
The trust examination force in the field was
strengthened by the adoption of specific numerical
complements for trust specialists in the examining
force of each National bank region. The recruitment
and promotion of trust examiners was given strong
emphasis. During the year, 36 new Assistants-inTrusts were hired, 11 Assistants were promoted to
Associate-in-Trusts, and 12 Associates were promoted to Repre^ntative-in-Trusts, the highest
qualification level.
The public image of trust departments and their
supervision became the subject of increased attention on the part of many persons, both inside and
out of the banking industry. Many asserted the need
for disclosure of asset holdings and securities
transactions by bank trust departments. That
subject was given careful consideration by our
Office and by year-end imposing such a requirement
upon National banks was under consideration.
The relationship between banks and their trust
departments has been a subject of continuing
study for several years. Proposed rules and examination procedures developed to provide more
explicit regulatory guidance on questions of the
Chinese Wall, brokerage, and related matters
were, and remain, under active consideration.

23

VII.

International Banking and Finance

1973 was a dramatic year for international
financial centers as well as for the National banks
which conduct business overseas. Worldwide
inflation, international commodity shortages, and
numerous political uncertainties were prevalent.
The significant decrease in Japan's exchange
reserves caused concern. The October Mideast
crisis was especially jolting. The United States
displayed its resiliency with a positive surge in our
balance of payments. The dollar returned to a
position of prominence.
National banks continually adjusted to those
events. While a few banks reduced their foreign
positions, the overall trend was expansionary
through additional foreign branches and increased
investment in de novo or existing foreign financial
institutions. To this Office, such changes posed
greater supervisory challenges which were met
head-on with more intensive and improved examinations, additional educational programs for
National Bank Examiners, and a closer working
relationship with government financial institutions
both here and abroad.
During 1973, National banks opened 72 foreign
branches and closed 17. At year-end, an additional
34 branches were approved, but unopened, National
banks also continued investing in foreign financial
institutions either directly or indirectly through
Edge Act subsidiaries. Forty-five National banks
had some form of such ownership at year-end;
the foreign institutions involved carry on commercial, retail, merchant, or investment banking.
The avenue of foreign market presence, i.e., branch
vs. investment, generally depended on the regulatory
framework of the market to be served and the
financial capacity of the banks involved.
The International Division coordinates the supervision of such activities. The division maintains a
London Embassy Office staffed with three experienced National Bank Examiners responsible
for examining the activities of the 22 National
banks in the United Kingdom. The United Kingdom
has the greatest concentration of National bank




foreign assets. In addition, 59 National Bank
Examiners were assigned to foreign branch examinations in 28 other countries during 1973;
three examinations were conducted jointly with
Italian Central Bank examiners. The division also
arranged for each traveling examiner to meet with
host country officials for discussion of mutual
matters. As in previous years, a specialized National
Bank Examiner was assigned to examine foreign
branch computer operations.
In order to improve examination responsibilities,
the International Division provided additional
training for National Bank Examiners. During the
year, eight examiners received 30 days' exposure
to the sophisticated London market. In July, four
examiners attended the School for International
Banking at the University of Colorado. In October,
the International Division conducted an intensive
5-day seminar for 30 examiners; subject matter
centered on sovereign credit analysis and foreign
exchange accounting. Finally, a 30 to 40 page newsletter has been instituted and is sent weekly to
185 examiners as well as to staff members of the
Federal Reserve System. That newsletter contains
media articles and country studies pertinent to
current international activities.
The International Division participated with the
National Advisory Council's working group to
monitor debt of less developed countries. The
Office was also an active participant in the Department of Treasury's membership on the Council of
International Economic Policy. Dialogue with
several Central Banks increased substantially
during 1973, and foreign bankers and foreign bank
supervisors visited the International Division
throughout the year. A mutually beneficial relationship was also established with the sovereign
analysis division of Eximbank. Finally, as in the
past, this Office cooperated fully with the House of
Representatives Committee on Banking and
Currency, The Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System, and The Bankers' Association for
Foreign Trade in international banking matters of
common interest.

25

VIII.

Administrative and Management
Development

During 1973 the administrative operations of the
bureau were strengthened by appointment of the
Administrative Assistant to the Comptroller to the
position of Deputy Comptroller of the Currency
for Administration. In recognizing the increased
scope of administrative activities, the Comptroller
has assured a more mobile and responsive management staff.
The Fiscal Management Division continued to
provide management with comprehensive and
timely information concerning the financial operations of the Office. Although there were no significant changes or developments in our financial
reporting system during the year, there were some
minor refinements and changes in various operating
procedures aimed at producing more efficient
operations. These changes included automating
some subsidiary accounting records which were
previously prepared manually, and completing the
automation of our manual record of total branches
by bank. Use of the automated branch record has
significantly reduced the time expended in the audit
of National bank branch assessments.
Another important area of responsibility for the
Fiscal Management Division is that of official
employee travel which is normally performed in
privately owned automobiles. During the year,
travel regulations were revised and reissued to all
employees. In recognition of increased travel costs,
some travel allowances were increased. Because of
the energy crisis, employees on official travel were
requested and encouraged to use carpools as an
energy conservation measure. Employee response to
that request has been exceptional and the "energy"
saved has been significant, with a decrease in unaccompanied travel from 39 percent to 25 percent.
The Comptroller's investment portfolio continued
to be a major source of operating funds during 1973.
The investment policy has been, and continues to
be, one of keeping all available funds fully invested
to maximize interest revenue, thereby defraying,

to the greatest possible extent, the cost of operating
the Office. Interest income increased by 56 percent
because of higher interest rates, an increase in
funds available for investment, and investment
policies and procedures initiated in prior years. Our
return on investments was approximately 7 percent.
Plans for consolidation of the Comptroller's
Washington, D.C. offices continued during 1973.
The fifth and sixth floors of the L'Enfant Plaza East
building have been selected for our National offices,
and planning and construction have advanced to
the point that occupancy is planned for summer of
1974. Those offices will consolidate employees
currently in three separate buildings. An exceptional increase in interoffice communications is
expected to result in increased productivity, decreased redundancy of operations, and improved
employee morale.
In coordination with the move, a computer
system has been selected and will be installed.
The acquisition of the computer system was
approved by the Comptroller as a measure in establishing independence of regulatory operations and
to provide better use of the information available.
The bureau is substantially involved in preparation for the July 1, 1974 implementation of the
federal building fund program requiring rental
payment for all federally-controlled space. Our
bureau currently occupies Federal space in approximately 55 cities and towns across the country;
thus, considerable administrative effort is necessary
to meet the program's requirements. Other space
management activity included the relocation of
four sub-regional offices, the establishment of three
additional offices, and the elimination of one.
The Records Management Branch has succeeded
in saving time, effort, and resources while sustaining
a high level of efficiency and effectiveness in the
preservation of vital records. That has been accomplished by eliminating the process of making a diazo
copv of each microfilm frame and by maintaining
27

550-906 O-LT - 75 - 3




a microfiche in addition to the microfilm itself. At
our request, the National Archives and Records
Service evaluated our legal file-keeping procedures
so that a centralized filing system for all legal
records might be established.
Procurement activity has increased in all areas,
keeping pace with the overall growth of the organization. Last year's decision to introduce electronic
calculators into our equipment inventory on a large
scale has been implemented and is highly successful.
The examiners using the calculators in bank examinations report them to be true time saving devices.
The Personnel Management Division was reorganized late in 1973 to better meet the needs of
expanding personnel activities and increasing
employment. Several revised personnel procedures
were issued to streamline paperwork requirements
and to minimize the efforts of managers in requesting personnel actions.
Significant progress was achieved in the hiring of
members of minority groups and women for the
examining force. Our year-end survey showed 287
minority employees on the rolls. Of those, 171 were
in examination, an increase of 68 percent over 1972,
and approximately 160 of those were women, an
increase of 70 percent over 1972. That progress was
achieved by implementing new approaches to
recruiting, including visits to college campuses
outside regional boundaries.
Continued progress has been made in the
cooperative education program. There were approximately 185 financial interns in the program at
the end of 1973. That was a 68 percent increase
over the prior year. Approximately 33 percent of
the financial interns are members of minority
groups and 23 percent are women. The program is
considered a valuable tool in the continuing effort
to achieve more effective equal employment opportunity and upward mobility programs.
Personnel ceilings established for each region
required greater emphasis on quality staffing and
effective manpower utilization. Based on an analysis
of actual workload, staffing patterns and grade
structures were developed for several regions.
An evaluation of the training needs of assistant
examiners resulted in plans to coordinate training
at the Washington level. The training program for
new examiners will include a new orientation program, examination training teams, and formal classroom training. A program was established during
1973 to provide a more formalized system of executive development in order to assure a continuing
28



supply of executive talent for key positions through
the identification and development of employees
with high potential for executive assignment. The
program will also provide opportunities for incumbent executives to attain and maintain their highest
possible level of competence.
During 1973, more emphasis was placed on supervisory training for National Bank Examiners. An
outside consultant conducted that training at the
regional level. Particular attention was given to the
areas of motivation, communication, and interpersonal relationships.
The labor-management relations policy was
broadened with new provisions relating to intramanagement communication and consultation. In a
document sent to all employees, supervisors were
advised of their responsibility for participating in
the formulation of policy. In addition, they were
advised of their role in communicating management
views to employees and employees' views to
management.
Because the Treasury Department relinquished
its control over the personnel security function, a
system for implementing such a program was
established in the bureau. That involved the identification of critical sensitive positions, the review
of full field investigation reports, and the issuance
of top secret security clearances as appropriate.
On-site visits to four regions were made in order
to evaluate the regional personnel management
program. Personnel problems were identified
through discussions with regional officials and
interviews with employees. In addition to resolving
individual problems, many regional personnel
policies and practices were changed through informal discussions with regional administrators.
Those visits also provided valuable input for changes
in personnel policies and adoption of new policies
at the Washington level.
Steady progress continued to be made in implementing the Comptroller's pay policy, expecially
for support and regional executive positions. A
number of positions were restructured for greater
efficiency and upward mobility. As a result of the*
incentive awards program, 38 awards were granted
for adopted suggestions and superior achievements. In addition, 137 employees were recognized
with high quality increase awards for their superior
performance. Amount of awards distributed totaled
$76,285 for the year. Major changes in leave laws
were implemented as were pay adjustments for all
employees.

The Internal Audit Division conducted reviews in
six regional offices and three computerized payroll
centers in addition to management reviews in
Washington. The audit reports contained 46 recommendations of which 41 were accepted.
The Management Services Division continued
active support response to a variety of on-going
government programs. Although no new programs




were initiated for data processing, extensive planning has been accomplished for the acquisition of
the new computer system. The Burroughs B1726
will perform all present computerized applications,
absorb the EAM system, and provide the capability
for expansion in areas of economic research, use
of examination data, and consolidation of bank
structure information.

29

IX. Financial Operations of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency
Total revenue for the year was $51.2 million, an
increase of 14.06 percent over 1972. The percentage
increase is greater than the increase in 1972 when
the growth rate was 10.76 percent. Assessment
receipts totaled $43.2 million, an increase of $5.4
million. That resulted from a $58.5 billion rise in
National bank assets. National bank assets affecting
1973 assessment receipts rose 15.54 percent, compared to an increase of 10.43 percent in the previous
year.
Revenues from trust examinations totaled
$2,502,000, an increase of $179,000. There were
1,668 trust examinations made in 1973, compared
to 1,660 in 1972. Revenue from branch investigation
applications was up sharply, increasing $100,000.
One thousand two hundred and eighty-four branch
applications were received in 1973, compared to
1,108 in 1972. New bank charter revenues increased
by $6,000, while merger and consolidation fees
decreased by $48,000. There were 299 new bank
charter applications in 1973, compared to 293 in
1972, and the number of bank merger applications
dropped to 142, compared to 155 in 1972.
Interest on investments increased $1,050,000, a
rise of 56 percent, for a total of $2,936,000. That rise
was due to a combination of higher interest rates
and a larger amount of funds available for
investment.
The 1972 amount in other revenue included
amounts received from the Small Business Administration for assistance provided that agency in
processing applications under the hurricane Agnes




flood disaster program. No such assistance was
required in 1973, thus accounting for the decrease.
All other revenue categories remained at substantially the same levels when compared to 1972.
Total expenses amounted to $45.8 million, compared to $40.5 million for 1972, an increase of
$5.3 million. That amounts to a 13.20 percent
increase for 1973, compared to 6.65 percent for 1972.
Salaries, personnel benefits, and travel expenses
amounted to $43.3 million, or 94.5 percent of the
total expenses for the year. Those three expenses
amounted to $38.2 million in 1972. Two acrossthe-board pay raises (5.14 percent in January
1973 and 4.77 percent in October 1973) and an
increase in our examining staff were the principal
reasons for the rise in salary expenses. Travel
expenses totaled $6.5 million, a rise of $800,000
over 1972. That rise was due primarily to an increase
in per diem rates and the encouragement of accompanied travel due to the energy situation. An
extra allowance for accompanied travel resulted
in increased mileage costs.
The remaining expenses totaled $2,519,000, an
increase of $270,000 over the previous year. The
most significant increases occurred in printing
costs and consultants' fees.
The equity account is in reality a reserve for
contingencies. Transfers of $5.4 million increased
the equity to $32.4 million at year end. That represents a 7.9 months' reserve for operating expenses,
based on the level of expenses over the last three
months of 1973.

31

T A B L E 11

OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY
BALANCE SHEETS
December 31
Assets

1973

Current assets:
Cash
Obligations of U.S. Government, at amortized cost (approximates market value)
Accrued interest on investments
Accounts receivable
Travel advances
Prepaid expenses and other assets

1972

fixtures

Less accumulated depreciation

Total assets
Liabilities and Comptroller's Equity
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable and accrued expenses
Taxes and other payroll deductions
Accrued travel and salaries
Total current liabilities
Long-term liabilities:
Accumulated annual leave
Closed receivership funds (Note 2)
Total liabilities
Comptroller's equity
Commitments and contingencies (Note 3):
Total liabilities and Comptroller's equity
See Notes at end of section.

32



33,256,668

21,667,965

886,466
509,110

868,440
443,612
1,312,052

798,609

718,946

596,967

Fixed assets, at cost (Note 1):
Furniture and
Office machinery and equipment

10,824,240

1,395,576

Long-term obligations of U.S. Government, at amortized cost (approximates market value)

$162,763
9,089,412
562,287
499,139
435,817
74,822

6,941,651

Total current assets

$1,620,642
3,749,000
738,230
245,010
483,440
105,329

593,106

$40,795,286

$33,085,311

$343,459
155,372
2,604,320

$193,194
133,536
857,838

3,103,151

1,184,568

2,581,794
2,706,492

2,208,146
2,706,358

8,391,437
32,403,849

6,099,072
26,986,239

$40,795,286

$33,085,311

TABLE

12

OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY
STATEMENTS OF REVENUE, EXPENSES AND COMPTROLLER'S EQUITY
Year Ended December 31
1973
Revenue (Note 1):
Semiannual assessments
Examinations and investigations
Investment income
Examination reports sold
Other

1972*

Comptroller's equity at end of year

44,917,714

33,985,944
4,195,473
2,854,360
2,263,484
629,907
495,468
181,498
244,917
256,977
155,204
121,418
111,890
128,590
193,046

29,998,319
3,840,710
2,538,394
1,850,070
608,819
445,849
248,478
205,521
204,012
129,458
124,937
80,953
59,104
142,189

45,818,176
Excess of revenue over expenses
Comptroller's equity at beginning of year

$37,824,450
4,335,914
1,886,494
490,355
380,501

51,235,786
Expenses:
Salaries
Per diem
Retirement and other employee benefits (Note 3)
Travel
Rent and maintenance (Note 3)
Communications
Moving and shipping
Employee education and training
Printing, reproduction and subscriptions
Office machine repairs and rentals
Depreciation
Supplies
Consulting services
Other

$43,178,771
4,520,905
2,936,677
507,080
92,353

40,476,813

5,417,610
26,986,239

4,440,901
22,545,338

$32,403,849

$26,986,239

See Notes at end of section.
*Reclassified to conform with 1973 presentation.




33

TABLE 13
OFFICE OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
Year Ended December 31
1973
Financial resources were provided by:
Excess of revenue over expenses
Add charges and credits not affecting working capital in the period:
Additions to accumulated annual leave
Depreciation
Amortization of premium and accretion of discount on long-term U.S. Government obligations
(net)
Net loss on sales of fixed assets
Working capital provided by operations for the period
Long-term U.S. Government obligations:
Redeemed
Transferred to current assets
Proceeds received on sales of fixed assets
Net receivership fund receipts

1972

$5,417,610

$4,440,901

666,850
121,418

369,635
124,937

(5,753)
2,613

(4,066)
2,111

7,848,067
4,061,003
2,319
967
16,845,874

12,932,950
293,202
137,863

12,830,323
211,501
106,129
13,147,953

$(5,801,172)

(Decrease) increase in working capital

1,350,000
9,971
134

13,364,015

Financial resources were used for:
Purchase of long-term U.S. Government obligations
Payments of accrued annual leave
Purchase of fixed assets

4,933,518

7,562,843

Total

6,202,738

$3,697,921

Analysis of Changes in Working Capital
(Decrease) increase in current assets:
Cash
Obligations of U.S. Government
Accrued interest
Accounts receivable
Travel advances
Prepaid expenses and other assets

34



2,647,081

(150,265)
(21,836)
(1,746,482)

(14,742)
(50,257)
1,115,839

,(1,918,583)
(Decrease) increase in working capital

$(102,223)
2,351,454
45,888
330,083
29,712
(7,833)

(3,882,589)
(Increase) decrease in current liabilities:
Accounts payable and other accruals
Taxes and other payroll deductions
Accrued travel and salaries

$1,457,879
(5,340,412)
175,943
(254,129)
47,623
30,507

1,050,840

$(5,801,172)

$3,697,921

OPINION OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT
To the Comptroller of the Currency
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
In our opinion, the accompanying balance sheets, the related statements of
revenue, expenses and Comptroller's equity and the statements of changes in
financial position present fairly the financial position of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency at December 31,1973 and 1972, the results of its operations
and the changes in financial position for the years then ended, in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied. Our examinations
of these statements were made in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards and accordingly included such tests of the accounting records and
such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances,
including confirmation of securities owned by correspondence with the depositary.
PRICE WATERHOUSE & CO.
WASHINGTON, D.C.

February 20, 1974.

NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Note 1 — Organization and Accounting Policies
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency was created for
the purpose of establishing and regulating a National Banking
System. The National Currency Act of 1863, rewritten and
re-enacted as The National Banking Act of 1864, created the
Comptroller's Office, provided for its supervisory functions and
the chartering of banks. The revenue of the Comptroller's Office
is derived principally from assessments and fees paid by the
National banks and interest on investments in U.S. Government
obligations. Assessments paid by National banks are not construed to be government funds. No funds derived from taxes or
Federal appropriations are allocated to or used by the Comptroller's Office in any of its operations. However, since the Comptroller's Office was created by an Act of Congress, its operations
are not subject to Federal income taxes.
The accounts of the Comptroller's Office are maintained on
the accrual basis. Fixed assets are depreciated on the straightline basis principally over an estimated useful life of 10 years.
Premiums and discounts on investments in U.S. Government
obligations are amortized or accreted ratably over the terms of
the obligations. U.S. Government obligations having a maturity
date more than 12 months from the date of the financial statements are classified as long-term investments.
Note 2 — Closed Receivership Funds
This amount represents a liability for unclaimed depositors
account balances, resulting principally from the failure and closing of certain National banks during the 1930's. At such time, the
assets of the banks were transferred to the custody of the




Comptroller's Office to be held in trust for their depositors.
Those funds have been invested in government securities pending
claim by depositors.
Note 3 — Commitments and Contingencies
Regional and sub-regional offices of the Comptroller of the
Currency lease office space under agreements which expire at
varying dates through 1981. Rent expense aggregates approximately $600,000 annually, of which approximately $225,000
relates to long-term lease commitments at December 31, 1973.
The Washington, D.C. office and certain regional Offices located
in Federal Government facilities are presently occupied on a
rent-free basis. However, as of July 1, 1974, the Comptroller's
Office will be required to pay an estimated $144,000 annually
for the space occupied by those regional offices.
The Comptroller's Office has entered into a lease agreement
for new office space in Washington, D.C. effective June 1, 1974
at an approximate annual rental of $1,200,000. The initial lease
is for a 5-year period and includes three consecutive 5-year
renewal options.
The Comptroller's Office contributes to the Civil Service
Retirement plan for the benefit of all its eligible employees.
Contributions aggregated $2,311,708 and $2,037,847 in 1973
and 1972, respectively. The plan is participatory, with 7 percent
of salary being contributed by each party.
Various banks in the District of Columbia have deposited
securities with the Comptroller's Office as collateral for those
banks entering into and administering trust activities. Those
securities, having a par or stated value of $11,741,000, are not
assets of the Comptroller's Office and accordingly are not included in the accompanying financial statements.

35

APPENDIX A

Merger Decisions, 1973




Merger* Decisions, 1973
/. Mergers consummated, involving two or more operating banks
Page
Jan. 8, 1973:
Fidelity National Bank of Pa., Williamsport, Pa.
The First National Bank of Lock Haven, Lock Haven,
Pa.
45
Merger
Jan. 15,1973:
Community National Bank, Loveland, Ohio
Citizensbank National Association, Felicity, Ohio
46
Merger
Jan. 19, 1973:
Bank of Indiana, National Association, Gary, Ind.
Northwest Bank of Indiana, National Association,
Whiting, Ind.
48
Merger
Jan. 19,1973:
Old National Bank of Washington, Spokane, Wash.
Security Bank, Lynnwood, Wash.
49
Purchase
Jan. 26,1973:
The Merchants National Bank of Allentown, Allentown, Pa.
The First National Bank of Coopersburg, Coopersbur
S> Pa 51
Merger
Feb. 13,1973:
The First National Bank of Morns, Morris, N. Y.
52
Merger
Feb.28,1973:
Bankers Trust Company Albany, National AssociaA1K

Mar. 30, 1973:
Pag*
National Community Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford,
N.J.

National Union Bank of New Jersey, Dover, N.J.
Merger
Mar. 31, 1973:
Northwestern National Bank of Sioux Falls, Sioux
Falls, S. Dak.
Parker State Bank, Parker, S. Dak.
Merger
Mar. 31, 1973:
The Union National Bank of Youngstown, Youngstown, Ohio
The First National Bank of Girard, Girard, Ohio
Merger
Apr. 2, 1973:
Farmers First National Bank, Lititz, Pa.
The First National Bank of Marietta, Marietta, Pa.
Merger
Apr. 2, 1973:
Guaranty National Bank and Trust Company of Corp u s Christi, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Bank of Commerce, Corpus Christi, Tex.
Merger
Apr 6 ^ 3 .
Tne
Merchants National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala.
Citronelle State Bank, Citronelle, Ala.
Merger

^

54

65

67

68

69

^ Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, Lancaster,
:
.
Jjie Leola National Bank, Leola, Pa.

71

Fa

55

Merger

72

A/r

56

58

60

61

* Includes mergers, consolidations, and purchase and sale
transactions where the emerging bank is a National bank.
Decisions are arranged chronologically by effective date.




64

JNew Jersey Bank (National Association), Lliiton, JN.J.
The National Bank of Palisades Park, Palisades Park,

NY

MonTgome"yCounty Trust Company, Amsterdam,
Feb 28 1973First National Bank, Bowling Green, Ohio
Progress National Bank of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio
Consolidation
Mar. 8,1973:
The Citizens National Bank of Meridian, Meridian,
]yjjsg
The Bank of Macon, Macon, Miss.
Merger
Mar. 9,1973:
North Carolina National Bank, Charlotte, N.C.
Citizens Bank and Trust Company, Henderson, N.C.
Merger
Mar. 9,1973:
Puget Sound National Bank, Tacoma, Wash.
State Bank of Morton, Morton, Wash.
Eatonville State Bank, Eatonville, Wash.
Orting State Bank, Orting, Wash.
Merger
Mar. 30, 1973:
National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville,
Va.
The First National Bank of Nelson County at Lovingston, Lovingston, Va.
Merger

63

May 11, 1973:
First National Bank of South Jersey, Egg Harbor
^ Township, NJ.
First National Bank of Moorestown, Moorestown, N.J.
Merger
May 31, 1973:
Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City, Utah
Bank of Vernal, Vernal, Utah
Purchase
June 1, 1973:
Purdue National Bank of Lafayette, Lafayette, Ind.
Stockwell State Bank, Stockwell, Ind.
Merger
June 1,1973:
The Amoskeag National Bank of Manchester, ManChester, N.H.
Amoskeag Trust Company, N.A., Manchester, N.H.
Merger
j u n e 30,1973:
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company,
Glens Falls, N.Y.
The National Bank of Schuylerville, Schuylerville,
N.Y.
Merger

74

75

76

77

78

39

June 30,1973:
Page
The First National Bank of Cobb County, Marietta,
Ga.
Bank of Acworth, Acworth, Ga.
Merger
79
June 30,1973:
The First National Bank of Kenton, Kenton, Ohio
The Alger Savings Bank, Alger, Ohio
Merger
81
June 30,1973:
The First National Bank of Logan, Logan, Utah
Pioneer National Bank, Logan, Utah
Merger
82
July 2,1973:
The South Carolina National Bank, Charleston, S.C.
The Bank of Berkeley, Moncks Corner, S.C.
Merger
83
Aug. 1,1973:
Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City, Utah
Carbon Emery Bank, Price, Utah
Merger
84
Sept. 1,1973:
The Union National Bank of New Brighton, New
Brighton, Pa.
The Freedom National Bank, Freedom, Pa,
C onsolidation
85
Sept. 10,1973:
The Peoples National Bank of State College, State
College, Pa.
The Rebersburg National Bank, Rebersburg, Pa.
Merger
87
Sept. 18,1973:
The Newport National Bank, Newport, Ky.
West Side Savings Bank, Newport, Ky.
Purchase
88
Oct. 1,1973:
The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich,
Norwich, N.Y.
The First National Bank of Newark Valley, Newark
Valley, N.Y.
Merger....,
89
Oct. 5,1973:
The National Bank of Commerce of Seattle, Seattle,
Wash.
Citizens State Bank, Puyallup, Wash.
Purchase
91
Oct. 15,1973:
The Peoples National Bank, Greenville, S.C.
Bankers Trust of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C.
C onsolidation
92
Oct. 18,1973:
Crocker National Bank, San Francisco, Calif.
United States National Bank, San Diego, Calif.
Purchase
93
Oct. 23, 1973:
The Park National Bank, Newark, Ohio
The Utica Savings Bank Company, Utica, Ohio
Purchase
94
Oct. 26, 1973:
Pittsburgh National Bank, Jeanette, Pa.
Farmers Bank and Trust Company, Indiana, Pa.
Purchase
95
Oct. 29, 1973:
The Shelburne Falls National Bank, Shelburne Falls,
Mass.
The Conway National Bank, Conway, Mass.
Merger
97
Oct. 31, 1973:
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens
Falls, N.Y.

40



Page
The Cambridge Valley National Bank, Cambridge,
N.Y.
Merger
Nov. 15, 1973:
The First National Bank of Gallipolis, Gallipolis, Ohio
The Vinton Banking Company, Vinton, Ohio
Purchase
Nov. 16, 1973:
First National State Bank of North Jersey, Hackensack, N.J.
County Trust Company, Tenafly, N.J.
Merger
Nov. 16, 1973:
The National Bank of Northern New York, Watertown, N.Y.
The First National Bank of Dexter, Dexter, N.Y.
Merger
Nov. 30, 1973:
Citizens First National Bank of Ridgewood, Ridgewood, N.J.
Pascack Valley Bank and Trust Company, Hillsdale,

98

99

100

101

NJ.

Merger
Nov. 30, 1973:
Highland National Bank of Newburgh, Newburgh,
N.Y.
First National Bank in Montgomery, Montgomery,
N.Y.
Merger
Dec. 1, 1973:
The First National Bank of Bethel, Bethel, Ohio
The Amelia State Bank, Amelia, Ohio
Merger
Dec. 12, 1973:
Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A., WinstonSalem, N.C.
Bank of Elizabethtown, Elizabethtown, N.C.
Merger
Dec. 17, 1973:
American National Bank, Bakersfield, Calif.
National Bank of Agriculture, Fresno, Calif.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
Citizens National Bank in Pocomoke City, Pocomoke
City,Md.
Bank of Crisfield, Crisfield, Md.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
Crocker National Bank, San Francisco, Calif.
Imperial Valley National Bank, El Centro, Calif.
Purchase
Dec. 31,1973:
Cumberland County National Bank and Trust Company, New Cumberland, Pa.
The Citizens National Bank of Newport, Newport,
Pa.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
First National Bank of South Carolina, Columbia,
S.C.
The Security Bank, Edgefield, S.C.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company,
North wood, Ohio
The Grand Rapids Banking Company, Grand Rapids,
Ohio
Merger

103

104

106

107

108

110

Ill

H3

114

115

//. Mergers consummated, pursuant to corporate reorganization
Jan. 1,1973:
Page
American National Bank and Trust Company of
Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tenn.
American Bank National Association, Chattanooga,
Tenn.
Merger
117
Jan. 1,1973:
National Bank of Detroit, Detroit, Mich.
Detroit National Bank, Detroit, Mich.
Merger
117
Jan. 1,1973:
San Angelo National Bank of San Angelo, San Angelo,
Tex.
Capital National Bank, San Angelo, Tex.
Merger.
118
Jan.8,1973:
The Niles National Bank and Trust Company, Niles,
Mich.
American Bank of Niles, National Association, Niles,
Mich.
Merger
119
Jan. 22, 1973:
Second National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw, Mich.
The Second Bank of Saginaw, N.A., Saginaw, Mich.
Merger
119
Jan. 26,1973:
The First National Bank of Highland, Highland, N.Y.
The Second National Bank of Highland, Highland,
N.Y.
Merger
120
Jan. 29,1973:
The American Bank of Three Rivers, National Association, Three Rivers, Mich.
Three Rivers National Bank, Three Rivers, Mich.
Merger
121
Jan. 30, 1973:
The American National Bank of Amarillo, Amarillo,
Tex.
Bank of Amarillo, N.A., Amarillo, Tex.
Merger
122
Jan. 31, 1973:
Neenah West National Bank, Neenah, Wis.
Second Neenah West National Bank, Neenah, Wis.
Merger
123
Feb. 1, 1973:
Bank of Maine, N.A., Augusta, Me.
Water Street National Bank, Augusta, Me.
Merger
124
Feb. 1, 1973:
State National Bank, Evanston, 111.
SNB National Bank, Evanston, 111.
Merger
124
Feb. 13,1973:
Gulf Coast National Bank, Houston, Tex.
Gulf Bank, National Association, Houston, Tex.
Merger
125
Feb. 13, 1973:
Houston Intercontinental National Bank, Houston,
Tex.
Kennedy Boulevard Bank, National Association,
Houston, Tex.
Merger
126
Feb. 15,1973:
The First National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg, Tenn.
The National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg,
Tenn.
Merger
126
Feb. 21,1973:
The First National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville,
Tenn.
The Second National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville,
Tenn.
Merger
127



Feb. 26, 1973:
The Fairfield County National Bank, Norwalk, Conn.
The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, N.A.,
Norwalk, Conn.
Merger
Feb. 28,1973:
The First National Bank of Hopedale, Hopedale,
Ohio
The Second National Bank of Hopedale, Hopedale,
Ohio
Merger
Feb. 28,1973:
The Saugerties National Bank and Trust Company,
Saugerties, N.Y.
The Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mid-Hudson
(National Association), Saugerties, N.Y.
Merger
Mar. 1, 1973:
The First National Bank of Moravia, Moravia, N.Y.
Moravia National Bank, Moravia, N.Y.
Merger
Mar. 1,1973:
The Hayes National Bank of Clinton, Clinton, N.Y.
Hayes National Bank, Clinton, N.Y.
Merger
Mar. 6,1973:
The Central Valley National Bank, Central Valley,
N.Y.
Citibank (Mid-Hudson), National Association, Town
of Woodbury (P.O. Central Valley), N.Y.
Merger
Mar. 6,1973:
The First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany
Falls, Oriskany Falls, N.Y.
Citibank (Central), National Association, Oriskany
Falls, N.Y.
Merger
Mar. 26,1973:
First National Bank of Holland, Holland, Mich.
Holland National Bank, Holland, Mich.
Merger
Mar. 30,1973:
Union Bank and Trust Company (National Association), Grand Rapids, Mich.
The Union National Bank, Grand Rapids, Mich.
Merger
Apr. 19,1973:
Somerset Hills & County National Bank, Basking
Ridge, N.J.
New Somerset Hills & County National Bank, Basking Ridge, N.J.
Merger
Apr. 20,1973^
The Austin National Bank, Austin, Tex.
Austin Bank, National Association, Austin, Tex.
Merger
Apr. 24,1973:
First National Bank of Abilene, Abilene, Tex.
Second National Bank of Abilene, Abilene, Tex.
Merger
Apr. 24,1973:
Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit, Detroit,
Mich.
Manufacturers Bank Detroit, N.A., Detroit, Mich.
Merger
Apr. 24,1973:
The Hibernia National Bank in New Orleans, New
Orleans, La.
Tower National Bank, New Orleans, La.
Merger
Apr. 30,1973:
Citizens National Bank in Ennis, Ennis, Tex.
Bancorp National Bank of Ennis, Texas, Ennis, Tex.
Merger

Page

128

129

130

131

132

133

134

135

136

137

139

139

140

141

141

41

Apr. 30,1973:
Page
The National City Bank of Cleveland, Cleveland,
Ohio
NCB National Bank, Cleveland, Ohio
Merger
142
May 1,1973:
Citizens National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio,
Tex.
Citizens Bank, N.A., San Antonio, Tex.
Merger
143
May 1, 1973:
Corpus Christi State National Bank, Corpus Christi,
Tex.
State National Bank of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi,
Tex.
Merger
143
May 1, 1973:
The Frost National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio,
Tex.
Frost Bank, N.A., San Antonio, Tex.
Merger
144
May 4, 1973:
The First National Bank of Eagle Pass, Eagle Pass,
Tex.
Maverick County National Bank, Eagle Pass, Tex.
Merger
145
May 7, 1973:
Nanuet National Bank, Nanuet, N.Y.
The Nanuet National Bank of Rockland County,
Nanuet, N.Y.
Merger
146
June 4, 1973:
The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield, Greenfield,
Ohio
Greenfield National Bank, Greenfield, Ohio
Merger
147
June 11, 1973:
First National Bank & Trust Co., Washington, Pa.,
Washington, Pa.
First Washington Bank, N.A., Washington, Pa.
Merger
148
June 14, 1973:
The Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis,
Hyannis, Mass.
Barnstable County Bank, National Association, Barnstable, Mass.
Merger
149
June 29, 1973:
Lincoln National Bank, Buffalo, N.Y.
Chase Manhattan Bank of Western New York (National Association), Buffalo, N.Y.
Merger
150
June 29, 1973:
The First National Bank of Manhattan, Manhattan,
Kans.
Poyntz National Bank of Manhattan, Manhattan,
Kans.
Merger
151
June 30, 1973:
The Commercial National Bank of Anniston, Anniston, Ala.
Commercial Bank National Association, Anniston,
Ala.
Merger
152
June 30,1973:
The First National Bank and Trust Company of Muskogee, Muskogee, Okla.
Three Rivers National Bank of Muskogee, Muskogee, Okla.
Merger
153
June 30, 1973:
Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago, Chicago,
111.
UA National Bank, Chicago, 111.
Merger
154

42



July 2, 1973:
Hackley Union National Bank and Trust Company of
Muskegon, Muskegon, Mich.
Hackley Bank National Association, Muskegon,
Mich.
Merger
July 9, 1973:
The Winters National Bank and Trust Company of
Dayton, Dayton, Ohio
Winters Bank, N.A., Dayton, Ohio
Merger
July 19,1973:
MacGregor Park National Bank of Houston, Houston,
Tex.
New MacGregor Park National Bank, Houston, Tex.
Merger
July 25,1973:
The First National Bank of Olean, Olean, N.Y.
First Bank of Olean, National Association, Olean,
N.Y.
Merger
July 31,1973:
The Farmers National Bank of Malone, Malone, N.Y.
Farmers Bank of Malone, National Association,
Malone, N.Y.
Merger
Aug. 8,1973:
Union National Bank, Lowell, Mass.
Union Bank, National Association, Lowell, Mass.
Merger
Aug. 17, 1973:
Virginia National Bank/Henry County, Henry County
(P.O. Martinsville), Va.
The Martinsville Branch of Virginia National Bank,
Norfolk, Va.
Purchase
Sept. 4,1973:
Bassett National Bank of El Paso, El Paso, Tex.
Bassett Bank, PanNational Association, El Paso,
Tex.
Merger
Sept. 4,1973:
Citizens National Bank of Austin, Austin, Tex.
Pan National Bank of Austin, Austin, Tex.
Merger
Sept. 4,1973:
First National Bank & Trust Company of Lincoln,
Lincoln, Nebr.
National Bank of Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebr.
Merger
Sept. 4,1973:
The First Freeport National Bank, Freeport, Tex.
First Freeport Interim National Bank, Freeport, Tex.
Merger
Sept. 4,1973:
The First National Exchange Bank of Washington
County, Washington County (P.O. Bristol), Va.
Three Bristol Branches of The First National Exchange Bank df Virginia, Roanoke, Va.
Purchase
Sept. 6,1973:
The First National Bank of Greeneville, Greeneville,
Tenn.
The National Bank of Greene ville, Greeneville, Tenn.
Merger
Sept. 21,1973:
Temple National Bank, Temple, Tex.
Temple Bank, National Association, Temple, Tex.
Merger
Sept. 28, 1973:
The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery, Ala.
Mongomery County National Bank, Montgomery, Ala.
Merger
Sept. 28, 1973:
The American National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala.

Page

154

155

156

156

158

159

160

161

162

163

163

164

165

166

167

Madison National Bank, Huntsville, Ala.
Merger
Sept. 28, 1973:
Union National Bank and Trust Company of Souderjton, Souderton, Pa.
New Union National Bank, Souderton, Pa.
Merger
Sept. 30, 1973:
The First National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba, Mich.
Second National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba, Mich.
Merger
Sept. 30, 1973:
The First National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette, Mich.
Second National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette, Mich.
Merger
Sept. 30, 1973:
The Miners' First National Bank and Trust Company
of Ishpeming, Ishpeming, Mich.
Miners' Second National Bank and Trust Company
of Ishpeming, Ishpeming, Mich.
Merger
Oct. 1, 1973:
First & Merchants National Bank of Tidewater, Chesapeake, Va.
Fourteen Branches of First & Merchants National
Bank, Richmond, Va.
Purchase
Oct. 5, 1973:
The First National Bank of Odessa, Odessa, Tex.
Odessa Bank, National Association, Odessa, Tex.
Merger
Oct. 15, 1973:
First National Bank and Trust Company of Evanston,
Evanston, 111.
FNB National Bank, Evanston, 111.
Merger
Oct. 31, 1973:
The Capital National Bank in Austin, Austin, Tex.
Capital Bank, National Association, Austin, Tex.
Merger
Oct. 31, 1973:
The First National Bank of Harlingen, Harlingen, Tex.
Harlingen Bank, National Association, Harlingen, Tex.
Merger
Nov. 1, 1973:
American National Bank in Springfield, Springfield,
Mo.
Charter Bank of Springfield, National Association,
Springfield, Mo.
Merger
Nov. 12, 1973:
The First National Bank of Anniston, Annistoh, Ala.
Alabama National Bank of Anniston, Anniston, Ala.
Merger
Nov. 15,1973:
First National Bank of Bay Minette, Bay Minette,
Ala.
Bay Minette National Bank, Bay Minette, Ala.
Merger
Nov. 15,1973:
The Citizens National Bank in Abilene, Abilene, Tex.
Citizens Bank, National Association, Abilene, Tex.
Merger
Nov. 15,1973:
The State National Bank of Denison, Denison, Tex.


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
550-906 O-LT 75 - 4
Federal Reserve Bank -of St. Louis

168

169

169

170

171

172

173

174

174

175

176

177

178

179

Denison Bank, National Association, Denison, Tex.
Merger
Nov. 19,1973:
Peoples National Bank & Trust Company of Bay
City, Bay City, Mich.
Commercial National Bank of Bay City, Bay City,
Mich.
Merger
Nov. 30,1973:
First National Bank in Brownwood, Brownwood, Tex.
First Bank National Association, Brownwood, Tex.
Merger
Nov. 30,1973:
Holyoke National Bank, Holyoke, Mass.
The Holyoke Bank, National Association, Holyoke,
Mass.
Merger
Nov. 30,1973:
The American National Bank in Western Michigan,
Allegan, Mich.
The West Allegan Branch of The American National
Bank and Trust Company of Michigan, Kalamazoo,
Mich.
Purchase
Nov. 30,1973:
The First National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala.
FBG National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala.
Merger
Nov. 30,1973:
The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala.
FBG National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
First Charter National Bank, Monroe Township (P.O.
Jamesburg), N.J.
Second Charter National Bank, Monroe Township
(P.O. Jamesburg), N.J.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Galveston,
Galveston, Tex.
Market Street Bank, National Association, Galveston,
Tex.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
First National Bank in Bartlesville, Bartlesville, Okla.
Security National Bank, Bartlesville, Okla.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
Mechanics National Bank of Burlington County,
Burlington Township, N.J.
Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley, Burlington Township, N.J.
Merger
Dec. 31,1973:
The City National Bank of Tuscaloosa, Tuscaloosa,
Ala.
City Bank of Tuscaloosa, N.A., Tuscaloosa, Ala.
Merger
Dec. 31, 1973:
The First National Exchange Bank of Montgomery
County, Blacksburg, Va.
Two Blacksburg Branches of The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia, Roanoke, Va.
Purchase
Dec. 31, 1973:
The First National Bank of Yorktown, Va.
Yorktown National Bank, Yorktown, Va.
Merger

180

181

181

182

183

184

185

185

186

187

188

189

190

191

43

///. Additional approvals
A. Approved, but in litigation
June 29, 1973:
The Merchants National Bank of Burlington, Burlington, Vt.
Montpelier National Bank, Montpelier, Vt.
Merger
B. Approved, but abandoned, no litigation
Feb. 8, 1973:
The Planters National Bank and Trust Company,

Page

193

Rocky Mount, N.C.
PNB National Bank, Rocky Mount, N.C.
Merger
C. Approved, but abandoned after litigation
Mar. 16, 1973:
The First National Bank of Platteville, Platteville, Wis.
Mound City Bank, Platteville, Wis.
Merger

Page
195

195

NOTE.—The 1972 Annual Report carried the Comptroller's decision approving the proposed merger of Bank of Fulton County,
East Point, Ga., into The National Bank of Georgia, Atlanta, Ga., under the heading "Approved, but in litigation." After the filing of an
action against the merger by the Justice Department in 1972, the banks abandoned their merger plans on January 31, 1973.

44



/. Mergers consummated, involving two or more operating banks
FIDELITY NATIONAL BANK OF PA., WILLIAMSPORT, PA., AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LOCK HAVEN,
LOCK HAVEN, PA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

The First National Bank of Lock Haven, Lock Haven, Pa. (507), with
and Fidelity National Bank of Pa., Williamsport, Pa., (175), which had
merged Jan. 8, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (175). The merged bank at date
of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 18,1972, The First National Bank of Lock
Haven, Lock Haven, Pa., and the Fidelity National
Bank of Pa., Williamsport, Pa., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
The Fidelity National Bank of Pa., the charter
bank, was organized in 1863, and is currently the
fourth largest bank in its service area. The bank,
with assets of $62.6 million and IPC deposits of $51.6
million, operates three branch offices, two of which
serve an area separate and distinct from that served
by the main office. One area is centered in Williamsport and consists of three-fourths of southern
Lycoming County and a small portion of eastern
Clinton County. The other area served by the bank
has the city of Danville as its nucleus and embraces
portions of southern Montour County, northeastern
Northumberland County, and Columbia County.
The economies of those areas are basically similar,
depending upon light and medium manufacturing,
dairy farming, and recreational pursuits.
In the Lycoming County market, the charter bank
competes with the Northern Central Bank and Trust
Company, Williamsport, with deposits of $78
million; the Commonwealth Bank and Trust Company, Muncy, with deposits of $69 million; and the
Williamsport National Bank, Williamsport, with deposits of $57 million. All of those banks are aggressive competitors. In the Danville area, the charter
bank ranks third in size and competes with the First
National Bank of Eastern Pennsylvania, WilkesBarre, and the United Penn Bank, Wilkes-Barre.
There are also several smaller banks with which the
Fidelity National Bank of Pa. competes in its two
service areas.
The First National Bank of Lock Haven, the merg


$32,815,248
66,006,960
98,822,208

In
operation

To be
operated

1
3
4

ing bank, was organized in 1864, and is headquartered 25 miles southwest of Williamsport. The bank
currently has assets of $27 million and IPC deposits
of $22.9 million. It has operated as a unit institution
since its inception, but has recently obtained regulatory approval to open a single branch to be located
in Lock Haven. The service area of this bank is relatively small and consists only of the town of Lock
Haven and its nearby environs. The economy of that
area is similar to that of the charter bank's service
area, with light and medium industries as well as
small dairy farms.
The merging bank competes with the Central
Counties Bank, an aggressive State-chartered institution headquartered in State College, Pa., which
has deposits of $62 million, and with the State Bank
of Avis, Avis, Pa., which has deposits of $13 million.
There is no competition between any offices of the
two proponents of this application because large
distances separate the nearest offices and an adequate number of competitors are located in the intervening distance. Williamsport is located 30 miles
from Lock Haven and the Danville offices are situated 45 miles from the site of the merging bank.
Those relatively large distances effectively preclude
any competition between the charter and merging
banks.
Consummation of the proposed merger will have a
significant impact on the competitive structures in the
service areas of both the charter and merging banks.
In Lock Haven, a small, unagressive bank will be replaced by an office of an aggressive, viable competitor which will provide expanded and improved
services to local residents and businesses. Those
new services will include a larger lending limit which
will stimulate the necessary industrial expansion in
this area, trust services, varied consumer and real
estate loans, and more competitive interest rates on
45

and deposits, the application states that competition between the banks is minimal but that direct
connection by new and improved highways will give
the banks a common business area.
If the proposed acquisition is approved, the probability for increased direct competition between the
banks in the near future will be eliminated.
State law permits de novo branching into counties
contiguous to home office counties. Hence, each of
the banks could be permitted to establish de novo
branches in the home county of the other. Even
though First National Bank of Lock Haven has not,
so far, elected to establish branches, it has submitted an application for the establishment of
another Lock Haven branch. Fidelity would even
more clearly appear to be capable of de novo expansion. However, the generally static population
and economy of this area detracts from the possibility of substantial de novo branching in the near
term.
The Williamsport area banks are the most significant potential entrants into the Lock Haven-Avis
area. There are two banks of this group larger
than Fidelity and one of near equal size.
Merger activity in the area is at a high level. The
proposed merger would contribute to the trend of
regional consolidation.
We conclude that the proposed merger may have
some adverse competitive effect.

deposits. The impact in the charter bank's service
area will be felt in the form of intensified competition with the larger banks in the area. Accordingly,
the merger will have a positive effect on competition
within the concerned areas.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the public
interest and it is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 7,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Lock Haven is served by First National Bank of
Lock Haven, a branch of Central Counties Bank
(deposits $62 million, formed in 1970 by the merger
of Lock Haven Trust Company and First National
Bank of State College, Centre County) and a branch
of the State Bank of Avis (deposits $15.2 million).
The nearest other banking alternatives for residents
of Lock Haven are in Jersey Shore (1970 population
5,322), Lycoming County, 13 miles east of Lock
Haven, presently served by Jersey Shore State Bank
(deposits $13.8 million) and a branch of the Commonwealth Bank and Trust Company (deposits
$69 million) established through the acquisition
of The Union National Bank of Jersey Shore in
December 1969. No other banking alternatives
intervene between Lock Haven and Williamsport.
Without supplying data as to overlaps between
the banks for loans (particularly real estate loans)
*

*

COMMUNITY NATIONAL BANK, LOVELAND, OHIO AND CITIZENSBANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
FELICITY, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Citizensbank National Association, Felicity, Ohio (15861), with
,
and Community National Bank, Loveland, Ohio (15945), which had
merged Jan. 15,1973, under charter of the latter bank (15945) and title "Citizensbank National
Association." The merged bank at date of merger had
J

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 16,1972, Citizensbank National Association, Felicity, Ohio, and Community National
Bank, Loveland, Ohio, applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under
the charter of the latter and with the title of the
former.
Community National Bank, the charter bank,
was organized in February 1972 as a wholly-owned
46



$6,748,872
8,397,921
15,146,792

To be
operated

3
1
4

subsidiary of BancOhio Corporation, a multi-bank
holding company headquartered in Columbus.
The bank, with assets of $5.9 million and IPC
deposits of $3.7 million, operates as a unit institution
in the Clermont County portion of Loveland, approximately 25 miles northeast of Cincinnati. Other portions of that city lie in Hamilton and Warren
counties. The charter bank is in an adverse
competitive position in relation to its largest competitors since it has a rather small lending limit

which prevents it from adequately serving the
credit needs of that growing area.
The service area of the charter bank consists
of the city of Loveland and its immediate environs,
a predominantly residential area with small local
businesses providing consumer services. A majority
of the wage earners who live in the area commute
daily to industrial and commercial employment
in the Cincinnati area. Competition for the Community National Bank is provided by a branch of
Clermont National Bank, Milford, which, with
deposits of $46 million and eight banking offices,
is the largest bank in Clermont County. Clermont
County is also served by several smaller unit
banks including The New Richmond National Bank,
The First National Bank of Bethel, and Amelia
State Bank. In view of the widespread commuting
in this area, the charter bank also competes with
banks in the areas where local residents work,
for example, with larger banks headquartered in
Cincinnati.
Citizensbank National Association, the merging
bank, was chartered in 1903, and, in 1968, became
a subsidiary of U.S. Grant Financial Corporation,
a registered one-bank holding company. With assets
of $5.4 million and IPC deposits of $3.9 million, the
merging bank operates one office each in Milford
and Batavia, and has received approval to open a
third branch in Mt. Carmel. The bank is currently
experiencing a management problem because its
one executive officer is going to retire soon and the
junior officers are not believed to be qualified to
manage the bank without assistance.
The head office of Citizensbank National Association is situated in Felicity, Ohio, a rural village
with a population of approximately 900 persons. The
service area of the bank, which has a total population of 5,000, has an economy based primarily on
agriculture. Through its branches, the merging bank
is in direct competition with several branches of the
Clermont National Bank.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
eliminate only the minimal competition between the
charter and merging banks resulting from a slight
overlap of the trade areas between the charter
banjt in Loveland and the merging bank's Milford
Office. That competition is clearly minimized
because of the dominant position Clermont National
Bank maintains in the intervening area.
The resulting bank will offer improved customer
services and an increased ability to compete with
the largest bank in the area through an increased



lending limit and the introduction of new services
such as trust services, equipment leasing, and a
wider variety of loan services. The management
weakness at the merging bank will be alleviated
through this merger and it will be able to take advantage of the financial resources and banking expertise of BancOhio Corporation.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 15,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The closest BancOhio subsidiary to Citizens is
Community, 6 miles north of the Citizens office in
Milford. BancOhio previously has indicated that the
service area of Community would encompass an
area which includes Milford. Since Citizens' office
in Milford draws accounts from several miles north
of that town, it appears that the two banks are in
direct competition over a substantial area. Furthermore, the rapid growth of both banks, with Community obtaining $3.8 million in deposits in its first
four months of operation and Citizens tripling its
business in the past 2 years, indicates that this
direct competition is increasing. Therefore, it
appears that the proposed merger would eliminate
significant direct competition.
Banking in Clermont County is highly concentrated; six banks operate 16 offices. Clermont
National Bank, a holding company subsidiary of
First Bane Group of Ohio, is by far the largest
bank, holding about 68 percent of total deposits in
the county and operating 11 banking offices. Citizens ranks third and Community fifth, with 7.2
percent and 5.7 percent of total county deposits,
respectively. The bank resulting from the merger
would rank second, with 12.9 percent of total
deposits, and the share of deposits held by the three
largest banks in the county would increase from
82.7 percent to 88.4 percent.
The effect of the proposed merger on concentration in the northern half of the county would be
even more pronounced. The only banks operating
in that area are Citizens, Community, and Clermont
National, the latter holding over 84 percent of total
deposits in the three banks. The bank resulting
from the merger would hold 16 percent of total
deposits in the three banks and the number of
banking alternatives for residents in the northern
half of the county would fall from three to two.
The proposed merger would combine the two
47

banks in Clermont County which are most capable
of providing effective and increasing competition
to each other and to the county's dominant bank.
As a subsidiary of BancOhio, Community has the
capability to continue its expansion and competitive
efforts without merging with Citizens. Citizens,
with its expanding branch system and excellent
recent performance record, also appears capable,

despite its presently modest absolute size, of providing competition in Clermont County. If affiliation
with a larger banking organization is deemed necessary by Citizens, there are many other alternatives in Ohio that would not present the anticompetitive effect of the instant proposal.
We conclude that the proposed merger would
clearly have an adverse effect on competition.

BANK OF INDIANA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, GARY, IND., AND NORTHWEST BANK OF INDIANA,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, WHITING, IND.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
To be
operation operated

Northwest Bank of Indiana, National Association, Whiting, Ind. (14813), with
and Bank of Indiana, National Association, Gary, Ind. (15455), which had
merged Jan. 19, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (15455). The merged bank at
date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 8, 1972, Northwest Bank of Indiana,
National Association, Whiting, Ind., and Bank of
Indiana, National Association, Gary, Ind., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
Bank of Indiana, National Association, the charter
bank, with IPC deposits of $78.2 million, was organized in 1907. In addition to its head office, it
operates six branches in the Gary area and one
branch in Shelby, a small community about 28
miles south of Gary.
Northwest Bank of Indiana, National Association, the merging bank, with IPC deposits of $31.9
million, was organized in 1931. In addition to its
head office in Whiting, it operates offices in Highland, St. John, and Cedar Lake, each of which is
close to the western border of Indiana.
Both merging banks and their branches are
located in the extreme northwestern corner of Indiana in Lake County which has a population of
546,253. Gary, Ind., with a population of 175,400, is
about 40 miles southeast of Chicago, 111., while
Whiting, Ind., with a population of 7,200, is approximately 9 miles northwest of Gary, and is separated
from it by portions of East Chicago and Hammond,
Ind. Heavy industry, particularly steel production,
dominates manufacturing and total employment in
this region. Plants of U.S. Steel Corporation, Repub-

48



% 41,601,410
124,454,488
157,422,686

4
8
12

lic Steel, and Youngstown Sheet and Tube Company are primary employers in Gary. Whiting is
the center of considerable industrial activity,
particularly oil refining. Standard Oil Company of
Indiana is the largest single employer in that
community.
Located in Lake County are 13 commercial
banks operating 49 branches. In addition, there
are 18 savings and loan associations, 73 offices of
finance companies, and 21 credit unions in the
county. Additional competition comes from financial
institutions located to the east, in the western
portion of Porter County where there are four commercial banks. In that service area the charter
bank, Bank of Indiana, N. A., ranks fifth in terms
of deposits, while the Whiting Bank ranks 10th.
The largest bank in the market area, Gary National
Bank, has deposits of $277 million, and provides
the strongest competition for Bank of Indiana.
Whiting Bank's primary competitors are The First
Bank of Whiting, with deposits of $33 million, and
American Trust and Savings Bank of Whiting,
with deposits of $15 million. The main offices and
branches of four banks headquartered in East
Chicago and Hammond, which have deposits
ranging from $53 to $128 million, provide significant
competition to both of the merging banks.
Consummation of this merger will help resolve
management problems of the two banks. Bankshares
of Indiana, Inc., which, since 1958, has controlled
Bank of Indiana, has committed itself to increase

the capital of the resulting bank and that will, to a
large degree, replace two undercapitalized banks
with one adequately capitalized bank. Furthermore,
the Whiting community will benefit from the merger
by virtue of a number of new, improved, and more
efficient services not now available nor within the
merging bank's capacity to provide, including
trust, travel, and expanded loan services.
Competition will not be adversely affected by
consummation of this transaction. The nearest
branches of the two banks are only 5 miles apart,
two branches of other banks intervene. Further,
the cities of Hammond and East Chicago are located
between Whiting and Gary, and 12 offices of five
banks are located in the intervening territory.
There is, in consequence, little competition between
the two banks. After consummation of this merger,
the resulting bank will become the second largest,
in terms of total resources, of the 19 banks headquartered in the service area, a change from the
fourth position the charter bank now occupies.
The result is that competition between and among
the largest banks in the area will be enhanced,
and smaller institutions will not be disadvantaged
competitively. In Gary, head-to-head competition
between the charter bank, with about $105.2 in
deposits, and the much larger Gary National Bank,
with deposits of $277 million, will be improved.
It is concluded that the merger will have no
adverse competitive effect and is in the public
interest. The application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 15,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The home offices of the participating banks are
located 12 miles apart, with several intervening
banking offices. However, the closest branches of
Northwest Bank and Gary Bank are only 5 miles
apart. Each bank draws some deposit and loan
business from the service area of the other; however, restrictions on de novo branching in northern
Lake County prevent the merging banks from
establishing offices in each other's immediate service area. Some competition would be eliminated by
the proposed merger.
The application considers the relevant market
in which to assess the competitive impact of the
proposed merger to include Lake County, and
portions of Porter County, Ind., and Cook County,
111. In this area, the merging banks hold 6.8 percent
and 2.4 percent of total commercial bank deposits.
However, since Indiana law limits commercial
banks to branching in their home counties, concentration in Lake County alone is also indicative of
competitive effects attending the proposed merger.
The four leading banks in the county account for
66 percent of total deposits held by such offices.
Gary Bank, with about 11 percent of these deposits,
ranks fourth in the market, and Northwest Bank,
with about 4 percent of these deposits, ranks
seventh. If this merger is consummated, Gary Bank
will become the second largest bank with offices in
Lake County, and the share of the four largest banks
there will increase to 70 percent.
We conclude that the proposed merger may have
an adverse effect on competition.

OLD NATIONAL BANK OF WASHINGTON, SPOKANE, WASH., AND SECURITY BANK,
LYNNWOOD, WASH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Security Bank, Lynnwood, Wash , with
was purchased Jan. 19, 1973, by Old National Bank of Washington, Spokane, Wash. (4668),
which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 12, 1972, Old National Bank of
Washington, Spokane, Wash., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to purchase
the assets and assume the liabilities of Security



$15,682,450

5

368,413,689
384,096,140

To be
operated

48
53

Bank, Lynnwood, Wash.
Old National Bank of Washington, the purchasing
bank, was organized in 1891, and currently operates 45 branches with assets of $368 million and
IPC deposits of $291.4 million. All but three of
those branches are located in the eastern part of

49

the State which is naturally separated from western
Washington by the Cascade Mountains. The purchasing bank is a subsidiary of Washington
Bancshares, Inc., a registered bank holding company which controls First National Bank in Spokane,
with deposits of $40 million, and owns 5 percent
or less of the stock of five additional banks headquartered in Port Angeles, Seattle, Ephrata,
Clarkston, and Yakima.
The service area of Old National Bank of Washington consists primarily of that portion of the
State of Washington east of the Cascade Mountains, and it competes with virtually all of the
banks operating in that section of the State. The
purchasing bank is not now a statewide commercial
bank because it maintains only three branches in
the western section of the State which contains
the majority of the population, commerce, and industry of the State, as well as the main offices of the
four largest commercial banks. The purchasing
bank does compete with the largest banks in the
State through the limited number of branches they
maintain east of the Cascade Mountains, but it
does not compete directly in the area from which
they derive the majority of their financiabstrength.
Spokane, where the purchasing bank maintains
its main office, is the second largest city in the State,
and has an estimated population of 170,500 persons.
It is situated about 285 miles east of Seattle and 17
miles west of the Idaho border. The economy of that
area is dependent primarily on agriculture, lumbering, and mining, with additional support from
manufacturing, the transportation industry, and
military installations. There are approximately
41,000 farms with a 1970 cash income of $600
million within the service area of the purchasing
bank. The lumber industry employs 28,000 persons
at an annual payroll of $120 million. Manufacturing
in the Spokane area consists of 350 diverse enterprises employing about 21,600 persons.
Security Bank, the selling bank, was organized
in 1961, and is headquartered in western Washington, 17 miles north of Seattle. It operates four branch
offices within 2 miles of its main office. The bank,
with assets of $15.7 million and IPC deposits of
$12 million, has experienced moderate growth
under conservative lending policies, but is presently
suffering from inadequate capitalization.
The selling bank is the sixth largest of 12 banks
currently operating in Snohomish County. Its
service area includes the towns of Lynnwood and
Mountlake Terrace. Security Bank competes di-

50




rectly with offices of Seattle-First National Bank,
with deposits of $2.3 billion; Peoples National
Bank of Washington, Seattle, with deposits of $440
million; Everett Trust and Savings Bank, Everett,
with deposits of $85 million; and Bank of Everett,
with deposits of $28 million.
Lynnwood, the city where the selling bank
maintains its offices, is located in the geographic
center of Snohomish County. It has a population
of 6,000 persons, and is considered the retail
trade center for several nearby residential communities within an 8- to 10-mile radius from Lynnwood; that area contains a total population of approximately 85,000 people. The economy of the
region is diversified, although it maintains a heavy
dependence on the transportation industry centered
in nearby Seattle. There are numerous retail and
commercial establishments, schools, and hospitals
which form the basic source of employment in the
service area of Security Bank.
There is no competition between the purchasing
and selling banks because relatively large distances
separate the two banks and an adequate number
of competitors operate in the intervening distance.
The main offices of the two banks are 290 miles
apart and the major portion of the purchasing
bank's branching system is on the eastern side of
the Cascade Mountains. Of the three offices in
western Washington operated by the buying bank,
the closest is 15 miles from Lynnwood. Because
the purchasing bank is precluded from opening a
de novo branch directly in competition with Security
Bank by reason of the State banking laws, there
is no potential for competition between those banks.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in the service area of Security
Bank by enabling the resulting branches in Snohomish County to provide additional resources
and services with which to meet the needs of the
community it presently serves. A significantly
larger lending limit, increased capitalization,
added management depth, trust services, and a
more liberal lending policy will serve the needs of
residents and local businesses more efficiently
than is now being done by the selling bank. Therefore, the purchase and sale agreement will merely
replace a small bank with a larger, more dynamic,
financial institution without eliminating any competition between the two banks involved.
The subject application will allow the purchasing
bank to compete more directly and effectively with
the four largest banks in the State in the very area

from which those banks derive the majority of their
financial resources. The resulting bank will remain
the fifth largest bank in the State, significantly
smaller than Seattle-First National Bank, with
deposits of $2.2 billion; National Bank of Commerce,
with deposits of $1.6 billion; Pacific National Bank
of Washington, with deposits of $643 million; and
Peoples National Bank of Washington, with deposits of $440 million, all of which are headquartered
in Seattle. The resulting bank will have total
deposits of $325 million.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public interest and the application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 7,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Since the nearest office of Old National Bank
of Washington to a Security Bank office is in downtown Seattle, the proposed acquisition will not

eliminate significant existing competition. Under
Washington law it would appear that Old National
Bank of Washington could not open a de novo
branch in the Lynnwood area. However, Old National Bank of Washington has established branch
offices in other communities apparently foreclosed
to de novo branching by sponsoring the creation of
a new bank and subsequently merging with the
sponsored bank. This means of entry into areas
ostensibly closed to de novo branching has been
used by other banks in the State of Washington.
Since Old National Bank of Washington is the
third largest bank in the State, in terms of deposits,
which does not operate an office in the Lynnwood
area, it must be considered a significant potential
competitor in that area. However, there are other
banks of significant size and capability which could
also enter the Lynnwood area. Hence, the effect
of the proposed merger on potential competition
will not be significantly adverse.

THE MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK OF ALLENTOWN, ALLENTOWN, PA., AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK
OF COOPERSBURG, COOPERSBURG, PA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Coopersburg, Coopersburg, Pa. (9034), with
and The Merchants National Bank of Allentown, Allentown, Pa. (6645), which had
merged Jan. 26, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (6645). The merged bank
at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On August 2, 1972, The First National Bank of
Coopersburg, Coopersburg, Pa., and The Merchants
National Bank of Allentown, Allentown, Pa., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
The Merchants National Bank of Allentown,
the charter bank, was organized in 1903, and is the
sixth largest bank operating in the Lehigh Valley.
The bank has assets of $262 million andlPC deposits
of $214 million. The charter bank is headquartered
55 miles northwest of Philadelphia and, through
a network of 15 branch offices, serves primarily
the counties of Lehigh and Northampton. That area,
which contains a population of approximately
2,000,000 persons, has enjoyed substantial growth
during the past decade. It has 2,000 farms in the



$14,680,425
292,874,718
307,555,143

To be
operated

2
16
18

surrounding area and 9,000 business establishments, including 29 major firms, in the vicinity of
Allentown.
The charter bank competes with both local banks
and branches of large Philadelphia-based banks
which have recently moved into the Lehigh Valley.
The larger competitors in this area include The
First Pennsylvania Banking and Trust Company,
with deposits of $2.9 billion; the Girard Bank,
with deposits of $1.9 billion; the American Bank
and Trust Company of Pennsylvania, with deposits
of $631 million; and the Industrial Valley Bank
and Trust Company, with deposits of $533 million.
The First National Bank of Coopersburg, the
merging bank, was organized in 1907, and is situated 8 miles south of the charter bank. The bank
has assets of $13 million and IPC deposits of
$11.1 million. It operates one branch in Upper
Saucon Township, approximately 5 miles northwest

51

of its main office. The service area of this bank is a
residential community with a population of about
46,000 people. The Coopersburg market area will
remain a predominantly residential area due to
restrictive zoning laws and will probably become a
suburb of Allentown or Bethlehem as those cities
expand.
The First National Bank of Coopersburg has no
direct competitors. Although the merging bank
maintains a branch 3 miles south of Allentown,
and its main office is located 5 miles to the south,
the offices of the charter and merging banks are
separated by the South Mountain, which forms a
natural barrier between the service areas of the
two banks and effectively isolates them from each
other.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition. The resulting offices in
Coopersburg will offer new and expanded services
to local residents such as a major credit card, automated customer services, a marketing division,
trust services, and a substantially larger lending
limit. The public interest will be served by this
merger since the resulting bank will offer more
diversified and specialized services to all its customers and will be in a better position from which
to compete with the larger banks in the area. This
will stimulate competition in the Lehigh Valley.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 20,1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Merchants' head office in Allentown is about 10
miles north of Coopersburg Bank's main office,
and only about 3 miles north of the latter's Upper
Saucon Township branch. Other branch offices
of Merchants in the southern sections of Allentown
are even closer. It is apparent that Merchants is
among the most convenient banking alternatives
for customers in the more limited service area of
Coopersburg Bank, and each bank draws significant
banking business from the other's service area.
The proposed merger would eliminate direct competition between these two banks.
Merchants is the second leading bank in the
Allentown-Bethlehem area, which probably overstates the relevant geographic market in which
the effects of the proposed merger primarily would
be felt. Its share of banking deposits in this area
amounted to over 25 percent as of June 30, 1970,
while the combined share of the three leading banks
in the area was about 81 percent. Coopersburg
Bank is among the smaller banks in the area, holding
about 1.5 percent of its commercial bank deposits.
While several banks larger in terms of total
deposits than Merchants have branches in this
area, Merchants is presently one of its dominant
banks. Accordingly, despite recent inroads into
Allentown-Bethlehem by Philadelphia and Reading
banks, we conclude that the proposed merger would
have an adverse effect on competition.

WILBER NATIONAL BANK OF ONEONTA, ONEONTA, N.Y., AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MORRIS,
MORRIS, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Morris, Morris, N.Y. (4870), with
and Wilber National Bank of Oneonta, Oneonta, N.Y. (2151), which had
merged Feb. 13, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (2151) and title "Wilber National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On November 6, 1972, The First National Bank
of Morris, Morris, N.Y., and Wilber National
Bank of Oneonta, Oneonta, N.Y., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
52




$4,729,691
51,864,974
56,594,665

To be
operated

1
4
5

merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title, "Wilber National Bank."
Wilber National Bank of Oneonta, the charter
bank, was incorporated in 1874, and, with assets
of $47.7 million and IPC deposits of $40.1 million,
operates three branch offices. The service area of

the bank consists of Otsego County in the Fourth
Banking District of New York, where its offices
are located, and western Delaware County in the
Seventh Banking District. An estimated 90,000
persons reside in the area which is primarily rural,
with an economy based on dairy farming.
The charter bank is the largest of three commercial banks headquartered in Otsego County,
and ranks 12th in size of the 35 commercial banks
operating in the Fourth Banking District. Competition is afforded primarily by branch offices of
larger banks based outside Otsego County, including
Marine Midland Bank-Eastern, National Association,
Troy, with deposits of $166 million, which is a
member of Marine Midland Banks, Inc., a multibank holding company with deposits of $6.3 billion;
National Commercial Bank and Trust Company,
Albany, with deposits of $746 million, which is a
member of First Commercial Banks, Inc., a bank
holding company controlling deposits of $1.1 billion; and State Bank of Albany, with deposits of
$686 million, which is a member of United Bank
Corporation of New York controlling deposits of
$1.1 billion. There are 12 commercial banks in the
designated service area with total deposits of $1.9
billion.
The First National Bank of Morris, the merging
bank, was organized in 1893, and, with assets of
$4.3 million and IPC deposits of $3.7 million,
operates as a unit institution. The service area of
the bank includes approximately 10,000 persons
and consists of the village of Morris and the neighboring townships of Morris, Pittsfield, New Lisbon,
and Butternuts. The area is predominantly rural
in nature and is dependent on dairy farming for its
economic base.
The merging bank is the smallest of three banks
based in Otsego County and ranks last in size of
the 35 commercial banks in the Fourth Banking
District of New York. The service area of the
merging bank is located within the service area
of several larger banks including that of the charter
bank but, because of its local nature and small
size, The First National Bank of Morris is unable
to offer many of the services available at these
larger commercial banks, thereby minimizing its
competitive impact with neighboring financial
institutions. The merging bank is a very small bank
and is therefore able to satisfy only local needs.
Competition in Otsego County will not be detri-




mentally affected by this proposal despite the fact
that the head offices of the two proponents of this
application are only 12 miles apart. The resulting
bank will provide the Morris area with improved
and expanded services including a much larger
lending limit, specialized farm loans, consumer
financing, and trust department services. The management succession problem and the weakness
in the capital structure of the merging bank will
also be alleviated by a consummation of this merger.
The resulting bank will have assets of $51 million
and total deposits of $47 million, and its relative
size in relation to other banks in the Fourth Banking
District will remain unchanged.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger
will result in no adverse competitive effects and
will benefit the public interest. This application
is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 12,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Morris Bank is the only bank in the village of
Morris. It is situated approximately 12 miles northwest of the nearest branch of Wilber Bank in
Oneonta. There are no banks in intervening communities, but National Commercial Bank and Trust
Co. of Albany (total deposits of $746.4 million, as
of December 31, 1971), which has six branches in
Otsego County, operates three of these in Oneonta.
It appears that some existing competition between
Morris Bank and Wilber Bank would be eliminated
as a result of the proposed merger. Morris Bank
would be eliminated as an independent competitor
in the county, or, alternatively, as an entry vehicle
for a banking organization not already operating
in the county.
Banking in Otsego County is concentrated, with
the top four banks (out of seven) holding 82.7
percent of total deposits (as of June 30, 1970).
Wilber Bank ranks second, with 31.7 percent of
total deposits, while Morris Bank ranks last with
3.3 percent of total deposits. If the proposed merger
is consummated, Wilber Bank will rank first in
the county, with 35 percent of total deposits.
The proposed merger would take place in a concentrated market, eliminate some existing competition, and increase concentration and domination
of one of the two leading banks in the area. The
overall effect of the transaction on competition
would be adverse.
53

BANKERS TRUST COMPANY ALBANY, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ALBANY, N.Y., AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
TRUST COMPANY, AMSTERDAM, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Montgomery County Trust Company, Amsterdam, N.Y., with
and Bankers Trust Company Albany, National Association, Albany, N.Y. (15758), which had
merged Feb. 28, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (15758). The merged bank
at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 6, 1972, the Montgomery County Trust
Company, Amsterdam, N.Y., and Bankers Trust
Company of Albany, National Association, Albany,
N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the latter.
Bankers Trust Company of Albany, National
Association, the charter bank, with $182.9 million
in total deposits, was organized in 1838. It presently
operates 23 offices in nine counties and has approval
for one additional office. While 12 of the bank's
offices are located in Albany County, there are none
in Montgomery County. Eight offices are located
in the city of Albany. Bankers Trust is a member
of the $8.1 billion Bankers Trust New York Corporation, a registered bank holding company.
Albany, capital of the State of New York and
home office city of the charter bank, has a population of 115,000. The charter bank's primary service
area has an estimated population of 210,844 and
Albany County has a population of 285,618. Albany
has been undergoing urban redevelopment and
many old buildings have been leveled. Although
government is the largest employer in Albany,
many industrial employers are found in the city
and the capital district. The population in Albany
is declining.
The $210.5 million charter bank is located in
the Fourth Banking District of New York which
encompasses 15 counties and has a population of
1,200,000. As of December 31, 1970, the charter
bank ranked third in size with $181 million in total
deposits or 6.7 percent of the aggregate deposits
of $27 billion held by 35 commercial banks in the
Fourth Banking District. Its competitors include
the $844 million State Bank of Albany, Albany; the
$817 million National Commercial Bank and Trust
Company, Albany; the $161 million Marine Midland Bank-Eastern, National Association, Troy,
a member of the $6.7 billion Marine Midland Banks,

54




$31,655,502
222,214,972
253,586,177

To be
operated

1
22
23

Inc., a registered bank holding company; the $73
million Union National Bank of Troy, which is
proposed to be a member of the $5.4 billion Charter
New York Corporation, a registered bank holding
company, and the $39 million Mechanics and
Farmers Bank of Albany, a member of the $2.9
billion Bank of New York Corporation, a registered
bank holding company. Competition is also provided
by the $350 million Schenectady Savings Bank,
Schenectady; the $348 million Albany Savings
Bank, Albany; and nine other savings banks.
Montgomery County Trust Company, the merging
institution, with total deposits of $25.5 million, was
organized in 1912, and is a unit bank. It is faced
with a serious management succession problem
which has developed as a result of illnesses and
retirements among its executives.
Amsterdam, home of the merging bank's only
office, has a declining population currently at
24,534. It is located in Montgomery County. The
service area of the merging bank has an estimated
population of 297,000, while Montgomery County
has a population of 55,583. Amsterdam, like Albany,
is experiencing a large urban renewal program.
It is largely an industrial and residential area and
is referred to as the "rug city". A large number of
its residents commute for work to either the large
General Electric plant in Schenectady or the South
Beechnut plant in Canajoharie.
The $30.3 million Montgomery County Trust
Company is also located in the Fourth Banking
District of New York. As of December 31, 1970,
it ranked 18th in size with $24 million in total deposits or 0.9 percent of the aggregate deposits held
by 34 commercial banks in the district. It competes
directly with branches of the $844 million State
Bank of Albany, the $817 million National Commercial Bank and Trust Company, and the $161
million Marine Midland-Eastern, National Association. It also competes with the $68 million Amsterdam Savings Bank and the $51 million Central

National Bank, Canajoharie, the only other commercial bank based in Montgomery County.
The resulting bank will provide improved and
expanded services to customers including accounts
receivable loans, construction loans, term loans,
lease financing, F.H.A. and V.A. mortgage loans,
F.H.A. home improvement loans, student loans,
BankAmericard, expanded trust department
services, municipal bonds underwriting and
municipal advisory services, a wider variety of
time deposits, and international banking services. At
the same time its management succession problem
will be solved.
Competition will not be adversely affected. Because the nearest office of the charter bank is 8
miles from the merging bank, there is little existing
competition between them. The $238 million resulting bank will continue to rank third in size in
the Fourth Banking District, with total deposits of
$206 million, or 7.6 percent of the aggregate deposits
of the $2.7 billion held by the 34 commercial
banks. In Amsterdam, the merging bank would be
replaced by the much larger charter institution with
the result that competition among the large banks
presently operating in Amsterdam will be intensi-

fied. At the same time, home office protection will
be eliminated in Amsterdam, thus opening the
community to the possibility of de novo branching
by other banks. In Albany the effect on competition
will be minimal.
It is concluded that the merger will have no
adverse competitive effect and is in the public
interest. The application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 11,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

We have reviewed the competitive factors presented by the proposed merger in the light of intervening developments in banking in New York State.
Expansion in upstate New York by newly developing multi-bank holding companies centered around
major New York City banks may enhance competition in some areas, particularly in and around the
major population centers. However, in view of the
substantial size of Bankers Trust, even when compared to these companies, for the reasons expressed
in our original competitive report, we remain of
the view that the proposed merger may have an
adverse effect on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK, BOWLING GREEN, OHIO, AND PROGRESS NATIONAL BANK OF TOLEDO, TOLEDO, OHIO
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Progress National Bank of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio (15470), with
and First National Bank, Bowling Green, Ohio (15416), which had
consolidated Feb. 28, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15416) and title "Mid-American
National Bank and Trust Company." The consolidated bank at date of consolidation had ,
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On October 24, 1972, First National Bank,
Bowling Green, Ohio, and Progress National Bank
of Toledo, Toledo, Ohio, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to consolidate under the charter of the former and with the
title "Mid-American National Bank and Trust
Company," with headquarters in North wood, Ohio.
First National Bank, the charter bank, was
organized in 1952, and is headquartered in Bowling
Green, the county seat of Wood County, approximately 20 miles south of Toledo. The bank, with
assets of $53.2 million and IPC deposits of $36.4
million, now operates six offices in the county and



$14,896,484
53,211,087
68,107,571

To be
operated

2
6
8

has approval to open two more branches, scheduled
to open in 1973, one each in Bowling Green and
Perrysburg.
The service area of the charter bank consists of
Wood County, a, residential suburb of Toledo.
While that county is the site of several large industrial plants, the economy of the area is considered rural with agriculture a significant economic
factor south of Bowling Green. Industry in the
county is a direct economic result of its close
proximity to Toledo; Wood County should grow as
metropolitan Toledo continues to expand. The
charter bank is the third largest of 10 commercial
banks in Wood County, and competes with TriCounty National Bank, Fostoria, with deposits of
55

$49.6 million, and Bank of Wood County, Bowling
Green, with deposits of $55.9 million.
Progress National Bank of Toledo, the consolidating bank, was chartered in 1965, and operates
a single branch in the Franklin Park Mall, just
west of Toledo. The bank, with assets of $14.9
million and IPC deposits of $11.2 million, is the
smallest of six commercial banks headquartered in
Toledo. It has experienced serious management
and earnings problems since its inception.
The service area of the consolidating bank consists of the city of Toledo, a highly industrialized
inland port located on the Great Lakes and in
relatively close proximity to Cleveland, Chicago,
and Detroit. Because of its small size and insufficient management personnel, the consolidating
bank has experienced great difficulty in competing
with the other Toledo-based banks, all of which
are substantially larger. Toledo-based competitors
include The Toledo Trust Company, with deposits
of $419 million; First National Bank of Toledo,
with deposits of $245 million; the Ohio Citizens
Trust Company, with deposits of $215 million; and
Lucas County State Bank, with deposits of $63.9
million.
There is no significant competition between the
charter and consolidating bank. As the two banks
operate in different counties representing separate
and distinct service areas as previously defined,
there is no effective competition generated between
them.
Consummation of the proposed consolidation
will have its primary effect in the service area of
Progress National Bank of Toledo which will benefit
from a larger lending limit, the introduction of new
and improved services, and the influence of the
stable and capable management team now operating

the charter bank. The consolidating bank has been
unable to overcome the turmoil of its initial organization, and the obvious benefit of this consolidation
will be to stabilize its internal operations so that the
resulting bank can become a more effective competitor within its enlarged service area. A secondary
effect of the proposed transaction will be to relocate
the main office of the resulting bank to Northwood,
allowing it to maintain its branches in both Wood
and Lucas counties. In spite of the fact that the
resulting bank will become the largest commercial
bank in Wood County, its margin over the next
largest competitors will be small, and the resulting
bank will remain significantly smaller than the three
largest banks headquartered in adjoining Lucas
County.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed consolidation is in the public interest
and is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 9,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Progress National is located in downtown Toledo
a short distance from the offices of four large banks
holding over $950 million in deposits. The closest
First National office to Progress National is located
in Rossford, Ohio, 3 miles south of downtown
Toledo across the Maumee River. While the distance between the two banks suggests that a certain
amount of direct competition may be eliminated by
the proposed merger, the two banks would have
minimal shares of any relevant banking market in
the Toledo area. The size of Progress National and
the existence of many large potential entrants into
the area also indicate that no significant potential
competition would be eliminated by the proposed
merger.
*

*

THE CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK OF MERIDIAN, MERIDIAN, MISS., AND THE BANK OF MACON, MACON, MISS.

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

The Bank of Macon, Macon, Miss., with
and The Citizens National Bank of Meridian, Meridian, Miss. (7266), which had
merged Mar. 8, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (7266). The merged bank at
date of merger had




$5,236,348
48,708,853
53,406,092

To be
operated

1
6
7

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On November 28, 1972, The Citizens National
Bank of Meridian, Meridian, Miss., and The Bank
of Macon, Macon, Miss., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the former.
The Citizens National Bank of Meridian, the
charter bank, was organized in 1888 and, with assets
of $44 million and IPC deposits of $35 million, is the
second largest bank headquartered in Meridian. The
charter bank operates six offices in Meridian and
has received approval to open a new branch,
which is presently under construction in nearby
Marion, approximately 5 miles northeast of Meridian.
Competition in Meridian is provided by Merchants
and Farmers Bank, with deposits of $40 million;
First National Bank in Meridian, with deposits of
$30 million; and a branch of Peoples Bank of
Mississippi, Union, with total deposits of $33
million. Additional competition is provided by 16
other banks located within the trade area of the
charter bank.
The Citizens National Bank of Meridian is in the
county seat of Lauderdale County, near the eastern
border of Mississippi, approximately 95 miles east
of Jackson. Meridian has a population of about
45,000 persons. The service area of the charter
bank consists of the surrounding eight counties;
Clarke, Jasper, Kemper, Lauderdale, Neshoba, and
Newton counties in Mississippi, and Choctaw and
Sumter counties in western Alabama. Meridian, the
only municipality with a population of more than
7,000 people in the bank's service area, is centrally
located within the 8-county area. That service area
has a diversified economy with a growing trend
toward industry and manufacturing and away from
agriculture.
The Bank of Macon, the merging bank, was
chartered in 1899 and, with assets of $4.6 million
and IPC deposits of $3.2 million, is the smallest of
three banks serving Noxubee County. The merging
bank operates as a unit institution and has never
been involved in any previous mergers or reorganizations. Competition is provided by Merchants and
Farmers Bank, Macon, which has total deposits of
$13 million.
The Bank of Macon is in the county seat of Noxubee County, near the eastern border of Mississippi,
approximately 60 miles north of Meridian. The
service area of the bank is defined as Noxubee
County in which it is centrally located. The econ-




omy of the area is primarily agricultural but has
attracted increased industrial activity in recent
years. Small farming operations appear to be
diminishing and mechanization is becoming more
prevalent on the larger farms in the area.
There is no competition between the charter and
merging banks because large distances separate
their two closest offices and an adequate number of
alternative banking facilities operate in the intervening distance. The closest two offices are approximately 55 miles apart, and each bank operates in
a separate and distinct service area, further precluding any competitive impact on each other.
Consummation of the proposed merger will allow
the resulting banking office in Macon to become a
more competitive financial institution by allowing
it to offer a broader range of services to residents
and businessmen in Noxubee County. Those services will include trust and estate planning services,
the ability to implement pension and profit sharing
plans, computer services, a travel department, a
complete line of time deposits, and several new
types of loans including construction loans, consumer installment loans, and FHA Title I Home
Improvement loans. The availability of a larger
lending limit will be especially significant because
the trend toward mechanization and larger operations in agriculture has brought about increased
credit demands for mortgage loans, equipment
loans and production loans. The availability of
larger loans will also be a significant aid in stimulating and developing the industrial potential of
this area.
Applying the statutory criteria it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
FEBRUARY 5,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The distance between the merging banks is
about 58 miles, with the offices of several other
banks intervening between them. The application
states that less than 1 percent of Citizens' deposits
originate in Noxubee and that Bank's correspondent
deposits account for most of that. The proposed
merger would not eliminate any substantial direct
competition presently existing between the two
banks.
Under Mississippi law, Citizens could establish
a branch bank in Noxubee County, but not in Macon.

57

However, in view of the size of Bank, and the
nature of its service area; it does not appear that

the proposed merger would eliminate substantial
potential competition.

NORTH CAROLINA NATIONAL BANK, CHARLOTTE, N.C., AND CITIZENS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY,
HENDERSON, N.C.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
To be
operation operated

Citizens Bank and Trust Company, Henderson, N.C., with
and North Carolina National Bank, Charlotte, N.C. (13761), which had
merged Mar. 9, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (13761). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 29, 1972, Citizens Bank and Trust
Company, Henderson, N.C, and North Carolina
National Bank, Charlotte, N.C, applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
North Carolina National Bank, the charter bank,
was organized in 1933 and, with assets of $2.2
billion and IPC deposits of $1.2 billion, is currently
the second largest commercial bank in North
Carolina. The bank operates 110 offices in 34
communities in various parts of North Carolina,
the majority of which are located in the western
portion of the State.
The charter bank competes both with the other
statewide financial systems in North Carolina and
with the smaller, regional and local banks situated
within the individual service areas of various
branches of North Carolina National Bank. The
larger statewide competitors include Wachovia
Bank and Trust Company, National Association,
Winston-Salem, with deposits of $1.6 billion; First
Union National Bank, Charlotte, with deposits of
$1.1 billion; and First-Citizens Bank and Trust
Company, Smithfield, with deposits of $715 million.
Citizens Bank and Trust Company, the merging
bank, was organized in 1889 and, with assets of
$32.8 million and IPC deposits of $25.7 million,
operates three branches in Henderson as well as a
drive-in facility adjacent to its main office. The
merging bank is the 27th in size among all banks in
North Carolina and has dropped substantially in
its position within Vance County in the last 20
years, indicative of its lack of aggression and conservative banking policies. The bank has no asset

58




$36,681,251
2,374,261,872
2,411,096,948

4
136
140

problems and is generally well managed internally.
The service area of the merging bank is limited
to the city of Henderson and its immediate environs
where it is the smallest commercial bank. Competition is provided by four offices of Peoples Bank and
Trust Company, Rocky Mount, the 13th largest
bank in the State, which has deposits of $116.5
million; and three offices of Southern National
Bank of North Carolina, Lumberton, the eighth
largest bank in North Carolina, which has deposits
of $219.4 million. In addition, First Citizens Bank
and Trust Company of Smithfield, the fourth largest
bank in the State, has received approval to open a
de novo office in Henderson.
The merging bank is located in Henderson, the
county seat and only urban center of Vance County,
at the eastern edge of the Piedmont section of
North Carolina adjacent to the Virginia State line.
The economy of Vance County has become strongly
industrial in character because a number of mediumand large-sized industrial plants settled in Vance
County in the 1960's, the majority of which are
clustered around Henderson. Commercialization
has also developed, although agriculture is still a
significant economic factor in this area.
There is no competition between the charter and
merging banks because large distances separate the
closest offices of the banks and an adequate number
of competitors operate in the intervening distances.
The head office of the North Carolina National
Bank is located approximately 185 miles southwest of Henderson and the closest offices of the
charter bank are located in Durham and Raleigh,
approximately 43 and 47 miles southwest of Henderson, respectively. Those large distances effectively
preclude any competition between the two proponents of this application.

Nor will this merger eliminate potential competition between the two banks. Even if the economic
climate of Henderson warranted another de novo
branch, it is neither clear nor certain that the
North Carolina National Bank could justify its
entry under the present state of the law as interpreted by the North Carolina courts in recent
branching decisions.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in Vance County by allowing
the charter bank to replace its broader range of
services and larger resources for those presently
offered by the merging bank. Because of its small
size and conservative policies Citizens Bank and
Trust Company has been unable to compete
effectively with the larger commercial banks operating branches within its service area and has had
difficulty in meeting the credit needs of the
industries which have recently settled in and around
Henderson. The resulting bank will be an active
catalyst in Vance County and will serve as a viable
alternative to the larger commercial banks now
operating in that area. The North Carolina National
Bank will also bring to the Henderson offices of the
resulting bank a broad range of consumer-oriented
services that will directly benefit individual residents
in Vance County. The proposed transaction will
not significantly change the size of the charter bank
which will remain the second largest bank in North
Carolina.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 9,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

This proposed merger would combine the State's
second largest bank, North Carolina National
Bank, and its affiliates with the leading bank in
Henderson and Vance County. Three banks currently operate 10 banking offices in Vance County—
all of which are located in Henderson. Citizens
accounts for the largest share of deposits held by
any bank operating in Vance County. On the basis
of June 30, 1970, figures, Citizens held 54.2 percent
of total deposits held by banks in the county and
59.2 percent of all IPC demand deposits. Offices
of the State's eighth and 12th largest banks accounted, in almost equal shares, for the balance
of bank deposits in the county.
The merger would appear to eliminate a limited


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
550-906
Federal Reserve O-LT - of St. Louis
Bank 75 - 5

amount of direct banking competition between
North Carolina National, Bank and Citizens. North
Carolina National Bank's branch nearest a Citizens
office is in Durham, about 34 miles southwest of
Henderson—via the excellent highway link provided
by Interstate 85. The offices of several other banks
operate in the intervening area. Nonetheless, both
banks appear to draw at least some deposits and
loans from areas served by the other.
More importantly, it would eliminate substantial
direct competition between Citizens and Stephenson
Finance Company, another subsidiary of North
Carolina National Bank's parent holding company,
NCNB Corporation. The latter operates a consumer
loan office in Henderson which has a significant
volume of personal consumer loans outstanding in
the Henderson area. Since Citizens, in view of its
loan portfolio, is a significant consumer lender in
Vance County, this proposed merger would eliminate significant direct competition between Citizens
and Stephenson Finance Company and increase,
concentration in the local market for these services.
North Carolina National Bank, as the State's
second largest bank with total resources exceeding
$2 billion, possesses the capability of continued
expansion and growth by means other than the
acquisition of leading local banks. None of the
other largest banks in the State operate offices in
Vance County (although First-Citizens, which ranks
fourth, has permission to enter de novo). Thus, these
other banks are also potential entrants into the
market served by Citizens. However, Citizens'
merger into North Carolina National Bank would
represent another significant contribution to the
continuing trend of mergers by the State's largest
banks —the five largest of which already account
for about 70 percent of deposits in the State —by
which they succeed to the deposits and leading
local market positions of the merged banks. Between its formation in 1960, by a merger of two of
the State's leading banks, and 1971, North Carolina
National Bank acquired 12 banks, succeeding to
their aggregate deposits of $151 million and 37
banking offices. In 1972 alone, North Carolina
National Bank has received approval to acquire
three leading local banks and their $51 million in
aggregate deposits and 11 banking offices —this
would be its fourth approval for a major acquisition. Furthermore, Citizens' merger into North
Carolina National Bank would eliminate Citizens
as a significant merger partner for smaller regional
or statewide banks whose development presents

59

the greatest possibility of effective statewide competition to existing banking giants such as North
Carolina National Bank.

We conclude that the proposed merger of Citizens
into North Carolina National Bank would have a
significantly adverse effect on competition.

PUGET SOUND NATIONAL BANK, TACOMA, WASH., AND STATE BANK OF MORTON, MORTON, WASH., AND
EATONVILLE STATE BANK, EATONVILLE, WASH., AND ORTING STATE BANK, ORTING, WASH.

Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

Banking offices
In
operation

State Bank of Morton, Morton, Wash., with
Orting State Bank, Orting, Wash., with
Eatonville State Bank, Eatonville, Wash., with
and Puget Sound National Bank, Tacoma, Wash. (12292), which had
merged Mar. 9, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (12292). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 29, 1972, State Bank of Morton,
Morton, Wash.; Orting State Bank, Orting, Wash.;
Eatonville State Bank, Eatonville, Wash.; and
Puget Sound National Bank, Tacoma, Wash.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter and with the
title of the latter.
Puget Sound National Bank, the charter bank,
with deposits of $226.2 million, was organized in
1890. In addition to its head office, the charter
bank operates 28 branches, all but two of which
are within 30 minutes' travel time from the charter
bank's main office in Tacoma.
Tacoma, home of the charter bank, is located
on Puget Sound and surrounding Commencement
Bay in Pierce County. The city of Tacoma has a
population of 155,000, and Pierce County is populated by 418,000 people. The service area of the
charter bank is considered to include a portion of
southern King County, western Pierce County,
and the Hood Canal and Shelton area lying to the
west across the southern portion of Puget Sound.
The economy of the area emphasizes logging and
wood products processing, metallurgical electrochemical and chemical processing industries,
marine industries, warehousing and distribution
facilities, with some agriculture outside the urban
area. Fort Lewis, one of the largest permanent
Army posts in the United States, borders Tacoma
to the south, while McChord Air Force Base and
Madigan General Hospital, in addition to a large
Veteran's Administration Hospital, are situated
nearby.
60




$6,251,927
2,733,198
4,782,028
287,728,181
297,990,490

To be
operated

1
1
1
29
32

The charter bank is the sixth largest bank in the
State of Washington. Its principal competitor is the
Pacific National Bank of Washington, Seattle,
whose local branches hold an estimated $214
million in deposits. Other banks operating in the
area include Bank of California, N.A., Tacoma, with
$70 million in area deposits; Seattle-First National
Bank with $21 million in area deposits; North
Pacific Bank, Tacoma, with $18 million in area
deposits; Peoples National Bank of Washington.
Seattle, holding $16 million in area deposits;
Western Commercial Bank,-with $3 million in area
deposits; and Tacoma Commercial Bank, with area
deposits of $2 million.
The State Bank of Morton, the first merging bank,
with deposits of $5.2 million, was organized in 1911.
The Eatonville State Bank, the second merging
bank, with deposits of $4.1 million, was organized
in 1913, and the Orting State Bank, with deposits
of $2.5 million, was chartered in 1891. Those three
banks have not only their ownership in common,
but also their president, and are unique in being
operated as branches of the same system. The
lending limits of those three small banks are quite
small and are inadequate to serve the needs of
customers in their service areas. In addition, the
banks are faced with the difficulty of attracting
qualified management personnel, and none is large
enough to have a formal management training
program.
Morton, Wash., home of the first merging bank,
is situated in Lewis County, and has a population
of 1,231; Lewis County has an estimated population
of 46,800. Lewis County is noted for producing more

logs for the Washington lumber market than any
other county. Employment in the county is involved
in light manufacturing, logging, and agriculture.
The county also produces large amounts of electrical
power from various dams. The only other financial
institution in the city or surrounding area is a small
branch of the Evergreen Savings and Loan Association with headquarters in Chehalis, Wash., 45 miles
west of Morton.
Eatonville, home of Eatonville State Bank, has
a population of 860, and is located in southern
Pierce County about 30 miles south of Tacoma.
Formerly one of Washington's most important
lumber-producing, log-shipping centers, the economy is presently dependent on agriculture and, to
a lesser extent, tourism.
Orting, home of the third subject bank, has a
population of 1,643 and is situated in Pierce County
about 20 miles southeast of Tacoma. The local
economy consists of truck gardening, bulb farming,
berry farming, logging, and lumber milling.
The merger will enable the acquiring institution
to offer banking services not now available from the
three merging banks, namely, trust, international,
dealer financing, automated accounting, and credit
card services. In addition, the merger will substitute the much larger lending limit of the charter
bank for that presently possessed by the merging
institutions.
Competition will not be adversely affected. The
service areas of none of the banks overlap and there
is, in consequence, no competition presently existing between them to be eliminated. In the service
areas of the merging banks there are no competing
commercial banks, and competition in those areas

would therefore be unaffected. In the service area
of the charter bank the addition of the three very
small merging banks will have little effect on the
charter bank's competitive position; its statewide
ranking as sixth largest bank will remain unchanged.
It is concluded that the merger will have no
adverse competitive effect and is in the public
interest. The application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 22,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

In view of their long standing common ownership and management, it does not appear that the
proposed transaction will eliminate any existing
competition between the Orting, Eatonville, and
Morton banks. Puget Sound National Bank's closest
office to any of these three banks is located in
Puyallup, about 8 miles north of Orting. Puget
Sound National Bank draws some banking business
from central and southern Pierce County. While
this business is limited in terms of absolute figures,
it is not insignificant when compared to the total
business done by the Orting and Eatonville banks.
Banking alternatives are few in these sparsely
populated areas of the county, and Puget Sound
National Bank would be one of the more important
competitive alternatives for customers in the
Orting and Eatonville areas.
Puget Sound National Bank holds about 32 percent of Pierce County commercial bank deposits.
While the Orting and Eatonville banks together
hold less than 1 percent of such deposits, the proposed transaction would eliminate some competition. The effect of this merger on competition will
be adverse.

NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA., AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF
NELSON COUNTY AT LOVINGSTON, LOVINGSTON, VA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Nelson County at Lovingston, Lovingston, Va. (11957), with
,
and National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville, Va. (10618), which had
merged Mar. 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (10618). The merged bank
at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On November 28, 1972, The First National Bank
of Nelson County at Lovingston, Lovingston, Va.,



$10,484,042
174,634,229
185,118,272

To be
operated

1
21
22

and National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville, Va., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter
and with the title of the latter.

61

National Bank and Trust Company, the charter
bank, was organized in 1914, and now ranks as the
13th largest of the 251 banks serving the State of
Virginia and has assets of $167 million and IPC
deposits of $150.7 million. The bank operates 21
offices in 13 communities within a 30-mile radius
of Charlottesville, with eight of its offices directly
in Charlottesville. The charter bank is the principal
component of NB Corporation, a one-bank holding
company that was formed in 1969. The holding company is now expanding its scope of operation, and
has recently filed an application for permission to
establish a new State-chartered bank in Culpeper,
approximately 46 miles northeast of Charlottesville.
National Bank and Trust Company competes
with 18 banks in its service area including the
three largest banks in Virginia. Among the largest
competitors are Virginia National Bank, with
deposits of $1.08 billion; First and Merchants
National Bank, with deposits of $946 million; and
United Virginia Bank, with deposits of $215 million.
The First National Bank of Nelson County, the
merging bank, was established in 1911, and operates
as a unit institution with assets of $9.7 million and
IPC deposits of $8.2 million. The merging bank,
which is located in the county seat of Nelson
County about 35 miles southwest of Charlottesville,
ranks 168th in size among the 251 banks in Virginia.
The competitors closest to the merging bank are
Farmers and Merchants Bank, Inc., and Fidelity
National Bank, both of which are in Amherst, 17
miles southwest of Lovingston.
Economic factors in the area served by the
charter bank are generally favorable; the University
of Virginia is the principal employer. Manufacturing,
agriculture, and tourism also contribute substantially to the economy of this area. In contrast,
the economy of the service area of the merging
bank is static and received a setback when a natural
flood disaster occurred in 1969. Nelson County is
primarily rural, and one-third of the working force
commutes daily outside of the county for
employment.
There is no competition between the charter

62



and merging banks because large distances separate
their closest two offices and an adequate number of
alternative banking facilities operate in the intervening distance. The nearest office of the charter
bank to Lovingston is in Scottsville, approximately
32 miles away. Due to road conditions and living
habits, there is little commerce between these two
communities.
Consummation of the proposed merger will result
in no adverse competitive effects because a small
country bank will be replaced by an office of a large
competitor capable of fulfilling the financial needs
of Nelson County. National Bank and Trust Company's entry into this area will bring specialized
banking services not presently available from the
merging bank, and will bring the resources necessary to aid the future economic growth of this
county. The subject merger will also alleviate the
management succession problem at the merging
bank.
Applying the statutory criteria it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is therefore
approved.
FEBRUARY 27,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The First National Bank of Nelson County at
Lovingston is currently the only commercial bank
in Nelson County, although one new bank is in
organization. National Bank and Trust Company has
no offices in the town of Lovingston or in Nelson
County; and its nearest office is located approximately 32 miles away in Scottsville. National Bank
and Trust Company's headquarters are 35 miles
away in Charlottesville.
According to the application, there is only very
minimal direct competition between the merging
banks. National Bank and Trust Company is a
potential competitor in Nelson County, but there
are several other larger potential entrants throughout Virginia. Therefore, we conclude that the proposed merger will have no significant competitive
effect.

NATIONAL COMMUNITY BANK OF RUTHERFORD, RUTHERFORD, N.J., AND NATIONAL UNION BANK OF NEW
JERSEY, DOVER, N.J.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
National Union Bank of New Jersey, Dover, N.J. (2076), with
and National Community Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford, N.J. (5005), which had
merged Mar. 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (5005). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On Dec. 20, 1972, National Union Bank of New
Jersey, Dover, N.J., and National Community
Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford, N.J., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
National Community Bank of Rutherford, the
charter bank, was organized in 1895, and now has
assets of $550 million and IPC deposits of $437.6
million. The bank is headquartered in Bergen
County and operates 32 branches, 26 of which are
in Bergen County and six in Sussex County.
The charter bank is the sixth largest of 88 commercial banks in the First Banking District of New
Jersey and ranks second in size of the 28 banks
headquartered in Bergen County. Competition for
the charter bank is provided by almost all of the
commercial banks in Bergen County. Among the
larger competitors are Peoples Trust of New
Jersey, Hackensack, with deposits of $828 million,
a member of United Jersey Banks, a multi-bank
holding company with aggregate deposits of $1.2
billion; New Jersey Bank (National Association),
Clifton, with deposits of $565 million; First National Bank of New Jersey, Totowa, with deposits
of $440 million; and Garden State National Bank,
Hackensack, with deposits of $375 million.
National Union Bank of New Jersey, the merging
bank, was organized in 1873, and now has assets
of $106 million and IPC deposits of $79.2 million.
The bank operates 12 branches, ten of which are
in Morris County; it has received approval to open
two additional offices within that county.
The merging bank is the 21st largest of 88 commercial banks in the First Banking District of New
Jersey, and ranks second in size of the 13 banks
headquartered in Morris County. Competition for
the merging bank is provided by American National
Bank and Trust of New Jersey, Montclair, which,
with deposits of $346 million, is a member of



$105,959,078
564,746,807
670,705,886

To be
operated

13
33
46

Princeton-American Bancorporation which has
aggregate deposits of $436 million; First National
Iron Bank of New Jersey, Morristown, which, with
deposits of $176 million, is a member of Heritage
Bancorporation, a multi-bank holding company
with aggregate deposits of $563 million; First
National State Bank of Northwest Jersey,
Succasunna, which with deposits of $84 million, is
a member of First National State Bancorporation
which has deposits of $1.2 billion; and Dover Trust
Company which, with deposits of $41 million, is a
member of United Jersey Banks which controls
deposits of $1.2 billion.
The trade area of National Community Bank of
Rutherford consists of Bergen County which has a
population of about 910,000 persons. The county
is primarily residential, and many of the residents
travel to New York City for employment. National
Union Bank of New Jersey serves Morris County
which has a population of approximately 400,000
persons. That county is heavily industrialized and
has experienced tremendous growth in recent
years.
There is minimal competition between the charter
and merging banks because each operates in a well
denned service area separate and distinct from that
of the other bank. The main offices of the two banks
are 29 miles apart and their nearest offices are 4
miles apart, and are separated by several alternative
banking facilities which dilute their competitive
impact on each other.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
result in no adverse competitive effects in the
First Banking District of New Jersey. The resulting
bank, with deposits of $562 million, will remain the
sixth largest bank in the First Banking District, and
will remain smaller than five of the multi-bank
holding companies operating in that banking district. The proposed merger will have a favorable
effect on competition by introducing an expanded
range of services to residents and businesses in
63

Morris County not now available from the merging
bank, such as a substantially larger lending limit,
an expanded trust department, international banking services, and other specialized consumer
services usually offered by the larger commercial
banks.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is therefore approved.
FEBRUARY 28,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

While the closest offices of the merging banks
are located only 3 or 4 miles apart, the application
indicates that each of the merging banks draws
only limited banking business from the service
areas of the other. Thus, the proposed merger would
not eliminate substantial existing competition.
Under New Jersey law, the merging banks could
be permitted to branch de novo throughout the First
Banking District, subject to home and branch office
protection statutes. Additionally, the increasingly
popular holding company device could serve as a

vehicle for entry into "closed" communities as
well. While National Union could not, because of
its size, be considered among the most significant
potential entrants into areas now served by National
Community, the latter is one of the larger banks
in the first district and indeed in the State as a
whole. It has the apparent resources and incentives
to enter attractive new markets, particularly in
those sections of the first district which it does not
now serve.
Morris County presents attractive expansion
opportunities for National Community. The county's
excellent growth rate has attracted de novo branching by other large banks in the first district. National Union, while much smaller in absolute size
than several of the banks operating offices in Morris
County, nonetheless has a substantial share of total
county deposits. As of June 30,1972, it ranked third
in the county, with about 12 percent of such deposits.
Although there are several other potential entrants into Morris County comparable in significance
to National Community, we conclude that the proposed merger would eliminate some potential
competition.

NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK OF SIOUX FALLS, SIOUX FALLS, S. DAK., AND PARKER STATE BANK,
PARKER, S. DAK.

Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
To be
operation operated

Parker State Bank, Parker, S. Dak., with
and Northwestern National Bank of Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls, S. Dak. (10592), which had
merged Mar. 31, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (10592). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 18, 1972, Parker State Bank,
Parker, S. Dak., and Northwestern National Bank
of Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls, S. Dak., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the latter.
Northwestern National Bank of Sioux Falls, the
charter bank, was organized in 1880, and currently,
with assets of $177 million and IPC deposits of
$142 million, operates 13 offices in the southeastern
portion of the State. It is a subsidiary of Northwest
Bancorporation, a Minnesota-based holding company which controls three of the four largest commercial banks in South Dakota. The bank operates
64




Banking offices

$6,747,726
18837376
195,118,591

1
13
14

as both a wholesale and retail institution and serves
as one of the State's leading correspondent banks.
It also provides a wide range of commercial banking
services at each of its branches for the convenience
of local residents and businesses. The charter bank
therefore competes both with the large statewide
commercial banks such as National Bank of South
Dakota, the largest bank in the State, and with each
of the smaller banks in the individual service areas
of the branches of Northwestern National Bank of
Sioux Falls.
Sioux Falls is the county seat of Minnehaha
County and, with 72,500 persons, is the largest population center in the State. The economy of Sioux
Falls is agriculturally oriented with a mixture of

light industry. The city also serves as a regional
distribution center for the surrounding area. Its
economy is considered stable with adequate growth
potential for the near future.
Parker State Bank, the merging bank, was organized in 1924, and operates as a unit institution with
assets of $6.3 million and IPC deposits of $5.1
million. Competition for the bank is provided by
Bank of Centerville, with deposits of $5.1 million;
Farmers State Bank, with deposits of $4.7 million;
Hurley State Bank, with deposits of $2.6 million;
Chancellor State Bank, with deposits of $1.9
million; and a branch office of United National Bank,
headquartered in Clay County, with total deposits
of $46 million. The area served by the merging
bank, all of Turner County, has an economy based
on agriculture.
There is no competition between the charter and
merging banks because large distances separate
their closest two offices andfivealternative banking
facilities are located in the intervening distance.
The closest two offices of these banks are situated
in different counties, approximately 30 miles apart,
which distance effectively precludes any competition between them.
Consummation of the proposed merger will not
result in any adverse competitive effects because a
small unaggressive bank will be absorbed by a
larger, aggressive institution which will allow the
resulting office in Parker to offer an improved and
expanded range of services to the residents and
businesses of Turner County. That will increase

banking competition in Turner County to the direct
benefit of the people who live there. The proposed
merger will also alleviate the management succession problem at the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
FEBRUARY 28,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The closest branches of Sioux Falls Bank to
Parker Bank are located in the Sioux Falls area,
about 30 miles northeast of Parker. There are no
intervening banks between Parker Bank and these
branches, and they derive $1.8 million in deposits
from Turner County, equal to 7.3 percent of the
deposits held by banks located in that county.
Parker Bank is the only bank in Parker and the
largest of six banks in Turner County with 22.7
percent of county deposits, although two other banks
are of similar size. Therefore, it appears that direct
competition, small in absolute terms but significant
in terms of banking in Turner County, would be
eliminated by the proposed merger.
Sioux Falls Bank could branch into Turner
County de novo, although the declining population
and small banking market appear to make such
entry unlikely. In addition, there are other banks
in South Dakota capable of de novo entry into
Turner County. The proposed merger would have
some adverse competitive effect.

THE UNION NATIONAL BANK OF YOUNGSTOWN, YOUNGSTOWN, OHIO, AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF
GlRARD, GlRARD, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Girard, Girard, Ohio (4884), with
and The Union National Bank of Youngstown, Youngstown, Ohio (13586), which had
merged Mar. 31, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (13586). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 24, 1972, The First National Bank of
Girard, Girard, Ohio, and The Union National Bank
of Youngstown, Youngstown, Ohio, applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the chirter and title of the latter.



$20,544,959
178,216355
199,705363

To be
operated

2
11
13

The Union National Bank of Youngstown, the
charter bank, with total deposits of approximately
$147 million, was chartered in 1931, and presently
maintains ten branch offices. It is headquartered
in the city of Youngstown, the county seat of Mahoning County. Youngstown supports an approximate population of 140,000. The charter bank
65

ranks second in size among the 13 commercial
banks in its service area, holding approximately
14.2 percent of total deposits and 11.8 percent of
total loans.
Banks competing with the charter bank in Mahoning County include The Dollar Savings and
Trust Company, Youngstown, with deposits of
approximately $233 million; The Peoples Bank of
Youngstown, Youngstown, Ohio, with total deposits
of approximately $38 million; the Mahoning National
Bank of Youngstown, with approximately $150
million in deposits; First National Bank of Sebring,
Sebring, Ohio, with total deposits of approximately
$5 million; The Farmers National Bank of Canfield,
Canfield, Ohio, with total deposits of approximately
$34 million; and, The Lowellville Savings and Banking Company, Lowellville, Ohio, with total deposits
of approximately $13 million.
The First National Bank of Girard, the merging
bank, with total deposits of approximately $18
million, was organized in 1893, and maintains one
branch office in McDonald, Ohio. It is headquartered
in Girard, located in Trumbull County, approximately 5 miles northwest of Youngstown. Girard's
approximate population is 14,200.
Competition with the merging bank in Trumbull
County is provided by The Second National Bank
of Warren, Warren, Ohio, with total deposits of
approximately $114 million; The Dollar Savings
Bank Company, Niles, Ohio, with total deposits of
approximately $11 million; The Niles Bank Company, Niles Ohio, with total deposits of approximately $28 million; Cortland Savings and Banking
Company, Cortland, Ohio, with total deposits of
approximately $39 million; and The Union Savings
and Trust Company, Warren, Ohio, with total
deposits of approximately $134 million.
Both banks are located in the Youngstown-Warren
Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area which consists of Mahoning and Trumbull counties. Because
Youngstown is located both in Mahoning and Trumbull counties, the charter bank has a right, under
Ohio law, to establish branches in Trumbull as
well as in Mahoning County. This area supported
a 1970 population of approximately 536,000. Its
economy is heavily dependent upon steel and iron
industries, as evidenced by an industrial employment of 154,000 and an annual industrial payroll
of $336 million in 1971. The Youngstown-Warren
area is expected to enjoy continued industrial
growth, although the Youngstown area of Mahoning
66




County has recently experienced some economic
set-backs due primarily to the closing down and
idling of local steel plants.
In addition to participating banks, competition
in the area is provided by the 11 other commercial
banks previously mentioned, ranging in size from
$259 million to $6 million. Additional competition
is furnished by the Orwell office of the Farmers
National Bank and Trust Company of Ashtabula,
with approximately $66 million in total deposits,
located in contiguous Ashtabula County. Besides
the competing commercial banks, the area supports
ten savings and loan associations, 24 credit unions,
and 32 consumer and sales finance companies, as
well as a number of insurance companies and
federal financial agencies.
Competition will not be significantly affected in
an adverse manner. At present there is no meaningful direct competition between participating banks.
While some competition does exist between the
subject banks, in their loan solicitations, the overlap
is not substantial. Consummation of the proposed
merger will not, therefore, eliminate any significant
competition despite the 5-mile proximity of the
participating banks. There will remain an abundance
of banking alternatives in the service area. The
resulting bank will remain second in size, holding
approximately 14.7 percent of the area's deposits
and 12.3 percent of the area's loans.
Consummation of this proposal will enable the
resulting bank to compete with The Niles Bank
Company, Niles, Ohio, affiliated with Bank Ohio
Corporation, the largest multi-bank holding company in Ohio, and with The Peoples Bank of
Youngstown in addition to The Farmers National
Bank and Trust Company of Ashtabula, both of
which are subsidiaries of Society Corporation, the
third largest multi-bank holding company in Ohio.
In addition, the proposed transaction will provide
the economically declining Girard community,
presently serviced solely by the merging bank, with
a more aggressive banking institution able to offer
larger lending limits, expanded trust and credit
card services, as well as home improvement paper
and certificates of deposit.
Applying the statutory criteria to this application,
it is concluded that the proposed merger is in the
public interest. The application is, therefore,
approved.
JANUARY 9,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The main offices of the merging banks are approximately 5 miles apart. Union National's closest
branches to Girard Bank are only about 2.5 and 4
miles distant. There are two additional offices of
other competing banks in the intervening area, but
Union National is obviously one of the most convenient banking alternatives for residents and business
located in the Girard service area of Girard Bank.
Extensive tables contained in the application purport to demonstrate that the merging banks actually
draw relatively small amounts of deposit and loan
business from each other's service area. However,
the application indicates that these tables were constructed by defining service areas as those areas encompassing 75 percent of the loan and deposits business of each bank; in view of the proximity of the
offices of the merging banks and the lack of any other
competing banking offices in the immediate vicinity
of Girard Bank, it is likely that the banks compete
much more substantially than the application would
appear to indicate. This competition would be eliminated by the proposed merger.

Commercial banking in the Youngstown area is
highly concentrated. Out of a total of ten banks, the
largest three hold 74.9 percent of total deposits, and
the largest four hold 80.2 percent. Union Bank ranks
third in size, holding 21 percent of total deposits,
and Girard Bank ranks eighth holding 2.6 percent.
Consummation of this merger would increase the
share of the four largest banks in the area to 82.7
percent of total deposits, and the largest three banks
would hold 77.5 percent.
Applicants apparently contend that any increase
in banking concentration would be illusory as Girard
Bank is in such a position as to compel its sale to
another institution. Without commenting on the merits of this conclusion, we would note that sale to any
other institution, particularly one of Ohio's expanding bank holding companies, not already operating
in the Youngstown area, would not present the competitive effects inherent in the instant proposal.
We conclude, therefore, that because existing
competition between the participating banks would
be eliminated and concentration would be increased
in an already concentrated market, this merger would
have a significantly adverse effect on competition.

FARMERS FIRST NATIONAL BANK, LITITZ, PA., AND THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MARIETTA, MARIETTA, PA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Marietta, Marietta, Pa. (25), with
and Farmers First National Bank, Lititz, Pa. (5773), which had
merged Apr. 2, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (5773). The merged bank at
date of merger had .:..:
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On November 30, 1972, The First National
Bank of Marietta, Marietta, Pa., and Farmers First
National Bank, Lititz, Pa., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the latter.
Farmers First National Bank, the charter bank,
was organized in 1901, and currently has assets of
$111 million and IPC deposits of $93.7 million.
The charter bank has nine banking offices located
in the cities of Lancaster, Neffeville, Ephrata,
Intercourse, and Lititz. The service area of the bank
consists of all of Lancaster County, although the
majority of its business as well as the location of
its offices are concentrated in north central Lan


$7,023,473
118,275,757
125332,695

To be
operated

1
10
11

caster County. The economy of that area is dependent on a mixture of light and heavy industry, agriculture, and tourism.
Farmers First National Bank is the sixth largest
of 19 commercial banks competing within its service
area, and is the third largest of all banks headquartered in Lancaster County. Competitors include
National Central Bank, Lancaster, with deposits
of $675 million; The Commonwealth National
Bank, Harrisburg, with deposits of $437 million;
Dauphin Deposit Bank and Trust Company, Harrisburg, with deposits of $300 million; and The Fulton
National Bank of Lancaster, with deposits of
$173 million.
The First National Bank of Marietta, the merging
bank, with assets of $6.8 million and IPC deposits
67

of $5.9 million, operates as a unit institution as it
has done since it was originally chartered in 1863.
The merging bank is situated in the western portion of Lancaster County, approximately 12 miles
west of Lancaster and 32 miles southwest of Lititz.
The bank serves an area confined exclusively to the
city of Marietta and its immediate environs, where
the economy is based on several small industries,
agriculture, and tourism. The merging bank has
no real competitors because of the limited scope of
its operations. The closest competitor is approximately 3 miles away.
There is no competition between the charter
and merging banks because of the relatively large
distance which separates the two banks and the
adequate number of alternative banking facilities
operating in the intervening distance. The closest
two offices of these banks are approximately 15
miles apart and nine banking offices operate in the
intervening distance.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in the service area of The
First National Bank of Marietta because a small
ineffective competitor will be replaced by a branch
of a larger, dynamic bank which will introduce a
wider variety of banking services for the convenience of residents and businessmen in Marietta.
Those will include a significantly larger lending
limit, computer services, modern bookkeeping
techniques, and a complete line of time deposits
and consumer-oriented loans. The proposed merger

will also relieve a mangement crisis at the merging
bank which, because of its small size, is unable to
recruit satisfactory replacements for the managing
officers who are now ready to retire.
Applying the statutory criteria it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
FEBRUARY 2,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The main office of Lititz Bank is about 22 miles
northeast of Marietta. Lititz Bank's Park City
Shopping Center office in Lancaster is 13.2 miles
east of Marietta and is its closest office. According
to the application, less than 3 percent of FNB
Marietta's accounts (savings and checking) are
derived from the Lancaster city area, the only area
in which both banks compete. There are several
offices of competing banks in the areas intervening
between offices of the merging banks, and it appears
that the proposed merger would eliminate only a
limited amount of direct competition.
As of June, 1972, 19 banks operated offices in
Lancaster County. The three leading banks held
52.6 percent of the total county deposits. Lititz
Bank, which ranks fourth, held 11.4 percent, while
FNB Marietta held 0.7 percent. The overall effect
of the proposed merger would not be significantly
adverse.

GUARANTY NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST OF CORPUS CHRISTI, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEX., AND BANK OF COMMERCE, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEX.

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

Bank of Commerce, Corpus Christi, Tex., with
and Guaranty National Bank and Trust of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, Tex. (14988), which
had
merged Apr. 2, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (14988). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On November 10, 1972, Bank of Commerce, Corpus Christi, Tex., and Guaranty National Bank and
Trust of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter and with the title of
the latter.

68




$13309,223

1

20,110,719

To be
operated

1

34,114,798

1

Guaranty National Bank and Trust of Corpus
Christi, the charter bank, was chartered in 1962 and
operates as a unit institution in compliance with
State law. The bank is located in the downtown financial district of Corpus Christi and currently has
assets of $18 million and IPC deposits of $14.9
million.

Bank of Commerce, the merging bank, was organized in 1962 and also operates as a unit institution
in the financial district of Corpus Christi. The bank,
with assets of $14.7 million and IPC deposits of $10.9
million has achieved a slow rate of growth because
of frequent ownership and managerial changes. It
has been controlled byfivedifferent owners and been
managed by three different presidents, thereby preventing the bank from stabilizing its financial policies and its public image.
The service area of both the charter and merging
banks consists of the Corpus Christi Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area which includes Nueces and
San Patricio counties. The population of this area is
almost 300,000 persons. Major factors in the economy of this area include industry, tourism, commercial fishing, and import-export trade. There are 150
manufacturing concerns in the Corpus Christi area
employing approximately 11,500 persons.
At the present time there are 26 banks in the
Corpus Christi area and 13 of these are headquartered in the city of Corpus Christi. The largest
banks include Corpus Christi State National Bank,
with deposits of $180 million; Corpus Christi Bank
and Trust, with deposits of $112.5 million; and
Citizens State Bank, with deposits of $43 million.
In the aggregate these three banks control in excess
of 55 percent of commercial banking deposits in
Corpus Christi.
Because the offices of the charter and merging
banks are separated by only a few city blocks, there
is some competition between these two institutions
but the nature of the business in which each has
concentrated minimizes this competitive effect on
each other. Guaranty National Bank and Trust has
a very active trust department, is heavily engaged in

real estate financing, and has an active credit card
program. Bank of Commerce has concentrated more
heavily on commercial banking, particularly in the
financing of oil and gas exploration and production.
The proposed merger will, therefore, combine two
complimentary financial institutions into a bank
which will have larger resources, larger capital
accounts, and increased earnings potential. The
resulting bank will introduce diversified and specialized services, which correspondingly will
increase, rather than diminish, competition in the
relevant banking market. The larger bank created
by this merger will be able to compete more effectively with the three largest banks in Corpus Christi
for loans, deposits, and new business, and will,
therefore, be a stimulus to competition in this area.
The 13 remaining banks in Corpus Christi will
provide adequate competition for the resulting bank,
which will become the fourth largest commercial
bank in that city.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
FEBRUARY 13,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Corpus Christi is a concentrated banking market,
dominated by the two largest banks, which together
hold 65 percent of total city deposits. Guaranty and
Commerce are the seventh and eighth largest banks
of the 13 in Corpus Christi, holding 3.4 percent and
2.7 percent, respectively, of total city deposits. The
applicant banks are small competitors located one
block apart; thus, the merger will eliminate some
direct competition.

THE MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK OF MOBILE, MOBILE, ALA., AND CITRONELLE STATE BANK, CITRONELLE,
ALA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Citronelle State Bank, Citronelle, Ala., with
and The Merchants National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala. (13097), which had
merged Apr. 6, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (13097). The merged bank at
date of merger had




Total assets

In
operation

To be
operated

$8,974,005
291,108,014
298,293,486

69

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On November 22, 1972, Citronelle State Bank,
Citronelle, Ala., and The Merchants National Bank
of Mobile, Mobile, Ala., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter and with the title of the latter.
The Merchants National Bank of Mobile, the
charter bank, was organized in 1901, and is currently the second largest commercial bank headquartered in Mobile with assets of $273 million and
IPC deposits of $206.4 million. The charter bank
operates six offices in Mobile and one office each in
the nearby towns of Prichard and Saraland. Mobile,
with a population of 188,000 persons, is the second
largest city in Alabama and is located in the extreme
southwestern corner of the State. The economy of
Mobile County, the primary service area of the
charter bank, is well diversified with agriculture
playing a secondary role to industry and sea transportation. Also, a revival of the oil industry is underway in this area.
Competition within the city of Mobile is provided
by First National Bank of Mobile, with deposits of
$244 million; American National Bank and Trust
Company of Mobile, with deposits of $74.5 million;
and Commercial Guaranty Bank of Mobile, with
deposits of $28.5 million. The Mobile Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area, which includes
Baldwin, Mobile and Washington counties, is also
served by 10 other banks holding a total of $105
million in deposits. There are a total of 38 branch
banking offices in the Mobile area.
Citronelle State Bank, the merging bank, was
chartered in 1918, and operates as a unit institution
with assets of $7.8 million and IPC deposits of
$6.3 million. The bank, which is located within the
Mobile SMS A, serves a trade area made up of
portions of northern Mobile County and southern
Washington County. Citronelle, which is located
35 miles northwest of Mobile, is in a rural area where
economic growth has been much slower than in the
port city of Mobile. Many residents commute to
nearby towns for industrial employment and the
small farms which still exist in this area no longer
play an important economic role. Competition for
the merging bank is provided primarily by a recently opened office of Deposit National Bank of
Mobile County which is headquartered in Prichard.
Despite the fact that the merging bank is situated
within the service area of The Merchants National
Bank of Mobile the two banks are not competitors
70




because of the great disparity in size between these
two institutions and the type of banjdng business offered by each bank. Citronelle State Bank, because
of its limited size and conservative lending policies,
can only satisfy the most immediate and limited
needs of its community while the charter bank is a
large, innovative commercial bank with many specialized departments serving the needs of many of
the largest individual customers and businesses in
the area. The many alternative banking facilities in
the surrounding area further diminish the competitive impact of these two banks.
Consummation of the proposed merger will have
its greatest impact in Citronelle because a small, unaggressive unit bank will be replaced by an office of
the second largest bank in Mobile County. The quality and variety of banking services to be made available by the resulting bank in the area now served by
the merging bank will be materially improved, including the introduction of such specialized services
as commercial and installment loans, investment
counselling, extensive trust services, and access to
one of the leading petroleum financing departments
in the South. The charter bank will also provide the
management skills necessary to implement these
new services and will provide for an orderly succession of management at the appropriate time. The
resulting branch in Citronelle will implement a much
more liberal lending policy than pursued by the
merging bank and will have available the necessary
capital for industrial expansion and diversification
which is so necessary to the economy of this area.
Applying the statutory criteria it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the public interest and will result in no adverse competitive
effects. This application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 7,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

There are seven banks located in Mobile County.
Merchants is slightly the largest, with about 41 percent of total county deposits. The two largest organizations hold together over 80 percent of Mobile
County deposits. Citronelle Bank holds about 1 percent of total county deposits, ranking as the next to
smallest bank in the county.
Although the banks are located some 28 miles
apart, Merchants is a significant competitive force
throughout Mobile County and beyond to the whole
southern Alabama and Gulf Coast area. The application defines Merchants' service area as a 3-county

area including Mobile County. Thus, the merger
would eliminate some existing competition between
Merchants and Citronelle Bank. Since Merchants
can branch throughout Mobile County, the merger
would also eliminate the chance of increased future
competition, should Merchants decide to branch into
Citronelle as two other Mobile area banks have done
in the very recent past.

Citronelle Bank appears to be well-managed and
profitable, and fully capable of continued independent existence or, in the alternative, of serving as an
entry vehicle for other banking organizations not
now represented in Mobile County. Although it is
small in absolute terms, its acquisition by one of the
dominant banks in the region would clearly have an
adverse effect on competition.

NEW JERSEY BANK (NATIONAL ASSOCIATION), CLIFTON, N.J.,

AND THE NATIONAL BANK OF PALISADES

PARK, PALISADES PARK, N.J.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The National Bank of Palisades Park, Palisades Park, N.J. (14088), with
was purchased Apr. 13, 1973 by
New Jersey Bank (National Association), Clifton, N.J. (15709), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 15, 1972, New Jersey Bank (National Association), Clifton, N.J., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
purchase the assets and assume the liabilities of
The National Bank of Palisades Park, Palisades
Park, N.J., under the charter and with the title of
the former.
New Jersey Bank (National Association), the
purchasing bank, was founded in 1869, and currently
has assets of $664 million and IPC deposits of
$484.5 million. The bank is headquartered in Passaic
County and currently operates 29 branches, 19 of
which are located in Passaic County, five in Bergen
County, and the remaining five branches in Warren,
Sussex, and Morris counties. The bank also has two
approved but unopened branches in Passaic County.
In April 1972, the purchasing bank became a
member of Greater New Jersey Bancorp., Clifton,
a one-bank holding company.
New Jersey Bank is thefifthlargest of 88 commercial banks in the First Banking District of New
Jersey and ranks as the largest of 10 commercial
banks headquartered in Passaic County. Competition is provided primarily by First National Bank
of New Jersey, with deposits of $440 million; Bank
of Passaic and Clifton, National Association, with
deposits of $182 million; Prospect Park National
Bank, with deposits of $158 million; and Broadway
Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $92
million. Competition is also provided by the multi


$19368,586

1

663,585300
679,724,580

To be
operated

30
31

billion dollar banks based in Newark, N.J., and in
New York City.
The National Bank of Palisades Park, the selling
bank, was chartered in 1934, and operates as a
unit institution in Bergen County. It has total assets of $19.4 million and IPC deposits of $15.5
million. At the present time the selling bank is the
60th in size of the 88 commercial banks in the First
Banking District, and ranks 20th in size of the 28
commercial banks headquartered in Bergen County.
Competition for the selling bank is provided by
Peoples Trust of New Jersey, Hackensack, which
has deposits of $828 million and is a member of
United Jersey Banks, a multi-bank holding company
with aggregate deposits of $1.2 billion; National
Community Bank of Rutherford, with deposits of'
$477 million; Garden State National Bank, with
deposits of $375 million; Citizens National Bank,
which has deposits of $240 million and is a member
of Midlantic Banks, Inc., a multi-bank holding
company with aggregate deposits of $1.2 billion;
and First National State Bank of North Jersey,
which has deposits of $69 million and is a member of
First National State Bancorporation, a multi-bank
holding company with aggregate deposits of $1.2
billion.
The service area of the purchasing bank consists
of all of Passaic County plus those portions of
Bergen, Warren, Sussex and Morris counties
served by the individual branches of that bank.
The southern portion of Passaic County is highly

71

industrialized and urbanized with many prominent
national corporations maintaining facilities there
because of its close proximity to the New York
metropolitan area. The northern portion of Passaic
County is moderately developed but has very little
industry. The selling bank primarily serves the
borough of Palisades Park, a residential area from
which a large portion of the population commutes
daily to New York City for employment.
There is minimal competition between the purchasing and selling banks. The main offices of these
two banks are 9 miles apart, their closest offices
are 6.8 miles apart; further, the nine commercial
banks operating 15 offices in the intervening distance dilute the competitive impact the two banks
have on each other.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
result in no adverse competitive effects and the
resulting bank will remain the fifth largest commercial institution in the First Banking District. The
proposed purchase of assets will have a favorable
effect upon competition by opening Palisades Park
to de novb branching not presently allowed because
of the head office protection afforded the selling
bank by New Jersey law. In addition, the resulting
bank will introduce an expanded range of services
to the residents and businesses of the Palisades
Park area such as a substantially larger lending
limit, international banking services, complete
trust department services, and other specialized
services usually offered by larger commercial banks.

Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed transaction is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 9, 1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

New Jersey Bank (National Association's closest
office to National Bank of Palisades Park is its branch
in River Edge, 6.8 road miles from National Bank of
Palisades Park. Despite the proximity of these offices, New Jersey Bank (National-Association) does
not draw any substantial deposit or loan business
from Palisades Park where National Bank of Palisades Park's service area is centered. Accordingly,
no more than a limited amount of existing competition would be eliminated by the proposed merger.
Under New Jersey law, New Jersey Bank (National
Association), one of the largest banks in New Jersey's
First Banking District, could establish de novo offices in Bergen County, by branching or establishing
new banks as subsidiaries of its parent holding company. Thus, the proposed merger would eliminate
some potential competition in the vicinity of Palisades Park, while removing the home office protection presently afforded to the community. However,
in view of the modest size of National Bank of Palisades Park and the existence of several other large
potential entrants into its vicinity, the overall effect
of the merger on potential competition would not be
significantly adverse.

THE FULTON NATIONAL BANK OF LANCASTER, LANCASTER, PA., AND THE LEOLA NATIONAL BANK, LEOLA, PA.

Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

Banking offices
In
operation

The Leola National Bank, Leola, Pa. (13186), with
and The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, Lancaster, Pa. (2634), which had
merged May 1, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (2634). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 6, 1972, The Leola National Bank,
Leola, Pa., and The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, Lancaster, Pa., applied to the Comptroller of
the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter and with the title of the latter.
The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, the charter
bank, was organized in 1882 and, with assets of $182
72




$15,637,410
207,693,218
223,330,629

To be
operated

2
12
14

million and IPC deposits of $147.6 million, is the
fifth largest commercial bank in its service area. The
charter bank operates 11 banking offices and has received approval to open three new branches. The
area served by this bank consists of Lancaster
County and the southwestern section of Dauphin
County with its economy supported by a wide variety of industries, agriculture, and tourism.
Competition in and around Lancaster is intense

and many large banks compete directly in the surrounding area. Competition for the charter bank is
provided by American Bank and Trust Company of
Pa., Reading, with deposits of $680 million; National Central Bank, Lancaster, with deposits of
$635 million; The Commonwelath National Bank,
Harrisburg, with deposits of $425 million; and
Dauphin Deposit Trust Company, Harrisburg, with
deposits of $293 million.
The Leola National Bank, Leola, Pa., the merging
bank, was organized in 1928, and currently operates
one branch office with total assets of $13.6 million
and IPC deposits of $10.8 million. The service area
of this bank is restricted to the city of Leola and its
immediate environs with its economic support derived primarily from agriculture and tourism.
The merging bank is the only bank presently
situated in its primary service area although the
second largest bank in Lancaster County, the
National Central Bank, recently received approval
to establish a branch in Leola. The filing of that
application by National Central Bank precipitated
the application for this merger because the management of the merging bank became convinced that
they could not compete successfully against such a
large bank and subsequently approached the
charter bank concerning the proposed merger. The
closest competitors to the merging bank at the
present time include The Brownstown National
Bank, with deposits of $9.6 million; New Holland
Farmers National Bank, with deposits of $31.4
million; and Farmers First National Bank, with
deposits of $95.6 million.
Some competition presently exists between the
charter and merging banks because the nearest
office of The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster
is located 5 miles from the merging bank. The
amount of this competition is minimal because of
an adequate number of intervening banking offices
as well as the traffic patterns and shopping habits of
area residents. What little competition may be
eliminated as a result of this merger will be more
than adequately compensated for as a result of the
ntense competition which the charter bank will




provide for the second largest bank in the area,
National Central Bank, when it opens its new branch
in Leola.
The service area of the merging bank will benefit
substantially as a result of this merger because a
small, unaggressive country bank will be replaced
by offices of a larger, more sophisticated commercial bank with the ability to provide the present
customers of The Leola National Bank with more
modern and efficient services. The subject merger
will have little effect in the charter bank's head office
city because, as the fifth largest bank, it will remain
substantially smaller than Dauphin Deposit Trust
Company, the fourth largest bank operating in
Lancaster.
Applying the statutory criteria it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
MARCH 6,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The head offices of the merging banks are 9
miles apart and their closest offices are 5 miles
apart. The application does not contain information
as to the amount of banking business drawn from
the vicinity of Leola by Fulton. As one of the leading
banks in Lancaster County, however, Fulton draws
banking business from areas throughout the county;
its offices are distributed well, and bracket those of
Leola Bank, which is located near the center of the
county. Accordingly, it is likely that the proposed
merger would eliminate some existing competition
in Lancaster County.
Nineteen commercial banks operate about 67
banking offices in Lancaster County. As of June 30,
1972, Fulton held the second largest share of total
deposits in the county, about 17 percent, while
Leola Bank held about 1.5 percent. The four leading
banks in the county held in the aggregate about 64
percent.
We conclude that the proposed merger would
have an adverse effect on competition.

73

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SOUTH JERSEY, EGG HARBOR TOWNSHIP, N.J., AND FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF
MOORESTOWN, MOORESTOWN, N . J .
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First National Bank of Moorestown, Moorestown, N.J., (15534), with
and First National Bank of South Jersey, Egg Harbor Township, N.J. (1326), which had
merged May 11, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (1326). The merged bank at
date of merger had
.'

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 5, 1973, First National Bank of
Moorestown, Moorestown, N.J., and First National
Bank of South Jersey, Egg Harbor Township,
N.J., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the latter.
First National Bank of South Jersey, the charter
bank, was originally chartered in 1907, and now,
with assets of $415 million and IPC deposits of
$306.7 million, operates 34 offices throughout the
Third Banking District of New Jersey. The Third
Banking District encompasses eight counties with
an estimated population of 1.7 million persons and
is a largely undeveloped area now experiencing
rapid growth: commercial and industrial interests
predominate.
The charter bank is the largest of seven commercial banks headquartered in Atlantic County and
ranks third in size among the 62 banks operating in
the Third Banking District. The largest competitors
of the charter bank are South Jersey National Bank,
Cherry Hill, with deposits of $387 million which is
a member of Heritage Bancorporation, and The
Bank of New Jersey, Camden, with deposits of
$381 million. Significant competition for the charter
bank's main office is provided by Guarantee Bank,
Atlantic City, with deposits of $104 million. Additional competition is provided by numerous banks
affiliated with holding companies such as Midlantic
Banks Inc., First National State Bancorporation,
and United Jersey Banks.
First National Bank of Moorestown, the merging
bank, was chartered in 1965 and operates as a unit
bank with assets of $15.7 million and IPC deposits
of $13.6 million. The merging bank is located in
Burlington County in the Third Banking District of
New Jersey. The service area of this bank is primarily Moorestown Township which has an estimated population of 15,900 persons. Moorestown is
74




$16,073,801
415,499,893
432,987,167

To be
operated

1
36
37

an affluent residential area with some light industry
situated in industrial parks as well as several large
retail establishments in a shopping mall.
The merging bank is the tenth in size of 11 banks
headquartered in Burlington County and ranks 45th
in size of the 62 banks operating in the Third Banking District of New Jersey. Competition for this bank
is provided primarily by the larger banks headquartered in Burlington County including Burlington
County Trust Company, Moorestown, with deposits
of $108 million; Mechanics National Bank of Burlington County, Burlington, with deposits of $81 million; Bank of Mid-Jersey, Bordentown, with deposits
of $51 million; and Provident Bank of New Jersey,
Willingboro, with deposits of $38 million.
There is minimal competition between the charter
and merging banks because relatively large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distances. The nearest offices of the
two banks are 10 miles apart. Competition between
these two banks is further diminished by the small
size and restricted service area of the merging bank.
Consummation of the proposed merger will increase competition in the service area of the merging bank because the resulting branch in Moorestown will provide expanded and improved banking
services to local residents and businesses such as a
significantly larger lending limit, a credit card program, a wider variety of time deposits, computer
services, expanded trust services, and added management depth. That will allow the resulting branch
in Moorestown to become a more viable competitor.
The effects of the merger will not be felt in the present service area of the charter bank which will remain the third largest bank in the Third Banking
District.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 10,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

First National operates two offices in Burlington
County, and holds about 3 percent of total county
deposits. Moorestown National with its single
office situated in Burlington County, holds about 2.6
percent of total county deposits. The closest
offices of the parties are approximately 7 miles
apart with several competitive alternatives in the
intervening area. It appears that the proposed merger would eliminate only a limited amount of
existing competition between the two banks.
Moorestown National ranks 14th among the 16

commercial banks operating in Burlington County.
State law would prohibit First National from
de novo branching into Moorestown. State law would
not, however, prevent the de novo chartering, by
a bank holding company, of a new bank in this attractive market. In view of the considerable number
of significant potential entrants, the proposed transaction will not eliminate substantial potential
competition.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed trans-,
action would not have a substantial competitive
impact.

ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, AND BANK OF VERNAL, VERNAL, UTAH
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Bank of Vernal Vernal, Utah, with
.
was purchased May 31, 1973, by Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City, Utah (4341),
which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On January 8, 1973, Zions First National Bank,
Salt Lake City, Utah, applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to purchase the
assets and assume the liabilities of the Bank of
Vernal, Vernal, Utah.
Zions First National Bank, the purchasing bank,
with deposits of over $323 million is the second
largest bank in the State. Chartered in 1890, it
now operates a number of branches throughout
Utah. Zions First National Bank is wholly owned by
Zions Utah Bancorporation with the exception of
director's qualifying shares.
Salt Lake City, home of the purchasing bank, has
a population of 175,885 and is the capital of Utah as
well as the seat of government of the Mormon
Church. A large and diversified industry has grown
up in the Salt Lake City region, producing a wide
variety of durable and non-durable goods. The city
is a regional center for finance and administration,
as well as a marketing and wholesaling center for
distributing commodities throughout the intermountain region. There are no cities of comparable size
within 500 miles. The purchasing bank is slightly
larger than the Walker Bank and Trust Company,
the State's third largest bank, and slightly smaller
than First Security Bank of Utah. N.A., the State's



$13,321,000

1

377,063,000
390,384,000

To be
operated

28
29

largest bank; it competes directly with branches of
these two banks at various points in the State.
The Bank of Vernal, with total deposits of $12
million, was organized in 1903. It is a unit bank
which has remained under the same ownership since
its inception.
Vernal has a population of 3,908, and is the county
seat of Uintah County, a desert county on the eastern
border of the State which has a population of 12,684.
The service area is primarily residential and commercial. Oil exploration is very active in the area
and the bulk of the area's economic growth has come
from oil activity. Vernal is 175 miles east of Salt Lake
City and some 30 miles east of Roosevelt, where the
purchasing bank's nearest branch is located. Vernal
is also served by a branch of the First Security Bank
of Utah, N.A. The Walker Bank and Trust, a member
of Western Bancorporation, has applied for a Vernal
location.
Consummation of the subject transaction will benefit the Vernal area. Overall, the growth of the area,
which is proceeding apace, should be extended by
the presence of the new institution and the expanded services it will offer.
Competition will not be adversely affected by consummation of this transaction. Because Vernal is 30
miles from the site of Zions First National Bank's
75

nearest branch, the two banks do not presently compete. Competition in Vernal will be improved since
the second largest bank in the State will gain a branch
there through which it can compete with the presently operating branch of the State's largest bank,
First Security Bank of Utah, N.A. Also, by eliminating the head office protection in Vernal, the transaction will open up Vernal to de novo branching,
further enhancing competition. Statewide, the purchasing bank's position as second largest will remain the same while its proportionate share of deposits and assets will increase only slightly.
It is concluded, this transaction will have no adverse competitive effect and is in the public interest.
The application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL

23,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Zions First's nearest office to Vernal Bank is located 30 miles west of Vernal, in Roosevelt, Duchesne
County, which is contiguous to Uintah County on its
western border. It is unlikely that either bank draws
any significant banking business from the service
area of the other; accordingly, the proposed transaction would not eliminate substantial existing
competition.
Zions First could not establish a branch in Vernal,
but its parent holding company could charter a new
bank in the area. However, in view of the nature of
Vernal and Uintah County, and the presence of
some other potential entrants into this part of Utah,
we conclude that the overall effect of the proposed
transaction on competition would not be adverse.

PURDUE NATIONAL BANK OF LAFAYETTE, LAFEYETTE, IND., AND STOCKWELL STATE BANK, STOCKWELL, IND.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Stockwell State Bank , Stockwell, Ind., with
and Purdue National Bank of Lafayette, Lafayette, Ind. (11148), which had
merged June 1, 1973,under charter and title of the latter hank (11148). The merged bank at
date of merger had ...

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On February 2, 1973, Purdue National Bank of
Lafayette, Lafayette, Ind., and Stockwell State
Bank, Stockwell, Ind., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter and with the title of the former.
Purdue National Bank of Lafayette, the charter
bank, was organized in 1918, and is the largest
commercial bank in Tippecanoe County with
assets of $126 million and IPC deposits of $92.5
million. The bank operates six branch offices,
three of which are located in Lafayette with the
remaining branches in adjacent West Lafayette.
The principal competitors of the charter bank are
Lafayette National Bank, with deposits of $97.4
million and Lafayette Bank and Trust Company,
with deposits of $51.6 million, both of which are
headquartered in the city of Lafayette.
The service area of the charter bank consists of
most of Tippecanoe County and portions of adjoining
counties. This area is agriculturally-oriented
except for the city of Lafayette which has a moderate amount of commercial and industrial development with Purdue University being the largest single
76




$3,733,763
140,846,321
144,249,829

To be
operated

1
7
8

employer. The principal crops in Tippecanoe
County are corn and soybeans, and there are also
extensive cattle and hog feeding operations.
Stockwell State Bank, the merging bank, was
organized in 1910, and has operated as a unit
institution since that date. The bank now has assets
of $3.4 million and IPC deposits of $2.8 million.
The merging bank actually competes with no other
banks and only serves the limited area surrounding
Stockwell, 14 miles from Lafayette. The service area
of the merging bank has a population of approximately 14,000 persons.
Stockwell is a small, rural farming community
containing a few retail stores which are all oriented
to the needs of the surrounding farmers. Most residents in this area travel to Lafayette for their shopping needs and many commute there for nonagricultural employment.
Consummation of the proposed merger will resolve an acute management succession problem at
the merging bank and will also provide additional
resources for the community of Stockwell whose
population consists mainly of farmers with credit
needs much larger than Stockwell State Bank is
presently able to supply. The resulting branch in

Stockwell will also provide new and improved services which will confer a direct benefit on the local
residents. Although the number of commercial banks
in Tippecanoe County will be reduced to three, the
merging bank has never been a significant competitive force and its deletion will have no adverse
effect. As a result of this merger, the charter bank's
ranking as the largest commercial bank in the
county will only be slightly enhanced.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 2,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

According to the application, Purdue Bank draws
a very small amount of business from the Stockwell
area. Four commercial banks operate 19 offices in
Tippecanoe County. Purdue Bank is the largest with
40.8 percent of county deposits. Stockwell State
Bank is the smallest bank in the county with 1.2 percent of total county deposits. The proposed merger
will eliminate limited competition between Purdue
Bank and Stockwell State Bank in Tippecanoe
County, and will further increase the already high
concentration in commercial banking in that county.

THE AMOSKEAG NATIONAL BANK OF MANCHESTER, MANCHESTER, N.H., AND AMOSKEAG TRUST COMPANY,
N.A., MANCHESTER, N.H.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Amoskeag Trust Company, N. A., Manchester, N.H., (16106), with
and The Amoskeag National Bank of Manchester, Manchester, N.H. (574), which had
merged June 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (574) and title "Amoskeag National
Bank & Trust Co." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 18, 1972, Amoskeag Trust Company, N. A., Manchester, N.H., and The Amoskeag
National Bank of Manchester, Manchester, N.H.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title, "Amoskeag National Bank &
Trust Co.".
The Amoskeag National Bank of Manchester,
the charter bank, was organized in 1848, and
currently, with assets of $47.8 million and IPC
deposits of $29 million, is the fourth largest of
eight commercial banks headquartered in Manchester. The bank has four banking offices with one
additional branch under construction. The charter
bank offers complete commercial banking services
but does not engage in trust activities.
Amoskeag Trust Company, N.A., the merging
bank, was organized in 1891 and has total assets of
$1.6 million and IPC deposits of $639,000. Although
the merging bank is authorized to engage in commercial banking activities, it has confined its scope
of business to handling and managing the properties
and funds of trust estates in a fiduciary capacity



$1,965,690
43,136,280

To be
operated

1
5

44,675,439

6

and handling and managing funds on an agency or
custodian basis. Except to the extent that it holds
deposits due various principals of trusts, agencies,
and estates in its fiduciary capacity it does not engage in activities authorized to commercial banks.
There is no competition between the charter and
merging banks primarily because the sevices provided by each are mutually exclusive of each other.
Another significant factor is that the two banks
enjoy a closely affiliated relationship in which they
share a commom board of directors as well as significant amounts of commonly owned stock. The
proposed merger is therefore a corporate. reorganization which will have no effect on banking competition in Manchester.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest.
This application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 17,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The main offices of Amoskeag Bank and Amoskeag Trust are located in the same building in
Manchester. They share largely identical boards
of directors and senior management. According to

77

the application, the two institutions have been under
common control and management for a long period
of time.
Amoskeag Bank has provided few trust services,
while Amoskeag Trust does little commercial

banking business, primarily as an adjunct to its
trust operations.
We conclude that the proposed transaction
would not have a significantly adverse effect on
competition.

GLEN FALLS NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, GLENS FALLS, N.Y.,
NATIONAL BANK OF SCHUYLERVILLE, SCHUYLERVILLE,

AND THE

N.Y.
Banking offices

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The National Bank of Schuylerville, Schuylerville, N.Y. (1298), with
and Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls, N.Y. (7699), which had
merged June 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (7699). The merged bank at
date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 26, 1973, The National Bank of
Schuylerville, Schuylerville, N.Y., and Glens Falls
National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls,
N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the latter.
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company,
the charter bank, was organized in 1851, and now
operates eight branch offices with assets of $101
million and IPC deposits of $76.2 million. The
service area of the bank includes portions of Warren,
Washington, Saratoga, and Essex counties with an
estimated population of 125,000 persons.
The charter bank is now the smaller of the two
banks headquartered in Warren County and competes primarily with The First National Bank of
Glens Falls which has deposits of $115 million.
Additional competition is provided by offices of
Marine Midland Bank-Eastern, National Association, Troy, with deposits of $175 million; State
Bank of Albany, with deposits of $790 million which
is a member of United Bank Corporation of New
York; National Commercial Bank and Trust Company, Albany, with deposits of $881 million which is
a member of First Commercial Banks, Inc.;'and
Bankers Trust Company of Albany, National Association, with deposits of $180 million which is a
member of Bankers Trust New York Corporation.
The National Bank of Schuylerville, the merging
bank, was organized in 1865 and has operated since
that time as a unit institution. The bank now has
assets of $7.5 million and IPC deposits of $5.9
million. The merging bank is located in Saratoga
78




$

7,258,629
102,857,054
110,115,683

To be
operated

1
9
10

County and its service area extends approximately
10 miles in all directions from Schuylerville; it contains an estimated population of 5,000 persons.
The merging bank is the smallest of three commercial banks headquartered in Saratoga County
and competes primarily with Adirondack Trust
Company, Saratoga Springs, with deposits of
$51 million, and with Ballston Spa National Bank,
Balls ton Spa, with deposits of $21 million. Additional competition is provided by Cambridge Valley
National Bank, with deposits of $6 million; The
First National Bank of Greenwich, with deposits
of $9 million; Marine Midland Bank-Eastern, National Association, Troy, with deposits of $175 million which is a member of Marine Midland Banks,
Inc.; and State Bank of Albany, with deposits of
$790 million which is a member of United Bank
Corporation of New York.
There is minimal competition between the charter
and merging banks because their closest two
offices are separated by relatively large distances
and an adequate number of alternative banking
facilities operate in the area. The closest offices
of the two banks are about 13 miles apart, and the
small size of the merging bank prevents it from
being a significant competitor with the charter bank.
Consummation of the proposed merger will stimulate competition in the service area of the merging
bank because the resulting branch in Schuylerville
will offer new and improved services such as a
significantly larger lending limit, trust services,
a credit card program, student loans, letters of
credit, federally insured loans, competitive interest
rates, and computer services. That will make the
resulting branch in Schuylerville a more viable com-

petitor within its service area. The resulting bank
will remain the eighth largest commercial bank in
the Fourth Banking District of New York.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 8,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The closest offices of the merging banks are located about 13 miles apart with some intervening

banking alternatives. The application indicates
that there is only limited existing competition
between the parties. Each holds a minor percentage
of commercial bank deposits in Saratoga County.
Glens Falls National could increase its competitive efforts in the area served by NBS, although it
could not open de novo branches in Schuylerville
itself. However, in view of the modest size of NBS,
the nature of its service area, and the existence of
other potential entrants, the proposed merger would
not eliminate significant potential competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COBB COUNTY, MARIETTA, GA., AND BANK OF ACWORTH, ACWORTH, GA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Bank of Acworth, Acworth, Ga., with
and The First National Bank of Cobb County, Marietta, Ga. (3830), which had
merged June 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (3830). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 27,1973, Bank of Acworth, Acworth,
Ga., and The First National Bank of Cobb County,
Marietta, Ga., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
and with the title of the latter.
The First National Bank of Cobb County, the
charter bank, was organized in 1888, and now operates five branches with assets of $92.5 million and
IPC deposits of $59.8 million. The charter bank
serves all of Cobb County, the fastest growing of the
five counties comprising the Atlanta Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area. Economic growth in
that county has been concentrated around the centrally located county seat of Marietta and south
of that area toward Atlanta. There are now 180
manufacturing and industrial firms located in
Cobb County with an annual payroll of approximately $358 million.
Direct competition for the charter bank and its
branches is provided by several banks headquartered in Cobb County including Cobb Exchange Bank, with deposits of $27.3 million; Bank
of Smyrna, with deposits of $24 million; Citizens
and Southern Bank of Cobb County, with deposits of $21.5 million; and Commercial Bank of
Cobb County, with deposits of $19 million. Strong
competition is also provided by several of the



$10,613,452
93,582,283
104,045,101

To be
operated

1
7
8

larger banks headquartered in the city of Atlanta,
especially for large commercial loans.
Bank of Acworth, the merging bank, was chartered in 1905 and has operated continuously as a
unit bank since that date. The merging bank,
located in the northwestern portion of Cobb County
which is economically the slowest growing area of
that county, has assets of $9.8 million and IPC
deposits of $8.4 million. The bank has no trust
powers and has recently experienced both management and ownership problems including the misappropriation of funds as a result of the illegal
activities of the bank's former executive officer.
The merging bank's service area is confined to
the community of Acworth and its immediate environs, a population of approximately 4,000 persons.
The nearest competitor for the merging bank is a
recently established branch of Cobb County Bank
located about 2.5 miles southeast of Acworth.
There is minimal competition between the charter
and merging banks because of the relatively large
distance which separates the two banks as well as
the economic reality of Cobb County. Bank of Acworth is located approximately 5.5 miles northwest
of the main office of the charter bank which is its
closest office to Acworth. The remaining branches of
The First National Bank of Cobb County are located
to the south which is that part of Cobb County

79

closest to Atlanta and furthest from Acworth. The
principal economic activity of both Cobb County and
the charter bank is concentrated in the southern
portion of Cobb County and, therefore, the major
efforts of the charter bank are directed away from
the area in which the merging bank is located. Bank
of Acworth has a restricted service area which does
not reach as far south as its nearest competitor.
Consummation of the proposed merger will bring
increased economic resources and banking services
to residents of Acworth including a significantly
larger lending limit, trust services, consumer loans,
and a wide variety of time deposits. That will confer
a direct benefit on residents of Acworth while not
significantly changing the competitive structure
in Cobb County. The proposed merger will also
resolve the management problems at the merging
bank and will provide the needed stability of ownership which the bank's public image needs to increase public confidence in this financial institution.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger is
in the public interest and is, therefore, approved.
MAY 21,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

First National Bank of Cobb County ("Cobb
Bank") maintains its main office in Marietta and
five other branches. As of December 31, 1972, it
held total deposits of $84.1 million (including IPC
demand deposits of $34.7 million) and loans and
discounts of $43.0 million.
The Bank of Acworth ("Acworth Bank") maintains its single office in Acworth. As of December 31,
1972, it held total deposits of $8.9 million (including
IPC demand deposits of $4.1 million) and loans and
discounts of $5.7 million.
Cobb County is a fast growing area northwest of
Atlanta, Georgia. The population of the county has
grown rapidly, from 114,174 in 1960, to 196,793 in
1970, an increase of 72 percent. Acworth, a small
town in northwest Cobb County, has only recently
begun to grow rapidly.

80




Acworth Bank is located 11 miles northwest of
Marietta, where Cobb Bank's closest offices are
located. There is one intervening competitive alternative. Marietta, located in the center of the county,
is a regional center for shopping, employment, and
banking. The application indicates that Cobb Bank
draws only about $550,000 in deposits from the town
of Acworth. There is, however, no information
concerning the distribution of accounts from the
area separating the two banks. Considering the
distances involved, and Cobb Bank's perception of
itself as a competitor throughout the county, it is
clear that the proposed transaction would eliminate
existing competition. Georgia law permits countywide branching. Therefore, the transaction would
also eliminate the potential for more extensive
competition between the parties in the future.
Since Georgia law limits branching to counties
in which banks are headquartered, either bank could
branch throughout Cobb County. This fact, combined with the competitive presence of Cobb Bank
throughout the county, supports the conclusion that
Cobb County is a relevant commercial banking
market in which the competitive effects ot the
proposed merger may be measured. This market is
concentrated; out of a total of nine banks, Cobb
Bank is the largest with 33.3 percent of total county
deposits, while the next three largest control approximately 12 percent each. The four largest banks
hold about 71 percent of such deposits. Acworth
Bank has 3.5 percent of the market. Consummation
of the proposed merger would give Cobb Bank
about 37 percent of total county deposits, and
increase the share of the four largest banks to about
74 percent.
The proposed transaction would eliminate existing
competition and increase banking concentration
in Cobb County. In addition, Cobb Bank's dominant
position in the county would be entrenched. Therefore, we conclude that the proposed acquisition
would have adverse competitive effects arid, in the
absence of convenience and needs considerations
which clearly outweigh these competitive effects,
should be denied.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF KENTON, KENTON, OHIO, AND THE ALGER SAVINGS
BANK, ALGER, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Alger Savings Bank, Alger, Ohio, with
and The First National Bank of Kenton, Kenton, Ohio (2500), which had
merged June 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (2500). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 29, 1972, The Alger Savings Bank,
Alger, Ohio, and The First National Bank of Kenton,
Kenton, Ohio, applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
and with the title of the latter.
The First National Bank of Kenton, the charter
bank, was organized in 1880 and operates as a unit
institution with assets of $16.3 million and IPC
deposits of $13.4 million. The bank is located in the
county seat of Hardin County, approximately 60
miles northwest of Columbus. In June 1972, the
charter bank became a subsidiary of Huntington
Bancshares, Incorporated, a multi-bank holding
company controlling 12 affiliated banks with aggregate deposits of $992 million.
The service area of the charter bank has an estimated population of 20,000 persons and derives its
economic support from a combination of agriculture
and manufacturing. The Hardin County farmland is
among the best in Ohio, and corn, soybeans, and
livestock feeding are the major sources of local
farm income. The Kenton area contains 33 manufacturing firms which employ about 2,300 persons.
Competition for the charter bank is provided by
The Kenton Savings Bank, with total deposits of
$14.2 million which is a member of BancOhio Corporation; and The Kenton National Bank, with total
deposits of $11.6 million. Hardin County is served
by a total of seven commercial banks.
The Alger Savings Bank, Alger, Ohio, the merging bank, was organized in 1906 and operates as
a single office institution with assets of $4 million
and IPC deposits of $3.1 million. The only real
competitor of the merging bank is The Liberty
National Bank of Ada, located about 5 miles north
of Alger.
The merging bank serves an agriculturally
oriented service area which has an estimated population of 12,000 persons. The city of Alger con-




To be
operated

$4,662,151
18,115,371
22,777,521

tains only a few small mercantile stores and a larger
grain elevator. The area immediately surrounding
Alger is devoted almost exclusively to farming and
related activities. Many of the residents in this area
must travel to Kenton, Lima, and other nearby communities for shopping purposes.
Competition between the charter and merging
banks is virtually nonexistent due to the restrictive lending policies of the merging bank and the
fact that the two banks are 15 miles apart.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in Hardin County and will
replace a small, ineffective competitor with a
larger bank capable of meeting the financial needs
of Alger. The merging bank has a very small lending limit which has proved unsatisfactory to meet
the credit requirements of the large farms near
Alger. The resulting office in Alger will be able to
satisfy those agricultural loans through its increased lending limit and will offer a wider range of
banking services to residents of Alger. In addition, the management succession problem at the
merging bank will be resolved as a result of the proposed transaction.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 2,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Alger Bank is,the only bank in the village of
Alger. It is situated 15 miles from Kenton Bank.
There are two other banks in Kenton: The Kenton
National Bank (total deposits of $11.6 million, as of
June 30, 1972) and The Kenton Savings Bank
(total deposits of $14.2 million, as of June 30,1972).
While Kenton Bank draws most of its deposits from
the immediate vicinity of Kenton, the application
indicates that it also draws banking business from

81

the surrounding areas. Thus, it appears that some
competition may be eliminated by the proposed
merger.

Kenton Bank is the leading bank in Hardin
County, holding 22.5 percent of total county deposits; Alger Bank ranks sixth with 4.9 percent.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LOGAN, LOGAN, UTAH, AND PIONEER NATIONAL BANK, LOGAN, UTAH
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

Banking offices
In
operation

Pioneer National Bank, Logan, Utah (15643), with
and The First National Bank of Logan, Logan, Utah (4670), which had
merged June 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (4670). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 12, 1973, Pioneer National Bank,
Logan, Utah, and The First National Bank of
Logan, Logan, Utah, applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter and with the title of the latter.
The First National Bank of Logan, the charter
bank, was organized in 1892 and operates as a unit
bank with assets of $24.4 million and IPC deposits of
$18.7 million.
Pioneer National Bank, the merging, bank, was
chartered in January 1968 by persons associated
with The First National Bank of Logan after an
attempt by that bank to establish a branch in Logan
was stifled on legal grounds. Pioneer National
Bank has operated as an affiliate of the charter bank
since its inception and the two banks have a common directorate as well as common stock ownership; 86 shareholders own 92.12 percent of The
First National Bank of Logan and own 85.3 percent
of Pioneer National Bank. Pioneer National Bank
has assets of $5.7 million and IPC deposits of
$4.3 million.
The city of Logan is situated 90 miles north of
Salt Lake City and has a population of 23,000
persons. The principal employer in Logan is the
Utah State University which employs 3,000 persons.
This city is predominantly residential in nature

82




$5,549,460
26,073,142
31,068,413

To be
operated

1
1
2

although several light manufacturing firms have
recently settled in Logan. The service area of the
charter and merging banks extends to most of Cache
County, which is predominantly agricultural.
Direct competition in Logan for both the charter
and merging banks is provided by branches of
First Security Bank of Utah, Salt Lake City, with
deposits of $589 million and a member of First
Security Corporation System, and Walker Bank
and Trust Company, Salt Lake City, with deposits
of $319 million and a member of Western Bancorporation. Additional competition is provided by
several smaller banks located in Cache County.
Consummation of the proposed merger will not
eliminate any competition in Logan because both of
the banks involved in this proposal are commonly
owned and managed and significant competition
will be provided by the remaining banks in that city
which are each much larger than the resulting bank.
Customers of both the charter and merging banks
will enjoy the advantages of an increased lending
limit, expanded services and the convenience of an
additional office.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 23,1973.
NOTE.

No Attorney General's report received.

THE SOUTH CAROLINA NATIONAL BANK, CHARLESTON, S.C.,
MONCKS CORNER, S.C.

AND THE BANK OF BERKELEY,

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

The Bank of Berkeley, Moncks Corner, S.C., with
and The South Carolina National Bank, Charleston, S.C. (2044), which had
merged July 2, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (2044). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On January 8, 1973, The Bank of Berkeley,
Moncks Corner, S.C, and The South Carolina
National Bank, Charleston, S.C, applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the latter.
The South Carolina National Bank, the charter
bank, was organized in 1834, and now, with assets
of $755 million, and IPC deposits of $525.6 million,
is the largest commercial bank in South Carolina.
The bank now operates 92 branches in 29 cities and
towns throughout the State and has seven approved
but unopened offices. In June 1972, the charter
bank was involved in a plan of reorganization in
connection with the formation of a holding company
and is now the only subsidiary of that corporation,
The South Carolina National Corporation.
As a statewide bank, The South Carolina National
Bank competes with all of the other major banks in
the State as well as with local banks situated in the
individual service areas of its various branches.
Competition is thus provided by Citizens and Southern National Bank, with deposits of $390 million;
First National Bank of South Carolina, with deposits
of $278 million; Bankers Trust Company of South
Carolina, with deposits of $244 million; and First
Citizens Bank and Trust Company, with deposits
of $113 million, among many other commercial
banks.
The Bank of Berkeley, the merging bank, was
chartered by the State of South Carolina in 1949,
and currently has assets of $6.3 million and IPC
deposits of $4.1 million. The bank operates one
branch in St. Stephen which is located approximately 16 miles northeast of Moncks Corner in
Berkeley County.
The service area of the merging bank includes
most of Berkeley County which is located on the
northeastern edge of the Charleston Metropolitan
Area. Goose Creek, located in Berkeley County,
appears to be at the extreme northern edge of



$7,574,054
872,357,834
879,931,887

To be
operated

2
95
97

that area. Development is now taking place between Goose Creek and Moncks Corner and the
latter will undoubtedly become a part of Charleston's urban area at some time in the future. Much
of Berkeley County is now covered by swamp,
forest, and lakes, and agriculture continues to be
the primary economic factor in the county.
Competition for the merging bank is provided by
The Farmers and Merchants Bank of Holy Hill
which operates a branch in Moncks Corner. The
Citizens and Southern National Bank of South
Carolina, the second largest commercial bank in
the State, has recently received approval to open
a Moncks Corner branch which is scheduled to
commence operations within the next few weeks.
There is no competition between the charter
bank and the merging bank because relatively
large distances separate their closest two offices
and each operates in a service area separate and
distinct from that of the other. The closest branch
of the charter bank is in Goose Creek, approximately 15 miles from Moncks Corner. The Goose
Creek office of the charter bank derives most of
its business from the Charleston Metropolitan
Area to the south, while almost all of the business
of the merging bank is generated from within
Berkeley County, close to its offices. Barren,
mostly undeveloped land serves as a natural barrier between Goose Creek and Moncks Corner
which further retards the competitive impact.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate banking competition in Berkeley County
because the resulting branches in Moncks Corner
and St. Stephen will be able to offer a greatly expanded range of services not currently available
to local residents and businesses. These will include a significantly larger lending limit, competitive interest rates on both loans and deposits, a
credit card service, installment consumer loans,
and a wide variety of other services, the effect of
which will be to confer an immediate and direct
83

benefit on local residents. In addition, the presence,
in Berkeley County, of both the largest and second
largest South Carolina banks will insure continued
competitive conditions.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 25,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The closest offices of the two banks are about
16 miles apart in Berkeley County, with no other
alternative banking offices located in the area intervening directly between them. It appears,

however, that the proposed transaction would
eliminate only a limited amount of direct competition presently existing between the two banks.
South Carolina National Bank could legally establish de novo offices in the area of Berkeley
County served by Bank. In view of its substantial
market position in the Charleston area, and existing office in southern Berkeley County, it must be
considered one of the most significant potential
entrants into the area served by Bank. Thus, some
potential competition would be eliminated by the
proposed transaction, although there is limited
economic and population growth in the area and
other large potential entrants also exist.

ZIONS FIRST NATIONAL BANK, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, AND CARBON EMERY BANK, PRICE, UTAH
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

Carbon Emery Bank, Price, Utah, with
and Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City, Utah (4341), which had
merged Aug. 1, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (4341). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 15, 1973, Zions First National Bank,
Salt Lake City, Utah, and Carbon Emery Bank,
Price, Utah, applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
and with the title of the former.
Zions First National Bank, the charter bank,
was organized in 1873, and is now the second largest
commercial bank in Utah with assets of $459.5
million and IPC deposits of $304 million. The bank
now operates 27 branch offices throughout the most
populous portions of the State and has received
approval to open two additional branches.
Competition for the charter bank is provided
by all of the largest banks in the State including
First Security Bank of Utah, National Association,
with deposits of $580 million; Walker Bank and
Trust Company, with deposits of $319 million;
and The Continental Bank and Trust Company, with
deposits of $130 million. Additional competition is
provided by the many smaller banks thoughout
Utah which are situated within the service areas of
the individual branches of the charter bank.
Carbon Emery Bank, the merging bank, was
originally chartered in 1910, and now has assets
84




$38,219,970
489,667,449
503,888365

To be
operated

2
29
31

of $31 million and IPC deposits of $24.6 million.
The bank operates one branch in Emery County
located at Castle Dale and has received approval to
open a second branch in the community of Sunnyside, in Carbon County. The service area of Carbon
Emery Bank now encompasses the coal producing
area of Utah.
Competition for the merging bank is provided by
a branch of Walker Bank and Trust Company,
which is located in the city of Price. Further,
First Security Bank of Utah, National Association,
the largest commercial bank in Utah, has recently
received approval to open a newly organized unit
bank in Price, to be called First Security Bank of
Price.
There is no competition between the charter
and merging banks because very large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distance. The main office of the
charter bank is located in Salt Lake City, approximately 130 miles northwest of Price, and its nearest
branch is situated in Spanish Fork, 70 miles northwest of Price. Those large distances are sufficient
to preclude any competition between those offices.
Consummation of the proposed merger will

stimulate competition in the service area of the
merging bank because the second largest bank in
Utah will enter a market in which the largest and
third largest commercial banks in the State will
be operating offices. The fact that the resulting
bank will have three branches in that area will
stimulate the other banks to seek to open additional
offices in the area for the added convenience of
local residents. Further, as part of the charter bank,
the resulting branches in the area will be able to
offer an expanded range of services not available
from the bank prior to the merger thus making
those branches viable competitors with the other
large banks.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 2,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City
("Zions Bank") is one of two banking subsidiaries
of Zions Utah Bancorporation, Utah's second largest
banking organization. On December 31, 1972,
Zions Bank held total deposits of $404.8 million
(including IPC demand deposits of $139.9 million)
and net loans of $284 million. It operates 28 banking offices, with 13 of these offices situated in Salt
Lake County.
Carbon Emery Bank ("Carbon Emery") operates
its main office in Price, Utah (Carbon County)
and one branch in Castle Dale in adjacent Emery
County. A second branch, to be located in Sunnyside (Carbon County) has been approved but is
not yet in operation. On December 31, 1972, Carbon Emery held total deposits of $28.4 million (including IPC demand deposits of $8.2 million)
and net loans of $12.2 million.
Carbon and Emery counties, the areas primarily

affected by the proposed merger, are located in
east-central Utah. Population of the two counties
totals about 21,000, which represents a decline of
about 22 percent in the last decade. Much of the
land area of these two counties is desert, and coal
mining is the single most important industry. In
recent years, employment in the coal industry has
declined significantly.
The closest offices of the merging banks are
approximately 70 miles apart, and are separated by
mountainous, sparsely populated terrain. No significant existing competition would be eliminated
by the proposed merger. Under applicable law,
Zions Bank could not branch de novo into Price, the
only significant community in the two-county area,
but its parent bank holding company could enter
de novo through establishment of a new banking
subsidiary. While demographic figures indicate that
the two-county area is not particularly attractive
as a de novo site, the contemporaneous de novo
entry of another large holding company indicates
some promise in this market.
The merger would have a clearly discernable
competitive effect on the developing structure of
commercial banking in the State of Utah. Three
large banking organizations, including Zions
Bank's parent holding company, dominate commercial banking in the State, and control about
60 percent of commercial bank deposits. Further
acquisitions by these organizations of banks of any
significant size can only add to this dominance,
and prevent the growth of additional banking systems able to offer increasing competition on a statewide basis. Carbon Emery ranks as the 10th largest banking organization in Utah, controls over
50 percent of the deposits in its market, and is of
sufficient size to be an important element in this
development. Accordingly, the proposed merger
would have some adverse effect on competition.

THE UNION NATIONAL BANK OF NEW BRIGHTON, NEW BRIGHTON, PA., AND THE FREEDOM
NATIONAL BANK, FREEDOM, PA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Freedom National Bank, Freedom, Pa. (5454), with
and The Union National Bank of New Brighton, New Brighton, Pa. (4549), which had
consolidated Sept. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4549) and title "The Century
National Bank and Trust Company." The consolidated bank at date of consolidation had




$21,111375
16,502,563
37,613,939

To be
operated

3
2
5

85

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 4, 1973, The Freedom National Bank,
Freedom, Pa., and The Union National Bank of New
Brighton, New Brighton, Pa., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to consolidate
under the charter of the latter and with the title
"The Century National Bank and Trust Company"
and with the head office to be located in Rochester,
Pa.
The Union National Bank of New Brighton, the
charter bank, was organized in 1891, and has total
assets of $14.7 million and IPC deposits of $11.6
million. The bank is headquartered in New Brighton,
Beaver County, Pa., and operates one branch, a
drive-up facility, located to the rear of the main
office.
Although Pennsylvania law would allow the charter bank to branch into four contiguous counties,
its small size effectively limits its service area to
central Beaver County. The service area, which is
bounded on the east by the Beaver River and
extends 2 miles north, south, and west of New
Brighton, encompasses New Brighton, Dougherty
Township, Rochester Township, and Beaver Falls.
The economy of that area is substantially industrial,
with a heavy emphasis on steeL production. Approximately 19,200 people live in the service area.
The charter bank ranks third among the six banks
which have their main offices in Beaver County.
Competition is afforded by several branches of
large Pittsburgh metropolitan banks, including
Mellon Bank, National Association, with deposits
of $5 billion; Western Pennsylvania National Bank,
with deposits of $1.1 billion; and Union National
Bank of Pittsburgh, with deposits of $726 million.
The Freedom National Bank, the consolidating
bank, was organized in 1872 and has total assets
of $18.4 million and IPC deposits of $15.6 million.
That bank is headquartered in Freedom, Pa., and
operates two branch offices. The service area of the
consolidating bank, which is slightly south of that
of the charter bank, is bounded on the south and
west by the Ohio River and extends 5.5 miles along
that river and 5 miles east and northeast. That
service area includes Baden, Conway, Freedom,
Rochester, Economy Borough, and New Sewickley
Township. The economy of that area is also based
primarily on steel production and its estimated
population is 27,500 people.
The Freedom National Bank is the second largest
bank of the six banks that operate their head offices
86




in Beaver County. Additional competition is felt
from the branches of large Pittsburgh metropolitan banks, including Mellon Bank, National
Association, with deposits of $5 billion, and Western
Pennsylvania National Bank, with deposits of
$1.1 billion.
Competition between the charter bank and the
consolidating bank is insignificant despite the close
proximity of their service areas because the rough
terrain of the area fosters distinct communities.
Only a nominal number of accounts and installment loans are drawn by each bank from the other's
service area.
Consummation of the proposed consolidation will
not significantly alter competition in Beaver County.
Although an insignificant amount of competition
will be eliminated between the charter bank and the
consolidating bank, competition in general will be
enhanced because the resulting bank will be better
able to compete with the large Pittsburgh metropolitan banks as well as the other commercial
banks headquartered in Beaver County. The resulting bank, which will continue to operate primarily in central Beaver County, will remain small
in comparison to its competitors but will become a
more viable banking institution. It will be able to
offer expanded and improved services, such as
trust services, extended banking hours, and a
larger lending limit. In addition, the management
problems of both banks, which arise from the domination of their respective presidents, will be improved since the expanded services of the resulting
bank will encourage delegation of authority.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed consolidation will stimulate competition in the service area
of the resulting bank. The application is, therefore, approved.
JUNE 29,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Freedom Bank and Union Bank are headquartered
within 5 miles of each other, and their closest
offices are about 2.8 miles apart. Thus, the consolidation would eliminate some existing competition between the two banks.
Freedom Bank and Union Bank hold 5.9 percent
and 4.6 percent, respectively, of total deposits held
by Beaver County commercial banks, the fifth
and sixth largest shares of the 11 commercial banks
operating in the county. The resulting bank would
be the second largest bank headquartered in

Beaver County and would hold 10.5 percent of
total county deposits, the fourth largest share of
all banks operating in the county. This increase
in concentration may somewhat overstate the effect
of the consolidation on competition, however,
because the two banks are not fully in competition with each other throughout their service areas.
Both banks could be permitted to branch into

the communities in which the other operates offices, but the small size of these communities
coupled with the existence of several large potential entrants into each community diminish the
effect of the consolidation on potential competition.
We conclude, therefore, that the consolidation would have some adverse effect on existing
competition.

THE PEOPLES NATIONAL BANK OF STATE COLLEGE, STATE COLLEGE, PA., AND
THE REBERSBURG NATIONAL BANK, REBERSBURG, PA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Rebersburg National Bank, Rebersburg, Pa. (11789), with
and The Peoples National Bank of State College, State College, Pa. (12261), which had
merged Sept. 10,1973, under charter of the latter bank (12261) and title "The Peoples National
Bank of Central Pennsylvania." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 26, 1973, The Rebersburg National
Bank, Rebersburg, Pa., and The Peoples National
Bank of State College, State College, Pa., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with
the title, "The Peoples National Bank of Central
Pennsylvania."
Peoples National Bank of State College, the charter bank, was organized in 1922, and now, with
assets of $40.5 million and IPC deposits of $35.7
million, operates five offices serving central and
west central Centre County. The charter bank has
filed applications to establish two additional branch
offices in the State College area. The service area of
the bank has an economy supported by a wide variety of businesses and industry devoted primarily to
research and development with Penn State University the largest single employer in the area.
The charter bank is the fourth largest commercial
bank in its service area and competes directly with
Mid-State Bank and Trust Company, Altoona, with
deposits of $157.6 million; Central Counties Bank,
State College, with deposits of $76.3 million; and
Union National Bank and Trust Company of
Huntingdon, with deposits of $38.9 million.
The Rebersburg National Bank, the merging
bank, was organized in 1920, and operates as a unit
bank with assets of $3.7 million and IPC deposits
of $3.2 million. The merging bank serves a rural



$3,891,845
42,929,457
46,821302

To be
operated

1
5
6

area in the extreme eastern portion of Centre
County containing a population of approximately
600 persons. Residents of that service area devote
their time to either agricultural pursuits or commute
to State College and its surrounding area for
employment. There is no public transportation in
the area and all travel must be done by private
car over small country roads, which emphasizes
the isolated location of the merging bank.
There is no competition between The Rebersburg National Bank and any other banking institution because of the large distance between its only
office and the nearest commercial banks which
are in the city of State College, approximately
26 miles southwest of Rebersburg. The small size
of the merging bank as well as its restricted service
areas further minimizes the competitive impact
which The Rebersburg National Bank has on any
other bank.
Consummation of the proposed merger will not
eliminate any competition in Centre County because there is no competition between the charter
and merging banks. The major impact of this merger
will be felt in the service area of the merging bank
because the resulting branch in Rebersburg will
be able to offer new and improved services to local
residents such as a significantly larger lending
limit, a trust department, consumer loans, and a
broader range of more sophisticated banking services. That will confer a direct benefit on residents
of Rebersburg. The resulting bank will become the
87

third largest bank operating in Centre County exceeding the presently third ranked Union National
Bank and Trust Company of Huntingdon by only
a few dollars in deposits.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The main office of Peoples National Bank of
State College is 26 miles from Rebersburg and the
closest existing office is 24 miles away. There are
three relatively small banks in the intervening

area. Rebersburg also is separated from State
College by a north-south mountain range. These
factors suggest that existing competition between
Peoples National Bank of State College and Rebersburg National Bank is of very limited magnitude.
Viewed from the perspective of potential competition, it appears that the small size of Rebersburg
makes it relatively unattractive for the de novo
entry of a second commercial bank. Thus, although
the proposed merger would have the effect of increasing Peoples National Bank of State College's
share of Centre County deposits from 22 percent
to approximately 24 percent, its overall effect on
competition would not be significantly adverse.

THE NEWPORT NATIONAL BANK, NEWPORT, KY., AND WEST SIDE SAVINGS BANK, NEWPORT, KY.

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

West Side Savings Bank, Newport, Ky., with
was purchased Sept. 18, 1973, by The Newport National Bank, Newport, Ky. (4765), which
had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On May 4, 1973, The Newport National Bank,
Newport, Ky., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to purchase the assets and
assume the liabilities of West Side Savings Bank,
Newport, Ky., under the charter and with the title
of the former.
The Newport National Bank, the purchasing bank,
was organized in 1892, and currently operates four
branches with assets of $26.9 million and IPC
deposits of $21.4 million. Three of the purchasing
bank's offices, including the main office, are located
in Newport, one is located in adjoining Fort Thomas,
and one is located in Alexandria, approximately
7 miles southeast of Newport.
Newport, the city in which the purchasing bank
maintains its main office, is geographically, historically, and economically an integral part of the
Cincinnati, Ohio Metropolitan Area. The city of
Newport has a population of about 26,000 and is
located within a loop of the Ohio River which
penetrates deeply into the city of Cincinnati.
Cincinnati has a population of 452,000. Newport is
connected to Cincinnati by two commuter bridges.
Its business district is within a mile of downtown
88



$7,772,000

1

29,920,000
33,431,000

To be
operated

5
6

Cincinnati, and the subject banks are located within
a mile of the main offices of the principal Cincinnati
banks. Commuter patterns illustrate the economic
integration of the Cincinnati-Newport urban area;
one half of the working residents of Newport are
employed in Ohio, one third are employed in
Cincinnati, and conversely, many Ohio citizens in
this area are employed in Kentucky. The Cincinnati
area has a diversified economy which includes
manufacturing, wholesale and retail trade, service
industries, and transportation.
The purchasing bank competes not only with
banks located in Newport but also with banks headquartered in Cincinnati. The distance between
Cincinnati and Newport is so short and their
economic integration so complete as to make
virtually all area banks realistic alternatives for
customers of any particular bank. The Newport
National Bank is the largest of the three banks in
Newport, but its total deposits of $23.7 million are
small in relation to the aggregate deposits of $2.3 billion in the south-central area of Cincinnati where 19
banks operate a total of 83 banking offices. Eight
of the area's nine largest banks are located within
1.5 miles of The Newport National Bank's main
office. Those competitors include First National

Bank of Cincinnati, with deposits of $656 million;
The Central Trust Company, with deposits of
$501 million; and The Provident Bank, with deposits of $310 million.
West Side Savings Bank, the selling bank, was
organized in 1925 and has no branches. That bank,
with assets of $7.7 million and IPC deposits of
$6.1 million, has very conservative lending policies.
It is now faced with a serious management succession problem and has been unable to replace its
vice president and cashier who resigned in December 1972. The selling bank is located within a
half mile of the purchasing bank, but direct competition between the two banks is limited. A majority
of the selling bank's loans consist of conventional
real estate loans and single payment loans for
personal expenditures, and those categories account
for only a small minority of the total loans of the
purchasing bank.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
not significantly alter the banking structure in the
south-central area of Cincinnati. The resulting bank,
with deposits of $30.7 million will continue to be
the fifth largest of the 13 remaining banks in both
Campbell and Kenton counties and will be far
smaller than any of the five principal banks in
Cincinnati which are prime competitors in the Newport area. The proposed transaction will provide
customers of the selling bank with longer business
hours, broader lending services, increased lending
limits, and trust services. It will also resolve a
serious problem of management succession in the
selling bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public interest

and the application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 6,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Newport National Bank ("Applicant"), organized
in 1892, operates its main office and one branch in
Newport, and branches in Fort Thomas and Alexandria, all in Campbell County, Ky. As of December 31, 1972, it held total deposits of $23.7
million (including IPC demand deposits of $9.9
million) and total loans and discounts of $12.2
million.
West Side Savings Bank ("WSB"), a State bank,
was organized in 1925. It operates its only office in
Newport, Campbell County, Ky. As of December 31,
1972, it held total deposits of $7 million (including
IPC demand deposits of $2.9 million) and total loans
and discounts of $2.6 million.
Both parties to this merger are located in Newport, Ky., a part of the Cincinnati, Ohio SMS A.
Newport and adjacent Covington, Ky., are separated by the Licking River and both cities lie
directly across the Ohio River from Cincinnati.
The three cities of Newport, Covington, and Cincinnati are separated by less than a mile.
The proposed merger will combine two of the
three banks in Newport, eliminating direct competition, particularly for customers which do not consider banks in neighboring Cincinnati as convenient
alternatives. However, in view of the small size of
the bank to be acquired, and the fact that the downtown Cincinnati banks are in such close proximity
to Newport, we do not believe that the overall
competitive effect of the proposed merger would
be significantly adverse.

THE NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF NORWICH, NORWICH, N.Y., AND THE FIRST NATIONAL
BANK OF NEWARK VALLEY, NEWARK VALLEY, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Newark Valley, Newark Valley, N.Y. (10111), with
and The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich, Norwich, N.Y. (1354), which had
merged Oct. 1,1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (1354). The merged bank at date
of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 5, 1973, The First National Bank of Newark Valley, Newark Valley, N.Y., and The National



$11,076,624
122,974,815
134,097,626

To be
operated

2
12
14

Bank and Trust Company of Norwich, Norwich,
N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the latter.
89

The First National Bank of Newark Valley, the
merging bank, was organized in 1911 and operates
one branch in Maine, N.Y. It has total assets of
$10.1 million and IPC deposits of $7.5 million, and
ranks second in deposit size among the four banks
headquartered in Tioga County and 20th among
the 32 banks located in the Seventh Banking District. The service area of the bank encompasses
the five northern townships of Tioga County and the
township of Maine in Broome County. That area has
an estimated population of 10,000 people and is
economically dependent on dairy farming, agriculture, and employment in the triple cities of Binghamton, Johnson City, and Endicott.
Competition in the service area of the merging
bank is principally afforded by Tioga State Bank,
which has deposits of $15 million; Endicott Bank of
New York, which has deposits of $48 million and is
a member of The Bank of New York Company,
Inc., a multibank holding company with deposits
of $2.8 billion; First City National Bank of Binghamton, which has deposits of $218 million and is a
member of Lincoln First Banks, Inc., a multibank
holding company with deposits of $2.1 billion; The
Owego National Bank which has deposits of $8
million; Nichols National Bank, which has deposits
of $5 million; Endicott Trust Company, which has
deposits of $89 million and is a member of Charter
New York Corporation, a multi-bank holding company with deposits of $5.1 billion; and Bankers
Trust of Binghamton, which has deposits of $25
million and is a member of Bankers Trust New
York Corporation, a multibank holding company
with deposits of $8 billion.
The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich, Norwich, N.Y., the charter bank, was organized in 1856, and operates eight branches in
Chenango County, two in Delaware County, and
one in Broome County. The bank possesses total
assets of $120.1 million and IPC deposits of $94.1
million. In Chenango County the bank ranks first
in deposit size among the three banks headquartered
there, and it ranks third among the 32 banks in the
Seventh Banking District. Chenango County, the
eastern portion of Delaware County, and the
western portion of Broome County, near the city
of Deposit, comprise the service area of the charter
bank. The economy of that area, which has an
estimated population of 50,000 people, depends on
dairy farming, agriculture, and industry.
Competitors of The National Bank and Trust
Company of Norwich include First City National
90




Bank of Binghamton, which has deposits of $218
million and is a member of Lincoln First Banks,
Inc., a multi-bank holding company with deposits
of $2.1 billion; The National Bank of Oxford,
which has deposits of $16 million; First National
Bank in Greene, which has deposits of $15 million;
Marine Midland Bank-Southern, which has deposits
of $316 million and is a member of Marine Midland Banks, Inc., a multi-bank holding company
with deposits of $6.6 billion; Deak National Bank,
which has deposits of $9 million; First National
Bank of Hancock, which has deposits of $9 million;
First National Bank of Hobart, which has deposits
of $5 million; National Bank of Roxbury, which has
deposits of $3 million; First National Bank in
Sidney, which has deposits of $15 million; National Bank of Stamford, which has deposits of
$16 million; and National Bank of Delaware County,
which has deposits of $17 million.
Competition between the subject banks is nominal
since they operate in different service areas and
their closest offices are separated by a distance of
approximately 44 miles.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate, rather than inhibit, competition. New
York State's "head office protection" provision
will no longer apply to Newark Valley, and other
banks will be permitted to branch de novo in that
area. In addition, expanded and improved services
will be provided in the Newark Valley area, including a larger lending limit, agricultural, mortgage,
and wholesale financing, credit card and overdraft
checking plans, and trust department services.
The management succession problem of the merging
bank will also be resolved.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the view of
this Office that the proposed merger is in the public
interest and will result in no adverse competitive
effects. It is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 27,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich operates 12 offices in Chenango, Delaware,
and Broome counties in upstate New York. As of
March 28, 1973, it held total deposits of $104.1
million (including IPC demand deposits of $27.1
million).
The First National Bank of Newark Valley operates its main office in Newark Valley, Tioga County,
and one branch in Maine, Broome County. As of
March 28, 1973, it held total deposits of $9 million

(including IPC demand deposits of $2 million).
The nearest offices of the parties are located
approximately 44 miles apart, with a number of
competitive alternatives in the intervening area.
Thus, it appears that the proposed transaction
would eliminate no substantial existing competition.
And because of the modest market position of the

bank to be acquired and the existence of other
significant potential entrants, we conclude that the
proposed acquisition will not eliminate substantial
potential competition.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed acquisition would not have a substantial competitive
impact.

THE NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE OF SEATTLE, SEATTLE, WASH., AND CITIZENS STATE BANK, PUYALLUP,
WASH.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Citizens State Bank, Puyallup, Wash., with
was purchased Oct. 5, 1973, by The National Bank of Commerce of Seattle, Seattle, Wash.
(4375), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On February 23, 1973, The National Bank of
Commerce of Seattle, Seattle, Wash., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
purchase the assets and assume the liabilities of
Citizens State Bank, Puyallup, Wash.
The National Bank of Commerce of Seattle, the
purchasing bank, was organized in 1889, and is
now the second largest commercial bank operating
in the State of Washington with assets of $1.6
billion and IPC deposits of $1.2 billion. The bank
maintains 107 banking offices throughout the
State.
Competition for the purchasing bank is provided
by numerous large banks including Seattle-First
National Bank, with deposits of $2.5 billion; a branch
of The Bank of California, National Association, San
Francisco, with deposits of $1.9 billion; Pacific
National Bank of Washington, with deposits of
$643 million; and Peoples National Bank of Washington, with deposits of $440 million.
Citizens State Bank, the selling bank, was organized in 1898 and has assets of $29 million and
IPC deposits of $24.6 million. The selling bank
operates four branch offices within 4 miles of its
main office and serves a relatively small area approximately 10 miles southeast of Tacoma and 32
miles south of Seattle. The service area of the bank
has an economy based on agriculture but is rapidly
becoming part of a developing suburban area
serving Tacoma and Seattle. Industrial expansion

550-906 O-LT - 75
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ - 7
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

To be
operated

$29,012326
1,656,420,031
1,685,432357

111
116

in this area is also becoming significant in terms of
employment opportunities for local residents.
Direct competition for the selling bank is provided by branches of Seattle-First National Bank,
the largest commercial bank in the State of Washington, with deposits of $2.5 billion, and Puget
Sound National Bank, Tacoma, with deposits of
$217 million.
There is minimal competition between the
purchasing and selling banks because relatively
large distances separate their closest offices and
natural barriers separating those offices prevent
them from becoming competitors. The purchasing
bank's nearest branch is located in Auburn, 7
miles north of an office of the selling bank. Any
overlap of service areas is hindered, however, by
minor geographic barriers including a river, a large
hill, and a heavily forested uninhabited area between the two communities. Further, the purchasing bank not only has no offices in Pierce
County, where the selling bank maintains all of
its offices, but is precluded from establishing
de novo branches in Pierce County by State law.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
not eliminate any banking offices but will merely
replace a small relatively ineffective competitor
with branches of a large, sophisticated bank capable
of competing with the larger banks now in Pierce
County. The branches of the resulting bank in
Pierce County will also be in a better position to
satisfy the financial requirements of this area's
growing economy and will provide a broader range
91

of financial services not now available through the
branches of the selling bank, such as data processing services, a trust department, comprehensive
investment and tax services, and teller machines.
That will serve to stimulate competition in Pierce
County.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public interest and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 30,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The nearest offices of the parties are situated
about 7 miles apart, with no competitive alternatives in the intervening area. NBC does not have
offices in Pierce County, although its offices in
adjacent King County derive a significant amount
of deposits and loans from the Puyallup Valley and
throughout Pierce County. Thus, the proposed
transaction will eliminate some existing competition.
Citizens is the largest of three banks with offices
in the Puyallup Valley, holding more than 42 percent
of the Valley's total deposits. In the larger Pierce
County market, Citizens ranks fifth among the 12
banks with offices in the county and holds approximately 4 percent of total deposits. Under Washington law, NBC could not open a de novo branch in
the Puyallup area. NBC could, however, enter
Pierce County by sponsoring the creation of a new
bank and subsequently merging with the sponsored
bank.
Banking in the State of Washington is highly

concentrated. The five largest banks in the State
hold more than 75 percent of the State's total
deposits, and the two largest (one of which is NBC)
hold 52 percent of statewide deposits. The number
of middle-sized banks in the State capable of
expanding beyond their local or regional areas is
small, yet they constitute the only reservoir from
which significant potential competition capable
of deconcentrating the State's banking structure
may be generated. Only if these medium-sized
banks are preserved to combine with one another
and with smaller banks and expand to compete with
the larger statewide institutions can significant
deconcentration evolve.
Citizens is one of a limited number of mediumsized independent banking organizations in Western Washington. It is the largest bank in the
Puyallup Valley, holding more than 42 percent of
area deposits and operating more than half of the
banking offices in the area. NBC is the second largest banking organization in the State of Washington. Citizens, as the 17th largest bank in the State
is a significant independent bank; to permit its
acquisition by NBC will further rigidify the existing
highly concentrated structure in banking in the
State of Washington and further reduce the likelihood of future deconcentration in the State.
We therefore conclude that the proposed merger
would have an adverse effect on potential competition in the Puyallup Valley and will tend to eliminate
the likelihood of future deconcentration in commercial banking in Western Washington.

THE PEOPLES NATIONAL BANK, GREENVILLE, S.C., AND BANKERS TRUST
OF SOUTH CAROLINA, COLUMBIA, S.C.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Bankers Trust of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C., with
and The Peoples National Bank, Greenville, S.C. (10635), which had
consolidated Oct. 15, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (10635) and title "Bankers Trust
of South Carolina, N.A." The consolidated bank at date of consolidation had

The "Comptroller's Decision" and the "Summary
of Report by Attorney General" for this case ap-

92




$350,280,741
129309,270,
479,590,011

To be
operated

61
20
81

peared in the 1972 Annual Report under the heading
"Approved, but in litigation."

CROCKER NATIONAL BANK, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., AND UNITED STATES NATIONAL BANK,
SAN DIEGO, CALIF.
Name of bank and type of transaction
United States National Bank, San Diego, Calif. (10391), with
was purchased Oct. 18, 1973, by Crocker National Bank, San Francisco, Calif. (1741), which had.
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 18,1973, application was made to the
Comptroller of the Currency for prior written approval for the Crocker National Bank, San Francisco, Calif, (the "Assuming Bank") to purchase
certain of the assets and assume certain of the
liabilities of the United States National Bank,
San Diego, Calif. ("USNB")Prior to 3:00 p.m. on October 18, 1973, USNB
was a National bank with 63 offices in five Southern
California counties and deposits of approximately
$940 million. At 3:00 p.m. on October 18, 1973,
the Comptroller became satisfied that USNB was
insolvent and appointed the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation ("FDIC") as receiver. The
present application is based upon an agreement,
which is incorporated herein by reference, by
which the FDIC as receiver has agreed to sell certain USNB assets and liabilities to the Assuming
Bank. For the reasons stated hereafter, the Assuming Bank's application is approved, and the purchase and assumption transaction may be consummated immediately.
USNB was organized in 1913, and has total book
resources of approximately $1.2 billion. As of June
30, 1973, it was the ninth largest bank in California
and the 83rd largest bank in the United States. It
operated 33 branches in Los Angeles County, 12
branches in Orange County, 11 branches in San
Diego County, four branches in San Bernadino
County, and two branches in Riverside County. It
had approximately 344,000 deposit accounts. An
estimated 3,330 of those depositors had amounts
on deposit in excess of the $20,000 insured by the
FDIC, and the aggregate uninsured and otherwise
unsecured deposits were about $300 million.
It has been apparent for several months that
USNB was in difficulty. The bank had suffered
serious losses in its loan portfolio. A deposit runoff
of approximately $100 million during June caused
severe liquidity problems necessitating high cost



Total assets
$1,014,314,670
6,804,594,544
8,176,934,387

borrowing in the federal funds market. As a result
the bank has been running operating losses of
approximately $1 million per month.
As early as July 1973, several banks were in direct
communication with the management of USNB
concerning the possibility of taking over USNB.
No prospective purchaser, however, appeared
interested in a takeover unless assistance was
provided by the FDIC. The FDIC indicated a willingness to provide assistance, and joint negotiations
among the Comptroller, the FDIC, and interested
banks has developed the purchase and assumption
agreement which the Comptroller is now being
asked by the Assuming Bank to approve.
Under the Bank Merger Act, 12 U.S.C. 1828(c),
the Comptroller cannot approve a purchase and
assumption transaction which would have certain
proscribed anticompetitive effects unless he finds
these anticompetitive effects to be clearly outweighed in the public interest by the probable
effect of the transaction in meeting the convenience
and needs of the community to be served. Additionally, the Comptroller is directed to consider the financial and managerial resources and
future prospects of the existing and proposed institution, and the convenience and needs of the
community to be served. When necessary, however,
to prevent the evils attendant upon the failure of a
bank, the Comptroller can dispense with the uniform
standards applicable to usual acquisition transactions, and need not consider reports on the competitive consequences of the transaction ordinarily
solicited from the Department of Justice and other
banking agencies. He is authorized in such circumstances to act immediately in his sole discretion,
to approve an acquisition, and to authorize the
immediate consummation of the transaction.
The proposed acquisition will prevent an enormous disruption to the community and potential
losses to a large number of uninsured depositors.
The Assuming Bank has strong financial and managerial resources, and the acquisition will enable

93

it to enhance the banking services it offers in the
five-county Southern California area. Thus, the
approval of this transaction will help to avert a loss
of public confidence in the banking system, and may
actually improve the services offered to the banking
public.
The Comptroller thus finds that the proposed
transaction will not result in a monopoly, be in furtherance of any combination or conspiracy to
monopolize or attempt to monopolize the business
of banking in any part of the United States, and that
the anticompetitive effects of the proposed transaction, if any, are clearly outweighed in the public
interest by the probable effect of the proposed transaction in meeting the convenience and needs of the
community to be served. For those reasons, the
Assuming Bank's application to acquire certain
liabilities and purchase certain assets of USNB,
as set forth in the agreement executed with the
FDIC as receiver, is approved. This approval includes specifically the transfer to the Assuming
Bank of USNB trust business as provided in Section 7 of the agreement. The Comptroller further
finds that the failure of USNB requires him to act
immediately, as contemplated by the Bank Merger
Act, to prevent disruption of banking services to
the community; and the Comptroller thus waives
publication of notice, dispenses with the solicitation
of competitive reports from other agencies, and
authorizes the transaction to be consummated
immediately.
OCTOBER 18,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Crocker operates 118 offices in four of the five
counties in which U.S. National had offices. Ninety-

five of these Crocker offices are in Los Angeles
County. The parties held the following market
shares (based on total deposits) in the five counties
in which U.S. National operated offices:
San
Los
Angeles Diego
U.S. National....
Crocker

1.2
5.5

San
Bernardino

9.8

2.8
3.4

Orange Riverside
2.2
2.6

3.2
3.5

Thus, although the acquisition eliminated direct,
actual competition in numerous local markets, in
no county in which both banks previously had offices
would the acquisition give Crocker a county-wide
market share greater than 6.7 percent. On a statewide basis, after the acquisition of U.S. National,
Crocker remains the fourth largest bank in the State
with 9.6 percent of total State deposits and 10.8
percent of commercial bank offices. The four
largest banks in California now control 69.9 percent
of total State deposits.
Absent the unusual circumstances present in
this situation the combination of banks such as
U.S. National and Crocker, with the resulting
elimination of not insubstantial direct competition and the loss of one of a small number of large
statewide or regional organizations, would present
serious competitive problems. The effects on the
structure of banking in the State of California would,
ordinarily, be clearly undesirable. However, given
the condition of U.S. National, and the difficult
practical and legal problems restricting the number
of potential purchasers, the acquisition of U.S.
National will not, in light of the available alternative
methods of protecting depositors, have a significantly adverse effect on competition.

THE PARK NATIONAL BANK, NEWARK, OHIO, AND THE UTICA SAVINGS BANK COMPANY, UTICA, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Utica Savings Bank Company, Utica, Ohio, with
was purchased Oct. 23,1973, by The Park National Bank, Newark, Ohio (9179), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 5,1973, The Park National Bank, Newark,
Ohio, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to purchase the assets and assume
94



$5,538,939
111,842,516
117,445,843

To be
operated

1
7
8

the liabilities of The Utica Savings Bank Company,
Utica, Ohio.
The Park National Bank, the purchasing bank,
was organized in 1908, and is currently the largest
of seven commercial banks in Licking County with

assets of $112 million and IPC deposits of $91.3
million. The bank operates six branch offices which
serve the central and southern portions of Licking
County as well as nearby portions of adjacent
Franklin County. The city of Newark serves as a
regional trade center for the surrounding rural
areas and is becoming an area from which many
people commute to Columbus for employment.
Competition for the purchasing bank in Licking
County is provided by The First National Bank of
Newark, which has deposits of $67.5 million and is
a member of BancOhio Corporation; The Newark
Trust Company, which has deposits of $66.2 million
and is a member of Citizens Financial Corporation;
and several smaller commercial banks. Additional
competition is provided by some of the larger banks
in Franklin County including The Ohio National
Bank of Columbus, with deposits of $1.2 billion;
The Huntingdon National Bank of Columbus, with
deposits of $728.4 million; and The City National
Bank and Trust Company of Columbus, with
deposits of $597.6 million.
The Utica Savings Bank Company, the selling
bank, was organized in 1905 and, with assets of
$5.5 million and IPC deposits of $4.6 million, is the
fourth largest of seven commercial banks headquartered in Licking County. The selling bank
operates as a unit institution and serves a limited
service area including Utica and the immediately
surrounding rural area of northern Licking County
and southern Knox County.
Competition for the selling bank in Utica is provided by a branch of The First National Bank of
Newark and direct competition will soon be provided by The Newark Trust Company which has
recently received approval to open a branch office
in Utica.
There is little competition between the purchasing
and selling banks because their closest offices are
approximately 15 miles apart. The Utica Savings
Bank Company is not an aggressive institution and

is unable to compete effectively with the larger
banks. The opening of a new branch in Utica by
The Newark Trust Company will put further pressure on the competitive capability of the selling
bank. The small amount of business done by the
purchasing bank which originates in Utica is due to
the fact that some Utica residents commute to work
or shop in Newark on a regular basis.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in the service area of The
Utica Savings Bank Company by offering expanded
and improved services. The resulting bank, will not
significantly increase in size over its principal
competitors.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed transaction is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
SEPTEMBER 21,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Utica Bank is situated in the small community
of Utica (population about 2,000), approximately 13
miles from Park National's nearest office. There are
no banking alternatives in the intervening area.
Thus, it appears that the proposed acquisition may
eliminate some existing competition.
Commercial banking in Licking County is highly
concentrated. Park National, with 44 percent of
County deposits, ranks first among the County's
seven banks, while the three largest banks hold
approximately 91 percent of total County deposits.
Utica Bank ranks fifth with 2 percent of County
deposits. The proposed acquisition will increase
Park National's share of the Licking County market
to 46 percent and increase the share of the top three
banks from 91 percent to 93 percent.
The proposed acquisition would eliminate some
existing competition and slightly increase banking
concentration in Licking County.

PITTSBURGH NATIONAL BANK, JEANETTE, PA., AND FARMERS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, INDIANA, PA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Farmers Bank & Trust Company, Indiana, Pa., with
was purchased Oct. 26, 1973, by Pittsburgh National Bank, Jeanette, Pa. (252), which h a d . . . .
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had




$33,692,000
2,155,558,000
2,155,558,000

To be
operated

2
87
89

95

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On June 13, 1973, Pittsburgh National Bank,
Jeanette, Pa., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to purchase the assets
and assume the liabilities of Farmers Bank and
Trust Company, Indiana, Pa.
Pittsburgh National Bank, the purchasing bank,
is the second largest of all the commercial banks
operating in the Pittsburgh area. The bank, with
assets of $2.1 billion and IPC deposits of $1.5 billion,
operates 86 offices serving Allegheny, Butler,
Westmoreland, and Washington counties. In addition, the bank has nine approved but unopened
branches and three pending applications for
branches in these four counties. The purchasing
bank moved its headquarters from Pittsburgh to
Jeanette in June 1972.
In the five counties in which Pittsburgh National Bank could, and still can, legally branch,
both before and after the relocation of its main
office, there are 41 commercial banks. Those banks,
offering a full range of services through many
offices, include Mellon National Bank and Trust
Company, Pittsburgh, with total deposits of $6.2
billion; Western Pennsylvania National Bank,
Pittsburgh, with total deposits of $1.3 billion; and
Union National Bank of Pittsburgh, with total deposits of $837 million.
Farmers Bank and Trust Company, the selling
bank, with total assets of $33.6 million and IPC
deposits of $28.4 million is the third largest of seven
commercial banks headquartered in Indiana County.
It maintains two banking offices and primarily serves
the borough of Indiana and environs. The management executives of the bank are nearing retirement
age, and there is no middle-level management
personnel who can take control of the daily operation of the bank. Competition within Indiana
County is provided by Blainsville National Bank,
with total assets of 21 million; The Savings and
Trust Company, with total assets of $67 million;
and National Bank of the Commonwealth, with
total assets of $61 million.
There is no competition between the purchasing
and selling banks. The closest offices of the selling
bank and Pittsburgh National Bank are 36 miles
apart. Although Pittsburgh National Bank's main
office is located in Jeanette, about 39 miles from

96



the borough of Indiana, its management and operations headquarters are in Pittsburgh, approximately
67 miles from Indiana. Those large distances and
the number of alternative banking institutions
located in the intervening area precludes the possibility of any competition between the purchasing
and selling banks.
Consummation of the proposed merger will increase competition in the service area of the selling
bank. The purchase by Pittsburgh National Bank
will enable the resulting branches in Indiana to
offer an expanded range of services for the convenience of area residents. Those improved services
will include overdraft checking, BankAmericard,
improved and expanded loan services, and a larger
lending limit. The proposed merger also will solve
the management succession problem at the selling
bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed purchase is in the
public interest and it is, therefore, approved.
SEPTEMBER 25,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The closest offices of the parties are approximately 36 miles apart, with several competitive
alternatives in the intervening area. It appears
that the instant proposal would eliminate only a
limited amount of existing competition.
Under Pennsylvania law, PNB has the legal
ability to establish branches in Indiana County;
in fact, the recent move of its main office into
Westmoreland County expanded its permissible
branching area to include this county. Commercial
banking in Indiana County is highly concentrated;
as of June 30, 1972, the four leading banks in the
county held about 76 percent of its total commercial
bank deposits. Farmers ranks third of nine banks
operating offices in the county, with about 15 percent of such deposits. PNB is by far the largest
bank eligible to enter Indiana County, and has
demonstrated its capability for de novo expansion.
Thus, although Farmers is significantly smaller
than the two leading banks in Indiana County,
and the county's growth rate has been modest, we
conclude that the proposed transaction would
eliminate some potential competition.

THE SHELBURNE FALLS NATIONAL BANK, SHELBURNE FALLS, MASS.,
AND THE CONWAY NATIONAL BANK, CONWAY, MASS.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Conway National Bank, Conway, Mass. (895), with
and The Shelburne Falls National Bank, Shelburne Falls, Mass. (1144), which had
merged Oct. 29, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (1144) and title "The Country Bank,
National Association." The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 3, 1973, The Conway National Bank,
Conway, Mass., and The Shelburne Falls National
Bank, Shelburne Falls, Mass., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and with the title
of "The Country Bank, National Association."
The Conway National Bank, the merging bank,
was organized in 1865 and operates as a unit institution. The bank, with total assets of $1.9 million and
IPC deposits of $1.3 million, is the smallest National
bank in Massachusetts. The service area of the
merging bank, encompassing Conway and its
environs to the west and south, is an isloated rural
area. The merging bank is experiencing a critical
management succession problem because it is
unable to offer competitive salaries. Two directors
are presently managing the daily affairs of the bank
during the 2 days a week that they each volunteer.
The Shelburne Falls National Bank, the charter
bank, was organized in 1865, and operates one
branch in Greenfield, Mass. With total assets of
$6.8 million and IPC deposits of $4.5 million, the
bank ranks 75th among the 83 National banks in
Massachusetts. The charter bank's service area,
which is economically dependent on dairy farming,
apple orchards and industry, extends west from
Greenfield to Charlemont and north to the Vermont
border.
Competitors in Franklin County include Franklin
County Trust Company, with deposits of $35.8
million; First National Bank of Franklin, with
deposits of $35.7 million; Franklin Savings Institution, with deposits of $56.4 million, which offers
"NOW" accounts; and Greenfield Savings Bank,
with deposits of $47.4 million, which also offers
"NOW" accounts.
Competition between the subject banks is minimal since they have only a nominal number of
common customers and since their closest offices




$1,880308
6,809,761

To be
operated

1
2

8,690,070

3

are separated by a distance of approximately 10
miles. In addition, the connecting roads are in poor
condition and winter snow makes travelling
hazardous.
Competition can only be enhanced by consummation of the proposed transaction. The serious
management succession problem of the merging
bank will be resolved and expanded and improved
services will be offered, such as a larger lending
limit, automated services, and higher savings
interest rates. The resulting bank will utilize the
same premises as presently maintained by the
subject banks and will operate under the title of
"The Country Bank, National Association."
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the view of
this Office that the proposed merger is in the public
interest and will result in no adverse competitive
effects. It is, therefore, approved.
SEPTEMBER 27,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Shelburne Falls National Bank operates its main
office in Shelburne Falls, Mass., and a branch in
nearby Greenfield. As of December 31, 1972, it
held total deposits of $5.5 million (including IPC
demand deposits of $2.5 million) and net loans and
discounts of $3.3 million.
Conway National Bank operates its single office
in Conway, Mass. As of December 31, 1972, it held
total deposits of $1.4 million (including IPC demand
deposits of $847,000) and net loans and discounts
of $971,000.
The parties to this proposed transaction are situated in Franklin County, with about 7 miles separating their nearest offices. Thus, it appears that
some existing competition may be eliminated by
the proposed merger. However, it does not appear
that banking concentration will be significantly
increased in any relevant market.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed merger
would not have a substantial competitive impact.

97

GLENS FALLS NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, GLENS FALLS, N.Y.,
AND THE CAMBRIDGE VALLEY NATIONAL BANK, CAMBRIDGE, N.Y.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Cambridge Valley National Bank, Cambridge, N.Y. (1275), with
and Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls, N.Y. (7699), which had
merged Oct. 31, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (7699). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 11,1973, The Cambridge Valley National
Bank, Cambridge, N.Y., and Glens Falls National
Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls, N.Y., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter and title of the latter.
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company,
the charter bank, was incorporated in 1851 and, with
assets of $101.1 million and IPC deposits of $72
miljion, operates eight branch offices. The service
area of the bank consists of Washington, Warren,
Essex, and Saratoga counties, with an estimated
population of 125,000.
The charter bank is the seventh largest in total
deposit size of 32 commercial banks in the Fourth
Banking District and is the smaller of two banks
headquartered in Warren County. Competition is
provided by the $700 million deposit State Bank of
Albany; the $196 million deposit Bankers Trust
Company of Albany, National Association; the $193
million deposit Marine Midland Bank-Eastern,
National Association, Troy; the$123 million deposit
The First National Bank of Glens Falls; and the $15
million deposit Essex County-Champlain National
Bank, Willsboro. The first three competitors named
are member of multi-bank holding companies.
The Cambridge Valley National Bank, the merging bank, was organized in 1865 and, with assets of
$7.2 million and IPC deposits of $5.9 million,
operates as a unit institution. The service area is
the village of Cambridge and the area within a 10mile radius of Cambridge, including the southeastern portion of Washington County and the
northern portion of Rensselaer County, with an
estimated population of 8,000.
The merging bank ranks 31st in total deposit
size among the 32 commercial banks in the Fourth
Banking District of New York, and is the smaller
of two commercial banks headquartered in Washington County. Competition is provided by the larger

98



$8,005,233
118.805382

To be
operated

1
12

126,810,615

13

banks operating in Washington County including,
the $9 million deposit First National Bank of Greenwich; the $51 million deposit The Adirondack
Trust Company, Saratoga Springs; the $947 million
deposit National Commercial Bank and Trust Company, Albany; the $700 million deposit State Bank
of Albany; the $193 million deposit Marine Midland
Bank-Eastern, National Association, Troy; and the
$79 million deposit Union National Bank, Albany.
The latter four competitors named are members
of multi-bank holding companies.
Competition for banking services will not be
adversely affected by the proposed merger. The
resulting bank, with deposits of $103 million, will
still rank seventh in deposit size in the Fourth
Banking District. There is negligible competition
between The Cambridge National Bank and Glens
Falls National Bank and Trust Company, as their
nearest offices are 15 miles apart. Consummation
of the merger will remove head office protection
from Cambridge as provided by New York State
law, thus allowing de novo branching by other banks
in that community.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
provide Cambridge residents with expanded and
improved services including an increased lending
limit, government guaranteed loans, wholesale
loans, credit cards, letters of credit, trust department services, data processing services, increased
rate of interest on savings and assured management succession.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger will
result in no adverse competitive effects and will
benefit the public interest. This application is,
therefore, approved.
SEPTEMBER 28,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Washington County is served by six commercial
banks. Cambridge Bank is the smallest bank in

the County with 8 percent of total deposits and
Glens Falls Bank ranks third with 18 percent of
total county deposits. Although both banks operate
in Washington County, it appears that the proposed
acquisition will eliminate only a limited amount of
existing competition; their Washington County
offices are separated by a distance of about 29 miles,
and Glens Falls' office nearest Cambridge is the
recently acquired Schuylerville branch, located
about 15 miles west of Cambridge in Saratoga

County. Glens Falls Bank has, however, applied
for approval to open an office near Greenwich, about
9 miles northwest of Cambridge in Washington
County.
Thus, while it does not appear that the proposed
merger will eliminate substantial existing competition between the parties, the transaction may
eliminate the potential for increased competition in
the future.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF GALLIPOLIS, GALLIPOLIS, OHIO, AND THE VINTON BANKING COMPANY,
VINTON, OHIO
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

The Vinton Banking Company, Vinton, Ohio, with
was purchased Nov. 15, 1973, by The First National Bank of Gallipolis, Gallipolis, Ohio (136)
which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 4, 1973, The First National Bank of
Gallipolis, Gallipolis, Ohio, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to purchase
the assets and assume the liabilities of The Vinton
Banking Company, Vinton, Ohio.
The First National Bank of Gallipolis, the purchasing bank, was organized in 1863 and operates
as a unit institution. With total assets of $16 million
and IPC deposits of $12.6 million, it is the third
largest of the four banks operating in Gallia County,
the service area of the purchasing bank. Gallia
County, an agricultural area, has a population of
25,200 people.
The Vinton Banking Company, the selling bank,
was organized in 1902 and operates as a unit institution. It possesses total assets of $590 thousand
and IPC deposits of $304 thousand. It is the smallest
of the four banks operating in Gallia County and its
service area extends in a radius of 2.5 miles from
Vinton.
The two banks in Gallia County with which the
subject banks compete are Commercial and Savings Bank of Gallipolis, with deposits of $18.8
million, and Ohio Valley Bank Company, with deposits of $26.5 million. Although the subject banks
operate in the same county, competition between
them is nominal since the selling bank offers only



$590,000

1

15,990,000
16,580,000

To be
operated

1
2

limited services and is separated by a distance of
approximately 18 road miles from the purchasing
bank.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
result in no adverse competitive effects. Rather,
competition will be enhanced because the management succession problems of the selling bank will
be resolved and expanded services will be offered,
such as a larger lending limit, savings and time
deposit accounts, safe deposit boxes, and night
depository services. The resulting bank will be
better able to serve the banking needs of the county,
which will expand when an electrical power plant
is built near Gallipolis and coal mines are opened
near Vinton.
Accordingly, it is the opinion of this Office that
consummation of the proposed transaction is in
the public interest and will result in no adverse
competitive effects. It is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 5,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

First National Bank of Gallipolis operates a single
office in Gallipolis, Gallia County, Ohio. As of
December 31, 1972, it held total deposits of $14
million (including IPC demand deposits of $4.5
million) and net loans and discounts of $7.4 million.
Vinton Banking Company operates a single office

99

in Vinton, also in Gallia County, Ohio. As of December 31, 1972, it held total deposits of $490,000
(including IPC demand deposits of $304,000) and
net loans and discounts of $171,000.
Both parties to this proposed acquisition operate
in Gallia County, and are separated by a distance
of approximately 16 miles. Although some existing

competition may be eliminated by the proposed
transaction, it does not appear that banking concentration will be significantly increased in any
relevant market.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed acquisition would not have a substantial competitive
impact.

FIRST NATIONAL STATE BANK OF NORTH JERSEY, HACKENSACK, N.J.,
TRUST COMPANY, TENAFLY, NJ.

AND COUNTY

Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

County Trust Company, Tenafly, N.J., with
and First National State Bank of North Jersey, Hackensack, N.J. (12014), which had
merged Nov. 16, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (12014) and title "County Trust Company, National Association." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On April 13, 1973, the County Trust Company,
Tenafly, NJ., and the First National State Bank of
North Jersey, Hackensack, N.J., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title "County Trust Company, National Association"
with its main office in Tenafly.
First National State Bank of North Jersey, the
charter bank, was organized in 1921 and was
acquired in 1970 by First National State Bancorporation, a multi-bank holding company with total
deposits of $1.2 billion. The charter bank, with
assets of $76.9 million and IPC deposits of $61.8
million, is headquartered in Hackensack and
operates six branch offices in the southern portion
of Bergen County in the First Banking District of
New Jersey. The service area is limited to the
southern portion of Bergen County which is bordered
by Passaic County on the west and Hudson County
to the south. That area, which has a population of
approximately 311,790 people, is economically
founded on retail and commercial enterprises with
estimated growth of the area in the future limited.
First National State Bank of North Jersey ranks
seventh in deposit size of the 28 commercial banks
in Bergen County and 23rd in size of the 88 banks
located in the First Banking District. Competition
is provided by many of the larger banks in Bergen
County, including Peoples Trust of New Jersey,
Hackensack, with deposits of $976 million, the lead
bank in United Jersey Banks, a multi-bank holding

100




$137,014366
77,780,873
214,795,239

To be
operated

9
7
16

company with total deposits of $1.2 billion; National
Community Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford, with
deposits of $417 million; Citizens National Bank,
Tenafly, with deposits of $251 million, a member of
Midlantic Banks, Inc., a multi-bank holding company
with total deposits of $1.2 billion; and Citizens First
National Bank of Ridgewood, Ridgewood, with
deposits of $169 million. In addition, because many
of the residents of Bergen County commute daily
to New York City, the larger banks in that city also
provide competition.
County Trust Company, the merging bank, was
organized in 1907 and possesses total assets of
$137.2 million and IPC deposits of $107.8 million.
The bank is headquartered in Tenafly and operates
eight branch offices in northeastern Bergen County
in the First Banking District of New Jersey. That
service area includes the municipalities of Cresskill, Dumont, Haworth, Mont vale, New Milford,
Oradell, Park Ridge, Tenafly, and Woodcliff Lake,
which have a total estimated population of 96,634.
The service area, which is predominantly residential
and rural in nature, possesses good potential for development in its northern sector.
County Trust Company ranks sixth in deposit
size of the 28 commercial banks in Bergen County
and 19th in size of the 88 commercial banks in the
First Banking District. Competition is primarily
offered by the larger banks in the area, including
Peoples Trust of New Jersey, Citizens National
Bank, and Broadway Bank and Trust, Paterson,
with deposits of $92 million. As with the charter

bank, County Trust Company also encounters
competition from the New York City banks. Because of its small lending limit and lack of adequate
services, the merging bank is unable to meet the
financial needs of the new enterprises moving into
its service area. Consequently, its competitive
impact is diminishing and will continue to do so
as the area develops. In addition, County Trust
Company is experiencing a management succession
problem caused by the death and retirement of its
senior managing officers and a lack of adequate
experience on the part of its midmanagement level
personnel.
Competition in Bergen County will not be adversely affected by consummation of this merger.
The service areas of the respective banks are separate and distinct, as evidenced by the negligible
number of common borrowers, even though their
closest offices are located only 2.6 miles apart.
The other members of First National State Bancorporation located in the First Banking District
also operate in service areas distinct from that of
County Trust Company. The resulting bank will
enhance competition since it will be better able to
serve the needs^of Bergen County by its improved
and expanded services, including a larger lending
limit, expanded trust services, and data processing
facilities. Additionally, the management succession
problem at County Trust Company will be resolved.
The resulting bank will have deposits of $192 million and will rank fifth in size in Bergen County and
15th in size in the First Banking District.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger is
in the public interest and will involve no adverse
competitive effects. This application is, therefore,
approved.
SEPTEMBER 7,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

As of June 30, 1972, County and North Jersey
ranked sixth and seventh among 35 banks operating
offices in Bergen County, with 4.5 and 2.6 percent
of Bergen County total deposits, respectively.
Banking in Bergen County is highly concentrated;
as of June 30,1972, the three largest banks in Bergen
County held 55.2 percent of the county's deposits;
the four largest held 69.9 percent; and the six largest held 74.4 percent. Consummation of the proposed merger would increase the share of total
Bergen County deposits held by its six largest
banks to 76.6 percent.
To the extent that Bancorp is not regarded as
competing throughout Bergent County (the application states that North Jersey serves only part of
the county), it is certainly a significant potential
competitor in those sections of the county where it
does not already have offices. As one of the very
largest bank holding companies in New Jersey,
Bancorp has the resources to expand in new markets
other than by repeated acquisitions of banks serving
the same general vicinity. The instant merger would
be Bancorp's third acquisition in Bergen County
since New Jersey law was amended to permit statewide holding company expansion in 1969. Repeated
acquisitions by the State's largest banking organizations in newly entered markets can only serve to
concentrate the State's banking industry, deterring
the development of a more competitive banking
structure. County Trust is of sufficient size as to
make its acquisition by one of the largest holding
companies, and particularly a holding company
serving adjoining and to some extent overlapping
sections of the same county, competitively
undesirable.
We conclude that the proposed merger would
have an adverse effect on competition.

THE NATIONAL BANK OF NORTHERN NEW YORK, WATERTOWN, N.Y., AND
THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF DEXTER, DEXTER, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Dexter, Dexter, N.Y. (8463), with
and The National Bank of Northern New York, Watertown, N.Y. (2657), which had
merged Nov. 16,1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (2657). The merged bank at
date of merger had




$6,745334
128,230,685
134,123,923

To be
operated

1
10
11

101

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On May 7, 1973, The First National Bank of
Dexter, Dexter, N.Y., and The National Bank of
Northern New York, Watertown, N.Y., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the latter.
The National Bank of Northern New York, the
charter bank, was organized in 1882, and has assets
of $123.5 million with IPC deposits of $100 million.
The bank has ten offices within the Fifth Banking
District of New York: its head office and three
branches in Watertown, two in Massena, and one
each in Adams Center, Clayton, Croghan, and
Lowville. Those municipalities, with a combined
population of approximately 60,000, comprise the
service area of the charter bank.
That service area has an economy based primarily
on agriculture and tourism, resulting in one of the
lowest per capita incomes in the State. The population density of the area is less than one-fifth the
statewide average, and the population of Watertown
has declined significantly since 1950. The bank does
well among the 20 commercial banks in its service
area, in deposits second only to Marine Midland
Bank-Northern, a member of Marine Midland Banks
Inc., a multi-bank holding company with total
deposits of $6.6 billion.
The First National Bank of Dexter, the merging
bank, was organized in 1906 and has always operated as a unit bank. It presently has assets of $5
million and $3 million IPC deposits. The village
of Dexter, with a population of 1,068, is located in
Jefferson County which comprises the bank's
service area. Among the seven commercial banks
within the service area, First National Bank of
Dexter ranks fifth. The three banks providing the
most direct competition are: Jefferson National
Bank, La Fargeville, with deposits of $6 million;
Seaway National Bank, Watertown, with deposits
of $12 million; and Marine Midland Bank-Northern,
Watertown, with deposits of $168 million.
Upon consummation of the proposed merger,
The National Bank of Northern New York will
remain the second largest commercial bank in both
Jefferson County and in the Fifth Banking District.
While some competition presently exists between
the charter and merging banks whose nearest
offices are 7 miles apart, the total effect of this
merger will be for the benefit of the citizens of
Dexter in the form of superior banking services,
a larger lending limit, more sophisticated com-

102




mercial loans, data processing services, expertise
in agricultural loans, the introduction of a credit
card program, and trust department services.
Future problems of management succession at the
merging bank will also be alleviated.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public
interest and this application is approved.
OCTOBER 17,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The National Bank of Northern New York
("Charter Bank"), established in 1882, operates
nine offices in Jefferson, Lewis, and St. Lawrence
counties in upstate New York. As of December 31,
1972, Charter Bank held total deposits of $104.9
million (including IPC demand deposits of $27.6
million) and loans and discounts of $65 million.
The First National Bank of Dexter ("Dexter
Bank"), established in 1906, maintains its only
office in Dexter, Jefferson County. As of December 31, 1972, Dexter Bank held total deposits of
$4.5 million (including IPC demand deposits of
$1.07 million) and loans and djgcounts of $2.6
million.
The impact of this proposed acquisition will be
felt primarily in Jefferson County, where Charter
Bank operates its main office and four branches and
where Dexter Bank operates its only office. Charter
Bank's main office and two of its Jefferson County
branches are located in Watertown, the Jefferson
County seat. Dexter Bank is situated about 8 miles
from Watertown in the small community of Dexter.
The nearest offices of the parties are located about
8 miles apart with no banking alternatives in the
area separating Watertown and Dexter. Thus, it
appears that the proposed acquisition will eliminate
some direct competition between the parties in
Jefferson County.
Eight commercial banks maintain offices in Jefferson County. Charter Bank, with 34.8 percent of
total county deposits, ranks second and Dexter
Bank, with 2.8 percent of total county deposits,
ranks fourth. Jefferson County is a highly concentrated banking market. The two largest of the
eight banks with offices in the county hold 83 percent of total county deposits and the top four banks
hold more than 92 percent. Consummation of the
proposed acquisition would increase Charter Bank's
share of the Jefferson County market to more than
37 percent and increase the share of the two largest

banks from 83 percent to 85.8 percent.
The proposed transaction would eliminate some
existing competition and increase banking con-

centration in Jefferson County. We therefore conclude that the proposed acquisition will have an
adverse effect on competition.

CITIZENS FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF RIDGEWOOD, RIDGEWOOD, NJ. AND PASCACK VALLEY BANK AND
TRUST COMPANY, HILLSDALE, NJ.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Pascack Valley Bank and Trust Company, Hillsdale, N.J., with
and Citizens First National Bank of Ridgewood, Ridgewood, N.J. (11759), which had
merged Nov. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (11759) and title "Citizens First National Bank of New Jersey." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On June 22,1973, Pascack Valley Bank and Trust
Company, Hillsdale, N.J., and Citizens First National Bank of Ridgewood, Ridgewood, NJ., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with
the title, "Citizens First National Bank of New
Jersey."
Citizens First National Bank of Ridgewood, the
charter bank, was established in 1920 and now
operates 13 branch offices. It has total assets of
$187 million and IPC deposits of $147.5 million.
The primary service area of the bank is the northwestern portion of Bergen County including the
municipalities of Mahwah, Ramsey, Upper Saddle
River, Saddle River, Allendale, Walkwick, Franklin
Lakes, Wyckoff, Midland Park, Ho-Ho-Kus, Ridgewood, Glen Rock, and Oakland, and the Passaic
County community of Hawthorne. That area has a
population of approximately 134,000 persons.
The charter bank ranks fifth in deposit size
among the 28 commercial banks headquartered in
Bergen County and is 16th in size among 88 commercial banks in the First Banking District of
New Jersey. Competition for the bank is provided
primarily by the larger banks in Bergen County
including Peoples Trust of New Jersey, Hackensack, with deposits of $976 million, the lead bank
in United Jersey Banks; National Community
Bank of Rutherford, with deposits of $504 million;
Garden State National Bank, Hackensack, with
deposits of $417 million; and Citizens National
Bank, Tenafly, with deposits of $251 million.
Pascack Valley Bank and Trust Company, the
merging bank, was organized in 1926 and now,



$40,590,487
193,249,436
233,839,922

To be
operated

2
14
16

with total assets of $40.6 million and IPC deposits
of $30 million, operates one branch in the Bergen
County community of Old Tappan. The service
area of the merging bank consists of the Pascack
Valley area of Bergen County which includes the
municipalities of Montvale, River Vale, Woodcliff
Lake, Hillsdale, Washington Township, Westwood,
Old Tappan, and Harrington Park, a combined
population of 65,100 persons.
The merging bank ranks tenth in size among the
28 commercial banks headquartered in Bergen
County and is the 37th largest of 88 banks in the
First Banking District of New Jersey. Competition
for the bank is provided by several banks including
Peoples Bank, Montvale, with deposits of $13 million, a member of United Jersey Banks; County
Trust Company, Tenafly, with deposits of $124
million; Citizens National Bank, Tenafly, with
deposits of $251 million, a member of Midlantic
Banks, Inc.; and Peoples Trust of New Jersey,
Hackensack, with deposits of $976 million, the
lead bank of United Jersey Banks.
Competition between the charter and merging
banks is minimal because their nearest offices are
approximately 6 miles apart and are geographically
separated by the Garden State Parkway which
serves as a man-made barrier between the areas
served by those offices.
Consummation of the proposed merger will allow
the resulting offices in Pascack Valley to offer
new and improved services to residents and businesses within its service area including a larger
lending limit, trust department services, a broader
range of savings plans, an alternative source of
municipal financing, and computer services. The
resulting bank, with deposits of $206 million, will

103

remain the fifth largest commercial bank in Bergen
County and will rank 14th by deposit size in the
First Banking District of New Jersey.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
OCTOBER 12,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Citizens First National Bank of Ridgewood
("Citizens Bank"), organized in 1920, operates its
head office in Ridgewood, Bergen County, N.J., and
a total of 13 branch offices, 12 in northwestern
Bergen County and 1 in adjoining Passaic County.
On March 31,1973, Citizens Bank held total deposits of $163.2 million (including IPC demand deposits of $51.2 million) and total loans and discounts
of $96.2 million. Its 1972 net current operating
income was $2.7 million, compared to its 1967-71
average of $2.2 million.
Pascack Valley Bank and Trust Company
("Pascack Bank"), organized in 1926, operates its
head office in Hillsdale, N.J., and one branch in
nearby Old Tappan, both in Bergen County.
On March 31, 1973, Pascack Bank held total
deposits of $36.3 million (including IPC demand
deposits of $9.8 million) and total loans and discounts of $22.3 million. Its 1972 net operating income was $360,000, compared to its 1967-71 average
of $211,000.
Bergen County is located in the northeastern
corner of New Jersey, bounded by Rockland County,
N.Y., to the north and by New York City and Westchester County, N.Y., to the east. The county is one
of the most populous and fastest growing in New

Jersey, total population having increased from
780,000 in 1960 to 898,000 in 1970. The northern
portion of the county, where both banks operate, is
the least populous portion, but is the fastest growing
and enjoys a higher average income than the county
as a whole. As the county grows, an increasing proportion of its residents also work there, instead of
commuting to New York City.
Citizens Bank's offices are concentrated in the
northwestern portion of Bergen County, while those
of Pascack Bank are in the northeastern portion.
The banks are separated by the Garden State Parkway. The head offices of the two banks, however,
are only about 7 miles apart and the closest offices
are only about 5 miles apart. Only a few banking
offices intervene between these offices of the two
banks. Thus, there is probably some existing competition between the two banks which would be eliminated by the merger.
Citizens Bank holds the fifth largest share of
total Bergen County commercial bank deposits,
6.1 percent. Pascack Bank's share is 1.4 percent.1
Thus, the resulting bank would hold 7.5 percent,
still fifth largest. The share held by the five largest
Bergen County banks would increase from 69.8
percent to 71.2 percent. This increase in concentration understates the effect of the merger in northern
Bergen County, however, where Citizens Bank operates more offices than any other bank. The merger
would enhance this leading position of Citizens
Bank in northern Bergen County. Thus, we conclude
that the proposed merger may have some adverse
effects on competition in northern Bergen County.
1
Most of the large, statewide or regional banking organizations operate in Bergen County, though some have relatively
small shares of total county deposits.

HIGHLAND NATIONAL BANK OF NEWBURGH, NEWBURGH, N.Y., AND FIRST NATIONAL BANK IN MONTGOMERY,
MONTGOMERY, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First National Bank in Montgomery, Montgomery, N.Y. (13559), with
and Highland National Bank of Newburgh, Newburgh, N.Y. (1106), which had
merged Nov. 30, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (1106). The merged bank at
date of merger had

104




$5,017,741
75,409,266
80,427,008

To be
operated

1
3

4

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 17, 1973, First National Bank in Montgomery, Montgomery, N.Y., and Highland National
Bank of Newburgh, Newburgh, N.Y., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the latter.
Highland National Bank of Newburgh, the charter
bank, was originally organized in 1834. The bank,
with assets of $69.4 million and IPC deposits of $57.4
million, operates two branch offices in addition to its
main office and has a branch application pending.
On November 30,1972, Highland National Bank became a member of United Bank Corporation of New
York, a multi-bank holding company with total assets of $1.4 billion. The holding company owns two
other banks, one located in New York State's Fourth
Banking District and the other located in New York
State's Ninth Banking District. Neither of those other
subsidiaries of United Bank Corporation of New
York competes with either the charter bank or the
merging bank.
Highland National Bank of Newburgh, with total
deposits of $62.2 million, is the second largest of 11
commercial banks headquartered in Orange County.
The charter bank's competition includes Columbus
Trust Company, Newburgh, with deposits of $31
million; The First National Bank of Highland, with
total deposits of $76 million, a member of First Empire State Corporation, a multi-bank holding company with deposits of $1.2 billion; The County Trust
Company, White Plains, with deposits of $988 million, a member of the Bank of New York Company,
Inc., a multi-bank holding company with deposits of
$2.7 billion; and The Chester National Bank, Chester, with deposits of $45 million, a member of Manufacturer's Hanover Corporation, a multi-bank holding company with deposits of $10.3 billion.
First National Bank in Montgomery, the merging
bank, has been operating as a unit bank since its
incorporation in 1905, and now has assets of $4.6
million and IPC deposits of $3.6 million. The active
management of the bank is supervised by its president, who is 67 years old and wishes to retire, and
by its cashier who may leave the bank soon. There
is no one else within the bank qualified to manage
it and all attempts to recruit management from the
outside have been unsuccessful.
First National Bank in Montgomery has total
deposits of $4 million, making it the smallest of the
11 commercial banks headquartered in Orange
County. The merging bank's competition comes pri


marily from Empire National Bank, Middle town, with
deposits of $431 million, and from Valley National
Bank, Wallkill, with deposits of $25 million.
The primary service area of Highland Bank of
Newburgh extends in approximately a 9-mile radius
from the city of Newburgh to serve an estimated
70,000 people. That area is urban in character and
the major employers are industry and the retail
trades. Much of the area's rapid growth can be
attributed to Newburgh's proximity to New York
City, 66 miles away, and to the increasing number
of area residents commuting to New York City
daily. The service area of First National Bank in
Montgomery extends in approximately a 6-mile
radius from the village of Montgomery to serve an
estimated 8,700 people. The service area consists
of the village of Montgomery and portions of the
towns of Montgomery and Crawford and the village
of Walden. The economy of the area is based upon
farming, light industry, and the service industries.
The area is rapidly becoming primarily residential
and surburban, and it is estimated that the village
of Montgomery will triple in size within the next
5 years.
Both the merger and charter banks are located
in the Third Banking District of New York. First
National Bank in Montgomery ranked smallest
among 44 commercial banks headquartered in the
district; Highland National Bank of Newburgh
ranked 12th. The resulting bank would rank 11th
in the district with $66 million in deposits.
Competition between the banks is insignificant
as the nearest offices are approximately 11 miles
apart. Consummation of this merger will stimulate
competition in the service area of the merging bank.
The head office protection afforded to First National
Bank in Montgomery under New York State law
will be eliminated thus opening the village of Montgomery to de novo branching by other banks. The
resulting bank will offer improved and expanded
services to residents of the Montgomery area including a larger lending limit, trust powers, equipment financing, lease financing, computer services,
and investment advisory services. None of those
services are provided in Montgomery at present,
but are available at the larger competitive banks.
The proposed merger would alleviate the management succession problem which presently exists
at First National Bank in Montgomery. In addition,
the resulting bank will not significantly increase its
position among other commercial banks operating
in the Third Banking District.

105

Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest.
This application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 30,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Highland National Bank of Newburgh ("Highland Bank") operates its head office and one branch
in Newburgh, N.Y., and one additional branch in
Village Gate, a few miles south of Newburgh,
all in Orange County. On December 31, 1972,
Highland Bank held total deposits of $62.3 million
(including IPC demand deposits of $21.7 million)
and total loans and discounts of $37.7 million. Highland Bank is one of three banks controlled by United
Bank Corporation, an upstate New York bank
holding company. The three banks controlled by
United Bank Corporation together held total deposits of $1.2 billion on December 31, 1972.
First National Bank in Montgomery ("Montgomery Bank") operates its only office in Montgomery, N.Y., also in Orange County, about 12
miles west of Newburgh. Montgomery Bank held
total deposits on December 31,1972, of $4.1 million
(including IPC demand deposits of $1.7 million)
and total loans and discounts of $2.4 million.
Newburgh (population 26,200) is located on the

Hudson River, 66 miles north of New York City.
Newburgh and Orange County are experiencing
rapid economic growth; total population of Orange
County increased from 184,000 to 221,000 during
the 1960's. Montgomery (population 1,500) is still
primarily rural, but is experiencing significant
residential growth.
The two banks are headquartered about 12 miles
apart in northeastern Orange County. Two banking
offices intervene between Montgomery Bank and
the closest office of Highland Bank. Thus, the
merger would eliminate some existing competition.
Nineteen commercial banks presently operate
offices in Orange County. On June 30, 1972, Highland Bank held the second largest share of total
deposits of all Orange County commercial banking
offices, 12.5 percent. Montgomery Bank is the smallest bank headquartered in Orange County, holding
1.0 percent of total county deposits. Thus, the
merger would increase Highland Bank's share of
county deposits from 12.5 percent to 13.5 percent,
and the share of total county deposits held by the
four largest banks in the county would increase
from 60.0 percent to 61.0 percent.
The proposed acquisition would eliminate some
existing competition and slightly increase banking
concentration in Orange County.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BETHEL, BETHEL, OHIO, AND THE AMELIA STATE BANK, AMELIA, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Amelia State Bank, Amelia, Ohio, with
and The First National Bank of Bethel, Bethel, Ohio (5627), which had
merged Dec. 1,1973, under charter of the latter bank (5627) and title "The First National Bank
of Bethel, Ohio." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 25,1973, The Amelia State Bank, Amelia,
Ohio, and The First National Bank of Bethel, Bethel,
Ohio, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the latter and with the title "The First National Bank of
Bethel, Ohio."
The Amelia State Bank, the merging bank, was
organized in 1910 and operates as a unit institution.
It possesses total assets of $4.1 million and IPC deposits of $3.2 million and is the smallest bank headquartered in Clermont County. The service area of

106




$4,892,479
6,640,958
11,494,091

To be
jperated

1
1
2

the merging bank encompasses portions of Batavia,
Pierce, Ohio, and Union Township in western Clermont County. That area, which has a population of
approximately 6,691 people, is primarily rural and
the inhabitants commute to industrial and office jobs
in Hamilton County.
The First National Bank of Bethel, the charter
bank, was organized in 1900 and also operates as a
unit institution. With total assets of $5.2 million and
IPC deposits of $3.7 million, the bank ranks second
smallest among the five banks located in Clermont
County. The service area of the charter bank, which
has a population of approximately 6,959 people, in-

eludes the village of Bethel and most of Tate Township in southeastern Clermont County. The economy
of that area is similar to that of the merging bank.
The three banks in Clermont County with which
the subject banks compete are Clermont National
Bank, which has deposits of $56.9 million and is an
affiliate of First Bane Group of Ohio, Inc.; Citizensbank National Bank, which has deposits of $14.3
million and is an affiliate of Bane Ohio Corporation;
and New Richmond National Bank, with deposits of
$6 million.
The subject banks are separated by approximately
9 miles, a distance which effectively inhibits
competition between them. Only a nominal number
of accounts are obtained by each bank from the
service area of the other.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
result in no adverse competitive effects. Rather,
the resulting bank will be better able to serve the
needs of western Clermont County, which is expected to expand rapidly when Interstate 275,
a reservoir and recreation area, a large shopping
center, and a nuclear power plant are constructed.
The resulting bank will have an increased lending
limit, more aggressive management, and improved
and expanded services, including monthly checking
statements, computerized accounting, and drive-in
windows, and will be capable of competing more

effectively with the larger banks in its service area.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the opinion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and will result in no adverse competitive effects. This is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 31,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The First National Bank of Bethel ("Bethel
Bank") operates its only office in Bethel, Clermont
County, Ohio. As of March 28, 1973, Bethel Bank
held total deposits of $4.3 million (including IPC
demand deposits of $3.3 million) and net loans and
discounts of $1J million.
Amelia State Bank ("Amelia Bank") operates a
single office in Amelia, also in Clermont County,
Ohio. As of March 28, 1973, Amelia Bank held
total deposits of $3.6 million (including IPC demand
deposits of $2 million) and net loans and discounts
of $1.6 million.
Both Amelia Bank and Bethel Bank operate in
Clermont County, Ohio, with their nearest offices
situated about 12 miles apart with no intervening
banks. Thus, it appears that the proposed merger
may eliminate some existing competition. However,
in view of the modest size of each of the merging
banks, the proposed transaction would not have
significant adverse competitive effects.

WACHOVIA BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, N.A.. WINSTON-SALEM, N.C.,
ELIZABETHTOWN, N.C.

AND BANK OF ELIZABETHTOWN,

Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Bank of Elizabethtown, Elizabethtown, N . C , with
and Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A., Winston-Salem, N.C. (15673), which had
merged Dec. 12, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (15673). The merged bank at
date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 9,1973, Bank of Elizabethtown, Elizabethtown, N.C, and Wachovia Bank and Trust Company,
N.A., Winston-Salem, N.C, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under
the charter and with the title of the latter.
Bank of Elizabethtown, the merging bank, was organized in 1907, and now operates three branch offices. It possesses total assets of $11 million and IPC
deposits of $8.6 million. The service area of the merg
550-906 O-LT - 75 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 8
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

$11,329,991
2,775,623,294
2,782,553,285

To be
operated

4
178
182

ing bank encompasses Bladen County, an agricultural area which has a population of approximately
26,477 people. Within "that area competition is generated by a branch of Bank of North Carolina, N.A.,
with deposits of $369 million; a branch of Waccamaw Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of
$104 million; and Bank of Bladenboro, with deposits
of $3.4 million.
Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A., the
charter bank, was organized in 1879 and is the main
subsidiary of Wachovia Corporation, a registered

107

bank holding company. With total assets of $2.7 billion and IPC deposits of $1.7 billion, it is the leading
bank in the southeastern section of the United States.
The bank operates 177 branches throughout North
Carolina.
The majority of the charter bank's business is generated from the Piedmont Crescent area of North
Carolina, wherein its competitors include Bank of
North Carolina, N.A.; First-Citizens Bank and Trust
Company, with deposits of $809 million; First Union
National Bank, with deposits of $1.3 billion; North
Carolina National Bank, with deposits of $2.2 billion;
The Northwestern Bank, with deposits of $769.6 million; American Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $105 million; and Central Carolina Bank
and Trust Company, with deposits of $225.7 million.
Little direct competition exists between the
subject banks. The limited amount of business
which the charter bank has acquired from Bladen
County is primarily business which the merging
bank is too small to handle. In addition, the closest
offices of the subject banks are separated by a
distance of approximately 24 miles and are located
in different counties.
Competition in Bladen County will be enhanced
by consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will offer a wide variety of expanded
and improved services including a full range of
deposit services, overdraft checking, a credit card
plan, trust services, tax services, and a larger lending limit. Also, the management succession problem
of the merging bank will be resolved. The infusion
of new services and additional resources will be
beneficial in stimulating the static economic development of Bladen County.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and will result in no adverse com-

petitive effects. This application is, therefore,
approved.
NOVEMBER 12,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A.
("Wachovia"), is the largest commercial banking
organization in North Carolina. It operates 167
offices throughout the State and holds approximately
21 percent of total statewide deposits. As of December 31, 1972, it held total deposits of $2.3 billion
(including IPC demand deposits of $804.9 million)
and loans and discounts of $1.5 billion.
Bank of Elizabethtown ("Bank") operates its
main office in the small community of Elizabethtown
(Bladen County) and three branches in surrounding
Bladen County. As of December 31, 1972, it held
total deposits of $9.8 million (including IPC demand deposits of $5.2 million) and loans and discounts of $3.9 million.
Wachovia maintains no offices in Bladen County;
the nearest offices of the parties are approximately
24 miles apart. Although Wachovia draws some
business from Bladen County, it appears that the
proposed acquisitions would eliminate only a limited
amount of existing competition.
Wachovia could legally establish de novo branches
in Elizabethtown and Bladen County. And Bank,
with approximately 31.5 percent of total Bladen
County deposits, is the largest of four banks situated
in that county. However, the small size of the
communities served by Bank, the decline in Bladen
County population and the existence of other significant potential entrants into this market diminish
the effect of the proposed transaction on potential
competition.
We conclude that the proposed acquisition
would not have a substantial competitive impact.

AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK, BAKERSFIELD, CALIF., AND NATIONAL BANK OF AGRICULTURE, FRESNO, CALIF.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

National Bank of Agriculture, Fresno, Calif. (11330), with
and American National Bank, Bakersfield, Calif. (15437), which had
merged Dec. 17, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (15437). The merged bank at
date of merger had

108




$28,593,405
115,775,269
146,846,361

To be
operated

5
17
22

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On August 1, 1973, National Bank of Agriculture,
Fresno, Calif., and American National Bank, Bakersfield, Calif., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter and
with the title of the latter.
American National Bank, the charter bank, was
organized in 1964 under the title of Bakersfield National Bank and now operates 15 branch offices with
assets of $97.2 million and IPC deposits of $76.6 million. The service area of the charter bank encompasses the Greater Metropolitan Bakersfield Area,
with an estimated population of 200,000 persons; the
Antelope Valley in northern Los Angeles County,
with an estimated population of 50,000 persons; an
agricultural area situated in the central coastal section of the State, with an estimated population of
5,000 persons; and the mid-San Joaquin Valley area
extending from Tulare and Porterville in the south
to Madera in the north, with an estimated population
of 260,000 persons.
The charter bank presently competes with 112
banking offices in its service area, many of which
are branches of large statewide banking institutions.
The principal competitors of the charter bank include Bank of America, NT&SA, which has deposits
of $33.3 billion; Crocker National Bank, which has
deposits of $6.2 billion; and Security Pacific Bank,
which has deposits of $10 billion.
National Bank of Agriculture, the merging bank,
was organized in 1964 under the title of Valley National Bank of Delano. It now operates five branch
offices, with approval to open a sixth, and has total
assets of $24.5 million and total IPC deposits of $19
million. The service area of the merging bank ranges
over an area extending from Bakersfield in the south,
300 miles north to the city of Sacramento, Calif.,
with an estimated population of 721,000 persons.
The merging bank presently competes with 129
banking offices, mainly branches, of large statewide
banking institutions. Competition is primarily
provided by the three banks which have been
cited as the major competitors of the charter bank.
No competition exists between National Bank of
Agriculture and American National Bank in the
areas of the Delano, Caruthers, and Sacramento
branch offices of the merging bank. A question may
arise, however, in regard to the Fresno and Bakersfield branch offices of those two banks because their
offices in those areas are separated by distances of
6 miles and 0.5 mile, respectively.



The competitive situation between the charter
and merging banks in the Fresno and Bakersfield
areas must be viewed in light of the particular
competitive structure of the California banking
industry. California law permits statewide branching with no limitations as to geography. The State's
vast geographic area, its population growth and
its dynamic economic expansion have all contributed to the existing banking structure. The resulting
situation has been an extensive proliferation of
over 3,000 offices operated by a group of 151 banks.
In the immediate vicinity of Fresno there are
47 banking offices. The charter and merging banks
each operate one. Thirty-six of the banking offices
in the Fresno area are operated by major, multibillion dollar statewide banks indicating that distance of separation alone is not the sole criterion
by which to assess competitive interplay. The 6
miles separating the subject banking offices
in Fresno is a relatively large distance in an area of
such intensive banking saturation. The Fresno
branch office of American National Bank is located
in the extreme northern portion of the city while
the Fresno head office of National Bank of Agriculture is located in the heart of the city indicating
that those offices obtain their business from completely distinct communities.
The Bakersfield area also typifies the intensive
competitive structure of the commercial banking
industry in California. It has 35 banking offices, 19
of which are operated by major statewide banks.
In that area American National Bank operates three
offices, one, its head office, is situated approximately
one-half mile from the Bakersfield branch office of
National Bank of Agriculture. Any significant
physical proximity of those two offices is considerably lessened by the fact that within the downtown area of 24 square city blocks there are nine
commercial banking offices operating. Three of
those provide an effective competitive buffer zone
between the offices of the charter and merging
banks. Within that intervening area is one branch
office each of Security Pacific National Bank,
Bank of America, NT&SA, and Community National Bank. The four other commercial banks with
one branch each operating within the immediate
vicinity are Wells Fargo National Bank, Crocker
National Bank, United California Bank, and California Republic Bank. Therefore, an adequate
number of large alternative banking facilities
operate in the intervening distance, inhibiting
competition between the closest two offices of the

109

charter and merging banks. The other two Bakersfield offices of the charter bank are situated 3
miles northeast and 3 miles southwest of the merging bank branch office, respectively, and serve
totally distinct communities.
In addition to the noncompetitive situation existing between the charter and merging banks in Fresno
and Bakersfield which has been created by the intensive nature of California banking activity, National Bank of Agriculture has been a less than viable competitor in the service areas it shares with
the charter bank. That the merging bank is financially unable to open its approved office in Modesto
and is currently suffering from a lack of effective
senior management and persistent operating losses
is indicative of that fact.
Consummation of the proposed merger will create
a bank with a more effective management capacity
and the ability to offer a wider range of economical
banking services to residents and businessmen in
the respective service areas. Drawing on the greater
financial resources of the charter bank, the resulting
bank will avoid the probable stagnation presently
facing the merging bank and will ably resume vigorous competition with its larger banking competitors.
Therefore, the elimination of one banking institution
in the Bakersfield and Fresno areas will not result
in any adverse competitive effects. The resulting
bank will have a greater diversity of assets and will
serve a larger area of California which will make it

less subject to local fluctuations and better able to
compete with larger banks which in turn would benefit the public.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and this
application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 16,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The competitive effects of this proposed merger
are limited largely to the cities of Bakersfield and
Fresno, the only banking markets in which both parties maintain banking offices. Ten banking organizations presently operate 41 offices in Bakersfield.
American National, with 3.7 percent of total city deposits, ranked fourth among these ten institutions
as of June 30, 1972. NBA, with 0.4 percent of city
deposits, ranked tenth as of that date.
In Fresno, ten banking institutions operate 36 offices. American National ranked tenth among the ten
Fresno banks with 0.4 percent of city deposits as of
June 30,1972, and NBA, with 0.7 percent of city deposits, ranked ninth.
The proposed merger would eliminate some existing competition between the parties in Bakersfield
and in Fresno. However, it does not appear that concentration in commercial banking would be substantially increased in either of these banking markets.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed merger
would not have a substantial competitive impact.

CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK IN POCOMOKE CITY, POCOMOKE CITY, MD., AND BANK OF CRISFIELD,
CRISFIELD, MD.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Bank of Crisfield, Crisfield, Md., with
and Citizens National Bank in Pocomoke City, Pocomoke City, Md., (14106), which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14106) and title "The Eastern Shore
National Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 4, 1973, Bank of Crisfield, Crisfield, Md., and Citizens National Bank in Pocomoke
City, Pocomoke City, Md., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and with the title
"The Eastern Shore National Bank."
Citizens National Bank in Pocomoke City, the

110



$17,097,116
13,475,011
30,572,126

To be
operated

3
1
4

charter bank, was organized in 1903 and now
operates as a unit institution with an application
currently pending to establish its first branch office
in Pocomoke City. The service area of the bank
includes portions of Worcester and Somerset
counties in Maryland and Accomack County in
Virginia, with an estimated population of 9,000
persons.
The charter bank, with assets of $12 million and

IPC deposits of $10.4 million, ranks 72nd in size
among the 112 banks in Maryland. A majority of
the outstanding voting shares of the bank is owned
by Financial General Bankshares, Inc., a multibank holding company controlling subsidiaries
in Maryland, Virginia, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, New
York, Tennessee, the Virgin Islands, and the
District of Columbia.
Competition for the charter bank is primarily
provided by Maryland National Bank, Baltimore,
with deposits of $1.2 billion. Additional competition is provided by The First National Bank of
Snow Hill, Snow Hill, Md., with deposits of $8.7
million.
Bank of Crisfield, the merging bank, was organized in 1893, and now operates a total of three
banking offices with assets of $16.1 million and
IPC deposits of $12.7 million. The service area of
the merging bank encompasses the southern
portion of Somerset County, Md.
The4 merging bank ranks 40th in size among
Maryland banks, and the majority of its outstanding
voting shares is controlled by Financial General
Bankshares, Inc. The primary competitor for the
bank is Bank of Somerset, Princess Anne, with
deposits of $23 million, an affiliate of Mercantile
Bankshares, Inc., a multi-bank holding company
headquartered in Baltimore.
There is minimal competition between the charter
and merging banks because their closest two offices
are separated by relatively large distances and an

adequate number of alternative banking facilities
operate in the intervening area. The closest offices
of these two banks are approximately 14 miles
apart. In addition, Financial General Bankshares,
Inc. controls both the charter and merging banks.
In view of that close affiliation, the subject application represents a corporate reorganization of
commonly owned assets the purpose of which is
to effectuate certain economies in operation and to
help alleviate an asset problem at the merging bank.
Consummation of the proposed merger will stimulate competition in the service area of the resulting
bank because customers will be afforded greater
depth of management and newly expanded trust
services among other benefits. Since the proposed
merger is merely a corporate reorganization,
Financial General Bankshares, Inc. will experience
no change in its size or rank among Maryland
banking organizations.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest,
and this application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 29,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The merging banks are both majority-owned
subsidiaries of the same registered bank holding
company. As such, their proposed merger is
essentially a corporate reorganization and would
have no effect on competition.

CROCKER NATIONAL BANK, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., AND IMPERIAL VALLEY NATIONAL BANK, EL CENTRO,
CALIF.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Imperial Valley National Bank, El Centro, Calif., (15557), with
was purchased Dec. 31, 1973, by Crocker National Bank, San Francisco, Calif. (1741), which
had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On August 22, 1973, Crocker National Bank,
San Francisco, Calif., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to purchase the
assets and assume the liabilities of Imperial Valley
National Bank, El Centro, Calif., under the charter
and title of the former.



$22,120,019

3

7345,630,150
7367,750,169

To be
operated

360
363

Crocker National Bank, the purchasing bank,
was formed in 1870 and, on the date of filing, with
291 branches in California, had assets of $6.1
billion and IPC deposits of $3.9 billion. The bank
is a subsidiary of Crocker National Corporation,
a registered bank holding company.
The service area of Crocker National Bank extends through large portions of California, and the

111

bank competes with all major California banking
systems as well as with many of the smaller banks
located within its service area. However, none of
its 291 branches are located in Imperial County
where the selling bank is located. The economy
of the service area is diverse, supported by agriculture, industry, finance, lumbering, fishing,
tourism, mining, oil production, manufacturing,
military establishments, and retail trade.
Imperial Valley National Bank, the selling bank,
was organized in 1965. Besides its main office in
El Centro, the selling bank has a branch in Brawley,
13 miles to the north, and one in Calexico, 12 miles
to the south of El Centro. The bank, with assets of
$22.8 million and IPC deposits of $15.6 million,
has experienced moderate growth under conservative lending policies but is suffering from inadequate
capitalization at the present time.
The service area of Imperial Valley National Bank
includes most of Imperial County but is concentrated in the commercial centers of Brawley,
Calexico, and El Centro. The estimated population
of the service area is 55,000 persons and its economy
is supported primarily by agriculture and livestock
production.
Competition for the merging bank is provided by
five branches of the $33.3 billion deposit Bank of
American National Trust and Savings Association, San Francisco; three branches of the $10.0
billion deposit Security Pacific National Bank,
Los Angeles; one branch of the $7.4 billion deposit
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, San
Francisco; and three branches of the $5.7 billion
deposit United California Bank, Los Angeles.
There is no competition between the purchasing
and selling banks because their nearest offices
are 97 miles apart, and an adequate number of
competitors operate in the intervening distance.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
directly benefit customers of Imperial Valley
National Bank by providing more competitive services in the areas of international banking, trusts,
credit cards, and extensive electronic data process-

112




ing, as well as by providing a significantly larger
lending limit. Furthermore, problems of management and capitalization at the merging bank will
be alleviated and the resulting bank will become a
more effective competitor against the larger banks
within its service area.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 30,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Crocker is the fourth largest bank in California
and currently operates a network of 291 offices located in most of the principal economic areas of California. Its nearest office (in Riverside County) is
approximately 97 miles from the nearest branch of
Imperial Bank. The amount of direct competition
between the two banks is minimal.
The economy of Imperial County in southeastern
California (which is served by the bank sought to be
acquired) is based on agriculture, principally through
irrigation, and is noted for its productivity and high
cash farm value. In addition to the current high level
of its economy Imperial County possesses significant
potential for further economic growth due to the increase in farm prices generally, increased per acre
output, shifts to higher value crops, substantial increase in cattle production, and current research
and development of geothermal resources of heated
underground water resources.
By entering Imperial County in the manner proposed, rather than by de novo branching, Crocker
will be acquiring the third largest of the five banks
in the county and the only existing independent
bank in the area which, since its organization in
1965, has had a demonstrably favorable record in
terms of growth and profitability. It currently holds
approximately 10 percent of total deposits in the
county. In view of the growth potential in the area,
the proposed acquisition would, in our view, have
some adverse competitive effects.

CUMBERLAND COUNTY NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, NEW CUMBERLAND, PA., AND THE CITIZENS
NATIONAL BANK OF NEWPORT, NEWPORT, PA.

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
To be
operation operated

$5,086,415

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 11, 1973, The Citizens National
Bank of Newport, Newport, Pa., and Cumberland
County National Bank and Trust Company, New
Cumberland, Pa., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
and with the title of the latter.
Cumberland County National Bank and Trust
Company, the charter bank, was organized in 1904.
The bank, with assets of $177.4 million and IPC deposits of $129.5 million, presently operates 16 offices
with two others approved but as yet unopened. With
total deposits of $155 million, it is the sixth largest
bank in its four-county service area.
Competition for the Cumberland County National
Bank and Trust Company is provided by National
Central Bank, Lancaster, with deposits of $685 million; The Commonwealth National Bank, Harrisburg,
with deposits of $455 million; the Dauphin Deposit
Bank and Trust Company, Harrisburg, with deposits
of $301 million; The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, with deposits of $199 million; and the Pennsylvania National Bank and Trust Company, Pottsville, with deposits of $177 million.
The Citizens National Bank of Newport, the merging bank, was chartered in 1905. The bank, with assets of $4.9 million and IPC deposits of $3.9 million,
is operated as a unit bank. The bank's president
plans to retire in the near future and the question of
finding a successor raises a serious problem for the
bank.
The merging bank with total deposits of $4.6
million has not provided aggressive competition
for its sole rival, The First National Bank of Newport, a bank with total deposits of $6.2 million.
The failure of the merging bank to pay competitive
rates for savings and time deposits and its declining
share of the market are evidence.
The primary service area of The Citizens National
Bank of Newport is confined to the city of Newport



1

182,741,424

The Citizens National Bank of Newport, Newport, Pa. (7716), with
and Cumberland County National Bank and Trust Company, New Cumberland, Pa. (14542),
which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (14542). The merged bank at
date of merger had

15

187,839,523

16

and the northeastern portion of Perry County, an
area dominated by agricultural pursuits. The service
area of the charter bank consists of the eastern half
of Cumberland County, southwestern Dauphin
County, east-central Adams County, and northern
York County, which is very ably supported by a
wide array of medium and light industry, governmental bodies, military installations, and service
organizations, as well as agriculture. The rate of
unemployment is very low.
At present The Citizens National Bank of Newport provides very little competition for any other
bank. The 19 miles between this unit bank and the
nearest branch of The Cumberland County National
Bank and Trust Company as well as the three alternative banks in between make competition between
the two banks very unlikely in such a rural area.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
provide much needed stimulation in the service
area of the merging bank. The resulting bank will
offer improved and expanded services to the residents of the Newport area including drive-in
banking, extended banking hours, a credit card
plan, a significantly larger lending limit, trust
powers, and the ability to provide more sophisticated
agricultural services. The merger, while solving the
foreseeable management problems of the merging
bank, will not significantly change the size of the
charter bank or its position in the area it presently
serves.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 30,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Bank's Newport (Perry County) office is located
about 15 miles from Applicant's nearest branch,
with 4 competitive alternatives in the intervening
area. Thus, it appears that the proposed acquisition
would eliminate only a limited amount of existing

113

competition. Although Applicant could legally
establish de novo offices in Perry County, the
relatively modest market position of Bank and its
small absolute size diminish the effect of this

transaction on potential competition.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed acquisition would not have a substantial competitive
impact.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF SOUTH CAROLINA, COLUMBIA, S.C., AND THE SECURITY BANK, EDGEFIELD, S.C.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Security Bank, Edgefield, S.C, with
and First National Bank of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C. (13720), which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter and title oi the latter bank (13720). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 3, 1973, The Security Bank, Edgefield, S.C, and First National Bank of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C, applied to the Comptroller of
the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter and with the title of the latter.
First National Bank of South Carolina, the charter
bank, was organized in 1933. That bank, with assets
of $384 million and IPC deposits of $264 million, operates 56 offices throughout the State of South
Carolina.
The charter bank has total deposits of $314 million and is the third largest bank in South Carolina.
Competition is provided statewide by South Carolina
National Bank, with deposits of $665 million; Citizens and Southern National Bank of South Carolina,
with deposits of $430 million; and Bankers Trust of
South Carolina, with deposits of $267 million.
The Security Bank, the merging bank, was chartered in 1933 and, with assets of $7 million and IPC
deposits of $5 million, operates one branch office.
Its board chairman is the only effective source of
managerial advice and he has planned his retirement
for the near future.
The Security Bank has total deposits of $6 million
and provides service for an area within a 10-mile
radius of Edgefield, S.C. Farmers and Merchants
Bank, Aiken, S.C, with a branch one block south of
merging bank and deposits of $36 million; Bankers
Trust of South Carolina, Columbia, S.C, with deposits of $267 million; and Bank of Trenton, Trenton,
S.C, with deposits of $9 million, all compete within
that service area. The merging bank is currently
finding it difficult to serve the needs of this area due
to its small size and inability to provide the banking

114




$8,544,771
467,861,074
473,849,177

To be
operated

2
54

56

services usually available from a larger bank.
The service area of The Security Bank is experiencing expansion of its manufacturing and
service related industries and a decline in the
employment of agricultural laborers. This area
lies in Edgefield County which has experienced a
decline in population over the* past 30 years. Manufacturing and service industries have checked this
decline in recent years and the banking needs they
have created in the area cannot be supplied by the
merging bank due to its limited resources. Customers must turn to banks in other areas of the State
and some to other states to meet their needs.
There is no direct competition between charter
bank and merging bank as the nearest branch of
First National Bank of South Carolina is 45 miles
northeast of Edgefield.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
provide experienced managerial advice for the
resulting branch in Edgefield County and will
allow it to provide many needed services to local
residents and businesses. Those new services will
include a significantly larger lending limit, a highly
specialized installment loan department offering
automobile, personal, mobile home, home improvement, and other installment loans; a highly developed trust department offering investment
services, corporate trusts, estate administration,
testamentary trusts, and tax services, and inhouse
computer services now unavailable in the area.
As a result of this proposal, the total resources of
the charter bank will not be significantly affected
and competition on a statewide basis will not be
altered.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded

that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 29,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The nearest offices of the parties are separated
by a distance of about 55 miles. Thus, it appears
that the proposed merger will eliminate little if
any existing competition. FNB could legally estab-

lish de novo offices in the area served by Security
Bank. However, because of the size and nature of
the community served by Security Bank and the
number of other potential entrants, we conclude
that the proposed acquisition will not eliminate
substantial potential competition.
Therefore, we conclude that the proposed transaction would not have a substantial competitive
impact.

MID-AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, NORTHWOOD, OHIO, AND THE GRAND RAPIDS
BANKING COMPANY, GRAND RAPIDS, OHIO
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Grand Rapids Banking Company, Grand Rapids, Ohio, with
and Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company Northwood, Ohio (15416), which
had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (15416). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On May 4,1973, The Grand Rapids Banking Company, Grand Rapids, Ohio, and Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company, Northwood, Ohio,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter and with the
title of the latter.
Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company,
the charter bank, was organized in 1952 and possesses assets of $60.9 million and IPC deposits of $37.8
million. The bank is headquartered in Northwood,
Ohio, and operates five branches in Wood County,
two branches in Toledo in Lucas County, and has
received authorization to open three additional offices in Wood County.
The service area of the charter bank encompasses
central and eastern Wood County and the city of
Toledo in Lucas County. The economy of that area
is based upon various factors, including manufacturing, agriculture, a State university, and the port
of Toledo. Competition is provided by the large
banks located in Toledo, including First National
Bank, with deposits of $265 million; The Ohio Citizens Trust Company, with deposits of $258 million;
and Toledo Trust Company, with deposits of $479
million which is a member of Northwest Ohio Baneshares, Inc.; and by banks headquartered in Wood
County such as Bank of Wood County, Bowling



To be
operated

$9,545,801
60,958,604
70,504,405

11

Green, with deposits of $67.7 million which is a member of Huntington Bancshares Incorporated; and
branches of Tri-County National Bank, Fostoria,
with deposits of $57.9 million which is a member of
Society Corporation Bank.
The Grand Rapids Banking Company, the
merging bank, was organized in 1900 and operates
one branch in Weston. The bank has total assets
of $9.5 million and IPC deposits of $7.9 million.
The president of the merging bank is nearing
retirement age and a management succession
problem is anticipated.
The merging bank's service area, which is confined to the northwestern portion of Wood County
and to small parts of Henry and Lucas counties,
is economically dependent on agriculture. Competition is afforded by banks in Wood and Henry
counties, including Farmers State Bank, McClure,
with deposits of $6.3 million, and The Custar
State Bank, Custar, with deposits of $4.5 million.
Since many of the area's residents commute to
Toledo, the large banks in that city also engender
competition.
The merging bank and the charter bank experience little competitive overlap. Their closest
offices are separated by a distance of 11 miles,
and a sufficient number of alternative banking
offices are located in the intervening area. The

115

number of accounts which each draws from the
service area of the other is nominal.
Consummation of the proposed transaction
will not adversely affect competition but will enhance it. The resulting bank will be better able to
serve the merging bank's customers because a
significantly larger lending limit will be available and
new and expanded services will be offered, such
as a credit card plan, trust services, automated
bookkeeping of deposits, real estate mortgages,
and personal loans. The management succession
problem of the merging bank will also be resolved.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed transaction is in
the public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
OCTOBER 18,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

Mid-American National Bank ("Applicant") was
established on March 1, 1973, by the consolidation
of The First National Bank of Bowling Green and
Progress National Bank of Toledo. Applicant oper-

116




ates its main office in Northwood, Wood County,
Ohio and nine branch offices dispersed throughout
Wood and Lucas counties, Ohio. On December 31,
1972, Applicant held total deposits of $65.4 million
(including IPC demand deposits of approximately
$11 million) and total consolidated loans of $42.3
million.
The Grand Rapids Banking Company ("Grand
Rapids Bank") operates its main office in Grand
Rapids, Wood County, Ohio and its single branch
office in nearby Weston, Ohio, also in Wood County.
On December 31, 1972, Grand Rapids Bank held
total deposits of $8.5 million (including IPC demand
deposits of $2.1 million) and total loans of $5.8 million.
Applicant and Grand Rapids Bank are both headquartered in Wood County, one of the three counties
comprising the Toledo, Ohio SMS A. The nearest
offices of the parties are situated about 11 miles
apart. Thus, the proposed acquisition would eliminate some existing competition in Wood County and,
to a lesser extent, in the Greater Toledo Area. However, it appears that no significant increase in concentration would occur in any appropriate market
as a result of the proposed acquisition.

//.

Mergers consummated, pursuant to corporate reorganization

AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF CHATTANOOGA, CHATTANOOGA, TENN., AND
AMERICAN BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, CHATTANOOGA, TENN.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
American National Bank and Trust Company of Chattanooga, Chattanooga, Tenn. (14611),
with
and American Bank National Association, Chattanooga, Tenn. (14611), which had
merged Jan. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14611) and title "American National
Bank and Trust Company of Chattanooga." The merged bank at date of merger had
...

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 21, 1972, American National Bank
and Trust Company of Chattanooga, Chattanooga,
Tenn., and American Bank National Association
(organizing), Chattanooga, Tenn., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
American National Bank and Trust Company of
Chattanooga, the merging bank, was chartered in
1912, and currently operates 18 branches in
Hamilton County, Tenn. The merging bank has
assets of $319 million and IPC deposits of $200
million.
American Bank National Association, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the merging bank to
the American National Corporation which will
become a one-bank holding company when it
acquires the resulting bank. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.

$380,943,738
239,957

To be
operated

19
0
19

381,183,695

Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same locations and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 20,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which American National Bank and Trust Company
of Chattanooga would become a subsidiary of
American National Corporation, a bank holding
company. The instant merger, however, would
merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving bank by American
National Corporation, it would have no effect on
competition.

NATIONAL BANK OF DETROIT, DETROIT, MICH., AND DETROIT NATIONAL BANK, DETROIT, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

National Bank of Detroit, Detroit, Mich. (13671), with
and Detroit National Bank, Detroit, Mich. (13671), which had
merged Jan. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13671) and title "National Bank of Detroit." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 28,1972, National Bank of Detroit,
Detroit, Mich., and Detroit National Bank (organiz


$5,456,605,341
249,500
5,456,612,541

To be
operated

108
0
108

ing), Detroit, Mich., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title of the former.
National Bank of Detroit, the merging bank, was

117

organized in 1933, and operates 106 branches with
total assets of $5.7 billion and IPC deposits of $3
billion.
Detroit National Bank, the charter bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership
of the merging bank to National Detroit Corporation
which will become a one-bank holding company upon
its acquisition of the resulting bank. The charter
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to this merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same

name as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and the
application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 27,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which National Bank of Detroit would become a subsidiary of National Detroit Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would
merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by National Detroit
Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

SAN ANGELO NATIONAL BANK OF SAN ANGELO, SAN ANGELO, TEX.,
AND CAPITAL NATIONAL BANK, SAN ANGELO, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
San Angelo National Bank of San Angelo, San Angelo, Tex. (13587), with
and Capital National Bank, San Angelo, Tex. (13587), which had
merged Jan. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13587) and title "San Angelo National
Bank of San Angelo." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 5,1972, the San Angelo National Bank
of San Angelo, San Angelo, Tex. and the Capital
National Bank (organizing), San Angelo, Tex.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the latter and
with the title of the former.
San Angelo National Bank of San Angelo, the
merging bank is headquartered in San Angelo and
is a unit bank. This bank, with total resources of
$76.7 million and IPC deposits of $49.4 million was
chartered originally in 1932.
Capital National Bank, the charter bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership
of the merging bank to Texas Commerce Baneshares, Inc. The charter bank will not be operating
as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there

118




$94,882,876
240,000

To be
operated

1
0

95,122,876

1

can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same location and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 24,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which.Capital National Bank (org.) would become a
subsidiary of Texas Commerce Bancshares, Inc.,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Texas Commerce Bancshares, Inc., it would have no
effect on competition.

THE NILES NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, NILES, MICH., AND AMERICAN BANK
OF NILES, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, NILES, MICH.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Niles National Bank and Trust Company, Niles, Mich. (15822), with
and American Bank of Niles, National Association, Niles, Mich. (15822), which had
merged Jan. 8, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15822) and title "The Niles National
Bank and Trust Company." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 20, 1972, The Niles National Bank
and Trust Company, Niles, Mich., and the American
Bank of Niles, National Association (organizing),
Niles, Mich., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title of the former.
The Niles National Bank and Trust Company, the
merging bank, is headquartered in Niles, and has
one office which is located in Niles. This bank, with
total resources of $4.9 million and IPC deposits of
$2.4 million, was chartered originally in 1970.
American Bank of Niles, National Association,
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank to
the American National Holding Company. The
charter bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same locations and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank. Since no
competition presently exists nor is likely to exist
between the resulting bank; the holding company's

$6,903,577
120,000

To be
operated

2
0

7,023,577

2

subsidiary, American National Bank and Trust
Company of Kalamazoo; or the holding company's
two affiiliates, The American Bank of Three Rivers,
National Association, and The American National
Bank in Portage, because Michigan banking law
restricts branching to within 25 miles of the home
office of the parent bank and prohibits branching
into any city or village in which a State or National
bank or branch thereof is then in operation, acquisition of the resulting bank by the holding company
will not reduce or eliminate any existing or potential
competition.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 8,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Niles National Bank and Trust Company
would become a subsidiary of American National
Holding Company, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by American National Holding Company, it would have no effect on competition.

SECOND NATIONAL BANK OF SAGINAW, SAGINAW, MICH., AND THE SECOND BANK
OF SAGINAW, N.A., SAGINAW, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Second National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw, Mich. (1918), with
and The Second Bank of Saginaw, N.A., Saginaw, Mich. (1918), which had
merged Jan. 22,1973, under charter of the latter bank (1918) and title "Second National Bank
of Saginaw." The merged bank at date of merger had




$269,596,054
252,581
269,600,673

To be
operated

15
0
15

119

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On Septembei 1, 1972, The Second Bank of Saginaw, N.A. (organizing), Saginaw, Mich., and the
Second National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw, Mich.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the former
and with the title of the latter.
Second National Bank of Saginaw, the merging
bank, is headquartered in Saginaw, and has 14
offices located throughout Saginaw and its environs.
The bank, with total resources of $250.2 million and
IPC deposits of $192.4 million, was chartered originally in 1871.
The Second Bank of Saginaw, N.A. (organizing),
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank to the
Century Financial Corporation of Michigan which
will then become a one-bank holding company. The
charter bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same
name as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 15,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Second National Bank of Saginaw would
become a subsidiary of Century Financial Corporation of Michigan, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by Century Financial Corporation
of Michigan, it would have no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HIGHLAND, HIGHLAND, N.Y., AND THE SECOND
NATIONAL BANK OF HIGHLAND, HIGHLAND, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Highland, Highland, N.Y. (5336), with
and The Second National Bank of Highland, Highland, N.Y. (5336), which had
merged Jan. 26, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (5336) and title "The First National
Bank of Highland." The merged bank at date of merger had
r

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On November 8,1972, The Second National Bank
of Highland (organizing), Highland, N.Y., and The
First National Bank of Highland, Highland, N.Y.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the former
and with the title of the latter.
The First National Bank of Highland, the merging bank, was originally opened in 1900, and is
currently eighth in size of the 43 commercial banks
operating in the Third Banking District of New
York. It is the largest of six commercial banks headquartered in Ulster County. The bank, with assets
of $70 million and deposits of $63 million, is located
approximately 75 miles north of New York City and
operates five offices within the three-county area of

120




$83,776,755
70,770
83,847,525

To be
operated

6
0
6

Ulster, Orange, and Dutchess counties. In addition, the merging bank has received permission to
establish a branch in its head office village. The total
population of thisfive-officeservice area is approximately 180,000 persons.
The Second National Bank of Highland, the charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the merging bank to
First Empire State Corporation. The charter bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior
to this merger.
First Empire State Corporation, Buffalo, N.Y.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, was organized in 1969 and is currently the
11th largest of 14 bank holding companies headquartered in New York State. This bank holding
company, controlling deposits of $1.1 billion, has

two subsidiaries at present, viz., the Manufacturers
and Traders Trust Company, Buffalo, its principal
subsidiary, and the First Empire Bank-New York,
New York City, which specializes in wholesale commercial banking and international operations. Those
subsidiaries operate in the ninth and second banking districts, respectively.
Competition between First Empire State Corporation's subsidiaries and the merging bank is minimal.
Empire First Bank-New York is not only located
60 miles from the Newburg office of The First
National Bank of Highland but also does not solicit
or conduct retail banking services as does the merging bank. The closest office of Manufacturers and
Traders Trust Company is 285 road miles from the
nearest office of the merging bank; that distance
effectively limits their competitive impact on each
other.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
enable The First National Bank of Highland to
offer expanded and improved services which will
make it a more effective competitor within its
service area. Those services will include trust
services, financial advisory services to municipalities, a greater variety of time deposits and interna-

tional services. In addition, the village of Highland
will be opened to de novo branching by other banks
with the removal of head office protection as
provided by New York State law. The subject proposal will not significantly increase the size of First
Empire State Corporation nor will it change the
rank in size of this holding company in relation to
the other bank holding companies in the State.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and will stimulate competition in the Third Banking
District of New York. This application is, therefore,
approved.
DECEMBER 26,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Highland would
become a subsidiary of First Empire State Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by First Empire State Corporation, it would have
no effect on competition.

THE AMERICAN BANK OF THREE RIVERS, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, THREE RIVERS, MICH.,
AND THREE RIVERS NATIONAL BANK, THREE RIVERS, MICH.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The American Bank of Three Rivers, National Association, Three Rivers, Mich. (15889), with
and Three Rivers National Bank, Three Rivers, Mich. (15889), which had
merged Jan. 29, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15889) and title 'The American Bank
of Three Rivers, National Association." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 28, 1972, The American Bank of
Three Rivers, National Association, Three Rivers,
Mich., and the Three Rivers National Bank (organizing), Three Rivers, Mich., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and with the title of
the former.
The American Bank of Three Rivers, National
Association, the merging bank, is headquartered in
Three Rivers, Mich., and has two offices, both of
which are located in Three Rivers. The bank, with



$7,871,345
120,000
7,991,345

To be
operated

2
0
2

total resources of $6.7 million and IPC deposits of
$5.7 million, was chartered originally in 1958.
Three Rivers National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to the American
National Holding Company. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
the merger.
While the merging bank experiences substantial
competition from other banks and financial institutions, virtually no competition now exists nor is
likely to exist between the merging bank, American
National Holding Company's subsidiary, American

121

National Bank and Trust Company of Michigan,
Kalamazoo, and American National Holding Company's to affiliated banks, The American National
Bank in Portage, Mich., and The Niles National
Bank and Trust Company, Niles, Mich.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same
name as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest

and the application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 29,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which American Bank of Three Rivers, N.A. would
become a subsidiary of American National Holding
Company, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such,
and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by American National Holding Company, it
would have no effect on competition.

THE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK OF AMARILLO, AMARILLO, TEX., AND
BANK OF AMARILLO, N.A., AMARILLO, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The American National Bank of Amarillo, Amarillo, Tex. (14350), with
and Bank of Amarillo, N.A., Amarillo, Tex. (14350), which had
merged Jan. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14350) and title 'The American National Bank of Amarillo." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 27,1972, The American National Bank
of Amarillo, Amarillo, Tex., and the Bank of Amarillo, N.A., (organizing), Amarillo, Tex., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and with the title of
the former.
The American National Bank of Amarillo, the
merging bank, was organized in 1936, and operates
as a unit institution in conformity with State law.
The bank has assets of $69 million and IPC deposits
of $44.8 million.
The Bank of Amarillo, N.A., the charter bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to the Fort
Worth National Corporation. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
The Fort Worth National Corporation, the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank,
is headquartered in Fort Worth. The principal subsidiary of this holding company is the Fort Worth
National Bank which has deposits of $660 million.
There is no competition between the holding
122




$80,058,543
247,200

To be
operated

1
0

80,314,743

1

company or its subsidiaries and The American
National Bank of Amarillo because large distances
separate the closest offices and because an adequate number of banking alternatives are in the
intervening distances. Fort Worth, where the Fort
Worth National Corporation has the overwhelming
majority of its subsidiaries, is 360 miles from Amarillo, and Paducah, where the holding company owns
a 5 percent interest in the First National Bank, is
120 miles from the office of The American National
Bank of Amarillo. The resulting bank will conduct
the same banking business at the same location and
with the same name as presently used by the merging bank. New services will be introduced and greater
management potential will be available.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and is,
therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 29,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which American National Bank of Amarillo would
become a subsidiary of Fort Worth National Corpo-

ration, a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and with-

out regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by Fort Worth National Corporation, it would have
no effect on competition.

NEENAH WEST NATIONAL BANK, NEENAH, WIS., AND SECOND NEENAH
WEST NATIONAL BANK, NEENAH, WIS.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Neenah West National Bank, Neenah, Wis. (15599), with
and Second Neenah West National Bank, Neenah, Wis. (15599), which had
merged Jan. 31,1973, under charter of the latter bank (15599) and title "Neenah West National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 26, 1972, Neenah West National
Bank, Neenah, Wis., and Second Neenah West
National Bank (organizing), Neenah, Wis., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
Neenah West National Bank, the merging bank,
was organized in 1966, and, with assets of $6.2
million and IPC deposits of $5.2 million, is the
smallest of the 15 banks within its service area. The
merging bank operates as a unit institution.
Second Neenah West National Bank, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the merging bank to
Associated Bank Services, Inc. The charter bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
Associated Bank Services, Inc., Green Bay, Wis.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, controls three banks with aggregate deposits
of approximately $215 million and is currently the
fourth largest bank holding company in Wisconsin.
Subsidiaries of this holding company include
Kellogg-Citizens National Bank of Green Bay, the
principal subsidiary of this holding company; and


550-906 O-LT - 75 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 9
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

$6,902,897
120,000

To be
operated

1
0
1

7,022,897

The First National Bank of Neenah, Neenah, Wis.
The merging bank was originally organized by directors and officers of The First National Bank of
Neenah and, at present, approximately 36 percent of
the stock of the merging bank is owned by management of that bank; about 70 percent of the stock of
Neenah West National Bank is held by shareholders
of Associated Bank Services, Inc. Accordingly, the
proposed merger is merely a reorganization of
preexisting, commonly owned assets which will
have no effect on competition in Wisconsin.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 8,1972.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
•vhich Neenah West National Bank would become a
subsidiary of Associated Bank Services, Inc., a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Associated Bank Services, Inc., it would have no
effect on competition.

123

BANK OF MAINE, N.A., AUGUSTA, ME., AND WATER STREET NATIONAL BANK, AUGUSTA, ME.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Bank of Maine, N.A., Augusta, Me. (498), with
and Water Street National Bank, Augusta, Me. (498), which had
merged Feb. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (498) and title "Bank of Maine, N.A.'
The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 25, 1972, Water Street National
Bank (organizing), Augusta, Me., and Bank of Maine,
N.A., Augusta, Me., applied to the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the former and with the
title of the latter.
Bank of Maine, N.A., the merging bank, is headquartered in Augusta and maintains two branches
in that city and one branch each in Winthrop and
Waterville. The bank, with total resources of $63.5
million and IPC deposits of $36.7 million, was
chartered in 1836.
Water Street National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to Bane of Maine
Corporation which will become a one-bank holding
company upon its acquisition of the resulting bank.
The charter bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating

To be
operated

$47,684,132
117,552
47,801,684

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same locations and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
the application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 29,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Bank of Maine would become a subsidiary
of Bane of Maine Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely
combine an existing bank with a nonoperating
institution; as such, and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving bank by Bane of Maine
Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

STATE NATIONAL BANK, EVANSTON, III., AND SNB NATIONAL BANK, EVANSTON, III.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

State National Bank, Evanston, 111. (15615), with
and SNB National Bank, Evanston, 111. (15615), which had
merged Feb. 1,1973, under charter of the latter bank (15615) and title "State National Bank.
The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 31, 1972, the SNB National Bank (organizing), Evanston, 111., and the State National Bank,
Evanston, 111., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the former and with the title of the latter.
State National Bank, the merging bank, is located
in Evanston, 111., and has total resources of $172.2

124




To be
operated

$177,002,317
246,954
177,249,271

million and IPC deposits of approximately $141.6
million.
SNB National Bank, the charter bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership
of the merging bank to the State National Corporation, a newly created holding company. The charter
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same location and with the same
name as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 29,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which State National Bank would become a subsidiary of State National Corporation, a bank
holding company. The instant merger, however,
would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
State National Corporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

GULF COAST NATIONAL BANK, HOUSTON, TEX., AND GULF BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, HOUSTON, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Gulf Coast National Bank, Houston, Tex. (14858), with
and Gulf Bank, National Association, Houston, Tex. (14858), which had
merged Feb. 13, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14858) and title "Gulf Coast National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 6,1972, Gulf Coast National Bank,
Houston, Tex., and Gulf Bank, National Association
(organizing), Houston, Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and with the title of
the former.
Gulf Coast National Bank, the merging bank, is
headquartered in Houston, and is a unit bank. The
bank, with total resources of $14.9 million and IPC
deposits of $13 million, was chartered in 1959.
Gulf Bank, National Association, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to Southwest Bancshares, Inc. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
Bank of the Southwest, National Association,
Houston is the only subsidiary of Southwest Bancshares, Inc. operating in the service area of the
merging bank, and is located about 10 miles away.




$15,965,134
253,128

To be
operated

1
0
1

16,218,261

As those two banks are affiliated, the proposal will
have little competitive effect. The resulting bank will
conduct the same banking business at the same location and with the same name as presently used by
the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 11,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Gulf Coast National Bank would become a
subsidiary of Southwest Bancshares, Inc., a bank
holding company. The instant merger, however,
would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Southwest Bancshares, Inc., it would have no effect
on competition.

125

HOUSTON INTERCONTINENTAL NATIONAL BANK, HOUSTON, TEX., AND KENNEDY BOULEVARD BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, HOUSTON, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Houston Intercontinental National Bank, Houston, Tex. (15802), with
and Kennedy Boulevard Bank, National Association, Houston, Tex. (15802), which had
merged Feb. 13, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15802) and title "Houston Intercontinental National Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 4, 1972, the Houston Intercontinental National Bank, Houston, Tex., and Kennedy
Boulevard Bank, National Association (organizing),
Houston, Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title of the former.
Houston Intercontinental National Bank, the
merging bank, is headquartered in Houston. The
bank, with total resources of $4.2 million and IPC
deposits of $3 million, was chartered originally in
1969.
Kennedy Boulevard Bank, National Association,
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to Southwest Bancshares, Inc. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to the
merger. There is not now and has never been any
meaningful competition between the merging bank
and any subsidiary of the applicant. Although the
merging bank and applicant's affiliate, Bank of the

$3,604,150
253,128

To be
operated

1
0
1

3,857,278

Southwest, operate in the same service area, they
do not compete as shareholders of the applicant,
which owns 100 percent of Bank of the Southwest,
also own 72 percent of the merging bank. The proposal, therefore, is merely a corporate reorganization
involving commonly owned assets. No competitive
impact will result from its consummation.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 11,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Houston Intercontinental National Bank
would become a subsidiary of Southwest Bancshares, Inc., a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and
without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by Southwest Bancshares, Inc., it would have
no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF LAWRENCEBURG, LAWRENCEBURG, TENN., AND THE NATIONAL
BANK OF LAWRENCEBURG, LAWRENCEBURG, TENN.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg, Tenn. (6093), with
and The National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg, Tenn. (6093), which had
merged Feb. 15, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (6093) and title "The First National
Bank of Lawrenceburg." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 18,1972, The First National Bank of
Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg, Tenn., and The
National Bank of Lawrenceburg (organizing),
Lawrenceburg, Tenn., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter of the latter and with the title of the former.

126




$25,040,691
120,000
25,160,691

To be
operated

2
0
2

The First National Bank of Lawrenceburg, the
merging bank, was chartered in 1902, and operates
as a unit institution, with assets of $24 million and
IPC deposits of $19.2 million.
The National Bank of Lawrenceburg, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to Third

National Corporation. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Third National Corporation, Nashville, Tenn., the
holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, was organized in January 1972 and now controls the Third National Bank in Nashville which
operates its main office and 19 branches in the
Nashville Metropolitan Area. That subsidiary has
deposits of $616 million and is headquartered in
Davidson County.
There is no competition between Third National
Bank and The First National Bank of Lawrenceburg
because large distances separate the closest offices
and an adequate number of competitors operate in
the intervening distance. The nearest office of the
Third National Bank is approximately 98 road miles
from Lawrenceburg and the State law that limits
branching to the county in which the main office of
the bank is located effectively prevents any competition between Third National Bank and the merging
bank.
The acquisition of the resulting bank by Third
National Corporation will stimulate competition in
Lawrence County because it will enable the resulting subsidiary in Lawrenceburg to expand the range
of services now offered to the public within the trade
area, particularly with respect to trust services,

consumer lending, and the ability of that bank to
satisfy the credit needs of the largest customers of
the area. The acquisition will add management
depth to the resulting bank and will allow it to
modernize and improve its internal operations and
credit procedures through the expertise in those
areas that will become available through affiliation
with the holding company. The proposed acquisition
will have a negligible effect on the statewide competitive position of Third National Corporation because of the relatively small size of the bank which
it will acquire.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 10,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Lawrenceburg would
become a subsidiary of Third National Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Third National Corporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF COOKEVILLE, COOKEVILLE, TENN., AND THE SECOND
NATIONAL BANK OF COOKEVILLE, COOKEVILLE, TENN.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville, Tenn. (9667), with
and The Second National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville, Tenn. (9667), which had
merged Feb. 21, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (9667) and title "The First National
Bank of Cookeville." The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 16, 1972, The First National Bank of
Cookeville, Cookeville, Tenn., and The Second
National Bank of Cookeville (organizing), Cookeville,
Tenn., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
latter and with the title of the former.
The First National Bank of Cookeville, the merging
bank, was incorporated in 1910. It currently operates
three offices in Cookeville and a fourth is under
construction. The bank has assets of $36.8 million
and IPC deposits of $27.3 million.
The Second National Bank of Cookeville, the



$42,903,341
120,000
43,023,341

To be
operated

4
0
4

charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
to transfer ownership of the merging bank to First
Tennessee National Corporation. The charter bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
First Tennessee National Corporation, Memphis,
Tenn., the holding company which will acquire the
resulting bank, was organized in 1968, and currently
controls three commercial banks with aggregate
deposits of $1 billion. The largest of these subsidiary
banks is First National Bank of Memphis which has
deposits of $967 million. The remaining subsidiaries
are The Banking and Trust Company, Jonesboro,
with deposits of $30 million, and White's Creek
127

Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $6.9
million. In addition to the present proposal, this
holding company has plans to acquire three more
banks, one each in Morristown, Kings port, and
Dyersburg, with aggregate deposits of $55 million.
There is no competition between First Tennessee
National Corporation or any of its subsidiaries and
the merging bank because large distances separate
their closest two offices and an adequate number of
competitors operate in the intervening distances.
Cookeville is located in east-central Tennessee
approximately 85 miles east of Nashville and 50
miles south of the Kentucky border. The closest
office of a subsidiary of the First Tennessee National
Corporation is White's Creek Bank and Trust
Company, White's Creek, approximately 85 miles
west of Cookeville. That large distance effectively
precludes any competition between First National
Bank of Cookeville and the subsidiaries of this
holding company.
The proposed transaction will have a negligible
effect on the statewide competitive position of First
Tennessee National Corporation because of the
relatively small size of the merging bank but, it will
increase competition in Putnam County, where The

First National Bank of Cookeville is headquartered,
by enabling the resulting bank to offer an expanded
range of services to the residents of its service area.
Consummation of the subject proposal will also
provide the resulting bank, as a subsidiary of First
Tennessee National Corporation, with an opportunity to strengthen its internal operations and staff
services through the expertise available from the
principal subsidiary of the holding company.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
the application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 10,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Cookeville would
become a subsidiary of First Tennessee National
Corp., a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First Tennessee National Corp., it would have no
effect on competition.

THE FAIRFIELD COUNTY NATIONAL BANK, NORWALK, CONN., AND THE CONNECTICUT BANK
AND TRUST COMPANY, N.A., NORWALK, CONN.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Fairfield County National Bank, Norwalk, Conn. (15294), with
and The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, N.A., Norwalk, Conn. (15294), which had
merged Feb. 26, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (15294). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 3,1972, The Fairfield County National
Bank, Norwalk, Conn., and The Connecticut Bank
and Trust Company, N.A. (organizing), Norwalk,
Conn., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the latter.
The Fairfield County National Bank, the merging
bank, is headquartered in Norwalk and has one
other office, also in Norwalk. The bank, with total
assets of $12.6 million and IPC deposits of $10.4
million, was chartered originally in 1964.
The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, N.A.,
128



$13,298,368
240,000
13,868,531

To be
operated

2
0
2

the charter bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to the CBT Corporation. The charter bank will not
be operating as a commercial bank prior to the
merger.
No competition will be eliminated by the acquisition of the resulting bank by CBT Corporation. CBT
Corporation was organized in 1969, and currently
operates as a one-bank holding company. CBT
Corporation's only banking subsidiary is the Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, Hartford, which
is the second largest commercial bank in the State,
with assets of $1.2 billion and deposits of $740
million. As of December 31,1971, Connecticut Bank

and Trust Company operated 67 offices in 37 towns.
The principal competitors of The Fairfield County
National Bank include The Union Trust Company,
New Haven, with assets of $604 million; the Connecticut National Bank, Bridgeport, with assets of
$413 million; the State National Bank of Connecticut, Bridgeport, with assets of $419 million; and the
Merchants Bank and Trust Company, Norwalk,
with assets of $40 million. The Fairfield County
National Bank also faces aggressive competition
from savings banks operating in Norwalk.
Competition between offices of The Fairfield
County National Bank and The Connecticut Bank
and Trust Company is negligible. Connecticut Bank
and Trust's closest offices are in Darien and Fairfield which are 5 miles and 12 miles from Norwalk,
respectively. Connecticut Bank and Trust has
applied for approval to establish a branch in New
Canaan which is adjacent to Norwalk. Approval of
that branch will have no negative effect on competition, however, because The Fairfield County
National Bank draws less than 1 percent of its total
IPC deposits and an even smaller percentage of
loans of all types from New Canaan. Distance and
the large number of banking alternatives prevents
Connecticut Bank and Trust from competing with
the prospective subsidiary of CBT Corp. The acquisition will not materially increase the size of CBT
Corporation.

The acquisition of the resulting bank will enhance
competition rather than diminish it. The same number of banking alternatives will be available. Additionally, commercial banks operating in Norwalk
will be offered new banking services. Through
affiliation with CBT Corporation, the bank will be
able to offer its customers a full range of retail credit
and trust department services. Through participations and correspondent relationships with CBT
Corporation subsidiaries, the Fairfield bank will be
able to offer the larger commercial borrower an
alternative source of substantial funds, international
financing services, and other specialized loan services such as commercialfinancingand leasing.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 26,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Fairfield County National Bank would become
a subsidiary of CBT Corporation, a bank holding
company. The instant merger, however, would
merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving bank by CBT Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HOPEDALE, HOPEDALE, OHIO, AND THE SECOND
NATIONAL BANK OF HOPEDALE, HOPEDALE, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Hopedale, Hopedale, Ohio (6938), with
and The Second National Bank of Hopedale, Hopedale, Ohio (6938), which had
merged Feb. 28, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (6938) and title "The First National
Bank of Hopedale." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On October 23, 1972, The First National Bank of
Hopedale, Hopedale, Ohio, and The Second National Bank of Hopedale (organizing), Hopedale,
Ohio, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
latter with the title of the former.
The First National Bank of Hopedale, the merging
bank, was chartered in 1903, and operates as a unit



$7,097,566
59,870
7,157,435

To be
operated

1
0
1

institution, with assets of $6.5 million and IPC
deposits of $5.3 million.
The Second National Bank of Hopedale, the charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to First Steuben Bancorp, Inc. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
First Steuben Bancorp, Inc., Steubenville, Ohio,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting
129

bank, was incorporated in September 1969, and has
acquired a controlling interest in The First National
Bank and Trust Company in Steubenville, its only
subsidiary to date. That bank, with deposits of $80.7
million, operates seven banking offices in Jefferson
County and has received approval to open a drive-in
facility in downtown Steubenville. The applicant is
the eighth largest bank holding company in Ohio
and is significantly smaller than Central Bancorporation, the seventh largest bank holding company in
the State, which controls deposits of $729 million.
There is minimal competition between the merging bank and The First National Bank and Trust
Company in Steubenville because relatively large
distances separate the two banks and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the surrounding area. The closest offices of these two
banks are located 8.5 miles apart. Hopedale is
located 20 miles from Steubenville where the major
portion of the banking business of The First National
Bank and Trust Company in Steubenville is transacted. It is only in the Bloomingdale-Unionport area
in Jefferson County that the service areas of these
two banks actually overlap, but the amount of business done by each bank in that specific area is
small in relation to the total volume of their business.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
not significantly alter the competitive banking structure in Jefferson and Harrison counties but will
bring many benefits to the residents and businessmen in the service area of the resulting subsidiary

by allowing that bank to offer many new services
not currently available at that location. The resulting
bank will have access to easier loan participations,
will introduce trust services, and will be able to
provide commercial loans in participation with the
Small Business Administration, as well as education
loans in conjunction with the Ohio State Loan Commission and the United States Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare and related federal
agencies. A larger, more specialized pool of management expertise will be available to advise the bank
in such areas as commercial and farm lending, bond
portfolio managment, audit procedures, and other
areas of banking which have not been tapped by the
bank in the past.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 26,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Hopedale would
become a subsidiary of First Steuben Bancorp, Inc.,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First Steuben Bancorp, Inc., it would have no effect
on competition.

THE SAUGERTIES NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, SAUGERTIES, N.Y., AND THE CHASE
MANHATTAN BANK OF THE MID-HUDSON (NATIONAL ASSOCIATION), SAUGERTIES, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Saugerties National Bank and Trust Company, Saugerties, N.Y. (1040), with
and The Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mid-Hudson (National Association), Saugerties,
N.Y. (1040), which had
merged Feb. 28,1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (1040). The merged bank at
date of merger had
,
*

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On November 2, 1972, The Chase Manhattan
Bank of the Mid-Hudson (National Association)
(organizing), Saugerties, N.Y., and The Saugerties
National Bank and Trust Company, Saugerties,

130




To be
operated

$17316,600
55,224
17,371,824

N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the former.
The Saugerties National Bank and Trust Company, the merging bank, is located in the Third
Banking District of New York and, with assets of

$16.4 million and IPC deposits of $12.3 million,
operates one branch in Barclay Heights which is
located 1 mile south of the bank's main office.
The merging bank serves an estimated population
of 8,500 persons.
The Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mid-Hudson
(National Association), the charter bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to The Chase
Manhattan Corporation. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
The Chase Manhattan Corporation, New York
City, the holding company which will acquire the
resulting bank, is one of the largest bank holding
companies in the United States and controls The
Chase Manhattan Bank (National Association), the
largest commercial bank headquartered in New York
State; and Chase Manhattan Bank of Long Island,
Melville, which was organized de novo in 1971.
The proposed merger will result in no adverse
competitive effects in the Third Banking District
nor will it eliminate any competition between The
Chase Manhattan Corporation or its subsidiaries

and the merging bank. The closest office of a subsidiary of this holding company to the service area
of The Saugerties National Bank and Trust Company is the Peekskill office of Chase Manhattan
Bank in Westchester County, which is approximately 60 miles from Saugerties. In addition, none
of the subsidiaries of The Chase Manhattan Corporation holds any deposits or loans originating in
the service area of the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 11,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Saugerties National Bank would become a
subsidiary of Chase Manhattan Corporation, a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Chase Manhattan Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MORAVIA, MORAVIA, N.Y., AND MORAVIA NATIONAL BANK, MORAVIA, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Moravia, Moravia, N.Y. (99), with
and Moravia National Bank, Moravia, N.Y. (99), which had
merged Mar. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (99) and title "The First National Bank
of Moravia." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On November 8, 1972, The First National Bank
of Moravia, Moravia, N.Y., and Moravia National
Bank (organizing), Moravia, N.Y., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
The First National Bank of Moravia, the merging
bank, was organized in 1863 and, with assets of
$19 million and IPC deposits of $14.5 million, is
the 13th in size among 24 commercial banks headquartered in the Sixth Banking District. It is the
second largest of the three commercial banks
headquartered in Cayuga County. The merging
bank is the only financial institution operating in



$19,764,474
63,044
19,764,474

To be
operated

1
0
1

the village of Moravia which has a population of
1,600. The bank is a unit institution which serves
an area extending 15 miles to the north and south
and 10 miles to the east and west of Moravia.
The bank is inadequately capitalized and has
limited profit retention.
Moravia National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to Charter
New York Corporation. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to the
consummation of this merger.
Charter New York Corporation, New York, N.Y.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, is the seventh largest of 14 registered
bank holding companies in New York State. It

131

presently controls 10 subsidiary banks, with aggregate deposits of $4.3 billion, which operate in eight
of the nine State banking districts. The principal
subsidiary of this holding company is Irving Trust
Company, New York, with deposits of $3.4 billion.
The remaining subsidiaries range in size from The
Merchants National Bank and Trust Company,
Rochester, with deposits of $239 million, to the Fulton County National Bank and Trust Company,
Gloversville, with deposits of $29 million. The subsidiaries are headquartered in various cities including Arcade, Albany, Babylon, Endicott, Poughkeepsie, and Scarsdale. Charter New York
Corporation has also filed additional applications to
acquire banks in Clinton and Nanuet which have
total deposits of $76 million.
Competition between The First National Bank
of Moravia and any subsidiary of charter New York
Corporation is negligible because relatively large
distances separate the closest two banks and an
adequate number of competitors operate in the
intervening distance. The closest office of a subsidiary of the holding company is the Elbridge office
of The Merchants National Bank and Trust Company of Syracuse which is 29 miles from Moravia
and therefore clearly outside of the service area of
the merging bank. No other subsidiary of Charter
New York Corporation is close enough to Moravia to
be considered a competitor.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in the service area of the
resulting subsidiary in Moravia by enabling it to
offer expanded and improved services including

specialized commercial, real estate, and consumer
loans, a check credit plan, trust services, and a full
range of advisory services. The resulting bank will
be able to operate more efficiently through the use of
electronic data processing and through its access to
larger lending capacity through easier participations with other subsidiaries of the holding company. That larger capacity will allow the bank to
more readily meet the credit needs of the larger
businesses in this area. The availability of increased
capital and experienced management by affiliation
with Charter New York Corporation will help to
alleviate the present problems of the bank in Moravia. The resulting acquisition will not significantly
increase the size of Charter New York Corporation
which will continue to be smaller than the $6.4
billion Marine Midland Banks, Inc., the next largest
multi-bank holding company in New York State.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
the application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 16,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Moravia would become a subsidiary of Charter New York Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Charter New York Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

THE HAYES NATIONAL BANK OF CLINTON, CLINTON, N.Y.,

AND HAYES NATIONAL BANK, CLINTON, N.Y.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Hayes National Bank of Clinton, Clinton, N.Y. (10295), with
and Hayes National Bank, Clinton, N.Y. (10295), which had
merged Mar. 1,1973, under charter and title of the later bank (10295). The merged bank at date
of merger had
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On November 3, 1972, The Hayes National Bank
of Clinton, Clinton, N.Y., and Hayes National Bank
(organizing), Clinton, N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter and with the title of the latter.

132




$17,304,642
62,914
17,306,542

To be
operated

1
0
1

The Hayes National Bank of Clinton, the merging
bank, was founded in 1912, and with assets of $16
million and IPC deposits of $12.8 million, is the
15th in size among the 24 commercial banks headquartered in the Sixth Banking District. It is the
third largest of the six commercial banks based in
Oneida County. This is the only bank headquartered

in the village of Clinton which has a population of
1,800 persons. The merging bank operates as a
unit institution but has a recently approved but unopened branch in New Hartford located approximately 5 miles northeast of Clinton. The service
area of The Hayes National Bank of Clinton is an
area of about 17 square miles in and around Clinton
which has a population of 17,000 people.
Hayes National Bank, the charter bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
the ownership of the merging bank to Charter New
York Corporation. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Charter New York Corporation, New York, N.Y.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, is the seventh largest of 14 registered
bank holding companies in New York State, and
presently controls ten subsidiary banks, with aggregate deposits of $4.3 billion, which operate in eight
of the nine State banking districts. The principal
subsidiary of this holding company is Irving Trust
Company, New York, with deposits of $3.4 billion.
The remaining subsidiaries range in size from
The Merchants National Bank and Trust Company,
Rochester, with deposits of $239 million to the
smaller Fulton County National Bank and Trust
Company, Gloyersville, with deposits of $29 million.
Its subsidiaries are headquartered in various cities
including Arcade, Albany, Babylon, Endicott,
Poughkeepsie, and Scarsdale. Charter New York
Corporation has also filed additional applications
to acquire banks in Moravia and Nanuet with total
deposits of $78 million.
Competition will not be adversely affected by
consummation of the proposed transaction because
relatively large distances separate the closest two
banks and an adequate number of competitors

operate in the intervening distance. The nearest
branch of a subsidiary of Charter New York Corporation is 32 miles from Clinton and therefore is
clearly outside of the service area of the merging
bank.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in the service area of the
resulting subsidiary in Clinton by enabling it to
offer expanded and improved services including
specialized commercial, real estate, and consumer
loans, a check credit plan, trust services, and a
full range of advisory services. The resulting bank
will be able to operate more efficiently by using
electronic data processing, and easier participations with other subsidiaries of the holding company will allow it to more readily meet the credit
needs of the larger businesses in this area. The
proposed transaction will not significantly increase
the size of Charter New York Corporation which
would continue to be smaller than the $6.4 billion
Marine Midland Banks, Inc., the next largest multibank holding company in New York State.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
JANUARY 10,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which The Hayes National Bank of Clinton would
become a subsidiary of Charter New York Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by Charter New York Corporation,
it would have no effect on competition.

THE CENTRAL VALLEY NATIONAL BANK, CENTRAL VALLEY, N.Y., AND CITIBANK (MID-HUDSON), NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, TOWN OF WOODBURY (P.O.

CENTRAL VALLEY),

N.Y.
Banking offices

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Central VaUey National Bank, Central Valley, N.Y. (9990), with
and Citibank (Mid-Hudson), National Association, Town of Woodbury (P.O. Central Valley),
N.Y. (9990), which had
merged Mar. 6, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (9990). The merged bank at
date of merger had




To be
operated

$17,425,896
61,900
17,487,796

133

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On August 25, 1972, The Central Valley National
Bank, Central Valley, N.Y., and Citibank (MidHudson), National Association (organizing), Town
of Woodbury (P.O. Central Valley), N.Y., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
The Central Valley National Bank, the merging
.bank, was organized in 1911, and is the ninth largest
of 11 commercial banks headquartered in Orange
County. The merging bank operates two branches
and has assets of $16 million and IPC deposits of
$14 million.
Citibank (Mid-Hudson), National Association, the
charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank to
First National City Corporation. The charter bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior
to this merger.
First National City Corporation, New York, N.Y.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, is the second largest of 13 registered
multi-bank holding companies in New York State
and controls deposits of $13.5 billion. The holding
company presently controls five banks including
First National City Bank, New York City; Citibank
(Suffolk), National Association, Bay Shore; Citibank (Western), National Association, Silver
Creek; Citibank (Mid-Western), National Association, Honeoye Falls; and Citibank (Eastern), National Association, Castleton-on-Hudson. An application is also pending to acquire The First Trust
and Deposit Company of Oriskany Falls, which is
located in the Sixth Banking District of New York.

There is minimal competition between the
applicant's subsidiaries and The Central Valley
National Bank because relatively large distances
separate the closest two offices and an adequate
number of competitors operate in the intervening
distance. The closest branch of any subsidiary of
the holding company is First National City Bank's
branch in Peekskill, 16 miles away.
Affiliation with First National City Corporation
will enable the resulting subsidiary to improve the
quality and range of banking services it now offers
including a wider variety of time deposits, more
competitive mortgage loans, overdraft banking, and
expanded trust services. Funds and expertise will
also be available for larger and more specialized
commercial loans and municipal financing. The
proposed affiliation will therefore stimulate competition in Orange County and will allow the resulting subsidiary to serve as a viable alternative to
the larger banks already serving that area.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and the
application is, therefore, approved.
FEBRUARY 2,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Central Valley National Bank would become
a subsidiary of First National City Corporation, a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First National City Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

THE FIRST TRUST AND DEPOSIT COMPANY OF ORISKANY FALLS, ORISKANY FALLS, N.Y.,

AND CITIBANK

(CENTRAL), NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ORISKANY FALLS, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany Falls, Oriskany Falls, N.Y., with
and Citibank (Central), National Association, Oriskany Falls, N.Y. (16089), which had
merged Mar. 6, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (16089). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 10, 1972, The First Trust and Deposit
Company of Oriskany Falls, village of Oriskany

134



$5,766,207
61,900
5,828,107

To be
operated

1
0
1

Falls, N.Y., and Citibank (Central), National
Association (organizing), village of Oriskany Falls,
N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency

for permission to merge under the charter and with
the title of the latter.
Citibank (Central), National Association, the
charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
to transfer ownership of the merging bank to The
First National City Corporation, New York, N.Y.
The charter bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
The First National City Corporation, New York,
N.Y., the applicant, is a registered bank holding
company headquartered in New York State and
controls $13.8 billion of the aggregate domestic
deposits of the $94 billion deposits held by all of
the commercial banks based in the State of New
York. The principal subsidiary of the holding company is the First National City Bank, New York
City, the largest bank in the State.
The First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany Falls, village of Oriskany Falls, N.Y., the bank
which will merge with the proposed subsidiary,
was organized in 1903 as a National bank, and
converted to a State charter in 1926. That bank,
operating as a single-office institution, currently
has deposits of $4.8 million. The service area of the
bank includes the towns of Augusta, Marshall,
and Sangerfield in Oneida County and the town of
Madison in Madison County.
The First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany
Falls is the smallest of six commercial banks headquartered in Oneida County and is the 23rd in size
of the 24 commerical banks in the Sixth Banking
District. The banks based in Oneida County include The Oneida National Bank and Trust Company of Central New York, Utica, with deposits
of $300 million; the Bank of Utica, with deposits of
$36 million; and The Hayes National Bank of Clinton, Clinton, with deposits of $14 million which
is a proposed member of the Charter New York
Corporation. Additional competition in the Sixth
Banking District includes many large banks, a

large number of which ate subsidiaries of holding
companies.
Competition between The First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany Falls and The First
National City Corporation or its subsidiaries is
negligible. The nearest office of any subsidiary of
the applicant to Oriskany Falls is 120 miles away.
If a proposed acquisition of The National Exchange
Bank of Castleton-on-Hudson by the applicant is
consummated, its nearest office would be 90 miles
from Oriskany Falls.
Consummation of the proposed transaction, by
improving and expanding services, will enable the
resulting subsidiary in Oriskany Falls to compete
more effectively with its larger competitors and with
banks affiliated with large holding companies in the
Sixth Banking District. New services would consist
of overdraft checking, a larger variety of time deposits, expanded consumer loans, business installment loans, and trust services, among others. The
proposed transaction will not significantly increase
the size of the applicant, but it will greatly increase
banking competition in the Sixth Banking District
of New York without causing any adverse effects.
On weighing the factors of this case in the light
of the statutory criteria, it is concluded that the
subject merger is in the public interest. The application is, therefore, approved.
FEBRUARY 2,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany
Falls would become a subsidiary of First National
City Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by First National City Corporation,
it would have no effect on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HOLLAND, HOLLAND, MICH., AND HOLLAND NATIONAL BANK, HOLLAND, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First National Bank of Holland, Holland, Mich. (14560), with
and Holland National Bank, Holland, Mich. (14560), which had
merged Mar. 26, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14560) and title "First National Bank
of Holland." The merged bank at date of merger had




$39,779,958
120,000
39,899,958

To be
operated

1
0
1

135

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On November 10, 1972, First National Bank of
Holland, Holland, Mich., and Holland National
Bank (organizing), Holland, Mich., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
First National Bank of Holland, the merging bank,
is headquartered in Holland, Mich., and has two
pending branch applications. The bank holds total
assets of approximately $36.9 million.
Holland National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to First National
Financial Corporation, a multi-bank holding company. The charter bank will not be operating as a
commercial bank prior to the merger.
First National Financial Corporation is the 11th
largest banking organization in Michigan. It controls
three banks with aggregate deposits of approximately $306 million, representing 1.25 percent of
total deposits in commercial banks in the State.
First National Financial Corporation's affiliates
are the First National Bank and Trust Company
of Michigan, Kalamazoo, Mich.; The Merchants
and Miners Bank, Calumet, Mich.; and the Deerfield State Bank, Deerfield, Mich.
The proposed affiliation will not have an adverse
competitive effect. First National Financial Corporation's nearest subsidiary office is located more
than 23 miles from First National Bank of Holland.
Further, the proposed acquisition will not significantly increase the concentration of banking resources in the State. First National Financial Corporation's share of State deposits would only in-

crease to approximately 1.5 percent, and its rank in
size among State banking institutions would only
increase from 11th to 10th.
Affiliation of First National Bank of Holland with
First National Financial Corporation would, however, enable the Holland bank to compete effectively with the two larger area banks: Peoples
State Bank, Holland, Mich., with approximately
$45 million in deposits, and First Michigan Bank
and Trust Company, Zeeland, Mich., with approximately $70 million in deposits. Further, the affiliation will enable First National Bank of Holland
to benefit from the experience and expertise of
First National Financial Corporation's lead bank,
First National Bank and Trust Company of Michigan. Among the lead bank's areas of expertise are
fully developed commercial and agricultural loan
programs, a full line of trust services, and modern
techniques of credit analysis.
Accordingly, applying the statutory criteria, it
is concluded that the proposed merger is in the
pubMc interest and the application is, therefore,
approved.
FEBRUARY 23,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Holland would become
a subsidiary of First National Financial Corporaation, a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by First National Financial Corporation, it would
have no effect on competition.

UNION BANK AND TRUST COMPANY (NATIONAL ASSOCIATION), GRAND RAPIDS, MICH., AND THE UNION
NATIONAL BANK, GRAND RAPIDS, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Union Bank and Trust Company (National Association), Grand Rapids, Mich. (15575), with
and The Union National Bank, Grank Rapids, Mich. (15575), which had
merged Mar. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15575) and title "Union Bank and
Trust Company (National Association)." The merged bank at date of merger had

136



$332,190,000
256,250
332,446,250

To be
operated

26
0
26

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 8, 1972, Union Bank and Trust
Company (National Association), Grand Rapids,
Mich., and The Union National Bank (organizing), Grand Rapids, Mich., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and with the title of
the former.
Union Bank and Trust Company (National Association), the merging bank, was organized in
1918, and, with deposits of $287 million, is currently
the third largest commercial bank operating in
Grand Rapids.
The Union National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to Peninsula Holding Corporation of Michigan, which will become a
one-bank holding company when it acquires the
resulting bank. The charter bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
^Because the merging bank is the only operating

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there can
be no adverse effect on competition resulting from a
consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business
at the same locations and with the same name as
presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
FEBRUARY 13,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Union Bank and Trust Company, N. A.
would become a subsidiary of Peninsular Holding
Corporation of Michigan, a bank holding company.
The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition
of the surviving bank by Peninsular Holding Corporation of Michigan, it would have no effect on
competition.

SOMERSET HILLS & COUNTY NATIONAL BANK, BASKING RIDGE, N.J., AND NEW SOMERSET HILLS & COUNTY
NATIONAL BANK, BASKING RIDGE, N.J.

Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Somerset Hills & County National Bank, Basking Ridge, N.J. (6960), with
and New Somerset Hills & County National Bank, Basking Ridge, N.J. (6960), which had
merged Apr. 19, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (6960) and title "Somerset Hills &
County National Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 26,1972, Somerset Hills & County
National Bank, Basking Ridge, N.J., and the New
Somerset Hills & County National Bank (organizing) Basking Ridge, N.J., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter of the latter and with the title of the former.
Somerset Hills & County National Bank, the
merging bank, is headquartered in Basking Ridge,
and has six branches located throughout Somerset
County. The bank, with total reserves of $167.7
million and IPC deposits of $55.4 million, was
chartered originally in 1903.
New Somerset Hills & County National Bank,
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a



$66,677,666
125,000
66,802,666

To be
operated

7
0
7

vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to the First National State Bancorporation. The
charter bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to the merger.
Basking Ridge, home of the subject bank, is
located in the northern central section of Somerset
County, approximately 30 to 35 miles southwest of
Newark, N.J. Somerset County had a 1970 population of 198,372, and the bank's service area, which
includes portions of Somerset, Morris, and Middlesex counties, had a 1970 population of 173,324. The
north-central and the western sections of Somerset
County are basically residential in nature, with
the industrial corridor located in the eastern section. Other parts of the service area are residential
and mixed industrial and commercial.

137

Of the 13 commercial banking institutions which
operate 31 offices in the primary service area of the
subject bank, that bank ranked eighth in terms of
amount of deposits. Competition includes American National Bank and Trust of New Jersey,
Mont clair, with deposits of $358 million, a member of
the Princeton American Bancorporation which has
aggregate deposits of $447 million; Franklin State
Bank, Somerset, with deposits of $149 million;
First National Bank of Central Jersey, Somerville,
with deposits of $141 million; Somerset Trust Company, Somerville, with deposits of $89 million; The
First National Bank of Princeton, Princeton, with
$85 million in deposits, a member of United Jersey
Banks which is a multi-bank holding company with
aggregate deposits of $1.3 billion; The National
Bank of New Jersey, New Brunswick, with deposits
of $77 million, a member of Fidelity Union Bancorporation which is a multi-bank holding company
with aggregate deposits of $792 million; and Peoples National Bank of Central Jersey, Piscataway,
with deposits of $59 million. In addition,fivesavings
and loan associations with combined assets of
$129 million provide additional competition. Two
credit unions, 18 sales finance companies, and 10
small loan licensees operate in the primary service
area and compete for smaller consumer loans.
First National State Bancorporation, the applicant, is the third largest of the six registered multibank holding companies in the State of New
Jersey. As of September 30, 1972, it held $1.1
billion of the $21 billion total deposits held by the
commercial banks in New Jersey. First National
State Bancorporation presently controls seven
banks located in the three banking districts in
New Jersey. The lead bank is First National State
Bank of New Jersey, Newark, with deposits of
$929 million, other subsidiary banks in the First
Banking District are the First National State Bank
of Northeast Jersey, Succasunna, with $84 million
in deposits and the First National State Bank of
North Jersey, Hackensack, with $55 million in deposits. In the Second Banking District there is The
Edison Bank, National Association, South Plainfield, with deposits of $76 million; First National
State Bank of Spring Lake, with deposits of $26
million; and First National State Bank of Central
Jersey, Trenton, with deposits of $54 million. The
holding company's representation in the Third

138



Banking District is First National State Bank of
Ocean County, Lakewood, with deposits of $31
million.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
enable Somerset Hills & County National Bank to
offer improved and expanded services to its customers including term loans, accounts receivable
financing, lease financing, auto dealer financing,
commercial letters of credit, expanded trust department services, and international services. Other
services will be computer services to customers,
investment planning, correspondent bank services,
underwriter, dealer, and distributor services in the
bond market, and a means whereby loans over the
lending limit can be more easily placed.
Competition should not be adversely affected.
Because the nearest office of a subsidiary of the
applicant is located 2.4 miles from the subject
bank, and is separated by the city of New Brunswick
in an area which is highly banked, it would appear
that there is little competition between the subject
bank and a subsidiary of the applicant. The applicant would continue its ranking as the third largest
bank holding company in New Jersey and its ability
to compete with its larger competitors would be
slightly improved while smaller holding companies should not be seriously disadvantaged. The
subject bank would continue as eighth largest bank
in its service area but its ability to compete with its
larger competitors and other holding company
affiliated banks should be improved through consummation of this transaction. Because of the high
demand for banking services in this area, smaller
competitors should not be seriously disadvantaged.
We find the proposal to be in the public interest
and without adverse competitive effect. The application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 8,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Somerset Hills and County National Bank
would become a subsidiary of First National State
Bancorporation, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of
the surviving bank by First National State Bancorporation, it would have no effect on competition.

THE AUSTIN NATIONAL BANK, AUSTIN, TEX., AND AUSTIN BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AUSTIN, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Austin National Bank, Austin, Tex. (4308), with
and Austin Bank, National Association, Austin, Tex. (4308), which had
merged Apr. 20, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4308) and title "The Austin National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 31, 1972, The Austin National
Bank, Austin, Tex., and the Austin Bank, National
Association (organizing), Austin, Tex., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
The Austin National Bank, the merging bank is
headquartered in Austin and is a unit bank. This
bank, with total resources of $292.9 million and
total deposits of $282.5 million was chartered
originally in 1890.
Austin Bank, National Association, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to the
Austin Bancshares Corporation, a newly created
bank holding company without present subsidiaries.
The charter bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating

$335,832,357
250,000

To be
operated

1
0
1

335,839,557

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same location and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 15,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Austin National Bank would become a subsidiary of Austin Bancshares Corporation, a bank
holding company. The instant merger, however,
would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Austin Bancshares Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ABILENE, ABILENE, TEX., AND SECOND NATIONAL BANK OF ABILENE, ABILENE,
TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
First National Bank of Abilene, Abilene, Tex. (4166), with
and Second National Bank of Abilene, Abilene, Tex. (4166), which had
merged Apr. 24, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4166) and title "First National Bank
of Abilene." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 27, 1972, the First National Bank of
Abilene, Abilene, Tex., and the Second National
Bank of Abilene (organizing), Abilene, Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the latter and
with the title of the former.



$94,951323
240,000
94,958,523

To be
operated

1
0
1

The First National Bank of Abilene, the merging
bank, was organized in 1889, and operates as a
unit bank in conformity with State law. The bank
has assets of $87.7 million and IPC deposits of
$61.2 million.
The Second National Bank of Abilene, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to the F & M
139

Operating Company. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
The F & M Operating Company, the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, controls the Bank of Commerce in Abilene. There is
minimal competition between the Bank of Commerce^ and the merging bank because the First National Bank of Abilene is located in downtown
Abilene and the Bank of Commerce is situated in a
suburban location 7 miles away. That distance as
well as the fact that several competitors are located in the intervening area effectively minimizes
the competition between the two banks. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business
at the same location and with the same name as
presently used by the merging bank.

Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 19,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Abilene would become a subsidiary of F & M Operating Company, a
bank holding compnay. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
F & M Operating Company, it would have no effect
on competition.

MANUFACTURERS NATIONAL BANK OF DETROIT, DETROIT, MICH., AND MANUFACTURERS BANK DETROIT,
N.A., DETROIT, MICH.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit, Detroit, Mich. (13738), with
and Manufacturers Bank Detroit, N.A., Detroit, Mich. (13738), which had
merged Apr. 24, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13738) and title "Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 12, 1972, Manufacturers National
Bank of Detroit, Detroit, Mich., and Manufacturers
Bank Detroit, N.A. (organizing), Detroit, Mich.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit, the existing bank, was organized in 1933, and now has
72 banking offices, with total assets of $2.3 billion
and IPC deposits of a $1.8 billion, located throughout the Detroit Metropolitan Area.
Manufacturers Bank Detroit, N.A., the new bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the existing bank to Manufacturers
National Corporation which will be a one-bank
holding company at the time of its formation. The
new bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
Because the existing bank is the only operating

140



$2337375,893
250,000

To be
operated

72
0

2337,365,893

72

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same locations and with the same name
as presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
the application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 23,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit
would become a subsidiary of Manufacturers National Corporation, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of
the surviving bank by Manufacturers National
Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

THE HIBERNIA NATIONAL BANK IN NEW ORLEANS, NEW ORLEANS, LA., AND TOWER NATIONAL BANK,
NEW ORLEANS, LA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Hibernia National Bank in New Orleans, New Orleans, La. (13688), with
and Tower National Bank, New Orleans, La. (13688), which had
merged Apr. 24, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13688) and title "Hibernia National
Bank in New Orleans." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On February 14, 1973, The Hibernia National
Bank in New Orleans, New Orleans, La., and
Tower National Bank (organizing), New Orleans,
La., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the
latter and with the title "Hibernia National Bank
in New Orleans."
The Hibernia National Bank in New Orleans, the
existing bank, was organized in 1933, and now,
with deposits of $444 million, is the third largest of
nine commercial banks headquartered in New
Orleans. Competition for the bank includes Whitney
National Bank of New Orleans, with deposits of
$707 million, and First National Bank of Commerce,
with deposits of $595 million.
Tower National Bank, the new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of the existing bank to Hibernia Corporation, New Orleans, which will become a onebank holding company upon its acquisition of the
existing bank. The new bank will not be operating

$528,240,178
240,000

To be
operated

13
0

528,477,678

13

as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Because The Hibernia National Bank in New
Orleans is the only operating bank involved in the
proposed transaction, there can be no adverse
effect on competition resulting from consummation
of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will
conduct the same banking business at the same
locations as presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 20,1973.
SUMMARY

OF

REPORT

BY ATTORNEY

GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Hibernia National Bank in New Orleans
would become a subsidiary of Hibernia Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Hibernia Corporation, it would have no effect on
competition.

CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK IN ENNIS, ENNIS, TEX., AND BANCORP NATIONAL BANK OF ENNIS, TEXAS, ENNIS,
TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Citizens National Bank in Ennis, Ennis, Tex. (13667), with
and Bancorp National Bank of Ennis, Texas, Ennis, Tex. (13667), which had
merged Apr. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13667) and title "Citizens National
Bank in Ennis." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 22, 1972, Citizens National Bank in
Ennis, Ennis, Tex., and Bancorp National Bank in
Ennis, Texas (organizing), Ennis, Tex., applied to



$23,198,082
120,000
23316,582

To be
operated

1
0
1

the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
Citizens National Bank in Ennis, the existing
bank, was organized in 1933, and currently has as-

141

sets of $20.8 million and IPC deposits of $15.4 million. Approximately 24 percent of the stock of this
bank is now owned by First Bancorp, Inc., Corsicana, Tex.
Bancorp National Bank of Ennis, Texas, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer total ownership of Citizens National Bank in Ennis to First Bancorp. The new bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
Because Citizens National Bank in Ennis is already controlled by First Bancorp, the proposed
transaction is merely part of a corporate reorganization in which the existing bank will become a
wholly-owned subsidiary of this holding company.

Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 16,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Citizens National Bank in Ennis would become a subsidiary of First Bancorp, Inc., a bank
holding company. The instant merger, however,
would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First Bancorp, Inc., it would have no effect on
competition.

THE NATIONAL CITY BANK OF CLEVELAND, CLEVELAND, OHIO, AND NCB

NATIONAL BANK,

CLEVELAND, OHIO

Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The National City Bank of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio (786), with
and NCB National Bank, Cleveland, Ohio (786), which had
merged Apr. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (786) and title "National City Bank."
The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 29, 1972, The National City Bank
of Cleveland, Cleveland, Ohio, and NCB National
Bank (organizing), Cleveland, Ohio, applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with
the title, "National City Bank."
The National City Bank of Cleveland, the existing
bank, was organized in 1845 and, with deposits of
$1.3 billion, is the second largest commercial bank
headquartered in Cleveland. Cleveland Trust, the
largest bank in Ohio, has deposits of $2.4 billion.
NCB National Bank, the new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of the existing bank to National City
Corporation, Cleveland, which will become a onebank holding company upon its acquisition of the
resulting bank. NCB National Bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Because The National City Bank of Cleveland is
the only operating bank involved in the proposed

142



$1,779,515,969
240,000

To be
operated

39
0

1,779,528,919

39

transaction, there can be no adverse effect on
competition resulting from consummation of the
proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct
the same banking business at the same locations
as presently used by The National City Bank of
Cleveland.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 20,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which National City Bank of Cleveland would
become a subsidiary of National City Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
National City Corporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK OF SAN ANTONIO, SAN ANTONIO, TEX., AND CITIZENS BANK,
SAN ANTONIO, TEX.

N.A.,

Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Citizens National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex. (14938), with
and Citizens Bank, N.A., San Antonio, Tex. (14938), which had
merged May 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14938) and title "Citizens National
Bank of San Antonio." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 31, 1972, Citizens National Bank of San
Antonio, San Antonio, Tex., and Citizens Bank,
N.A. (organizing), San Antonio, Tex., applied to the
Office of the Comptroller of Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the latter and
with the title of the former.
Citizens National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex., the merging bank, is headquartered in
San Antonio, Tex. The bank, with IPC deposits of
approximately $18 million, was chartered in 1961.
Citizens Bank, N.A., San Antonio, Tex., the
charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to Frost Realty Company, soon to be changed to
Frost Bank Corporation, a Texas-based bank holding company.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there

$27,495,719
240,000

To be
operated

1
0
1

27,502,919

can be no adverse competitive effect resulting from
the consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same location and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest.
The application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 27,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Citizens National Bank of San Antonio would
become a subsidiary of Frost Bank Corporation, a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Frost Bank Corporation, it would have no effect on
competition.

CORPUS CHRISTI STATE NATIONAL BANK, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEX., AND STATE NATIONAL BANK OF CORPUS
CHRISTI, CORPUS CHRISTI, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Corpus Christi State National Bank, Corpus Christi, Tex. (4423), with
and State National Bank of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi, Tex. (4423), which had
merged May 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4423) and title "Corpus Christi State
National Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 19, 1972, Corpus Christi State
National Bank, Corpus Christi, Tex., and State
National Bank of Corpus Christi (organizing),
Corpus Christi, Tex., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter of the latter and with the title of the former.



$250,500,469
240,000
250,507,669

To be
operated

1
0
1

Corpus Christi State National Bank, the existing
bank, was organized in 1890 and now, with deposits
of $180 million, is the largest commercial bank in
Corpus Christi. Corpus Christi Bank and Trust,
the bank's principal competitor, is in the process
of being acquired by First City Bancorporation of
Texas, Inc., Houston.
State National Bank of Corpus Christi, the new

143

bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
Federated Texas Bancorporation, Inc. State National Bank of Corpus Christi will not operate as a
commercial bank prior to this merger.
Federated Texas Bancorporation, Inc., San Antonio, Tex., the holding company which will acquire
the resulting bank, has recently been organized as
a holding company and has submitted applications
to acquire The American National Bank of Austin,
Austin, Tex., and The Alamo National Bank, San
Antonio, Tex. The holding company has no previous
financial history and does not operate any subsidiaries at the present time.
The American National Bank of Austin was organized in 1890, and currently, with deposits of
$177.3 million, is the third largest commercial
bank in Austin. Principal competitors with the bank
include The Austin National Bank, with deposits
of $283 million, and The Capital National Bank in
Austin, with deposits of $240 million. The Alamo
National Bank, the other bank to be acquired by
Federated Texas Bancorporation, was organized in
1891, and, with deposits of $181 million, is the
third largest of 29 commercial banks headquartered
in San Antonio. Competition is provided by Frost
National Bank, with deposits of $452 million; National Bank of Commerce of San Antonio, with
deposits of $277 million; and National Bank of
Fort Sam Houston, with deposits of $49.7 million.
There is no competition between the three banks
to be acquired by Federated Texas Bancorporation
because large distances separate their offices and
an adequate number of alternative banking facilities
operate in the intervening distances. Austin is
located 75 miles from San Antonio and 150 miles
from Corpus Christi. San Antonio is about 120
miles from Corpus Christi. Those large distances

preclude any direct competition between the banks
which are to be acquired by this holding company.
A common characteristic of the three subject
banks is that the share of the deposit structure
controlled by each in their respective service
areas has declined between 5 and 10 percent in
the past 10 years. It is pointed out that those declines are the result of the growing influence of
Dallas/Fort Worth- and Houston-based multi-bank
holding companies and, to a lesser extent, to the
larger local competitors that have been successful
in attracting corporate business from the three
banks individually. The subject proposal is part of
a plan designed to create an alternative banking
force capable of competing more effectively with
the sophisticated services provided by the largest
commercial banks and by the larger multi-bank holding companies in the State. That will stimulate
competition over a large portion of Texas. Federated
Texas Bancorporation will become the ninth largest
bank holding company in the State, which means
that it will not be in a position to dominate banking
in any respect.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 23,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Corpus Christi State National Bank would
become a subsidiary of Federated Texas Bancorporation, Inc., a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and
without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by Federated Texas Bancorporation, Inc., it
would have no effect on competition.

THE FROST NATIONAL BANK OF SAN ANTONIO, SAN ANTONIO, TEX., AND FROST BANK, N.A.,
SAN ANTONIO, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Frost National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex. (5179), with
and Frost Bank, N.A., San Antonio, Tex. (5179), which had
merged May 1,1973, under charter of the latter bank (5179) and title "The Frost National Bank
of San Antonio." The merged bank at date of merger had

144



$571353,677
240,000
571,793,677

To be
operated

1
0

1

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 1, 1972, The Frost National Bank of
San Antonio, San Antonio, Tex., and Frost Bank,
N.A. (organizing), San Antonio, Tex., applied to
the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
The Frost National Bank of San Antonio, the
merging bank, is headquartered in San Antonio,
Tex., and has IPC deposits of approximately
$288 million. The merging bank, established in
1899. has no branch office?
Frost Bank, N.A., San Antonio, Tex., the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to Frost
Realty Company, soon to be changed to Frost Bank
Corporation, a Texas-based bank holding company.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there

can be no adverse competitive effect resulting from
the consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same location and with the same name
as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest.
The application is, therefore, approved.
MARCH 27,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Frost National Bank of San Antonio would
become a subsidiary of Frost Bank Corporation, a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Frost Bank Corporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF EAGLE PASS, EAGLE PASS, TEX., AND MAVERICK COUNTY NATIONAL BANK,
EAGLE PASS, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Eagle Pass, Eagle Pass, Tex. (4490), with
and Maverick County National Bank, Eagle Pass, Tex. (4490), which had
merged May 4, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4490) and title "The First National
Bank of Eagle Pass." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 28, 1972, The First National Bank
of Eagle Pass, Eagle Pass, Tex., and Maverick
County National Bank (organizing), Eagle Pass,
Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
latter and with the title of the former.
The First National Bank of Eagle Pass, the
existing bank, was organized in 1890, and now,
with deposits of $16.7 million, is the largest bank
in Eagle Pass. Competition is provided by Frontier
State Bank, Eagle Pass, with deposits of $7 million,
and by several banks in the contiguous community
of Piedras Negras, Mexico.
Maverick County National Bank, the new bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of the existing bank to National Bancshares Corporation of Texas. Maverick



$20,898,421
120,000
21,018,421

To be
operated

1
0
1

County National Bank will not be operating as a
commercial bank prior to this merger.
National Bancshares Corporation of Texas,
San Antonio, Tex., the holding company which will
acquire the resulting bank, was organized in
March 1972 and currently controls two subsidiary
banks with aggregate deposits of $294.9 million.
The principal subsidiary of this holding company
is National Bank of Commerce of San Antonio
which, with deposits of $276.6 million, is the second
largest bank headquartered in that city. The other
subsidiary of this holding company is Randolph
Field National Bank, Universal City, with deposits
of $18.3 million.
There is no competition between National Bancshares Corporation of Texas or its subsidiaries and
The First National Bank of Eagle Pass because
very large distances separate their closest two offices and an adequate number of alternative bank-

145

ing facilities operate in the intervening distance.
The closest subsidiary of this holding company is
140 miles from Eagle Pass, which precludes any
competition between the banks.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in Eagle Pass and its immediate environs by allowing the resulting subsidiary to offer new and improved banking services
such as trust services, data processing, installment consumer loans, a wider variety of time deposits and business counseling to local residents
and businesses. That will stimulate competition
from which local residents and businesses will derive direct and immediate benefits.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that

the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.»
MARCH 28,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Eagle Pass would
become a subsidiary of National Bancshares Corporation of Texas, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of
the surviving bank by National Bancshares Corporation of Texas, it would have no effect on
competition.

NANUET NATIONAL BANK, NANUET, N.Y., AND THE NANUET NATIONAL BANK OF ROCKLAND COUNTY,
NANUET, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Nanuet National Bank, Nanuet, N.Y. (13314), with,
and The Nanuet National Bank of Rockland County, Nanuet, N.Y. (13314), which had
merged May 7, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13314) and title "Nanuet National
Bank " The merged bank at date of merger had. ..

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On November 21, 1972, Nanuet National Bank,
Nanuet, N.Y., and The Nanuet National Bank of
Rockland County (organizing), Nanuet, N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
Nanuet National Bank, the existing bank, was
chartered in 1929, and operates eight branches, in
the Third Banking District, with total deposits
of $65 million.
The Nanuet National Bank of Rockland County,
the new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer ownership of the existing
bank to Charter New York Corporation. The new
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to this merger.
Charter New York Corporation, New York, N.Y.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, is the seventh largest of 20 bank holding companies in the State of New York, and controls ten
commercial banks with aggregate deposits of
$4.1 billion. The subsidiaries of the holding company

146




$86,149,250
122,893
86,152,927

To be
operated
9
0
9

operate in eight of the nine banking districts of New
York. Charter New York Corporation has two subsidiaries in the Third Banking District: Scarsdale
National Bank and Trust Company, with deposits
of $99 million; and Dutchess Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $60 million.
Competition between Nanuet National Bank and
any subsidiary of Charter New York Corporation
is minimal because their nearest offices are separated by the Hudson River which forms an effective
natural barrier. The Hartsdale office of Scarsdale
National Bank and Trust Company is 10 miles from
the West Nyack office of Nanuet National Bank.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
provide residents, businesses, and industries in
the service area of Nanuet National Bank with the
benefits of expanded lending services, data processing, trust services, municipal financing and a host
of other services which will be made available
through affiliation with Charter New York Corporation. That will serve to stimulate competition
in Rockland County.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion

of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Nanuet National Bank would become a

subsidiary of Charter New York Corporation, a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Charter New York Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

THE PEOPLES NATIONAL BANK OF GREENFIELD, GREENFIELD, OHIO, AND GREENFIELD NATIONAL BANK,
GREENFIELD, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield, Greenfield, Ohio (10105), with
and Greenfield National Bank, Greenfield, Ohio (10105), which had
merged June 4,1973, under charter of the latter bank (10105) and title "The Peoples National
Bank of Greenfield." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 27, 1972, Greenfield National Bank
(organizing), Greenfield, Ohio, and The Peoples
National Bank of Greenfield, Greenfield, Ohio,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the former
and with the title of the latter.
The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield, the
existing bank, was chartered as a National bank
in 1911, and currently operates two branches,
with total deposits of $15.8 million, within the city
of Greenfield. The bank is located about 50 miles
southwest of Columbus and 60 miles northeast of
Cincinnati, in Highland County.
Competition for The Peoples National Bank of
Greenfield is provided by four banks in Highland
County: The Merchants National Bank of Hillsboro,
with deposits of $16.4 million; The Hillsboro Bank
and Savings Company, with deposits of $15.9 million; The Farmers and Traders National Bank of
Hillsboro, with deposits of $15.2 million; and The
Farmers Exchange Bank of Lynchburg, with
deposits of $6.8 million.
Greenfield National Bank (organizing), the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank
to BancOhio Corporation. Greenfield National
Bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to this merger.
BancOhio Corporation, Columbus, Ohio, the
bank holding company which will acquire the re


$17,906,359
125,000
18,028,359

To be
operated

3
0
3

sulting bank, is the largest multi-bank holding
company in the State, controlling 32 subsidiary
banks with aggregate deposits of $2.1 billion. The
principal subsidiary of that holding company is
Ohio National Bank, Columbus, with deposits of
$1.2 billion. In addition to this proposal, the applicant has filed applications to acquire six other banks
in Ohio.
Competition for BancOhio Corporation is provided by many large holding companies including
Centran Bancshares Corp., Cleveland, with aggregate deposits of $1.5 billion; Society Corporation,
Cleveland, controlling total deposits of $1.2 billion; Union Commerce Corp., Cleveland, with aggregate deposits of $934 million; Huntington Bancshares, Inc., Columbus, with total deposits of $957
million; and First BancGroup of Ohio, Inc., Columbus, controlling aggregate deposits of $940 million.
The formation of a new bank holding company,
Clevtrust Corp., Cleveland, has been proposed, and
upon its acquisition of three proposed subsidiaries,
it will have total deposits of $2.4 billion.
There is little, if any, competition between BancOhio Corporation or its subsidiaries and The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield because relatively
large distances separate their closest offices and
each operates in a service area separate and distinct from that of the other banks. The closest
subsidiaries of the applicant are located in Wilmington, 30 miles west of Greenfield; Chillicothe,
about 22 miles east of Greenfield; and Washington
147

Court House, approximately 16 miles north of Greenfield. Any competition existing between The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield and the closest
subsidiary of the applicant is negligible.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition for banking services in Highland County while not altering the competitive
statewide position of the applicant in relation to the
other bank holding companies in Ohio. The resulting subsidiary in Greenfield will offer a wider range
of banking services including data processing, consumer installment loans, a larger variety of time
deposits, and more sophisticated internal procedures which will make the bank a more efficiently
run institution. The resulting subsidiary will also
introduce trust services not now available at that
bank, and the immediate problem of management
succession at The Peoples National Bank of Green-

field will be solved.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclu
sion of this Office that the proposed merger is ir
the public interest and this application is, therefore
approved.
MAY 4,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Peoples National Bank of Greenfield would
become a subsidiary of BancOhio Corporation, a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
BancOhio Corporation, it would have no effect on
competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK & TRUST CO., WASHINGTON, PA., WASHINGTON, PA., AND
FIRST WASHINGTON BANK, N.A., WASHINGTON, PA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
First National Bank & Trust Co., Washington, Pa., Washington, Pa. (5920), with
and First Washington Bank, N.A., Washington, Pa. (5920), which had
merged June 11, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (5920) and title "First National Bank
& Trust Co., Washington, Pa." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On January 18, 1973, First Washington Bank,
N.A. (organizing), Washington, Pa., and First
National Bank & Trust Co., Washington, Pa.,
Washington, Pa., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter of the former and with the title of the latter.
First National Bank & Trust Co., Washington,
Pa., the existing bank, was organized in 1901, and
now operates 13 branches with deposits of $103
million. The bank competes directly with branches
of Mellon National Bank and Trust Company, with
deposits of $4.9 billion; Gallatin National Bank,
Uniontown, with deposits of $181 million; and Commercial Bank and Trust Company, Pittsburgh, with
deposits of $63 million.
First Washington Bank, N.A., the new bank,

148



$147,858,961
120,000
147,858,961

To be
operated

14
0
14

is being organized to provide a vehicle by which
to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
First Southwest Corporation, Washington, Pa.,
which will become a one-bank holding company
upon its acquisition of the- resulting bank. First
Washington Bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Because the existing bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same
name as presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 8,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank & Trust Co. would
become a subsidiary of First Southwest Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, how-

ever, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First Southwest Corporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

THE BARNSTABLE COUNTY NATIONAL BANK OF HYANNIS, HYANNIS, MASS., AND BARNSTABLE COUNTY
BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, BARNSTABLE, MASS.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis, Hyannis, Mass. (13395), with
and Barnstable County Bank, National Association, Barnstable, Mass. (13395) which had
merged June 14, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13395) and title "The Barnstable
County National Bank of Hyannis." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 16, 1973, Barnstable County Bank,
National Association (organizing), Barnstable,
Mass., and The Barnstable County National Bank
of Hyannis, Hyannis, Mass., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the former and with the title
of the latter.
The Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis, the existing bank, was organized in 1929, and
now has deposits of $15.3 million. The bank operates
three branch offices, all of which are located in
Barnstable County. The economy of the service
area of The Barnstable County National Bank of
Hyannis is dependent upon the popularity of Cape
Cod as a summer resort. Hyannis, the largest
community in Barnstable County, serves as a business center for all of Cape Cod.
Competition for The Barnstable County National
Bank of Hyannis is provided by Cape Cod Bank
and Trust Company, Hyannis, with deposits of
$50.3 million; First National Bank of Cape Cod,
Orleans, with deposits of $23.8 million; The Falmouth National Bank, Falmouth, with deposits of
$22.8 million; and Merchants Bank and Trust
Company, Hyannis, with deposits of $12.3 million.
Barnstable County Bank, National Association,
the new bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle by which to transfer ownership of The
Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis to
New England Merchants Company. The new bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior
to this merger.



$17,300,066
125,000
18,449,132

To be
operated

4
0
4

New England Merchants Company, Boston,
Mass., the bank holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, was organized in June
1970, and now owns, as its only banking subsidiary,
New England Merchants National Bank, Boston,
with deposits of $875 million. That holding company also controls three bank-related subsidiaries
which specialize in equipment leasing, investments, and international banking operations.
There is no competition between New England
Merchants Company or its subsidiary and The
Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis
because very large distances separate their closest
two offices and an adequate number of alternative
banking facilities operate in the intervening distances. Hyannis is approximately 79 miles southeast of the main office of New England Merchants
National Bank in Boston and is over 70 miles from
the border of Suffolk County. Barnstable County is
located about 50 miles from Suffolk County, in
which all of New England Merchants National
Bank's offices are located. In the intervening distance are 150 offices of 17 commercial banks having
aggregate deposits in excess of $860 million.
Consummation of the proposed merger will stimulate competition in Barnstable County because the
resulting subsidiary in Hyannis will be able to offer
new and improved services such as equipment
purchasing and leasing services, international banking, trust services, and computer facilities. The
resulting subsidiary will also be able to handle
larger loan requests because of the convenient
availability of participation sources. The acquisition

149

of the existing bank by New England Merchants
Company will solve a management succession problem at The Barnstable County National Bank of
Hyannis and will result in an economy of operations
which will be reflected in increased profits for that
bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 10, 1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan throug
which Barnstable County National Bank of Hyanni
would become a subsidiary of New England Mei
chants Company, Inc., a bank holding company
The instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of th<
surviving bank by New England Merchants Com
pany, Inc., it would have no effect on competition

LINCOLN NATIONAL BANK, BUFFALO, N.Y., AND CHASE MANHATTAN BANK OF WESTERN NEW YORK
(NATIONAL ASSOCIATION), BUFFALO, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Lincoln National Bank, Buffalo, N.Y. (13952), with
and Chase Manhattan Bank of Western New York (National Association), Buffalo, N.Y.
(13952), which had
merged June 29, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (13952). The merged bank at
date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On January 8, 1973, Lincoln National Bank,
Buffalo, N.Y., and Chase Manhattan Bank of Western New York (National Association) (organizing),
Buffalo, N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
and with the title of the latter.
Lincoln National Bank, the existing bank, was
organized in 1934 and, with assets of $11.6 million
and IPC deposits of $8.9 million, now operates two
branch offices in Erie County. The service area of
this bank includes a portion of the city of Buffalo,
the town of Cheektowaga, and portions of the town
of Lancaster.
Lincoln National Bank is the ninth largest of 10
commercial banks headquartered in Erie County
and is the 22nd in deposit size of the 30 banks
operating in the Ninth Banking District of New
York. Vigorous competition is provided by the
following banks, all of which are headquartered in
the city of Buffalo: Marine Midland Bank-Western,
with deposits of $1.5 billion, a member of Marine
Midland Banks; Manufacturers and Traders Trust
Company, with deposits of $995 million, a member
of First Empire State Corporation; Liberty National Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of
$476 million, a member of United Bank Corporation of New York; and Bank of Buffalo, with de150



To be
operated

$14,513,202
240,000
14,751,591

posits of $113 million, a member of Empire Shares
Corporation. Lincoln National Bank is the only
commercial bank headquartered in Buffalo which
is not affiliated with a bank holding company.
Chase Manhattan Bank of Western New York
(National Association), the new bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of Lincoln National Bank to The Chase
Manhattan Corporation. The new bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
The Chase Manhattan Corporation, New York,
N.Y., the holding company which will acquire the
resulting bank, is the largest of 20 bank holding
companies operating in New York State and controls four subsidiary banks with aggregate deposits
slightly in excess of $15 billion. The principal
subsidiary of the holding company is The Chase
Manhattan Bank (National Association), which
operates offices in each of the first three banking
districts in New York State and has deposits of
$15 billion. The other subsidiary banks of this
holding company operate in the first, sixth, and
eighth banking districts in New York.
There is no competition between The Chase
Manhattan Corporation or its subsidiaries and
Lincoln National Bank because large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate

number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distance. The nearest offices of
Lincoln National Bank and a subsidiary of the
holding company are 45 miles apart which precludes any competition between them. The Chase
Manhattan Corporation has no subsidiary in the
Ninth Banking District of New York.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
not adversely affect competition in Buffalo because
it will provide for the entry of New York State's
largest bank holding company into an area of
vigorous banking competition. The resulting subsidiary in Buffalo will have access to the expertise
of the specialized departments of The Chase Manhattan Corporation which will allow it to offer
increased services, including one-statement banking, a wider range of time deposits, competitive
mortgage financing, a wider range of consumer

loans, and municipal financing. That will serve to
increase competition in Buffalo and will therefore
confer a benefit on the banking public.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public
interest and this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 11, 1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Lincoln National Bank would become a
subsidiary of The Chase Manhattan Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
The Chase Manhattan Corporation, it would have
no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MANHATTAN, MANHATTAN, KANS., AND POYNTZ NATIONAL BANK OF
MANHATTAN, MANHATTAN, KANS.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Manhattan, Manhattan, Kans. (3782), with
and Poyntz National Bank of Manhattan, Manhattan, Kans. (3782), which had
merged June 29, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (3782) and title "First National Bank
of Manhattan." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 29, 1972, The First National Bank
of Manhattan, Manhattan, Kans., and Poyntz
National Bank of Manhattan (organizing), Manhattan, Kans., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title, "First National Bank
of Manhattan."
The First National Bank of Manhattan, the existing bank, was organized in 1887. It now operates
from its main office and a single teller facility and
has assets of $32 million and IPC deposits of $23.2
million.
Poyntz National Bank of Manhattan, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
First Manhattan Bankshares, Inc., Manhattan,
Kans., which will become a one-bank holding
company upon its acquisition of the resulting bank.




$34,458,687
121,238

To be
operated

2
0
2

34,579,925

Poyntz National Bank of Manhattan will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
Because The First National Bank of Manhattan
is the only operating bank involved in the proposed
transaction, there can be no adverse effect on competition resulting from consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the
same banking business at the same locations as
presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 16,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Manhattan would
become a subsidiary of First Manhattan Bankshares,

151

Inc., a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and with-

out regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by First Manhattan Bankshares, Inc., it would have
no effect on competition.

THE COMMERCIAL NATIONAL BANK OF ANNISTON, ANNISTON, ALA., AND COMMERCIAL BANK NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, ANNISTON, ALA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Commercial National Bank of Anniston, Anniston, Ala. (11753), with
and Commercial Bank National Association, Anniston, Ala. (11753), which had...
merged June 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (11753) and title "The Commercial
National Bank of Anniston." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 29, 1972, Commercial Bank National Association (organizing), Anniston, Ala., and
The Commercial National Bank of Anniston,
Anniston, Ala., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the former and with the title of the latter.
The Commercial National Bank of Anniston, the
existing bank, was chartered in 1920, and operates
three branches in the city of Anniston with deposits
of $30.7 million. The service area of the bank includes Anniston, Oxford, Fort McClellan, Hobson
City, Blue Mountain, Weaver, and the surrounding
portions of Calhoun County.
Competition for the existing bank is provided by
The First National Bank of Anniston, with deposits
of $60.8 million; The Anniston National Bank, with
deposits of $39.3 million; First National Bank of
Jacksonville, with deposits of $15.3 million; and
First State Bank of Oxford, with deposits of $12.9
million, as well as several other small banks in the
surrounding area.
Commercial Bank National Association, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
Alabama Bancorporation. Commercial Bank National Association will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Alabama Bancorporation, Birmingham, Ala., the
holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, was organized as a bank holding company in November 1970 and now controls three
subsidiary banks located in the northern, central,

152



$35,049,331
120,000
35,169,331

To be
operated

4
0
4

and southern parts of Alabama, with aggregate
deposits of $863 million. The principal subsidiary
of this holding company is The First National Bank
of Birmingham, with deposits of $753 million. In
addition to the present proposal, Alabama Bancorporation has received approval to acquire Bank
of Sulligent, with deposits of $8.6 million, and has
an application pending to acquire Alabama National
Bank of Montgomery, with deposits of $66.2
million.
Competition for Alabama Bancorporation is
provided by several large bank holding companies
including First Alabama Bancshares, Inc., Montgomery, with aggregate deposits of $524 million;
Alabama Financial Group, Inc., Birmingham, controlling deposits of $512 million; and Central and
State National Corporation, Birmingham, with
total deposits of $505 million.
There is no competition between Alabama Bancorporation or its subsidiaries and The Commercial
National Bank of Anniston because large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distance. The nearest subsidiary
of this holding company is The First National Bank
of Birmingham which is 56 miles from Anniston.
This large distance precludes any competition
between these two banks.
Competition in Calhoun County will be increased
as a result of the consummation of the proposed
transaction because the resulting subsidiary in
Anniston will offer a broader range of financial
services than is now available from The Commercial
National Bank of Anniston. Expanded services will

include a wider variety of time deposits, consumer
installment loans, data processing, and sophisticated business counseling. In addition, the
proposed acquisition will not significantly alter
the statewide competitive position of Alabama
B ancorporation.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed transaction is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 11, 1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Commercial National Bank of Anniston would
become a subsidiary of Alabama Bancorporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by Alabama Bancorporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF MUSKOGEE, MUSKOGEE, OKLA., AND
THREE RIVERS NATIONAL BANK OF MUSKOGEE, MUSKOGEE, OKLA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank and Trust Company of Muskogee, Muskogee, Okla. (4385), with
and Three Rivers National Bank of Muskogee, Muskogee, Okla. (4385), which had
merged June 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4385) and title "The First National
Bank and Trust Company of Muskogee." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 19, 1972, Three Rivers National
Bank of Muskogee (organizing), Muskogee, Okla.,
and The First National Bank and Trust Company
of Muskogee, Muskogee, Okla., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the former and with the
title of the latter.
The First National Bank and Trust Company of
Muskogee, the existing bank, was organized in 1890
and, with deposits of $38 million, is the second largest of four commercial banks headquartered in
Muskogee. The largest bank in that city is Commercial Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of
$43 million.
Three Rivers National Bank of Muskogee, the
new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
by which to transfer ownership of the existing bank
to First Muskogee Corporation, Muskogee, Okla.,
which will become a one-bank holding company
upon its acquisition of the resulting bank. Three
Rivers National Bank of Muskogee will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.




$48,227,000
130,000

To be
operated

1
0

48,357,000

1

Because The First National Bank and Trust
Company of Muskogee is the only operating bank
involved in the proposed transaction, there can be
no adverse effect on competition resulting from
consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business
at the same location and with the same name as
presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 4,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank & Trust Company of
Muskogee would become a subsidiary of First of
Muskogee Corporation, a bank holding company.
The instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by First of Muskogee Corporation,
it would have no effect on competition.

153

UPPER AVENUE NATIONAL BANK OF CHICAGO, CHICAGO, I I I . , AND UA NATIONAL BANK, CHICAGO, I I I .
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation

Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago, Chicago, 111. (14363), with
and UA National Bank, Chicago, 111. (14363), which had
merged June 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14363) and title "Upper Avenue
National Bank". The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 13, 1972, Upper Avenue National
Bank of Chicago, Chicago, 111., and UA National
Bank (organizing), Chicago, 111., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title, "Upper Avenue National Bank."
Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago, the
existing bank, was organized in 1929, and currently
has assets of $107 million and IPC deposits of $91.4
million.
UA National Bank, the new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of the existing bank to Dearborn Financial Corporation, Chicago, 111., which will become
a one-bank holding company upon its acquisition
of the resulting bank. UA National Bank will not
be operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
Because Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago is the only operating bank involved in the

$120,976,657
265,342

To be
operated

1
0
1

121,224,635

proposed transaction, there can be no adverse
effect on competition resulting from consummation
of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will
conduct the same banking business at the same
location as presently used by Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
MAY 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago
would become a subsidiary of Dearborn Financial
Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such,
and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by Dearborn Financial Corporation, it
would have no effect on competition.

HACKLEY UNION NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF MUSKEGON, MUSKEGON, MICH., AND HACKLEY
BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, MUSKEGON, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Hackley Union National Bank and Trust Company of Muskegon, Muskegon, Mich. (4398),
with
and Hackley Bank National Association, Muskegon, Mich. (4398), which had
merged July 2, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4398) and title "Hackley Union National Bank and Trust Company of Muskegon." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On March 27, 1973, Hackley Union National
Bank and Trust Company of Muskegon, Muskegon,
Mich., and Hackley Bank National Association
(organizing), Muskegon, Mich., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to

154




$162,191,736
116,763
162308,499

To be
operated

9
0
9

merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
Hackley Union National Bank and Trust Company
of Muskegon, the existing bank, was organized in
1870 and, with assets of $156 million and IPC
deposits of $119 million, is currently the largest
bank headquartered in Muskgeon. Competition for

this bank is provided by National Lumberman's
Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $96
million, and The Muskegon Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $77 million.
Hackley Bank National Association, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of Hackley Union
National Bank and Trust Company of Muskegon to
Lake Shore Financial Corporation, Muskegon,
Mich., which will becomes a one-bank holding company upon its acquisition of the resulting bank.
The new bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
Because Hackley Union National Bank and Trust
Company of Muskegon is the only operating bank
involved in the proposed transaction, there can be
no adverse effect on competition resulting from
consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business

at the same locations and with the same name as
presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
the application is, therefore, approved.
JUNE 1,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Hackley Union National Bank and Trust
Company of Muskegon would become a subsidiary
of Lake Shore Financial Corporation, a bank
holding company. The instant merger, however,
would merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard
to the acquisition of the surviving bank by Lake
Shore Financial Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

THE WINTERS NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF DAYTON, DAYTON, OHIO, AND WINTERS BANK,
N.A., DAYTON, OHIO
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Winters National Bank and Trust Company of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio (2604), with
and Winters Bank, N.A., Dayton, Ohio (2604), which had
merged July 9, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (2604) and title "Winters National Bank
and Trust Co." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 4, 1973, Winters Bank, N.A. (organizing),
Dayton, Ohio, and The Winters National Bank and
Trust Company of Dayton, Dayton, Ohio, applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the former and with
the title, "Winters National Bank and Trust Co."
The Winters National Bank and Trust Company
of Dayton, the existing bank, was organized in
1814, and now has assets of $661.8 million and IPC
deposits of $466.8 million. The bank is the largest
of four commercial banks in Dayton and competes
with The First National Bank, with deposits of
$237 million and The Third National Bank and
Trust Company, with deposits of $227 million.
Winters Bank, N.A., the new bank, is beingorganized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of The Winters National Bank and Trust


http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/
550-906 O-LT 75 - 11
Federal Reserve Bank-of St. Louis

$614,792,923
242,500
614,800,123

To be
operated

20
0
20

Company of Dayton to Winters National Corporation, which will be a one-bank holding company
upon its acquisition of the resulting bank. The new
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to this merger.
Because The Winters National Bank and Trust
Company of Dayton is the only operating bank
involved in the proposed transaction, there can be
no adverse effect on competition resulting from
consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business at the same location and with approximately
the same name as presently used by the existing
bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
,and this application is, therefore, approved.
JUNE 6,

1973.

155

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Winters National Bank and Trust Company
of Dayton would become a subsidiary of Winters
National Corporation, a bank holding company

The instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of
the surviving bank by Winters National Corporation,
it would have no effect on competition.

MACGREGOR PARK NATIONAL BANK OF HOUSTON, HOUSTON, TEX., AND NEW MACGREGOR PARK
NATIONAL BANK, HOUSTON, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
MacGregor Park National Bank of Houston, Houston, Tex. (14703), with
and New MacGregor Park National Bank, Houston, Tex. (14703), which had
merged July 19, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14703) and title "MacGregor Park
National Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 28, 1973, New MacGregor Park
National Bank (organizing), Houston, Texm and MacGregor Park National Bank of Houston, Houston,
Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the former
and with the title, "MacGregor Park National
Bank."
MacGregor Park National Bank of Houston, the
existing bank, was organized in 1954, and now has
assets of $37 million and IPC deposits of $31.7
million. The bank operates as a unit institution in
compliance with State law.
New MacGregor Park National Bank, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
Bancshares, Inc., Houston, Tex., which will become
a one-bank holding company upon its acquisition
of the resulting bank. New MacGregor Park National Bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.

To be
operated

1
0

$36,220,722
240,000

1

36,460,722

Because MacGregor Park National Bank of
Houston is the only operating bank involved in the
proposed transaction, there can be no adverse effect
on competition resulting from consummation of the
proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct
the same banking business at the same location as
presently used by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and this
application is, therefore, approved.
JUNE 6,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which MacGregor Park National Bank of Houston
would become a subsidiary of Bancshares, Inc., a
bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Bancshares, Inc., it would have no effect on
competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF OLEAN, OLEAN, N.Y., AND FIRST BANK OF OLEAN,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, OLEAN, N.Y.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Olean, Olean, N.Y. (1887), with
and First Bank of Olean, National Association, Olean, N.Y. (1887), which had
merged July 25, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (1887) and title "The First National
Bank of Olean." The merged bank at date of merger had

156



$52,153,735
120,000
52,157,350

To be
operated

4
0
4

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 26,1973, First Bank of Olean, National
Association (organizing), Olean, N.Y., and The First
National Bank of Olean, Olean, N.Y., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the former and with the
title of the latter.
The First National Bank of Olean, the existing
bank, was organized in 1870, and now operates
three branches with deposits of $46 million. The
primary service area of the bank consists of the
cities of Olean, Allegany, and Portville, covering an
estimated population of 26,700 persons.
The First National Bank of Olean is the largest
of six commercial banks headquartered in Cattaraugus County, and ranks 11th among the 30
commercial banks headquartered in the Ninth
Banking District of New York. Competition for
the bank is provided by First Trust Union Bank,
Wellsville, with deposits of $73 million, a member
of Security New York State Corporation; The
Citizens National Bank of Wells ville, with deposits
of $64 million; and The Exchange Bank of Olean,
with deposits of $43 million, a member of The Bank
of New York Company. Additional competition is
provided by several smaller banks.
First Bank of Olean, National Association, the
new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
by which to transfer ownership of The First National
Bank of Olean to Manufacturers Hanover Corporation, Dover, Del. The new bank will not be operating
as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Manufacturers Hanover Corporation, the holding
company which will acquire the resulting bank,
is the third largest of 20 bank holding companies
operating in New York State; it now controls two
banks with aggregate deposits of approximately
$9 billion. The principal subsidiary of the holding
company is Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company,
New York City, with deposits of $9 billion, which
operates offices in the first, second and third
banking districts of New York. First National Bank
of Bay Shore, the other subsidiary, has deposits




of $59 million, and is located in the First Banking
District. Manfacturers Hanover Corporation has
also submitted applications to acquire four banks,
including the subject of this application.
There is no competition between Manufacturers
Hanover Corporation or its subsidiaries and The
First National Bank of Olean because large distances separate their closest two offices and an
adequate number of alternative banking facilities
operate in the intervening distance. The nearest
office of a subsidiary of Manufacturers Hanover
Corporation is approximately 325 miles from the
closest branch of The First National Bank of
Olean. Further, the resulting subsidiary will be 157
miles from the closest office of the other banks
which Manufacturers Hanover Corporation has
submitted applications to acquire.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in the service area of the
resulting subsidiary in Olean by allowing it to offer
a wider range of banking and credit services,
including" expanded trust services, computer
services, easy access to large loan reserves, and the
expertise of very specialized banking departments
and their personnel. The proposed transaction will
have no effect on the present service area of
Manufacturers Hanover Corporation and its subsidiaries, nor will it alter the size of this holding
company relative to its principal competitors.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JUNE 22,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Olean would become
a subsidiary of Manufacturers Hanover Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Manufacturers Hanover Corporation, it would have
no effect on competition.

157

THE FARMERS NATIONAL BANK OF MALONE, MALONE, N.Y., AND FARMERS BANK OF MALONE, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION, MALONE, N.Y.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Farmers National Bank of Malone, Malone, N.Y. (598), with
and Farmers Bank of Malone, National Association, Malone, N.Y. (598), which had
merged July 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (598) and title "Farmers National
Bank of Malone." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On October 12,1972, The Farmers National Bank
of Malone, Malone, N.Y., and Farmers Bank of
Malone, National Association (organizing), Malone,
N.Y., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
latter and with the title "Farmers National Bank of
Malone".
The Farmers National Bank of Malone, the existting bank, was chartered in 1864, and currently
has assets of $37.4 million and IPC deposits of
$29.7 million. The bank is the largest of three
commercial banks headquartered in Franklin
County, and ranks fourth among 20 banks located
in the Fifth Banking District of New York. The
existing bank now has three operating branches
with one approved but unopened office.
Farmers Bank of Malone, National Association,
the new bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle by which to transfer ownership of the
existing bank to Bankers Trust New York Corporation. The new bank will not be operating as a
commercial bank prior to this merger.
Bankers Trust New York Corporation, New York
City, the holding company which will acquire the
resulting bank, is the fourth largest of 18 bank
holding companies in New York State, and currently controls eight commercial banks with
aggregate deposits of approximately $10 billion.
The principal subsidiary of the holding company
is Bankers Trust Company, which has 91 banking
offices in the New York Metropolitan Area, with
total deposits of $9.5 billion. While subsidiaries
of the holding company operate in seven of the
nine banking districts of New York, it has no
subsidiary in the Fifth Banking District of New
York, which is where the existing bank maintains
its office.

158




$44,658,229
116,987

To be
operated

5
0

44,775,216

5

There is minimal competition between Bankers
Trust New York Corporation or its subsidiaries and
The Farmers National Bank of Malone because
large distances separate the closest two offices and
an adequate number of alternative banking facilities
operate in the intervening distance. The nearest
office of any subsidiary of the holding company to
Malone is the Long Lake branch of Bankers Trust
of Albany, National Association, which is 81 miles
away and in the Fourth Banking District. That large
distance satisfactorily precludes any competition.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
allow the resulting subsidiary in Malone to offer
an improved and expanded range of services to
residents and businessmen in the area, such as a
wider variety of loans, expanded trust and investment services, municipal financing, and international banking services. That will stimulate competition in New York's Fifth Banking District to the
direct benefit of the public. This transaction will
not significantly increase the size of Bankers Trust
New York Corporation, which will remain the fourth
largest bank holding company in New York State.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and this
application is, therefore, approved.
JUNE 14,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Farmers National Bank of Malone would
become a subsidiary of Bankers Trust New York
Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by Bankers Trust New York Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

UNION NATIONAL BANK, LOWELL, MASS., AND UNION BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, LOWELL, MASS.
Banking offices

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Union National Bank, Lowell, Mass. (6077), with
and Union Bank, National Association, Lowell, Mass. (6077), which had
merged Aug. 8,1973, under charter of the latter bank (6077) and title "Union National Bank
The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 27, 1972, Union Bank, National
Association (organizing), Lowell, Mass., and Union
National Bank, Lowell, Mass., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the former and with the
title of the latter.
Union National Bank, the existing bank, was
organized in 1902, and now operates 16 banking
offices in 10 cities and towns in northern Middlesex
County. The bank has assets of $168.4 million and
IPC deposits of $127.3 million.
Union National Bank is the fourth largest of
eight commercial banks in Middlesex County and
competes with Middlesex Bank, National Association, with deposits of $220 million, a member of
Baystate Corporation; Howard Trust Company, the
second largest bank in Middlesex County with
deposits of $189 million, also a member of Baystate Corporation; Melrose-Wakefield Trust Company, with deposits of $40 million, a member of
Shawmut Association, Inc.; and Lexington Trust
Company, with deposits of $35 million, also a member of Shawmut Association, Inc.
Union Bank, National Association, the new bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle by which
to transfer ownership of Union National Bank to
State Street Boston Financial Corporation, Boston,
Mass. The new bank will not be operating as a
commercial bank prior to this merger.
State Street Boston Financial Corporation, the
holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, is the fourth largest banking organization in
the State, and controls, as its only subsidiary bank,
State Street Bank and Trust Company, Boston,
Mass. That bank, with deposits of $963 million, is
the third largest commercial bank headquartered
in Boston, and operates 17 branches, all of which
are situated within Suffolk County. State Street




$171,872,243
250,000
171,879,443

To be
operated

16
0
16

Bank and Trust Company is prohibited by State
law from branching outside of Suffolk County.
The principal competitors of State Street Bank
and Trust Company include The First National
Bank of Boston, with deposits of $2.9 billion, and
National Shawmut Bank of Boston, with deposits
of $972 million, each of which is the major subsidiary of a large bank holding company. Another
large competitor is New England Merchants National Bank, with total deposits of $875 million.
There is no competition between State Street
Boston Financial Corporation or its subsidiary and
Union National Bank because large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distance. There are 24 cities and
towns located in the intervening area between the
service area of Union National Bank and Suffolk
County where all of the offices of the State Street
Bank and Trust Company are located. Those 24
cities and towns have a combined population of
910,000 and contain a total of 130 offices of 29
commercial banks with aggregate deposits in excess
of $1.2 billion. Of those 130 commercial banking
offices, 24 of them belong to banks which are subsidiaries of Shawmut Association, Inc., and 46
belong to banks which are subsidiaries of Baystate
Corporation. The large number of banks in the
intervening distance precludes any competition
between Union National Bank and State Street
Bank and Trust Company.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in the service area of Union
National Bank because the resulting subsidiary
in Middlesex County will be able to offer new and
improved services through its affiliation with State
Street Bank and Trust Company. The new services
to be introduced will involve the more sophisticated
banking operations usually available from only

159

the largest banks in the State. Further, serious loan
problems and the complete lack of management
succession at Union National Bank will be
ameliorated as a result of the subsequent acquisition
of that bank by State Street Boston Financial
Corporation.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 2,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Union National Bank would become a subsidiary of State Street Boston Financial Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
State Street Boston Financial Corporation, it would
have no affect on competition.

VIRGINIA NATIONAL BANK/HENRY COUNTY, HENRY COUNTY (P.O.

MARTINSVILLE), VA., AND THE

MARTINSVILLE BRANCH OF VIRGINIA NATIONAL BANK, NORFOLK, VA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Martinsville Branch of Virginia National Bank, Norfolk, Va. (9885), with
was purchased Aug. 17, 1973, by Virginia National Bank/Henry County, Henry County (P.O.
Martinsville), Va. (16167), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 20, 1973, Virginia National Bank/
Henry County, Henry County, Va. applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
purchase the assets and assume the deposit liabilities of the Martinsville Branch of Virginia
National Bank, Norfolk, Va.
Virginia National Bank/Henry County, Henry
County, Va., the purchasing bank, is a new bank
which is being organized by persons associated with
Virginia National Bankshares, Inc., a registered
bank holding company headquartered in Norfolk,
Va. In a companion application, the holding company has requested approval to acquire the purchasing bank as a subsidiary. Prior to its successful
acquisition by Virginia National Bankshares, the
purchasing bank will not be operating as a commercial bank.
Virginia National Bank, Norfolk, Va., the selling
bank, acquired its Martinsville branch in 1964 by
merger, and now seeks to sell that branch to the
purchasing bank. Due to the restrictions of the State
banking laws, Virginia National Bank is now prohibited from further de novo expansion in Henry
County. The selling bank is the principal subsidiary

160




$8,120,000

1

1,250,000
9,370,000

To be
operated

0
1

of Virginia National Bankshares.
Competition for the Martinsville Branch of Virginia National Bank is provided by The First National
Bank of Martinsville, with deposits of $85 million
and seven offices in the area; Piedmont Trust Bank,
with deposits of $62 million and five offices in the
area; and First National Bank of Bassett, with deposits of $36 million and two offices in the area.
The purchase by Virginia National Bank/Henry
County of the Martinsville Branch of Virginia National Bank will provide a vehicle through which
Virginia National Bankshares will be able to provide more effective banking services in a rapidly
expanding area of Virginia. It will be able to open
additional offices to meet the strong competition
already existing in that area. Because both the
purchasing and selling banks are subsidiaries of
the same holding company and will remain so, the
subject application is part of an internal corporate
reorganization which will result in no adverse
competitive effects.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public interest and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 12,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which an office of Virginia National Bank would
be transferred to a newly organized bank. Since
both the transferring bank and the acquiring bank

will be wholly-owned subsidiaries of Virginia National Bancshares, Inc., a bank holding company,
the proposed transaction is simply a corporate
reorganization and would have no competitive
effect.

BASSETT NATIONAL BANK OF EL PASO, EL PASO, TEX., AND BASSETT BANK,
PANNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, EL PASO, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Bassett National Bank of El Paso, El Paso, Tex. (15011), with
and Bassett Bank, PanNational Association, El Paso, Tex. (15011), which had
merged Sept. 4, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15011) and title "Bassett National
Bank of El Paso." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On April 16, 1973, Bassett Bank, PanNational
Association (organizing), El Paso, Tex., and Bassett
National Bank of El Paso, El Paso, Tex., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the former and with
the title of the latter.
Bassett National Bank of El Paso, the existing
bank, was organized in 1962, and now has assets
of $21.3 million and IPC deposits of $17 million.
Prior to the filing of this application, PanNational
Group, Inc., acquired 30.07 percent of the stock of
the bank.
Bassett Bank, PanNational Association, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer the remaining shares of the existing bank to PanNational Group, Inc., El Paso,
Tex. Bassett Bank, PanNational Association, will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
PanNational Group, Inc., the holding company
which will acquire the resulting bank as a whollyowned subsidiary, already owns 30.07 percent of
the existing bank. Its principal subsidiary is The
State National Bank of El Paso, which has deposits
of $230 million and this holding company also owns
24.98 percent of the stock of Citizens State Bank




$20,862,842
250,000

To be
operated

1
0

21328,068

1

of Ysleta. PanNational Group, Inc., has submitted
applications to acquire Citizens National Bank of
Austin and Metro Bank of Dallas and has plans to
acquire two new banks which will be organized in
the El Paso area.
Because of the prior affiliation between the existing bank and PanNational Group, Inc., there can
be no adverse effect on competition resulting from
consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business
at the same location and with the same name as
presently used by Bassett National Bank of El Paso.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Bassett National Bank of El Paso would
become a subsidiary of PanNational Group Inc.,
a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by PanNational Group Inc., it would have no effect
on competition.

161

CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK OF AUSTIN, AUSTIN, TEX., AND PANNATIONAL BANK OF AUSTIN,
AUSTIN, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Citizens National Bank of Austin, Austin, Tex. (14928), with
and PanNational Bank of Austin, Austin, Tex. (14928), which had
merged Sept. 4, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14928) and title "Citizens National
Bank of Austin." The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On April 16, 1973, PanNational bank of Austin
Tex., and Citizens National Bank of Austin, Austin,
Tex., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
former and with the title of the latter.
Citizens National Bank of Austin, the existing
bank, was organized in 1961 and, with deposits
of $35 million, is the sixth largest bank headquartered in Austin. Competition for the bank is
provided by The Austin National Bank, with
deposits of $289 million; The Capital National
Bank in Austin, with deposits of $266 million;
The American National Bank of Austin, with deposits of $207 million; City National Bank of Austin,
with deposits of $183 million; and Texas State
Bank, with deposits of $41.6 million.
PanNational Bank of Austin, the new bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of Citizens National Bank of
Austin to PanNational Group, Inc., El Paso, Tex.
PanNational Bank of Austin will not be operating
as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
PanNational Group, Inc., the bank holding
company which will acquire the resulting bank,
was organized in April 1972 and owns as its principal
subsidiary State National Bank of El Paso which,
with deposits of $275 million, is the second largest
bank headquartered in that city. Tfrat bank holding
company also controls Bassett National Bank,
El Paso; Citizens State Bank of Ysleta, El Paso;
and has submitted an application to acquire Metro
Bank of Dallas.

162




$43,906,827
250,000

To be
operated

1
0

44,156,827

1

There is no competition between PanNational
Group, Inc., or its subsidiaries and Citizens National
Bank of Austin because large distances separate
their closest two offices and an adequate number of
alternative banking facilities operate in the intervening distances. The closest subsidiary bank of this
holding company is in El Paso, approximately
580 miles west of Austin.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
stimulate competition in the service area of the
resulting subsidiary because that bank will be able
to offer a broader range of services which will
increase its ability to compete with the larger banks
in its service area. That will be of direct benefit
to the banking public because it will provide an
alternative source from which the more sophisticated banking services may be obtained.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
AUGUST 3,1973.
SUMMARY

OF

REPORT

BY ATTORNEY

GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Citizens National Bank of Austin would
become a subsidiary of PanNational Group Inc.,
a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by PanNational Group Inc., it would have no effect
on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK & TRUST COMPANY OF LINCOLN, LINCOLN, NEBR., AND
NATIONAL BANK OF LINCOLN, LINCOLN, NEBR.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

First National Bank & Trust Company of Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebr. (1798), with
and National Bank of Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebr. (1798), which had
merged Sept. 4,1973, under charter of the latter bank (1798) and title "First National Bank &
Trust Company of Lincoln." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On May 4, 1973, First National Bank & Trust
Company of Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebr., and National
Bank of Lincoln (organizing), Lincoln, Nebr.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
First National Bank & Trust Company of Lincoln,
the merging bank, was organized in 1871, and
operates one drive-in facility in Lincoln. It possesses total assets of $336.7 million and IPC
deposits of $178 million.
National Bank of Lincoln, the charter bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to First National
Lincoln Corporation, Lincoln, Nebr. The charter
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to this merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there

$402,842,695
260,429

In
operation

To be
operated

2
0

402,842,695

2

can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same
name as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 3,
SUMMARY

OF

1973.
REPORT

BY ATTORNEY

GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank & Trust Company of
Lincoln would become a subsidiary of First National
Lincoln Corp., a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and
without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by First National Lincoln Corp., it would have
no effect on competition.

THE FIRST FREEPORT NATIONAL BANK, FREEPORT, TEX., AND FIRST FREEPORT INTERIM NATIONAL BANK,
FREEPORT, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction
The First Freeport National Bank, Freeport, Tex. (10420), with
and First Freeport Interim National Bank, Freeport, Tex. (10420), which had
merged Sept. 4, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (10420) and title "First Freeport
National Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 25,1973, First Freeport Interim National
Bank (organizing), Freeport, Tex., and the First
Freeport National Bank, Freeport, Tex., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the former and with
the title "First Freeport National Bank".



$32,402,939
120,000
32,522,939

In
operation

To be
operated

1
0
1

The First Freeport National Bank, the existing
bank, was organized in 1913, and now has assets of
$33.5 million and IPC deposits of $23 million. The
bank ranks as the 49th largest of the 152 commercial
banks in the Houston Standard Metropolitan
Statistical Area.
First Freeport Interim National Bank, the new

163

bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of The First Freeport
National Bank to First Freeport Corporation, Freeport, Tex., which will become a one-bank holding
company upon its acquisition of the resulting bank.
The new bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
Because The First Freeport National Bank is
the only operating bank involved in the proposed
transaction, there can be no adverse effect on
competition resulting from consummation of the
proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct
the same banking business at the same location and
with approximately the same name as presently
used by The First Freeport National Bank.

Applying the statutory criteria, it is concludec
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 2,1973.
SUMMARY

OF REPORT

BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First Freeport National Bank would become
a subsidiary of First Freeport Corporation, a bank
holding company. The instant merger, however,
would merely combine an existing bank with a
nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First Freeport Corporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF WASHINGTON COUNTY, WASHINGTON COUNTY (P.O. BRISTOL),
VA., AND THREE BRISTOL BRANCHES OF THE FIRST NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF VIRGINIA,
ROANOKE, VA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Three Bristol Branches of The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia, Roanoke, Va. (2737),
with
were purchased Sept. 4, 1973, by The First National Exchange Bank of Washington County,
Washington County (P. 0 . Bristol), Va. (16174), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 15, 1973, The First National Exchange
Bank of Washington County (organizing), Washington County, Va., applied to the Comptroller of
the Currency for permission to purchase the assets
and assume the liabilities of three Bristol branches
of The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia,
Roanoke, Va.
The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia,
the selling bank, has total deposits of approximately
$531 million. It is the principal subsidiary of
Dominion Bankshares Corporation, a registered
bank holding company with total deposits of $807
million. The Bristol offices of The First National
Exchange Bank of Virginia, whose assets are to be
purchased and whose liabilities are to be assumed
by The First National Exchange Bank of Washington County, were organized under Dominion National Bank in 1890. Dominion National Bank
merged with The First National Exchange Bank of
Virginia in 1963. As of December 31,1972, the three
164




$48361,218

3

3,600,000
51,961,218

To be
operated

0
3

Bristol offices of the selling bank had total deposits
of approximately $46.3 million.
The First National Exchange Bank of Washington County, the purchasing bank, is being organized by Dominion Bankshares Corporation to
effect a transfer of its Bristol banking offices to a
new bank which will have broader de novo branching powers than are presently available to The First
National Exchange Bank of Virginia under State
law.
Because both The First National Exchange Bank
of Virginia and The First National Exchange Bank
of Washington County are subsidiaries of the same
bank holding company, Dominion Bankshares
Corporation, the proposed transaction is simply a
corporate reorganization and would have no competitive effect.
Accordingly, applying the statutory criteria, it is
concluded that the proposed transaction is in the
public interest. This application is, therefore,
approved.
JULY 5,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed transaction is part of a plan through
which the Washington County offices of First National Exchange Bank of Virginia would be transferred to a newly organized bank. Since both the

transferring bank and the acquiring bank are subsidiaries of Dominion Bankshares Corporation, a
bank holding company, the proposed transaction
is simply a corporate reorganization and would
have no competitive effect.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF GREENEVILLE, GREENEVILLE, TENN., AND THE NATIONAL BANK OF
GREENEVILLE, GREENEVILLE, TENN.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Greeneville, Greeneville, Tenn. (4177), with
and The National Bank of Greeneville, Greeneville, Tenn. (4177), which had
merged Sept. 6, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4177) and title "The First National
Bank of Greeneville." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On May 10, 1973, The First National Bank of
Greeneville, Greeneville, Tenn., and The National
Bank of Greeneville (organizing), Greeneville,
Tenn., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
latter and with the title of the former.
The First National Bank of Greeneville, the
merging bank, was chartered in 1889, and now
maintains four branches with total deposits of
$31 million. Recently, the bank has been granted
approval to establish a branch in Mosheim, Tenn.
The service area of the merging bank includes most
of Greene County which has an estimated population of 39,000 people.
Competitors of the merging bank include Greene
County Bank, with deposits of $36.8 million, and
Mosheim Bank, with deposits of $7.6 million. The
merging bank also competes with several banks
located in Johnson City which is 31 miles northeast
of Greeneville.
National Bank of Greeneville, the charter bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to Tennessee Valley Bancorp., Inc., a registered bank
holding company. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Tennessee Valley Bancorp., Inc., Nashville,
Tenn., the bank holding company which will acquire
the resulting bank, is the seventh largest banking
organization in the State of Tennessee. At present,
it owns as its only subsidiary bank, Commerce
Union Bank, Nashville, which has deposits of $505.7




$37,894,515
120,000

To be
operated

5
0
5

38,479,005

million. In addition to the present proposal, Tennessee Valley Bancorp., Inc., has submitted an
application to acquire Citizens Bank, Elizabethton,
with deposits of $21.9 million.
There is no competition between the merging
bank and either the existing or proposed subsidiary
of Tennessee Valley Bancorp., Inc. The nearest
office of Commerce Union Bank, the existing subsidiary, is in Sparta, Tenn., 171 miles west of
Greeneville. The nearest office of the proposed
subsidiary, Citizens Bank, Elizabethton, is 37 miles
northeast of Greeneville. This distance, and the
number of alternative banking institutions located
between Greeneville and Elizabethton precludes
any competition between these banks. The resulting
bank will conduct the same banking business
at the same locations and with the same name as
presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 6,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Greeneville would
become a subsidiary of Tennessee Valley Bancorp,
Inc., a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by Tennessee Valley Bancorp, Inc., it would have
no effect on competition.

165

TEMPLE NATIONAL BANK, TEMPLE TEX., AND TEMPLE BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, TEMPLE, TEX
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Temple National Bank, Temple, Tex. (14459), with
and Temple Bank, National Association, Temple, Tex. (14459), which had
merged Sept. 21, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14459), and title "Temple National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 5, 1973, Temple National Bank, Temple,
Tex. and Temple Bank, National Association (organizing), Temple, Tex., applied to the Comptroller
of the Currency for permission to merge under
the charter of the latter and with the title of the
former.
Temple National Bank, the merging bank, was
established in 1910, and has assets of $61 million and
IPC deposits of $45 million. The charter bank is
the largest bank in the Hilleen-Temple SMS A,
serving a population of 160,000. Its chief competitors are First National Bank of Temple, with total
deposits of $46.2 million, and First National Bank
of Hilleen, with total deposits of $44.5 million.
Temple Bank, National Association (organizing),
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle by which to transfer ownership of the merging bank to First International Bancshares, Inc.,
Dallas, a registered bank holding company. The
charter bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to the merger.
First International Bancshares, Inc., the bank
holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, was organized in December 1972, and has
acquired First National Bank in Dallas and HoustonCitizens National Bank and Trust Company. The
former has deposits of $2.5 billion and is the
second largest bank in Dallas. The latter has deposits of $245.8 million and is the fifth largest bank
in Houston. First International Bancshares, Inc.,
the second largest bank holding company in Texas,
has certain other acquisitions pending and has
indicated an intent to divest itself of certain minority
bank interests.

166




To be
operated

$63,687,038
125,000
62,553,052

There is no competition between the applicant's
present or proposed subsidiaries and Temple
National Bank because large distances separate
the closest offices. Temple National Bank is located
in the city of Temple, approximately 168 miles from
Houston and 135 miles from Dallas. A large number
of alternative banking institutions are located between those cities.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in the Hilleen-Temple area.
As a result of its affiliation with First International
Bancshares, Inc., Temple National Bank will
gain access to expertise in construction and mortgage lending, international banking services, and
business and industrial development, and will
be able to increase its lending capabilities. The
bank will thus strengthen its competitive position
in the area and improve its services to the community. Further, acquisition of the proposed subsidiary will not greatly enhance the competitive
position of First International Bancshares, Inc.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 22,1973.
SUMMARY

OF

REPORT

BY

ATTORNEY

GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of
First International Bancshares, Inc. Each of these
mergers, however, will merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving banks
by First International Bancshares, Inc., will have
no effect on competition.

THE ALABAMA NATIONAL BANK OF MONTGOMERY, MONTGOMERY, ALA., AND MONTGOMERY COUNTY
NATIONAL BANK, MONTGOMERY, ALA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery, Ala. (12993), with
and Montgomery County National Bank, Montgomery, Ala. (12993), which had
merged Sept. 28, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (12993) and title "The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On December 29, 1972, The Alabama National
Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery, Ala., and Montgomery County National Bank (organizing), Montgomery, Ala., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title of the former.
The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery, the
existing bank, was organized in 1907, and now, with
deposits of $66 million, is the third largest of five
commercial banks headquartered in Montgomery.
The bank has one operating branch and principally
serves the city of Montgomery and Montgomery
County, which has a population of approximately
168,000.
The existing bank competes directly with The
First National Bank of Montgomery, with deposits
of $233 million; Union Bank and Trust Company,
with deposits of $127 million; Peoples Bank and
Trust Company, with deposits of $51 million; and
Capitol National Bank of Montgomery, with deposits
of $8.5 million.
Montgomery County National Bank, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
Alabama Bancorporation. Montgomery County
National Bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
Alabama Bancorporation, Birmingham, Ala.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, was organized in November 1970 and now
controls three subsidiary banks with aggregate
deposits of $865 million. The principal subsidiary
of the holding company is The First National Bank
of Birmingham, the largest commercial bank in
Alabama, with deposits of $754.3 million. Alabama
Bancorporation also owns American National Bank
and Trust Company of Mobile and First National
Bank of Decatur.




$84,616,822
240,000
84,856,822

To be
operated

2
0
2

Alabama Bancorporation is the largest multi-bank
holding company in the State. The largest competitors of this holding company include First Alabama
Bancshares, with aggregate deposits of $565.5
million; C and S National Corporation, with deposits
of $549 million; and Alabama Financial Group, with
aggregate deposits of $514.5 million.
There is no competition between Alabama Bancorporation or its subsidiaries and The Alabama
National Bank of Montgomery because large distances separate the closest two banks and an adequate number of competitors operate in the intervening distances. The closest subsidary bank of
this holding company is an office of The First
National Bank of Birmingham, which is 82 miles
from Montgomery.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
allow the resulting bank, as a subsidiary of Alabama
Bancorporation, to increase its services to the public
by expanding its branch operations, making available FHA and VA mortgage loans, increasing its
construction financing, and offering more sophisticated fiduciary services. In addition, the bank will
be in a position to offer international banking
services, a credit card plan, and data processing to
local commercial customers. Residents within the
bank's trade area will benefit considerably from
the acquisition of The Alabama National Bank of
Montgomery by Alabama Bancshares as a result of
the introduction of new services and the expansion
of existing services. This will stimulate competition
in Montgomery County while only slightly increasing the concentration of banking resources on a
statewide basis.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 3,1973.

167

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Alabama National Bank of Montgomery
would become a subsidiary of Alabama Bancorporation, a bank holding company. The instant merger,

however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by Alabama Bancorporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

THE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK OF HUNTSVILLE, HUNTSVILLE, ALA., AND
MADISON NATIONAL BANK, HUNTSVILLE, ALA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The American National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala. (15316), with
and Madison National Bank, Huntsville, Ala. (15316), which had
merged Sept. 28, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15316) and title 'The American National Bank of Huntsville." The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On December 27, 1972, The American National
Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala., and Madison
National Bank (organizing), Huntsville, Ala.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the latter and
with the title of the former.
The American National Bank of Huntsville, the
merging bank, was organized in 1964, and operates
four branch offices in Huntsville. It possesses total
assets of $21.1 million and IPC deposits of $16
million, making it the smallest of the five banks
located in Huntsville.
Madison National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of the merging bank to Alabama
Bancorporation. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Alabama Bancorporation, Birmingham, Ala., the
hiding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, controls three banks with aggregate deposits
of approximately $929.1 million. Subsidiaries of the
holding company include the First National Bank of
Birmingham, its principal subsidiary, the American
National Bank and Trust Company of Mobile, and
the First National Bank of Decatur.
Competition between the merging bank and the
subsidiaries of Alabama Bancorporation is minimal.
The American National Bank of Huntsville and the
three subsidiaries are all located in different counties, with the First National Bank of Decatur in
closest proximity to the merging bank. That bank is
over 20 road miles from the merging bank and they

168



$27,928,207
240,000

To be
operated

5
0

28,168,207

5

are separated by the Tennessee River. The other
two subsidiaries are located considerable distances from Huntsville, thus effectively limiting any
competition between them and the merging bank.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
enable The American National Bank of Huntsville
to offer expanded and improved services which will
make it a more effective competitor within its service
area. Those services will include trust services,
installment credit loans, and a larger lending
capacity through easier participations with other
subsidiaries of the holding company. In addition,
the internal operations of the merging bank will
be benefited by the expertise of the holding company. The proposed transaction will not significantly increase the size of the applicant, but it
will enhance the merging bank's ability to compete with the larger banks in Huntsville.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which American National Bank of Huntsville would
become a subsidiary of Alabama Bancorporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Alabama Bancorporation, it would have no effect
on competition.

UNION NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF SOUDERTON, SOUDERTON, PA., AND
NEW UNION NATIONAL BANK, SOUDERTON, PA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Union National Bank and Trust Company of Souderton, Souderton, Pa. (2333), with
and New Union National Bank, Souderton, Pa. (2333), which had
merged Sept. 28, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (2333) and title "Union National Bank
and Trust Company of Souderton." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On February 5, 1973, New Union National Bank
(organizing), Souderton, Pa., and Union National
Bank and Trust Company of Souderton, Souderton,
Pa., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the former
and with the title of the latter.
Union National Bank and Trust Company of
Souderton, the existing bank, was organized in
1876, and now has assets of $88.6 million and IPC
deposits of $68 million.
New Union National Bank, the new bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of the existing bank to Univest
Corporation of Pennsylvania, Souderton, Pa., which
will become a one-bank holding company upon its
acquisition of the resulting bank. New Union National Bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
Because Union National Bank and Trust Company
of Souderton is the only operating bank involved in

$88,573,392
120,000

To be
operated

10
0
10

88,693,392

the proposed transaction, there can be no adverse
effect on competition resulting from consummation
of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will
conduct the same banking business at the same
locations and with the same name as presently used
by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Union National Bank & Trust Co. of Souderton would become a subsidiary of Univest Corporation of Pennsylvania, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by Univest Corporation of Pennsylvania, it would have no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF ESCANABA, ESCANABA, MICH., AND SECOND NATIONAL
BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF ESCANABA, ESCANABA, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba, Mich. (3761), with
and Second National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba, Mich. (3761), which had.,
merged Sept. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (3761) and title "First National Bank
and Trust Co. of Escanaba." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On April 4, 1973, Second National Bank and
Trust Company of Escanaba (organizing), Escanaba.
Mich., and The First National Bank and Trust
Company of Escanaba, Escanaba, Mich., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission



$42,307,765
125,000
42,432,765

To be
operated

3
0
3

to merge under the charter of the former and with
the title of "First National Bank and Trust Co.
of Escanaba."
The First National Bank and Trust Company
of Escanaba, the existing bank, was organized in
1871, and now has assets of $38 million and IPC
deposits of $29 million. Direct competition for this

169

bank is provided by Northern Michigan National
Bank, Escanaba, with deposits of $26 million and
State Bank of Escanaba, with deposits of $19 million.
Second National Bank and Trust Company of
Escanaba, the new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer ownership of
The First National Bank and Trust Company to
Michigan Financial Corporation, Marquette, Mich.
Second National Bank and Trust Company will not
be operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
Michigan Financial Corporation, the holding
company which will acquire the resulting bank,
has filed applications to acquire six existing banks
as subsidiaries. The proposed merger will result in
no adverse competitive effects because all six of
those banks are, at the present time, commonly
owned and controlled by a single family and
Michigan Financial Corporation does not own or

operate any other subsidiaries. Accordingly, the
proposed merger is part of an internal corporate
reorganization which will have no effect or
competition.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 12,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank and Trust Company,
Escanaba would become a subsidiary of Michigan
Financial Corporation, a bank holding company.
The instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of
the surviving bank by Michigan Financial Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF MARQUETTE, MARQUETTE, MICH., AND
SECOND NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF MARQUETTE, MARQUETTE, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette, Mich. (390), with
and Second National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette, Mich. (390), which
had
merged Sept. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (390) and title "First National Bank
and Trust Company of Marquette." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On April 4,1973, Second National Bank and Trust
Company of Marquette (organizing), Marquette,
Mich., and The First National Bank and Trust
Company of Marquette, Marquette, Mich., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the former and with
the title of "First National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette."
The First National Bank and Trust Company of
Marquette, the existing bank, was organized in
1864, and now has assets of $62.6 million and IPC
deposits of $43 million. Direct competition for this
bank is provided by The Union National Bank and
Trust Company, Marquette, with deposits of $32
million.
Second National Bank and Trust Company of
Marquette, the new bank, is being organized to

170




$67,216,598

3

625,000

To be
operated

0

67,841,598

3

provide a vehicle by which to transfer ownership of
The First National Bank and Trust Company of
Marquette to Michigan Financial Corporation,
Marquette, Mich. Second National Bank and Trust
Company of Marquette will not be operating as a
commercial bank prior to this merger.
Michigan Financial Corporation, the holding
company which will acquire the resulting bank, has
filed applications to acquire six existing banks as
subsidiaries. The proposed merger will result in no
adverse competitive effects because all six of those
banks are, at the present time, commonly owned
and controlled by a single family and Michigan
Financial Corporation does not own or operate any
other subsidiaries. Accordingly, the proposed merger is part of an internal corporate reorganization
which will have no effect on competition.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded

that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 12,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank and Trust Company of

Marquette would become a subsidiary of Michigan
Financial Corporation, a bank holding company.
The instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by Michigan Financial Corporation,
it would have no effect on competition.

THE MINERS' FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF ISHPEMING, ISHPEMING, MICH., AND
MINERS' SECOND NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF ISHPEMING, ISHPEMING, MICH.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Miners' First National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, Ishpeming, Mich (13931),
with
,
and Miners' Second National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, Ishpeming, Mich.
(13931), which had
merged Sept. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13931) and title "Miners' First
National Bank and Trust Co. of Ishpeming." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 3, 1973, Miners' Second National
Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming (organizing),
Ishpeming, Mich., and The Miners' First National
Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, Ishpeming,
Mich., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
former and with the title of "Miners' First National
Bank and Trust Co. of Ishpeming."
The Miners' First National Bank and Trust
Company of Ishpeming, the existing bank, was
organized in 1934, and now has assets of $29.4
million and IPC deposits of $22.7 million. Direct
competition for this bank is provided by The
Peninsula Bank, Ishpeming, with deposits of $11
million.
Miners' Second National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, the new bank, is being organized
to provide a vehicle by which to transfer ownership of The Miners' First National Bank and Trust
Company of Ishpeming to Michigan Financial
Corporation, Marquette, Mich. Miners' Second National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
this merger.
Michigan Financial Corporation, the holding
company which will acquire the resulting bank,




To be
operated

$31,127,317
125,000
31,252,317

has filed applications to acquire six existing banks
as subsidiaries. The proposed merger will result
in no adverse competitive effects because all six
of those banks are, at the present time, commonly
owned and controlled by a single family and
Michigan Financial Corporation does not own or
operate any other subsidiaries. Accordingly, the
proposed merger is part of an internal corporate
reorganization which will have no effect on
competition.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
JULY 12,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Miners' First National Bank and Trust
Company of Ishpeming would become a subsidiary
of Michigan Financial Corporation, a bank holding
company. The instant merger, however, would
merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving bank by Michigan
Financial Corporation, it would have no effect on
competition.

171

FIRST & MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK OF TIDEWATER, CHESAPEAKE, VA., AND FOURTEEN
BRANCHES OF FIRST & MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK, RICHMOND, VA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Fourteen Branches of First & Merchants National Bank, Richmond, Va. (1111), with
were purchased Oct. 1,1973, by First & Merchants National Bank of Tidewater, Chesapeake,
Va. (16184), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On May 8, 1973, First & Merchants National
Bank of Tidewater (organizing), Chesapeake, Va.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to purchase the assets and assume the
liabilities of fourteen branches of First & Merchants National Bank, Richmond, Va., under the
charter and with the title of the former.
First & Merchants National Bank, the selling
bank, was organized in 1865, and now has deposits
of $863 million. The bank is attempting to sell 14
of its branches, which have aggregate assets of
$89.9 million and total IPC deposits of $66.8 million,
to a new bank that is being organized by persons
closely associated with the selling bank. Those
branches are located in the cities of Norfolk, Portsmouth, Chesapeake, and Virginia Beach.
First & Merchants National Bank of Tidewater,
the purchasing bank, is being organized to provide
a vehicle through which the banking operations of
affiliates of First and Merchants Corporation in the
tidewater area of Virginia can be consolidated
under the ownership of a locally-based bank.
Through a separate application, First and Merchants Corporation will acquire the purchasing
bank as a Subsidiary. The purchasing bank will not
be operating as a commercial bank prior to the
consummation of the subject application.
First and Merchants Corporation, Richmond,
Va., the holding company that will acquire the
resulting bank, is a multi-bank holding company con-

172




$89,970,000

14

6,500,000
96,470,000

To be
operated

0
14

trolling aggregate deposits of $936.9 million. That
holding company presently controls three banks
including First & Merchants National Bank, First
& Merchants National Bank of the Peninsula, and
the First National Bank of Danville.
The proposed transaction is part of an internal
corporate reorganization involving the transfer of
ownership of branches between commonly owned
affiliates. The transaction will have no effect on the
competitive structure of banking in the tidewater
area because all of the operating offices involved
are branches of a subsidiary of First and Merchants
Corporation and will merely be transferred to another subsidiary of that holding company.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed transaction is
in the public interest and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 31,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed transaction is part of a plan through
which the Tidewater Region offices of First & Merchants National Bank would be transferred to a
newly organized bank. Since both the transferring
bank and the acquiring bank are subsidiaries of
First & Merchants Corporation, a bank holding
company, the proposed transaction is simply a
corporative reorganization and would have no
competitive effect.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ODESSA, ODESSA, TEX., AND ODESSA BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
ODESSA, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Odessa, Odessa, Tex. (13608), with
and Odessa Bank, National Association, Odessa, Tex. (13608), which had
merged Oct. 5, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13608) and title ' T h e First National
Bank of Odessa. " T h e merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 2, 1973, The First National Bank of
Odessa, Odessa, Tex., and Odessa Bank, National
Association (organizing), Odessa, Tex., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
The First National Bank of Odessa, the existing
bank, was organized in 1932, and now has deposits
of $52.9 million. It is the largest bank in Odessa,
and the third largest of the nine banks in the Midland-Odessa area. Competition for The First National Bank of Odessa is provided by American
Bank of Commerce, Odessa, with deposits of $47.5
million, a member of Texas Commerce Bancshares,
Inc., a bank holding company headquartered in
Houston; First State Bank, Odessa, with deposits
of $27.6 million; and National Bank of Odessa, with
deposits of $21.9 million.
Odessa Bank, National Association (organizing),
the new bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle by which to transfer ownership of The
First National Bank of Odessa to First International
Bancshares, Inc. The new bank will not be operating
as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
First International Bancshares, Inc., Dallas, Tex.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, has aggregate deposits of $2.7 billion,
making it the largest bank holding company in the
State. Its principal subsidiaries are the $2.5 billion-




$64,744,380
254,499

To be
operated

1
0

65,494,617

1

deposit First National Bank in Dallas, the largest
bank in the State of Texas, and the $245.8 milliondeposit Houstor> Citizens Bank and Trust Company,
thefifthlarge*
< in the city of Houston.
There is no competition between First International Bancshares, Inc., or its subsidiaries and The
First National Bank of Odessa because very large
distances separate their closest two offices and an
adequate number of alternative banking facilities
operate in the intervening distances. Applicant's
subsidiary bank closest to First National Bank of
Odessa is located in Dallas, more than 300 miles
away. Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in Odessa because the resulting subsidiary will be able to offer expanded and
improved services, as a result of its affiliation with
the applicant.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
SEPTEMBER 5,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of First
International Bancshares, Inc. Each of these mergers, however, will merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution and without regard
to the acquisition of the surviving banks by First
International Bancshares, Inc., will have no effect
on competition.

173

FIRST NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF EVANSTON, EVANSTON, III., AND
FNB NATIONAL BANK, EVANSTON, III.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First National Bank and Trust Company of Evanston, Evanston, 111. (13709), with
and FNB National Bank, Evanston, 111. (13709), which haH
merged Oct. 15, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13709) and title "First National Bank
and Trust Company of Evanston." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On March 13,1973, First National Bank and Trust
Company of Evanston, Evanston, 111., and FNB
National Bank (organizing), Evanston, 111., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
First National Bank and Trust Company of Evanston, the existing bank, was organized in 1933 and,
with deposits of $173 million, is the largest of four
commercial banks headquartered in Evanston. The
principal competitor with the bank is State National
Bank, with deposits of $158 million.
FNB National Bank, the new bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership
of First National Bank and Trust Company of
Evanston to First Illinois Corporation, Evanston, 111.,
which will become a one-bank holding company
upon its acquisition of the resulting bank. The new
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to this merger.
Because First National Bank and Trust Company

$210,027,824
259,913

To be
operated

2
0

210,037,675

2

of Evanston is the only operating bank involved in
the proposed transaction, there can be no adverse
effect on competition resulting from consummation
of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will
conduct the same banking business at the same
locations and with the same name as presently used
by the existing bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
AUGUST 3,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank and Trust Company of
Evanston would become a subsidiary of First
Illinois Corporation, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by First Illinois Corporation, it would
have no effect on competition.

THE CAPITAL NATIONAL BANK IN AUSTIN, AUSTIN, TEX., AND CAPITAL BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
AUSTIN, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Capital National Bank in Austin, Austin, Tex. (13926), with
and Capital Bank, National Association, Austin, Tex. (13926), which had
merged Oct. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (13926) and title "The Capital National Bank in Austin." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On March 29, 1973, The Capital National Bank
in Austin, Austin, Tex., and Capital Bank, National
Association (organizing), Austin, Tex., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to

174



$310,624,672
250,000
310,874,672

To be
operated

1
0
1

merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
The Capital National Bank in Austin, the merging
bank, was organized in 1934, and operates as a unit
institution. The bank possesses total assets of $304
million and IPC deposits of $140.8 million.

Capital Bank, National Association, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the merging bank to
The Bancapital Financial Corporation, Austin,
Tex., which will become a one-bank holding company upon its acquisition of the resulting bank.
The charter bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same location and with the same
name as presently used by the merging bank.

Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
SEPTEMBER 10,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Capital National Bank in Austin would
become a subsidiary of The Bancapital Financial
Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and
without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by The Bancapital Financial Corporation, it
would have no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF HARLINGEN, HARLINGEN, TEX., AND HARLINGEN BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, HARLINGEN, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Harlingen, Harlingen, Tex. (12119), with
and Harlingen Bank, National Association, Harlingen, Tex. (12119), which had
merged Oct. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (12119) and title "The First National
Bank of Harlingen." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 27, 1973, Harlingen Bank, National
Association (organizing), Harlingen, Tex., and The
First National Bank of Harlingen, Harlingen, Tex.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the former
and with the title of the latter.
The First National Bank of Harlingen, the existing
bank, was organized in 1922 and, with total deposits
of $66 million, is the second largest commercial
bank in the Brownsville-Harlingen-San Benito
area. Its chief competitors are First National Bank
of Brownsville, with deposits of $66.5 million, and
Harlingen National Bank, with deposits of $43.7
million.
Harlingen Bank, National Association, is being
organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of The First National Bank of Harlingen
to First International Bancshares, Inc., Dallas, Tex.
The new bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
First International Bancshares, Inc., the bank
holding company which will acquire the resulting



$71,390,330
125,000
75,289,087

To be
operated

1
0
1

bank, was organized in December 1972 and has
acquired First National Bank in Dallas and Houston
Citizens National Bank and Trust Company. The
former has deposits of $2.5 billion and is the second
largest bank in Dallas. The latter has deposits of
$245.8 million and is the fifth largest bank in Houston. The holding company has plans to acquire
several other banks and has indicated an intent to
divest itself of certain minority bank interests.
There is no competition between First International Bancshares, Inc. or its subsidiaries and
The First National Bank of Harlingen because
large distances separate their closest office. The
First National Bank of Harlingen is located approximately 293 miles from the closest subsidiary of
First International Bancshares, Inc. and an adequate
number of banking alternatives are located in the
intervening distance.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in the service area of the
resulting bank. Because of its affiliation with International Bancshares, Inc., The First National
Bank of Harlingen will gain additional expertise in
construction and mortgage lending, specialized

175

industry lending, business and industrial development, and international banking. The resulting
bank will be able to strengthen its competitive
position in the area and improve its services to
the community.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger is in
the public interest and the application is, therefore,
approved.
SEPTEMBER 20,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which The First National Bank of Harlingen would
become a subsidiary of First International Baneshares, Inc., a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such,
and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by First International Bancshares, Inc., it
would have no effect on competition.

AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK IN SPRINGFIELD, SPRINGFIELD, MO., AND CHARTER BANK OF SPRINGFIELD,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, SPRINGFIELD, MO.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

American National Bank in Springfield, Springfield, Mo. (15183), with
and Charter Bank of Springfield, National Association, Springfield, Mo. (15183), which had
merged Nov. 1, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (15183) and title "American National
Bank ii^ Springfield." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On June 25, 1973, American National Bank in
Springfield, Springfield, Mo., and Charter Bank of
Springfield, National Association (organizing),
Springfield, Mo., applied to the Comptroller of
the Currency for permission to merge under the
charter of the latter and with the title of the former.
American National Bank in Springfield, the merging bank, was organized in 1963. That bank, with
assets of $20.1 million and IPC deposits of $16.1
million, is the fifth largest of eight banks in Springfield.
Competitors of the merging bank in Springfield
include The Union National Bank, with deposits of
$115.1 million; Commerce Bank of Springfield,
with deposits of $59.2 million; and Bank of Springfield with deposits of $11.7 million. Three of the
competing banks in Springfield are members of
large multi-bank holding companies.
Charter Bank of Springfield, National Association,
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle by which to transfer ownership of the
merging bank to First National Charter Corporation,
a registered bank holding company. The charter
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to the merger.
First National Charter Corporation, Kansas City,
Mo., the bank holding company which will acquire
176



$21,961,655
240,000
22,254,807

To be
operated

1
0
1

the resulting bank, is the fourth largest holding
company in Missouri and presently controls nine
subsidiary banks with aggregate deposits of $671
million. The principal subsidiary of the holding
company is First National Bank of Kansas City,
Kansas City, Mo., with deposits of $480.8 million.
The remaining subsidiaries are located in Kansas
City, Boonville, Webster Groves, Beltors, Jennings,
Overland, and Butler, Mo., with deposits ranging
from $10.7 million, at National Bank of Boonville,
to $47.7 million, at Webster Groves Trust Company.
The holding company has proposed certain other
acquisitions throughout the State.
Competition between American National Bank
in Springfield and any subsidiary of First National
Charter Corporation is negligible. The closest subsidiary of the holding company to Springfield is
Butler State Bank, approximately 130 miles away,
and there are a large number of competitors operating in the intervening distance.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in the service area of American National Bank in Springfield by enabling it to
offer expanded and improved services, strengthening its capital structure, and improving its financial
and managerial resources. The resulting bank will
conduct the same banking business at the same
location as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded that

the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
SEPTEMBER 28,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which American National Bank in Springfield would

become a subsidiary of First National Charter
Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and
without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by First National Charter Corporation, it
would have no effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ANNISTON, ANNISTON, ALA., AND ALABAMA NATIONAL
BANK OF ANNISTON, ANNISTON, ALA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Anniston, Anniston, Ala. (3041), with
and Alabama National Bank of Anniston, Anniston, Ala. (3041), which had
merged Nov. 12, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (3041) and title "The First National
Bank of Anniston." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 1, 1973, The First National Bank of
Anniston, Anniston, Ala., and Alabama National
Bank of Anniston (organizing), Anniston, Ala.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
The First National Bank of Anniston, the existing
bank, was organized in 1883 and now operates
eight offices in the city of Anniston and has deposits
of $60.8 million. The service area of the bank, which
has an estimated population of 106,000 persons,
includes the towns of Oxford and Heflin as well as
the surrounding portions of Calhoun and Cleburne
counties.
The First National Bank of Anniston competes
directly with Anniston National Bank, with deposits
of $39 million and Commercial National Bank of
Anniston, with deposits of $30.7 million. Competition
is also provided by First State Bank of Oxford, with
deposits of $12.9 million; First National Bank of
Jacksonville, with deposits of $14.6 million; and
Bank of Heflin, with deposits of $18 million.
Alabama National Bank of Anniston, the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the existing bank to
The Alabama Financial Group, Inc., Birmingham,
Ala. The new bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
The Alabama Financial Group, Inc., the bank
holding company which will acquire the resulting



$75,026,625
120,000
75,254,108

To be
operated

7
0
7

bank, was organized in 1968 and now controls four
subsidiary banks with aggregate deposits of $512
million. Those banking subsidiaries serve widely
separated areas of the State with one located in
each of the cities of Birmingham, Dothan, Huntsville, and Mobile. The principal subsidiary of this
holding company is Birmingham Trust National
Bank, with deposits of $395 million. In addition to
the present proposal, the applicant has submitted
an application to acquire Marion County Banking
Company, Guin, with deposits of $14.7 million.
The Alabama Financial Group is now the fourth
largest multi-bank holding company in the State.
The holding company's largest competitors include
Alabama Bancorporation, with aggregate deposits
of $865 million; First Alabama Bancshares, with
deposits of $565.5 million; and Central and State
National Corporation, with deposits of $549 million.
There is no competition between The Alabama
Financial Group or its subsidiaries and The First
National Bank of Anniston because large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distances. The nearest such office
is a branch of Birmingham Trust National Bank, 48
miles from Anniston.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
enable The Alabama Financial Group to enter a
highly competitive market from which its present
subsidiaries are excluded from branching because
of the head office protection afforded by State law.

177

A broader range of services than is now available
to the banking public in the service area of The First
National Bank of Anniston will be introduced by
the resulting subsidiary, including specialized
lending, data processing for local commercial
customers, sophisticated fiduciary services, and
lease financing. The resulting subsidiary will also
have access to the specialized management skills
of its parent holding company for the purpose of
satisfying the particular financial needs of its
customers as they arise. That will stimulate competition in Anniston which will confer a direct
benefit on the banking public.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger is

in the public interest and this application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 12,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Anniston would
become a subsidiary of Alabama Financial Group,
Inc., a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Alabama Financial Group, Inc., it would have no
effect on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF BAY MINETTE, BAY MINETTE, ALA., AND BAY MINETTE NATIONAL
BANK, BAY MINETTE, ALA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
First National Bank of Bay Minette, Bay Minette, Ala. (14720), with
and Bay Minette National Bank, Bay Minette, Ala. (14720), which had
merged Nov. 15, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14720) and title "First National Bank
of Bay Minette." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On August 8, 1973, First National Bank of Bay
Minette, Bay Minette, Ala., and Bay Minette
National Bank (organizing), Bay Minette, Ala.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge under the charter of the latter and
title of the former.
First National Bank of Bay Minette, the existing
bank, was organized in 1954 and, with total deposits
of $13.7 million, operates one branch office. The
service area of the bank consists of the towns of
Bay Minette, Loxley, and areas immediately adjacent, with an estimated population of 14,000.
Competition for First National Bank of Bay
Minette is provided principally by Baldwin County
Bank, Bay Minette, with deposits of $11.5 million,
and Baldwin National Bank of Robertsdale, Loxley,
with deposits of $7.8 million.
Bay Minette National Bank, the new bank, is
being organized as a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of First National Bank of Bay Minette
to First Alabama Bancshares, Inc. The new bank
will not be operating as a commercial bank prior
to this merger.
178



$19,085,790
120,000
18,913,670

To be
operated

2
0
2

First Alabama Bancshares, Inc., Birmingham,
Ala., the bank holding company which will acquire
the resulting bank, was organized in 1971, and is
now the second largest multi-bank holding company
in Alabama, a rank which will be unchanged by the
proposed acquisition. The holding company controls three subsidiary banks in Birmingham, Huntsville, and Montgomery with aggregate deposits of
$524 million, and has received approval to acquire
Dothan Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of
$41.7 million.
There is no competition between the holding
company or its subsidiaries and First National
Bank of Bay Minette because large distances separate the closest two banks and an adequate number
of alternative banking offices operate in the intervening distances. The nearest subsidiary of the
holding company is First National Bank of Montgomery, which is approximately 150 miles northeast
of the proposed subsidiary. That large distance
precludes any competition between those banks.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in the service area of the
resulting subsidiary in Bay Minette because the

bank will be able to offer a wider range of more
sophisticated banking services such as lease finaning, data processing, credit card operations, trust
services, and commercial and industrial loans of
sufficient size to encourage growth in that community. That will be of great benefit to residents
of Bay Minette.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 16,1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank of Bay Minette would
become a subsidiary of First Alabama Bancshares,
Inc., a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank
by First Alabama Bancshares, Inc., it would have
no effect on competition.

THE CITIZENS NATIONAL BANK IN ABILENE, ABILENE, TEX., AND CITIZENS BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
ABILENE, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Citizens National Bank in Abilene, Abilene, Tex. (13727), with
and Citizens Bank, National Association, Abilene, Tex. (13727), which had
merged Nov. 15,1973, under charter of the latter bank (13727) and title 'The Citizens National
Bank in Abilene." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 19, 1973, The Citizens National Bank in
Abilene, Abilene, Tex., and Citizens Bank, National Association (organizing), Abilene, Tex.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
The Citizens National Bank in Abilene, the
merging bank, was organized in 1902 and operates
one facility at Dyess Air Force Base. With total
assets of $92.2 million and IPC deposits of $71.4
million, it is the largest bank in Abilene. The bank
services the Abilene Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area which is defined as Callahan, Jones, and
Taylor counties, with an estimated population of
122,000 people.
Competitors of the merging bank include Abilene
National Bank, with deposits of $13.9 million; First
National Bank, Abilene, with deposits of $86.3
million; First State Bank, Abilene, with deposits of
$67.9 million; Bank of Commerce, Abilene, with
deposits of $15.3 million; First National Bank, Stamford, with deposits of $12.4 million; and First
National Bank, Baird, with deposits of $7.9 million.
Citizens Bank, National Association, the charter
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle by
which to transfer ownership of the merging bank to



$105,842,173
250,000
106,092,173

To be
operated

1
0
1

First International Bancshares, Inc., Dallas, Tex.,
a bank holding company. The charter bank will not
be operating as a commercial bank prior to the
transaction.
First International Bancshares, Inc., is the registered bank holding company which will gain control
of the resulting bank. That corporation wholly owns
First National Bank in Dallas, with deposits of $2.5
billion, and Houston-Citizens Bank and Trust
Company, with deposits of $245.8 million. In addition, it indirectly owns 6.67 percent to 24.52 percent
of 11 other banks in Texas and has applied for
permission to acquire six additional banks.
There is virtually no competition between the
merging bank and any subsidiaries of First International Bancshares, Inc., since the closest subsidiary of this corporation is located approximately
178 miles from Abilene. The resulting bank will
operate the same banking business at the same
location and with the same name as presently
used by the merging bank but will offer a wider
range of more sophisticated services as a result
of its affiliation with a large holding company.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the opinion
of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and will result in no adverse competitive effects. It is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 15,1973.
179

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of First
International Bancshares, Inc., a bank holding
company. Each of these mergers, however, will

merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving banks by First International Bancshares, Inc., will have no effect on
competition.

THE STATE NATIONAL BANK OF DENISON, DENISON, TEX., AND DENISON BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, DENISON, TEX.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The State National Bank of Denison, Denison, Tex. (3058), with
and Denison Bank, National Association, Denison, Tex. (3058), which had
merged Nov. 15, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (3058) and title "The State National
Bank of Denison." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 2, 1973, The State National Bank of Denison, Denison, Tex., and Denison Bank, National
Association (organizing), Denison, Tex., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
The State National Bank of Denison, Denison,
Tex., the merging bank, was organized in 1883 and,
with $33.8 million in deposits, is the third largest
bank in the Sherman-Denison Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. Principal competition for the
bank comes from Merchants and Planters National
Bank, with deposits of $56 million; The Citizens
National Bank of Denison, with deposits of $35.6
million; and Grayson County State Bank, with
deposits of $22.5 million.
Denison Bank, National Association, Denison,
Tex., the charter bank, is being organized to provide
a vehicle by which to transfer ownership of the
merging bank to First International Bancshares,
Inc., Dallas, Tex. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
First International Bancshares, Inc., Dallas, Tex.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting bank, currently controls two banks, the largest
of which is First National Bank in Dallas, which has
deposits of $2.5 billion and is the second largest
commercial bank in Dallas. Houston-Citizens Bank

180




$40,962,185
127,250

To be
operated

1
0

40,519,854

1

and Trust Company, the second subsidiary of the
applicant, has deposits of $245.8 million and is the
fifth largest bank in Houston. That holding company,
second largest in Texas, also owns minority interests
in 13 other banks in the Dallas Metropolitan Area,
eight of which it has announced plans to divest by
March 1975.
There is no competition between the holding
company or its subsidiaries and State National
Bank of Denison because large distances separate
their closest two offices and an adequate number of
alternative banking facilities operate in the intervening distances. The nearest office of a subsidiary
of the holding company is First National Bank in
Dallas, 75 miles south of Denison.
Apply the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and
this application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 15,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of
First International Bancshares, Inc. Each of these
mergers, however, will merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving banks by
First International Bancshares, Inc., will have no
effect on competition.

PEOPLES NATIONAL BANK & TRUST COMPANY OF BAY CITY, BAY CITY, MICH., AND COMMERCIAL
NATIONAL BANK OF BAY CITY, BAY CITY, MICH.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
$193,977,087
127,500

Peoples National Bank & Trust Company of Bay City, Bay City, Mich. (14641), with
and Commercial National Bank of Bay City, Bay City, Mich. (14641), which had
merged Nov. 19, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (14641) and title "Peoples National
Bank & Trust Company of Bay City." The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 23, 1973, Peoples National Bank &
Trust Company of Bay City, Bay City, Mich., and,
Commercial National Bank of Bay City (organizing),
Bay City, Mich., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title of the former.
Peoples National Bank & Trust Company of
Bay City, the merging bank, was organized in 1887
and operates 12 branch offices in Bay County. The
bank has total assets of $199.8 million and IPC
deposits of $155.4 million. In its service area, the
merging bank primarily competes with Bay City
Bank and Trust Company, with deposits of $53.7
million; Chemical Bank and Trust Company of
Midland, with deposits of $110.5 million; and Valley
National Bank, with deposits of $43.2 million.
Commercial National Bank of Bay City, the
charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
by which to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to Peoples National Corporation, Bay City, Mich.
The charter bank will not be operated as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
Peoples National Corporation has applied to the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
for permission to become a bank holding company

To be
operated

13
0

194,104,587

13

and will acquire the resulting bank and West Branch
Bank (organizing), West Branch, Mich., the successor by consolidation to The State Savings Bank
of West Branch, West Branch, Mich. Because those
two proposed subsidiaries operate in different
service areas and share only a nominal number of
common customers, and because their closest
offices are separated by a distance of approximately 44 road miles, competition between them is
minimal.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded that
the proposed merger is in the public interest and will
result in no adverse competitive effect. The application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 15,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Peoples National Bank & Trust Company of
Bay City would become a subsidiary of Peoples
National Corporation, a bank holding company. The
instant merger, however, would merely combine an
existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as
such, and without regard to the acquisition of the
surviving bank by Peoples National Corporation,
it would have no effect on competition.

FIRST NATIONAL BANK IN BROWNWOOD, BROWNWOOD, TEX., AND FIRST BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
BROWNWOOD, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First National Bank in Brownwood, Brownwood, Tex. (4695), with
and First Bank National Association, Brownwood, Tex. (4695), which had
merged Nov. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (4695) and title "First National Bank
in Brownwood." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On May 21, 1973, First National Bank in Brownwood, Brownwood, Tex., and First Bank National



$40,839,022
127,983
40,842,622

To be
operated

1
0
1

Association (organizing), Brownwood, Tex., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with
the title of the former.
181

First National Bank in Brownwood, the existing
bank, was organized in 1892 and now has deposits
of $32.4 million.
First Bank National Association is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to transfer
ownership of First National Bank in Brownwood to
Central Texas Financial Corporation, Brownwood,
Tex. The new bank will not be operating as a commercial bank prior to this merger.
Central Texas Financial Corporation, Brownwood,
Tex., will become a registered bank holding company by acquisition of the successor by merger to
First National Bank in Brownwood. The resulting
holding company has no previous financial history
and does not operate any subsidiaries at the
present time. This acquisition, in itself, will have
no effect on competition in Brownwood, since it

involves the formation of a one-bank holding coir
pany, Central Texas Financial Corporation.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is conclude*
that the proposed merger is in the public interes
and this application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 30,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank in Brownwood would
become a subsidiary of Central Texas Financial
Corporation, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such,
and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by Central Texas Financial Corporation, it
would have no effect on competition.

HOLYOKE NATIONAL BANK, HOLYOKE, MASS., AND THE HOLYOKE BANK,
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, HOLYOKE, MASS.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Holyoke National Bank, Holyoke, Mass. (1939), with
and The Holyoke Bank, National Association, Holyoke, Mass. (1939), which had
merged Nov. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (1939) and title "Holyoke National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 8, 1973, Holyoke National Bank,
Holyoke, Mass., and The Holyoke Bank, National
Association (organizing), Holyoke, Mass., applied
to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission
to merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
Holyoke National Bank, the merging bank, was
organized in 1872, and operates four branches in
Hampden County. The bank possesses total assets
of $28.6 million and IPC deposits of $21.7 million.
The service area of the merging bank encompasses
Holyoke, Southampton, Easthampton, South Hadley, and Granby in Hampshire County, and Westfield, West Springfield, and Chicopee in Hampden
County. That area, which is primarily industrial
in nature, has a population of approximately 215300
people. Competitors of the merging bank include
Third National Bank of Hampden County, with
deposits of $215 million; Valley Bank and Trust

182




$27,251,462
240,550
27,492,012

To be
operated

5
0
5

Company, with deposits of $200 million, which is a
member of Baystate Corporation; and First Bank
and Trust Company of Hampden County, with
deposits of $219 million, which is a member of
Shawmut Association, Inc.
The Holyoke Bank, National Association, the
charter bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
by which to transfer ownership of the merging bank
to First National Boston Corporation, a bank holding
company. The charter bank will not be operating as
a commercial bank prior to the proposed transaction.
First National Boston Corporation, Boston, Mass.,
the holding company which will acquire the resulting
bank, was organized in 1970 and operates one subsidiary, The First National Bank of Boston. That
subsidiary, with deposits of $4.6 billion, is the
largest commercial bank in New England. Competition between the merging bank and The First
National Bank of Boston for consumer business is
nonexistent as they operate in different counties.

Also, because of its small size, Holyoke National
Bank is not capable of competing for the large industrial loans and business services in which The
First National Bank of Boston has great expertise.

public interest and will result in no adverse competitive effects. It is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 31,1973.

The resulting bank will operate the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same
name as presently utilized by the merging bank but
will also be able to offer a wider range of services as
a result of its affiliation with a large holding company, which will act to stimulate competition in its
service area.

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Holyoke National Bank would become a
subsidiary of First National Boston Corporation,
a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First National Boston Corporation, it would have
no effect on competition.

Applying the statutory criteria, it is the opinion
of this Office that the proposed transaction is in the

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

THE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK IN WESTERN MICHIGAN, ALLEGAN, MICH., AND THE WEST ALLEGAN
BRANCH OF THE AMERICAN NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY OF MICHIGAN, KALAMAZOO, MICH.
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets

Banking offices
In
operation

West Allegan Branch of The American National Bank and Trust Company of Michigan
Kalamazoo, Mich. (13820), with
was purchased Nov. 30,1973, by The American National Bank in Western Michigan, Allegan
Mich. (16211), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had
COMPTROLLERS DECISION

On August 7, 1973, The American National Bank
in Western Michigan (organizing), Allegan, Mich.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to purchase the West Allegan branch
office of The American National Bank and Trust
Company of Michigan, Kalamazoo, Mich.
The American National Bank and Trust Company
of Michigan, the selling bank, was organized in 1933
and was acquired in 1972 by American National
Holding Company, Kalamazoo, Mich., the parent
company. The selling bank has total deposits of
$191.1 million and presently operates 16 branch
offices.
The American National Bank in Western Michigan, the purchasing bank, is being organized by
people closely affiliated with the selling bank and
the parent company. The bank will locate a branch
office in what is presently the West Allegan branch
office of the selling bank, adjacent to, but outside
of, the city limits of Allegan, approximately 4 miles
from the location of the proposed subsidiary. The
service area of the purchasing bank will extend to




$221,428,000

1

825,000
7,925,000

To be
operated

0
1

the city of Allegan, Allegan Township, Cheshire
Township, Lee Township, Trowbridge Township,
and Valley Township. Competition for the proposed
subsidiary will be provided by a branch of The
First National Bank and Trust Company of Michigan, located in Allegan.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is merely part of a
corporate reorganization which will result in no
adverse competitive effects. This application is,
therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 23,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which American National Bank and Trust Company
of Michigan would become a subsidiary of American
National Holding Company, a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely
combine an existing bank with a nonoperating
institution; as such, and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving bank by American National Holding Company, it would have no effect on
competition.

183

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF MOBILE, MOBILE, ALA., AND FBG NATIONAL BANK OF MOBILE, MOBILE, ALA
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The First National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala. (1595), with
and FBG National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala. (1595), which had
merged Nov. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (1595) and title "The First National
Bank of Mobile." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On June 27, 1973, The First National Bank of
Mobile, Mobile, Ala., and FBG National Bank of
Mobile (organizing), Mobile, Ala., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to merge
under the charter of the latter and the title of the
former.
The First National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala.,
the existing bank, was organized in 1865 and now
has deposits of $243.7 million. The bank operates
six branches located in Mobile and one each in
Bayou La Barte, Grand Bay, and Saraland, Ala. In
addition, the bank has an approved, but unopened
branch in Mobile. The service area of The First
National Bank of Mobile is defined as Mobile
County whose economy is mainly supported by
natural resources, such as oil, minerals, and wood
products.
Principal competition for the existing bank is
provided by the $240.8 million deposit Merchants
National Bank of Mobile, the $74.5 million deposit
American National Bank & Trust Company of
Mobile, and the $28.5 million deposit Commercial
Guaranty Bank of Mobile. Two of the competing
banks are existing subsidiaries of multi-bank holding companies and plans for affiliation with multibank holding companies have been reported by
three other competitors.
FBG National Bank of Mobile, the new bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of The First National Bank of
Mobile, Mobile, Ala. The new bank will not be

184



$333,932,543
240,000

To be
operated

12
0

334,172,543

15

operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., Mobile, Ala.,
wishes to become a registered bank holding company by acquisition of the successors by merger to
The First National Bank of Mobile and The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala.,
which are 355 miles apart. The proposed holding
company has no previous financial history and at
present does not operate any subsidiaries.
First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., will become, by
its acquisition of the two banks, the fifth largest
banking organization in Alabama. The proposed
transaction will not result in any significant movement toward the ability of the applicant to dominate
the competition for banking services in Mobile.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is the conclusion of this Office that the proposed merger is in the
public interest and this application is, therefore,
approved.
OCTOBER 26,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of First
Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc. Each of these mergers,
however, will merely combine an existing bank with
a nonoperating institution and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving banks by First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., will have no effect on
competition.

THE HENDERSON NATIONAL BANK OF HUNTSVILLE, HUNTSVILLE, ALA., AND FBG NATIONAL
BANK OF HUNTSVILLE, HUNTSVILLE, ALA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala. (8765), with
and FBG National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala. (8765), which had
merged Nov. 30, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (8765) and title "The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On June 27, 1973, The Henderson National Bank
of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala., and FBG National
Bank of Huntsville (organizing), Huntsville, Ala.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and the title of the former.
The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville, the
existing bank, was organized in 1907 and now has
deposits of $40.5 million. The bank operates four
branches which serve an area composed of Huntsville and Madison County whose economy is supported mainly by military installations and industries
supporting the government space effort.
Competition for The Henderson National Bank is
provided principally by a branch of the $305.2 million deposit State National Bank of Decatur,
Decatur, Ala., and the $91.9 million deposit First
National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville, Ala. Four
of the competing banks are presently subsidiaries
of multi-bank holding companies.
FBG National Bank of Huntsville, the new bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle by which to
transfer ownership of Henderson National Bank to
First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., Mobile, Ala. The
new bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to this merger.
First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., Mobile, Ala.,
wishes to become a registered bank holding com-

$54,635,000
240,000

To be
operated

5
0

54,875,000

5

pany by acquisition of the successors by merger
to The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville and
The First National Bank of Mobile, Mobile, Ala.
There is no competition between the two banks,
because their nearest offices are 335 miles apart.
The proposed holding company has no previous
financial history and at present does not operate
any subsidiaries.
First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., will become,
upon its acquisition of the two banks, the fifth
largest banking organization in Alabama. The proposed transaction will not result in any significant
movement toward the ability of the resulting holding company to dominate the competition for
banking services in Huntsville.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 26,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of
First Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc. Each of these mergers, however, will merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution and without regard
to the acquisition of the surviving banks by First
Bancgroup-Alabama, Inc., will have no effect on
competition.

FIRST CHARTER NATIONAL BANK, MONROE TOWNSHIP (P.O. JAMESBURG), N.J., AND
SECOND CHARTER NATIONAL BANK, MONROE TOWNSHIP (P.O. JAMESBURG), NJ.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First Charter National Bank, Monroe Township (P.O. Jamesburg), N J . (288), with
and Second Charter National Bank, Monroe Township (P.O. Jamesburg), N.J. (288), which
had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (288) and title "First Charter National
Bank." The merged bank at date of merger had




$149,402,992

11

123,014

To be
operated

0

149,526,006

11

185

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 9, 1973, First Charter National Bank,
Monroe Township, N.J., and Second Charter National Bank (organizing), Monroe Township, N.J.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
First Charter National Bank, the merging bank, is
headquartered in Monroe Township, and has nine
offices located throughout Middlesex and Mercer
counties. The bank, with total resources of $140.1
million and IPC deposits of $109 million, was chartered originally in 1864.
Second National Charter Bank, the charter bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to Heritage Bancorporation, Cherry Hill, N.J. The charter bank will
not be operating as a commercial bank prior to
the merger.
Heritage Bancorporation, the parent company,
began operation as a bank holding company in
November 1971 with the acquisition of South Jersey
National Bank, Camden, and The First National
Iron Bank of New Jersey, Morristown, through
which it serves the southern and central portions of
the State. The parent company, with aggregate
deposits of $646 million, ranks fifth in size among
the eight bank holding companies operating in New
Jersey.
There is minimal competition between the parent
company or its subsidiaries and First Charter

National Bank, because large distances separai
their closest two offices and an adequate nun
ber of alternative banking facilities operate in th
intervening area. The closest office of a subsidiai
of the parent company to the merging bank is th
Stirling Branch Office of The First National Iro
Bank of New Jersey located in Passaic Townshi]
approximately 17 miles northeast.
Consummation of the proposed transaction wi
enable the resulting bank to offer improved an
expanded services to area residents and businesse
including specialized commercial lending, municipf
financing, improved personal and corporation trus
services, computer services, and a wider range c
interest rates and savings plans. The resulting ban
will be better able to compete effectively with are
banks and holding companies.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is conclude
that the proposed merger is in the public interes
and the application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 27,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan througl
which First Charter National Bank would become
a subsidiary of Heritage Bancorporation, a banl
holding company. The instant merger, however
would merely combine an existing bank with •<
nonoperating institution; as such, and without re
gard to the acquisition of the surviving bank h]
Heritage Bancorporation, it would have no effec
on competition.

FIRST HUTCHINGS-SEALY NATIONAL BANK OF GALVESTON, GALVESTON, TEX., AND MARKET STREET
BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, GALVESTON, TEX.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Galveston, Galveston, Tex. (1566), with
and Market Street Bank, National Association, Galveston, Tex. (1566), which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (1566) and title "First HutchingsSealy National Bank of Galveston." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On July 20, 1973, First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Galveston, Galveston, Tex., and
Market Street Bank, National Association (organizing), Galveston, Tex., applied to the Comptroller of

186




$93,516,977
250,000
93,766,977

To be
operated

1
0
1

Currency for permission to merge under chartei
of the latter and title of the former.
First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Gal
veston, the existing bank, was organized in 1854
and now has total deposits of $81.1 million. The cit]
of Galveston, which comprises the service area o

the bank, has a growing economy based on a wide
variety of industry including port-related activities.
Competition in Galveston is provided by the
$66.8 million deposit United States National Bank,
the $40.6 million deposit Moody National Bank,
$10.5 million deposit Bank of Galveston, the $10.0
million deposit American Bank, and the $6.5 million
deposit University National Bank.
Market Street Bank, National Association, the
new bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle
by which to transfer ownership of First HutchingsSealy National Bank of Galveston to First International Bancshares, Inc. The new bank will not
be operating as a commercial bank prior to this
merger.
First International Bancshares, Inc., Dallas, Tex.,
which will acquire the resulting bank, is the largest
bank holding company in the State and has 10
approved subsidiaries with aggregate deposits of
$2.5 billion. Its primary subsidiary is First National
Bank of Dallas.
There is only negligible competition between the
holding company or its subsidiaries and First
Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Galveston
because large distances separate their closest two
offices and a number of alternative banking facilities

FIRST

operate in the intervening distance. The nearest
subsidiary of the holding company is HoustonCitizens Bank, some 52 miles away. That long distance precludes any competition between the two
banks.
Consummation of the proposed merger will
stimulate competition in Galveston because the
resulting subsidiary will be able to offer new and
improved services, such as in credit, trust, and
investment counseling services, and managerial
talent.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 29,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

These mergers are parts of plans through which
the existing banks will become subsidiaries of First
International Bancshares, Inc., a bank holding
company. Each of these mergers, however, will
merely combine an existing bank with a nonoperating institution and without regard to the
acquisition of the surviving banks by First International Bancshares, Inc., will have no effect on
competition.

NATIONAL BANK IN BARTLESVILLE, BARTLESVILLE,

OKLA., AND SECURITY NATIONAL BANK,

BARTLESVILLE, OKLA.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

First National Bank in Bartlesville, Bartlesville, Okla. (6258), with
and Security National Bank, Bartlesville, Okla. (6258), which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (6258) and title "First National Bank
in Bartlesville." The merged bank at date of merger had
COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On August 20, 1973, First National Bank in
Bartlesville, Bartlesville, Okla., and Security
National Bank (organizing), Bartlesville, Okla.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
First National Bank in Bartlesville, the merging
bank, was organized in 1900 and operates as a unit
institution. The bank possesses total assets of $129.1
million and IPC deposits of $96.6 million.
Security National Bank, the charter bank, is
being organized to provide a vehicle by which to

550-906 O-LT - 75
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/- 13
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

$138,841,910
120,000
138,961,910

To be
operated

1
0
1

transfer ownership of the merging bank to First
Bancshares, Incorporated, which will become a
one-bank holding company upon its acquisition of
the resulting bank. The charter bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating
bank involved in the proposed transaction, there can
be no adverse effect on competition resulting from
consummation of the proposed merger. The resulting bank will conduct the same banking business
at the same location and with the same name as
presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
187

that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 12,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which First National Bank in Bartlesville would

become a subsidiary of First Bancshares, Incorporated, a bank holding company. The instant
merger, however, would merely combine an existing
bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and
without regard to the acquisition of the surviving
bank by First Bancshares, Incorporated, it would
have no effect on competition.

MECHANICS NATIONAL BANK OF BURLINGTON COUNTY, BURLINGTON TOWNSHIP, N.J., AND
MECHANICS NATIONAL BANK OF DELAWARE VALLEY, BURLINGTON TOWNSHIP, N.J.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
Mechanics National Bank of Burlington County, Burlington Township. N J . (1222), with
and Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley, Burlington Township, N.J. (1222), which
had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter and title of the latter bank (1222). The merged bank at
date of merger had
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On April 12, 1973, Mechanics National Bank of
Burlington County, Burlington Township, N.J.,
and Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley
(organizing), Burlington Township, N.J., applied to
the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter and with the title of the
latter.
Mechanics National Bank of Burlington County,
the merging bank, was organized in 1839 and
operates 13 branches in the north and central portions of Burlington County. The bank possesses
total assets of $95 million and IPC deposits of $70.8
million. The economy of the service area, which has
a population of approximately 249,000 people, is
fostered by military installations and industrial
operations.
Mechanics National Bank of Burlington County
ranks second in deposit size among the 12 commercial banks headquartered in Burlington County
and 11th among the 68 commercial banks in the
Third Banking District. Its competitors include
Burlington County Trust Company, Moorestown,
with depsoits of $120 million; South Jersey National
Bank, Cherry Hill, with deposits of $441 million,
which is a member of Heritage Bancorporation, a
multi-bank holding company with deposits of $646
million; The Bank of New Jersey, Camden, with
deposits of $460 million; Fidelity Bank and Trust

188




$106,582,456

To be
operated

12

125,000
106,707,456

12

Company of New Jersey, Pennsauken, with deposits
of $55 million; Bank of Mid-Jersey, Bordentown,
with deposits of $54 million, and The Third National
Bank of New Jersey, Camden, with deposits of $47
million, which is a member of United Jersey Banks,
a multi-bank holding company with deposits of $1.4billion.
Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley,
the charter bank, is being organized to provide a
vehicle by which to transfer ownership of the
merging bank to First National State Bancorporation. The charter bank will not be operating as a
commercial bank prior to the merger.
First National State Bancorporation, Newark,
N.J., the registered bank holding company which
will gain control of the resulting bank, was organized
in 1970 and is the second largest of the eight
multi-bank holding companies operating in New
Jersey. The company controls eight banks in the
first, second, and third banking districts, which have
aggregate deposits of $1.4 billion. Its largest subsidiary, First National State Bank of New Jersey,
Newark, N.J., has deposits of $1 billion.
Competition between Mechanics National Bank
of Burlington County and the subsidiaries of the
applicant is minimal. They operate in different
service areas and their closest offices are separated
by a distance of approximately 11 miles.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
result in no adverse competitive effects. The re-

suiting bank will be able to offer improved and
expanded services, including specialized commercial loans, automobile loans to servicemen,
overdraft banking, international banking services,
trust services, and competitive bidding for municipal
financing.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 30,

1973.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which Mechanics National Bank of Burlington
County would become a subsidiary of First National
State Bancorporation, a bank holding company.
The instant merger, however, would merely combine
an existing bank with a nonoperating institution;
as such, and without regard to the acquisition of
the surviving bank by First National State Bancorporation, it would have no effect on competition.

THE CITY NATIONAL BANK OF TUSCALOOSA, TUSCALOOSA, ALA., AND CITY BANK OF
TUSCALOOSA, N.A.,

TUSCALOOSA, ALA.
Banking offices

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

The City National Bank of Tuscaloosa, Tuscaloosa, Ala. (6173), with
and City Bank of Tuscaloosa, N.A., Tuscaloosa, Ala. (6173), which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (6173) and title "The City National
Bank of Tuscaloosa." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER'S DECISION

On September 4, 1973, The City National Bank
of Tuscaloosa, Tuscaloosa, Ala., and City Bank of
Tuscaloosa, N.A. (organizing), Tuscaloosa, Ala.,
applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for
permission to merge under the charter of the latter
and with the title of the former.
The City National Bank of Tuscaloosa, the merging bank, is headquartered in Tuscaloosa, Ala.,
and has five offices located throughout Tuscaloosa
County. The bank, with total resources of $85.7
million and IPC deposits of $52.1 million was
chartered originally in 1902.
City Bank of Tuscaloosa, N.A., the charter bank,
is being organized to provide a vehicle to transfer
ownership of the merging bank to First Alabama
Bancshares, Inc., Birmingham, Ala. The charter
bank will not be operating as a commercial bank
prior to the merger.
First Alabama Bancshares, Inc., the parent
company, began operation as a bank holding company in October 1971 with the acquisition of First
National Bank of Montgomery; Exchange Security
Bank, Birmingham; and First National Bank,
Huntsville, through which the parent company
serves three of the four largest population centers
in the State. In June 1972, the parent company was



$95,154,409
240,000
95,161,609

To be
operated

6
0
6

the second largest of four bank holding companies
operating in Alabama with aggregate deposits of
$565.5 million. Since that time, the parent company
has acquired the Dothan Bank and Trust Company
which has deposits of $38.3 million.
There is no competition between the parent
company or its subsidiaries and The City National
Bank of Tuscaloosa, because large distances
separate their closest two offices and an adequate
number of alternative banking facilities operate in
the intervening distances. The closest office of
First Alabama Bancshares to Tuscaloosa is a
branch of Exchange Security Bank located in
Bessemer approximately 45 miles northeast of the
merging bank. That large distance effectively
precludes any competition between those two
banks.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
allow the resulting bank to offer broader and more
effective banking services to residents and businesses within its service area. The services will
include sophisticated trust services, a credit card
program, lease financing, and expanded construction loans. This will directly benefit all within the
bank's service area who need or use these services
and will stimulate competition among banks in
Tuscaloosa.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded

189

that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 30,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which The City National Bank of Tuscaloosa would

become a subsidiary of First Alabama Bancshares,
Inc., a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without
regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
First Alabama Bancshares, Inc., it would have no
effect on competition.

THE FIRST NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, BLACKSBURG, VA., AND TWO
BLACKSBURG BRANCHES OF THE FIRST NATIONAL EXCHANGE BANK OF VIRGINIA, ROANOKE, VA.
Banking offices

Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Two Blacksburg Branches of The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia, Roanoke, Va.
(2737), with
were purchased Dec. 31, 1973, by The First National Exchange Bank of Montgomery
County, Blacksburg, Va. (16246), which had
After the purchase was effected, the receiving bank had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On July 6, 1973, The First National Exchange
Bank of Montgomery County (organizing), Blacksburg, Va., applied to the Comptroller of the Currency for permission to purchase the assets and
assume the liabilities of the two Blacksburg, Va.,
branches of The First National Exchange Bank of
Virginia, Roanoke, Va.
The First National Exchange Bank of Montgomery County, the purchasing bank, is a new National banking association in the process of organization. The proposed location of the main office of
the purchasing bank is on North Main Street in the
center of downtown Blacksburg and the proposed
location of the branch is on South Main Street,
approximately 1.5 miles south of central Blacksburg. Dominion Bankshares Corporation, a registered multi-bank holding company headquartered
in Roanoke, Va., has submitted an application to
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System for permission to acquire all the voting
shares, except for directors' qualifying shares, of
the purchasing bank. The First National Exchange
Bank of Montgomery County will not open for business unless it becomes a subsidiary of Dominion
Bankshares Corporation.
The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia,
desires to sell its two existing Blacksburg branches
which have total assests of $20.7 million and IPC

190




$18,926,000

2

1,800,000
20,726,000

To be
operated

0
2

deposits of $16 million to the purchasing bank.
Dominion Bankshares Corporation owns a controlling interest in the selling bank.
Since both the purchasing and selling banks are
owned by the sahie bank holding company, the
entire transaction is merely a corporate reorganization. While Virginia law prohibits branching in
Montgomery County by the selling bank, The First
National Bank of Montgomery County will be
allowed to branch de novo, thereby enhancing
competition. The purchasing bank will conduct the
same banking business at the same locations as
presently used by the selling bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed transaction is in the public
interest and it is, therefore, approved.
OCTOBER 31,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed transaction is part of a plan
through which the Blacksburg offices of First
National Exchange Bank of Virginia would be transferred to a newly organized bank. Since both the
transferring bank and the acquiring bank are
subsidiaries of Dominion Bankshares Corporation,
a bank holding company, the proposed transaction
is simply a corporate reorganization and would have
no competitive effect.

THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF YORKTOWN, YORKTOWN, VA., AND YORKTOWN NATIONAL BANK, YORKTOWN,
VA.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The First National Bank of Yorktown, Yorktown, Va. (11554), with
and Yorktown National Bank, Yorktown, Va. (11554), which had
merged Dec. 31, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (11554) and title "The First National
Bank of Yorktown." The merged bank at date of merger had

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On September 21, 1973, The First National Bank
of Yorktown, Yorktown, Va., and Yorktown National
Bank (organizing), Yorktown, Va., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title of the former.
The First National Bank of Yorktown, the
merging bank, is headquartered in Yorktown, Va.,
and has two branch offices. This bank, with total
deposits of approximately $10.1 million, ranks 185th
in size among 251 banks in Virginia.
The First National Bank of Yorktown serves the
central portion of York County as well as small
portions of southern Gloucester County and northwestern Newport News. Competitors within The
First National Bank of Yorktown's service area
include The First National Bank of Poquoson, with
total deposits of approximately $9 million, and
Citizens Bank of Poquoson, an affiliate of First
Virginia Bankshares, Inc., with aggregate deposits
of $706 million. Also competing with the existing
bank are First and Merchants National Bank and
Dominion National Bank of the Peninsula, affiliates
of First and Merchants Corporation and Dominion
Bankshares Corporation, respectively. In addition,
United Virginia Bank/Citizens and Marine and
United Virginia Bank of Williamsburg have an
office in York County. Both banks are affiliated with
United Virginia Bankshares Incorporated, the
largest banking organization in Virginia, with
aggregate deposits in excess of $1.5 billion.
Yorktown National Bank, Yorktown, Va., the new
bank, is being organized to provide a vehicle to
transfer ownership of The First National Bank of
Yorktown to Central National Corporation, Richmond, Va. Yorktown National Bank will not be
operating as a commercial bank prior to the merger.




$10,991,208
154,500

To be
operated

2
0

11,145,708

2

Central National Corporation, Richmond, Va.,
with aggregate deposits of $275 million, ranks ninth
in deposit size of ten bank holding companies in
Virginia. Central National Corporation controls
Central National Bank, Richmond, Va., which has
total deposits of $257.2 million and has 15 branch
offices. The holding company has also received
permission to acquire the successor by merger to
City Savings and Trust Company, Petersburg, Va.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
not adversely affect competition. The proposed
acquisition will not change Central National Corporation's rank with regard to other bank holding
companies and will not significantly increase the
concentration of banking resources in Virginia.
Furthermore, there is no overlap between the service areas of the existing bank and subsidiaries of
Central National Corporation. The shortest distance
between offices of the subject banks is 57 miles.
The proposed merger will have a procompetitive
effect. Affiliation with Central National Corporation
will enable the resulting bank to compete more
effectively within its service area with affiliates of
other bank holding companies. Additionally, the
proposed acquisition will allow the resulting bank
to offer such new and expanded services as a
credit card program, investment and trust services
as well as financial business services like automated
payroll billings, lock box inventory, and equipment financing.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and this application is, therefore, approved.
NOVEMBER 30,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger is part of a plan through
which The First National Bank of Yorktown would
become a subsidiary of Central National Corpora-

191

tion, a bank holding company. The instant merger,
however, would merely combine an existing bank
with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without

192



regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by
Central National Corporation, it would have no
effect on competition.

///. Additional approvals
A. Approved, but in litigation
THE MERCHANTS NATIONAL BANK OF BURLINGTON, BURLINGTON, VT., AND MONTPELIER NATIONAL BANK,
MONTPELIER, VT.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Montpelier National Bank, Montpelier, Vt. (13915), with
and The Merchants National Bank of Burlington, Burlington, Vt. (1197), which had
applied for permission to merge June 29, 1973, under charter of the latter bank (1197) and
title "The Merchants National Bank of Burlington, Vermont." The application was approved
Nov. 1, 1973. The pending merger was challenged by Justice Department Nov. 29, 1973, and
is presently in litigation
COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On June 29, 1973, Montpelier National Bank,
Montpelier, Vt. and The Merchants National
Bank of Burlington, Burlington, Vt., applied to the
Comptroller of the Currency for permission to
merge under the charter of the latter and with the
title "The Merchants National Bank of Burlington,
Vermont."
The Merchants National Bank of Burlington, the
charter bank, was organized in 1849, and presently
operates seven banking offices with assets of $64.6
million and IPC deposits of $54.2 million. The
service area of the charter bank generally encompasses the central section of the State of
Vermont with competition provided by Chittenden
Trust Company, Burlington, with deposits of $185.4
million; The Howard Bank, Burlington, with deposits
of $145.7 million; The First Vermont Bank and
Trust Company, Brattleboro, with deposits of $104.4
million; and Vermont National Bank, Brattleboro,
with deposits of $92.4 million.
Montpelier National Bank, the merging bank,
was organized in 1824, and presently operates two
banking offices with assets of $35.7 million and IPC
deposits of $26.1 million. Those offices are located
in Montpelier and Berlin. Principal competition for
this bank is provided by the larger banks cited as
competitors of the charter bank.
Vermont is the 48th most populous State in the
Union with an estimated population of only 458,000
persons. The significance of that small figure to the
competitive structure of the banking industry is
enhanced by the fact that 88 percent of the land in
Vermont is devoted to farms and forests, leaving
a rather small amount of acreage for commercial,
industrial, and residential use.



$35,738,000
64,638,000

To be
operated

2
7

In that small, more densely populated area there
are presently 41 commercial banks and 133 commercial banking offices, including home offices.
The charter bank ranks fifth in size while the
merging bank ranks ninth. Among the 20 states
with statewide branching, Vermont ranks 19th in
population per bank and in population per banking
office. Hence, the combination of a statewide
branching law with a limited populated land area
requires that the entire State be taken as one service
area for concentration computations.
The five largest banks in Vermont hold slightly
over one-half the total deposits in the State. That
concentration of banking business might, at first
glance, signal the anticompetitive tendencies of the
charter bank, ranking fifth, enlarging its holdings.
However, the relevant figures show that the true
concentration centers in the three largest Vermont
banks with the charter bank holding only a small
fraction of total State deposits compared to the combined deposits of those banks. Thus, the proposed
merger would not alter the present competitive
hierarchy in the State and would enable the resulting
bank to compete more effectively with the larger
institutions.
Even if the unitary nature of the State were to be
disregarded and a service area delineated in the
Montpelier-Barre corridor, the competitive banking
structure, both present and prospective, would only
be improved by the proposed merger. There are
presently eight banking offices in this area, two of
which are operated by the merging bank and one of
which is operated by the charter bank. Applications
are now pending to open six new banking offices in
this area, most of which have been submitted by
banks already established in Montpelier or Barre.
That rash of applications is indicative that such
193

banks, which had been willing to compete with
Montpelier National with their existing facilities,
feel that consummation of the proposed merger of
that bank with the charter bank will produce a more
competitive banking arena necessitating more and
better facilities. That preliminary reaction by the
banking community is a most pro-competitive result.
The fact that the resulting bank will move the
Merchants National Bank of Burlington from
second to first place in size of banks in the Montpelier-Barre corridor is of questionable significance.
The percentage difference in deposit amounts between the first and second place banks will virtually
remain the same prior to and following the proposed
merger with only the top two banks reversing rank.
There will be no greater concentration of deposits
following the transaction and competition will
remain keen with three sizable area competitors.
There is minimal actual competition between the
charter and merging banks because their head
offices are 37 miles apart and the nearest branch
of the former is 5 miles from the only branch of the
latter with four competitive banking alternatives
between them. The charter bank has been unsuccessful in attempting to enter the Montpelier
banking community and the merging bank has obtained a less than substantial amount of business
in the Barre region. The communities of Montpelier
and Barre are separated by poor roads and hilly
terrain. The newly opened Interstate 89 does not
go through either Montpelier or Barre but runs
several miles outside each and there are no easy
access roads from this route to either city. The
only road directly linking the two cities is a narrow
two-lane State Route 302 making transit between
them extremely inconvenient.
Consummation of the proposed merger will have
distinctly pro-competitive effect in the service area
of the merging bank. Even though the limited
competition which exists between the charter and
merging banks in the Montpelier-Barre corridor
will be eliminated, the size and role of the resulting
bank will tend to increase competition in both the
Barre-Montpelier corridor and the other State
markets. The problems facing the merging bank
will be resolved. The management succession
dilemma confronting the merging bank will be
settled through the transferral by the charter bank
of a depth of leadership. The question of the

194



marginally adequate capital base of the merging
bank will be eliminated by joining it with adequate
capital and capital note sales ability of the charter
bank. The resulting bank will be able to offer
improved and expanded services to the residents
and businessmen of the Montpelier-Barre area
including computerized accounting and record
keeping, longer hours, complete trust services and
a full line of loan services.
Applying the statutory criteria it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest,
and this application is, therefore, approved,
NOVEMBER 1,1973.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The impact of this acquisition may be measured
in the Montpelier-Barre area in Washington County.
Montpelier National operates its main office in
Montpelier and a branch in Berlin, situated about
midway between Montpelier and Barre. Merchants
maintains a branch in Barre, located about 5 miles
from Montpelier National's nearest office. There
are six banks with offices in the highly concentrated
Montpelier-Barre market, with the three largest
holding 64.2 percent of the market's total deposits.
Montpelier National ranks second in the area with
19.1 percent of the total deposits, while Merchants
ranks sixth with 8.5 percent of total deposits. The
proposed merger will move Merchants to first
among the six banks in the market, and increase
top three concentration to 72.7 percent. Thus, the
proposed merger will eliminate substantial existing
competition and significantly increase banking
concentration in the Montpelier-Barre market.
In addition, the proposed merger may foreclose
the potential for increased competition in the area,
since Vermont law permits statewide de novo
branching. Thus, Merchants and Montpelier National could open additional branches in the Montpelier-Barre area. Since both banks are capable of
branching de novo, the proposed merger will eliminate the potential for intensifying the existing
competition in the market.
During the past decade there has been a significant increase in the concentration of deposits held
by the State's largest banks. The five largest banks
in the State now hold 52.5 percent of the State's
total deposits, while in 1960 the five largest held
35 percent. This proposed merger not only will

further this trend toward greater concentration of
banking resources in Vermont, but will also eliminate existing competition and increase concentra-

tion in the important Montpelier-Barre market. We
conclude that the proposed merger would have a
significantly adverse effect on competition.

B. Approved, but abandoned, no litigation
THE PLANTERS NATIONAL BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, ROCKY MOUNT, N.C., AND PNB NATIONAL BANK,
ROCKY MOUNT, N.C.
Banking offices
Total assets

Name of bank and type of transaction

In
operation
The Planters National Bank and Trust Company, Rocky Mount, N.C. (10608), with
and PNB National Bank, Rocky Mount, N.C. (10608), which had
applied for permission to merge Feb. 17, 1969, under charter of the latter bank (10608) and
title "The Planters National Bank and Trust Company." The application was approved
Apr. 1, 1969, but was abandoned by the banks Feb. 8, 1973

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On February 8,1969, The Planters National Bank
and Trust Company, Rocky Mount, N.C, and the
PNB National Bank (organizing), Rocky Mount,
N.C, applied to the Comptroller of the Currency
for permission to merge under the charter of the
latter and with the title of the former.
The Planters National Bank and Trust Company,
the merging bank, is headquartered in Rocky
Mount, and has 24 branches. The bank, with total
resources of $111.6 million and IPC deposits of
$94.3 million, was chartered originally in 1899.
PNB National Bank, the charter bank, is being
organized to provide a vehicle to transfer ownership
of the merging bank to the PNB Corporation. The
charter bank will not be operating as a commercial
bank prior to the merger.
Because the merging bank is the only operating

$111,586,071
125,000

To be
operated

25
0

bank involved in the proposed transaction, there
can be no adverse effect on competition resulting
from consummation of the proposed merger. The
resulting bank will conduct the same banking
business at the same locations and with the same
name as presently used by the merging bank.
Applying the statutory criteria, it is concluded
that the proposed merger is in the public interest
and the application is, therefore, approved.
APRIL 1,1969.
SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

[This merger] * * * is part of a transaction which
will result in a presently existing bank becoming a
wholly-owned subsidiary of a one-bank holding company. Thus, * * * [it] is merely part of a corporate
reorganization and as such will have no effect on
competition.

C Approved, but abandoned after litigation
THE FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF PLATTEVILLE, PLATTEVILLE, WIS., AND MOUND CITY BANK, PLATTEVILLE,
WIS.
Banking offices
Name of bank and type of transaction

Total assets
In
operation

Mound City Bank, Platteville, Wis., with
and The First National Bank of Platteville, Platteville, Wis. (53818), which had
applied for permission to merge Aug. 21, 1972, under charter of the latter bank (4650) and
title "The First Mound City National Bank." The application was approved Dec. 14, 1972,
but was abandoned by the banks Mar. 16, 1973, after filing of antitrust suit by the Justice
Department




To be
operated

$17,253,000
12,428,000

195

COMPTROLLER S DECISION

On August 21,1972, Mound City Bank, Platteville,
Wis., and The First National Bank of Platteville,
Platteville, Wis., applied to the Comptroller of the
Currency for permission to merge under the charter
of the latter and with the title "The First Mound
City National Bank."
The First National Bank of Platteville, the charter
bank, was established in 1891 and operates from a
single office with assets of $12.4 million and IPC
deposits of $10.7 million. Mound City Bank, the
merging bank, was organized in 1915 and, with
assets of $17.2 million and IPC deposits of $14.4
million, maintains one branch office in nearby Belmont. Platteville, the city in which both the charter
and merging banks are headquartered, is situated in
the southwestern corner of Wisconsin approximately
40 miles southwest of Madison, the capital of Wisconsin, and 20 miles northeast of Dubuque, Iowa,
the closest large cities.
The trade areas served by those two banks, which
are co-extensive, lie within a 25-mile radius of
Platteville and include the major portion of the three
adjacent counties of Grant, Iowa, and Lafayette.
Both the charter and merging banks compete
actively throughout the entire delineated service
area, which has an estimated population of 56,000
persons, because of the status of Platteville as the
trading center of that large rural area. Within that
area, where agriculture forms the primary economic
base, a total of 18 commercial banks have their
main offices and operate five additional branches,
the largest of which include Union State Bank,
Lancaster, with deposits of $14.3 million; State
National Bank of Platteville, with deposits of
$13.9 million; Lancaster State Bank, with deposits
of $13.4 million; and Strong's Bank, Dodgeville,
with deposits of $12.7 million.
No concentration of banking resources has occurred in the service area of the charter and merging
banks because the area surrounding Platteville
contains many small banking units that have not
found it economically feasible to acquire the personnel and facilities needed to provide full service
commercial banking. Lending activities by banks in
the area are, in large part, confined to equipment
and livestock financing, real estate mortgage loans
to individuals, and personal, single payment loans.

196



Those services are insufficient to meet the current
financial needs of local residents and businesses.
The enormous importance of mortgage loans and
the virtual absence of consumer, installment, and
commercial loans place great emphasis on competition with savings and loan institutions which
compete strongly for that type of business in the
service area of the charter and merging banks.
Within the city of Platteville alone there are offices
of two such institutions, the newly chartered First
Federal Savings and Loan Association of Platteville
and a branch of Anchor Savings and Loan Association, Madison, with total assets of $200 million. The
Anchor Savings and Loan Association recently
entered the Platteville market by absorbing an
existing savings institution previously headquartered
there; its ability to bring substantial resources to
this market through this new office is a significant
factor in evaluating the competitive structure of this
area. An additional factor concerning those financial
institutions is their ability to offer higher interest
rates on savings accounts which will provide effective competition for large amounts of deposits now
held by commercial banks which will be unable to
meet the higher rate because of various legal
restrictions.
The charter and merging banks compete with
other financial institutions including the Federal
Land Bank and the Production Credit Association
which deal in real estate mortgage loans, installment
loans and other farm oriented loans with offices in
Lancaster, Darlington, and Dodgeville. Thorp
Finance, a wholly owned subsidiary of International
Telephone and Telegraph Corporation, is considered
a strong competitor for consumer and installment
loan business through offices in Platteville, Lancaster, Darlington, and Dodgeville.
The geographic area that the two proponents of
this application serve is predominantly agricultural
and although relatively stable; it has had no significant growth in population or in economic development in the recent past. This area is becoming
industrialized with a substantial portion of the
industrial employment represented by agriculturally
related enterprises such as cheese-making and
dairying. The city of Platteville also serves as the
retail trade center for the surrounding three-county
area and is the site of a campus of the Wisconsin

State University system which has a local enrollment
of about 3,000.
The individual lending limits of The First National
Bank of Platteville and Mound City Bank are
presently incapable of adequately serving the
credit needs of many of its customers and the
number and size of large loans which cannot be
satisfied by either of those banks on a separate
basis is increasingly becoming an important factor
in determining whether local banks will be able to
satisfy the growing credit needs of this community.
The fact that larger lines of credit are needed is
illustrated by the financial requirements of a number
of the largest farms in the area which have approached or exceeded the respective individual loan
limits of the subject banks. The campus of the State
university system in Platteville is another example
of a customer with large credit needs, including
construction financing and an outlet through which
student loans may be obtained. In addition, no bank
in this area offers a trust department capable of
handling the growing demand for estate and fiduciary services. If the commercial banks operating
in the Platteville market are unable to satisfy the
credit and trust demands of these large local
customers, they will be forced to travel to distant
cities in which larger banks are headquartered
unless an adequate, local, viable alternative becomes available. This will not only inconvenience a
growing number of residents and businessmen, but
the lack of a large commercial bank will also discourage new business from settling in this area
which is only marginally industrialized and which
needs the diversity of new businesses.
Because the charter and merging banks are
headquartered in the same city and serve an
identical trade area, the resulting merger will
eliminate some existing competition between the
two subject banks but at the same time it will
serve to increase competition within the service
area as a whole by establishing a larger bank capable
of offering an expanded range of services which will
directly benefit the residents and businesses located
within Grant, Iowa, and Lafayette counties. The
resulting institution will have greater lending
capabilities based on a larger capital structure
which will allow it to meet the credit needs of the
larger customers in this area who now must go to
banks in Dubuque, Madison, and far-away Milwaukee for their financial needs. The resulting bank




will also be in a position to offer specialized agricultural loan services, complete trust facilities,
and installment loans. The proposed merger will
allow the resulting bank in Platteville to operate
from the newly constructed offices of The First
National Bank of Platteville thereby allowing the
merging bank to save the expense of building a new
and modern office facility which will be needed in
the near future. The branch of Mound City Bank,
located in Belmont, will remain at that location.
Consummation of the proposed transaction will
also provide for the succession of capable management at the resulting bank, an issue which is now
in question at the merging bank. This will bring
financial stability to Platteville and its surrounding
communities at a time when the economic expansion and diversification of Grant, Iowa, and Lafayette
counties can play a significant role in the development of this area for the next generation.
Applying the statutory criteria to this application,
it is concluded that the convenience and needs of
this proposal clearly outweigh the marginally adverse competitive effects of this merger and will
stimulate competition in the resulting service area
as a whole. This application is, therefore, approved.
DECEMBER 14,

1972.

SUMMARY OF REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL

The proposed merger would combine two of the
three banking alternatives in the city of Platteville.
The head offices of the merging banks are both
located in the central portion of the city of Platteville, and both operate in the same banking market
area. Therefore, it appears that the proposed merger
will eliminate substantial direct competition between First National and City Bank.
Within a 17-mile radius of Platteville (an area
which clearly overstates the market) nine banks
(including the applicants) operate 12 banking offices.
As of December 31, 1971, City Bank held the largest
share, approximately 18 percent, of total deposits
in this area, while First National held the fifth
largest share, some 13 percent. The State National
Bank of Platteville held the second largest share,
about 16 percent of such deposits. The participants'
combined share of these deposits would be about
31 percent, almost twice as large as the next largest
commercial bank.
These concentration figures understate the com-

197

petitive effects of this merger, for competition
between the merging banks appears to be most
direct in Platteville itself. Deposits by Platteville
customers constitute 67 percent of total deposits
in City Bank's main, Platteville office, and 87
percent of First National's total deposits. As of
December 31, 1971, City Bank and First National

198



held 34 percent and 30 percent, respectively, of
deposits in the town and the combined bank would
hold 64 percent of these deposits.
Since this merger would combine two direct
competitors, both of which have a considerable
share of the relevant local market, it would have a
significantly adverse effect on competition.




APPENDIX B

Statistical Tables

Statistical Tables
Table
No.
B-l
B-2
B-3
B-4
B-5
B-6
B-7
B-8
B-9
B-10
B-ll
B-12
B-13
B-14
B-15
B-16
B-l7
B-18
B-19
B-20
B-21

Title
Page
Comptrollers of the Currency, 1863 to the present... 201
Deputy Comptrollers of the Currency
202
Regional Administrators of National banks
202
Changes in the structure of the National Banking
System, by States, 1863-1973
203
Charters, liquidations, and changes in issued
capital stock of National banks, calendar 1973... 204
Applications for National bank charters, approved
and rejected, by States, calendar 1973
205
Applications for National bank charters, by States,
pursuant to corporate reorganizations, calendar
1973
208
Newly organized National banks, by States,
calendar 1973
210
National bank charters issued and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations,
by States, calendar 1973
213
State-chartered banks converted to National
banks, by States, calendar 1973
219
National bank charters issued pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States, calendar
1973
220
National banks reported in voluntary liquidation,
by States, calendar 1973
222
National banks merged or consolidated with
State banks, by States, calendar 1973
223
National banks converted into State banks,
by States, calendar 1973
224
Purchases of State banks by National banks,
by States, calendar 1973
225
Consolidations of National banks, or National and
State banks, by States, calendar 1973
225
Mergers of National banks, or National and State
banks, by States, calendar 1973
226
Mergers resulting in National banks, by assets of
acquiring and acquired banks, 1960-73
229
Domestic branches entering the National Banking
System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States, calendar 1973
230
Domestic branches of National banks closed, by
States, calendar 1973
241
Principal assets, liabilities, and capital accounts
of National banks, by deposit size, year-end 1972
and 1973
244

200




Table
No.
Title
Page
B-22 Dates of reports of condition of National banks,
1914-73
245
B-23 Total and principal assets of National banks, by
States, June 30, 1973
247
B-24 Total and principal liabilities of National banks,
by States, June 30, 1973
248
B-25 Capital accounts of National banks, by States,
June 30, 1973
249
B-26 Total and principal assets of National banks, by
States, Dec. 31, 1973
250
B-27 Total and principal liabilities of National banks,
by States, Dec. 31, 1973
251
B-28 Capital accounts of National banks, by States,
Dec. 31, 1973
252
B-29 Loans of National banks, by States, Dec. 31,1973... 253
B-30 Outstanding balances, credit cards and related
plans of National banks, Dec. 31, 1973
254
B-31 National banks engaged in direct lease financing,
Dec. 31, 1973
255
B-32 Income and expenses of National banks, by States,
year ended Dec. 31, 1973
256
B-33 Income and expenses of National banks, by deposit
size, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
270
B-34 Capital accounts, net income, and dividends of
National banks, 1944-73
272
B-35 Loan losses and recoveries of National banks,
1945-73
273
B-36 Securities losses and recoveries of National banks,
1945-73
273
B-37 Assets and liabilities of National banks, date of last
report of condition, 1950-73
274
B-38 Foreign branches of National banks, by region and
country, as of Dec. 31, 1973
275
B-39 Total assets of foreign branches of National banks,
year-end 1953-73
276
B-40 Foreign branches of National banks, 1960-73
276
B-41 Assets and liabilities of foreign branches of
National banks, Dec. 31, 1973: consolidated
statement
276
B-42 Trust assets and income of National banks, by
States, calendar 1973
277
B-43 Common trust funds of National and State banks,
by States, 1972 and 1973
278

TABLE

B-l

Comptrollers of the Currency, 1863 to the present
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

Name
McCulloch, Hugh
Clarke, Freeman
Hulburd, Hiland R
Knox, John Jay
Cannon, Henry W
Trenholm, William L...
Lacey, Edward S
Hepburn, A. Barton
Eckels, James H
Dawes, Charles G
Ridgely, William Barret
Murray, Lawrence O ...
Williams, John Skelton
Crissinger, D. R
Dawes, Henry M
Mclntosh, Joseph W....
Pole, John W
O'Connor, J. F. T
Delano, Preston
Gidney, Ray M
Saxon, James J
Camp, William B
Smith, James E




Date of
appointment
May
Mar.
Feb.
Apr.
May
Apr.
May
Aug.
Apr.
Jan.
Oct.
Apr.
Feb.
Mar.
May
Dec.
Nov.
May
Oct.
Apr.
Nov.
Nov.
July

9, 1863
21, 1865
1,1867
25, 1872
12, 1884
20, 1886
1, 1889
2, 1892
26, 1893
1, 1898
1, 1901
27, 1908
2,1914
17, 1921
1, 1923
20, 1924
21, 1928
11, 1933
24, 1938
16, 1953
16, 1961
16, 1966
5, 1973

Date of
resignation
Mar. 8,1865
July 24, 1866
Apr. 3,1872
Apr. 30, 1884
Mar. 1, 1886
Apr. 30, 1889
June 30, 1892
Apr. 25, 1893
Dec. 31, 1897
Sept. 30, 1901
Mar. 28, 1908
Apr. 27, 1913
Mar. 2, 1921
Apr. 30, 1923
Dec. 17, 1924
Nov. 20, 1928
Sept. 20, 1932
Apr. 16, 1938
Feb. 15,1953
Nov. 15, 1961
Nov. 15, 1966
Mar. 23, 1973

State
Indiana.
New York.
Ohio.
Minnesota.
Minnesota.
South Carolina.
Michigan.
New York.
Illinois.
Illinois.
Illinois.
New York.
Virginia.
Ohio.
Illinois.
Illinois.
Ohio.
California.
Massachusetts.
Ohio.
Illinois.
Texas.
South Dakota.

201

TABLE B-2

Deputy Comptrollers of the Currency
Dates of tenure

Name

No.

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46

May 9,1863
Aug. 1,1865
Mar. 12,1867
Aug. 8,1872
Jan. 5,1886
Jan. 27,1887
Aug. 11,1890
Apr. 7,1893
Mar. 12,1896
Sept. 1,1898
June 29,1899
July 1,1908
May 21,1923
July 1,1923
Jan. 6,1925
July 1,1927
July 6,1927
Dec. 1,1928
Jan. 24,1933
Feb. 24,1936
Jan. 16,1938
Jan. 16,1938
Oct. 1,1938
May 1,1939
July 7,1941
Sept. 1,1941
Oct. 1,1944
Jan. 1,1949
Sept. 1,1950
Mar. 1,1951
Feb. 18,1952
Sept. 15,1959
May 16,1960
Apr. 2,1962
Aug. 4,1962
Sept. 3,1962
Dec. 23,1962
Jan. 1,1963
July 13,1964
Sept. 1,1964
Sept. 1,1964
July 19,1965
July 1,1966
Feb. 21,1967
July 5,1973
July 5,1973

Howard, Samuel T
Hulburd,HilandR
Knox, John Jay
Langworthy, John S ....
Snyder,V.P
Abrahams, J. D
Nixon, R.M
Tucker, Oliver P
Coffin, George M
Murray, Lawrence O...
Kane, Thomas P
Fowler, Willis J
Mclntosh, Joseph W ...
Collins, Charles W
Stearns, E. W
Awalt,F.G
Gough, E. H
Proctor, John L
Lyons, Gibbs
Prentiss, Jr., William...
Diggs, Marshall R
Oppegard, G. J
Upham, C. B
Mulroney, A. J
McCandless, R. B
Sedlacek,L.H
Robertson, J. L
Hudspeth,J.W
Jennings, L. A
Taylor, W. M
Garwood, G. W
Fleming, Chapman C .
Haggard, Hollis S
Camp, William B
Redman, Clarence B. >
Watson, Justin T
Miller, Dean E
DeShazo, Thomas G...
Egertson,R. Coleman.
Blanchard, Richard J..
Park,Radcliffe
Faulstich, Albert J
Motter, David C
Gwin, John D
Howland,Jr.,W.A....
Mullin, Robert A

State

Aug. 1,1865
Jan. 31,1867
Apr. 24,1872
Jan. 3,1886
Jan. 3,1887
May 25,1890
Mar. 16,1893
Mar. 11,1896
Aug. 31,1898
June 27,1899
Mar. 2,1923
Feb. 14,1927
Dec. 19,1924
June 30,1927
Nov. 30,1928
Feb. 15,1936
Oct. 16,1941
Jan. 23,1933
Jan. 15,1938
Jan. 15,1938
Sept. 30,1938
Sept. 30,1938
Dec. 31,1948
Aug. 31,1941
Mar. 1,1951
Sept. 30,1944
Feb. 17,1952
Aug. 31,1950
May 16,1960
Apr. 1,1962
Dec. 31,1962
Aug. 31,1962
Aug. 3,1962
Nov. 15,1966
Oct. 26,1963

New York.
Ohio.
Minnesota.
New York.
New York.
Virginia.
Indiana.
Kentucky.
South Carolina.
New York.
Dist. of Columbia.
Indiana.
Illinois.
Illinois.
Virginia.
Maryland.
Indiana.
Washington.
Georgia.
California.
Texas.
California.
Iowa.
Iowa.
Iowa.
Nebraska.
Nebraska.
Texas.
New York.
Virginia.
Colorado.
Ohio.
Missouri.
Texas.
Connecticut.
Ohio.
Iowa.
Virginia.
June 30,1966 Iowa.
Massachusetts.
June" l! 1967 Wisconsin.
Louisiana.
Ohio.
Mississippi.
Georgia.
Kansas.

TABLE B-3

Regional Administrators of National Banks
Region

Name

Headquarters

1 Charles H. Paterson

Boston, Mass

2 Charles M. Van Horn
3 R. Coleman Egertson
4 Charles B. Hall
5 John G. Hensel

New York, N.Y
Philadelphia, Pa
Cleveland, Ohio
Richmond, Va

6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

Joseph M. Ream
Joseph G. Lutz
John W. Schaffer, Jr
Donald B. Smith
John R. Burt
Michael Doman
John R. Thomas
H. Joe Selby
Arnold E. Larsen

202



Atlanta, Ga
Chicago, 111
Memphis, Tenn
Minneapolis, Minn
Kansas City, Mo
Dallas, Tex
Denver, Colo
Portland, Oreg
San Francisco, Calif

States
Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode
Island, Vermont.
New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands.
Pennsylvania, Delaware.
Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio.
District of Columbia, Maryland, North Carolina, Virginia,
West Virginia.
Florida, Georgia, South Carolina.
Illinois, Michigan.
Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Tennessee.
Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin.
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska.
Oklahoma, Texas.
Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, Wyoming.
Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, Washington.
California, Guam, Hawaii, Nevada.

TABLE

B-4

Changes in the structure of the National Banking System, by States, 1863-1973
Organized
and opened
for business 18631973

Consolidated and merged
under 12 U.S£. 215

12 U.S.C. 214
Insol-

Consolidated

Liquidated

Merged or
Converted to consolidated
State banks with State
banks

Merged

United States..

16,250

724

719

2,824

6,755

224

343

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida

220
8
33
169
616
278
140
32
40
351

4
0
1
1
21
5
11
0
8
2

17
0
0
2
52
0
9
0
0
2

45
0
6
39
67
58
7
1
7
43

63
2
21
55
396
86
69
18
13
42

0
0
1
0
4
3
5
0
0
0

0
1
1
0
19
0
15
8
0
0

Georgia....
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas....
Kentucky.
Louisiana.
Maine

211
8
113
995
454
567
462
250
126
130

1
0
20
14
4
6
11
4
8

4
0
2
13
7
2
4
2
2
10

42
0
35
227
98
206
77
37
16
13

87
4
65
299
205
243
198
110
53
79

9
1
2
17
4
11
7
8
0
0

0
0
3
2
4
1
0
2
0
1

Maryland
Massachusetts ...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.

157
394
380
522
103
340
211
416
18
88

3
44
11
8
5
13
4
2
1
3

17
22
18
0
4
12
1
3
0
8

17
28
77
116
16
58
76
83
4
5

69
208
157
193
35
148
76
199
8
23

1
1
1
4
2
4
0
7
0
0

11
12
5
0
0
1
0
0
1
0

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina.
North Dakota...
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania...
Rhode Island...

495
98
1,054
166
264
740
786
154
1,300
70

56
1
127
8
3
33
12
2
111
3

70
1
106
22
0
36
8
4
113
2

60
25
130
44
100
112
85
31
211
2

154
37
441
58
118
336
454
103
494
58

1
0
13
0
0
2
33
0
9
0

27
0
78
9
0
6
0
6
98
0

South Carolina.
South Dakota...
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia..
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands..
Puerto Rico

138
224
230
1,415
51
85
299
247
211
308
80
1
2

14
9
45
4
3
23
19
11
9
0
0
0

14
2
9
47
2
4
56
9
0
1
0
0
0

43
93
36
142
6
17
28
51
38
54
12
0
0

49
81
94
574
23
29
74
143
68
116
26
0
1

1
2
8
53
3
2
4
0
0
1
0
0
0

In
operation
Dec. 31,
1973

4
0
2
4
2
8
11
1
0
0
0
0
0


550-906 O-LT - 75
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/- 14
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

203

TABLE

B-5

Charters, liquidations, and changes in issued capital stock of National banks, calendar 1973
Number of
banks

Common
Increases:
Banks newly chartered:
Primary organizations
Conversions of State banks
Capital stock:
Preferred" 2 cases by new issue
Common:
759 cases by statutory sale
633 cases by statutory stock dividends
1 case by statutory consolidation
34 cases by statutory merger
41 cases by conversion of preferred stock
70 cases by conversion of capital notes
Capital notes and debentures: 214 cases by new
issue

*176
16

Preferred

$62,886,700
14,065,465
$450,000
123,091,497
282,379,928
14,250,690
20,093,275
7,027,832
3,042,863
$273,248,341

192

526,838,250

2
0
2
1104
20
10
3

273,248,341

1,105,000

Total increases
Decreases:
Banks ceasing operations:
Voluntary liquidations:
Succeeded by National banks
Succeeded by State banks
Statutory consolidations
Statutory mergers
Converted into State banks
Merged or consolidated into State banks
Insolvent
Capital stock:
Preferred' 30 retired
Common:
22 cases by statutory reduction
1 case by statutory consolidation
5 cases by statutory merger
Capital notes and debentures:
47 retirements
70 converted to common stock

Capital notes
and debentures

Capital stock

10,969,165
2,742,250
20,930,000

450,000

1,950,000
11,004,250
, 5 840 248

4,066,584
45,380
1,098,600
94,459,947
10,495,500
141

40,956,979

7,790,248

115,959,697

Net change.
Charters in force Dec. 31, 1972, and issued capital

+ 51
4,618

485,881,271
7,429,005,238

- 7,340,248
40,529,898

157,288,644
2,220,770,406

Charters in force Dec. 31, 1973, and issued capital

4,669

7,914,886,509

33,189,650

2,378,059,050

Total decreases

*Includes 82 reorganized banks with capital stock of $11,510,000.
tlncludes 81 reorganized banks.
NOTE: Premium on sale of common stock
Premium on sale of convertible notes
Total

204



$204,395,097 (743 cases)
$ 7,443,138 ( 70 cases)
$211,838,235(813 cases)

TABLE B-6

Applications for National bank charters, approved and rejected, by States, calendar 1973
ALABAMA

Citizens National Bank of Limestone County,
Athens
Eastern Shore National Bank, Daphne
Commonwealth National Bank, Mobile
Exchange National Bank of Montgomery,
Montgomery
The United Memorial National Bank,
Montgomery
First National Bank of Autauga County,
Prattville

Approved

Apr.
May
Feb.

Rejected

23
4
26

June 28
Feb.

12

Mar. 20

ARKANSAS

Corning
Northwest National Bank, Fayetteville
Feb.
Lonoke
The First National Bank of McGehee,
McGehee
May
First National Bank of Sheridan, Sheridan... Mar.

May 15
5
Feb. 16
10
9

CALIFORNIA

Harbor National Bank, Carson
Carson
Citizens National Bank, Hanford
Irvine National Bank, Irvine
Far East National Bank, Los Angeles
The Torrance National Bank, Torrance

June 27
Jan.

3

Approved Rejected
Mar. 30
May 14
Feb.
July

15
2

Feb.

20
Mar. 8

Feb.

5

June 6
June 6
June 18
June 5
Dec. 21
Dec. 21

Sept. 28
May 10
Jan. 2
Jan. 2
May

9

Fidelity National Bank, Decatur
May
First National Bank of Thomasville-Thomas
County, Thomasville
July

Apr. 19
Apr.
4
July 21
Mar. 19

8

GEORGIA

COLORADO

Buckingham
Square
National
Bank,
Aurora
Jan. 12
Aurora
Jan. 12
United Bank of Skyline, National Association, Denver
Mar. 30
Empire National Bank, East Canon City
July 21
CONNECTICUT

Citizen's National Bank of Fairfield, Fairfield
July

FLORIDA—Continued
North Bay Village
Oakland Park
West Boynton Beach National Bank,
Unincorporated area of Palm Beach
County
Panama City National Bank, Panama City...
First National Bank of Port Salerno, Port
Salerno
St. Petersburg
Barnett Bank of Sarasota, National Association, Sarasota
Sarasota
Sarasota
Unincorporated area of Sarasota County
First National Bank of Sunrise, Sunrise
City National Bank, Tallahassee
North Florida National Bank, Tallahassee...
Tampa
Venice
Vero Beach
Vero Beach
Winter Park National Bank, Winter Park...

21

21

ILLINOIS

Lake Shore National Bank, Danville
University National Bank of DeKalb,
DeKalb
First National Bank of Mt. Zion, Mt. Zion
Pekin
Suburban National Bank of Woodfield,
Village of Schaumburg
Schaumburg

Sept. 29
May
Aug.

9
9
Mar. 21

Jan.

15
Mar." 12

IOWA

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

American Indian National Bank, Washington
June
Hemisphere National Bank, Washington
June

Second National Bank, Eldora
12
18

Oct.

8

Apr.

30

Continental National Bank of Kentucky,
Louisville
Mar.

5

KANSAS

First National Bank of Derby, Derby
FLORIDA

Avon Park
Boynton Beach
Southern National Bank of Broward County,
Unincorporated area of Broward County...
Unincorporated area of Broward County
Clearwater
Destin
Destin
Palmer Bank of Fort Myers, National
Association, Fort Myers
Gainesville
Second National Bank of Homestead,
Homestead
Key Biscayne
Lake Worth
The Exchange National Bank of Largo,
Largo
Palmer Bank of Bradenton, National Association,
Unincorporated
area of
Manatee County
Southeast National Bank of Manatee, Unincorporated area of Manatee County
First National Bank of Miramar, Miramar
First National Bank of Moore Haven, Moore
Haven
Palmer Bank and Trust Company of Naples,
National Association, Naples



Dec. 17
Feb. 15
Sept. 28
Feb.
Mar.
Oct.
Oct.
Apr.

2
23
28
28

30
Mar. 29

Feb.

4

May

9

May
Mar.

17
7

July

21

May

LOUISIANA

Belle Chasse
May 16
First National Bank in St. Charles Parish,
Boutte
June 1
Republic National Bank of Louisiana, New
Orleans
Jan. 29
First
National
Bank of Opelousas,
Opelousas
May 24

9
Mar. 1
Mar. 30

June

KENTUCKY

24

MAINE

Casco-Northern National Bank, Augusta

Aug.

9

MARYLAND

Bethesda
June 21
Lincoln National Bank, Gaithersburg
Dec. 4
Atlantic National Bank, Ocean City
May 23
Unincorporated area of Prince Georges
Mar. 15
County
MICHIGAN

The American National Bank in Western
Michigan, Allegan
Mar. 16

205

B-6 — Continued
Applications for National bank charters, approved and rejected, by States, calendar 1973
TABLE

MICHIGAN- Continued

The American National Bank in Battle
Creek, Battle Creek
Greenfield National Bank, Dearborn
Michigan National Bank —Mid Michigan,
Flint Township
First National Bank of Gaylord, Gaylord
Grand Rapids Bank, National Association,
Grand Rapids
Michigan National Bank - West, Kalamazoo..
The American National Bank in South
Haven, South Haven

Approved Rejected
Mar. 16
Jan. 12
May
May

10
30

Nov. 10
Aug. 20

Metrolina National Bank, Charlotte
Peoples National Bank, Smithfield

MINNESOTA

May 23
June 12
Apr. 23

MISSISSIPPI

Metropolitan National Bank, Biloxi
Clinton National Bank, Clinton

Aug. 24
Jan. 31

June

13

Feb.
Aug.

Feb.

21

May
Feb.

18
16

OHIO

First Trust Company of Ohio, N. A., Columbus
Apr.
The Central Trust Company of Montgomery
County, National Association, Dayton
Dec.

20
17

Aug.

9
June 22
June 22
Mar. 9

Mar.
Feb.

7
23

7

4

NEW JERSEY

Jan. 16
Mar. 2
Jan. 30
Mar. 20
Apr.
May

20
8
May

Feb.

8

21
July 21

July

16
May 15

TENNESSEE

NEW HAMPSHIRE

21

NEW MEXICO

206

6

PENNSYLVANIA

9

Indian Head National Bank of Concord,
Concord
June




Dec.

Yough Valley National Bank, Connellsville... Mar. 28

27

First National Bank of Elm Creek, Elm
Creek
May

Albuquerque
Farmington
Gallup

Sept. 29

OKLAHOMA

NEBRASKA

Township of Berkeley
Midlantic National Bank/Somerset,
Borough of Bernardsville
Liberty National Bank, Borough of Hillsdale..
Montville National Bank, Township of
Montville
Fidelity Union Trust Company, National
Association, Morristown
Arcadia National Bank, Secaucus
Borough of Secaucus
Suburban National/A United Jersey Bank,
Borough of South Plainfield
Township of Wall
United Jersey National Bank of Monmouth
County, Freehold

Mar. 21

Quail Creek Bank, National Association,
Oklahoma City.
May
Warr Acres

MISSOURI

United Missouri Bank of Blue Springs,
National Association, Blue Springs
Commerce Bank of Independence, National
Association, Independence
United Missouri Bank of Jefferson City,
National Association, Jefferson City
Mercantile National Bank of Clay County,
Kansas City
Kansas City
Kansas City
Kansas City
Harvester National Bank, Unincorporated
area of St. Charles County
Mercantile National Bank of St. Louis
County, Unincorporated area of St.
LouisCounty

Approved Rejected

NORTH CAROLINA

Mar. 16

Burnsville
Maplewood
Village of Maple wood

NEW YORK
Chase Manhattan Bank of Eastern New York
(National Association), Albany
Chase Manhattan Bank of the Southern
Tier (National Association), Binghamton...
Bessemer Trust Company, National Association, New York
Peoples National Bank of Rockland County,
Ramapo

Feb. 22
Feb. 22
Mar. 12

Hamilton Bank, National Association,
Bristol
Nov. 26
First National Bank of Lebanon, Lebabon
June 12
City National Bank of Memphis, Memphis.... May
1
TEXAS

Alief
Central National Bank, Arlington
Brownsville National Bank, Brownsville
Cleveland
Pan American National Bank of Dallas,
Dallas
Dallas
Dallas
Dallas
Dallas
Denton
DeSoto
Montwood National Bank, El Paso
Continental National Bank, El Paso
Franklin National Bank, El Paso
El Paso
Meadowbrook National Bank, Fort Worth
National Bank of Finance, Fort Worth
National Bank of Grand Prairie, Grand
Prairie
Plaza National Bank, Harlingen
Harlingen
West Loop National Bank, Houston
Plaza Commerce Bank, National Association, Houston
Security National Bank, Houston
First Professional Bank, National Association, Houston
Houston
Houston
Houston
Houston
Houston
Houston

Jan. 23
Dec.
Feb.

4
27
July 21

Apr.

6
Mar.
Mar.
Jan.
June
Mar.
May

22
1
26
27
21
15

July

3

Aug. 25
July
3
July 21
Mar.
July

2
3

Aug. 25
Feb.
1
June 1
Sept. 29
Aug. 9
Sept. 29
Feb.

,
,

Mar.
Apr.
Apr.
Jan.
Jan.
Apr.

6
23
19
22
22
23

TABLE B-6-Continued
Applications for National bank charters, approved and rejected, by States, calendar 1973
Approved
TEXAS - Continued
Houston
Houston
Dallas/Fort Worth Airport National Bank,
Irving
June
7
Irving
Irving
Jersey Village
Jersey Village
The First National Bank in Joshua, Joshua.... July 21
First
National Bank
of
LaMarque,
LaMarque
Mar. 15
Commercial National Bank of Longview,
Longview
Dec. 4
League City
Oak Hill National Bank, Oak Hill
July 21
Piano
Richardson National Bank, Richardson
Aug. 25
Lakeside National Bank, Rockwall
July
5
Rockwall Bank, National Association,
Rockwall
Mar.
7
Churchill National Bank, San Antonio
Dec. 4
Colonial National Bank, San Antonio
May
2
Eisenhower National Bank, San Antonio
Feb.
1
Peoples National Bank of San Antonio,
San Antonio
Dec. 4
Southwest Texas National Bank, San
Antonio
May
2
San Antonio
Stafford
National Security Bank, Tyler
July 17

Rejected

VIRGINIA

Mar. 6
Jan. 22

Arlington
The Services National Bank, Arlington
The First National Exchange Bank of
Montgomery County, Blacksburg
First & Merchants National Bank of Tidewater, Chesapeake
Fidelity National Bank, Unincorporated
area of Halifax County
Virginia National Bank/Henry County,
Henry County
Fidelity National Bank, Roanoke, Unincorporated area of Roanoke County
The First National Exchange Bank of
Washington
County,
Unincorporated
Area of Washington County

June
June
June
June

7
7
8
8

June 8




Feb.
May
May

14

Jan.

23

June

14

Feb.

6

May

14

Jan.

16

Mar.

19

May

8

4

17

Dec. 4
WASHINGTON

Columbia National Bank, Longview
WEST VIRGINIA

First National Bank, Beckley
Suburban National Bank of Martinsburg,
Unicorporated area of Berkeley County...
Elk National Bank, Big Chimney
South Berkely National Bank, Inwood
Mountain National Bank, Shady Spring
May 2
June 14

Jan. 15
Feb. 20
May 16
Dec.
7

WISCONSIN

Tri City National Bank of West Allis,
WestAllis
Aug. 25

UTAH

First Security Bank of Murray, National
Association, Murray
Mai.
Salt Lake

Approved Rejected

WYOMING

8
Feb.

6

Bank of Wyoming, National Association,
Sheridan
July

2

207

TABLE B-7

Applications for National bank charters, by States, pursuant to corporate reorganizations, calendar 1973
Approved Rejected

ALABAMA

Alabama National Bank of Anniston,
Anniston
First Bank of Athens, N.A., Athens
Bay Minette National Bank, Bay Minette
FBG National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville.
FBG National Bank of Mobile, Mobile
Interim National Bank of Mobile County,
Prichard
City Bank of Tuscaloosa, N.A.,Tuscaloosa...
Gulf Coast National Bank of Robertsdale,
Robertsdale
SelmaBank,N. A.,Selma
Dallas County National Bank, Selma

Feb.
June
Apr.
Apr.
Apr.

5
18
10
26
23

Feb. 5
Apr. 10
July 13
June 20
Sept. 7

COLORADO

Second National Bank in Aspen, Aspen
Second National Bank in Glenwood Springs,
Glen wood Springs
Second National Bank in Grand Junction,
Grand Junction
Second National Bank —North, Grand Junction, Grand Junction

Mar. 13
Mar. 16
Mar. 13
Mar. 13

ILLINOIS

First National Bank & Trust Company,
Alton
Dec. 12
FNB National Bank, Evanston
Jan.
4
INDIANA

Tippecanoe National Bank, Lafayette

June

6

LOUISIANA

FNB National Bank, Baton Rouge

Mar. 26

MARYLAND

Charles Street National Bank, Baltimore

Sept. 26

Approved Rejected

NEW HAMPSHIRE

The Concord Bank, National Association, Concord
July
The Laconia Bank, National Association,
Laconia
July
The Merchants Bank, National Association,
Manchester
July

23
23
23

NEW JERSEY

The Farmers & Merchants National Bank
of Cumberland County, Bridgeton
Mechanics National Bank of Delaware
Valley, Township of Burlington
New Jersey National Bank —South, Township of Cherry Hill
Midlantic National Bank/Cranbury, Cranbury
Second Peoples National Bank of New
Jersey, Township of Haddon
Second Charter National Bank, Township of
Monroe
New Colonial First National Bank, Red
Bank
Second Plaza National Bank, Secaucus
First Prospect Park National Bank, Wayne...
Gloucester County National Bank, Woodbury

Sept.

7.

Feb.

5.

Sept. 17 .
Sept. 26
Feb.

7

June 20
Oct. 19
Dec. 7
Dec. ?0
Dec. 20

NEW YORK

Chase Manhattan Bank of Northern New
York (National Association), Village of
Canton
Glen Head National Bank, Glen Head
Hancock National Bank, Hancock
Homer Bank N.A., Village of Homer
Bank of Watkins Glen, National Association, Watkins Glen

Apr. 24
May 1
May 3
Mar. 28
Jan.

17

OHIO
MASSACHUSETTS

Barnstable County Bank, National Association, Barnstable
Easthampton Bank (N.A.), Easthampton
Montachusett National Bank, Fitchburg
The Holyoke Bank, National Association,
Holyoke
Second National Bank of New Bedford, New
Bedford

Jan. 30
May 4
July 26
Apr. 13
Dec. 12
Aug. 31
Jan.
Feb.
Sept.
May
Mar.
Aug.
Aug.
Feb.
Aug.
Feb.

4
27
17
30
21
17
15
6
24
23

MISSOURI

208

July

13

Security National Bank, Bartlesville
Fidelity National Bank, Oklahoma City.,
U.N. National Bank, Tulsa

Mar. 30
Apr. 2
Apr. 20

New Union National Bank, Souderton

Jan.

30

TENNESSEE

Cleveland Interim Bank, N.A., Cleveland
The National Bank of Greeneville, Greeneville
LoudonBank,N.A., Loudon
The Second National Bank of Murfreesboro,
Murfreesboro
The National Bank of Union City, Union
City....
Winchester Bank, N.A., Winchester

Dec. 26
Mar. 27
Aug. 9
Aug.

16

Nov. 28
Aug. 9

TEXAS

National
May 22

NEBRASKA




National

PENNSYLVANIA

National Bank of Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor
Commercial National Bank of Bay City,
Bay City
E. L. National Bank, East Lansing
EvartBank,N. A.,Evart
LCM National Bank, Lake City
UNB National Bank, Marquette
NLB Bank, N. A., Muskegon
NBR National Bank, Rochester
V. National Bank, Saginaw
Sault National Bank, Sault Ste. Marie
W. National Bank, Wyoming

National Bank of Lincoln, Lincoln

Sept. 28
Jan. 23

OKLAHOMA

MICHIGAN

Charter Bank o* Springfield,
Association, Springfield

FN National Bank, Cincinnati
Winters Bank, N.A., Dayton
Northern Columbiana County
Bank, Salem

Jan.

24 ....

Citizens Bank, National
Association,
Ablilene
Capital Bank, National Association, Austin...
PanNational Bank of Austin, Austin
First Bank National Association, Brownwood

Apr. 24
Jan. 29
Mar. 7
Feb. 22

TABLE

B - 7 - Continued

Applications for National bank charters, by States, pursuant to corporate reorganizations, calendar 1973
TEXAS —Continued
Guaranty
Commerce
National
Bank,
Corpus Christi
The New National Bank of Crockett,
Crockett
Stemmons National Bank, Dallas
Denison Bank, National
Association,
Denison
Bassett Bank, PanNational Association,
El Paso
First Freeport Interim National Bank,
Freeport
Market Street Bank, National Association,
Galveston
Second National Bank in Grand Prairie,
Gra id Prairie
Harlingen Bank, National Association,
Harlingen
New MacGregor Park National Bank,
Houston
Hurst Commerce National Bank, Hurst
New Lufkin National Bank, Lufkin
The New National Bank of Nordheim,
Nordheim




Approved Rejected
Aug.

8

Oct. 11
June 29
Feb.
Mar.

23

June 29
Mar. 14
Feb.
8
May 29
Nov. 15
Aug.

Approved Rejected
Feb.
8
Aug. 24
Aug. 31
Apr. 27
Nov. 21
Feb.
8
Apr. 25
Oct. 14

2

Mar. 26
Apr.

TEXAS —Continued
Odessa Bank, National Association, Odessa..
New National Bank of Paris, Paris
New National Bank, San Angelo
New First National Bank of Silsbee, Silsbee..
Stephenville National Bank, Stephenville
Temple Bank, National Association, Temple.
Ferguson Bank, National Association, Tyler..
Waco Bank, National Association, Waco

9

Virginia National Bank/Fredericksburg,
Fredericksburg
Aug. 31
OnancockBank,N.A.,Onancock
Feb.
1
Yorktown National Bank, Yorktown
Aug. 17
WASHINGTON

SeaFirst National Bank, Seattle

Nov. 28

WEST VIRGINIA

Kanawha National Bank, Charleston
Community National Bank, Fairmont

Dec. 11
Dec. 11

209

TABLE

B-8

Newly organized National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank

Total capital
accounts
$113,710,700

Total, United States: 94 banks.
ALABAMA

16105 First City National Bank of Oxford, Oxford
16219 First National Bank of Autauga County, Prattville
16247 Exchange National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery.
Total: 3 banks

1,000,000
800,000
2,000,000
3,800,000

ARKANSAS

16093 Grand National Bank, Hot Springs
16256 The First National Bank of McGehee, McGehee .

2,250,000
850,000
3,100,000

Total: 2 banks.
CALIFORNIA

16139
16168
16154
16202
16240

1,250,000
2,500,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
2,500,000

Foothill National Bank, Glendora
Irvine National Bank, Irvine
First National Bank of Riverbank, Riverbank .
The Torrance National Bank, Torrance
Los Angeles National Bank, Los Angeles

9,250,000

Total: 5 banks.
COLORADO

16244 Buckingham Square National Bank, Aurora
16098 Coronado National Bank, Denver
16102 United Bank of Skyline, National Association, Denver..

500,000
500,000
500,000

1,500,000

Total: 3 banks.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

16220 American Indian National Bank.

1,000,000
FLORIDA

16116
16171
16143
16126
16064
16135
16146
16119
16242
16233
16107
16224
16160
16206
16108
16170
16212

Citizens National Bank, Boca Raton
Broward National Bank of Plantation, Unicorporated area of Broward County
Ellis National Bank of Clearwater, Clearwater
First National Bank of Englewood, Englewood
,
Southport American National Bank of Fort Lauderdale, Fort Lauderdale
First Financial National Bank of Tampa, Unincorporated area of Hillsborough County .
Second National Bank of Homestead, Homestead
First National Bank of Hudson, Hudson
Southeast National Bank of Manatee, Unincorporated area of Manatee County
First National Bank of Miramar, Miramar
First National Bank of Palm Bay, Palm Bay
West Boynton Beach National Bank, Unincorporated area of Palm Beach County
First National Bank of Port Salerno, Port Salerno
Barnett Bank of Sarasota, National Association, Sarasota
Sun Bank of Semoran, National Association, Unincorporated area of Seminole County.
The Gulf National Bank, Tallahassee
Winter Park National Bank, Winter Park
Total: 17 banks.

1,275,000
600,000
750,000

1,500,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
510,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
500,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
750,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
17,885,000

GEORGIA

16117

Commerce National Bank of Warner Robins, Warner Robins.

1,200,000

HAWAII

16104 Bank of Honolulu, National Association, Honolulu

210



2,500,000

TABLE

B-8 —Continued

Newly organized National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank

Total capital
accounts

ILLINOIS

$750,000
600,000
750,000

16199 University National Bank of DeKalb, DeKalb
16101 First National Bank of Lincolnshire, Lincolnshire
16176 First National Bank of Wilmette, Wilmette

2,100,000

Total: 3 banks
INDIANA

16215 The First National Bank of Scottsburg, Scottsburg

875,000

IOWA

16197

600,000

Second National Bank, Eldora
LOUISIANA

1,200,000

16200 First National Bank of Opelousas, Opelousas
MICHIGAN

16211
16185
16157
16234
16152
16186

The American National Bank in Western Michigan, Allegan.
The American National Bank in Battle Creek, Battle Creek..
Greenfield National Bank, Dearborn
Michigan National Bank — Mid Michigan, Flint
Kentwood National Bank, Kentwood.
The American National Bank in South Haven, South Haven..

825,000
1,000,300
1,500,000
1,500,000
750,000
825,000
6,400,300

Total: 6 banks.
MINNESOTA

1,500,000

16128 Shelard National Bank, St. Louis Park.
MISSISSIPPI

2,000,000
500,000
1,000,000

16079 Citizens National Bank, Pascagoula
16204 First National Bank of Wiggins, Wiggins .
16257 Clinton National Bank, Clinton

3,500,000

Total: 3 banks.
MISSOURI

16136 United Missouri Bank of St. Louis, National Association, St. Louis.

2,500,000

NEBRASKA

250,000

16133 First National Bank of Elm Creek, Elm Creek
NEW HAMPSHIRE

16175 Indian Head National Bank of Concord, Concord

1,000,000

NEW JERSEY

16193
16162
16172
16142
16075
16129
16164
16092

Midlantic National Bank/Somserset, Bernardsville
Liberty National Bank, Hillsdale
Fidelity Union Trust Company, National Association, Morristown.
City National Bank of New Jersey, Newark
New Jersey National Bank of Princeton, Borough of Princeton ....
Suburban National/A United Jersey Bank, South Plainfield
Glendale National Bank of New Jersey, Voorhees Township
Independent National Bank, Township of Willingboro
Total: 8 banks.

1,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
2,000,000
10,000,000

NEW MEXICO

16236 United Southwest National Bank of Santa Fe, Santa Fe

750,000

NEW YORK

16203 Chase Manhattan Bank of Eastern New York, National Association, Albany .




2,000,000

211

B-8 — Continued
Newly organized National banks, by States, calendar 1973
TABLE

Charter
No.

Title and location of bank

Total capital
accounts

NORTH CAROLINA

16100
16114

Capitol National Bank, Raleigh
Columbus National Bank, Whiteville .

$1,397,000
500,000
1,897,000

Total: 2 banks
OHIO

16235 First Trust Company of Ohio, National Association, Columbus .

2,000,000

OKLAHOMA

16166 Exchange National Bank of Del City, Del City

750,000
TENNESSEE

16076 Citizens National Bank, Sevierville

1,250,000
TEXAS

16103
16226
16109
16213
16223
16205
16096
16138
16251
16201
16127
16156
16144
16209

Love Field National Bank, Dallas
The National Bank of Texas at Fort Worth. Fort Worth
Executive National Bank, Houston
Heritage National Bank, Houston
Inwood Commerce Bank, National Association, Houston
Plaza del Oro Commerce Bank, National Association, Houston.
San Felipe National Bank, Houston
Suburban National Bank, Houston
Dallas/Fort Worth Airport National Bank, Irving
First National Bank of LaMarque, LaMarque
City National Bank of Laredo, Laredo
Rockwall Bank, National Association, Rockwall
Eisenhower National Ban'k, San Antonio
Southwest Texas National Bank, San Antonio
Total: 14 banks .

1,000,000
750,000
1,000,000

1,000,000
1,000,000
1,000,000
1,250,000
1,000,000
1,250,000
750,000
600,000
500,000
400,000
2,500,000

14,000,000
UTAH

16225 Second National Bank of Layton, Layton
16241 First Security Bank of Logan, National Association, Logan .
Total: 2 banks

250,000
500,000
750,000

VIRGINIA

16246
16174
16184
16167
16192

The First National Exchange Bank of Montgomery County. Blacksburg.
The First National Exchange Bank of Washington County, Bristol
First & Merchants National Bank of Tidewater, Chesapeake
Virginia National Bank/Henry County, Martinsville
Fidelity National Bank, Unincorporated area of Roanoke

1,800,000
4,500,000
6,500,000
1,250,000
1,500,000
15,550,000

Total: 5 banks
WASHINGTON

16214 Columbia National Bank, Longview.

1,000,000
WEST VIRGINIA

16182
16134
16132
16137

Elk National Bank, Big Chimney
Suburban National Bank of Martinsburg, Unincorporated area of Berkeley County.
The Teays Valley National Bank, Scott Depot
Union Central National Bank, Unincorporated area of Wood County
Total: 4 banks

750,000
400,000
800,000
653.400
2,603,000

WISCONSIN

16091 Metropolitan National Bank, Monona.

212



1,000,000

TABLE

B-9

National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Operating bank
New bankResulting bank

Effective date
of merger

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

ALABAMA

June

30, 1973

Sept.

28, 1973

Sept.

28, 1973

Nov.

12, 1973

Nov.

15, 1973

Nov.

30, 1973

Nov.

30, 1973

Dec.

31,1973

The Commercial National Bank of Anniston, Anniston
Commercial Bank National Association, Anniston
Charter issued June 29, 1973
The Commercial National Bank of Anniston, Anniston
The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery
Montgomery County National Bank, Montgomery
Charter issued September 26, 1973
The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery
The American National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
Madison National Bank, Huntsville
Charter issued September 26, 1973
The American National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
The First National Bank of Anniston, Anniston
Alabama National Bank of Anniston, Anniston
Charter issued November 9, 1973
The First National Bank of Anniston Anniston
First National Bank of Bay Minette, Bay Minette
Bay Minette National Bank, Bay Minette
Charter issued November 14, 1973
First National Bank of Bay Minette Bay Minette
First National Bank of Mobile, Mobile
FBG National Bank of Mobile, Mobile
Charter issued November 26, 1973
First National Bank of Mobile Mobile
The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
FBG National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
Charter issued November 26, 1973
The Henderson National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
The City National Bank of Tuscaloosa, Tuscaloosa
City Bank of Tuscaloosa, National Association, Tuscaloosa
Charter issued December 19, 1973
The City National Bank of Tuscaloosa, Tuscaloosa

$3,158,055

$42,319,971

8,423,028

84,856,822

1,949,556

28,168,207

7,183,672

75,254,108

1,462,122

18,913,670

22,029,565

334,172,543

6,415,957

57,941,827

7,061,772

95,161,609

978,130

13,868,531

4,124,048

34 579 925

11,549,066

177,249,271

7,390,967

121 224 635

14,929,425

210,037,675

CONNECTICUT

Feb.

26,1973

The Fairfield County National Bank, Norwalk
The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, National Association, Norwalk
Charter issued February 23, 1973
The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, National Association, Norwalk
KANSAS

July

2,1973

The First National Bank of Manhattan, Manhattan
Poyntz National Bank of Manhattan, Kansas, Manhattan
Charter issued June 26, 1973
First National Bank of Manhattan, Manhattan
ILLINOIS

Feb.

June

Oct.

State National Bank, Evanston
SNB National Bank, Evanston
Charter issued January 31, 1973
1,1973 State National Bank, Evanston
Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago
UA National Bank, Chicago
Charter issued June 26, 1973
30,1973 Upper Avenue National Bank of Chicago, Chicago
First National Bank and Trust Company of Evanston, Evanston
FNB National Bank, Evanston
Charter issued October 11, 1973
15,1973 First National Bank and Trust Company of Evanston, Evanston
See footnote at end of table.




213

TABLE B - 9 — Continued

National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Operating bank
New bank
Resulting bank

Effective date
of merger

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

LOUISIANA

The Hibernia National Bank in New Orleans, New Orleans
Tower National Bank, New Orleans
Charter issued April 20, 1973
24, 1973 Hibernia National Bank in New Orleans, New Orleans

Apr.

$44,556,704

$528,477,678

3,863,953

47,801,684

2,509,092

18,449,132

10,439,014

171,879,443

2,347,300

27,492,012

438,211,393

5,456,612,540

1,117,255

7,023,577

19,901,305

269,600,673

706,720

7,991,345

2,689,847

39,899,958

16,286,619

372,714,794

158,262,189

2,337,365,893

13,581,666

162,308,499

MAINE

Bank of Maine, National Association, Augusta
Water Street National Bank, Augusta
Charter issued January 29, 1973
1, 1973 Bank of Maine, National Association, Augusta.

Feb.

MASSACHUSETTS

The Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis, Hyannis
Barnstable County Bank, National Association, Barnstable
Charter issued June 11, 1973
14,1973 The Barnstable County National Bank of Hyannis, Hyannis .
Union National Bank, Lowell
Union Bank, National Association, Lowell
Charter issued August 6, 1973
8, 1973 Union National Bank, Lowell
Holyoke National Bank, Holyoke
The Holyoke Bank, National Association, Holyoke
Charter issued November 26, 1973
30, 1973 Holyoke National Bank, Holyoke

June

Aug.

Nov.

MICHIGAN

Jan.

1, 1973

Jan.

8, 1973

Jan.

22, 1973

Jan.

29, 1973

Mar.

26, 1973

Mar.

30, 1973

Apr.

24, 1973

July

2, 1973

National Bank of Detroit, Detroit
Detroit National Bank, Detroit
Charter issued December 27, 1972
National Bank of Detroit
The Niles National Bank and Trust Company, Niles
American Bank of Niles, National Association, Niles
Charter issued January 5, 1973
The Niles National Bank and Trust Company, Niles
Second National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw
The Second Bank of Saginaw, National Association, Saginaw
Charter issued January 19, 1973
Second National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw
The American Bank of Three Rivers, National Association, Three Rivers
Three Rivers National Bank, Three Rivers
Charter issued January 26, 1973
The American Bank of Three Rivers, National Association, Three Rivers ....
First National Bank of Holland, Holland
Holland National Bank, Holland
Charter issued March 22, 1973
First National Bank of Holland, Holland
Union Bank and Trust Company, National Association, Grand Rapids
The Union National Bank, Grand Rapids
Charter issued March 27, 1973
Union Bank and Trust Company, National Association, Grand Rapids
Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit, Detroit
Manufacturers Bank Detroit, National Association, Detroit
Charter issued April 20, 1973
Manufacturers National Bank of Detroit, Detroit
Hackley Union National Bank and Trust Company of Muskegon, Muskegon
Hackley Bank National Association, Muskegon
Charter issued June 28, 1973
Hackley Union National Bank and Trust Company of Muskegon, Muskegon.

See footnote at end of table.

214



TABLE

B - 9 - Continued

National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Effective date
of merger

Operating bank
New bank
Resulting bank

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

MICHIGAN — continued

Sept. 30, 1973

Sept. 30, 1973

Sept. 30, 1973

Nov.

19, 1973

The First National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette
Second National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette
Charter issued September 26, 1973
The First National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette
The Miners' First National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, Ishpeming
Miners' Second National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, Ishpeming
Charter issued September 26, 1973
The Miners' First National Bank and Trust Company of Ishpeming, Ishpeming...
The First National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba
Second National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba
Charter issued September 26, 1973
First National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaba
Peoples National Bank and Trust Company of Bay City, Bay City
Commercial National Bank of Bay City, Bay City
Charter issued November 16, 1973
Peoples National Bank and Trust Company of Bay City, Bay City

$4,175,829

$67,841,598

2,089,233

31,252,317

4,069,513

42,532,765

16,388,756

194,104,587

1,691,907

22,254,807

22,927,389

402,842,695

5,320,397

66,802,666

4,395,623

106,707,456

8,894,920

149,526,006

5,104,272

83,847,525

1,400,186

17,371,824

1,290,933

17,304,642

MISSOURI

Nov.

American National Bank in Springfield, Springfield
Charter Bank of Springfield, National Association, Springfield
Charter issued October 29, 1973
1, 1973 American National Bank in Springfield, Springfield

Sept.

First National Bank and Trust Company of Lincoln, Lincoln
National Bank of Lincoln, Lincoln
Charter issued August 29, 1973
4, 1973 First National Bank and Trust Company of Lincoln, Lincoln

NEBRASKA

NEW JERSEY

Apr.

Dec.

Dec.

Somerset Hills and County National Bank, Basking Ridge
New Somerset Hills and County National Bank, Basking Ridge
Charter issued April 18, 1973
19, 1973 Somerset Hills and County National Bank, Basking Ridge
Mechanics National Bank of Burlington County, Burlington Township
Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley, Burlington Township
Charter issued December 17, 1973
31, 1973 Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley, Burlington Township
First Charter National Bank, Township of Monroe
Second Charter National Bank, Township of Monroe
Charter issued December 20, 1973
31, 1973 First Charter National Bank, Township of Monroe
NEW YORK

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

The First National Bank of Highland, Hamlet of Highland
The Second National Bank of Highland, Hamlet of Highland
Charter issued January 24, 1973
26, 1973 The First National Bank of Highland, Hamlet of Highland
The Saugerties National Bank and Trust Company, Village of Saugerties
Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mid-Hudson, National Association, Village of
Saugerties
Charter issued February 20, 1973
28, 1973 Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mid-Hudson, National Association, Village of
Saugerties
The Hayes National Bank of Clinton, Village of Clinton
Hayes National Bank, Village of Clinton
Charter issued February 27, 1973
1, 1973 Hayes National Bank of Clinton, Village of Clinton

See footnote at end of table.




215

TABLE B - 9 — Continued
National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Operating bank
New bank
Resulting bank

Effective date
of merger

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

NEW YORK —continued

Mar.

1, 1973

Mar.

6, 1973

War.

6, 1973

Way

7, 1973

lune

29, 1973

July

25. 1973

July

31, 1973

The First National Bank of Moravia, Village of Moravia
Moravia National Bank, Village of Moravia
('barter issued February 27, 1973
The First National Bank of Moravia, Village of Moravia
The First Trust and Deposit Company of Oriskany Falls, Village of Oriskany Falls
Citibank (Central), National Association, Village of Oriskany Falls
Charter issued March 2, 1973
Citibank (Central), National Association, Village of Oriskany Falls
The Central Valley National Bank, Town of Woodbury
Citibank (Mid-Hudson), National Association, Town of Woodbury
Charter issued March 2, 1973
Citibank (Mid-Hudson), National Association, Town of Woodbury
Nanuet National Bank, Nanuet
The Nanuet National Bank of Rockland County, Nanuet
('barter issued May 3, 1973
Nanuet National Bank, Nanuet
Lincoln National Bank, Buffalo
Chase Manhattan Bank of Western New York, National Association, Buffalo
Charter issued June 26, 1973
("base Manhattan Bank of Western New York, National Association, Buffalo
The First National Bank of Olean, Olean
First Bank of Olean, National Association, Olean
Charter issued July 23, 1973
The First National Bank of Olean. Olean .
The Farmers National Bank of Malone, Village of Malone
Farmers Bank of Malone, National Association, Malone
Charter issued July 27, 1973
Farmers National Bank of Malone, Village of Malone

$1,026,756

$19,764,474

660,065

5,828,107

1,126,339

17,487,796

5,662,685

86,152,927

898,258

14,513,202

5,096,897

52,157,350

2,823,885

44,775,216

704,790

7,157,436

168,599,576

1,779,528,919

1,413,916

18,028,359

49,550,424

614,800,123

2,610,199

50,287,000

17,480,802

138,961,910

OHIO

Feb.

28, 1973

Anr

30. 1973

June

4. 1973

July

9, 1973

The First National Bank of Hopedale, Village of Hopedale
The Second National Bank of Hopedale, Village of Hopedale
Charter issued February 26, 1973
The First National Bank of Hopedale, Village of Hopedale
The National City Bank of Cleveland, Cleveland
NCB National Bank, Cleveland
Charter issued April 26, 1973
The National City Bank of Cleveland Cleveland
The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield, Greenfield
Greenfield National Bank, Greenfield
Charter issued May 31, 1973
The Peoples National Bank of Greenfield, Greenfield
The Winters National Bank and Trust Company of Dayton. Dayton
Winters Bank. National Association, Dayton
Charter issued July 6, 1973
Winters National Bank and Trust Company of Dayton, Dayton
OKLAHOMA

lune

Dee.

The First National Bank and Trust Company of Musko^ee, Musko<jee
Three Rivers National Bank of Muskojjee, Muskojjee
("barter issued June 22, 1973
30, 1973 The First National Bank and Trust Company of Musko^ee, Musko^ee
First National Bank in Bartlesville. Bartleville
Security National Bank, Bartlesville
Charter issued December 11, 1973
31, 1973 First National Bank in Bartlesville, Bartlesville

See footnote at end of table

216



TABLE B-9 — Continued

National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Operating bank
\eiv bankResulting bank

Effective date
of merger

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

PENNSYLVANIA

June

Sept.

First National Bank and Trust Company, Washington
First Washington Bank, National Association, Washington
Charter issued June 8, 1973
11,1973 First National Bank and Trust Company, Washington
Union National Bank and Trust Company of Souderton, Souderton
New Union National Bank, Souderton
Charter issued September 28. 1973
28. 1973 Union National Bank and Trust Company of Souderton, Souderton

$9,859,978

$147,858,961

2.758,737

43,023.341

24.357.406

381.183.695

1,616.113

25.160,691

2,758.737

43.023.341

2.774.500

38,479.005

4.538.178

95,122.876

4,301.568 I

80.314.743

553.911

3.857.278

1.428.105

16.218.261

23.694.578

335.839.557

7.828.797

94.958.523

1.666.033

23.316.582

17.940.725

250.507.669

TENNESSEE

Jan.

1, 1973

Feb.

15, 1973

Feb.

21,1973

Sept.

6, 1973

American National Bank and Trust Company of Chattanooga, Chattanooga
American Bank National Association, Chattanooga
Charter issued December 27, 1972
American National Bank and Trust Company of Chattanooga, Chattanooga.
The First National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg
The National Bank of Lawrenceburg. Lawrenceburg
Charter issued February 14, 1973
The First National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg
The First National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville
The Second National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville
Charter issued February 16, 1973
The First National Bank of Cookeville, Cookeville
The First National Bank of Greeneville, Greeneville
The National Bank of Greeneville. Greeneville
Charter issued September 5. 1973
The First National Bank of Greeneville. Greeneville
TEXAS

Jan.

1, 1973

Jan.

30, 1973

Feb.

13. 1973

Feb.

13. 1973

Apr.

20, 1973

Apr.

24, 1973

Apr.

30. 1973

May

1. 1973

San Angelo National Bank of San Angelo. San Angelo
Capital National Bank, San Angelo
Charter issued December 14, 1972
San Angelo National Bank of San Angelo, San Angelo
American National Bank of Amarillo, Amarillo
Bank of Amarillo, National Association, Amarillo
Charter issued January 30, 1973
The American National Bank of Amarillo, Amarillo
Houston Intercontinental National Bank, Houston
Kennedy Boulevard Bank. National Association, Houston
Charter issued February 12. 1973
Houston Intercontinental National Bank. Houston
Gulf Coast National Bank, Houston
Gulf Bank National Association, Houston
Charter issued February 12. 1973
Gulf Coast National Bank, Houston
The Austin National Bank, Austin
Austin Bank, National Association. Austin
Charter issued April 17. 1973
The Austin National Bank, Austin
The First National Bank of Abilene, Abilene
Second National Bank of Abilene. Abilene
Charter issued April 20. 1973
First National Bank of Abilene, Abilene
Citizens National Bank in Ennis. Ennis
Bancorp National Bank of Ennis, Ennis
Charter issued April 25, 1973
Citizens National Bank in Ennis, Ennis
Corpus Christi State National Bank. Corpus Christi
State National Bank of Corpus Christi. Corpus Christi
Charter issued April 26. 1973
Corpus Christi State National Bank. Corpus Christi

See footnote at end of table




217

TABLE B-9-Continued

National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Operating bank
New bank
Resulting bank

Effective date
of merger

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

TEXAS-Continued

May

1, 1973

May

1, 1973

May

4, 1973

July

19, 1973

Sept.

4, 1973

Sept.

4, 1973

Sept.

4, 1973

Sept.

21, 1973

Oct.

5, 1973

Oct.

31, 1973

Oct.

31, 1973

Nov.

15, 1973

Nov.

15, 1973

Nov.

30, 1973

Dec.

31, 1973

Citizens National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio
Citizens Bank, National Association, San Antonio
Charter issued April 26, 1973
Citizens National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio
The Frost National Bank, San Antonio
Frost Bank, National Association, San Antonio
Charter issued April 26, 1973
The Frost National Bank, San Antonio
The First National Bank of Eagle Pass, Eagle Pass
Maverick County National Bank, Eagle Pass
Charter issued May 3, 1973
The First National Bank of Eagle Pass, Eagle Pass
MacGregor Park National Bank of Houston, Houston
New MacGregor Park National Bank, Houston
Charter issued July 17, 1973
MacGregor Park National Bank, Houston
Citizens National Bank of Austin, Austin
PanNational Bank of Austin, Austin
Charter issued August 30, 1973
Citizens National Bank of Austin, Austin
Bassett National Bank of El Paso, El Paso
Bassett Bank, PanNational Association, El Paso
Charter issued August 30, 1973
Bassett National Bank of El Paso, El Paso
The First Freeport National Bank, Freeport
First Freeport Interim National Bank, Freeport
Charter issued August 30, 1973
First Freeport National Bank, Freeport
Temple National Bank, Temple
Temple Bank, National Association, Temple
Charter issued September 20, 1973
Temple National Bank, Temple
The First National Bank of Odessa, Odessa
Odessa Bank, National Association, Odessa
Charter issued October 3, 1973
The First National Bank of Odessa, Odessa
The Capital National Bank in Austin, Austin
Capital Bank, National Association, Austin
Charter issued October 29, 1973
The Capital National Bank in Austin, Austin
The First National Bank of Harlingen, Harlingen
Harlingen Bank, National Association, Harlingen
Charter issued October 30, 1973
The First National Bank of Harlingen, Harlingen
The State National Bank of Denison, Denison
Denison Bank, National Association, Denison
Charter issued November 12, 1973
The State National Bank of Denison, Denison
The Citizens National Bank in Abilene, Abilene
Citizens Bank, National Association, Abilene
Charter issued November 12, 1973
The Citizens National Bank in Abilene, Abilene
First National Bank in Brownwood, Brownwood
First Bank National Association, Brownwood
Charter issued November 28, 1973
First National Bank in Brownwood, Brownwood
First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Galveston, Galveston
Market Street Bank, National Association, Galveston
Charter issued December 20, 1973
First Hutchings-Sealy National Bank of Galveston, Galveston.

See footnote at end of table.

218



$1,765,789

$27,502,919

32,193,406

571,553,677

1,386,127

21,018,421

11,357,030

37,819,215

4,175,776

44,156,827

1,614,614

21,328,068

3,409,878

32,522,939

5,287,634

63,687,038

4,361,579

65,494,617

19,005,610

310,874,672

3,960,834

75,289,087

3,461,793

40,962,185

6,502,976

106,092,173

2,691,952

40,842,622

11,624,282

93,766,977

TABLE B-9 — Continued

National bank charters issued* and mergers consummated pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States,
calendar 1973
Operating bank
New bank
Resulting bank

Effective date
of merger

Total
capital
accounts

Total
assets

VIRGINIA

Dec.

The First National Bank of Yorktown, Yorktown
Yorktown National Bank, Yorktown
Charter issued December 11, 1973
31, 1973 The First National Bank of Yorktown, Yorktown

Jan.

Neenah West National Bank, Neenah
Second Neenah West National Bank, Neenah
Charter issued January 26, 1973
31, 1973 Neenah West National Bank, Neenah

$972,522

$11,145,708

612,072

7,022,897

WISCONSIN

*Includes only charter issuances related to mergers consummated during 1973. For a full listing of all charters issued pursuant to
corporate reorganizations during the year, see Table B - l l .

TABLE

B-10

State-chartered banks converted to National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Charter
No.

Effective
date of
charter

Total* 16 banks . . .

Outstanding
capital stock

Surplus, undivided profits
and reserves

$13,915,650

Title and location of bank

$23,675,061

$599,591,700

Total assets

ARKANSAS

16173 First National Bank of Sharp County, Ash Flat
Conversion of Bank of Ash Flat

Sept.

1

200,000

489,280

9,564,900

May

1

200,000

289,433

2,497,165

Apr.

2

750,000

512,789

19,046,821

Dec.

11

7,514,650

9,865,960

315,737,949

Feb.

1

641,000

961,197

44,772,641

Mar.

30

50,000

458,766

5,670,227

Oct.

12

600 \J V/ V
000
\J\J v/«)

1,948,597

42,419,682

Oct.

1

720,000

2,011,485

49,470,378

Feb.

26

350,000

1,098,638

18,460,020

CONNECTICUT

16125

National Industrial Bank of Connecticut, Meriden
Conversion of The Meriden Industrial Bank
FLORIDA

•
16099 First National Bank of Dade City, Dade City
Conversion of Commercial Bank of Dade City
IDAHO

16237

Bank of Idaho, National Association, Boise
Conversion of Bank of Idaho
ILLINOIS

16072

First National Bank of Niles, Niles
Conversion of Bank of Niles
INDIANA

16118

Central National Bank of Howard County, Russiaville
Conversion of Russiaville State Bank
MINNESOTA

16196

Northwestern National Bank of Owatonna, Owatonna
Conversion of security Bank and Trust Company of
Owatonna
MISSISSIPPI

16194

Peoples Bank of Mississippi, National Association, Union
Conversion of Peoples Bank of Mississippi
MISSOURI

16083

Commerce Bank of Fenton, National Association, Fenton
Conversion of Commerce Bank of Fenton


550-906 O-LT - 75 - 15


219

TABLE B - 1 0 - Continued
State-chartered banks converted to National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Charter

Effective
date of
charter

Title <ui(I /oration of bank

No.

Outstanding
capital stock

Surplus, undivided profits
and reserves

Total assets

NEW HAMPSHIRE

Amoskeag Trust Company. National Association. Manchester
Conversion of Amoskeag Trust Company

16106

Apr.

10

$50,000

$1,035,692

$2,412,529

Aug.

17

1,000,000

846,835

22.199,491

Feb.

1

200.000

364,032

3,405,202

1,000,000

1.704,643

36,885,118

300,000

354,095

2,664,549

90,000

425,275

7,204,001

250,000

1,308.344

17,181,027

NEW JERSEY

The Hamilton Bank, National Association. Hamilton Township
Conversion of The Hamilton Bank

16169

Texas National Bank of Baytown, Baytown
Conversion of Bank of Baytown
16232 State National Bank of Odessa, Odessa
Conversion of First State Bank
16073

Dec.

3

Dominion National Bank of The Peninsula, York County
Conversion of Dominion Bank of York County

16159

WEST VIRGINIA

July

Citizens National Bank of Follanshee, Follansbee
Conversion of Citizens Bank of Follansbee
16088 The Peoples National Bank of Martinsburg,
Conversion of The Peoples Trust Company

19

16097

Martinsburg
Apr.
Mar.

TABLE

2
1

B-ll

National bank charters issued pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States, calendar 1973
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Date of
issuance

Total: 82 banks
ALABAMA
3041
11753
14720
8765
15316
1595
12993
6173

Alabama National Bank of Anniston, Anniston
Commercial Bank National Association. Anniston
Bay Minette National Bank. Bay Minette
FBC National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
Madison National Bank, Huntsville
FBC National Bank of Mobile, Mobile
Montgomery County National Bank. Montgomery
City Bank of Tuscaloosa. National Association, Tuscaloosa
Total: 8 banks

15294

The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company. National Association. Norwalk.

14363
13709
15615

UA National Bank. Chicago
FNB National Bank, Evanston
SNB National Bank. Evanston
Total: 3 banks

Nov.
June
Nov.
Nov.
Sept.
Nov.
Sept.
Dec.

9
29
14
26
26
26
26
19

Feb.

23

June
Oct.
Jan.

26
11
31

June

26

Apr.

20

Jan.

29

CONNECTICUT

ILLINOIS

KANSAS
3782

Poyntz National Bank of Manhattan. Kansas. Manhattan
LOUISIANA

13688

Power National Bank, New Orleans
MAINE

498 Water Street National Bank. Augusta

220



TABLE B - l l — Continued

National bank charters issued pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States, calendar 1973
Charter
No.

Title (inel location of bank

Date of
issuance

MASSACHUSETTS

1939 The Holyoke Bank, National Association. Holyoke
13395 Barnstahle County Bank, National Association, Hyannis
6077 Union Bank, National Association, Lowell
Total: 3 hanks

Nov.
June
Aug.

MICHIGAN

14641
13738
3761
15575
14560
13931
390
4398
15822
1918
15889

Commercial National Bank of Bay City, Bay City
Manufacturers Bank Detroit, National Association, Detroit
Second National Bank and Trust Company of Escanaba, Escanaha
The Union National Bank, (/rand Rapids
Holland National Bank, Holland
Miners' Second National Bank and Trust Company of' Ishpeming, Ishpeming.
Second National Bank and Trust Company of Marquette, Marquette
Hackley Bank National Association. Muskegon
American Bank of Niles, National Association, Niles
The Second Bank of Saginaw, National Association, Saginaw
Three Rivers National Bank, Three Rivers
Total: 11 banks

15183

Charter Bank of Springfield, National Association, Springfield

Nov.
Apr.
Sept.
Mar.
Mar.
Sept.
Sept.
June
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.

MISSOURI

Oct.

NEBRASKA

1798

Aug.

National Bank of Lincoln, Lincoln..
NEW JERSEY

6960 New Somerset Hills and County National Bank, Township of Bernards
1222 Mechanics National Bank of Delaware Valley, Burlington Township
288 Second Charter National Bank. Township of Monroe
Total: 3 hanks

Apr.
Dec.
Dec.

NEW YORK

13952
10295
5336
598
99
13314
1887
16089
104
9990

Chase Manhattan Bank of Western New York. National Association. Buffalo
Hayes National Bank, Village of Clinton
Second National Bank of Highland. Hamlet of Highland
Farmers Bank of Malone, National Association. Malone
Moravia National Bank, Village of Moravia
The Nanuet National Bank of Rockland County. Nanuet
First Bank of Olean, National Association, Olean
Citibank (Central), National Association, Village of Oriskany Falls
Chase Manhattan Bank of Mid-Hudson (National Association). Village of Saugerties.
Citibank (Mid-Hudson), National Association. Town of Woodbury
Total: 10 banks

24
786
2604
13944
6938
973

FN National Bank, Cincinnati
NCB National Bank, Cleveland
Winters Bank, National Association, Dayton
(Greenfield National Bank, (Greenfield
The Second National Bank of Hopedale, Village of Hopedale
Northern Columhiana County National Bank, Salem
Total: 6 banks

June
Feb.
Jan.
July
Feb.
May
July
Mar.
Feb.
Mar.

OHIO

Dec.
Apr.
July
May
Feb.
Dec.

OKLAHOMA

6258 Security National Bank, Bartlesville
4385 Three Rivers National Bank of Muskogee. Muskogee
12016 Fidelity National Bank, Oklahoma City....
Total: 3 banks

Dec.
June
Dec.

PENNSYLVANIA

2333 New Union National Bank. Souderton
5920 First Washington Bank, National Association. Washington
Total: 2 banks

Sept.
June

TENNESSEE

9667 The Second National Bank of Cookeville, Cookcvillc
4177 The National Bank of Creeneville, Creeneville
6093 The National Bank of Lawrenceburg, Lawrenceburg
Total: 3 banks




Feb.
Sept.
Feb.

221

TABLE B - l l — Continued

National bank charters issued pursuant to corporate reorganizations, by States, calendar 1973
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank

Date of
issuance

TEXAS

13727
4166
14350
4308
13926
14928
4695
4423
3058
4490
15011
13367
10420
1566
12119
14858
15802
4076

13608
14938
5179
14459

Citizens Bank, National Association, Abilene
Second National Bank of Abilene, Abilene
Bank of Amarillo, National Association, Amarillo
Austin Bank, National Association, Austin
Capital Bank, National Association, Austin
PanNational Bank of Austin, Austin
First Bank National Association, Brownwood
State National Bank of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi
Denison Bank, National Association, Denison
Maverick County National Bank, Eagle Pass
Bassett Bank, PanNational Association, El Paso
Bancorp National Bank of Ennis, Ennis
First Freeport Interim National Bank, Freeport
Market Street Bank, National Association, Galveston
Harlingen Bank, National Association, Harlingen
Gulf Bank, National Association, Houston
Kennedy Boulevard Bank, National Association, Houston ....
New MacGregor Park National Bank, Houston
Odessa Bank, National Association, Odessa
Citizens Bank, National Association, San Antonio
Frost Bank, National Association, San Antonio
Temple Bank, National Association, Temple
Total: 22 banks

Nov.
Apr.
Jan.
Apr.
Oct.
Aug.
Nov.
Apr.
Nov.
May
Aug.
Apr.
Aug.
Dec.
Oct.
Feb.
Feb.
July
Oct.
Apr.
Apr.
Sept.

12
20
30
17
29
30
28
26
12
3
30
25
30
20
30
12
12
17
3
26
26
20

Dec.

11

Jan.

26

VIRGINIA

11554 Yorktown National Bank, Yorktown
WISCONSIN

15594 Second Neenah West National Bank, Neenah .

TABLE

B-12

National banks reported in voluntary liquidation, by States, calendar 1973
Title and location of bank

Date of
liquidation

Total capital
accounts of
liquidated
banks
$3,147,778

Total: 2 National banks..
CALIFORNIA

Imperial Valley National Bank, El Centro (15557), absorbed by Crocker National Bank , San Francisco
(1741)

Dec.

31

1,260,699

Apr.

13

1,887,079

NEW JERSEY

The National Bank of Palisades Park, Palisades Park (14088), absorbed by New Jersey Bank , National
Association, Clifton (15709)...

222



TABLE

B-13

National banks merged or consolidated with State banks, by States, calendar 1973
Title and location of bank

Total capital
accounts of
National
banks

Effective
date

Total: 10 banks

$14,635,810
IDAHO

1,283,669

Cassia National Bank, Burley (12256), merged into Bank of Idaho, Boise, under title of "Bank of Idaho"... Jan.
MASSACHUSETTS

First National Bank of Winchendon, Winchendon (327), consolidated with Guaranty Bank and Trust
Company, Worcester, under title of "Guaranty Bank and Trust Company"

Feb.

663,042

PENNSYLVANIA

First National Bank in Bangor, Bangor (14170), merged into First Valley Bank, Lansford, under title of
"First Valley Bank"
July
Tri-Valley National Bank, Hegins (13994), merged into American Bank and Trust Company of Pennsylvania, Reading, under title of "American Bank and Trust Company of Pennsylvania"
Dec.
First Citizens National Bank, Montgomery (5574), merged into Northern Central Bank and Trust Company, Williamsport, under title of "Northern Central Bank and Trust Company"
Apr.
The Liberty National Bank of Pittston, Pittston (11865), merged into First Valley Bank, Lansford, under
title of "First Valley Bank"
Dec.
The First National Bank of Shingle House, Shingle House (6799), merged into Commonwealth Bank
and Trust Company, Muncy, under title of "Commonwealth Bank and Trust Company"
Dec.

2

2,441,163

28

1,172,640

30

595,838

31

2,316,224

31

506,432

Mar.

30

2,403,400

Aug.

31

2,382,902

Feb.

12

870,500

VERMONT

The Peoples National Bank of Barre, Barre (7068), merged into First Vermont Bank and Trust Company, Brattleboro, under title of "First Vermont Bank and Trust Company"
The County National Bank of Bennington, Bennington (2395), merged into Chittenden Trust Company,
Burlington, under title of "Chittenden Trust Company"
VIRGINIA

Woodlawn National Bank, Fairfax County (15353), merged into Clarendon Bank and Trust, Arlington
County, under title of "Clarendon Bank and Trust"




223

TABLE

B-14

National banks converted into State banks, by States, calendar 1973
Title and location of batik

Charter
No.

Effective
date

Total: 20 banks

Total capital
accounts of
National
banks
$41,369,041

CONNECTICUT

1139 The Deep River National Bank. Deep River, converted into Deep River Bank and Trust Company
May
15542 The Constitution National Bank Hartford. Hartford, converted into Constitution Bank and Trust
Company
June
720 The Home National Bank and Trust Company. Meriden. converted into Home Bank Trust
Company
Mar

17

799.682

20

2.418.867

•>7

3 641 005

2

592.185

1

391.762

Sept. 18
Mar. 12

787.935
7.564.498

Dec.

15

1.288.208

Sept.

4

2.657.812

Aug.

1

1.070.268

June
May

21
1

1.106.467
104.712

Mar.

19

7.678,933

Feb.
Sept.

1
1

5.747.547
733.632

Aug.
Jan.
Oct.
July

1
2
9
2

874,646
329,459
538,846
1,368,481

15

1,674,096

(;Eom;iA
11939 The Citizens National of Montezuma. Montezuma. converted into Citizens Bank of Montezuma... Jan.
IDAHO

15153 Tri-State National Bank of Montpelier. Montpelier. converted into Tri-State Bank Trust

Oct.

ILLINOIS

14237 The Peoples National Bank of Cambridge. Cambridge, converted into Peoples Bank of Cambridge
.
.
14245 The Manufacturers National Bank of Chicago. Chicago, converted into Manufacturers Bank
INDIANA

13788 The Stone City National Bank of Bedford. Bedford, converted into The Stone Citv Bank
KANSAS

9758 Stockyards National Bank. Wichita, converted into United American State Bank and Trust
Company
.
MICHIGAN

15042

First National Bank of Cadillac. Cadillac, converted into First Bank of Cadillac
NEBRASKA

9400 The Minden Exchange National Bank. Minden. converted into Minden Exchange Bank and
Trust Company
13339 The First National Bank of Oakdale. Oakdale. converted into The First State Bank
PENNSYLVANIA

12526 The Cheltenham National Bank. Cheltenham, converted into Cheltenham Bank
TENNESSEE

13635 The Hamilton National Bank of Johnson City. Johnson City, converted into Hamilton Bank of
Johnson City
13056 The First National Bank of Smithville. Smithville. converted into The First Central Bank
TEXAS

14227 State National Bank in Comanche, Comanche, converted into First Comanche Bank
15298 Lone Star National Bank, Lone Star, converted into Lone Star State Bank
15440 Uvalde National Bank Uvalde converted into The Uvalde Bank
15289 Northwest National Bank, White Settlement, converted into Northwest Bank
WISCONSIN

14906 Mayfair National Bank of Wauwatosa, Wauwatosa, converted into First Wisconsin Bank of
Mavfair
.
....
, Jan.

224



TABLE B-15

Purchases of State banks by National banks, by States, calendar 1973
Effective
date

Title and location of bank

Total capital
accounts of
State banks
$35,261,508

Total: 7 banks
KENTUCKY

The Newport National Bank, Newport (4765). purchased The West Side Savings Bank. Newport

Sept. 18

793.811

Oct. 23
Nov. 15

637.386
108.305

OHIO

The Park National Bank, Newark (9179). purchased The Utica Savings Bank Company. Utica
The First National Bank of Gallipolis, Gallipolis (136). purchased The Vinton Banking Company. Vinton
PENNSYLVANIA

Oct.

26

3.203.192

May

Pittsburgh National Bank, Jeannette (252), purchased The Farmers Bank and Trust Company. Indiana

31

1.093,811

Oct.
Jan.

5
19

1.749,298
27.675.705

UTAH

Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City (4341). purchased The Bank of Vernal. Vernal
WASHINGTON

The National Bank of Commerce of Seattle, Seattle (4375), purchased The Citizens State Bank, Puyallup
Old National Bank of Washington, Spokane (4668). purchased The Security Bank. Lynn wood

TABLE B-16

Consolidations* of National banks, or National and State hanks, hy States, calendar 1973
Consolidating banks
Resulting bank

Effective
date

Outstanding
capital
stock

Surplus

Undivided
profits and
reserves

Total assets

Total: 3 consolidations
OHIO

Feb. 28

First National Bank. Bowling Green (15416)
Progress National Bank of Toledo. Toledo (15470)
Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company.
Northwood (15416)

$1,985,620
600.000

$2,000,000
291.955

$363,423
none

$60,958,604
11.851.122

2.540.240

2.345.380

391.601

73.432.764

200.000
400.000

400.000
500.000

650,579
111.714

16,502.563
21.111,375

600.000

900.000

762.293

37.613.939

2.078.800
9.677.330

3.097.740
2.588,265

4.568,049
7.923.414

129.309,270
350,280.741

16.329.490

5.686.005

7.918.103

479.590,011

PENNSYLVANIA

Sept.

1

Union National Bank. New Brighton (4549)
The Freedom National Bank. Freedom (5454)
The Century National Bank and Trust Company,
Rochester (4549)
SOUTH CAROLINA

Oct. 15

The Peoples National Bank, Greenville (10635)
Bankers Trust of South Carolina, Columbia
Bankers Trust of South Carolina, National Association.
Columbia (10635)

* Excludes consolidations involving only one operating bank, effected pursuant to corporate reorganizations.




225

TABLE

B-17

Mergers* of National banks, or National and State banks, by States, calendar 1973
Merging banks
Resulting bank

Effective
date

Outstanding
capital
stock

Surplus

Undivided
profits and
reserves

Total assets

Total: 41 merger actions
ALABAMA

$150,000
3,300,000
3,300,000

$225,000
10,200,000
10,200,000

$497,783
6,358,992
6,096,007

$8,974,005
291,108,014
298,293,486

1,072,030
1,825,095
2 347 710

304,800
1,116,235
1 518 391

648,554
954,283
934 114

28,593,405
115,775,269
146 846 361

264,000
1,500,000
2,000,000

200,000
3,000,000
3,200,000

389,842
1,722,570
1,407,478

10,613,452
93,582,283
104,045,101

750,000
2,500,000
3,625,000

750,000
1,350,000
1,800,000

420,092
1,584,338
1,929,430

41,601,410
124,454,488
157,422,686

75,000
2,160,000
2,272,500

200,000
3,840,000
4,227,500

176,271
1,858,576
1,828,933

3,733,763
140,846,321
144,249,829

200,000
100,000
260,000

800,000
300,000
1,100,000

356,201
499,145
895,346

17,097,115
13,475,011
30,572,126

25,000
150,000
215,600

95,000
150,000
245,000

74,286
415,383
401,133

1,551,642
9,304,928
9,568,422

90,000
1,003,000
1,149,840

330,000
2,145,000
2,423,160

61,018
141,133
203,525

5,236,348
48,708,853
53,406,092

200,000
1,200,000
1,279,000

300,000
4,800,000
5,200,000

594,507
1,849,828
2,458,202

1,965,690
43,136,280
44,675,439

National Union Bank of New Jersey, Dover (2076)
National Community Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford (5005)
Mar. 30 National Community Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford (5005)

2,713,110
10,475,669
14,206,194

3,557,400
15,500,000
20,000,000

2,681,681
12,846,590
13,568,256

105,959,078
564,746,807
670,705,886

First National Bank of Moorestown, Moorestown (15534)
First National Bank of South Jersey, Egg Harbor Township (1326)
May 11 First National Bank of South Jersey, Egg Harbor Township (1326)
Countv Trust Comoanv Tenaflv
.
First National State Bank of North Jersey, Hackensack (12014)
Nov. 16 County Trust Company, National Association, Tenafly (12014)

303,185
10,182,310
10,182,310

303,185
10,182,310
10,182,310

428,389
5,058,698
4,929,858

16,073,801
415,499,893
432,987,167

4,000,000
2,000,000
6,000,000

4,000,000
2,000,000
6,000,000

1,449,136
1,670,884
3,120,020

137,014,366
77,780,873
214,795,239

Apr.

Citronelle State Bank Citronelle
The Merchants National Bank of Mobile, Mobile (13097)
6 The Merchants National Bank of Mobile, Mobile (13097)
CALIFORNIA

Dec 17

National Bank of Agriculture, Fresno (11330).
American National Bank Bakersfield (15437)
American National Bank Bakersfield (15437)
GEORGIA

Bank of Acworth, Acworth
The First National Bank of Cobb County, Marietta (3830)
June 30 The First National Bank of Cobb County, Marietta (3830)
INDIANA

Northwest Bank of Indiana, National Association, Whiting (14813)...
Bank of Indiana, National Association, Gary (15455)
Jan. 19 Bank of Indiana, National Association, Gary (15455)

June

Stockwell State Bank, Stockwell
Purdue National Bank of Lafayette, Lafayette (11148)
1 Purdue National Bank of Lafayette, Lafayette (11148)
MARYLAND

Bank of Crisfield Crisfield
.
Citizens National Bank in Pocomoke City, Pocomoke City (14106)
Dec. 31 The Eastern Shore National Bank, Pocomoke City (14106)
MASSACHUSETTS

The Conwav National Bank Conwav (895)
. .
The Shelburne Falls National Bank, Shelburne (1144)
Oct. 29 The County Bank, National Association, Shelburne (1144)
MISSISSIPPI

The Bank of Macon Macon
The Citizens National Bank of Meridian, Meridian (7266)
Mar. 8 The Citizens National Bank of Meridian, Meridian (7266)
NEW HAMPSHIRE

June

Amoskeag Trust Company, National Association, Manchester
(16106)
The Amoskeag National Bank of Manchester, Manchester (574)
1 Amoskeag National Bank & Trust Company, Manchester (574)
NEW JERSEY

See footnote at end of table.

226



TABLE B - 1 7 - Continued

Mergers* of National banks, or National and State banks, by States, calendar 1973
Merging banks
Resulting bank

Effective
date

Outstanding
capital
stock

Surplus

Undivided
profits and
reserves

Total assets

NEW JERSEY —Continued

Nov. 30

Pascack Valley Bank and Trust Company, Hillsdale
Citizens First National of Ridge wood, Ridge wood (11759)
Citizens First National Bank of New Jersey, Ridge wood (11759).

$1,250,000
3,913,230
5,038,230

$1,350,000
3,913,230
5,388,230

$761,959
7,975,538
8,737,498

$40,590,487
193,249,436
233,839,922

50,000
1,320,000
1,490,000

150,000
1,350,000
1,380,000

112,895
1,402,253
1,515,148

4,729,691
51,864,974
56,594,665

400,000

2,000,000

1,717,839

31,655,502

NEW YORK

The First National Bank of Morris, Morris (4870)
Wilber National Bank of Oneonta, Oneonta (2151)
13 Wilber National Bank, Oneonta (2151)

Feb.

Montgomery County Trust Company, Amsterdam
Bankers Trust Company of Albany, National Association, Albany
(15758)
28 Bankers Trust Company of Albany, National Association, Albany
(15758)

4,000,000

6,000,000

9,672,568

222,214,972

4,400,000

The National Bank of Schuylerville, Schuylerville (1298)
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls (7699)...
June 30 Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls (7699)...

250,000
2,116,920
2,416,920

8,000,000
250,000
2,600,000
2,850,000

11,390,407
236,950
2,457,529
2,644,479

253,586,177
7,258,629
102,857,054
110,115,683

The First National Bank of Newark Valley, Newark Valley (10111)....
The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich, Norwich (1354).
1 The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich, Norwich (1354).

154,000
3,265,620
3,727,620

180,000
3,265,620
3,727,620

423,374
3,726,531
3,561,502

11,076,624
122,974,815
134,097,626

The Cambridge Valley National Bank, Cambridge (1275)
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls (7699).
Oct. 31 Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls (7699)...

100,000
2,416,920
2,796,920

250,000
2,850,000
3,100,000

I 324,502
/ 2,806,555
2,851,057

8,005,233
118,805,382
126,810,615

The First National Bank of Dexter, Dexter (8463)
The National Bank of Northern New York, Watertown (2657)
Nov. 16 The National Bank of Northern New York, Watertown (2657)

50,000
2,307,815
2,417,815

200,000
2,307,815
2,417,815

259,884
5,624,013
5,913,896

6,745,334
128,230,685
134,123,923

First National Bank in Montgomery, Montgomery (13559)
Highland National Bank of Newburgh, Newburgh (1106)
Nov. 30 Highland National Bank of Newburgh, Newburgh (1106)

50,000
1,300,000
1,300,000

200,000
2,020,000
2,270,000

245,833
1,990,391
2,236,224

5,017,741
75,409,266
80,427,008

750,000
30,111,968
35,511,968

2,000,000
55,490,945
52,840,945

200,000

600,000

51,360,070

70,000,000

42,174,849 2,775,623,294

51,360,070

70,800,000

42,336,475 2,782,553,285

190,000
200,000
390,000

210,000
150,000
360,000

43,346
122,240
165,586

6,748,872
8,397,921
15,146,792

437,500
6,528,000
7,193,000

562,500
10,972,000
12,807,000

811,279
4,178,472
3,491,138

20,544,959
178,216,355
199,705,363

100,000
200,000
320,880

100,000
300,000
529,120

138,482
573,429
561,910

4,662,151
18,115,371
22,777,521

100,000
100,000
327,425

200,000
400,000
600,000

120,333
563,578
573,386

4,892,479
6,640,958
11,494,091

250,000
2,540,240
2,950,240

250,000
2,400,000
2,650,000

340,046
463,551
643,597

10,427,143
77,554,195
87,981,338

Feb.

Oct.

NORTH CAROLINA

Mar.

9

Dec. 12

Citizens Bank and Trust Company, Henderson
North Carolina National Bank, Charlotte (13761)
North Carolina National Bank, Charlotte (13761)
Bank of Elizabethtown, Elizabethtown
Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, National Association, WinstonSalem (15673)
Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, National Association, WinstonSalem (15673)

36,681,251
1,526,568
24,851,792 2,374,261,872
26,870,134 2,411,096,948
161,626

11,329,991

OHIO

Citizensbank National Association, Felicity (15861)
Community National Bank, Loveland (15945)
Jan. 15 Citizensbank National Association, Felicity (15945)
The First National Bank of Girard, Girard (4884)
The Union National Bank of Youngstown, Youngstown (13586)
Mar. 31 The Union National Bank of Youngstown, Youngstown (13586)
The Afger Savings Bank, Alger
The First National Bank of Kenton, Kenton (2500)
June 30 The First National Bank of Kenton, Kenton (2500)

Dec.

Dec.

The Amelia State Bank, Amelia
The First National Bank of Bethel, Bethel (5627)
1 The First National Bank of Bethel, Bethel (5627)
The Grand Rapids Banking Company, Grand Rapids
Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company, Northwood (15416).
31 Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company, Northwood (15416).
See footnote at end of table.




227

TABLE B-17 —Continued

Mergers* of National banks, or National and State banks, by States, calendar 1973
Merging banks
Resulting bank

Effective
date

Outstanding
capital
stock

Surplus

Undivided
profits and
reserves

Total assets

PENNSYLVANIA

The First National Bank of Lock Haven, Lock Haven (507)
Fidelity National Bank of Pennsylvania, Williamsport (175)
Fidelity National.Bank of Pennsylvania, Williamsport (175)

$220,000
1,338,480
2,664,640

$1,580,000
3,341,490
3,815,330

$545,331
441,461
986,792

$32,815,248
66,006,960
98,822,208

Jan. 26

The First National Bank of Coopersburg, Coopersburg (9034)
The Merchants National Bank of Allentown, Allentown (6645)
The Merchants National Bank of Allentown, Allentown (6645)

200,000
3,718,825
4,068,825

400,000
7,500,000
7,900,000

362,030
4,110,409
4,322,438

14,680,425
292,874,718
307,555,143

Apr.

2

The First National Bank of Marietta, Marietta (25)
Farmers First National Bank, Lititz (5773)
Farmers First National Bank, Lititz (5773)

110,000
2,959,000
3,234,000

300,000
4,200,000
4,500,000

205,055
852,195
927,238

7,023,473
118,275,757
125,332,695

1

The Leola National Bank, Leola (13186)
The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, Lancaster (2634)
The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, Lancaster (2634)

210,000
2,170,875
2,485,875

600,000
5,052,350
5,652,350

409,831
6,766,803
7,071,633

15,637,410
207,693,218
223,330,629

The Rebersburg National Bank, Rebersburg (11789)
The Peoples National Bank of State College, State College (12261)
Sept. 10 The Peoples National Bank of Central Pennsylvania, State College
(12261)

25,000
600,000

175,000
1,200,000

136,536
1,379,497

3,891,845
42,929,457

652,500

1,347,500

1,516,032

46,821,302

The Citizens National Bank of Newport, Newport (7716)
Cumberland County National Bank and Trust Company, New Cumberland (14542)
Cumberland County National Bank and Trust Company, New Cumberland (14542)

75,000

200,000

312,365

5,086,415

1,845,620

4,854,380

2,826,101

182,741,424

1,845,620

5,129,380

3,110,916

187,839,523

129,000
8,167,010
8,399,210

221,000
22,072,990
22,190,790

420,643
28,447,124
28,867,768

7,574,054
872,357,834
879,931,887

200,000
5,000,000
5,000,000

300,000
15,000,000
15,000,000

222,406
10,994,361
11,716,767

8,544,771
467,861,074
473,849,177

125,000
3,500,000
3,600,000

225,000
3,500,000
3,600,000

216,672
3,880,447
4,270,099

6,747,726
188,247,376
195,118,591

750,000

750,000

667,006

13,309,223

462,750

468,250

763,322

20,110,719

991,500

1,218,250

1,652,882

34,114,798

June 30

Pioneer National Bank, Logan (15643)
The First National Bank of Logan, Logan (4670)
The First National Bank of Logan, Logan (4670)

120,000
600,000
720,000

73,000
600,000
720,000

182,400
729,341
864,742

5,549,460
26,073,142
31,068,413

Aug. 1

Carbon Emery Bank, Price
Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City (4341)
Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City (4341)

400,000
5,630,890
6,030,890

800,000
12,662,354
13,462,354

885,142
6,771,101
7,345,965

38,219,970
489,667,449
503,888,365

Jan.

8

May

Dec. 31

SOUTH CAROLINA

July

The Bank of Berkeley, Moncks Corner
The South Carolina National Bank, Charleston (2044)
2 The South Carolina National Bank, Charleston (2044)

Dec. 31

The Security Bank, Edgefield
First National Bank of South Carolina, Columbia (13720)
First National Bank of South Carolina, Columbia (13720)
SOUTH DAKOTA

Mar. 31

Parker State Bank, Parker
Northwestern National Bank of Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls (10592)
Northwestern National Bank of Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls (10592)
TEXAS

Apr.

2

Bank of Commerce, Corpus Christi
Guaranty National Bank & Trust of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi
(14988)
.
Guaranty National Bank & Trust of Corpus Christi, Corpus Christi
(14988)
UTAH

See footnote at end of table.

228



TABLE B-17 — Continued

Mergers* of National banks, or National and State banks, by States, calendar 1973
Outstanding
capital
stock

Merging banks
Resulting hank

Effective
date

Surplus

Undivided
profits and
reserves

Total assets

VIRGINIA

The First National Bank of Nelson County at Lovingston, Lovingston
$100,000
2,005,785
2,105,785

Mar. 30

$400,000
4,045,000
4,445,000

$269,884
7,020,900
7,290,784

$10,484,042
174,634,229
185,118,272

50,000
50,000
50,000
6,551,500

(11957)

National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville (10618)
National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville (10618)

200,000
75,000
150,000
5,850,000
5,850,000

354,535
93,281
209,342
1,724,837
2,440,154

6,251,927
2,733,198
4,782,028
287,728,181
297,990,490

WASHINGTON

Mar. 9

State Bank of Morton, Morton
Orting State Bank, Orting
Eatonville State Bank, Eatonville
I'uget Sound National Bank, Taeoma (12292)
Puget Sound National Bank, Taeoma (12292)

7,166,500

'Excludes mergers involving only one operating bank, effected pursuant to corporate reorganizations.

TABLE

B-18

Mergers resulting in National banks, by assets of acquiring and acquired banks, 1960-73}
Assets of acquired hank
Assets of acquiring hanks't

Under $10 million
$10 million to $24.9 million
$25 million to $49.9 million
$50 million to $99.9 million
$100 million and over
Total

Acquired
hanks
1960-73

Under $10
mil/ion

$10 million to $25 million to $50 mil/ion to $100 million
$24.9
$99.9
$49.9
and over
million
million
million

87
137
156
170
525

87
120
103
107
223

0
17
42
40
182

0
0
11
20
65

0
0
0
3
25

0
0
0
0
30

1,075?-

640

281

96

28

30

* Includes all forms of acquisitions involving two or more hanks from May 13, 1960 through December 31, 1973.
f In each transaction, the bank with larger total assets was considered to he the acquiring bank.
t Comprises 1,035 transactions, 23 involving three banks, seven involving four banks, and one involving five banks.




229

TABLE

B-19

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Local
314

Total.

Outside
branches
819

ALABAMA

3041
12455
14569
15473
14590
14414
13414
1595
13097
12993
1814
9550
15604
1736
5593

First National Bank of Anniston, Anniston
The First National Bank of Auburn, Auburn
Birmingham Trust National Bank, Birmingham
City National Bank of Birmingham, Birmingham
First National Bank of Columbiana, Columbiana
State National Bank of Alabama, Decatur
The American National Bank & Trust Company of Mobile, Mobile.
The First National Bank of Mobile, Mobile
The Merchants National Bank of Mobile, Mobile
The Alabama National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery
The First National Bank of Montgomery, Montgomery
The Farmers National Bank of Opelika, Opelika
The Deposit National Bank of Mobile County, Prichard
The City National Bank of Selma, Selma
First Farmers and Merchants National Bank of Troy, Troy
ALASKA

14747 Alaska National Bank, Fairbanks
7718 First National Bank of Fairbanks, Fairbanks ....
ARIZONA

3728 First National Bank of Arizona, Phoenix
14324 The Valley National Bank of Arizona, Phoenix .

1
10

ARKANSAS

7346
14429
8952
14000
13949
13958
16009
14238
15222
14818
14056
8763
15257

The First National Bank of Fayetteville, Fayetteville
Helena National Bank, Helena
The First National Bank of Huntsville, Hunts ville
The Commercial National Bank of Little Rock, Little Rock
The First National Bank in Little Rock, Little Rock
Union National Bank of Little Rock, Little Rock
Worthen Bank & Trust Company, National Association, Little Rock...
The Malvern National Bank, Malvern
First National Bank & Trust Co. of Mountain Home, Mountain Home
First American National Bank, North Little Rock
National Bank of Commerce of Pine Bluff, Pine Bluff
The First National Bank of Springdale, Springdale
Commercial National Bank of Texarkana, Texarkana
CALIFORNIA

15347
15437
15398
15310
15089
11330
15958
14823
15305
15495
2491
6919
15220
6268

Alameda First National Bank, Alameda
American National Bank, Bakersfield
Inyo-Mono National Bank, Bishop
Penisula National Bank, Burlingame
First National Bank of Daly City, Daly City
National Bank of Agriculture, Fresno
Gavilan National Bank, Gilroy
Valley National Bank, Glendale, Glendale
Valley Bank, National Association, Livermore
Mid-Cal National Bank, Lodi
Security Pacific National Bank, Los Angeles
Central Bank, National Association, Oakland
West Coast National Bank, Oceanside
First National Bank and Trust Company, Ontario.

See footnotes at end of table.

230



0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
16
1
1
1

TABLE B-19 —Continued
Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Outside
branches

Total

CALIFORNIA — C o n t i n u e d

8181
15532
9897
15349
3050
13044
1741
13178
9655
15660
2158
15241
14891
15180
15443

The First National Bank of Orange County, Orange
Commercial and Farmers National Bank, Oxnard
The First National Bank of Pleasanton, Pleasanton
Valley National Bank, Salinas
Southern California First National Bank, San Diego
Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, San Francisco .
Crocker National Bank, San Francisco
Liberty National Bank, San Francisco
The Bank of California, National Association, San Francisco
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, San Francisco
The First National Bank of San Jose, San Jose
San Luis Obispo National Bank, San Luis Obispo
Santa Barbara National Bank, Santa Barbara
Security National Bank, Walnut Creek
National Bank of Whittier, Whittier

1
0
0
1
2
24
68
1
1
4
2
1
1
1
0

COLORADO

13928 The Greeley National Bank, Greeley
15436 Westlake First National Bank, Loveland.
CONNECTICUT

780
335
4
15542
1338
1184
14588

The City National Bank of Connecticut, Bridgeport
The Connecticut National Bank, Bridgeport
The State National Bank of Connecticut, Bridgeport....
The Constitution National Bank, Hartford
Hartford National Bank and Trust Company, Hartford.
The New Britain National Bank, New Britain
Northern Connecticut National Bank, Windsor Locks..
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA t

15013
2038
5046
3275
15382

District of Columbia National Bank, District of Columbia
The First National Bank of Washington, District of Columbia
The Riggs National Bank of Washington, D.C., District of Columbia
Union Trust Company of the District of Columbia, District of Columbia.
United National Bank of Washington, District of Columbia

1639
15789
1559
9617
15541
14483
11833
2338
9613
12105
3907
11936
3830
14046
2368
13068
13472
15531
15947

The First National Bank of Athens, Athens
Mercantile National Bank, Atlanta
The First National Bank of Atlanta, Atlanta
The Fulton National Bank of Atlanta, Atlanta
The National Bank of Georgia, Atlanta
American National Bank of Brunswick, Brunswick
First National Bank of Polk County, Cedartown
The First National Bank of Columbus, Columbus
The First National Bank of Habersham County, Cornelia
The First National Bank of Dallas, Dallas
The First National Bank of Dalton, Dalton
First National Bank of Lawrenceville, Lawrenceville
The First National Bank of Cobb County, Marietta
The National Bank of Walton County, Monroe
The First National Bank of Rome, Rome
The Citizens and Southern National Bank, Savannah
The Liberty National Bank & Trust Company of Savannah, Savannah.
The First National Bank of Tucker, Tucker
National Bank of Grady County, Whigham

GEORGIA

See footnotes at end of table.




231

TABLE

B-19— Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Outside
branches
IDAHO

16237
14444
1668
4773

Bank of Idaho, N.A., Boise
First Security Bank of Idaho, National Association, Boise
The Idaho First National Bank, Boise
The First National Bank of Wallace, Wallace
ILLINOIS

13630
13373
14450
15019
14467
13744
9408
14689

The First National Bank in Champaign, Champaign
First National Bank in Chicago Heights, Chicago Heights
Northwest National Bank of Chicago, Chicago
The Archer National Bank, Chicago
University National Bank, Chicago
The City National Bank of Hoopeston, Hoopeston
The Peoples National Bank of McLeansboro, McLeansboro
Ottawa National Bank, Ottawa
INDIANA

First National Bank of Bloomington, Bloomington
The Bloomington National Bank, Bloomington
Old National Bank in Evansville, Evansville
Lincoln National Bank and Trust Company of Fort Wayne, Fort Wayne...
Bank of Indiana, National Association, Gary
The First National Bank of Goshen, Goshen
The National Bank of Greenwood, Greenwood
American Fletcher National Bank and Trust Company, Indianapolis
The Indiana National Bank, Indianapolis
Lafayette National Bank, Lafayette
Purdue National Bank of Lafayette, Lafayette
Citizens National Bank of Grant County, Marion
,
First National Bank, Martinsville, Martinsville
The American National Bank of Noblesville, Noblesville
4678 The First National Bank of North Vernon, North Vernon
7011 The First National Bank and Trust Company of Plainfield, Plainfield
1869 The Rush County National Bank of Rushville, Rushville
16118 Central National Bank of Howard County, Russiaville
15662 American National Bank and Trust Company of South Bend, South Bend

1888
8415
12444
7725
15455
14113
14292
13759
984
14175
11148
15784
13643
9756

IOWA

10034
2511
15133
13321
2370
10354
2574
13609

The Citizens First National Bank of Storm Lake, Storm Lake
The Merchants National Bank of Cedar Rapids, Cedar Rapids
First National Bank of Davenport, Davenport
Central National Bank & Trust Company of Des Moines, Des Moines
Iowa—Des Moines National Bank, Des Moines
The Harlan National Bank, Harlan
The First National Bank of Mason City, Mason City
The Newton National Bank, Newton
KANSAS

5498
3180
3584
1951
14987
2782
12490
11010

Citizens National Bank and Trust Company, Emporia
The First National Bank of Hutchinson, Hutchinson
The First National B^nk of Lawrence, Lawrence
The First National Bank of Parsons, Parsons
East Side National Bank and Trust Company, Wichita
First National Bank in Wichita, Wichita
The Fourth National Bank and Trust Company, Wichita, Wichita
Union National Bank of Wichita, Wichita

See footnotes at end of table.

232



26

2
2
1

Total

TABLE B-19— Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Local

Outside
branches

KENTUCKY

5900 The Citizens National Bank of Bowling Green, Bowling Green
14840 Citizens Union National Bank & Trust Company, Lexington, Lexington
109 First National Bank of Louisville, Louisville
14320 Liberty National Bank and Trust Company of Louisville, Louisville
6129 The Traders National Bank of Mt. Sterling, Mount Sterling
4765 Newport National Bank, Newport
12961 The Peoples First National Bank & Trust Company of Paducah, Padueah
7030 Pikeville National Bank & Trust Company, Pikeville
12456 The Farmers National Bank of Scottsville, Scottsville
3832 The First and Farmers National Bank of Somerset, Somerset

0
1
2
0
1
1
1
0
0
1

1
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
1
1

2
3
2
1
0
1
1
1
0

0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1

1
0
1
0
0

0
1
0
1
1

0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

2
4
4
1
0
1
1
1
3
1
1
1
1

0
1
1
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0

1
0
0
1
2
1
1
1
0
1
1
1

LOUISIANA

14462 Fidelity National Bank of Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge
9834 Louisiana National Bank of Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge
14086 The Citizens National Bank in Hammond, Hammond
14753 The National Bank of Commerce in Jefferson, Jefferson Parish
4154 The First National Bank of Lake Charles, Lake Charles
3671 The New Iberia National Bank, New Iberia
4524 The Peoples National Bank of New Iberia, New Iberia
13689 First National Bank of Commerce, New Orleans
14685 First National Bank of West Monroe, West Monroe

,

MAINE

498

Bank of Maine, N.A., Augusta
The Camden National Bank, Camden
Northeast Bank N.A. of Farmington, Farmington
13843 The First National Bank of Aroostook, Fort F airfield
1254 The Ocean National Bank of Kennebunk, Kennebunk
2311
5861

MARYLAND
1244

13745
1413

2498
13979
4364
5623
13776

14106
14856
15365
14937
8799

The Farmers National Bank of Annapolis, Annapolis
Maryland National Bank, Baltimore
The First National Bank of Baltimore, Baltimore
The National Bank of Cambridge, Cambridge
Frostburg National Bank, Frostburg
The Citizens National Bank, Laurel
The First National Bank of Oakland, Oakland
The Garrett National Bank in Oakland, Oakland
The Eastern Shore National Bank, Pocomoke City
Potomac National Bank, Potomac
University National Bank, Kockville
American National Bank of Maryland, Silver Spring
The Woodbine National Bank, Woodbine
MASSACHUSETTS

393
15483
475
15509
528
1129
484
1014
4013
13241
1018
726

The First National Bank of Amherst, Amherst
Harbor National Bank of Boston, Boston
New England Merchants National Bank of Boston, Boston..
The National Shawmut Bank of Boston, Boston
Community National Bank, Framingham
Merrimack Valley National Bank, Haverhill
The Haverhill National Bank, Haverhill
Bay State National Bank, Lawrence
The Lenox National Bank, Lenox
Needham National Bank, Needham
Northampton National Bank, Northampton
Merchant —Warren National Bank of Salem, Salem

............

See footnotes at end of table.




233

TABLE

B-19-Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Outside
branches
MASSACHUSETTS - C o n t i n u e d

1144
15005
308
2232
1440
79

The Country Bank, National Association, Shelburne Falls..
Hampshire National Bank of South Hadley, South Hadley.
Third National Bank of Hampden County, Springfield
First Bristol County National Bank, Taunton
The National Bank of Wareham, Wareham
Worcester County National Bank, Worcester
MICHIGAN t

16211
14933
9497
1812
14948
13671
15049
15575
14560
14452
13741
191
15234
14032
1587
13753
15899
5607
15938
1918
15403
3547
15527
15167
14918
15008
15286
13807

The American National Bank in Western Michigan, Allegan
National Bank and Trust Company of Ann Arbor, Ann Arbor.
Hickory National Bank of Michigan, Burr Oak
The First National Bank of Cassopolis, Cassopolis
Michigan National Bank of Detroit, Detroit
National Bank of Detroit, Detroit
Metropolitan National Bank of Farmington, Farmington
Union Bank and Trust Company (National Association), Grand Rapids
First National Bank of Holland, Holland
Commercial National Bank of Iron Mountain, Iron Mountain
The National Bank of Jackson, Jackson
The First National Bank and Trust Company of Michigan, Kalamazoo
First National Bank of Lake City, Lake City
Michigan National Bank, Lansing
The First National Bank of Monroe, Monroe
First National Bank of Southwestern Michigan, Niles
West Oakland Bank, National Association, Novi
First National Bank and Trust Company, Petoskey
The American National Bank in Portage, Portage
Second National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw
Valley National Bank of Saginaw, Saginaw
The First National Bank of Sault Ste. Marie, Michigan, Sault Ste. Marie.
Michigan National Bank — Oakland, Southfield
National Bank of Southfield, Southfield
National Bank and Trust Company of Traverse City, Traverse City
Michigan National Bank —North Metro, Troy
First National Bank of Wyoming, Wyoming
The National Bank of Ypsilanti, Ypsilanti
MINNESOTA

2648
10740
2073
579

Fergus Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Fergus Falls.
The First National Bank of Lakeville, Lakeville
The First National Bank of Northfield, Northfield
The First National Bank of Rochester, Rochester
MISSISSIPPI

15284
15124
10738
10361
14487
5176
15386
15548
10523
13313
13551
7266
15519
15479
16194

First National Bank of Clarksdale, Clarksdale
First National Bank of Bolivar County, Cleveland
First-Columbus National Bank, Columbus
The National Bank of Commerce, Columbus
Gulf National Bank, Gulfport
First Mississippi National Bank, Hattiesburg
First American National Bank, Uika
Deposit Guaranty National Bank, Jackson
First National Bank of Jackson, Jackson
First National Bank of Holmes County, Lexington
First National Bank in Meridian, Meridian
The Citizens National Bank of Meridian, Meridian
First National Bank, New Albany
First Citizens National Bank, Tupelo
Peoples Bank of Mississippi National Association, Union.

See footnotes at end of table.

234



Total

TABLE B-19 —Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Outside
branches
MISSOURI

15996
1467
1770
14876
15115
4157
3712
4215
170
15793
5209

The National Bank of Affton, Affton
First National Bank and Trust Company, Columbia
The Boone County National Bank of Columbia, Columbia..
First National Bank of Callaway County, Fulton
First National Bank of Gladstone, Gladstone
The First National Bank of Independence, Independence ..
The First National Bank of Liberty, Liberty
The First National Bank of Plattsburg, Plattsburg
First National Bank in St. Louis, St. Louis
Springfield National Bank, Springfield
The Union National Bank of Springfield, Springfield
NEBRASKA

3081
13953
9908
1633
15435

The Beatrice National Bank and Trust Company, Beatrice.
City National Bank of Hastings, Hastings
Northwestern National Bank, Omaha
The Omaha National Bank, Omaha
West Omaha National Bank, Omaha
NEVADA

7038 First National Bank of Nevada, Reno, Nevada, Reno.
14406 Security National Bank of Nevada, Reno
NEW HAMPSHIRE

5183
12889
14835
1885
574
15563
3404
15652

The Farmers and Traders National and Savings Bank, Colebrook..
Indian Head National Bank of Exeter, Exeter
Hampton National Bank, Hampton
The Littleton National Bank, Littleton
Amoskeag National Bank & Trust Co., Manchester
Indian Head National Bank of Manchester, Manchester
The Citizens National Bank of Newport, Newport
Community National Bank of Rochester, Rochester
NEW JERSEY

15781
10712
15913
7945
1209
15971
15709
8704
15430
1326
1436
13893
15035
12014
16169
4147

Atlantic National Bank, Atlantic City
Citizens' Bank, National Association, Bloomsbury
Shore National Bank, Bricktownship
The First National Bank of Cape May Court House, Cape May Court House
South Jersey National Bank, Cherry Hill
United Jersey National Bank of Cherry Hill, Cherry Hill
New Jersey Bank, N.A., Clifton
First National Bank and Trust Company of Beverly, Edgewater Park Township.
Midlantic National Bank/Raritan Valley, Edison
First National Bank of South Jersey, Egg Harbor Township
The National State Bank, Elizabeth, N.J., Elizabeth
The Edgewater National Bank, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Englewood Cliffs
Urban National Bank, Franklin Lakes
First National State Bank of North Jersey, Hackensack
The Hamilton Bank, National Association, Hamilton Township
Peoples National Bank of Monmouth County, Hazlet
8627 The First National Bank and Trust Company of Kearny, Kearny
16035 First National State Bank of Ocean County, Lakewood Township
15360 Midlantic National Bank/Morris, Morristown
15505 Security National Bank, Newark
587 The National Bank of New Jersey, New Brunswick
12732 Meadowlands National Bank, North Bergen
See footnotes at end of table.


550-906 O-LT - 75 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 16
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

235

TABLE

B-19- Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Outside
branches
NEW JERSEY- Continued

15975
15790
3697
4872
11759
5005
2076

12978
12014
13039
3709
14673
12861
399
15838

Midlantic National Bank, Parsippany-Troy Hills, Parsippany-Troy Hills
Bank of Passaic and Clifton, National Association, Passaic
The Peoples National Bank of Central Jersey, Piscataway
The First National Bank of Princeton, Princeton
Citizens First National Bank of New Jersey, Ridgewood
National Community Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford
National Union Bank of Rutherford, Rutherford
The First National Bank of Stone Harbor, Stone Harbor
County Trust Company, National Association, Tenafly
First National State Bank of Central Jersey, Trenton
The Broad Street National Bank of Trenton, Trenton
The City National Bank of Millville, Vineland
The Prospect Park National Bank, Wayne
Peoples National Bank of New Jersey, Westmont
Mid-Jersey National Bank, Woodbridge Township
NEW MEXICO

12485
15499
13814
6597
15256
14636
14577
14912
13438

Albuquerque National Bank, Albuquerque
Fidelity National Bank, Albuquerque
First National Bank in Albuquerque, Albuquerque
The First National Bank of Belen, Belen
Farmington National Bank, Farmington
First National Bank in Las Vegas, Las Vegas
Liberty National Bank, Lovington
Security National Bank of Roswell, Roswell
Hot Springs National Bank, Truth or Consequences
NEW YORKt

15758
1301
963
15917
10029
12997
15080
13952
16050
13590
8531
976
5816
10295
15464
11511
7699
980
13126
9305
6587
5336

15976
7703
1120
13365
4925
598
15922
5293

Bankers Trust Company of Albany, National Association, Albany
National Commercial Bank and Trust Company, Albany
Union National Bank, Albany
Citibank (Suffolk), National Association, Bay Shore
Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company/Suffolk, National Association, Bay Shore
Franklin National Bank, Brooklyn
Liberty National Bank and Trust Company, Buffalo
Lincoln National Bank, Buffalo
Chase Manhattan Bank of Greater Rochester (National Association) Caledonia....
United National Bank, Calicoon
The St. Lawrence National Bank, Canton
The Putnam County National Bank of Carmel, Carmel
Citibank (Eastern), National Association, Castleton-on-Hudson
The Hayes National Bank of Clinton, Clinton
First National Bank of East Hampton, East Hampton
Marine Midland Tinker National Bank, East Setauket
Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company, Glens Falls
The First National Bank of Glens Falls, Glens Falls
The First National Bank of Glen Head, Glen Head
City National Bank and Trust Company of Gloversville, Gloversville
Security National Bank, Hempstead
The First National Bank of Highland, Highland
Citibank (Mid-Western), National Association, Honeoye Falls
National Bank of North America, Jamaica
The Rondout National Bank, Kingston
Jefferson National Bank, Lafargeville
The Sullivan County National Bank of Liberty, Liberty
The Farmers National Bank of Malone, Malone
Chase Manhattan Bank of Long Island (National Association), Melville
The First National Bank of Mexico, Mexico

See footnotes at end of table.

236



Total

TABLE B-19 — Continued
Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Outside
branches
NEW YORK- Continued

13314
1106
1461
13295
2370
1354
14734
2151
16089
12788
1269
15641
1040
1226
14680
10258
14763
16047
15627
721
2657
10525
9405

Nanuet National Bank, Nanuet
Highland National Bank of Newburgh, Newburgh
First National City Bank, New York
Sterling National Bank & Trust Company of New York, New York
The Chase Manhattan Bank National Association, New York
The National Bank and Trust Company of Norwich, Norwich
Chemical Bank Hudson Valley, National Association, Nyack
Wilber National Bank, Oneonta
Citibank (Central), National Association, Oriskany Falls, Oriskany Falls
Bankers Trust of Suffolk, National Association, Patchogue
The National Bank of Pawling, Pawling
Bankers Trust Hudson Valley, N.A., Poughkeepsie
Chase Manhattan Bank of the Mid-Hudson (National Association), Saugerties ...
The Mohawk National Bank of Schenectady, Schenectady
First National Bank of Scotia, Scotia
Citibank (Western) National Association, Silver Creek
Chemical Bank of Suffolk, National Association, Smithtown
Chase Manhattan Bank of Central New York, National Association, Syracuse
Lincoln First Bank-Central, National Association, Syracuse
Marine Midland Bank —Eastern National Association, Troy
The National Bank of Northern New York, Watertown
National Bank of Westchester, White Plains
Essex County-Champlain National Bank Willsboro, Willsboro

0
0
12
1
25
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0

1
1
1
0
1
1
2
2
1
3
0
1
1
2
2
3
3
2
0
2
1
1
1

1
1
1
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
1
0

14
13
0
1
0
4
1
3
0
1
0
8

0
0
2
0
1
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1

1
1
0
1
1
2
2
1
0
2
1
1
0
1
1
1
2
0

NORTH CAROLINA

15650
13761
14229
3903
4597
14676
6744
10610
4896
13859
8571
15673

First Union National Bank of North Carolina, Charlotte
North Carolina National Bank, Charlotte
Cherryville National Bank, Cherryville
The Concord National Bank, Concord
First National Bank of Catawba County, Hickory
Bank of North Carolina, National Association, Jacksonville
Carolina First National Bank, Lincolnton
Southern National Bank of North Carolina, Lumberton
The First National Bank of Mount Airy, Mount Airy
The Union National Bank of Oxford, Oxford
The First National Bank of West Jefferson, West Jefferson
Wachovia Bank and Trust Company National Association, Winston-Salem
OHIO

15526
5627
6566
14879
4318
786
15423
5065
10
2604
15573
136
2449
98
2500
3505
15945
11831

The Ross County National Bank, Adelphi
The First National Bank of Bethel, Ohio, Bethel
First National Bank of Cambridge. Cambridge
The Geauga County National Bank of Chardon, Chardon
Central National Bank of Cleveland, Cleveland
National City Bank, Cleveland
The Capital National Bank, Cleveland
The Ohio National Bank of Columbus, Columbus
The Third National Bank and Trust Company of Dayton, Ohio, Dayton
Winters National Bank and Trust Company, Dayton
Euclid National Bank, Euclid
The First National Bank of Gallipolis, Gallipolis
The Merchants National Bank of Hillsborough, Hillsboro
The First National Bank of Ironton, Ironton
The First National Bank of Kenton, Kenton
The Kenton National Bank, Kenton
Citizensbank National Association, Loveland
The National City Bank of Marion, Marion

See footnotes at end of table.




237

TABLE

B-19-Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Total

Outside
branches
OHIO —Continued

4842
9179
15416
14686
7781
973
238
6594
90
15561
2350
13586
828

The Old Phoenix National Bank of Medina, Medina
The Park National Bank, Newark
Mid-American National Bank and Trust Company, North Wood
The Lake County National Bank of Painesville, Painesville
The Security Central National Bank of Portsmouth, Portsmouth
The Farmers National Bank of Salem, Salem
The First National Bank of Springfield, Springfield
The Security National Bank, Springfield
The First Citizens National Bank of Upper Sandusky, Upper Sandusky
Community National Bank of Warrensville Heights, Warrensville Heights.,
The Mahoning National Bank of Youngstown, Youngstown
The Union National Bank of Youngstown, Youngstown
The Wayne County National Bank of Wooster, Wooster

0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
0

1
1
4
2
0
1
1
1
0
1
1
1
1

4
1
0

3
3
1

0
1
0
2
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0

1
0
3
0
5
3
1
6
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
0
1
1
1
4
3
1
1
0
0
3
2
2
1
1

OKLAHOMA

15177

Plaza National Bank of Bartlesville, Bartlesville..
OREGON

1553 First National Bank of Oregon, Portland
4514 United States National Bank of Oregon, Portland.
14860 Douglas National Bank, Roseburg
PENNSYLVANIA^

13871
373
6645
247
539
723
9026
15422
664
355

10232
12967
5118
5084
10775
14205
5351
580
6445

3893
4204
2822
252
694
2634

9528
5502
745
5773
9207
870
12
357

First National Bank at Albion, Albion
The First National Bank of Allentown, Allentown
The Merchants National Bank of Allentown, Allentown
The First National Bank of Altoona, Altoona
The Philadelphia National Bank, Ardmore
Central Penn National Bank, Bala-Cynwyd, Bala-Cynwyd
The Brownstown National Bank, Brownstown
Provident National Bank, Bryn Mawr
First National Bank, Carbondale, Pennsylvania, Carbondale
Southeast National Bank of Pennsylvania, Chester
The Central Pennsylvania National Bank of Claysburg, Claysburg...
The Dale National Bank, Dale
The Northampton National Bank of Easton, Easton
The First National Bank of Ebensburg, Ebensburg
The Elverson National Bank, Elverson
Community National Bank, Forest City
Southwest National Bank of Pennsylvania, Greensburg
The Commonwealth National Bank, Harrisburg
The First National Bank of Hawley, Hawley
Peoples First National Bank and Trust Company, Hazleton
The Hazleton National Bank, Hazleton
The Hummelstown National Bank, Hummelstown
Pittsburgh National Bank, Jeannette
National Central Bank, Lancaster
The Fulton National Bank of Lancaster, Lancaster
Sullivan County National Bank, Laporte
The First National Bank of Leechburg, Leechburg
The Lewisburg National Bank, Lewisburg
Farmers First National Bank, Lititz
Community National Bank of Southern Pennsylvania, Littlestown...
Marine National Bank, Meadville
The First National Bank of Pennsylvania, Meadville
Tri-County National Bank, Middleburg

See footnotes at end of table.

238



q
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
0

TABLE B-19 — Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Outside
branches

Total

PENNSYLVANIA— Continued

5147
5496
2223
5077
4676
14542
8499
11015
7910
2222
6301
252
5702
8045
4549
8764
12261
42
1237
4984
5034
5920
30
175
14082

The Juniata Valley National Bank, Mifflintown
The First National Bank of Pike County, Milford
County National Bank of Montrose, Montrose
Nazareth National Bank & Trust Company, Nazareth
The Citizens National Bank of New Castle, New Castle
Cumberland County National Bank and Trust Company, New Cumberland..
New Holland Farmers National Bank, New Holland....
The Solebury National Bank of New Hope, New Hope
The First National Bank of Nicholson, Nicholson
Equibank N.A., Pittsburgh
Mellon Bank, N.A., Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh National Bank, Pittsburgh
Keystone National Bank, Punxsutawney
The Farmers National Bank of Quarryville, Quarryville
The Century National Bank and Trust Company, Rochester
The McDowell National Bank of Sharon, Sharon
The Peoples National Bank of Central Pennsylvania, State College
The First National Bank of Strasburg, Strasburg
First National Trust Bank, Sunbury
The First National Bank of Troy, Troy
Gallatin National Bank, Uniontown
First National Bank & Trust Co., Washington, Pa., Washington
The First National Bank of Eastern Pennsylvania, Wilkes-Barre
Fidelity National Bank of Pa., Williamsport
Citizens National Bank in Windber, Windber
RHODE ISLAND

1492 The Newport National Bank, Newport
1302
Industrial National Bank of Rhode Island, Providence

16
0

SOUTH CAROLINA

14425
2044
10635
13720
14625
14448
10660

The Citizens and Southern National Bank of South Carolina, Charleston
The South Carolina National Bank, Charleston
Bankers Trust of South Carolina, N.A., Columbia
First National Bank of South Carolina, Columbia
First National Bank of Easley, Easley
Rock Hill National Bank, Rock Hill
The National Bank of South Carolina of Sumter, Sumter
SOUTH DAKOTA

4
9
53
5
1
0
0

12881 National Bank of South Dakota, Sioux Falls
10592 Northwestern National Bank of Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls
3393 The First National Bank in Sioux Falls, Sioux Falls
TENNESSEE

3341
7848
1666
9809
4177
15056
10842
13539
7225
10028
8673

The First National Bank of McMinn County, Athens
The Hamilton National Bank of Chattanooga, Chattanooga
The Cleveland National Bank, Cleveland
The First National Bank of Crossville, Crossville
The First National Bank of Greeneville, Greene ville
The First National Bank of Gibson County, Humboldt
The First National Bank of Sullivan County, Kingsport
The Hamilton National Bank of Knoxville, Knoxville
The First National Bank of La Follette, La Follette
City and County Bank of Anderson County, National Association, Lake City
Hamilton National Bank of Lenoir City, Lenoir City

See footnotes at end of table.




239

TABLE

B-19-Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Outside
branches
TENNESSEE - Continued

14279 The Blount National Bank of Maryville, Maryville
2221 The First National Bank of McMinnville, McMinnville
336 The First National Bank of Memphis, Memphis
13349 Union Planters National Bank of Memphis, Memphis
9319 The First National Bank of Mount Pleasant, Mount Pleasant.
3032 First America National Bank of Nashville, Nashville
8039 The First National Bank of Oneida, Oneida
UTAH

4607
15490
2597
4341

The First National Bank of Logan, Logan
Citizens National Bank, Ogden
First Security Bank of Utah, National Association, Ogden.
Zions First National Bank, Salt Lake City
VERMONT

1368
194
2274
2295
122

The National Bank of Derby Line, Derby Line
Catamount National Bank, North Bennington
The Randolph National Bank, Randolph
The Merchants National Bank of St. Johnsbury, St. Johnsbury.
First National Bank of Springfield, Springfield
VIRGINIA

7093
651
11205
16246
15390
10618
16184
4503
9343
1985
15247
12267
16167
14325
3917
6031
1558
6748

7206
10194
9885
11381
1111
15027
10080
11817
15117
8984
11265
14824
6126
16174
1635
16159
15984

Alexandria National Bank, Alexandria
United Virginia Bank/First & Citizens National, Alexandria
The Farmers National Bank of Appomattox, Appomattox
The First National Exchange Bank of Montgomery County, Blacksburg
First Virginia bank — Monticello National, Charlottesville
National Bank and Trust Company, Charlottesville
First & Merchants National Bank of Tidewater, Chesapeake
The Covington National Bank, Covington
American National Bank and Trust Company of Danville, Danville
The First National Bank of Danville, Danville
Grundy National Bank, Grundy
The Old Point National Bank of Phoebus, Hampton
Virginia National Bank/Henry County, Henry County
Citizens National Bank of Herndon, Herndon
The Peoples National Bank of Leesburg, Leesburg
The First National Bank of Luray, Luray
United Virginia Bank/First National, Lynchburg
The Peoples National Bank of Manassas, Manassas
The First National Bank of Martinsville and Henry County, Martinsville
United Virginia Bank/Seaboard National, Norfolk
Virginia National Bank, Norfolk
American National Bank, Portsmouth
First & Merchants National Bank, Richmond
Richmond National Bank, Richmond
The Central National Bank of Richmond, Richmond
The Colonial-American National Bank of Roanoke, Roanoke
United Virginia Bank/Security National, Roanoke County
The Peoples National Bank of Rocky Mount, Rocky Mount
The First National Bank of Saltville, Saltville
Fairfax County National Bank, Seven Corners
The Fauquier National Bank of Warrenton, Warrenton
The First National Exchange Bank of Washington County, Washington County..
The Shenandoah Valley National Bank of Winchester, Winchester
Dominion National Bank of the Peninsula, York
First & Merchants National Bank of the Peninsula, York County

See footnotes at end of table.

240



Total

TABLE B - 1 9 - Continued

Domestic branches entering the National Banking System, by de novo opening, merger, or conversion, by States,
calendar 1973
Branches opened for business
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank

Outside
branches

Local

Total

WASHINGTON

3417
14394
11280
4375
13331
4668
12292

Pacific National Bank of Washington, Seattle
Peoples National Bank of Washington, Seattle
Seattle-First National Bank, Seattle
The National Bank of Commerce of Seattle, Seattle
First National Bank in Spokane, Spokane
Old National Bank of Washington, Spokane
Puget Sound National Bank, Tacoma
WEST VIRGINIA

13954 The National Bank of Logan, Logan
WISCONSIN

14397 The Baraboo National Bank, Baraboo
1998 The First National Bank of Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin Rapids
4639 The Wood County National Bank of Wisconsin Rapids, Wisconsin Rapids
*Includes three automated teller machines beginning operation in 1972.
tlncludes one non-National bank.
^Includes adjustment from prior year.

TABLE

B-20

Domestic branches of National banks closed, by States, calendar 1973
Branches closed
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Local

39

Total

Outside
branches

Total

138

177

1
59
2
4
0

1
63
3
4
1

ALABAMA

4067 The First National Bank of Huntsville, Huntsville
CALIFORNIA

2491
10391
13044
15660
15180

Security Pacific National Bank, Los Angeles
United States National Bank, San Diego
Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association, San Francisco
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, San Francisco
Security National Bank, Walnut Creek
COLORADO

15170

Northern National Bank, Colorado Springs
CONNECTICUT

1139 The Deep River National Bank, Deep River
15542 The Constitution National Bank, Hartford
720 The Home National Bank and Trust Company, Meriden




241

TABLE B-20-Continued

Domestic branches of National banks closed, by States, calendar 1973
Branches closed
Charter
No.

Title and location of bank
Local

Outside
branches

Total

IDAHO

1668 The Idaho First National Bank, Boise
12256 The Cassia National Bank of Burley Burley

0
1

1
1

1
2

1

o

1

0

1

1

1

0

1

....

1

0

1

..

1
2
1

0
3
0

1
5
1

1
0

0
1

1
1

1

0

1

0
1

1
0

1
1

1

o

1

0
0
1

1
1
3

1
1
4

0
1
0

1
1
1

1
2
1

0
0

1
1

1
1

IOWA

4677 The Citizens National Bank of Charles City, Charles City
KANSAS

9758

Stockyards National Bank, Union Stock Yards
KENTUCKY

109 First National Bank of Louisville, Louisville
MAINE

13750

Norway National Bank Norway

.
MASSACHUSETTS

..
200 The First National Bank of Boston, Boston
14834 First National Bank of Natick Natick
..
308 Third National Bank of Hampden County Springfield

....

MICHIGAN

13671
13820

National Bank of Detroit, Detroit
The American National Bank and Trust Company of Michigan, Kalamazoo
MISSOURI

5036

The First National Bank of West Plains West Plains
NEW JERSEY

1326 First National Bank of South Jersey Egg Harbor Township
1452 First National State Bank of New Jersey Newark
NEW MEXICO

14628

First National Bank of Lea County Hobbs
NEW YORK

12997 Franklin National Bank, Brooklyn
1461 First National City Bank New York
...
7703 National Bank of North America New York .

..

NORTH CAROLINA

15650 First Union National Bank of North Carolina, Charlotte.
10608 The Planters National Bank and Trust Company Rocky Mount
15673 Wachovia Bank and Trust Company, N.A., Winston-Salem
OHIO

786 National City Bank, Cleveland
15423 The Capital National Bank, Cleveland

242



TABLE B - 2 0 - Continued

Domestic branches of National banks closed, by States, calendar 1973
Branches closed
Title and location of bank

Charter
No.

Local

Outside
branches

Total

OREGON

1553 The First National Bank of Oregon, Portland
PENNSYLVANIA

14170
12526
13994
5429
5574
2222
6301
252
705
4549

First National Bank in Bangor, Bangor
The Cheltenham National Bank, Cheltenham
Tri-Valley National Bank, Hegins
The First National Bank of Meshoppen, Meshoppen
First Citizens National Bank, Montgomery
Equibank N.A., Pittsburgh
Mellon Bank, N.A., Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh National Bank, Pittsburgh
The Union National Bank of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh
The Century National Bank and Trust Company, Rochester.
TENNESSEE

12031 First National Bank in Harriman, Harriman
13635 The Hamilton National Bank of Johnson City, Johnson City..
13056 The First National Bank of Smithville, Smithville
UTAH

7685 The First National Bank of Layton, Layton.
VERMONT

2395 The County National Bank of Bennington, Bennington.
VIRGINIA

15353
9343
9885
1111
2737

Woodlawn National Bank, Alexandria
American National Bank & Trust Company of Danville, Danville.
Virginia National Bank, Norfolk
First & Merchants National Bank, Richmond
The First National Exchange Bank of Virginia, Roanoke

3
0
1
14
3

3
1
1
14
3

WASHINGTON

3417 Pacific National Bank of Washington, Seattle...
14394 Peoples National Bank of Washington, Seattle.
WISCONSIN

2725 The First National Bank and Trust Company of Beloit.
Adjustment from prior year




243

to

TABLE

B-21

Principal assets, liabilities, and capital accounts of National banks, by deposit size, year-end 1972 and 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Securities*
Number
of banks

Total
assets

Cash and
cash items

Loans*

Deposits

U.S.
Treasury
securities

Total

Fixed
assets
Total

Time
and
savings

Demand

Capital
stock

Capital
Surplus,
notes and undivided
debenprofits,
tures
and
reserves

1973
Deposit size
Less than $1.0...
$1.0 to $1.9
$2.0 to $4.9
$5.0 to $9.9
$10.0 to 24.9
$25.0 to $49.9....
$50.0 to $99.9....
$100.0 to $499.9.
$500.0 and over..
Total.

$20
104
1,572

15
51
371
799
1,659
847
457
348
114

36,140
87,337
293,570

12,977

46,568

44,426

4,661

489,600

12

16
132
1,731
7,549
28,795
31,065
31,922

$4
17
201

$3
34
686
3,192
15,060
17,750
19,041

$5

$4
17
242

105,731

$3
32
715
3,271
15,817
17,697
18,526
40,216
120,558

395,880

179,046

6

101
1,531

$9
81
1,360
5,997
26,985
29,830
31,637
73,692
226,289

$6
50
645

169,238

2,090
9,359
9,792
9,874
20,454
52,616

2,948
2,801
5,659
13,119

$1
4
31
106
503
598
699
1,580
4,621

70,724

271,572

104,684

28,897

8,143

5
57
772
3,552
13,898
15,709
16,290
39,685
140,489

4
39
9,416
9,608
9,619

3
27
326
1,155
3,788
3,449
3,316

1
3
25
117
478
542

20,626

6,680

51,367

16,555

1,378
4,186

202,493

59
734
3,049
10,999
11,665
12,226
32,345
101,482

230,457

103,738

35,299

7,334

359,428

172,565

6,743

826

30,249

3,571
4,054

33,865

4,648

26
468

864
3,243

2,726

11,168
12,133
13,111
33,476

$5
8
52
131

$0
0
1

1,502
4,519

86
111
420
1,531

$5
13
124
427
1,713
1,770
1,805
4,087
13,051

216,835

7,940

2,200

22,995

2
41
797
3,699
14,847
15,949
16,051

3
11
41
142

0
0
1
5
34

4
18
124
470
1,556
1,577
1,563

506

590
627

6
45

1972
Deposit size
Less than $1.0...
$1.0 to $1.9
$2.0 to $4.9
$5.0 to $9.9
$10.0 to $24.9....
$25.0 to $49.9....
$50.0 to $99.9....
$100.0 to $499.9.
$500.0 and over..
Total.

904
1,603
781
404
315
110

256,057

3
17
233
926
3,404
3,707
4,048
11,752
43,311

4,614

434,949

67,401

65
420

77,682

576
2,483

604

*Loans and securities figures are shown gross, that is, reserves are not deducted from the respective assets.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding.




6,748
25,846

27,614
28,278
66,808

486
555
564

66

101,011

1,355
4,344

91
320
1,726

11,643

186,860

7,501

2,243

20,607

34,463

3,652

TABLE

B-22

Dates of reports of condition of National banks, 1914-73
[For dates of previous calls see Annual Report for 1920, vol. 2, table No. 42, p. 150]
Year
1914
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
1940
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973

Jan.

Feb.

Mar.

Apr.

4
4
7

13

4

12
4

28
5

10
3
31
6
12

..
.
.

June

1
1
1
10

5
4
28
21

May

23
28
27
27
25

5
4
4
31
7
29
26

4
4
13
20

30
23
30
20
29
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
30
30
30
29
30

12

30
30
30
30
30

31
20
15
11
10

..
.

15
26
5
25
18
30
30
20

. .
..
.

30
6
23
10
15
30
30
29
30
30
30
30
29
30
30
30

18
28

30
30

14
4
12
15

12
26
18

.

Sept.

12
2
12
11

Oct.

Nov.

31
10
17
20
1

31

17
15

12
8
6
15
14

10
28
10
3

4
24
29
30
25
17

1
28
2
24
18
30
6

30
30

9

..
.

Aug.

30

11
24

July

Dec.

31
31
27
31
31
31
29
31
29
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
30
31
31
31
31
31
30
31
31
31
31
30
31
31
31

31
1

4
10
5
30

7
5

26
11
24
6
3
27
28
30
1
13

20
4
30
21

28
30
10

17

31
30

31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
31
30
28
20
31
31
31
30
31
31
31
31

31
31

See notes on next page.




245

NOTES

Act of Feb. 25, 1863, provided for reports of condition on
the 1st of each quarter before commencement of business.
Act of June 3, 1864 —1st Monday of January, April, July,
and October, before commencement of business, on form
prescribed by Comptroller (in addition to reports on 1st Tuesday
of each month showing condition at commencement of business
in respect to certain items; i.e., loans, specie, deposits, and
circulation).
Act of Mar. 3, 1869, not less than 5 reports per year, on form
prescribed by Comptroller, at close of business on any past date
by him specified.
Act of Dec. 28, 1922, minimum number of calls reduced from
5 to 3 per year.
Act of Feb. 25, 1927, authorized a vice president or an assistant
cashier designated by the board of directors to verify reports of
condition in absence of president and cashier.
Act of June 16, 1933, requires each National bank to furnish
and publish not less than 3 reports each year of affiliates other
than member banks, as of dates identical with those for which the
Comptroller shall during such year require reports of condition
of the bank. The report of each affiliate shall contain such information as in the judgment of the Comptroller shall be necessary
to disclose fully the relations between the affiliate and the bank
and to enable the Comptroller to inform himself as to the effect
of such relations upon the affairs of the bank.
Sec. 21 (a) of the Banking Act of 1933 provided, in part, that
after June 16, 1934, it would be unlawful for any private bank

246



not under State supervision to continue the transaction of business
unless it submitted to periodic examination by the Comptroller
of the Currency or the Federal Reserve bank of the district, and
made and published periodic reports of condition the same as
required of National banks under sec. 5211, U.S.R.S. Sec 21(a)
of the Banking Act of 1933, however, was amended by sec. 303
of the Banking Act of 1935, approved Aug. 23, 1935, under the
provisions of which private banks are no longer required to submit to examination by the Comptroller or Federal Reserve bank,
nor are they required to make to the Comptroller and to publish
periodic reports of condition. (Five calls for reports of condition
of private banks were made by the Comptroller, the first one for
June 30,1934, and the last one for June 29,1935.)
Sec. 7(a)(3) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (Title 12,
U.S.C., sec. 1817(a)) of July 14, 1960, provides, in part that,
effective Jan. 1, 1961, each insured National bank shall make to
the Comptroller of the Currency 4 reports of condition annually
upon dates to be selected by the Comptroller, the Chairman of
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the
Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, or a majority thereof. Two dates shall be
selected within the semiannual period of January to June, inclusive, and 2 within the semiannual period of July to December,
inclusive, Sec. 161 of Ttitle 12 also provides that the Comptroller
of the Currency may call for additional reports of condition, in
such form and containing such information as he may prescribe,
on dates to be fixed by him, and may call for special reports from
any particular association whenever in his judgment the same are
necessary for use in the performance of his supervisory duties.

TABLE

B-23

Total and principal assets of National banks, by States, June 30, 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Securities, grosst
Number
of banks

Total
assets

Cash
assets*

U.S. Government
obligationsX

State
and
local

Loans,
gross
Other

Federal
funds
sold§

United States.

4,631

$449,924

$61,356

$43,428

$53,277

$2,995

$254,211

$16,072

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida

90
5
3
71
56
125
24
5
11
254

5,266

711
97
531
420
7,836
698
625
4
408
2,165

554
78
359
347
5,767
406
184
11
263
1,787

883
135
500
355
5,435
562
396
2
294
2,484

21
3
15
10
301
21
23

171
4

Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire...
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

61
2
6
416
122
100
171
80
50
19
39
80
106
200
39
104
54
122
4
48
122
33
163
25
43
215
193
8
270
5
19
32
73
545
10
23
98
23
93
127
42
1
1

6,896
126
1,447
39,331
9,740
3,306
3,758
3,332
5,816
950

303
30
132
4,382
1,065
468
579
460
853
54

651
5

75

193
4,450
1,148
370
474

4
425
98
11
12
9
24
2

3,907
10,947
17,079
9,250
2,439
7,629
1,332
3,533
1,211
956
14,648
1,700
62,863
8,066
1,081
17,616
6,478
4,916
27,453
2,400
2,239
1,382
7,992
29,390
1,376
464
7,721
7,521
2,633

1,065
17
160
4,483
1,364
472
511
449
765
103
559
1,601
2,578
1,234
353
1,178
138
484
133
115
1,664
224
10,727
1,130
108
2,037
872
710
3,185
215
344
150
1,135
4,462
221
40
805
909
279

2,768
339
2,843
1,511
36,736
3,041
2,125
29
1,438
7,274
4,292
65
874
22,890
5,312
1,700
1,834
1,729
2,853
597

325
734
1,593
1,037
261
681
170
358
145
108

567
1,353
2,009
997
304
995
184
403
149
101

1,673
177
4,539
660
168
2,124
804
373
2,812
150
185
155
922

2,433
252
5,220
1,114
150
2,638
1,039
610
3,870
292
237
196
991

2,668

4,260

6,556

766

899
134
18

98
12

98
40
696
502
440
618
122
3
2

120
65
1,014
807
432
681
117
27

14

3,823

633

436

433

Direct
lease
financing

District of Columbia —all"...

685
4,506

2,876
61,959
5,046
3,584
49
2,590
14,829

426
743

142

16
113

16
68
148
39
13
21
4
11
6
2
240
4
429
17
3
178
34
9
238
8
6
2
64

146
4
4
24
20
11
37
6

24

2,165
6,448
9,599
5,362
1,353
4,009
764
2,033
681

571
7,822
921
36,969
4,772
611
9,463
3,097
2,842
15,374
1,643
1,300
797
4,373
15,046
871
292
4,734
4,314
1,270
3,866
502
87
2,079

36

141
2,855
115
83
2
103
525
168
6
40
1,293
438
211
245
158
398
20
162
184
645
241
74
517
34
151
48
32
303
74
996
90
13
610
434
140
1,071
8
95
43
123
1,691
14
13
153
621
119
337
23

127

* Cash, balances with other banks, and cash items in process of collection.
t Includes investment securities and securities held in trading accounts.
$ Includes U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of other U.S. Government agencies.
§ Also includes securities purchased under agreements to resell.
II Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts of less than $500,000.



247

TABLE

B-24

Total and principal liabilities of National banks, by States, June 30, 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Deposits
Total
liabilities

Total
deposits

Demand
deposits,
total

Time and
savings
deposits,
total

Demand
deposits,
IPC*

Reserves
Federal
on loans
Time
funds purand
deposits,
chased^ securities
IPC

United States..

$413,747

$364,236

$159,958

$204,277

$121,004

$171,523

$30,643

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.

4,831
633
4,199
2,636
57,834
4,657
3,313
45
2,355
13,683
6,300
117
1,341
36,269
9,005
3,055
3,403
3,058
5,317
875
3,598
9,999
15,723
8,500
2,247
6,948
1,235
3,241
1,120
860

4,513
595
3,737
2,402
50,982
4,242
3,030
44
2,201
12,623

2,059
286
1,335
1,210
18,450
2,044
1,615
17
1,286
6,117
2,788
50
508
12,084
3,535
1,216
1,536
1,393
2,207
350

2,454
309
2,402
1,192
32,532
2,198
1,416
27
915
6,507

1,608
227
1,146
918
15,506
1,605
1,260
15
1,095
4,841

2,110
161
2,122
1,084
25,563
1,853
1,216
27
889
5,316

134
14
218
168
4,616
217
178
0
73

2,427
65
759
19,246
4,493
1,447
1,568
1,478
2,503
456

2,155
39
413
9,502
2,571
868
1,055
1,097
1,664
296

688
0
15
3,489
646
325
214
108
436
34

1,653
4,797
5,594
2,948
1,040
3,238
420
1,385
462
447

1,624
3,631
8,925
4,139
1,067
2,471
737
1,536
624
361

1,307
3,490
3,943
2,087
717
2,290
340
1,008
375
358

1,943
39
681
16,219
4,106
1,340
1,320
1,329
1,927
415
1,490
3,017
7,598
3,741
859
2,205
663
1,383
497
328

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina...
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia....
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands...,
Puerto Rico

13,480
1,572
57,068
7,427
995
16,089
5,927
4,503
25,041
2,211
2,057
1,269
7,386
27,085
1,265
427
7,120
7,003
2,404
6,060
824
124
17

12,766
1,481
47,287
6,581
943
14,599
5,296
4,133
21,958
2,031
1,862
1,230
6,378
23,540
1,132
409
6,437
5,998
2,247
5,460
789
91
16

5,255
655
23,976
2,990
334
5,888
2,523
1,726
8,570
639
1,216
448
2,688
12,039
468
133
2,546
2,535
925
2,000
317
18
3

7,511
825
23,311
3,591
609
8,712
2,773
2,407
13,388
1,391
646
782
3,690
11,501
664
276
3,891
3,463
1,323
3,460
472
72
13

4,161
507
15,113
2,315
277

6,829
625
18,542
3,044
565
7,767
2,251
2,073
11,930
1,293

6

294
40
4,991
457
21
849
461
194
1,737
114
102
4
614
2,608
90
4
341
784
75
371
7
29
0

3,472

3,230

1,909

1,321

1,607

1,291

137

District of Columbia —all*.

5,215
115
1,266
31,330
8,028
2,663
3,103
2,871
4,710
806
3,277
8,428
14,518
7,087
2,107
5,709
1,157
2,921
1,086
808

4,688

1,859
1,468
6,865

511
1,016
361
2,006
8,842

369
112
2,126
2,119
672

1,562
243
15
3

605

701
2,925
8,791
546

261
3,481
3,104
1,249
3,034
410
48

628

221
962
766
926
74
1,041
29
215
0
19

*IPC deposits are those of individuals, partnerships, and corporations.
tAlso includes securities sold under agreements to repurchase.
^Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts less than $500,000.

248




TABLE

B-25

Capital accounts of National banks, by States, June 30, 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Total
capital
accounts

Debentures

United States..

$31,877

$2,093

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina...
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia....
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

390
46
273
216
3,536
345
237
4
211
1,047
536
8
95
2,627
659
224
328
243
449
67
276
832
1,196
667
171
613
85
260
82
88
1,038
117
4,997
565
75
1,372
506
369
2,166
169
162
98
547
2,050
100
34
530
447
209
437
68
8
2

4
1
74
22
428
27
12
0
1
42
66
2
5
64
3
12
18
3
17

317

14

District of Columbia —all*.

3
43
96
96
9
28
7
22
0
1
62
12
296
89
5
35
43
100
134
5
11
21
79
13
2
28
5
3
43
2
0
0

Preferred
stock
$38

Common
stock

Surplus

Undivided
profits

$7,668

$13,161

$8,434

98
13
37
49
748
84
53
1
41
292

159
19
90
73
1,425
130
129
1
99
429

122
3
26
696
151
52
78
62
91
21
57
163
253
165
40
144
31
59
27
15
262
29
1,371
137
20
324
115
93
404
30
35
24
130
574
30
7
130
128
39
108
7

144
2
41
1,337
270
73
125
102
203
23

Capital
reserves

122
13
72
68
835
103
44
1
68
265
156
2
23
481
226
82
104
71
133
22
93
228
275
211
10
218
14
96
27
27
273
32
1,263
111
24
345
195
76
571
51
56
33
186
614
21
13
164
119
66
102
29
3

1

111
396
555
189
112
218
31
81
27
44
426
40
2,040
223
24
666
151
99
1,003
83
68
29
199
727
37
10
207
183
94
179
28
4
1

54

133

113

* Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts less than $500,000.




249

TABLE

B-26

Total and principal assets of National banks, by States, Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Securities, gross t
Number
of banks
United States.

Total
assets

4,661

$489,600

91
5
3
72
57
126
24
5
12
262

5,743
695

$46,038

State
and
local

$3,412

50
3
25
10
290
24
23

2,863
1,532
8,603
32,791
1,551
458
8,483
8,304
2,873
6,926
1,004
106
24

849
118
420
364
5,583
624
407
2
275
2,595
656
6
226
4,561
1,191
377
498
401
750
122
494
1,282
1,966
1,098
320
1,049
205
429
140
80
2,406
245
5,968
1,261
160
2,721
1,101
728
3,959
269
310
219
956
4,509
120
51
1,013
834
437
738
143
1
0

4,067

588

445

422

Maryland
Massachusetts....
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire..

39
79
111
201
41
104
54
122
4
49

4,163
11,799
17,693
10,430
2,754
8,836
1,446
4,005
1,268
1,009

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina...
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

127
34
159
25
43
215
194
8
264
5

15,503
1,826
66,732
9,337
1,175
19,107
6,923
5,371
29,572
2,565

19
32
72
550
11
22
103
24
94
127
42
1
1
15

4,863

3,192
67,747
5,533

3,791
52
2,705
16,271
7,592
128
1,925
42,461
10,959
3,580
4,229
3,689
6,434

978

Loans,
gross

Other

$55,236

579
89
340
358
6,465
402
211
11
262
1,754
286
22
167
4,761
1,122
481
581
476
845
55
311
810
1,624
1,320
278
714
183
385
143
109
1,685
186
4,959
710
183
2,279
766
463
2,787
183
210
177
882
2,750
108
36
682
580
454
674
135
2
1

417
122
100
170
80
51
19

D i s t r i c t of C o l u m b i a — allII.

$70,724

U.S.
Government
obligations $

812
82
661
531
9,214
963
635
5
429
2,696
1,291
16
244
4,724
1,608
571
728
464
976
129
601
1,836
2,714
1,356
443
1,521
162
665
134
136
1,812
277
10,708
1,696
136
2,404
1,127
766
3,600
194
473
169
1,331
5,833
310
45
1,027
1,250
311
761
136
7
5

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine

61
2
6

Cash
assets *

16
107
86
5
444
97
11
12
11
21
4
17
76
154
191
12
26
4
11
6
2
241
4
536
38
2
215
31
9
246
8
7
3
66
163
4
3
24
22
12
34
5

23

$271,572

Federal
funds
sold§

Direct
lease
financing

$22,091

2,941
344
3,010
1,596
39,426
3,104
2,160
30
1,469
7,809
4,475
75
1,146
25,004
5,728
1,808
1,897
1,954
3,086
617
2,430
6,619
10,396
5,638
1,501
4,196
818
2,119
731
591
8,322
972
39,524
5,071
646
10,035
3,324
2,963
16,501
1,724
1,590
888
4,690
15,678
932
297
5,100
4,544
1,372
4,056
523
88
14

342
25
117
233
3,261
193
204
3
170
802

2,182

287

387
4
72
1,321
829
245
397
264
553
18
201
578
294
475
112
1,056
36

296
61
63

490
89
933
198
20
841
358
148
1,509
90
186
35
277
2,664
23

16
325
678

195
370
30
1
3

* Cash, balances with other banks, and cash items in process of collection.
t Includes investment securities and securities held in trading accounts.
t Includes U.S. Treasury securities and obligations of other U.S. Government agencies.
§ Also includes securities purchased under agreement to resell.
II Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts less than $500,000.

250




TABLE B- 27

Total and principal liabilities of National banks, by States, Dec. 31,1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Deposits
Total
liabilities

Total
deposits

Demand
deposits,
total

Time and
savings
deposits,
total

Demand
deposits,
IPC*

Time
deposits,
IPC

Federal
funds
purchased t

United States.

$451,749

$395,881

$179,046

$216,835

$136,056

$181,215

$35,975

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia..
Florida

5,268
639
4,547
2,937

4,864
595
3,892

63,436

54,957

5,122
3,510
48

4,654

2,280
275
1,475
1,372
20,809
2,394
1,831
19
1,337
6,771

2,584
320
2,417
1,311
34,147
2,261
1,451
28
974
7,180

1,753
235
1,296
1,039
17,126
1,857
1,427
17
1,130
5,233

2,206
170
2,157
1,174
26,863
1,943
1,235
28
957
5,696

215
24
397
177
5,783
280
121
0
93

8,815
2,946
3,496
3,097
5,163
853

3,062
53
721
13,146
3,920
1,402
1,830
1,516
2,548
371

2,359
64
990
20,476
4,895
1,544
1,667
1,581
2,615
483

2,368
45
585
10,194
2,860
1,021
1,276
1,221
1,943
318

1,948
42
878
17,362
4,365
1,424
1,412
1,424
2,026
440

852
0
15
4,154
934
292
281
197
519
15

1,702
5,307
5,758
3,462
1,129
3,933
471
1,663
485
467

1,704
3,959
9,124
4,517
1,247
2,699
786
1,659
645
380

1,409
3,797
4,211
2,524
831
2,731
396
1,220
402
375

1,524
3,199
7,805
4,124
975
2,419
696
1,503
514
349

320
1,101
971
1,134
99
1,353
32
289

7,943
906
25,121
3,898
621
9,110
2,943
2,531
14,255
1,487

7,212
668
19,317
3,258
589
8,188
2,387
2,106
12,504
1,348

853
860
3,757
12,238
734
275
4,169
3,610
1,407
3,454
514
69
16

4,549
552
16.953
2,830
353
5,216
2,168
1,583
7,796
545
1,262
432
2,317
10,462
452
114
2,398
2,409
725
1,791
291
13
4

111
771
3,048
9,370
612
260
3,740
3,308
1,329
3,069
446
37
14

203
42
4,701
696
23
1,097
354
377
1,763
132
127
3
551
3,298
72
0
499
1,055
178
471
11
0
0

1,440

1,658

1,418

Reserves
on loans
and
securities

180

2,467

15,029

2,683

3,282
47
2,311
13,951

Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine

6,975
119
1,790
39,267
10,184
3,317
3,863
3,397
5,921
897

Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.

3,834
10,818
16,294
9,647
8,138
1,342
8,700
1,171
908

3,405
9,266
14,881
7,979
2,376
6,632
1,258
3,322
1,130
847

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

14,270
1,685
60,751
8,648
1,084
17,520
6,353
4,943
27,071
2,370

13,648
1,592
51,380
7,556
1,030
15,711
5,822
4,372
23,830
2,166

South Carolina...
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

2,636

6,414
921
97
22

2,402
1,367
7,016
26,157
1,311
412
7,000
6,462
2,367
5,717
878
93
21

5,705
686
26,259
3,658
409
6,602
2,874
1,841
9,574
679
1,549
507
3,259
13,918
576
137
2,831
2,852
960
2,263
365
23
5

3,707

3,437

1,997

District of Columbia — all X.

2,546

1,414
7,982
30,350
1,431
421
7,848
7,759
2,632

5,421
117
1,710
33,622

644

28

* IPC deposits are those of individuals, partnerships, and corporations.
t Also includes securities sold under agreements to repurchase.
X Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts less than $500,000.


550-906 O-LT - 75
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/- 17
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

251

TABLE B-28

Capital accounts of National banks, by States, Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Total
Preferred Common
Undivided Capital
Decapital bentures
stock
stock
profits
reserves
Surplus
accounts
United States...
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia.
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts...
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire.
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina...
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina...
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands....
Puerto Rico
District of Columbia—all*

$33,135

$2,200

427
50
277
230
3,635
364
243
4
213
1,129
553
8
119
2,691
687
231
337
254
457
71
290
859
1,224
693
183
626
92
269
86
91
1,092
128
5,183
607
79
1,422
520
381
2,227
172
201
103
556
2,159
108
32
554
466
219
445
76
8
2

24
1
74
22
437
30
12
0
1
41
66
2
8
67
4
12
19
5
18
1
4
39
95
98
9
29
9
22
0
1
65
12
279
115
6
37
44
100
144
5
12
11
21
100
15
1
28
5
4
43
7
0
0

323

13

$37

$7,904

$13,513

$8,998

0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2

100
16
37
54
736
85
53
1
42
305
124
3
34
701
153
53
79
64
92
21
58
169
260
167
42
145
32
60
27
15
274
37
1,467
137
20
328
116
93
418
30
50
24
131
586
30
7
138
134
40
108
7

133
12
75
74
801
113
48
1
69
298
161
2
25
491
242
88
113
75
136
24
110
246
289
229
2
226
19
102
31
28
295
30
1,449
125
26
375
204
88
590
53
65
37
187
662
20
13
166
132
72
107
32
3

1

164
20
91
74
1,556
135
130
2
99
465
153
2
53
1,383
278
74
125
106
204
24
114
402
564
192
129
221
32
81
27
46
442
45
1,967
226
25
680
153
99
1,023
83
74
30
207
743
43
10
221
184
97
182
29
4
1

55

133

118

0
0
0
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
4
0
0
5
0
0
0
0
19
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

*Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts less than $500,000.

252



TABLE

B-29

Loans of National banks, by States, Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Loans

Loans
secured
by real
estate

Loans to
financial
institutions

Loans to
purchase
or carry
securities

Loans to
farmers

Commercial
and industrial loans

Personal
loans to
individuals

United States

$271,572

$67,208

$24,131

$6,571

$8,858

$98,393

$57,979

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida

2,941
344
3,010
1,596
39,426
3,104
2,160
30
1,469
7,809

122

22

56

172
34
3,682
214
42

290
85
1,370
304
14
1
0
70

1,120
89
763
532

244
339

11
58
688
32
26
0
14
78

911
110
769
457
14,320
855
656
3
346
2,470

Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine

4,475
75
1,146
25,004
5,728
1,808
1,897
1,954
3,086
617

588
142
936
408
11,587
686
772
16
475
2,229
911
38
325
3,555
1,857
446
262
573
671
248

211
0
15
4,190
380
25
48
109
217
3

29
0
6
1,206
63
38
38
16
53
3

28
167
575
127
392
488
96
40
6

1,576
29
266
11,396
1,531
450
547
495
1,163
173

Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

2,430
6,619
10,396
5,638
1,501
4,196
818
2,119
731
591

856
1,069
4,074
1,442
341
724
227
249
325
179

184
830
907
362
82

22
46
120
165
23
146
1
89
3
1

22
12
73
287
44
210
154
716
13
4

641
3,365
2,629
2,162
420
1,714
194
527
159
186

1,150
2,263
1,115
534
926
230
481
211
209

8,322
972
39,524
5,071
646
10,035
3,324
2,963
16,501
1,724
1,590
888
4,690
15,678
932
297
5,100
4,544
1,372
4,056
523
88
14

3,546
177
6,750
707
196
2,994
673
768
4,996
714
358
210
942
2,572
319
157
1,472
1,297
462
1,493
125
64

329
28
5,757
173
1
486
165
284
1,661
124
25
3
295
1,165
40
1
189
392
23
202
3
0
0

48
9
2,125
34
1
113
94
26
151
2
12
1
41
731
19

12
103
210
46
126
125
439
113
187
1
22
285
56
940
41
8
94
193
10
96
104
0
0

2,187
329
18,270
2,088
177
2,932
1,072
1,170
5,212
540
485
207
1,764
6,197
287
58
1,557
1,577
296
1,294
149
13
11

2,029
295
4,750
1,792
140
3,171
755
574
3,717
311
591
176
1,507
3,303
184
69
1,618
946
554
767
137
11
1

2,182

719

379

23

0

466

Other
loans

509

District of Columbia — all

306
6
42

13
3

29
52
6
77
3

6,666

929
553
9
349
2,489
1,594
8
351
3,151
1,656

429
498
603
857
178
636

* Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the
Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding. Dashes indicate amounts of less than $500,000.




253

TABLE

B-30

Outstanding balances, credit cards and related plans of National banks, Dec. 31, 1973
Credit cards
Number of
banks

Other related credit plans

Outstanding
volume
(dollars in
thousands)

Number of
banks

Outstanding
volume
(dollars in
thousands)

United States

839

$4,999,338

Alabama
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida

16
2
4
29
45
5
0
2
60

61,715
149,310

Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine

24
3
29
56
6
4
35
5
14

187,065
20,225
223,859
83,025
26,063
37,790
43,107
47,106
11,819

9
2
89
16
16
13
7

Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire

2
38
29
4
2
10
6
5
3
22

66,517
81,923
205,879
9,837
21,583
145,358
2,373
75,949
15,120
11,807

9
42
32
82
2
17
8
19
1
10

19
5

42
2
42
14
11
51
17
0
39
2

57,043
643
228,344
37,705

2
4
8
39
0
1
21
5
8
53
12
0
1
0
0

954
291
5,820
12,997
0
18
9,607
11,051
797
13,250
1,669
0
280
0
0

•

900

$1,148,424

60,189

2,677

83,467

27
39
7
0
3
43

18,150
440
185,438
14,258
17,393
0
10,830
47,436

19,960
992,204
126,963
56,588
0

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

103
8
3
20
4

56,633
16,965
541,925
110,236
589
268,714
70,296
75,077
176,907
30,196

South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Alaska
•
Hawaii
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

5
0
13
55
4
6
20
6
8
42
9
3
0
0
0

55,435
0
104,756
230,184
24,309
2,812
126,576
133,470
13,052
83,015
1,178
10,212
0
0
0

254



32
8
6

6

9

18,140
7,680
40,867

10,530
2,919
1,282
3,596
4,141
3,513
15,582
91,273
46,360

39,387
1,141
10,901
578
3,315
4,407
2,351

1,277
30,055
2,690
0
114,934
14,414

TABLE

B-31

National banks engaged in direct lease financing, Dec. 31, 1973
Total number
of banks

Number of banks
engaged in direct
lease financing

Amount of direct
lease financing
(dollars in thousands)

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of C olumbia *
Florida

91
5
3
72
57
126
24
5
15
262

9
2
2
7
20
25
4
0
4
24

$11,635
896
4,876
4,968
609,243
17,748
11,265
0
9,477
10,803

Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine

61
2
6
417
122
100
170
80
51
19

13
0
2
50
17
11
15
8
8
0

16,802
0
9,882
70,890
47,731
1,577
2,299
16,555
19,886
0

39
79
111
201
41
104
54
122
4
49

4
8
24
15
6
22
7
9
2
1

4,346
71,263
16,591
38,291
220
27,363
493
1,798
12,261
3

New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island

127
34
159
25
43
215
194
8
264
5

9
2
13
6
0
33
77
3
14
2

51,609
49
165,377
17,431
0
61,035
24,162
14,143
41,906
6,712

South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Virgin Islands
Puerto Rico

19
32
72
550
11
22
103
24
94
127
42
1
1

2
2
13
30
2
2
8
6
9
20
16
0
0

82
118
33,511
42,893
7,967
279
9,609
38,109
1,656
21,379
2,450
0
0

4,663

588

$1,579,639

....

Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire

..

....

Total United States and possessions*
c

Includes 3 non-National banks in the District of Columbia.




255

to

s

TABLE B-32

Income and expenses of National banks,* by States, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
United
States

Number of banks
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions,
and fees
Other operating income
Total operating income
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under
agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing,
etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income




Alabama

Alaska

Arizona

Arkansas

California

Colorado

Connecticut

4,661

91

5

3

72

57

126

24

$21,054,480

$232,834

$30,245

$241,205

$120,446

$3,039,676

$267,803

$175,436

1,454,717

21,057

1,933

1,158

12,631

186,339

13,718

- 5,159

1,821,807

25,633

1,978

14,646

12,701

209,936

18,780

7,472

725,749
2,230,757
203,664
820,368
752,699

8,677
36,946
1,975
7,446
13,408

3,064
5,972
366
541
3,096

6,422
22,044
284
6,989
9,545

8,227
15,571
799
2,378
6,415

86,490
207,512
22,164
97,592
132,948

6,008
25,480
1,376
15,074
15,236

4,624
18,144
2,154
15,039
6,659

815,651
1,334,341

9,371
7,107

2,832
677

5,114
6,987

4,859
2,971

146,380
240,769

13,176
7,494

7,151
4,806

31,214,233

364,454

50,704

314,394

186,998

4,369,806

384,145

246,644

4,921,969
905,315
11,666,030

62,377
12,186
131,712

12,191
1,631
17,219

64,457
10,183
132,794

32,744
5,057
64,278

751,040
133,651
1,880,760

68,779
11^90
122,819

56,174
10,425
75,561

2,681,225
304,008
130,390
999,201

12,333
3,496
446
10,167

1,578
79
49
2,051

20,862
1,354
5,212
13,172

12,815
554
1,475
6,907

308,390
15,034
24,659
160,377

21,715
2,577
2,147
11,197

16,582
2,221
585
13,159

718,746
758,146
3,161,864

10,710
7,832
43,015

1,786
484
5,292

9,487
5,547
29,235

6,614
3,368
21,967

76,153
115,388
355,471

10,958
10,427
59,176

8,147
6,271
27,667

26,246,894

294,274

42,360

292,303

155,779

3,820,923

321,085

216,792

4,967,339
1,194,886
3,772,453
- 13,509
3,758,944
+ 9,025
-302

70,180
16,148
54,032
162
54,194
+ 724
+ 1

8,344
1,335
7,009
62
7,071
+ 24
0

22,091
-1,330
23,421
- 135
23,286

548,883
167,261
381,622
849
382,471

+ 116
0

63,060
17,572
45,488
265
45,753
+ 90
0

29,852
6,586
23,266
-266
23,000

+ 101
0

31,219
6,167
25,052
544
25,596
-46
0

3,767,667

54,919

7,095

23,387

25,550

382,587

45,843

23,079

+ 79
0

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided profits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including
premium received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities
All other increases
Total increases
Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On preferred stock
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including premium paid
Reduction in surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases
Net change in capital accounts
Capital accountst
Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)
Total operating expense to total operating revenue (percent)..
See footnotes at end of table.

to



3,767,667

54,919

7,095

23,387

25,550

382,587

45,843

23,079

780,419

25,277

33

932

8,336

44,422

12,921

130

101,602

2,056

0
0
135

19
86
2,011

424
468

468

246
83

542,923

391
7,038

0
144
58

974

35,622

184,318

2,131

160

1,460,566

34,762

235

1,067

10,482

229,632

16,494

619

1,446,994
2,398

19,553
0

855
0

10,740
0

5,810
0

175,779
0

15,700
14

11,255
0

171,098

0

20

932

62

6,422

464

1

117,440
292,634
313,870

283
2,163
4,167

0
66
75

0
2,205
507

0
1,155
1,322

111
65,134
109,791

0
2,290
1,086

0
1,964
82

2,344,434

26,166

1,016

14,384

8,349

357,237

19,554

13,302

2,883,799

63,515

6,314

10,070

27,683

254,982

42,783

10,396

31,787,879

393,598

46,447

272,202

215,854

3,533,065

343,546

239,889

1L85

13.95

15.28

8.59

11.84

10.83

13.34

9.62

84.09

80.74

83.54

92.97

83.31

87.44

83.58

87.90

B-32 — Continued

TABLE

Income and expenses of National banks,* by States, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
Delaware
Number of banks
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions, and fees
Other operating income
Total operating income
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under
agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing,
etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income




District of Florida
Columbia

Georgia

Hawaii

Idaho

Illinois

Indiana

5

12

262

61

2

6

417

122

$2,327

$116,214

$622,847

$403,026

$6,908

$90,224

$1,855,986

$427,911

195

9,786

56,029

29,182

256

5,012

113,324

44,872

502

13,107

63,514

14,540

1,014

8,441

169,557

48,405

189
85
4
0
103

2,591
10,999
912
6,197
6,053

46,236
108,053
7,531
26,831
30,033

3,531
27,799
3,1°4
15,797
20,132

499
214
8
0
18

1,516
9,481
410
926
5,211

88,391
197,223
29,293
82,701
32,773

18,567
49,892
6,814
16,076
16,584

49
60

2,183
3,652

34,208
18,681

15,683
27,033

284
68

2,897
903

44,287
112,938

23,578
15,329

3,514

171,694

1,013,963

559,917

9,269

125,021

2,726,473

668,028

657
106
1,182

35,674
6,020
50,384

160,939
27,773
360,488

108,043
20,360
142,046

2,298
276
3,557

23,448
3,737
48,567

325,107
59,840
1,160,996

103,818
16,779
239,503

0
7
0
126

7,195
847
930
6,776

58,352
4,022
2,745
24,474

68,509
26,035
3,594
18,844

58
0
75
693

1,981
475
500
3,226

356,245
21,322
4,573
71,230

70,665
3,171
244
22,865

146
16
466

4,783
2,836
19,220

24,614
19,820
143,677

16,738
18,277
64,513

285
200
1,643

3,575
1,995
12,785

47,968
56,874
196,723

18,063
14,883
74,526

2,706

134,665

826,904

486,959

9,085

100,289

2,300,878

564,517

808
290
518
14
532
0
0

37,029
12,466
24,563
48
24,611
+ 34
0

187,059
37,698
149,361
-3,079
146,282
+ 799
0

72,958
17,812
55,146
3,060
58,206
+ 282
0

184
27
157
27
184
+ 23
0

24,732
7,855
16,877
-8
16,869
0
0

425,595
98,573
327,022
-2,624
324,398
-403
-2

103,511
23,669
79,842
320
80,162
-54
0

532

24,645

147,081

58,488

207

16,869

323,993

80,108

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided profits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including
premium received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities
All other increases
Total increases
Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On preferred stock
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including premium paid
Reduction in surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases
Net change in capital accounts
Capital accountst
Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)
Total operating expense to total operating revenue (percent)..
See footnotes at end of table.

8


CO


532

24,645

147,081

58,488

207

16,869

323,993

80,108

200

3,034

61,236

17,172

2,500

4,687

26,128

5,891

0
0
81

0
16
574

7,235
697
5,012

15,616
209
6,155

0
0
0

557
288
0

1,293
6,255
9,718

4,668
356

18,400

281

3,624

74,180

39,152

2,500

5,532

43,394

29,315

101
0

9,193
608

52,575
0

24,808
0

132
0

5,608
0

130,138
95

23,718
0

73

2,981

7,793

0

0

698

548

0
18
99

0
1,027
5,091

50
7,282
3,423

2,140
6,345
4,442

0
0
108

0
1,156
123

2,217
43,565

9,286

1,198
5,371
2,222

218

15,992

66,311

45,528

240

6,887

185,999

33,057

595

12,277

154,950

52,112

2,467

15,514

181,388

76,366

4,141

208,435

1,049,828

524,728

7,199

101,649

2,611,503

652,926

12.85

11.82

14.01

11.15

2.88

16.60

12.41

12.27

77.01

78.43

81.55

86.97

98.01

80.22

84.39

84.50

TABLE B - 3 2 - Continued
Income and expenses of National banks,* by States, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
Kansas

Iowa

Number of banks
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions, and fees
Other operating income
Total operating income
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under
agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing,
etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income



Kentucky

Louisiana

Maine

Maryland

Massachusetts Michigan

100

170

80

51

19

39

79

111

$132,243

$145,183

$142,367

$237,699

$50,795

$185,192

$539,139

$774,210

20,463

21,710

13,811

23,684

1,762

12,988

38,431

63,256

19,639

26,252

22,415

43,215

2,723

14,661

35,532

75,272

7,930
15,220
1,006
4,756
4,903

9,438
20,357
715
4,113
7,165

5,465
18,749
507
3,029
5,199

9,732
32,493
1,853
3,894
11,215

677
5,308
150
2,353
1,846

5,754
22,809
973
4,205
9,696

11,284
45,781
3,948
45,049
16,756

20,437
83,849
10,025
28,142
24,683

7,148
1,892

8,194
2,830

4,626
7,829

10,200
6,528

1,722
704

5,830
4,306

31,915
45,613

21,514
20,428

215,200

245,957

223,997

380,513

68,040

266,414

813,448

1,121,816

32,338
5,007
76,847

39,495
6,539
82,619

36,933
6,015
75,542

56,233
9,244
141,877

14,144
2,771
23,572

49,330
7,898
78,478

150,804
29,251
229,866

173,275
32,206
486,106

23,079
1,936
700
5,926

16,088
1,949
902
6,371

11,061
866
287
8,343

34,350
5,478
1,336
12,325

1,633
456
38
2,928

21,391
1,955
186
11,833

92,000
9,881
2,555
31,026

71,578
3,256
5,803
36,714

8,240
2,252
20,824

7,073
4,949
25,446

6,805
4,064
29,739

11,174
8,916
41,072

2,204
1,295
9,556

7,818
5,039
29,017

19,773
26,054
84,518

25,418
13,943
96,165

177,149

191,431

179,655

322,005

58,597

212,945

675,728

944,464

38,051
10,337
27,714
29
27,743
+ 11
-10

54,526
16,031
38,495
32
38,527
-78
0

44,342
11,057
33,285
-246
33,039

58,508
11,719
46,789
25
46,814

53,469
15,197
38,272
-306
37,966

137,720
48,189
89,531
-1,275
88,256

+ 80
0

+ 874
0

9,443
1,772
7,671
-35
7,636
+ 231
0

+ 19
0

+ 401
0

177,352
45,788
131,564
-1,575
129,989
+ 89
-19

27,744

38,449

33,119

47,688

7,867

37,985

88,657

130,059

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided profits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including premium received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities
All other increases
Total increases
Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On preferred stock
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including
premium paid
Reduction in surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident to mergers and consolidations
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases

27,744

38,449

33,119

47,688

7,867

37,985

88,657

130,059

9,766

12,021

3,628

10,362

1,506

3,332

13,161

25,294

0
14
2,025

21
99
3,149

0
1,138
2,131

1,108
1,830
1,244

0
65
1,341

271
4,679

1,986
752
7,809

4,225
4,443
110,497

11,805

15,290

6,897

14,544

2,912

8,294

23,708

144,459

8,941
0

10,549
30

8,864
0

15,765
118

3,841
0

11,925
0

39,936
0

70,367
195

71

1,190

53

150

0

134

4,042

102,786

2
2,027
1,541

0
1,588
3,284

1,504
3,105
1,491

0
2,557
7,701

0
478
1,192

0
3,390
1,223

41
10,708
3,800

184
9,308
4,128

12,582

16,641

15,017

26,291

5,511

16,672

58,527

186,968

12

26,967

37,098

24,999

35,941

5,268

29,607

53,838

87,550

219,808

322,376

241,909

443,887

67,939

275,322

832J41

1,185,693

Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)..

12.62

11.93

13.69

10.74

11.58

13.80

10.65

10.97

Total operating expense to total operating revenue (percent)

82.32

77.83

80.20

84.62

86.12

79.93

83.07

84.19

Net change in capital accounts
Capital accountst

See footnotes at end of table.




to
a*
to

TABLE

B-32—Continued

Income and expenses of National banks,* by States, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
New
Hampshire

New
Jersey

Minnesota
Number of banks
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions,
and fees
Other operating income
Total operating income
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under
agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing,
etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income



Mississippi

201

41

104

54

122

4

49

127

$435,297

$115,457

$324,620

$63,061

$164,578

$58,334

$48,383

$613,543

24,153

7,743

40,808

3,418

16,919

3,452

3,609

29,128

40,052

12,466

28,151

8,843

15,417

7,164

5,899

71,098

19,309
41,260
1,291
20,983
12,392

3,359
13,410
655
1,919
6,814

11,609
38,933
1,490
20,458
7,726

2,143
7,994
258
569
2,937

6,879
17,594
856
6,250
4,982

2,065
6,061
381
1,985
3,823

879
4,194
149
1,559
3,172

36,078
104,302
17,650
21,418
28,377

25,227
25,208

6,902
2,506

12,620
19,052

2,534
1,063

9,212
4,937

2,369
791

748
1,479

13,946
17,522

645,172

171,231

505,467

92,820

247,624

86,425

70,071

953,062

85,203
15,574
242,812

27,915
4,835
59,143

78,172
13,268
142,952

13,530
2,550
40,463

38,476
6,208
85,843

16,732
2,528
31,416

14,259
2,686
19,312

175,872
33,882
377,651

78,977
14,449
6,145
13,175

7,958
407
479
4,679

78,373
2,637
1,374
13,293

2,149
211
455
2,240

16,656
2,283
1,419
8,184

31
0
0
3,210

1,644
317
55
3,505

22,880
4,043
4,000
39,750

13,379
9,221
57,909

5,746
6,948
20,231

12,944
12,225
54,006

2,348
1,385
10,829

8,559
5,038
25,854

2,141
1,681
8,686

2,217
1,339
12,107

27,679
13,442
104,481

536,844

138,341

409,244

76,160

198,520

66,425

57,441

803,680

108,328
35,746
72,582
-1,266
71,316
+ 155
0

32,890
8,722
24,168
73
24,241
-39
0

96,223
26,640
69,583
-605
68,978
-768
0

16,660
4,106
12,554
-312
12,242
-195
0

49,104
14,042
35,062
-208
34,854
+ 116
0

20,000
6,685
13,315
23
13,338
+ 48
0

12,630
3,704
8,926
-39
8,887
-7
0

149,382
18,577
130,805
-1,631
129,174
+ 432
0

71,471

24,202

68,210

12,047

34,970

13,386

8,880

129,606

Missouri

Montana

Nebraska

Nevada

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided profits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including
premium received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities
All other increases
Total increases

..

Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On Dreferred stock
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including premium paid
Reduction in surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases
Net change in capital accounts
Capital accountst
Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)
Total operating expense to total operating revenue (percent)...
See footnotes at end of table.

to
Digitized GO FRASER
for


71,471

24,202

68,210

12,047

34,970

13,386

8,880

129,606

26,280

6,441

5,224

5,950

3,989

1

1,636

33,357

304
224
4,285

309
417
1,216

1,946
404
1,610

47
452
1,731

0
224
2,266

0
0
4

1,537
113
365

13,201
727
2,846

31,093

8,383

9,184

8,180

6,479

5

3,651

50,131

27,705
0

8,163
0

40,611
237

4,085
0

12,181
6

4,403
0

3,341
0

58,386
3

912

120

10

160

10

0

0

1,509

0
4,388
2,068

29
215
206

400
2,714
1,993

300
766
1,462

0
2,436
788

0
341
172

9
526
441

1,124
7,244
1,141

35,073

8,733

45,965

6,773

15,421

4,916

4,317

69,407

67,491

23,852

31,429

13,454

26,028

8,475

8,214

110,330

660,932

170,389

610,813

85,554

258,078

81,698

87,226

1,040,682

10.81

14.20

11.17

14.08

13.55

16.38

10.18

12.45

83.21

80.79

80.96

82.05

80.17

76.86

81.98

84.33

TABLE B-32 — Continued

Income and expenses of National banks * by States, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
New Mexico

Number of banks
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions,
and fees
Other operating income
Total operating income
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under
agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing,
etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income



New York

North
Carolina

North
Dakota

Ohio

Oklahoma

Oregon

Pennsylvania

34

159

25

43

215

194

8

264

$78,893

$3,067,040

$411,658

$48,038

$779,043

$263,681

$233,359

$1,199,254

6,232

70,870

18.043

2,325

59,222

29,256

17,640

100,896

7,458

180,682

19,554

7,631

110,154

42,758

16,788

123,504

3,694
10,715
452
1,491
4,403

52,883
220,980
• 26,630
113,322
71,003

19,814
48,964
1,254
17,169
16,570

3,408
6,538
194
1,142
2,209

24,299
113,548
11,702
29,851
32,352

5,295
43,216
2,112
7,807
12,499

10,007
28,246
429
7,366
15,975

44,252
153,518
18,648
62,811
19,943

4,003
1,681

106,161
471,757

16,374
21,769

1,947
630

30,360
21,007

8,944
10,226

7,282
5,953

26,587
74,243

119,022

4,381,328

591,169

74,062

1,211,538

425,794

343,045

1,823,656

20,754
3,045
47,460

611,420
142,009
1,491,196

110,143
19,548
217,511

10,198
1,945
32,806

190,208
29,084
462,295

62,147
9,582
158,056

68,223
12,931
126,195

270,303
53,254
713,470

3,539
219
1,010
3,057

451,420
56,182
15,119
156,443

44,050
3,882
5,991
21,480

1,113
501
341
1,732

82,999
4,929
2,024
35,386

37,659
4,265
2,617
9,830

17,570
325
6,712
13,736

126,903
48,692
9,082
59,360

3,243
3,055
13,192

75,992
165,477
452,982

13,856
8,972
64,361

1,646
794
7,141

32,266
24,736
141,422

9,227
12,281
47,039

8,327
5,965
28,107

41,640
30,726
169,403

98,574

3,618,240

509,794

58,217

1,005,349

352,703

288,091

1,522,833

20,448
4,564
15,884
121
16,005

763,088
190,911
572,177
-4,721
567,456
+ 2,216
-7

81,375
16,085
65,290
-3,018
62,272
-543
0

15,845
4,284
11,561
-261
11,300

206,189
41,241
164,948
-3,288
161,660

73,091
11,504
61,587
97
61,684

54,954
15,207
39,747
-529
39,218

+9
0

+ 166
-9

+ 132
-3

+3
0

300,823
49,906
250,917
11,619
262,536
-604
-233

569,665

61,729

11,309

161,817

61,813

+6
0
16,011

39,221

261,699

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided profits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including
premium received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities...
All other increases

16,011

569,665

61,729

11,309

161,817

61,813

39,221

261,699

6,941

109,575

38,847

1,357

11,787

7,184

208

69,863

85
49
2,808

8,901
263
93,373

2,496
1,270
1,022

350
7
490

2,953
1,201
9,062

525
733
5,856

0
387
26

4,855
1,415
9,012

9,883

212,112

43,635

2,204

25,003

14,298

621

85,145

4,440
0

156,574
875

22,151
0

3,339
0

73,384
0

25,262
0

15,099
0

125,884
176

70

28,509

375

150

1,230

19

0

7,353

0
1,103
1,205

90,120
24,470
85,548

2,650
5,766
1,489

0
451
533

345
7,686
4,321

362
2,777
2,923

0
1,083
173

420
14,451
17,414

6,818

386,096

32,431

4,473

86,966

31,343

16,355

165,698

19,076

395,681

72,933

9,040

99,854

44,768

23,487

181,146

117,654

4,988,955

569,148

75,036

1,373,058

500,235

369,178

2,152,030

Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)

13.61

11.42

10.85

15.07

11.79

12.36

10.62

12.16

Total operating expense to total operating revenue (percent)

82.82

82.58

86.23

78.61

82.98

82.83

83.98

83.50

Total increases
Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On preferred stock
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including
premium paid
Reduction in surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases
Net change in capital accounts
Capital accounts t

See footnotes at end of table.

fcO



TABLE

B - 3 2 - Continued

Income and expenses of National banks,* by States, year ended Dec. 31,1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]

Rhode
Island
Number of banks
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under
agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions,
and fees
Other operating income
Total operating income
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under
agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing,
etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan looses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income




South
Carolina

South
Dakota

Tennessee

Texas

Utah

Vermont

Virginia

5

19

32

72

550

11

22

103

$134,206

$134,275

$64,424

$377,979

$1,270,624

$77,210

$22,573

$411,439

4,148

8,694

3,583

20,822

154,997

3,207

1,342

16,879

5,403

8,768

7,566

33,368

107,682

5,650

2,026

28,934

3,284
10,474
466
9,714
2,735

3,878
12,475
239
4,348
9,722

2,573
8,989
127
1,135
3,484

17,930
42,640
4,585
11,046
13,757

51,850
175,047
10,298
48,441
46,920

1,176
6,139
460
1,547
4,216

245
2,387
220
213
1,102

13,010
44,266
2,002
12,467
9,444

2,948
5,853

5,797
3,917

3,142
645

19,219
15,704

45,507
48,159

3,645
1,392

275
302

17,071
7,830

179,231

192,113

95,668

557,050

1,959,525

104,642

30,685

563,342

24,606
6,145
76,849

47,082
8,502
39,893

13,507
2,643
42,802

89,433
14,313
214,309

267,842
43,781
679,295

17,084
2,618
37,686

5,749
908
13,281

89,344
17,062
211,516

12,989
1,740
313
4,445

7,502
1,422
627
6,322

517
115
668
2,242

51,552
7,439
1,052
16,894

239,783
29,022
4,722
36,156

5,523
1,618
1,060
2,278

102
144
107
967

33,534
3,300
2,100
16,508

2,507
6,375
18,449

7,854
3,735
28,188

2,604
1,517
8,249

17,234
19,200
60,436

46,776
54,976
214,922

2,746
1,071
11,422

1,026
469
3,270

13,780
11,725
77,707

154,418

151,127

74,864

491,862

1,617,275

83,106

26,023

476,576

24,813
6,681
18,132
-297
17,835
0
0

40,986
14,023
26,963
-106
26,857
+ 2,497
0

20,804
5,978
14,826
-474
14,352
+ 14
0

65,188
9,229
55,959
-42
55,917
+ 22
-20

342,250
77,053
265,197
-2,596
262,601
+ 1,587
0

21,536
7,712
13,824
-5
13,819
-576
0

4,662
972
3,690
-90
3,600

+4
0

86,766
18,474
68,292
-1.474
66,818
+ 153
0

17,835

29,354

14,366

55,919

264,188

13,243

3,604

66,971

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided profits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including
premium received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities
All other increases
Total increases
Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On preferred stock
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including premium paid
Reduction in surplus, undivided profits and rserves incident
to mergers and consolidations
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases
Net change in capital accounts
Capital accountst
Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)
Total operating expense to total operating revenue (percent)
See footnotes at end of table.

to



29,354

14,366

55,919

264,188

13,243

3,604

66,971

900

12,737

4,836

5,364

81,957

2,850

519

28,596

0
0
8,758

1,155
0
19

589
10
661

2,313
153
1,592

6,422
7,760
18,009

1,259
0
307

1
26
430

8,710
105
2.233

9,658

13,911

6,096

9,422

114,148

4,416

976

39,644

7,965
0

11,771
0

4,687
0

20,347
0

78,747
17

5,477
0"

1,254
23

29,311
0

0

0

40

65

1,314

0

194

120

0
1,312
32

31
1,597
219

0
712
209

456
3,037
6,326

2,796
19,382
14,795

275
706
8

0
312
234

6,664
5,059
1,481

9,309

13,618

5,648

30,231

117,051

6,466

2,017

42,635

18,184

29,647

14,814

35,110

261,285

11,193

2,563

63,980

165,030

169,970

96,476

543,147

2,048,405

101,836

33,500

525,843

10.81

17.27

14.89

10.30

12.90

13.00

10.76

12.74

86.16

78.67

78.25

88.30

82.53

79.42

84.81

84.60

17,835

to
00

TABLE B-32 — Continued

Income and expenses of National banks* by States, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands)
Washington
Number of banks ..
Operating income:
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to
resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions
Other securities
Trust department income
Service charges on deposit accounts
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions, and fees ..
Other operating income
Total operating income.
Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to
repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing, etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses
Total operating expense.
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses.
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
Net income.




West
Virginia

Wisconsin

Wyoming

Puerto
Rico

District of
Columbiaallt

Virgin
Islands

24

94

127

42

1

1

15

$360,231

$98,367

$308,326

$42,445

$864

$7,362

$167,169

58,544

13,213

36,617

1,943

62

196

12,395

23,124

17,542

19,321
8,550
18,324
728
2,663
2,151
2,565
2,309

25,692
12,354
29,205
2,428
9,324
7,306
14,310
9,742

6,279
1,634
5,488
389
574
2,076
1,431
1,150

201
0
0
1
0
72
2
117

239
2
703
8
0
95
245
250

23,402
3,861
16,541
1,439
11,168
8,729
4,003
5,330

562,759

168,191

455,304

63,409

1,319

9,100

254,037

111,894
19,134
176,655

23,695
3,481
66,390

66,005
13,778
199,844

9,834
1,497
26,590

164
16
655

1,877
263
4,911

49,258
8,728
71,047

78,271
4,095
413
21,775
16,456
12,804
59,079

10,866
200
253
4,189
4,372
3,546
18,951

37,303
3,432
2,995
15,436
11,972
6,861
42,694

902
473
216
1,740
1,395
1,332
7,279

0
0
0
23
50
100
278

0
695
0
436
232
420
1,477

12.819
1,750
1,539
10,687
6,506
4,396
27,134

500,576

135,943

400,320

51,258

1,286

10,311

193,864

62,183
10,734
51,449
-437
51,012
+ 274
0

32,248
5,959
26,289
111
26,400
+ 122
0

54,984
11,944
43,040
-121
42,919

33
8
25
3
28

+ 10
0

-1,211
-939
-272
8
-264
0
0

60,173
21,627
38,546
58
38,604

+ 91
0

12,151
2,915
9,236
68
9,304
+ 304
0

51,286

26,522

43,010

9,608

38

-264

38,681

7,541

35,166
1,101
13,668
24,765
21,077

+ 77
0

Changes in capital accounts:
Increases:
Net income transferred to undivided Drofits
Capital stock, notes and debentures sold or issued including premium
received
Addition to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident to mergers
and consolidations
•
Transfers from reserves on loans and securities
All other increases
Total increases
Decreases:
Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
On Dreferred stock
.. ..
Capital stock, notes and debentures, retired including premium paid
Reduction to surplus, undivided profits and reserves incident to mergers
and consolidation .
Transfers to reserves on loans and securities
All other decreases
Total decreases
Net change in capital accounts
Capital accounts t
Ratios:
Net income before dividends to capital accounts (percent)
Total ooeratins exoense to total oDeratins revenue (Derc^nt^

51,286

26,522

43,010

9,608

38

-264

38,681

1,069

6,794

9,358

4,800

0

0

3,034

625
850
1,961

0
442
1,275

770
236
1,877

1,550
83
1,163

0
0
0

0
257
0

0
16
587

4,505

8,511

12,241

7,596

0

257

3,637

16,490
1
45

6,763
0
30

20,138
0
133

2,883
0
310

0
0
0

0
0
0

14,553
608
693

3,297
5,470
144

0
1,316
1,131

432
4,066
888

0
346
178

0
0
0

0
0
164

0
2,061
5,136

25,447

9,240

25,657

3,717

0

164

23,051

30,344

25,793

29,594

13,487

38

-171

19,267

449,803

206,675

433,323

69,222

1,917

7,981

314,609

11.40

12.83

9.93

13.88

1.98

-3.31

12.29

88.95

80.83

87.92

80.84

97.50

113.31

76.31

* Includes all banks operating as National banks at year-end and full-year data for those State banks converting to National banks during the year.
t Includes the aggregate book value of debentures, preferred stock, common stock, surplus, undivided profits, and reserves. Excepting Puerto Rico, these are averages from
the June and December call dates in the year indicated and the previous December call date.
$ Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding.

to
CO



TABLE B-33

Income and expenses of National banks,* by deposit size, year ended Dec. 31, 1973
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
Banks operating full year with deposits in December 1973, of—
Total

Number of banks

4,661

Operating income:
$21,054,480
Interest and fees on loans
Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased
1,454,717
under agreements to resell
Interest and dividends on investments:
1,821,807
U.S. Treasury securities
Obligations of other U.S. Government agencies and
725,749
corporations
Obligations of States and political subdivisions ....
2,230,757
Other securities
203,664
Trust department income
820,368
Service charges on deposit accounts
752,699
Other service charges, collection and exchange charges,
815,651
commissions, and fees
1,334,341
Other operating income
Total operating income



31,214,233

$2,000.1
$2,000.0
and under to $5,000.0
66

371

$25,000.1
$10,000.1
$50,000.1
$100,000.1
Over
$5,000.1
to $10,000.0 to $25,000.0 to $50,000.0 to $100,000.0 to $500,000.0 $500,000.0
799

1,659

847

457

348

114

$2,075

$49,158

$239,136

$1,138,237

$1,352,243

$1,448,220

$3,649,321

$13,176,090

1,230

12,394

39,942

133,639

105,544

103,413

251,498

807,057

1,100

15,157

55,305

208,522

192,785

184,175

360,931

803,832

277
67
114
0
146

5,918
3,753
718
41
3,062

24,502
27,971
2,611
420
15,947

99,209
167,167
13,989
4,842
71,243

101,577
206,183
16,395
16,686
77,398

97,658
222,260
19,406
40,991
73,836

163,551
478,457
46,662
160,428
146,511

233,057
1,124,899
103,769
596,960
364,556

78
87

1,629
1,084

7,201
4,255

34,108
20,371

40,973
23,927

43,358
28,231

166,254
104,150

522,050
1,152,236

5,174

92,914

417,290

1,891,327

2,133,711

2,261,548

5,527,763

18,884,506

Operating expense:
Salaries and wages of officers and employees
Pensions and other employee benefits
Interest on deposits
Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold
under agreements to repurchase
Interest on borrowed money
Interest on capital notes and debentures
Occupancy expense of bank premises, net
Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs,
servicing, etc
Provision for loan losses (or actual net loan losses)
Other operating expenses

4,921,969
905,315
11,666,030

1,681
185
980

21,068
2,537
30,516

80,954
10,727
150,361

322,368
50,016
755,098

351,889
58,727
871,896

384,839
65,459
926,675

943,056
165,844
2,081,159

2,816,114
551,820
6,849,345

2,681,225
304,008
130,390
999,201

1
5
0
248

140
61
49
3,202

1,206
511
311
12,512

6,977
3,383
2,616
57,312

19,942
5,483
5,465
67,593

45,036
8,950
6,966
79,592

349,169
31,349
26,302
193,177

2,258,754

718,746
758,146
3,161,864

199
339
1,176

2,661
2,494
14,091

10,652
9,934
53,831

47,475
40,335
225,108

56,175
44,576
255,368

62,184
43,400
265,255

166,630
115,235
629,172

372,770
501,833
1,717,863

26,246,894

4,814

76,819

330,999

1,510,688

1,737,114

1,888,356

4,701,093

15,997,011

4,967,339
1,194,886
3,772,453
-13,509
3,758,944
+ 9,025
-302

360
198
162
o
157
-62
0

16,095
4,139
11,956

86,291
22,156
64,135
-152
63,983

+ 161
-1

380,639
92,366
288,273
+ 293
288,566
+ 1,260
-10

396,597
87,668
308,929
593
308,336
+ 456
-2

373,192
73,883
299,309
-2,646
296,663
+ 1,791
-11

826,670
165,873
660,797
-6,269
654,528
+ 1,585
-50

2,887,495
748,603
2,138,892
-4,143
2,134,749
+ 3,952
-228

Net income

3,767,667

95

11,844

64,143

289,816

308,790

298,443

656,063

2,138,473

Cash dividends declared:
On common stock
O n preferred stock

1,446,994
2,398

206
0

3,069
0

14,815
0

68,760
26

89,510
45

98,813
113

268,943
541

902,878
1,673

1,449,392

206

3,069

14,815

68,786

89,555

98,926

269,484

904,551

Total operating expense
Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses ..
Applicable income taxes
Income before securities gains or losses
Net securities gains or losses (after tax effect)
Net income before extraordinary items
Extraordinary charges or credits
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries

Total cash dividends declared

+6
11,962
-118
0

* Includes all banks operating as National banks at year-end, and full-year data for those State banks converting to National banks during the year.

to
^1



254,266

88,681
585,565

to
to
TABLE B-34

Capital accounts, net income, and dividends of National banks, 1944-73
[Dollars amounts in thousands]
Capital stock (par value)*
Year (last call)

1944.
1945.
1946.
1947.
1948.
1949.
1950.
1951.
1952.
1953.
1954.
1955.
1956.
1957.
1958.
1959.
1960.
1961.
1962.
1963.
1964.
1965.
1966.
1967.
1968.
1969.
1970.
1971.
1972.
1973.

Cash dividends

Number of
banks

Preferred

Common

Total

Total
capital
accounts*

5,031
5,023
4,013
5,011
4,997
4,981
4,965
4,946
4,916
4,864
4,796
4,700
4,659
4,627
4,585
4,542
4,530
4,513
4,503
4,615
4,773
4,815
4,799
4,758
4,716
4,669
4,621
4,600
4,614
4,661

$110,597
80,672
53,202
32,529
25,128
20,979
16,079
12,032
6,862
5,512
4,797
4,167
3,944
3,786
3,332
3,225
2,050
2,040
9,852
24,304
27,281
28,697
29,120
38,081
57,704
62,453
62,572
56,761
42,627
38,660

$1,440,519
1,536,212
1,646,631
1,736,676
1,779,362
1,863,373
1,949,898
2,046,018
2,171,026
2,258,234
2,381,429
2,456,454
2,558,111
2,713,145
2,871,785
3,063,407
3,257,208
3,464,126
3,662,603
3,861,738
4,135,789
4,600,390
5,035,685
5,224,214
5,503,820
6,165,757
6,326,508
6,640,849
7,132,092
7,676,452

$1,551,116
1,616,884
1,699,833
1,769,205
1,804,490
1,884,352
1,965,977
2,058,050
2,177,888
2,263,746
2,386,226
2,460,621
2,562,055
2,716,931
2,875,117
3,066,632
3,259,258
3,466,166
3,672,455
3,886,042
4,163,070
4,629,087
5,064,805
5,262,295
5,561,524
6,228,210
6,389,080
6,697,610
7,174,719
7,715,112

$4,114,972
4,467,618
4,893,038
5,293,267
5,545,993
5,811,044
6,152,799
6,506,378
6,875,134
7,235,820
7,739,553
7,924,719
8,220,620
8,769,839
9,412,557
10,003,852
10,695,539
11,470,899
12,289,305
13,102,085
14,297,834
16,111,704
17,971,372
19,095,324
20,585,402
22,158,066
24,080,719
25,986,802
28,714,775
31,787,879

Net income
On
before
dividends preferred
stock

$411,844
490,133
494,898
452,983
423,757
474,881
537,610
506,695
561,481
573,287
741,065
643,149
647,141
729,857
889,120
800,311
1,046,419
1,042,201
1,068,843
1,205,917
1,213,284
1,387,228
1,582,535
1,757,491
1,931,556
2,534,029
2,829,334
3,041,122
3,307,906
3,767,667

$5,926
4,131
2,427
1,372
1,304
1,100
712
615
400
332
264
203
177
171
169
165
99
119
202
1,126
1,319
1,453
1,348
2,124
4,344
4,428
4,677
4,011
2,703
2,398

On
common
stock

$139,012
151,525
167,702
182,147
192,603
203,644
228,792
247,230
258,663
274,884
299,841
309,532
329,777
363,699
392,822
422,703
450,830
485,960
517,546
547,060
591,491
681,802
736,591
794,056
892,934
1,063,647
1,273,039
1,386,166
1,307,628
1,446,994

Ratios (percent)
Net income
before
dividends
to total
capital
accounts

Cash dividends to
net income
before
dividends

10.01
10.97
10.11
8.56
7.64
8.17
8.74
7.79
8.17
7.92
9.58
8.12
7.87
8.32
9.45
8.00
9.78
9.09
8.70
9.20
8.49
8.61
8.81
9.20
9.38
11.44
11.75
11.70
11.52
11.85

35.04
31.76
34.38
40.51
45.76
43.11
42.69
49.04
46.14
48.01
40.50
48.16
50.99
49.85
44.20
52.84
43.09
46.64
48.44
45.46
48.86
49.25
46.63
45.30
46.45
42.15
45.16
45.71
39.61
38.47

These are averages of data from the reports of condition of the previous December, and June and December of the respective years.
NOTE: For earlier data, see Annual Reports of the Comptroller of the Currency, 1938, p. 115, and 1963, p. 306.




Cash
Cash dividends on dividends
to total
preferred
capital
stock to
preferred accounts
capital
4.79
5.12
4.56
4.22
5.19
5.24
4.43
5.11
5.83
6.02
5.50
4.87
4.49
4.52
5.07
5.12
4.83
5.83
2.05
4.63
4.83
5.06
4.63
5.58
7.53
7.09
7.46
7.07
6.34
6.20

3.53
3.48
3.48
3.47
3.50
3.52
3.73
3.81
3.77
3.80
3.88
3.91
4.01
4.15
4.18
4.23
4.22
4.24
4.21
4.18
4.15
4.24
4.11
4.17
4.36
4.82
5.31
5.35
4.56
4.56

TABLE

B-35

Loan losses and recoveries of National banks, 1945-73
[Dollar amounts in thousands]

Year

Net losses or
recoveries (+)

$13,948,042
17,309,767
21,480,457
23,818,513
23,928,293
29,277,480
32,423,777
36,119,673
37,944,146
39,827,678
43,559,726
48,248,332
50,502,277
52,796,224
59,961,989
63,693,668

1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

Total loans, end
of year, net

+ $7,740
3,207
29,913
19,349
33,199
14,445
22,108
19,326
32,201
25,674
29,478
41,006
35,428
38,173
25,767
130,177

Ratio of net
losses or net
recoveries (+)
to loans

Year

Percent
+ 0.06 1961
.02 1962
.14 1963
.08 1964
.14 1965
.05 1966
.07 1967
.05 1968
.08 1969
.06 1970
.07 1971
.08 1972
.07 1973
.07
.04 Average for
1945-73
.20

Ratio of net
losses or net
recoveries (+)
to loans

Total loans, end
of year, net

Net losses or
recoveries (+)

$67,308,734
75,548,316
83,388,446
95,577,392
116,833,479
126,881,261
136,752,887
154,862,018
168,004,686
173,456,091
190,308,412
226,354,896
266,937,532

$112,412
97,617
121,724
125,684
189,826
240,880
279,257
257,280
303,357
601,734
666,190
545,473
731,633

0.17
.13
.15
.13
.16
.19
.20
.17
.18
.35
.35
.24
.27

85,415,662

164,303

.19

Percent

NOTE: For earlier data, including figures on gross losses and chargeoffs and gross recoveries, see Annual Reports of the Comptroller
of the Currency, 1947, p. 100 and 1968, p. 233.

TABLE

B-36

Securities losses and recoveries of National banks, 1945-73
[Dollar amounts in thousands]

Year

1945
1946
1947
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960

Total securities,
end of year,
net
$55,611,609
46,642,816
44,009,966
40,228,353
44,207,750
43,022,623
43,043,617
44,292,285
44,210,233
48,932,258
42,857,330
40,503,392
40,981,709
46,788,224
42,652,855
43,852,194

Losses and
chargeoffs*

$74,627
74,620
69,785
55,369
23,595
26,825
57,546
76,524
119,124
49,469
152,858
238,997
151,152
67,455
483,526
154,372

Ratio of net
losses to
securities

Year

Percent
0.04 1961
.09 1962
.10 1963
.07 1964
.04 1965
.04 1966
.12 1967
.15 1968
.25 1969
.08 1970
.32 1971
.56 1972
.35 1973
.12
1.09
Average for
.30
1945-73

Total securities,
end of year,
net

Losses and
chargeoffs*

Ratio of net
losses to
securities
Percent

$49,093,539
51,705,503
52,601,949
54,366,781
57,309,892
57,667,429
69,656,371
76,871,528
70,216,983
84,157,505
95,948,647
103,658,543
104,606,665

$51,236
47,949
45,923
86,500
67,898
302,656
149,545
344,068
286,215
137,704
+189,347
+ 94,506
36,738

0.08
.08
.07
.15
.11
.52
.21
.44
.41
.16
+ .20
+ .09
.04

56,541,321

108,566

.19

*Excludes transfers to and from valuation reserves beginning in 1948.
NOTE: For earlier data, including figures on gross losses and chargeoffs and gross recoveries, see Annual Reports of the Comptroller of the Currency, 1947, p. 100 and 1968, p. 234.




273

fcO

TABLE

B-37

Assets and liabilities of National banks, date of last report of condition, 1950—73
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
Number
Year

of
banks

1950
1951
1952
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973

4,965
4,946
4,916
4,864
4,796
4,700
4,659
4,627
4,585
4,542
4,530
4,513
4,505
4,615
4,773
4,815
4,799
4,758
4,716
4,669
4,621
4,600
4,614
4,661

Total
assets*
$97,240,093
102,738,560
108,132,743
110,116,699
116,150,569
113,750,287
117,701,982
120,522,640
128,796,966
132,636,113
139,260,867
150,809,052
160,657,006
170,233,363
190,112,705
219,102,608
235,996,034
263,374,709
296,593,618
310,263,170
337,070,049
372,538,487
430,768,064
484,887,096

Cash
and due
from banks
$23,813,435
26,012,158
26,399,403
26,545,518
25,721,897
25,763,440
27,082,497
26,865,134
26,864,820
27,464,245
28,674,506
31,078,445
29,683,580
28,634,500
34,065,854
36,880,248
41,689,580
46,633,658
50,952,691
54,727,953
56,040,460
59,200,995
67,401,118
70,723,613

Total
securities,
net
$43,022,623
43,043,617
44,292,285
44,210,233
48,932,258
42,857,330
40,503,392
40,981,709
46,788,224
42,652,855
43,852,194
49,093,539
51,705,503
52,601,949
54,366,781
57,309,892
57,667,429
69,656,371
76,871,528
70,030,342
84,157,465
95,948,647
103,658,543
104,606,665

Loans,
net
$29,277,480
32,423,777
36,119,673
37,944,146
39,827,678
43,559,726
48,248,332
50,502,277
52,796,224
59,961,989
63,693,668
67,308,734
75,548,316
83,388,446
95,577,392
116,833,479
127,453,846
136,752,887
154,862,018
168,004,686
173,455,791
190,308,412
226,354,896
266,937,532

Other
assets
$1,126,555
1,259,008
1,321,382
1,416,802
1,668,736
1,569,791
1,867,761
2,173,520
2,347,698
2,557,024
3,040,499
3,328,334
3,719,607
5,608,468
6,102,678
8,078,989
9,185,179
10,331,793
13,907,381
17,500,189
23,416,333
27,080,433
33,353,507
42,619,286

Total
deposits
$89,529,632
94,431,561
99,257,776
100,947,233
106,145,813
104,217,989
107,494,823
109,436,311
117,086,128
119,637,677
124,910,851
135,510,617
142,824,891
150,823,412
169,616,780
193,859,973
206,456,287
231,374,420
257,883,926
256,426,791
283,784,496
314,211,616
359,427,154
395,880,964

Liabilities
for
borrowed
money
$76,644
15,484
75,921
14,851
11,098
107,796
18,654
38,324
43,035
340,362
110,590
224,615
1,635,593
395,201
299,308
172,087
1,015,147
296,821
689,087
2,283,717
1,280,365
866,103
2,370,204
3,721,870

Other
liabilities t
$1,304,828
1,621,397
1,739,825
1,754,099
1,889,416
1,488,573
1,716,373
1,954,788
1,999,002
2,355,957
3,141,088
3,198,514
3,446,772
5,466,572
5,148,422
7,636,524
9,975,692
11,973,852
16,496,707
28,284,638
27,130,131
30,387,265
38,616,017
52,149,189

Capital

$2,001,650
2,105,345
2,224,852
2,301,757
2,485,844
2,472,624
2,638,108
2,806,213
2,951,279
3,169,742
3,342,850
3,577,244
3,757,646
4,029,243
4,789,943
6,089,792
6,299,133
6,602,519
7,008,482
7,347,948
7,680,597
8,277,752
9,629,168
10,140,173

Surplus,
undivided
profits and
reserves
$4,327,339
4,564,773
4,884,369
5,107,759
5,618,398
5,463,305
5,834,024
6,278,004
6,717,522
7,132,375
7,755,488
8,298,062
8,992,104
9,518,935
10,258,252
11,334,232
12,159,775
13,127,097
14,515,416
15,906,249
17,194,460
18,794,699
20,722,810
22,994,400

*After deduction of securities and loan reserves.
tBeginning in 1973, includes minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries.
NOTE: For earlier data, revised for certain years and made comparable to those in this table, references should be made as follows: years 1863 to 1913, inclusive Annual Report
of the Comptroller of the Currency, 1913; figures 1914 to 1919, inclusive, report for 1936; figures 1920 to 1939, inclusive, report for 1939; and figures 1936 to 1949, inclusive, report
for 1966.




TABLE

B-38

Foreign branches of National banks, by region and country, Dec. 31,1973
Region and country
Central America
El Salvador
Guatemala
Honduras
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
South America
Argentina
Bolivia
Brazil
Colombia
Ecuador
Guyana
Paraguay
Peru
Uruguay
Venezuela
West Indies — Caribbean
Antigua
Bahamas
Barbados
British Virgin Islands
Cayman Islands
Dominican Republic
French West Indies
Grenada
Haiti..
Jamaica
Montserrat
Netherlands Antilles
St. Lucia
Trinidad and Tobago
West Indies Federation of States
Europe
Austria
Belgium
England
France
Germany
Greece
Ireland
Italy




Number

Region and country

47 Europe — Continued
Luxembourg
1
Monaco
3
Netherlands
3
Northern Ireland.
5
Scotland
3
Switzerland
32
Africa.
131
Liberia..
38
3 Middle East.
21
Bahrain
32
Israel
15
1
Lebanon
6
Qatar
6
Saudi Arabia...
5
Trucial States.
4
Asia and Pacific...
151
Brunei
2
Fiji Islands
68
Hong Kong
4
India
3
Indonesia
26
Japan
16
Korea
3
Malaysia
3
Pakistan
2
Philippines
9
Republic of China.
1
Singapore
3
Thailand
2
Vietnam
6
3 U.S. overseas areas and trust territories.
121
1
5
31
11
24
16
4
8

Canal Zone (Panama).,
Caroline Islands
Guam
Marianas Islands
Marshall Islands
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands
Total.

Number

15

101
2
4
22
11
6
18
3
5
4
4
4
13
2
3
53
2
1
7
1
1
22
19
621

275

Table B-39
Total assets of foreign branches* of National banks, year-end 1953-73
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
1953
1954..
1955.,
1956..
1957..
1958..
1959..
I960..
1961..
1962..
1963..

$1,682,919
1,556,326
1,116,003
1,301,883
1,342,616
1,405,020
1,543,985
1,628,510
1,780,926
2,008,478
2,678,717

1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973

$3,319,879
7,241,068
9,364,278
11,856,316
16,021,617
28,217,139
38,877,627
50,550,727
54,720,405
83,304,441

*Includes military facilities operated abroad by National banks in 1966 through 1971.

TABLE

B-40

Foreign branches of National banks, 1960-73

End of year

National bank
branches as a
Number of branches
percentage of total
operated by
foreign branches
National banks
of U.S. banks

1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966

93
102
111
124
138
196
230

75.0
75.6
76.6
77.5
76.7
93.5
94.3

TABLE

End of year

National bank
Number of branches
branches as a
percentage of total
operated by
foreign branches
National banks
of U.S. banks

1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973

95.5
95.0
93.0
92.7
91.5
90.2
89.5

278
355
428
497
528
566
621

B-41

Assets and liabilities of foreign branches of National banks, Dec. 31,1973: consolidated statement
[Dollar amounts in thousands]
Assets
Cash and cash items in process of collection
Demand balances with other banks
Time balances with other banks
Securities
Loans, discounts and overdrafts, etc
Customers' liability on acceptances outstanding...
Customers' liability on deferred payment letters of
credit
Premises, furniture and fixtures
Accruals—interest earned, foreign exchange profits,
etc
Due from other foreign branches of this bank
Due from head office and its domestic branches
Other assets
Total assets

276



$373,770
1,505,541
32,052,808
1,010,654
34,791,864
1,524,701
87,514
198,431
1,441,925
7,714,287
1,863,189
739,757
$83,304,441

Liabilities
Demand deposits
Time deposits
Liabilities for borrowed money
Acceptances executed
Deferred payment letters of credit outstanding
Reserve for interest, taxes and other accrued expenses
Other liabilities
Due to other foreign branches of this bank
Due to head office and its domestic branches
Total liabilities

$5,887,410
62,677,739
2,040,759
1,601,705
53,767
1,499,717
512,347
7,568,603
1,462,394
$83,304,441

Memoranda
Letters of credit outstanding
Future contracts to buy foreign exchange and
bullion
Future contracts to sell foreign exchange and
bullion

$1,827,945
$38,889,646
$37,861,733

TABLE

B-42

Trust assets* and income of National banks, by States, calendar 1973
[Dollar amounts in millions]
Trust department
Total
Other
Total
Employee
trust and income
Agency
benefit
Number
trust
trust
(Dollar
of banks accounts t accounts $ accounts accounts § agency
accounts amounts in
thousands)
Total United States..
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia''
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Puerto Rico
Virgin Islands

1,783

$63,798

$96,886

$160,684

$43,233

$203,918

$825,339

32
4
2
37
14
32
9
1
6
97
31
0
3
175
97
49
54
53
23
16
11
54
39
23
22
43
13
23
3
22
70
18
78
16
12
62
45
2
121
4
8
10
29
152
2
8
51
10
38
43
16
0
0

367
51
225
68
7,548
689
493
0

1,187
35
753
300
9,971
1,511
2,166
0
1,499
4,280
1,415
0
113
7,684
2,795
597
610
402
342
274
784
4,416
3,180
2,116
248
3,038
61
679
364
250
2,062
208
10,257
2,208
159
5,145
985

1,553
86
978
368
17,519
2,200
2,659
0
1,976
4,717
2,151
0
169
15,156
3,395
723
724
481
607
322
941
8,580
8,599
3,499
317
4,222
70
905
386
260
2,596
242
26,400
3,563
190
7.482
1,567
1,071
14,406
1,691
720
155
2,044
7,933
328
35
1,795
2,357
569
1,893
84
0
0

213
92
110
51
2,308
428
950
0
1,494
683
1,565
0
12
4,841
1,093
357
317
132
129
109
230
1,563
1,928
1,000
14
1,536
22
336
29
97
1,227
31
6,172
828
51
1,449
499
230
6,127
338
292
56
619
1,792
28
5
990
308
80
455
16
0
0

1,766
178
1,088
420
19,828
2,628
3,609
0
3,470
5,400
3,716
0
181
19,996
4,488
1,081
1,041
613
736
431
1,170
10,142
10,527
4,499
331
5,758
93
1,241
415
357
3,823
273
32,571
4,390
242
8,931
2,067
1,302
20,533
2,029
1,012
211
2,663
9,726
356
39
2,785
2,665
649
2,348
100
0
0

7,446
541
6,989
2,378
97,592
15,074
15,039
0
11,168
26,831
15,797
0
926
82,701
16,076
4,756
4,113
3,029
3,894
2,353
4,205
45,049
28,142
20,983
1,919
20,458
569
6,250
1,985
1,559
21,418
1,491
113,322
17,169
1,142
29,851
7,807
7,366
62,811
9,714
4,348
1.135
11,046
48,441
1,547
213
12,467
13,668
2,663
9,324
574
0
0

477
438
736
0
56
7,471
600
126
113
78
264
48
157
4,163
5,419
1,383
69
1,184
9
226
21
10
534
34
16,142
1,355
32
2,337
582
294
5,385
338
187
39
318
2,434
113
2
343
470
42
321
6
0
0

777
9,021
1,353
533
116
1,726
5,499
215
32
1,453
1,887
527
1,572
78
0
0

*As of December 31, 1973.
tEmployee benefit accounts include all accounts for which the bank acts as trustee, regardless of whether investments are partially, or wholly, directed by others. Insured plans or portions of plans funded by insurance are omitted, as are employee benefit accounts
held as agent.
tIncludes all accounts, except employee benefit accounts and corporate accounts, for which the bank acts in the following, or
similar capacities: trustee (regardless of whether investments are directed by others), executor, administrator, guardian; omits all
agency accounts and accounts for which the bank acts as registrar of stock and bonds, assignee, receiver, safekeeping agent, custodian,
escrow agent, or similar capacities.
§ Includes both managing agency and advisory agency accounts.
"Includes National and non-National banks in the District of Columbia, all of which are supervised by the Comptroller of the Currency.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding.



277

TABLE

B-43

Common trust funds of National and State banks, by States, 1972 and 1973*
Number of banks
with common
trust funds
1972

1973

Number of
common trust
funds

Number of account
participations

Total assets of
funds (millions)

1972

1973

1972

1973

1972

1973

Percent change
in assets
1971-72

United States.

725

783

1,738

1,882

465,457

509,174

15,217.4

15,910.6

20.0

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

9
1
4
11
16
18
15
4
6
26
14
3
4
35
30
14
9
10
5
10

11
2
5
11
16
21
15
4
6
29
16
3
4
44
32
16
13
10
6
10

19
1
13
19
57
43
45
11
16

25
2
18
21
58
49
49
11
16

65.5
2.8

47.1
58.8
24.3
26.7
27.0
25.1
25.1
15.9
24.4

65
34

10
7
84
63
26
19
22
10
23

10
8
102
73
29
24
27
12
23

8

8
32
23
16
5
15
4
6
2
7

27
80
60
43

28
85
64
45
9
44
7
13
6
13
54
13
81
35
7
94
22
14
193
14
8
14
27
126
17
10
63
24
19
73
4

4,259
124
5,903
2,130
39,839
10,361
14,730
3,534
4,548
8,324
9,629
2,604
1,585
32,152
9,620
3,795
2,275
4,628
1,542
3,712
9,447
21,304
16,792
8,742
1,476
15,090
984
3,872
764
809
11,088
1,867
41,649
14,849
896
19,238
2,410
5,862
83,335
2,456

55.7
1.3
166.9
27.3
1,299.6
337.9

62
30

3,570
71
4,437
1,914
36,475
9,394
13,058
3,650
4,420
8,064
9,015
2,257
1,462
28,178
8,317
3,321
1,870
4,221
1,284
3,489

1972-73

31
22

16
5
14
4
5
2
5
22
5
27
14
4
34
9
4
87
3
3
5
11
55
6
5
28
8
14
23
2

23
6
27

14
4
37
9
4
88
3
4
6

11
59
7
5
31
9
14
28
2

8
39
7
12
7
12
52
11
85
34
7
91
22
12
181
14
6
12
26

115
14
9
61
25
18
65
3

8,372
19,358
15,745
8,800
1,377
13,609
937
3,640

809
635

10,230
1,734
38,213
10,675
814
17,616
2,238
5,041
80,233
2,484

1,877
1,119
5,364
17,462
3,548
1,060
10,921
8,592
2,039
22,249
199

2,365
1,234
5,693
19,102
3,746
1,391
11,049
10,489
2,220
23,355
306

105.5
171.7
205.0
284.0

197.1
31.6
1,311.0
343.7
504.4
98.8
174.7
205.2
301.3

63.5
23.4

76.4
24.4

1,222.3
215.7
99.8
35.9
113.1
25.6
98.3

1,398.8
255.8
116.1
41.0
126.7
32.1
94.8
253.7
871.8
508.4
220.7
27.7
396.7
14.8
100.9
15.2
25.5
274.8
38.5

504.6

223.6

831.6
492.6
245.6
24.5

401.1
15.1
99.3
15.5
26.3
264.4

37.9
2,256.6
286.7
6.8
580.1
71.4
113.1
1,804.5
65.0

34.7
14.6
142.8
521.4
56.5

11.6
289.7
244.8
34.4
945.6
2.5

2,226.5

403.1
8.4
592.7
77.8
120.0
1,758.7
62.9
46.0

13.9
146.8
550.8
71.4
13.7
297.6
278.5
37.5
1,049.8
3.9

39.3
36.7
21.0
26.7
51.4
50.5
93.6
44.5
38.3
40.3
17.3
47.9
23.9
30.1
25.3
30.3
9.9
28.3
26.7
97.9
109.6
25.2
7.6
20.1
28.1
10.7
30.3
24.6
16.2
-3.8
10.5
31.4
-31.8
49.0
29.9
46.8
-6.3

19.0
30.7
25.2
-13.2
78.7

T h e s e figures were derived from a survey of banks and trust companies operating common trust funds. Data are for the last valuation date in 1972 and 1973.
t Less than 0.1 percent.
NOTE: Data may not add to totals because of rounding.

278




APPENDIX C

Addresses and Selected
Congressional Testimony of
the Comptroller of the Currency




Addresses and Selected Congressional Testimony
of the Comptroller of the Currency
Date and Topic
Page
Sept. 13, 1973, Statement of James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, before the House Committee on Banking and Currency,
Washington, D.C
281
Oct. 9, 1973, Remarks of James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, before the Annual Convention of the American Bankers
Association, Chicago, 1 1
1
282
Oct. 31, 1973, Statement of James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, before the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs of the
House Committee on Banking and Currency, Washington, D.C
285
Nov. 29, 1973, Correspondence of James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, on his Oct. 31 testimony before the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs of the House Committee on Banking and Currency
290
Nov. 6, 1973, Correspondence of Thomas G. DeShazo, Acting Comptroller of the Currency, on H.R. 10993
291
Nov. 6, 1973, Remarks of James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, before the National Correspondent Banking Conference
of the American Bankers Association, San Francisco, Calif
292
Nov. 8, 1973, Statement by James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, before the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions of
the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Washington, D.C
296
Nov. 27, 1973, Statement by James E. Smith, Comptroller of the Currency, before the Subcommittee on Bank Supervision and
Insurance of the House Committee on Banking and Currency, Washington, D.C
299
May 16, 1973, Remarks of Dean E. Miller, Deputy Comptroller for Trusts, before the Iowa Trust Association, Des Moines, Iowa...

280




301

STATEMENT OF JAMES E. SMITH, COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE
ON BANKING AND CURRENCY, WASHINGTON, D.C., SEPT. 13, 1973

Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished
Committee, I am pleased for this opportunity to join
with you in analyzing the causes and effects of our
current financial dilemma and in considering reforms
for our financial intermediation system which will
strengthen that system's capacity to function more
effectively throughout the cyclical changes in the
economy.
The Chairman's letter of invitation to appear at
these hearings and the accompanying Committee
staff report on financial institutions reform establish
an awesomely panoramic focus for this inquiry. Both
because of the statutory province of the Office of the
Comptroller of the Currency and my own brief term
on duty, I shall direct my comments to the more limited domain of reforms affecting the structure and
functions of our deposit financial institutions.
Throughout the course of these hearings, you will
receive testimony from experts on fiscal and monetary policy. I pretend no such expertise. Nor, for the
purposes of my discussion, is it necessary to deal
with the underlying economic forces that bring about
another period of monetary restraint. It is sufficient
to stipulate that for the third time in just 7 years we
find inflationary pressures having built to a level that
necessitates policies of tightening monetary control
with attendent sharp increases in short-term interest
rates and restricted availability of credit.
Again, as in 1966-67 and 1969-70, we find the
deposit financial institutions —savings and loan
associations, mutual savings banks, and commercial
banks —under increasing strain in the performance
of their intermediation function. Journalistic attention has tended to focus on the deposit outflows
from the thrift institutions and the resulting adverse
impact on both the cost and availability of home
mortgage credit. But the Federal Reserve Board's
statistical series of weekly reporting banks indicates
that the last three weeks of August produced an
intensifying deposit flow problem for commercial
banks as well. Thus that condition called disintermediation, unpleasant both in effect and in sound, is
upon us!




As we assess this latest period of economic destabilization, we must be careful to separate cause
from effect. That is especially so when we are considering reform and modification of the structure of
our financial institutions. Structural reform of those
institutions is absolutely necessary, and it is that
subject matter to which I will address most of my
comments.
Our objective in making institutional reforms in
the financial system must be to strengthen the
capacity of that system to perform its intermediation function during all phases of the economic
cycle. We must avoid the mistaken assumption
that by altering the framework of our financial institutions we can somehow cure the basic ills that
give rise to periods of destabilization. By mistaking
effect for cause we create potential danger for
undertaking changes detrimental to our financial
system.
In an earlier period of extreme monetary stringency (1966-67) we sought to mitigate the impact on
deposit institutions by resorting to a regulatory relic
of the Banking Act of 1933; namely, ceiling rate regulation of the interest paid on time and savings deposits. That price-fixing mode of regulation, which
had its origins in some invalid assumptions regarding
the causes of past financial problems, has shown
itself to be both inadequate in its protection of the
deposit institutions and unfair in its effect on their
deposit customers.
The governmental imposition of ceiling rates on
deposits is predicated on the false assumption that
ceilings offer meaningful protection to deposit institutions during periods of sharply rising short-term
interest rates. Perhaps it mutes somewhat the competition among the deposit institutions, but any such
limited benefit is vastly outweighed by the collective
handicap those institutions face in competing for
funds with market instruments such as Treasury
bills, U.S. agency issues and corporate debentures.
In the two previous periods of recent experience,
deposit-rate ceilings did not work to insulate the institutions from deposit outflows. They are not work-

281

ing today. Moreover, such rate setting is highly discriminatory to the consumer-saver, who lacks either
the financial sophistication or the monetary wherewithal to shift his funds to the high-yielding market
instruments.
Over the past decade, ceiling regulation of
deposit rates has come under increasing attack from
both academic observers and financial practitioners.
Even with only a brief exposure to the regulatory
role, I believe I better understand the inherent
weaknesses in such a system. Governmentally
regulated deposit rates will never keep in real touch
with market rates. They will always lag by some
considerable margin. On the "up side", the regulatory instinct is one of caution against "posting"
a rate too high for our marginal institutions. On the
"down side", concern for consumer reaction causes
delay in reducing ceilings, which have also become
floors, with the result that deposit rates stay
racheted above market rates. Those inherent inefficiencies in a system of regulated rates are
harmful both to the deposit institutions and the
consumers they are meant to serve.
Having had this regime of government price
fixing in effect for 40 years with respect to the banks,
and for 7 years with respect to the thrifts, its instant
removal would undoubtedly cause some dislocations
in our financial system. Furthermore, there is a
necessity to augment the powers of the thrift
institutions to serve household and consumer needs
before we totally withdraw rate regulation. Added
powers for the thrift institutions should make it
possible for thrift institutions and banks to compete
on essentially equal footing for household deposits.
Increasingly all of those institutions will be looking
to those consumer deposits as the stabilizing
element in their deposit structure.
As you are aware, on August 3, President Nixon
sent a message to the Congress, calling for a number of modernizing reforms of our depository institutions. The central thrust of the President's message is that we must ensure the continued viability
of the thrift institutions as our principal residential
mortgage financers through additional consumer
service powers and diversification of their loan and
investment portfolios. Also, we must unshackle our
entire financial intermediation system from the deadening grip of self-defeating deposit rate regulation
so as to better avoid the cycle of feast or famine in
our credit markets.
While there are some differences of degree and
detail between the Administration's recommenda-

282




tions and the proposals of this Committee's staff for
broadening the powers of the thrift institutions, there
is nevertheless, considerable agreement as to the
general objectives and the approach to them. I would
hope that this Committee would give special attention to this area.
Your Committee's inquiry comes at a time when
the Congress and the President are searching for opportunities to make common cause for the constructive advancement of this Nation. Of the subject matter you will consider, none has a higher order of
priority or a brighter prospect for real accomplishment than modernizing reform of our deposit financial institutions. Reforms of the type recommended
by the President offer the dual benefits of broadening and intensifying competition in the field of consumer finance and assisting the thrift institutions to
attain viability over the economic cycle. I earnestly
hope that this distinguished Committee will move in
this session to begin work on this important legislative project.
REMARKS OF JAMES E. S M I T H , COMPTROLLER OF
THE CURRENCY, BEFORE THE ANNUAL CONVENTION OF THE AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION,
CHICAGO, I I I . , OCT. 9,

1973

"The Dual System of the 70's: A view from the
Comptroller's Office"
It is a special honor for me to address the American Bankers Association in my new regulatory
capacity. I very much cherish the memories of my
past direct relationship with this Association, and
the friendships that I enjoy with so many of the
members.
Some may believe that that prior relationship will
limit my capacity for objectivity. I anticipate no
such incapacitation! Indeed, the rapport which I
hope exists between this Comptroller and the
banking industry should help, not hinder, the achievement of objectives that are in the public interest.
It has been my personal experience that mutual
trust and confidence are important, perhaps essential, ingredients for the effective solution of tough
issues.
There can be no doubt that the banking industry
faces some tough issues. The last several years have
seen a great deal of effort devoted to rethinking the
purposes and functions of our financial institutions
and their regulators. That effort is a healthy one that
can yield substantive public benefits.

In overseeing banks' pursuit of their purpose,
regulators must always be congnizant of the fact
that no sector of the financial community impacts
quite so broadly or directly on human aspirations
and commercial development as does banking. In
urban America, the direct correlation between bank
performance and the economic vitality of a community may be somewhat obscured. In less populous
areas, like my native South Dakota, that inextricable
tie can be observed in bold relief. A prosperous community is highly reliable evidence of progressive
banking.
Thus, regulators have an obligation to permit
banks the operational flexibility they require to respond to changing needs. Dogmatic and unbending
regulation should not be equated with sound bank
supervision. Adherence to the status quo is often a
"cop-out" for those who really do not want to grapple with the complexities of change.
Determining the appropriate regulatory posture is
an extraordinarily difficult task. No regulator has a
valid claim to omniscience. Indeed, our profession
is more an art than a science and, as such, relies
heavily on experimentation. In that regard, I, as a
bank regulator, am very fortunate to be part of the
dual banking system.
The greatest single advantage offered by the duality of our system is its capacity to foster fruitful experimentation. In effect, we have 51 banking laboratories. Results of changes in regulatory stance soon
become apparent to all authorities. False turns can
quickly be amended without widespread impact;
salutary changes can spread rapidly into other
jurisdictions.
That competition between the National and State
systems, and among State systems, is thoroughly
consistent with the precepts of Federalism. It has
not led to a competition in laxity. Instead, it has engendered a healthy march away from the stultifying
protectionist mode of regulation that was an understandable outgrowth of the Great Depression.
Unfortunately, because of lack of resources, some
State banking authorities are forced to lean heavily
upon the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit
Insurance Corporation for aid in bank supervision.
I personally hope that, over time, such States will
acquire a greater independent regulatory capacity.
When that day arrives, duality will have been materially strengthened. I commend Chairman Wille
and the Conference of State Bank Supervisors for
their experimental efforts to achieve more independence for State banking agencies.


550-906 O-LT - 75 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 19
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

I want to assure each State banking authority that,
in all supervisory matters, we stand ready to cooperate fully and to exchange the fruits of our experiences. For example, we are undertaking a fundamental and detailed evaluation of our examination function to assure that our procedures are keeping pace
with changes in the industry. In that evaluation, we
expect to consult fully with both State and Federal
regulatory colleagues, and will, of course, share its
results.
The current controversy over deposit reserve
requirements revolves in part around the dual system. If a case can be made for strengthening the
Federal Reserve's ability to shape monetary results
more precisely, we must, of course, be sensitive to
that need. However, we must give no less attention
to the importance of preserving our dual banking
system.
The current debate involves men of good will on
both sides. I believe that solutions can be found that
will fulfill both important objectives. No matter how
much time it takes we must not be satisfied with a
solution that sacrifices one objective to gain the
other.
For all of its flexibility, our dual banking system
does not provide a full choice of structural options
in a number of States. The principal gap is a lack of
branching powers. I believe that the public interest
can be best served if the banking authorities have
the flexibility to employ all four structural options:
chartering a new bank; allowing an existing bank to
branch; allowing two or more existing banks to
merge; and allowing expansion by holding company
acquisition.
Possession of the branching option is crucial.
Many small communities can have convenient
access to a banking office even if the local market
cannot support an independent bank. Large communities can reap the benefits of greater competition.
Developing areas can experience a more rapid
infusion of banking services. Decaying areas need
not witness a complete withdrawal of banking
offices. Branching permits, via merger, a flexible
and efficient means for handling management succession problems without interrupting the flow of
banking services. Regulators facing emergency
problems are able to utilize the merger route to solve
them.
Availability of the four major structural options is
fully consistent with dual banking. State authorities
yield no additional powers to Federal authorities.
I am pleased that we are witnessing today a

283

gradual movement among the States toward granting banking authorities fuller use of those structural options. Liberalizations of branch laws have
been enacted in Arkansas, Georgia, New Jersey,
and New York. Authorities in Pennsylvania are
actively sponsoring a less restrictive branching bill.
Significant steps have been taken to liberalize
the use of facilities: a new facilities law is on the
books in Florida; in Kansas the number of services
available at a facility has been expanded; and in
Nebraska the permissible number of facilities per
bank has been increased.
Other types of State initiatives have also given
bankers new flexibility in their branching options.
The availability of the automated teller has
prompted significant reexamination of branching
statutes. Such machines are finding widespread
public acceptance. They are, or soon will be,
operating as free standing installations in Connecticut, Ohio, North Carolina, New Jersey, and New
York. In Oregon, the State legislature explicitly
authorized their use, after the courts upheld a
restrictive regulatory interpretation. In Ohio, the
State banking authority has tried to promote their
use by exempting them from the branch application process. If that effort is successful, we will
all watch the experiment closely.
The record has not been without reversals for
the consumer of banking services, however. In
Montana, a unit banking State, a law permitting
a bank to operate another bank acquired by merger
as a branch was recently stricken from the books.
In Illinois, some banks pressed by economic
circumstances have sought to relocate. After an
intensive study, our Office denied such a relocation
application as not being in the public interest. How
much easier it would be if banks in large urban
areas could move their headquarters while operating
their former head offices as branches! The State
banking authority prepared, earlier this year, a
bill to that effect. It was regrettably defeated in
legislative committee.
The merits of interstate banking operations deserve consideration. Mr. Harry Albright, New York
State Superintendent of Banks, has reported an
encouraging response to his proposal for reciprocal
banking privileges across State lines.
There has been progress toward the removal of
barriers blocking the entrance of foreign banks.
Recently, State legislatures in Illinois and Washington enacted statutes permitting the establishment
of branches of foreign banks within their borders.
284



Pressures are building for a comparable law in
Pennsylvania.
Despite all that progress in bank structure options, much remains to be done. Consistent with my
own legal responsibilities, I will exercise the authority of my office in a manner that will not jeopardize
continued progress. I will not employ contrived and
tortured interpretations of State law to advance my
personal judgment that branch banking is an essential element of modern, progressive, full-service
banking. However, I have no intention of surrendering my right of free speech! I shall be forthright in
my public declarations as to the absolute need for
every State to have flexible laws on banking
structure.
My concern with attaining structural flexibility
for banking stems from my belief that structure
governs the performance of the industry to a considerable extent. By performance, I am simply
referring to the degree to which the banking industry accomplishes its basic public purposes.
One measure of performance is responsiveness.
For an industry as constrained by regulation as
banking, I think its record of responsiveness to
both new customer demands and to new technology
is remarkable.
A number of financial activities that either were
not engaged in or were relatively insignificant 15
years ago have become important today. Those
include direct lease financing, factoring, data processing, investment advisory services, and various
specialized types of consumer lending, including
credit card programs.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has
consistently encouraged National banks to react
positively to developing financial needs. That
course has not been without controversy. Litigation
has been common as legal frontiers were explored. I
believe this process is a healthy one, and under my
stewardship the Office will continue to offer encouragement and support to constructive innovation. We do not seek litigation, but where public
benefits are clearly at stake we will not be intimidated by the threat of litigation.
Our Office is also going to encourage, in fact, to
insist, that all National banks serve their consumer
customers in an equitable and nondiscriminatory
manner. We have begun an effort to intensify our
supervision of compliance with Federal and State
consumer protection statutes. To determine how
we can best fulfill our responsibilities in this important area, we will be consulting with banking and

consumer affairs authorities in the States. Discriminatory or deceptive practices have no place in our
system, and we do not intend to allow them to exist.
Fortunately, most bankers agree fully with us.
The Administration proposals for financial reform
are another effort to improve the responsiveness of
our financial institutions to the needs of the public.
Structural reform of our financial institutions is absolutely necessary. The capacity of our system to
perform its intermediation function during all phases
of the economic cycle must be strengthened.
Regulated ceilings for deposit rates have proved to
be both inadequate in their protection of the deposit
institutions and unfair in their effect on deposit customers. We must move with all deliberate speed to
eliminate this price-fixing mode of regulation. It is
appropriate to augment the powers of the thrift institutions to serve household and consumer needs
before rate regulation is totally withdrawn. Added
powers for the thrift institutions will make it possible
for them to compete with banks on essentially equal
footing for household deposits. Increasingly, all institutions will be looking to consumer deposits as a
stabilizing element in their deposit structure.
Banks not only live in regulatory and market environments, but also in a technological one. Responsiveness and adaptability to technological change is
a requisite for retention of a competitive position.
Failure to adapt leads to higher costs for some services and an inability to offer others. The banking industry deservedly receives high marks for the imaginative manner in which it has harnessed the computer revolution. In one manner or other, it has found
ways to bend computer technology to its purposes,
and thereby to reshape its own destiny.
Another measure of banking's responsiveness to
public needs is its commitment to fostering equal
opportunity. I would like to commend the efforts
of this Association and its member banks directed
toward the development and expansion of minorityowned businesses. I understand that you are ahead
of your schedule in meeting the goal of $1 billion in
loans to minority businesses over a 5-year period.
MinBank is beginning to make investments in
minority banks to augment their capital.
Those efforts are a good start, but there is need
for still greater effort. Banks, bank trade associations, and the banking agencies must push on, and
create ever more employment and ownership opportunities in banking for members of minority groups.
The number of minority banks has about doubled
in the past 4 years, while their assets have tripled.



A major barrier to further progress is an inadequate
supply of experienced management personnel. I
would like you to consider, either as an association
or as individual banks, the development of a lendlease program that would provide management
talent during the first years of minority bank operations. Such a program would need to include firm
guarantees to the "leased" personnel that they
would not lose their place in the batting order at
their home institution.
In conclusion, let me affirm that I am optimistic
about the future of the banking industry and its
ability to achieve its essential purpose; that is, to
bring a full array of financial products and services
to all individuals and to all businesses in a convenient manner and at a reasonable cost.
In carrying out its mission, I believe the industry,
aided by the duality of the system, will be fully
responsive to new needs as they emerge and to new
possibilities for service created by further technological developments.
STATEMENT OF JAMES E. SMITH, COMPTROLLER
OF THE CURRENCY, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE
ON CONSUMER AFFAIRS OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY, WASHINGTON, D.C., OCT. 31, 1973

Madam Chairwoman and members of this distinguished Committee, I am pleased to appear
before you today to testify on the Truth-in-Lending
Act and related consumer protection issues. In
July 1969, the Truth-in-Lending Act became effective and, for the first time in the history of our
country, consumer credit, or one aspect of consumer credit (disclosure), came under the aegis of
federal control and regulation. Since 1969, the Act
has been amended twice with the addition of two
new major sections relating to credit cards and
the reporting of information on consumers —The
Fair Credit Reporting Act. Under consideration
by the Congress is a "Truth-in-Savings Act" and
a "Fair Credit Billing Act."
Certainly one of the legitimate areas of inquiry
by Congress and specifically this Committee, is
who should regulate this important field. Should
all consumer matters be turned over to a single
agency or bureau as suggested in the Report of
the National Commission on Consumer Finance?
Or, do the banking agencies, the Federal Trade
Commission, and other regulatory agencies have a
legitimate and primary role to play in this field?
Can those agencies adequately protect the interests

285

of consumers, or are they truly captives of the industries they regulate, as has been suggested on a
number of occasions, not only in the press, but in
testimony before the Congress? Those are certainly
important questions which require straightforward
answers and I appreciate this opportunity to share
with you a few thoughts on those matters.
I would like to begin my testimony today with a
discussion of some of our recent efforts to safeguard
the interests of consumers who deal with National
banks. This is a particularly relevant topic, not only
because the National Commission on Consumer Finance has recommended the creation of a Consumer
Protection Agency with authority to supervise all
examination and enforcement functions under the
Consumer Credit Protection Act, but also because
I have a strong personal interest in protecting consumers from unfair and deceptive practices.
Let me start by describing our present procedures
for handling consumer complaints. All written complaints addressed to the Washington Office are reviewed by a supervisory level attorney. Each complaint is then assigned to a staff attorney for investigation or to one of our fourteen regional offices. In
either case, all letters from consumers are acknowledged promptly with an assurance of a definite response upon completion of our investigation.
The next step is to ask the bank involved for a full
explanation in writing. Our request to the bank is
often accompanied by specific questions which we
believe may be important in obtaining a complete
picture of the facts surrounding a particular complaint. If we ultimately decide that the bank's position is correct, we inform the consumer by letter and
provide a detailed explanation. On the other hand,
if we believe the bank has erred, we request that
restitution be made or an accommodation reached
that is satisfactory to both parties. In nearly every
instance, cooperation on the part of the bank is forthcoming immediately.
In more difficult cases involving disputed questions of fact or law, the Office may send a National
Bank Examiner to the bank to make a special onthe-spot investigation of the consumer's complaint.
We do not hesitate to insist that the bank furnish us
with a comprehensive legal opinion from its attorneys if the situation warrants it.
We recognize, of course, that consumer protection
involves more than responding to consumergenerated complaints. A conscientious effort
must also be made to uncover, during our examination, violations of consumer protection laws. To
286



that end, National Bank Examiners devote considerable time to scrutinizing individual bank
installment and real estate loan departments, where
violations of Federal and State consumer protection
laws are most likely to be found.
The process of educating the examiner in the
requirements of consumer protection acts is a
matter which now receives special attention.
All new examiners are given instruction in that area,
usually by a qualified attorney. In addition, regional
staff conferences attended by all examiners in a
particular region frequently feature a lecture by an
attorney familiar with consumer protection laws.
Recently, for example, all National Bank Examiners
in the Twelfth National Bank Region (Arizona,
Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, and Wyoming)
received instruction in the Uniform Consumer
Credit Code from a lawyer formerly associated with
the National Conference of Commissioners on
Uniform State Laws. In Kansas, our regional office
is currently conferring with State officials to determine the best means of educating State and National
Bank Examiners in the provisions of the UCCC,
which becomes effective in that State on January
1, 1974. In fact, enforcement of the UCCC will
be further explored at a meeting scheduled for
November 15 between representatives of our
Washington Office and the State administrators
of the Uniform Consumer Credit Code.
We believe that our present efforts on behalf of
the consumer are effective. Nevertheless, the
Comptroller's staff is presently restudying our
entire approach to consumer problems to determine
if we are doing all that we can. Consideration is
being given to the establishment within the Office
of a division of consumer affairs and to the training
of examiners who will serve as specialists in the
field of consumer credit. We also contemplate
increased liaison with State banking supervisors
and administrators of State consumer protection
acts.
In speaking appearances throughout the Nation,
I am emphasizing that the Comptroller's Office
does not, and will not, treat the consumer's interest
lightly. Recently, before the annual convention of
the American Bankers Association, I announced
our intention to intensify consumer protection enforcement and advised that our Office is going to
insist that all National banks serve their customers
in an equitable and nondiscriminatory manner.
Deceptive practices have no place in our system,
and we do not intend to allow them to exist.

on the basis of sex or marital status. As the regulatory agency for National banks, we realize that the
best interests of those banks are served when loan
demand is strong and creditworthy customers are
plentiful. That women who are creditworthy, no
matter what their marital status, should not be
denied credit simply because of their sex or marital
status should no longer be a matter for debate.
Discrimination against women in the credit fields,
however, has been well documented by the National Commission on Consumer Finance. I applaud
the efforts of this subcommittee in considering
legislation that would outlaw such practices.
Let me offer a few comments on the 15 bills
recently introduced as they pertain to the subject
at hand. Twelve of the bills (H.R. 247, 4734, 5414,
8163, 9388, 9996, 10162, 10603, 10109, 10142, 10675,
and 10737) would amend the Consumer Credit
Protection Act and would prohibit discrimination
by any creditor on the basis of sex or marital status.
Since the Federal Reserve Board has rule-making
authority by virtue of that Act, all of the enforcing
agencies would be governed by uniform Federal
Reserve Board regulations promulgated to enforce
the prohibition through record-keeping and reporting requirements.
H.R. 10674 prohibits sex and marital status discrimination but applies only to Federally insured
financial institutions and credit card issuers. It
does not amend the Consumer Credit Protection
Act although it would give the Federal Reserve
Board rule-making powers and the enforcing structure would be similar to that of the Consumer
Credit Protection Act. Its recordkeeping and reporting requirements are onerous and duplicative. Under
that bill, each creditor must file reports with its
regulatory agency reporting whatever loan information is required under the Federal Reserve Board's
regulations. The agencies then report to Congress
annually. In addition, as a "party" to a Federally
related mortgage transaction, Federally insured
financial institutions must report to HUD all terms
and information on every mortgage loan refused or
denied.
H.R. 246 is similar to 10674 although it is confined
to prohibiting sex and marital status discrimination
in Federally related mortgage transactions. We do
not feel that this bill is broad enough in scope to
remedy the problem of discrimination. We recommend against the passage of H.R. 10674 and H.R.
246.
H.R. 8246 prohibits sex and marital status dis


crimination and also requires lenders to take into
account the combined incomes of husband and wife
if both are obligated. It does not amend the CCPA
and gives rule-making authority to each regulatory
agency mentioned. We feel the "combined incomes"
provision is unnecessary and we would prefer that
antidiscrimination regulations be uniform. Therefore, we recommend against passage of this bill.
The antidiscrimination provisions contained in
the other bills are virtually identical in scope and
would bar discrimination in lending on the basis of
sex or marital status by any creditor covered by the
Act. This Office is in favor of passage of such a
provision to amend the Consumer Credit Protection
Act. Our Agency has the capacity for enforcing
antidiscrimination legislation. We have seen that
the structure for implementing Truth-in-Lending
is workable: the Federal Reserve Board issues
regulations and each enforcing agency carries them
out in a generally uniform manner. We have every
reason to believe that the same technique for enforcing antidiscrimination provisions would be
successful.
One final comment concerning antidiscrimination
statutes. Other statutory provisions, such as
Title 8 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, contain antidiscrimination requirements that are applicable
to lenders. This Office and the other bank regulatory agencies have been working on the formulation of regulations that would assist the enforcement of the prohibition of discrimination in housing
related lending on the basis of race, color, religion,
or national origin. Again, to assist in effective
enforcement and to avoid unnecessary difficulties
in compliance, we urge that all existing antidiscrimination provisions be amended to provide for
uniform goals and uniform administrative enforcement, as well as uniform liabilities and remedies.
Finally, let me add a word or two about Senate
Joint Resolution 160 recently passed by the Congress. That resolution directs the various bank
regulatory agencies to impose a rate ceiling on the
so-called "wild card" consumer certificates of deposit. The avowed purpose of this resolution is to
assure a flow of funds into thrift institutions so that
home mortgage loans can be maintained at reasonable rates of interest.
I am sorry that in its rapid consideration of the
Resolution, the Congress did not obtain the full
benefit of hearings or recommendations from this
subcommittee and of other committees charged
with protection of the consumer's interest. I would

289

have expected that a measure so directly affecting
the consumer would have been preceded by some
evaluation of its overall impact by a consumer
affairs committee.
In the past, interest rate ceilings on savings accounts have not achieved their objectives. Contrary to expectations, they have not protected the
liquidity of thrift institutions by preventing an outflow of funds during periods of tight money.
CORRESPONDENCE OF JAMES E. SMITH, COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, ON HIS OCTOBER 31
TESTIMONY BEFORE THE CONSUMER AFFAIRS
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE BANKING AND
CURRENCY COMMITTEE
NOVEMBER 29,

1973

Hon. LEONOR K. SULLIVAN

House of Representatives
Washington, B.C. 20515:
Permit me, once again, to thank you for granting
me the opportunity to testify on October 31, 1973,
before the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs of the
House Committee on Banking and Currency. It is
always a pleasure to exchange views with members of Congress, and particularly with your
Subcommittee.
At several points during my testimony, I promised
to provide you with additional material on certain
questions. That material, cited by the page number
of the transcript on which the matter is discussed, is
set forth below. As per instructions from the Subcommittee's staff, we have made any necessary corrections to the transcript and attached a copy of this
letter to each page that will be supplemented.
Page 534, line 12:
My staff has not yet completed its study of possible approaches that we can take to improve our
representation of consumer interests. As soon as the
report is completed and I have had a chance to
review its recommendations, I will inform the Subcommittee of the actions we contemplate in this area,
Page 541, line 12:
As part of our effort to assist the credit card customer in resolving billing complaints as quickly as
possible, our staff suggested that each bank credit
card bear the name of the issuing or account bank,
so that the customer would know to whom he could
turn in the event of a billing dispute. Although the
periodic statement sent to the customer each month
usually contains the name and address of the clear290



ing house association which performs the billing, we
have observed that customers may experience some
delay in obtaining corrections from this source.
Rather than engage in correspondence with a distant
clearing house, the customer might be able to secure
speedier redress if he were able to approach the
bank in his community which issued the card or
maintains duplicate records of his account. That is
not possible now because in many cases the local
bank is not named either on the card or on the billing
statement.
Upon further reflection, we believe that this matter
can be resolved through an amendment to Regulation Z, without additional legislation by Congress.
Accordingly, we will consult with the Federal Reserve Board to determine the best approach to the
problem.
Page 545, line 2:
The most significant violation of State laws
encountered by this Office appears to be the miscalculation of the proper amount of rebate on an
installment loan which is repaid prior to maturity.
Our experience suggests that these errors are not
deliberate but result from ignorance.
Occasionally, we have detected instances in
which National banks have exceeded the maximum
allowable fee established by State law for the filing
or recording of documents. These violations also
appear to be unintentional.
Insofar as the "Rule of 78V is concerned, a
growing number of commercial banks are switching
to the simple interest method of rebating interest,
which yields a higher rebate to the customer than
the "Rule of 78V. One of the leaders in this movement, Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust
Co., Chicago, 111., has received more than 150
requests from banks throughout the country for
details on the operation of the simple interest
method. Other major banks which have introduced
simple interest rebates include Wachovia Bank &
Trust Co., N.A., Winston-Salem, N.C., and United
California Bank, Los Angeles. Some of those banks
have indicated that while simple interest rebates
have produced a slight loss in interest income, increases in loan volume and customer satisfaction
have made the experience worthwhile.
For the assistance of the Subcommittee in its
consideration of the "Rule of 78V issue, we refer
you to 1 CCH Consumer Credit Guide 11530, which
describes the operation of the rule and provides
helpful tables, and to the Comments following sections 2.209 and 2.210 of the Uniform Consumer

Credit Code. The latter, which are published both
at 1 CCH Consumer Credit Guide 115069 and 115070
and in the West Publishing Company edition of the
UCCC, furnish useful examples of interest rebates
under the rule. See also, Bone v. The Hibernia Bank,
4 CCH Consumer Credit Guide 1199,025 (N.D. Cal.
1972), now on appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of
Appeals.
Page 549, line 8:
This Office has looked into the matter referred
to by Rep. Young to determine whether cardissuing U.S. banks utilize fluctuations in foreign
exchange rates to increase bank earnings at the
expense of the cardholder. We have been assured
by one of the largest credit card issuers in the country that no conscious attempt is made by that organization to indulge in such a practice. Our own
view is that attempts to profit in this manner will
not yield much, if anything, in the way of additional
earnings to the bank.
The methods of settlement between the card
issuer and the foreign bank will vary according to
the laws of the different countries involved and the
negotiations between the parties. We will set forth
two common methods applicable to most situations.
Under the first method, the foreign bank receives
a local currency draft from a local merchant representing a sale to a U.S. cardholder. The foreign
bank pays the merchant the face amount of the
draft, less discount, and then reimburses itself
by charging its local currency account of the U.S.
bank. The foreign bank then sends the local currency draft to the U.S. bank, which converts it to
dollars and charges the cardholder.
Under the other method, the same procedure is
followed until the foreign bank seeks reimbursement. At that point, rather than charging its local
currency account of the U.S. bank, the foreign
bank converts the draft to dollars and sends it
to the U.S. bank, which pays the draft by crediting
the foreign bank's dollar account at the U.S. bank.
In the first instance, the U.S. card-issuing bank
bears the "float" expense, a factor which causes
the bank to make every attempt possible to reduce
the amount of time consumed in the clearing process. If the U.S. bank must absorb the entire "float,"
it will be especially anxious to present the sales
drafts to the cardholder as soon as possible for
payment and thereby cut down on the cardholder's
"free-ride" period. Thus, it seems unlikely that
the bank would delay posting in the hope of benefitting from changes in the exchange rates.



In the second situation, the foreign bank into
which the foreign merchant deposits his sales
drafts will bear the "float" expense until the U.S.
bank credits the foreign bank's account, after which
the U.S. bank carries the "float" expense until its
American customer remits. Since the U.S. bank
must absorb the "float" between the date of posting and the date the cardholder makes his payment, the bank will, as in the first situation, be apt
to post as quickly as possible, although it is conceivable in this instance that the bank could make
some money through intentional delays.
I am alerting our International Division to this
matter and I appreciate your bringing it to our
attention. If there is any other information we can
provide, please let us know.
CORRESPONDENCE OF THOMAS G. DESHAZO, ACTING
COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY, ON H.R. 10993
NOVEMBER 6, 1973
Hon. FERNAND J. ST. GERMAIN,

Subcommittee on Bank Supervision and Insurance of
the Committee on Banking and Currency
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.:
This is in reference to H.R. 10993, a bill which
would provide for 100 percent deposit insurance in
banks, savings and loans, and credit unions for
deposits of public funds and increase insurance on
private deposits from the present $20,000 to $50,000.
I. Section 1 would amend the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act, the National Housing Act, and the
Federal Credit Union Act to require the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Federal Savings
and Loan Insurance Corporation, and the National
Credit Union Administration to insure the deposits
of public units for the full aggregate amount of such
deposits rather than to the maximum amount of
$20,000 currently provided for other depositors.
•'We understand the reasons advanced for the passage of Section 1 to be as follows: (1) It would enable
types of institutions such as savings and loan associations and credit unions, which are now unable to
receive deposits from public bodies, to do so. We
understand that such institutions cannot receive
public deposits now because they are legally and
practically unable to pledge the collateral typically
required by public units of their depositaries; (2) It
would provide deserved additional protection for
taxpayers in the event of the failure of a depositary
bank in a jurisdiction in which public deposits were
291

not required to have been fully collateralized; and
(3) It would provide desirable flexibility to the receiving institutions in their use of funds received from
public depositors.
While we believe that each of the foregoing factors
deserves consideration by the Congress, there are
also negative aspects of the proposed change which
must be considered.
(1) The present requirements of Federal State,
and local governments that their deposits be collateralized reflect legislative determinations that the
interest of taxpayers require such protection. The
proponents of the bill assume that 100 percent Federal insurance would effectively substitute for such
protection. However, to the extent that collateral
requirements are dropped, the attractiveness of public funds to the depositaries will be markedly
increased. While that could be reflected by a salutary increase in competition for those deposits, it
could also have the undesirable side effect of materially increasing the temptation to collusion between
officials having charge of public funds and depositaries. As long as public funds must be fully collateralized, the possibilities for such collusion, while
not eliminated, are kept to a minimum.
(2) The testimony of Mr. Wille indicates that
under the present system, the amount of losses
suffered by public depositors in closed banks has
been negligible.
(3) The elimination of the collateral security requirement could result in a material increase in
the borrowing costs of the Treasury, other Federal
agencies and State and local governments. Insured
banks now hold about $170 billion in Treasury,
Federal agency and municipal obligations, part of
which are used as collateral security for public
deposits which are not insured. The release of the
collateralization requirements would almost surely
reduce bank demand for such obligations.
II. With reference to sections 2 and 3 of H.R.
10993, increasing from $20,000 to $50,000 the
coverage on private accounts held by commercial
banks, mutual savings banks, and savings and loan
associations, the FDIC has concluded that the
amount of coverage could be substantially increased without subjecting the insurance fund to
undue risk. Based on this and other considerations,
the Corporation has announced its support for a
substantial increase in the present $20,000 insurance ceiling and has said it had no objection if
the Congress were to set the ceiling at $50,000.
A 1963 Presidential Commission, on the other

292



hand, reported reservations about increases in the
insurance coverage other than those necessary to
take account of rising wealth and incomes. The
Commission felt that any increases over and above
such amounts should not be considered apart from
complementary measures to strengthen the supervisory framework and enable the responsible authorities to oversee more effectively certain practices
bearing on the safety and liquidity of individual
institutions. The Commission felt that general increase in coverage without such corresponding increases in regulation, could cause managements to
feel less need for the exercise of prudent and careful management of the funds entrusted to them.
We conclude that prior to taking action on Section 1, the Committee should obtain data on its
effects on the demand for public securities. In
view of the negligible losses suffered by public
depositaries under the present system, it would appear likely that the increases in their borrowing
costs occasioned by the elimination of pledging
requirements, would outweigh any advantages to
be gained by 100 percent insurance.
With respect to Section 2, changes in economic
conditions since the last increase of coverage in
December 1969 would appear to make some increase appropriate, although not necessarily the
figure of $50,000 contained in the bill.
REMARKS OF JAMES E. S M I T H , COMPTROLLER OF
THE

CURRENCY, BEFORE THE NATIONAL

COR-

RESPONDENT BANKING CONFERENCE, AMERICAN
BANKERS ASSOCIATION, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF.,

Nov. 6,1973
"Assessing the Capital Needs of Banking"
In preparation for this session, we reviewed
some of the earlier annual reports of the Comptroller of the Currency. We found that Comptroller
John Skelton Williams, in his 1914 Annual Report,
expressed his concern about the adequacy of the
capital of National banks. Specifically, he stated:
The view is held by many practical bankers
and experienced economists that it is not sound
banking for an active commercial bank to be
allowed to receive deposits in excess of ten
times its capital and surplus. I am firmly impressed with the correctness of this view, and
respectfully recommend to the Congress that
the national-bank act be amended so as to
provide that no national bank shall be permitted to hold deposits in excess often times its

unimpaired capital and surplus. Perhaps it
might be wiser to make this limitation eight
times the capital and surplus.
To put Mr. Williams' recommendation in context,
we may note that as of September 12, 1914, the
ratio of total deposits to total capital for all National banks was 4.6. As of June 30, 1973, the same
ratio for all National banks was 11.4.
Bank regulators must inevitably be concerned
with the adequacy of bank capital. We in the Comptroller's Office are giving a good deal of attention
to that question, and I would like to share with
you today our early thinking on some of the issues
with which we are wrestling.
As I see it, there are five major issues. They are:
(1) the relevance of total economic collapse; (2)
the weight to be given the quality of management;
(3) the role of capital notes and debentures; (4)
the role of bank capital in bank holding companies;
and (5) the usefulness of capital ratios as measures
of capital adequacy. I will discuss those topics in
turn.
The first problem that must be faced in any discussion of capital adequacy is composing a list
of contingencies threatening bank capital. At the
forefront of that problem is the question: should
the list include total economic collapse?
Perhaps the principal element that may distinguish our answer to this question today from
the answer that may have been appropriate 40
years ago is the changing role of national economic
policies. Most economic authorities are agreed
that our knowledge of appropriate counter-cyclical
fiscal and monetary policies is vastly superior to
that available to our policymakers in the early
1930's. From that, one may reasonably assume that
an economic debacle of the magnitude of the
Great Depression of the early 1930's is avoidable.
What does this mean for the stance of the
banker and the bank regulator in connection with
capital adequacy? I think it is defensible for both
bank regulators and bankers to assume that
fiscal and monetary policies will allow the prevention of large-scale economic crises. We are well
aware, however, that cyclical movements have not
been abolished, and that periodic recessions of
more limited amplitude are to be expected. Those
swings can bring significant pressures to bear upon
banks.
The second issue to be considered is whether the
quality of management should influence determinations of capital adequacy. Some views from out


side and inside banking suggest that management quality has not been given its due. For example, a major study completed a few years ago
by Professors Robinson and Pettway suggested
that bank examiners ". . . should take their eyes
off bank capital and focus on the quality of bank
management." The authors continue:
An analogy will help at this point: examiners
do not try to specify the elements of a liquidity
policy to a bank but they rightly criticize a bank
if it does not have a clearly articulated liquidity
policy. By the same token, why should examiners try to establish capital standards
(which by their nature can't be specified)?
Shouldn't their efforts and energy be directed
to the problem of making sure that bank
managements have clearly articulated capital
policies and that they are implemented by
managers of as high skill and training as
possible?
Mr. George Vojta, in his recent monograph,
after examining the body of research dealing with
the relationship between bank capital and bank
failures, concludes that ". . . the important causal
factors relating to solvency are competence and
integrity of management."
The Comptroller's Manual, until its 1971 revision,
contained a section dealing with capital adequacy.
It opened with the statement that:
The Comptroller of the Currency will not
hereafter rely on the ratios of capital to risk
assets and to total deposits in assessing the
adequacy of capital of national banking associations.
That is a strong, unqualified statement and may account for deletion of the section in the 1971 revision.
The section also included the well-known set of
eight factors to ". . . be considered by the Comptroller in assessing the adequacy of capital." The
very first factor listed was "the quality of management." The other seven were:
(a) The liquidity of assets;
(b) The history of earnings and of the retention
thereof;
(c) The quality and character of ownership;
(d) The burden of meeting occupancy expenses;
(e) The potential volatility of deposit structure;
(f) The quality of operating procedures; and

293

(g) The bank's capacity to meet present and
future financial needs of its trade area,
considering the competition it faces.
Although that list is not contained in the current
edition of the Manual, the factors have not been
disowned by this Office. Indeed, to some degree
the set of factors has come to epitomize the nonratio approach with which the Comptroller has been
identified during the past decade.
Let me now turn to the issue of capital notes and
debentures. The Office of the Comptroller of the
Currency in the early 1960's issued a ruling that
encouraged National banks to resort, on appropriate occasions, to the sale of debentures to supplement their capital position. Until that ruling,
senior capital, in the view of many bankers, was
associated only with near-emergency situations
at financially weak institutions. Our Office has applied a rule of thumb that limits the proportion of
a National bank's total capital that can be in
debentures to one-third.
Some of the capital formulae applied by bank regulators discriminate against the use of debentures.
For example, one such ratio involves total equity
capital plus reserves on loans and securities, divided
by the sum of total liabilities plus total debentures
less cash and cash items. It is obvious that a bank
with outstanding debentures is penalized in the
application of this ratio, as compared with a bank
that has issued no debentures.
In our Office, we believe there is a place for debt
instruments in the capital structure of National
banks. The basic regulatory function of bank capital
is to serve as protection for depositors and those who
assume, their risks. Capital notes and debentures
extend substantial additional protection to bank
depositors. Further, some market situations would
penalize bank stock holders greatly, were the regulatory authorities to insist upon the sale of equity
securities. Having the option of selling capital notes
yields valuable flexibility.
A subsidiary question, in connection with bank
debt capital, relates to the sale by one bank, usually
a smaller one, of its debentures to a larger bank.
There are, I believe, reasons for holding such transactions to a minimum. From the standpoint of the
entire banking system, such transactions do not provide any net inflow of capital. Were such transactions to proceed on a round-robin basis throughout
the system, it is evident that a substantial watering
down of capital requirements for the system would
294



have occurred. If the regulatory authorities desire to
reduce capital requirements for the system, it may
be preferable to take such action directly. Having
stated this, I do not today advocate abolition of that
type of transaction. On occasion, in a particular
situation, that course of action can be beneficial to
both banks involved and, perhaps, to the mental
health of the bank regulator.
Let us now look at the question of bank capital for
holding company banks.
There appears to be fairly general agreement
that a bank and its capital position must be protected, whether or not it is a holding company
subsidiary. Certainly, from the standpoint of a
primary bank regulator, the relationship of a regulated bank with a parent bank holding company
and its associated non-bank affiliates, should be
a source of positive strength for the bank. Our
Office will oppose any affiliation for a National bank
when that affiliation would tend to threaten the
soundness of the bank.
No single banking agency is responsible for
regulating all types of banking organizations. In
general, that division of responsibility is a plus
for banking. However, the division of responsibility does lead to some overlap, and to occasional
jurisdictional problems. One such problem involves
the adequacy of capital in holding company banks,
where the banks are other than State member
banks.
As a primary bank regulator, our Office is concerned with the soundness of the bank and with its
capital position.
We also recognize that the Federal Reserve, as
the regulator of bank holding companies, is legitimately concerned with the capital position of
the holding company per se and its constituent
parts.
I would like to offer a suggestion for discussion
purposes, which I plan to pursue further upon
my return to Washington. Would it be workable
for a rebuttable presumption to exist in connection with the capital position of a subsidiary bank,
based on the view of the primary bank regulator? In other words, in each case we would draw
a conclusion as to whether or not the capital of a
National bank were adequate. If our decision
were in the affirmative, and if the bank in question
were a subsidiary of a bank holding company,
the Federal Reserve Board would accept our conclusion, unless the Board found cause for rebutting
or attempting to rebut our conclusion. In the latter

instance, further interagency discussion would be
required.
I wish to emphasize that I view such interagency
discussions as a useful educational exercise for all
parties. Each agency has a wealth of experience
gained from implementing its views of capital adequacy that has not as yet been fully shared with the
other. No one, of course, should expect all differences of opinion to evaporate through that sharing.
However, I am hopeful that major issues can be
resolved.
The fifth and final issue touched on in my introduction relates to the usefulness of capital ratios as
measurements of capital adequacy. In fact, somewhat more broadly, the question really is: how may
the adequacy of capital be measured?
A variety of capital ratios are used by all bank
examiners as initial screening devices in their
attempt to determine whether an institution under
examination is adequately capitalized. The loans-tocapital ratio, the capital-to-total assets ratio, the
capital-to-total deposits ratio —those and others are
among the more popular measures.
As to the norms or the "acceptable" levels for
those ratios, it is undoubtedly true that the current
average figures tend to become a sort of standard. In
my opening example, I pointed out the sharp drop in
capital ratios over the past 60 years. That drop illustrates that we tend to look at the concept of capital
adequacy in relative terms rather than in absolute
terms.
In using ratios, one is often tempted to adopt
"minimum" values for regulatory purposes. When
that is done, there is a natural tendency on the part
of bankers, hard pressed as they are to maintain a
favorable rate of return on capital, to allow their
institutions to slide gradually to the minimum
acceptable levels. The choice of any minimum that
lies below the ratios of a significant number of banks
would tend, in and of itself, to exert downward pressure on the aggregate capital ratios of the system.
I personally believe that no strict formulation can
substitute for the factor of human judgment in
determining capital adequacy. Obviously, if that
were not so, the world would be an easier place for
bank regulators. Were mechanistic judgments to
be finally determinative, one perhaps could appoint
the latest generation computer as regulator.
However, bank regulators do need benchmarks
and guideposts, and I would like to close by describing one exercise in which we are currently engaged.
Even if this exercise bears fruit, we will not have



altered our basic position that no strict formula
can be finally determinative of the adequacy of
capital. Rather, we will simply have another tool to
help us in our determination.
As you know, our Office develops classified
assets totals for National banks. Classified assets are
those assets of an institution which our examiners
find to be subject to some type of criticism. The
volume of classified assets is related to the degree
of potential loss in a bank's asset portfolio.
There are several determinants of the overall
classification of a bank, but a principal one relates
to the ratio of classified assets to gross capital funds.
Gross capital funds include total stated capital
plus reserves on securities and loans. Banks with
a ratio below 20 percent are A banks, those with a
ratio of 20 percent or more but below 40 percent are
B banks, those with a ratio of 40 percent or more
but below 80 percent are C banks, and those with
a ratio of 80 percent or more are D banks.
We have also divided all National banks into a
number of deposit-size categories. For our purposes
here, let me confine the discussion to three broad
size categories, the smallest being those banks with
less than $100 million, and the largest those with
$500 million or more.
The approach we are considering as an additional tool in the capital adequacy area involves a
determination of acceptable limits of certain capital ratios for banks in each of our groups. The
approach assumes that the A banks, that is, those
banks with relatively low ratios of classified assets
to gross capital funds, can safely reach higher
loans-to-capital ratios than is the case for banks
in the D category.
As of the end of 1972, the ratio of total loans to
total capital accounts for all insured banks was
7.4. Taking this as a jumping-off point, we have explored the question of how many National banks
would require additional capital were various
limits of the loans-to-capital ratio applied to banks
in the A, B, C, and D classifications.
In a preliminary exercise, we have applied two
different sets of limits for the loans-to-capital
ratio to banks in each classification. The first
ranges from 8.5 for A banks to 6.5 for D banks,
while the range for the second is from 9.0 to 7.0.
Under the first set of loans-to-capital ratio limits,
i.e., the set ranging from 8.5 for A banks to 6.5
for D banks, 12.7 percent of all National banks
would need additional capital. Only 8.4 percent
of A banks would require an injection of capital,

295

while the percentages for the B, C, and D groups
would be 30.0 percent, 64.6 percent, and 81.3
percent, respectively.
If the set of limits ranging from 9.0 for A banks
to 7.0 for D banks were to be applied, 8.1 percent
of all National banks would fall short. That would
include 4.8 percent of A banks, 20.3 percent of B
banks, 51.3 percent of C banks, and 71.9 percent
of D banks.
We applied the same sets of limits to banks in
various deposit-size categories. For the set of ratio
limits ranging from 8.5 to 6.5, 12.2 percent of the
National banks with deposits under $100 million
would require a capital injection. Of National
banks with deposits between $100 and $500 million, 14.8 percent would need to augment their
capital, while for the banks above $500 million,
the comparable percentage would be 26.6.
A similar pattern occurs with the application of
the set of ratio limits ranging from 9.0 to 7.0. For the
smallest size category, 7.8 percent of the banks
would need capital. For the middle size category,
the percentage would be 9.1 percent, and for the
$500 million and above category, 18.3 percent.
To add some perspective to these figures, it is
useful to note that most of our National banks,
85.5 percent, in fact, are A banks, and that a far
lower percentage of A banks would require additional capital under the limits discussed than is the
case for the other classifications. Secondly, for many
banks showing a need for capital under the procedures outlined, a comparatively small injection
would suffice. That is shown by the fact that altering
limits by small amounts drastically reduces the number of banks failing to meet the limit test.
It is obvious that similar exercises can be pursued
for each of a number of capital ratios. We have
already made, for example, a preliminary examination of the effects of various cutoffs applied to the
capital-to-total assets ratio. We have not made any
determination to date as to whether different limits
would be appropriate for different-size banks.
I must re-emphasize that whatever the continuing
results of such exercises may be, we will never
replace our judgment with any strict formulation.
We do believe, however, that the more relevant data
that can be brought to bear on the question, the better our judgment is likely to be. However, I am
reasonably certain that annual reports of the Comptroller of the Currency well into the future will
continue to provide evidence that no final resolution
of this question has been achieved.
296



STATEMENT BY JAMES E. SMITH, COMPTROLLER
OF THE CURRENCY, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE
ON FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS OF THE SENATE
COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN
AFFAIRS, WASHINGTON, D.C., NOV. 8, 1973

Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished
committee, I am pleased to appear before you to
testify on the President's recommendations for
change in the U.S. financial system. As we are all
aware, the tremendous growth of our country would
have been impossible without its well-developed and
sophisticated system of financial markets. Our
system has marshalled funds in times of national
emergency and it has provided the finance needed
to transform innovative ideas into new products
that increase the well-being of all Americans. Efficient financial markets are vitally necessar^ for
continued improvements in our standard of living.
Experience since the mid 1960's has, however,
revealed significant weaknesses in the functioning
of our financial markets. During periods of monetary
restraint, the ability of our thrift institutions to perform their intermediation function has been substantially curtailed, and the flow of funds to high
priority sectors such as housing has been seriously
threatened.
After a thorough review of those problems, and
their causes, the Administration proposed a seven
point program of reform. In essence, all deposit
institutions would be permitted freer rein to compete
in offering financial services to the consumer.
Because of the statutory province of the Office
of the Comptroller of the Currency, I shall direct
my comments to the portions of the reform package
that most affect National banks and what they imply
for the work of our Office. Those portions are:
(1) the removal of interest ceilings on time and
savings deposits; (2) N.O.W. (negotiable order of
withdrawal) accounts; (3) truth-in-savings; and
(4) expanded real estate lending powers for National banks.
Let me comment first on the issue of ceilings on
deposit interest rates. The President has recommended phasing out the current deposit rate regulations over the next 5V2 years, and for good
reason.
Governmental imposition of ceiling rates on deposits is predicated on the false assumption that
ceilings offer meaningful protection to deposit
institutions during periods of sharply rising shortterm interest rates. Perhaps ceilings mute some-

what the competition among the deposit institutions, but any such limited benefit is vastly
outweighed by the collective handicap those institutions face in competing for funds with market
instruments such as Treasury bills, U.S. agency
issues, and corporate debentures. In the two
previous periods of monetary restraint, deposit
rate ceilings did not insulate institutions from
deposit outflows. They are not working today.
Moreover, such rate setting is highly discriminatory to the consumer-saver, who lacks either the
financial sophistication or the monetary wherewithal to shift his funds to the high-yielding market
instruments.
The inability of rate ceilings to protect deposit
institutions against a loss of funds is of increasing
significance. Banks are more dependent today
upon the savings dollar than they have ever been,
and that dependence is growing. In the mid 1940's,
time and savings deposits made up 31.3 percent
of the deposits of insured commercial banks
outside of New York City. The comparable figure
for large money market banks was only 6.7 percent. Since that time, there has been a slow but
dramatic change in those numbers. By 1966, the
time and savings deposits of insured banks outside
the money market center reached 50.3 percent,
and early this year it climbed to 61.2 percent.
Money market banks have witnessed a similar
trend; early this year their time and savings deposits surpassed their demand deposits for the
first time.
Such shifts have contributed significantly to
increases in bank costs because of a substantial
increase in the cost of time money. One estimate,
based on the ratio of interest expense to year-end
deposit totals, indicates that the cost of such funds
more than doubled during the 1960's. That was
true for banks in all size categories —from those
with less than $1 million in deposits to those with
over $1 billion.
Higher cost funds for banks are related to a
desire by the American public to economize on
its money holdings and to changes in banking
practices and technology which permit it to do so.
Pressures for continued pursuit of that goal will
remain strong.
Buttressing that view is the development and
success of the N.O.W. account in Massachusetts
and New Hampshire. That new interest-bearing
transaction account forms a bridge between the traditional demand account and the passbook account.



It could not have been possible without development
of sophisticated money transfer systems. It would
not have been profitable without the public support
it has received. If allowed to flourish, that new
instrument can become an important element in the
attempt by deposit institutions to attract and keep
consumer funds.
The President's proposals would allow all deposit
institutions to offer N.O.W. accounts. Because of
their similarity to demand deposits they would be
subject to the same range of reserves. However, the
authorities may, if they wish, set a different rate for
N.O.W. deposits. Because of their similarity to savings accounts, interest payments on them cannot be
prohibited, although such interest can be no higher
than that paid on passbook accounts. Moreover, individual institutions may impose a 30-day delay after
any notice of withdrawal. They will not, however, be
required to do so.
With consumer tastes and funds transfer technology constantly changing, our institutions must be
free to compete for consumer deposits. However,
many questions have already been raised about the
long-run viability of deposit institutions in an atmosphere of freer competition. There appear to be two
arguments here. One is that banks in general will bid
funds away from thrift institutions by offering interest rates they cannot match. Secondly, some have
expressed the fear that money center banks will bid
funds away from smaller banks, especially those
which serve the less urbanized areas of the United
States. I, for one, do not share the view that in a free
market large banks can succeed only at the expense
of thrift institutions and small banks. All can
succeed to the benefit of the American consumer.
My optimism, if it may be called that, rests upon
two propositions: (1) a comparison of deposit rates
is not the sole factor influencing consumers in the
placement of their savings deposits; and (2) thrifts
will be given an expanded capability to offer more
financial services to consumers, and thus will be
able to compete with banks in non-price areas.
Thrifts do not possess that capability today, and it
makes no sense to remove interest ceilings completely until they do possess it. Let us look at those
two propositions in turn.
If rate ceilings have had any positive effect it
might be this: deposit institutions have learned to
compete in non-price terms. There has been a significant expansion in the variety and quality of deposit services. Overdraft facilities and "A to Z"
monthly financial statements for the consumer, non297

existent a few years ago, are commonplace today.
The concept of full-service banking, embracing
both deposit and lending services, has proved to be
successful. Locational convenience, always an important factor, has become increasingly significant.
The consumer has become attuned to those nonprice factors and is not likely to forget them, even in
the context of freer rate competition.
Thus, if thrift institutions are granted the powers
recommended by the President to expand their
offerings of deposit and lending services to the consumer, they will have the ability to compete with
banks. They need not fear any exodus of funds to
banks so long as they can and do offer the quality
and variety of deposit and lending services demanded by the public. By the same token, banks will
find it necessary to intensify their consumer lending
activities. Among other things, that will mean a
larger mortgage portfolio.
Total competition is today conducted in both
price and non-price terms between banks and thrifts.
The advantages held by commercial banks today
in non-price competitive factors have allowed them
to maintain a large volume of time money in the
face of a 0.25 percent to 0.50 percent rate differential favoring S&L's. When the proposals under
discussion are adopted, thrifts will be on a much
more nearly equal footing. In that setting, bankers
who take the long view of their operations would
not be likely to offer the significant rate differentials
needed to attract deposits from thrift institutions.
The examination process, which places significant
constraints on the acquisition of high risk assets,
encourages banks to take the long view.
Moreover, under the President's program, thrifts
will have the capacity to blunt the adverse effects
of upward shifts in interest rates, when they
occur. If they utilize the proposed broader lending
and investing capabilities, they will not be as
locked into earning assets whose interest income
is frozen for long periods as they are today.
Free competition in deposit markets is not,
of course, a license for insupportable and confusing claims about interest payments. As a consumer safeguard, the Administration is proposing
a truth-in-savings amendment which is a logical
extension of the truth-in-lending law now on the
books. It requires that all institutions subject to
the proposed "Financial Institutions Act of 1973"
provide full disclosure of all rates, terms and restrictions relating to all interest bearing deposit
accounts. In particular, it requres that when rate

298




quotations are given in advertisements, they must
indicate the annual percentage rate or annual
percentage yield for only 1 year, regardless of the
underlying maturity. For deposits maturing in
more than 1 year, current practices of quoting a
compounded interest rate give an exaggerated
picture of the true yield. Adoption of the truth-insavings proposals will result in substantive gains
for the American consumer.
The President's legislative plan would also increase the capacity of National banks to extend
real estate and real estate-related credit. That is
to be done by repealing all current limitations on
real estate lending. In essence, National banks
will be able to extend real estate loans on the same
basis as all other loans. That change is long overdue.
The present restraints find their origins in the
National Bank Act of 1864. It forbade National
banks to make real estate loans, partly to protect depositors. Congress gradually relaxed that
position, but it has continued to insist that National
banks be guided by more stringent criteria than
those applicable to competing institutions.
There is no valid reason why the current restrictions should be part of today's banking law.
They are unnecessarily hindering the flow of funds
into housing markets. In general, loans secured by
residential mortgages have become very low risk
loans. Protecting bank depositors against particular
instances of unsound lending practices can be most
appropriately handled by the banking agencies.
Although that simple step will encourage banks
to extend needed real estate credit, more needs to
be done. Greater incentives are required to expand
further the financial involvement of banks in redeveloping our urban areas. Thus, the President's
proposals would explicitly authorize National banks
to invest in loans, or debt securities, or real estate
for community welfare and development up to 3
percent of total assets.
The liberalizations and consumer safeguards I
have discussed today will pose new challenges
for bank supervisory authorities. Regulators, like
banks, have become accustomed to the current
environment. However, we are prepared to assess
changes in the asset and liability structures of
banks in terms of the public interest. We have a
responsibility to assure that no regulation or ruling
unduly inhibits experimentation with new lending
and deposit powers. At the same time, our judgements must be made with the full realization that
banks lend other people's money, not their own.

STATEMENT BY JAMES E. SMITH, COMPTROLLER OF
THE CURRENCY, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE
ON BANK SUPERVISION AND INSURANCE OF THE
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY,
WASHINGTON, D.C., NOV. 27,1973.

I appreciate the opportunity to discuss with this
Committee the impact of electronic funds transfer
systems (EFTS) on the banking industry and on the
general public. Technological developments in the
EFTS area have been so rapid in recent years that
the capability exists to create and operate more
sophisticated EFTS systems than have been put in
place to date. The timing of advances from this
point forward will be largely determined by the statutory and regulatory framework and by the extent of
anticipated lower costs through the use of more
complex systems.
Our basic policy position in this area can be stated
as follows: the public must be allowed to gain the
full benefits available from all technological advances. Where that is not possible because of
existing statutory or regulatory restrictions, we
favor making the requisite changes.
A second general principle that we believe should
be used to test the wisdom of policy actions in the
EFTS area relates to competition. Whereever
consistent with attaining an efficient use of resources, we believe that competition among financial
insititutions should be encouraged. Another way
of saying that is that we would place the burden of
proof on those who hold that certain EFT systems
can be operated efficiently only if established as
a quasi-utility with monopoly powers.
From the standpoint of the payments mechanism
in our country, appropriate public policy calls for
encouraging those developments that would reduce
the flow of paper required to carry out and record
financial transactions. Twenty-five billion checks
now pass through the banking system each year;
that figure has been increasing on the order of 7
percent annually. The clearing mechanisms have
absorbed the substantial increases in that flow over
the years. However, in its recent release relating to
proposed revisions in Regulation J, the Federal Reserve Board held out the possibility that ". . . the
growth in check usage may eventually impede the
flow of funds in the economy and make the use of
checks slow and expensive." Certainly the costs
associated with the current procedures for handling
payments will, over time, become larger and larger
relative to the costs associated with alternative
EFTS methods.



Discussions of EFTS are often broken down into
three topics: automated clearing houses; pointof-sale systems; and automated tellers. I would
like to look at each of those in turn.
Groups of banks have traditionally established
clearing houses on a joint basis to carry out clearing
transactions. A major function of the automated
clearing house is to achieve the same end as the
traditional clearing house but in a more efficient
manner. Automated clearing houses also can be
used to facilitate certain transactions that were
not historically associated with clearing houses.
One of those is the direct deposit of payrolls without the use of any checks. An employer sends a
tape to his bank showing the amounts to be credited
to the deposits of each of his employees. The employer's bank, in conjunction with tfife automated
clearing house, is able to arrange the appropriate
credits for employees in their accounts in their
respective banks. The system can also involve
a guaranteed credit for employees on a given date
on a regular basis. Systems for preauthorization
of bill payments for bank customers can also be
established through the facilities of an automated
clearing house.
Automated clearing houses are in operation in
San Francisco and Atlanta, and it is anticipated
that perhaps as many as 10 additional ones will
come into being over the next year. The policy issue
that has gained most attention in connection with
automated clearing houses relates to the tests for
admission to membership. Although savings and
loan associations have applied for membership,
none have yet been admitted. The bank founders of
the San Francisco automated clearing house have
justified the non-admission of savings and loan
associations by noting that the latter in general do
not possess third party payment powers. The
banks note that the traditional function of clearing
houses relates to interbank clearing of third party
payment items.
I would like to emphasize that adoption of the
Administration proposals for financial reform,
which I strongly support, will make that issue
moot. The reform package will give thrift institutions third party payment powers, and at that
point, their admission to clearing houses would
become virtually automatic.
The immediate question, of course, relates to
the time prior to the adoption of the Administration
package. In my view, the development of integrated
clearing systems in each area or region is consistent
299

with the public interest. Thus, it would be appropriate over time for arrangements to be worked out
that would allow participation of all financial institutions within a clearing system, at least to the
extent necessary to allow them to perform the
services they are currently offering to the public.
Consideration must also be given to the anti-trust
question concerning exclusion of competitors from
a facility. It is my understanding that the determination of any possible anti-trust violation hinges
on the question of whether institutions are being
barred from a facility which is "essential" to their
continued successful operation.
Point-of-sale terminal systems have been operated
to date only on a scattered experimental basis.
Yet, it is those systems that have generated the most
imaginative speculation as to the form of our future
payments mechanism.
In a point-of-sale system, terminals are located
in retail outlets. Those terminals' are linked to a
central computer facility. A purchase by a customer
from a merchant can be paid for through crediting
the merchant's account and debiting the customer's
account on a same-day basis. If both merchant
and customer have deposits at the bank associated
with the point-of-sale system, the transaction can
occur without reference to other financial institutions. However, it is apparent that for any widespread use of point-of-sale systems to develop,
it would be necessary for most, or all, of the financial institutions in an area to be linked to a
communications network.
It is at that point, the interface between pointof-sale systems and automated clearing houses,
that most of the sticky policy questions appear.
Many of those will not be resolved for some time.
A major reason is that the experience with pointof-sale systems is so fragmentary to date that it
is difficult to create the factual base necessary to
arrive at intelligent policy decisions.
A crucial question is whether the economies
of scale are such that duplicate communication
networks for handling point-of-sale transactions
are net feasible from a cost standpoint. That question is still open, and we hope that some experimental moves, now in the planning stage in several
cities, will shed some additional light on the matter.
Even if it turns out that only a single area communications network is economically feasible,
the question remains whether there are methods
and devices that will allow competition to occur
among various groups of users of the network.
300




Another issue with which regulators must be
concerned is the consumer reaction to EFTS
developments in general, and to point-of-sale systems in particular. Scattered surveys indicate
that there is considerable consumer resistance to
payment methods that have the effect of removing
"float" and that remove the option normally held
by customers as to the precise order in which bills
are paid.
If it becomes obvious over time that the economies associated with point-of-sale systems are
too great to pass up, an intensive program of consumer education may have to be mounted. I
think that the point made by Governor Mitchell in
that connection has considerable relevance. He
holds that customer resistance will be overcome
only if there is monetary benefit associated with
immediate payment as opposed to deferred payment. While such a differential appears economically sound, it is often absent under current payment methods,
I would like to conclude by giving attention to
automated tellers and cash machines. The impact
of those machines on the banking industry and
on bank customers can be distinguished from that
of automated clearing houses and point-of-sale
systems. The automated teller need not have any
communications link with any institutions other
than the parent. In simplest terms, those machines offer a new dimension in customer convenience. The principal customer advantages
offered relate to location and hours of availability.
In the absence of regulatory or statutory prohibitions, those machines can be placed at numerous
locations that would not merit a full-scale branch.
As to hours, the machines are operable 24 hours a
day, except for downtime.
The placement of automated tellers has inevitably
become associated with the branching question. A
recent survey appearing in The Magazine of Bank
Administration revealed that 1,430 automated tellers
and 355 cash dispensers had been installed as of
2 months ago. In addition, aboi* 1,300 additional
machines are on order. The survv v also indicated
that over 90 percent of the installat ns are located
on the outside wall of existing bank ofi es. On-premises locations do not raise the brai hing issue.
However, about 4 percent of all mach, e installations are located off existing premises, and the
number will grow if regulatory barriers can be
removed.
In general, in those States whose branchii. v law

would allow a full-scale branch at a given site, we
have approved and certificated locations for freestanding machine installations. In a number of nonbranching States, the use of machines is currently
restricted to existing bank premises.
We are sympathetic to the efforts under way in
several States to liberalize the use of automated
tellers. The banking commissioner of Ohio is supporting legislation that would eliminate the need for
a branch application procedure in connection with
machines. An Anti-trust Division official has testified before this Committee that the Division may
look with favor, at some point down the road, at legislation that would allow National banks to establish
automated tellers without reference to State branching law. Our Office has not reached such a determination yet; however, if it became apparent that the
only way for the banking public to gain the benefits
associated with automated tellers was through that
approach, we would probably favor it. Whatever
legislative developments occur at the State or
National level in that area, it will be necessary to
preserve the competitive equality of the dual
banking system.
The possiblity of two or more banks sharing automated tellers has been raised. From a technological
standpoint, machines can easily be linked to the
computers of two or more banks. As I understand it,
the existing technology allows essentially the same
results to be achieved from the customer standpoint
when two banks share one automated teller, or alternatively, when two banks install separate machines
side-by-side at a location. The sharing of facilities
would again raise an anti-trust question. The possibility of shared facilities is under consideration by
our Office, but we have not reached any conclusion
to date.
Another public policy issue which will become
more important in the future relates to the development of interchange systems tying together
the automated tellers of various banks. Such a
system would yield considerable consumer benefit,
since the customer of one bank could carry out the
transactions he desired with his own bank through
the automated teller of another bank. Such an interchange system is already in use in certain multibank holding companies. One may conceive of
the development, first of local interchanges, then
regional interchanges, and finally, at some point,
a national interchange. Such interchanges would
require compatible data formats and security
systems. The regulatory question here is whether




the convenience of an interchange system can be
secured without losing the benefits of competition.
In summary, new technology makes possible a
number of developments in the payments mechanism, only a portion of which have yet been implemented. Some further advances await clarification
or modification of the statutory and regulatory
framework; others depend upon a demonstration
that the innovation would yield an acceptable
profit. It is our intent to take those steps open to
us that will enhance the opportunity of bank customers to gain the benefits made possible by technology. To achieve this, we must allow National
banks to be fully responsive to emerging financial
needs and to utilize all available means to serve
those needs. At the same time, we will insist that
vital competitive safeguards be maintained and
strengthened.
REMARKS

OF DEAN E.

MILLER, DEPUTY COMP-

TROLLER FOR TRUSTS, BEFORE THE IOWA TRUST
ASSOCIATION, DES MOINES, IOWA, MAY 16,

1973

You have asked me here today to discuss current
regulatory developments. In complying with your
request, I propose to take a broad view of the subject. Regulation of trust departments has greatly
increased in complexity in a very short span of time,
and all indications are that this process has not
abated. Accordingly, some of the "developments" I
wish to discuss today are things that I think are
going to happen. Others are already here and are
accepted as a part of the scene, yet are not fully comprehended. The implications of the developing interplay of conflicting statutory schemes administered
by diversely-oriented regulators are not readily
appreciated. New progeny of those matings are continally emerging —often to our surprise —often to
our chagrin. Thus the picture I will try to paint of the
regulatory panorama may appear disorganized.
Although I would maintain that the activities of my
office could not accurately be so labeled, I must
admit that the accusation may quite validly be leveled at the combination of forces that has created
the current regulatory framework, and my discourse can, in large part, only reflect that lack of
organization.
For the Trust Division of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the key word for the past
few years has been "adaptability." Faced by constantly mounting asset totals in trust departments, a
steadily increasing number of matters of concern
which should be the subject of supervisory inquiry,

301

and a manpower complement which could not be
expanded correspondingly, we have had to reexamine our procedures, and in the process reevaluate our priorities in examination time and emphasis.
Procedures and checks that relate to more remote
possibilities of liability have been given lower priorities or dropped. The process is a continuing one.
Just before coming here I drafted the following examination circular which has yet to be issued:
TO: Regional Administrators and Trust
Examining Personnel
SUBJECT: Examination of Banks Having
E.D.P. Facilities
It has been made apparent to this Office that
we can no longer afford the waste of time which
is involved in transcribing balances to line cards
in departments where accurate printouts of such
balances are available. Hereafter the printout
of the assets will be preserved for the next examination. At that time it will be compared with
the succeeding printout, using the account
governing instrument provisions of the Forms
1487 for reference where necessary. Through
comparison of the account ledgers, changes
in investments, terminations of accounts, variable amount note balances in excess of a year,
and large corpus reductions can be ascertained
and marked for subsequent inquiry. The trial
balance is to be used for overdraft and large
uninvested cash balances. The holder's list of
assets by type is to be used to examine for
quality and large holdings. In summation, therefore, where the account ledger for the current
year and the previous year, a trial balance and a
holder's list by type are available, Representatives-in-Trusts will utilize these printouts
rather than transcribing balances.
Any questions concerning this procedure
shall be directed to the Washington Office.
Until now, the question whether to follow the
time-honored practice of copying appropriate balances onto line cards has been left to the Representative. Now, we simply cannot permit him that
flexibility. The older method, while it has certain
benefits not possible under the newer, simply takes
too much time. Besides, it does not lend itself to
rotation of examiners. We were finding that examiners who did not want to follow the method
used in the previous examination either had to
utilize both methods, in order that the necessary
up-to-date records would be available for both
procedures at the next examination, or to "break
302



the chain" for one system or the other. Thus, we
were forced to require that one system be followed —
and we opted for the less time consuming. That
is but one small example of the process which
we have been going through in the past few years.
What are some of the developments that have
necessitated our continuing adaptation? They
defy classification, but I'll try.
First are the additional restrictions relating to
bank collective investment funds. There are now
two means by which such funds for tax-exempt
trusts may obtain tax exemption. You may operate
a pooled fund solely for pension and profit-sharing
trusts and obtain tax exemption under the provisions of Revenue Ruling 56-267, and the subsequent
rulings elaborating on it. Each participating trust
must provide for investment in a group trust, in
which event such group trust would be adopted
as a part of each participating trust. The alternative is to operate a common trust fund for taxexempt trusts and get exemption for the common
fund under Section 584 of the Internal Revenue
Code. You may invest charitable trusts as well
as employee benefit trusts in such funds. No adoption provisions are needed by the participants.
Compliance with the percentage limitations of
Section 18 of Regulation 9 is not necessary for
either type of fund. However, only assets held as
trustee, executor, administrator or guardian may
be invested in a fund operating under Section 584
of the Internal Revenue Code. Those are the
variations on a collective investment fund authorized
by one paragraph of Regulation 9 which can now
exist. It used to be that there were no variations —
there was one type of fund, subject to certain welldefined requirements and limitations —but things
have become more complicated.
The second development creating a need for us
to be adaptable is further restrictions on collective fund operations caused by application of
securities laws. It appears that interests in such
funds, i.e., accounts which are so invested, are
securities issued by an entity other than the bank,
i.e., the fund, thus are not entitled to the provisions
pertaining to securities issued by a bank. There
are, however, exceptions or exemptions available
at least in part. By virtue of the provisions of the
Mutual Fund Reform Act of a couple of years ago,
interests in traditional common trust funds and
pooled funds for employee benefit trusts, other
than H. R. 10 trusts, are exempt from the provisions
of the securities laws, except for the anti-fraud

sections. Funds for H. R. 10 trusts are subject to
the provisions of the securities laws if they are
issuing securities in interstate commerce —that is,
if there should be invested therein funds of a trust
established by a person who lives outside the
state where the bank is located. In addition, all
collective funds themselves are investment companies, but are exempt from the Investment Company Act under specific exemptions contained
in that Act. For traditional common trust funds,
however, the exemption only applies for funds
being operated for bona fide fiduciary purposes.
If you have followed all that, you may be beginning
to see why our job requires constant training. You
may even ask, "If bank collective funds are investment companies and issuers of securities, why
aren't banks which operate such funds in violation
of the Glass-Steagall Act, particularly in view of the
holding of the Supreme Court in Investment Company Institute v. Camp?" My first reaction in
answer to that question reflects very unfavorably
on the functioning of our system of government,
so I'll instead be politic here and shrug my
shoulders.
Of course, the operation of collective investment
funds is not the only place where a bank's trust
department may run afoul of the securities laws.
It may do so if it buys or sells securities for trust
accounts, based upon information obtained because of a commercial relationship with the company involved. It would appear that the problem
only arises where there is an actual transmission
of information to the trust officer who acts on it.
However, recent lawsuits brought by some unions
against Continental Illinois National Bank in Chicago would apparently seek to extend the theory
of liability under the securities laws to any cases
where there exists a significant lending relationship between a trustee bank and the company in
whose securities its trust accounts also invest,
or where there exists a common director between
the bank and such a company. One such suit
even goes so far as to allege that in such a case
Regulation 9 is violated. That would extend the
Regulation further than we had thought heretofore. However, since the Regulation essentially
parallels the local law of trusts in a question such
as this, it would not be unprecedented for us to
learn, by virtue of a court's decision, that we should
be interpreting our Regulation more strictly. If,
indeed, the courts in Illinois decide that Continental
has violated the securities laws and/or our regula


tions and the law of trusts, we shall have to revise
our regulations and interpretations thereof and
involve our examiners in a little more education.
Another area where we have rubbed against the
securities laws in trust department operations concerns the sale of stock of the trustee bank's parent
holding company which is held infiduciaryaccounts.
Not long ago, the SEC issued an interpretation
which stated that before a bank could sell such stock
out of its fiduciary accounts, it would have to have an
additional registration of that stock under the Securities Act. That was modified more recently to enable
such sale without registration for stock acquired as
an original asset of the fiduciary account. However,
the interpretation continues to apply to stock purchased by a bank for a trust account in the mistaken
exercise of its investment discretion. In such a case,
which does happen occasionally, the bank would be
requested by the supervisory authority to sell the
stock without loss to the accounts. The ruling then
would still require registration, posing a significant
impediment to our obtaining corrective action. Further along that line, it is our policy in cases where a
bank has accumulated amounts of its own or affiliated companies' stock in excess of 20 percent of the
outstanding amount, to recommend, pursuant to
proper authority, that a program of disposal be initiated. That too is now hampered by the SEC
opinion.
Another area where the SEC has an interest,
and is shortly to become involved in the supervision
of bank trust department activities, pertains to
stock transfers. There exists before Congress proposed legislation which would give the SEC extensive rule making authority as to performance of
stock transfer functions, backed up by enforcement
authority. While the Administration's proposals in
that regard would have those rules enforced by a
bank supervisory authority in the case of bank stock
transfer agents, the bill submitted by the Moss
Subcommittee in the House would make no such
provision. Even in an instance where legislation in
this area did not confer supervisory authority upon
the banking agencies, it is obvious that if a bank
were to run afoul of the SEC regulations and become
the subject of disciplinary action by that agency, a
significant adverse effect could result on its soundness. For that reason, it would be necessary, in my
opinion, for the banking agencies to also check for
compliance with SEC regulations in order to forestall such an event.
It is interesting at this point to observe that is
303

is frequently stated, usually by the opponents of
bank agency supervision of stock transfer regulations, that there is a divergence between the
purposes sought by the SEC and those of the
banking agencies. That is apparently seen to be
true on the Commission's side; however, it is not
necessarily so from the viewpoint of the banking
agencies. To that point in the few cases where the
SEC has brought disciplinary actions against
banks, we have seen their complete concern with
investor protection and an apparent disregard for
the objective of bank solvency. That has resulted
in their insistence on applying the same rules and
disciplinary methods to banks as to other companies. Under such circumstances, although
evenhanded treatment of violators of investor
protection concerns does result, there is certainly
a divergence of governmental ends. Were we to
disregard the sacred cow of evenhandedness,
however, and attempt to guarantee investors protection from bank violators through traditional
bank supervisory means, there would not have to
be a divergence between the federal regulatory
agencies. Investors would be protected and bank
solvency would not be jeopardized. Once again,
I would like to say that the reason that the latter
more sensible and more economical approach will
not come to pass does not reflect favorably upon
the workings of our system of government.
The last area I shall touch upon in which trust
department activity comes into contact with the
securities laws was illuminated by the Sharon
Steel case. There the principle was made clear; the
purchase and sale of a company's securities by its
employee benefit trusts for the purpose of influencing the price of those securities violates provisions
of the Securities Exchange Act. A cynic could say
that that was one of the motivations for every such
purchase and I might have trouble arguing