View original document

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

EXTRACT

CONFERENCE

FROM

O F GOVERNORS

O F THE

FEDERAL R E S E R V E B A N K S
DISCUSSION with MR. N E W T O N D . BAKER

t#
x

General Files
eLibrary
m

|

LERAgentss
e
l
i
F

selstow
,#

When initialed
bythose indicated.

TREASURY B U I L D I N G +

W A S H I N G T O N , D. C.

2 McConkey - 4 Ra eae

PiWhite Ti d a s

MARCH 23, 1926

PlGilmore_<gi_____.
Oo "Adaths

7 AG 9ES |Rig k e r e
C]Stewart
PyNovy c

a

e

ea


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

WALTER S. COX, S H O R T H A N D REPORTER
472 Louisiana Avenue, Northwest W a s h i n g t o n , D. C.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

192
(Governor Orissinger, Vice-Governor Platt, Messrs.
Hamlin, miller, James, Cunningham,

o f t h e Federal Reserve

Board, e n d wr. Newton D. Baker, o f Cleveland, Qhio,
entered t h e Conference room, a n d the following nroceedings

were had:)
Governor Crissinger, M r . Baker i s here a t the request o f t h e Governors,

t o g i v e a n account

o f the G r i m

alfalfa case, a s t o the effect i t might have uvnon the re—
discount operations o f the Federal Reserve Banks.
Baker w i l l e x p l a i n t h e s i t u a t i o n

M r ,

t o you.

Mr. Baker. G o v e r n o r Crissinger, a n d gentlemen, t h e

Grimm-alfelfa case i s largely a lawyer's brief t o me.
So far as that particular case i s concerned I confess 1
thought the Supreme Court would hear i t o n a writ o f
°

certiorari, because I

believed t h e n a n d believe n o w that

while it does not change the lew, thet it is a misapplication o f the l a w t o the facts i n that particular case.
aly h o p e w a s t h e t t h e G i o r e n 3 C o u r t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s

would regard the legal orincivles i n that c a s e a s s o vital
to the business o f the country that t h e y would not b e
willing t o let that case stand with the possibility o f
the confusion that i t might cause throughout t h e Federal


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Reserve System. I

suspect t h a t t h e s u p r e m e C o u r t

cluded i t f o r t w o reasons.
et o f t h e C o u r t

e x

I n the first place t h e d o c k —

i s very heavy a n d they a r e excluding

all cases that t h e y can.

I t was easy f o r them t o exclude

this c a s e because i t i s a question which arises more o n
a determination o f the facts i n the lower court t h a n d e —
termination o f principles o f law,

I f one takes t h e

opinion o f the Circuit Court o f Anpeals a n d takes t h e
statement o f l a w made b y i t n o particular exception c a n

be taxen t o what they state the law to be, with the
single exception t h a t i n the. ovinion written b y Jydge
Rodman they d o say t h a t t h e Federal Reserve B a n k wittingly o r u n w i t t i n g l y b e c a m e p a r t y t o a

fraud w h i c h w a s c o m -

mitted b y the S tanrod Bank, which was the member bank
in the case.

B u t i f you read t h e rest o f the Judge's

opinion, a n d o f course t h e Supreme Court did, i t seems
fairly clear that t h e y held that there were facts e n ough
to g o t o the j u r y o n the question o f fraud.
Now ‘vith regard t o the Grimn-Alfalfa case, taking

it altogether, I think it is fair to say this: T h a t the
trial Judge, with great respect t o him, flouncered a
good d e a l

i n t h e t r i a l o f t h e cause,

T h e case involved


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

194
some d r a f t s w h i c h h a d b e e n d e p o s i t e d w i t h t h e S t a n r o d
Bank b y t h e G r i m m - A l f a l f a A s s o c i a t i o n a n d a

deposit l i a b —

ility created f o r the proceeds o f those drafts i n favor
of the Grima-Alfalfa Association,

T h o s e drafts h a d beén

discounted a t the Federal Reserve Bank, e n d when s u i t
was b r o u g h t a f t e r t h e S t a n r o d B a n s closed, t h e r e w e r e s i x
causes

o f action, b a s e d w n o n t h e t h r e e d r a f t s

i n question.

The odd-numbered ones, 1 , 3 and 5, applicable t o separate
drafts, rather irregularly charged the insolvency o f the
Stanrod Bans a t the time that t h e y were devosited there
and inferentially charged, t h o u g h they d i d not directly

do it, the pleadings were not clear, t w o things: T h a t
the drafts were only deposited for collection p u r p o s e s —
and a l s o t h a t t h e r e h a d b e e n a

fraud u p o n t h e G r i m m - A l

falfa Association i n the creation o f a deposit liability
ane h e acceptance o f that devosit after t h e imsolvency
of t h e S t a n r o d B a n k w a s ‘ n o w n t o i t s officers,

a n d that

the F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k « n e w t h a t also,
The e v e n n u n b e r e d d r a f t s w e r e dismissed.
up c a u s e s o f a c t i o n o n another theory,

T h e y set

t h e y were

ultimately a n d did. not figure i n t h e law suit.
+o b e brought

e e e

T h e Judge

o n the s i x


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

195

causes o f action, a n d allowed all the evidence t o go before t h e jury, s a y i n g that h e did not xcnow whether h e
should t r y t h e c a s e i n e q u i t y o r a t law, t h a t i n s t e a d

of

trying t o decide that question, which would have cleared
the decxs,

h e decided h e would t r y i t both ways; t h a t

if i t was a law question t h e verdict o f the j u r y would
stand a s a law verdict, a n d i f i t was a n equitable quées—
tion h e would regard t h e jury a s having b e e n empaneled
as a n a i d t o the Chancellor i n detzrmining t h e question
of facts; t h a t h e would adont t h e decision o f the j u r y
on the question o f fact a s the Chancellor's decision,
Judge Rodman i n the Circuit C o u r t o f Appeals s a i d that
he was inclined t o think that t h e case w a s a t law, b u t
that i t wasn!+ n e c e s s a r y t o decide. that, s i n c e t h e d o u b l e

cour.se which the Chancellor h a d taxen w a s enough t o justify
the fudgmemt i f i t ~ould s t a n d o n other grounds.
Out o f thet somerhat.confused situation i n the lower

courts, caused b y the determination o f ths Trial Judge not
to decide exactly what kind o f case h e had, i t was v e r y
aifficult

t o conduct t h e c a s e a n d i t i s v e r y d i f f i c u l t

aoply f a c t s t o t h e law.

N

o

w the n e t result

to

o f all o f

that i s this, t h a t t h e Circuit Court o f Appeals h e l d that


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

196
a jury having passed o n the question t h e o n l y thing t h e y
would cetermine w a s whether there was enovgh evidence t o

zo t o the jury o n the question o f eithér4a tort o r a
fraud,

o r a tort i n the nature o f a fraud, a n d they de.

cided that there was enough evidence.

N o w that evidence

which t h e Circuit Court o f Appeals reviews,

i s based o n

r three things. First, t h e application that was made
discount o f this paper a t t h e Fed>ral Reserve Bank o f
Francisco,

o n which w a s t h e letter "D", which i n d i

cated t o everybody i n the Federal Reserve System,
far a s I

so

x n o w t h e o r i g i n o f t h e paver, t h a t i t h a d c o m e

from a depositor.

T h a t fact g o t twisted around ultimate—

ly a n d t h e C o u r t o f Eppeals t h o u g h t t h e t i t b e l o n g e d

to

spositor instead o f belonging t o the Federal Reserve
immortant, therefore,
action,

i n your

t o clarify t h a t misunderstanding

and @ither sxlain i t on the avnlication o r take out of
the Goaliceticn
able i n t o a

designation

o f ownershin, t h e r e b y o v e r c o m i n g

that difficulty.

-‘The next thing that f

Avoeals commented

on w a s t h e f a c t t h a t t h e S t a n r o d P a n k h a d e n d e a v o r e d

t o


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

197
borrow money f r o m t h e Federal Reserve B a n k o f San Francisco
and h a d b e e n t o i d b y t h e F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k t h a t t h e y

their directors
must p u t i n sane money t o get t h e *

o u t o f its difficul—

ty; t h a t t h e y must h a v e a statement signed b y every menber
of the board o f directors t h a t t h e y would reform their
conduct, a n d growing o u t o f that transaction there w a s
the
corréspondencs between/Utah branch o f the Federal Reserve
Bank o f San Francisco a n d the Stanrod Bank which indicated
to t h e C o u r t o f A v p e a l s ‘ n o m l e d g e

o n the part o f t h e U t a h

branch o f the condition o f the Stanrod Bank.
Then there w e r e o n e o r two other transactions, o n e
the failure o f the Stanrod Bank t o vay a
been p r e s e n t e d

draft which h a d

t o i t f o r paynent u o o n w h i c h i t h a d failed

to nemit, a n d which fact w a s within t h e c«nowledge o f the
Federal Reserve B a n ,

A l l o f those things nut together,

the Court o f Apozals held, constituted some evidence, a n d
enough evidence t o < o t o the jury, e n d the j u r y having

determined the facts, they ~ould not disturb i t a s a
question o f fact.
So m u c h f o r t h e G r i m m - A l f a l f a c a s e a s @ case.

e t

thins i t lsaves t h e l a w exactly where i t h a s always been,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

which y o u gentlemen « n o w a s e l l a s I, a n d that i s this:
When a

bank i s i n f a c t i n s o l v e n t a n d i s ‘cnown b y i t s

officers a n d directors t o t e insolvent, t h e creation o f
deposit liability b y that bank, w i t h <cnovledge o f its

condition o n the nart o f the officers and directors, i s
a f r a u d o n t h e dsvositor,.

A n y body that taxes evidence

by which that fraud w a s nossible t o b e committed, l i k e
the paver that w a s denosited a n d sold t o the Stanrod
Bank,

a n d takes

i t with cnowledge

o f t h e condition

of

the bank, a n d elso o f the fact that the officers and
directors o f that oank itself had *novledgs o f its inperty t o the fraud.

solvent condition, becomes a

That

has always beenthe lewand is still the law, as stated
tn t h e G r i m - — A l f a l f a c a s e ,

a

y judgnent t h e r e f o r e i s ,

as. I said a t the outset, that the Grimn-Alfalfa case
hue o o t cheng3d t a e l a w and w e must meet t h e question
you h a v e raised,
siderations.

i t seems t o 16, f r o m another s e t o f con-

T h e G r i a m A l f a l f e c a s e m a y b e quoted here-

after i n sone cases lize it, o u t i t i s not strong enouzh

in itself t o the change the very authoritative opinion
of the Supreme C

t

h

e United States i n favor o f t h e
to you; t h a t is, t h a t mere sus—


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

picion i s not enough, a

condition-of insolvency i n a

bank o r a condition o f suspicion i n a bank which i s bad
enough t o challenge t h e suspicion a n d alertness o f the

Federal Reserve Bank, will not b e enough, T h e r e mist b e
actual insolvency a n d i t must b e brought h o m e t o the Fed.
eral Reserve B a n k i n order t o create Liability:

T h e

Grimi-Alfalfa case, while i t may be cited t o a e that a
less decree o f *nowledge t h a n h a s heretofore b e e n supposed
to be, enough t o charge a
. ledge,

Federal Reserve B a n k with ‘now.

i s not enough t o overcome a n oft—reveated decision

of t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s
I: think t h e n e x t t i m e a

case arises

o n that subject,
i n any o f the

Federal Reserve Bansxs which involves this guestion i n
any o f its forms, t h a t i t ought t o b e regarded a s —

no

matter i n what f o r m i t arises o r where i t arises ~ — i t
ought t
o be regerded a s a n oovortunity t o bring about a
conference

o f latyers r e p r e s e n t i n g t h e banks,

a n d should

become, i f I may maxe a suggestion, what I think you would
' call a system matter, s o that from its inception clear
through t o t h e e n d i t c a n h a v e t h e a t t e n t i o n o f t h e e n .

tire system with a view o f getting,

i f y o u can ger, a

decision f r o m some other Circuit Court o f Appeals which


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

200
will clarify the atmosphere,

T h e decision i n the Grima-

Alfalfa case has n o t i n any decree affected t h e integrity
and validity o f those well established principles o f l a w
which I

think t h e Grimn-Alfalfa c a s e does n o t undertake

to alter, but may b e regarded a s having altered the s i t u a
tion o f the anplicationof those nrincioles t o these facts,
so I would sugcest t h a t t h e v e r y next time a
anywhere

case arises

i n t h e S y s t e m t h a t i n v o l v e s t h i s question,

that

it be made a System matter, a n d that from the very out—
set t h e Roane w e l d e d with a

view o f presenting i t t o the

last court that will hear it, the Circuit Court o f A p
peals,

o r the Suprene Court,

a s the case m y be,

T h a t

this precise question be extracted and made as much an
issué a s possible i n the case i n order that w e will g e t
an authoritative determination o f it.
ig not with the GrimnmAlfalfa case,

T h e difficulty

I t i s t h e difficulty

inherent i n the system, T a x i n g the law as I heve stated
it t O you, where a Federal Reserve Bank hes actual xnowledge o f the insolvency o f a nenber bank, i t takes b y
discount paper f r o n that bans, i t incurs liability.
Now that i s t o b e said o n the question o f a statute
giving t h e Federal Reserve Ban’ t h e right t o examine t h e


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

201
member bank a n d t o become acquainted w i t h t h e concition
of the meaber bank, a n d where t h e Fedsral Reserve banks
have access t o examinations m a d e b y the Comotroller a n d
by S t a t e b a n k examiners,

e v e n worsing

those examining bodies i n maxing a

i n concert w i t h

joint examination?

Does that attrbbute «xnowledge o f the condition o f a bank
to the Federal Reserve S y s t e m o f a xind that c a n b e vleaded i n a suit o f this sort? I
difficult and, perhaps, a
question w e s n o t r a i s e d

think that raises a

very parlous question.

very

That

i n t h e G r i m n - A l f a l f a case.

There

Was n o suggestion i n that record, o r i n any of the briefs,
that t h e Federal Reserve B a n o f San Fyancisco h a d a n y

‘cnowledge o f the condition o f the Stanrod Bank b y reason
of a n y examination i t had ever made,as a mere examination, T h e y attributed t o i t «xnowledge growing o u t o f
transactions w h i c h i t h a d with t h e Stanrod Bank but i t
never attributed t o i t a n y <novledge growing o u t o f its

function a s a n examiner, o r the fact that i t had examined
the bank, T h a t question i s going t o b e raised some time.
A suit i s going t o b e filed i n which t h e Federal Reserve
Ban's will b e held accountable »by reason o f the fact that
it has xnowledge which i t has gained through a n examination


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

of a bank, o r that i t ought t o have h a d it.

t h a t is,

thet i t ought t o have h a d knowledge i f i t had examined
the bank a s i t h a d power t o do. T h a t i s going t o make
it mare difficult. I
be conclusive. I

d o not mean t o sey that that would

think i t w o u l d n o t b e conclusive.

a

b

think i t is going t o make i t more difficult t o get b y a
court o n a motion t o arrest t h e case from t h e jury o n
question
evidence w h i c h w o u l d j u s t i f y s u b m i s s i o n o f t h e
to t h e jury.

C o u r t s a r e g o i n g t o raise t h e q u e s t i o n a s

to whether there i s n o t always s o m e evidence o f knowledge
on t h e p a r t o f a

Federal R e s e r v e B a n k w h e r e a

Federal

Reserve B e n k h a s b e e n e x a m i n i n g a n d h a s h e d t h e f r u i t s

of the examinetion made b y t h e Comptroller o r the State

bank examiners, as, the ease may be. W h e t h e r there i s
anything y o u could d o t o moderete t h e responsibility I
do not know.

T t i s a c u r i o u s k i n d o f responsibility.

You have t h e power t o examine a n d o b viously y o u have t h e
duty t o examine,

b u t y o u h a v e n o visitorial p o w e r i n t h e

sense that y o u c a n close t h e bank.

Y o u c a n expel i t f r o m

the Federal Reserve System i f i t fails t o live u p t o its
to
condition o f m e m b é r s h i p b u t y o u a r e n o t g i v e n p o w e r


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

203
y reason o f any condition disclosed b y such
close v a n k s b
an examinetion o n your part.

Y o u r power a s examiners

falls short o f being a visitorial nower, a n d yet i t i s
a Dower that i s very essential t o you i n order t o enable
you t o help banks f o r o n e thing a n d t o deal safely w i t h
banks f o r another thing.
You have that o w e r u n d e r t h e statute, I
44 w o u l d b e u n d e s i r a b l e

should think

t o s u r r e n d e r t h a t power, a l t h o u g h

it increases your difficulty i n defense w h e n y o u are
charged with heaving «knowledge i n any situation where yos-

session of m o vledge imposes liability. N o w , I am not
a oractical banker. I

can merely state t o y o u what t h e

orinciples o f l a w are,

A s I have tried t o think i t over

it seems t o m e that t h e only answer that there could b e
would b e t o p u t a

red ticket

every b a n x a n e x a m i n a t i o n

i n your o w n banks w o o n

o f ‘which, e i t h e r

b y the C o m p

troller o r b y the Federal Reserve Bank o r State Examiner,
or because o f the condition o f its reserve account, show.

ed that the bank was extended and i n trouble, a n d that
of
in dealing with a n y such institution a n abundance
offered
caution s h o u l d b e u s e d w i t h r e g a r d t o p a p e r
then f o r discount

o r a s collateral

by

t o the Federal Reserve


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Bank, T h a t i s a statement o f principle which i s very
easy t o mace a n d very difficult t o apply.

T h e »yroblem

you h a v e o f c o u r s e i s whether y o u s h o u l d p l a y h i g h e x e -

cutioner t o a bans that i s i n trouble —

a n d i s not i n -

solvent, but i s i n trouble ~~ but may get out o f trouble,
and m a k e a

catastrophe b e c a u s e

o f your xnowledge

o f the

bank b y closing its doors and refusing t o hely it. I
not t h i n k t h e r e i s a n y s e t r u l e y o u c o u l d apply,

do

Y o u have

got t o exerciss j u s t human judgement i n each o n e o f those
cases a n d continue constantly t o exercise t h a t judgment,
Doubtless i t may mean some losses t o the Federal Reserve
Bank, b u t those loses will b e moderated a n d m i n i m i s d f
i
care i s used,

I n m y judgment i t would b e very much b e t _

ger T o r y o u t o t a k e sgotie risks ¢

o s e s o m e monsy than

it w o u l d b e t o p u t t h e Fe@beral R e s e r v e B a n k i n a @ s i t u a

tion o f rigidity with regard t o bance that are i n trouble.
I should b e very happy t o answer any questions.
Governor Crissinger.
to b e insolvent,

I

n a

case w h e r e a @ bank p r o v e s

a n d there h a s deen indication a l l t h e

time that something i s going wrong, a n d the Federal Reserve B a n k neglected t o supervise t h e examination, w o u l d
you tell u s what position y o u would get into?


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

205
I thins failure t o examine i s just a s

bed a s that <ind o f examination. T h a t i s to say, where
you h a v e t h e » o w e r a n d d o n o t u s e i t I

think y o u w o u l d

be charged with responsibility j u s t a s though y o u aid
have cnowlecge.
Vice Governor Platt.

T o u l d that avoly t o your Nation-

al Banks a s well eas your State banks?
Governor Crissinger.

R i g h t i n the beginning o f the

Statute t h e Statute says i t i s for the purvose o f creating
a better supervision o f banking a n d a better system o f

banxing, o r something o f that cind. ,
Vice Governor Platt, Y e s , i t docs s a y that.
wir. Baker. I

would n o t s a y that i t wes t h e duty

of the Federal Reserve B a n s
aminations, a

t o conduct indevendent e x -

t h a t t h e y w o u l d b e held t o responsibility

for n o t doing that where examinations a r e veing made b y
others i f they are perfectly f r e e t o taxe those exanina¢iond. x

t h i n t h e statute gives y o u that ower.

Vice Governor Platt. Y e s , i t does,
S o that ‘there a Federal Reserve B a n k

iir, Baker,
relies u n o n Santee
office, t h e n I

e e

a n d revoft o f the Comotroller's

think y o u w o u l d w a v e a

nerfectly g o o d


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

alioi.
Governor Crissinger. A s s u a i n g that t h e renort o f
the Comptroller o n one o f these examinations does s h o w
a lax banking system i n the bank, a n d does s h o w that

thers are things going o n that are being criticised,
would i t b e the d u t y o f the Federal Reserve B a n k t o take
notice o f that fact?

‘ir, Baker. Obviously I think where you find i n the
Comotroller's report o r the Exsminer's report such conditions a s would put a n ordinarily prudent m a n o n guard,
that y o u are t h e n cherged w i t h a n y knovledge that y o u

might discover b y an independent examjnation.
Governor Calxins. I

would like t o ask a question

with n o regaré t o the cxind o f exanination y o u were just

speaking of. Inasimich as the Federal “eserve Banks o r
the F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B o a r d h a v e t h e v o v e r

t o accept t h e

examinations o f State and National devart-nents, a r e they
not charged ~ith responsibility o f determining whether
those examinetionsa are sufficient o r not, a n d whether t h e y
are a c c e p t a d l e e x a m i n a t i o n s ?

‘ Y e believe t h a t w e are. I

think i n reviewing the reports o f examinations that come
to us, mainly from State departments, a n d possioly i n
some cases from the National department, that we are


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

207
charged with responsibility o f determining whether t h e
examination i s a sufficient examination, whether i t i s
a dependable examination, a n d whether w e c a n accept i t
or not...

l s that your 26ea7
thin:

air. Baker. I

i n view o f the fact that t h e

statute gives y o u t h e option t o decice whether y o u will
reky u p o n t h e e x a m i n a t i o n

o f others, t h a t i t a l s o i m o o s e s

L
an obligation o n you t o determine whether that examina- |

tiln i s reliable, o r one that you can rely on.
Governor Gelxins. T h e other question that I have i n
mind, a n d I would appreciate i t very m u c h i f you would

elucidate i t for m y benefit, i s thse question o f how, previous t o the decision i n the GrimaAlfalfa case, insol-—
vency might b e determined o r should b e determined;

i n

other words, w h a t a r e the determining elements o r factors,
by which insolvency w a s determined i n the absence o f
the actual closing o f a n institution?
Mr. Baker.

O

f course t h e l a w i s verfectly e a s y t o

state, b u t t h e avplication i s egain difficult.

I n the

this
Grimn-Alfalfa case there never was, and has not t o
was
date been, a n y determination t h a t the Stanrod Bank
a n y determinainsolvent. T h e r e never h a s been t o this hour


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

tion that t h e Stanrod Bank was insolvent.

W h a t took

nlace there was t h e bans closed i t s doors; I

think i t s

elderly o r e s i d e n t g o t s c a r e d a n d i t s orincipal d i r e c t o r s
got t o g e t h e r

o n Thanxsgiving Day, t h e y decided t h a t t h e

situation was nretty dangerous, they did not want t o d o

anything wrong and they closed the doors, T w o or three
months after that had taxen place, when their assets had
obviously lost a great deal o f value, a schedule o f their
assets, with the appraised values then fixed, was exhibited
in the case and i t showed,

o n the basis o f the valuation

made t w o months after t h e banc closed i t s doors, t h a t

the bank could b e inferentially regarded a s having been
insolvent a t the time i t did close i t s doors.

B u t they

never d i d determine t h e insolvency o f the bank a s o f t h e

date when those drafts were deposited i n the bank,
Governor Calins. I
had i n mind, ir. Beker,

think y o u missed t h e voint I
I n practice w e may s a y that a

ban i s insolvent under t w o conditions,

F i r s t when i t

has committed t h e unmistakable a c t o f insolvency b y being
unable t o meet t h e cemands o f its devositors, A

bank

that cannot meet t h e current a n d local demands o f i t s

depositors i s an insolvent institution i n practice.
Secondly,

i t may b 2 Aetornined b y conetituted authority,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

209
such a s the Comptroller o f the Currency o r the State superi_ntendent o f banking,

t o b e insolvent,

to banks f r o m a practical point o f view I

B u t a s applied
do not xcnow o f

eny other kind o f bank insolvency excent those t w o kinds.

iy. Baker. I
would p e r h a p s
a bans

be a

think there i s a third sind, which
rare o c c u r r e n c e ; m b u t

y o u can imagine

i n such a n extended condition t h a t e v e r y member

of the board o f directors w o u l d feel hopeless about being
able t o rescue i t and yet b e unwilling t o face t h e music;
where y o u would s a y there w a s nothing t o d o but close

the doors, and they would s a y we know we have t o do i t
but w e are not going t o do it, w e just cannot face the
wrath o f this co:mminity.

W e will not d o i t today. M a y b e

something will happen tomorrow.

When a

bank i s i n a n

obviously hovelessly insolvent condition a n d yet they

adopt a Micawber attitude toward it, and put off the
evil d a y hoping t h a t something will happen, t h e n I think
you k n o w that b a n s i s insolvent.

Govermor drissinger. ‘ T h a t would y o u s a y a s t o the

effect o f evidence against a bank which “emanded and was
receiving a

large amovnt o f excess collateral f o r loans?

Would n o t t h a t b e a

fact t h a t w o u l d b e t a k e n a s c h a r g i n g


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

the bank with xnowledge there was something wrong?
Mir. Baker, W e l l , i t does not seem 6 0 t o me, vir. Orissinger,

I t may b e perhaps that I do not aovly that a s I

ought to,

Governor Crissingsr. I
criticism, through a

mean a bans that «cnows of

National B a n k Sxaminer,

o f that i n -

stitution, k n o w s i t i s very much extended, a n d because o f

that fact demands a large amount o f excess collateral, i n
order t o mace the oank a nreferred creditor? A r e n ' t
those some facts that would g o t o a jury t o determine the
question O f whether t h e ban’: i s o n notice?
wt. Beker,

J I shoul¢ thinz s o i f that were a n excen-

tional case; i f you made a n excention o f that dank a s
against o t h e r oan's.

Govermor Crissinger. T h e y a r e not exceptional cases.

There are a zreat many cases o f that kind, where the
Federal “eserve Banks d o *no™ that those banzs a r e largely
extended and, f o r t h e vurpose o f trying t o null t h e m
through t h e condition i n which they f i n d then, t h e y demand
large excess collateral, sometimes a l l o f t h e resources

of the dans, t o secure the dendihg
of the things —

s o a r

t h a t one

a t least i t i s s0 down i n Chio, i f I re-


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

ell
menber i t correctly — - which would reflect u n o n t h e ques—
tion o f xnowledge o f that bank's insolvency o r solvency?
bir. Baker. I

think i t would be, although a s I un-

derstand i t the Federal Reserve Banks, when they d o get
marginal o r excess collateral, g e t i t not o n l y t o secure
the existing obligations b u t future obligations a s well.
I think i f w e were arguing t o a jury w e might well s a y
that t h e reason f o r t h e excess collateral w a s not t o take

care o f this varticular claim, but that the Federal Reerve Bank w a s more o r less a

continuing creditor o f t h e

oank i n question, e n d the excess collateral w a s deposited
for that »uroose a s well, I

understand, f r o m something

wir. Mason said t o me, that banks very often, o f their
ow motion, deposit excess collateral a s convenience
for themselves,

s o that I

should think that was a more

or less equivocal circumstance i n eny varticular c a s e

where excess collateral was demanded, unless i t was done
regularly i n regard t o a bank o f which y o u otherwise h a d
snowledge o f its extended condition.
Governor Seay.

I t has really become a

banxing prac-

tice,
Governor sicDougel. R e q u i r i n g additional collateral
igs comnon banxing vractice.

I

t has always b e e n required


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2l3
by commercial banks, which have required a large margin
of collateral,

i n connection with advances t o other banks,

Governor Crissinger. I

understand that, but I am

inquiring about this because there are cases, about which

you gentlemen o f the Northwest ‘now, where nearly all
the p a p e r o f t h e b a n s h a s b e e n t a k e n b y t h e F e d e r a l R e serve Ban‘c, a t l e a s t v a p e r t h a t i s w o r t h anything,

and

yet that banc i s vermitted t o r u n and receive devosits.

ify. Baker.
is a

O f course, Governor Crissinger, that

different c a s e f r o m t h e o n e I

was discussing.

H e r e

are a

hundred m e a b e r banks.

comes

t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t B a n A , o r No. J , i n t h a t

hundred,

T h e Federal R e s e r v e B a n k

i s i n a different situation f r o m all t h e other

99 banks,

I t - says t o Bante A , " Y o u M u s t p u t u p m o r e c o l —

Lateral than anybody else i n this whole list o f a hundred banks,

i n or oportion t o the service that y o u get f r o m

this bank." I

thins that olaces you i n a prejudicial

position a n d I think i t would b e vrejudicial t o argue i t
to a n y jury,

Nom the condition o f the reserve account o f menber
banks i s a circumstence t h a t y o u are soing t o have t o
face before juries.

T h e statute makes i t obligatory t o


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

213

maintain those reserves, a n d a bank which over any sub—
stantial p e r i o d o f t i m e i s l o w i n i t s r e s e r v e s a n d s o m e -

times has a n overdraft i n its reserves, creates a situation that challenges the attention o f the Reserve Bank t o
the condition o f that bank, a n d i n some suit that w e are
soing t o have t o face some d a y w e are going t o have t h e
lawyer o n the other side g e t u p a n d produce i n court t h e
state o f the reserve o f the dank i n question a n d the
oyroumstance which w e ought t o have taxen notice o f
which ought t o have o u t u s o n our guerd,
The Chairman.

O f course t h e reserve banks a r e loan-

ing a hundred million dollars a n d i t i s natural I

think

for every banxing officer i n the Reserve System t o feel
safe i n observing t h e rules which have always aoplied t o
the loaning o f noney i n commercial banks.

W e have n o w

learned that those rules d o not aoply t o the Reserve
Banks because w e are charged w i t h certain special k n o w
which t h e c o m m e r c i e l b a n k n e v e r r e c e i v e s f r o m i t s
ban'csing customers,

a n d therefore

r e have z o t t o c o n

sider t o w h a t extent, u n w i t t i n g l y ,
up e v i d e n c e

~ e my

b e building

i n our o r m transections a n d i n our method

of conducting them which, even under the most excessive


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

care, w i l l ceuse loss 3

which would n o t

& couwlercial v a n s a tall,

y n a t I nove would

from the m s e t i n g h e r s t o d a y i s s o m e t h i n g l i x -

Here i s the question o f the @
Very: carefel. to-nave
WLLL n o t buildings

w w evicence arainst o u r -

Taen comes t h e question o f
reoort,

W

e

Giscussion a n d

to <vuide u s i n dseling vith thCigclosec. that
would n u t u s t o s o m e é x t e n s

o n notice o f

ties o f the ban,

additional collateral, “here
additional c o l l s t e r a l a b o v < e

f a c e amount

o f t h e vaper

Giscountsd, w h e r e i t rould aonsar t h a t v e a r e mating

by giving excsytional treat
Under t h e sen+ral f o r m o f

which many o f the banks have,
leteral

collateral

o n one loan must serve a s

o n other loans which they m a y inaxs, a n d

wnich maces securities h e l d i n custody f o r a nenbear ovank


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

in effect o f those securities f o r loans.
is a difficult question a s t o information disclosed
in connection “ i t h collections w e are making f o r
banks,

i n cases w h e r e ;

Gifficult t o get

paic, a n d which sometimes a r e held up. I

have a feeling

that w s have g o t t o have a V5T} w r e t u l r e v i e w f
o the
of reserve banxs 6

t o safeguard ourselves

rainst+ mMasing unnecessary records a g a i n s t ourselves.
It seems i n cases o f failed Danks o r where w e have e a r n
estly endeavored t o hely a member bank a t times, t h a t
our v e r y e f f o r t s
is a

i n that r e c t i o n m a x é u s Liable.

1 %

case o f where o u r liability increases w i t h t h e d e -

with ~ h i c h w
e concuct our dusiness increases,
so to speak,

w

e d o business blindly, without a n y

knowledge o f the condition o f the bank, a n d loen money
to ‘it, w e e

safer t h a n w e a r e i f w e x n o w all about it.

lie. Baker,

I s i t nossibdle t o ses difficulties a r i s —

ing o u t o f another situation t h a n ths crsation o f deposit
Llianility?

m e a ,

csemendsd e x c e (

f o r instance this: f
(

i

> p o s 8 42

y o u have
° c the


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

knowledge o f t h e extended condition o f the bank t o

Which you were giving accommodations was indicated b y
vour ¢emand f o r excess collateral, a n d were assisting
in c o n t i n u i n g t h a t f a i l e d b a n p e y o n d a

should have continued,

noint w h e r e i t

t o the orejwiice o f the general

ereiitors, w h o could thus assert their right t o the collateral held i n preference t o youe I

do not know whether

that i s a practical oroposition, b u t perhaps i f i t i s you
bankers have met it.
The Ohairman. 2

ur, Wyatt.

should think that i t would arise,

T e have a suit o f that xind now pend

Governor Harding. I

would l i k e t o a s k a

with r e c a r d t o t h i s e x c e s s collateral.

question

T h e banks

in

Aykoostook County, Maine, “hich i s ourely a n
section, producing o n e crop, potatoes,

u p t o last fall

were i n a very badly extended condition and had veen
for about f i v e ysars.

T h e Federal Reserve Bank o f

Boston, ever since 1919, which wes the last good year
hat they had, carried those banks along, a t times
carrying them for a s much a s @ million dollars, f o r those
little banks,

W e t o o k e x c e s s collateral,

They


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

OL?
managed t o get those loanc down, i n 1925, t o $750,000.
But i n 1 9 2 4 t h e y w e r e u p again, c a u s e d b y a

crop o f

potatoes t h e prices f o r which were a s l o w a s 6 0 cents
a barrel.

T h e condition o f those banks o a year a g o was

such that i f they h a d had another l o w priced c r o p o r

a very short crop those banks would. have been insolvent,
In other words, there was n o actual insolvency a t the
time, b u t t h e r e w a s p r o s p e c t i v e i n s o l v e n c y i f t h o s e

adverse conditions continued, F o r t u n a t e l y t h e y sold
their c r o p a t $ 6 a barrel, t h e y have all paid out, their
deposits h a v e i n c r e a s e d 5 0 p e r c e n t a n d t h e a u t o m o b i l e

agents a n d radio agents a r e traveling u p through there
and selling t h e m stuff.

T h o s e banks will certainly

be back s o m e time this sumner f o r more money. T h e y dontt
any o f them ove anything n o w , b u t I havé made u p m y mind
when t h e y c o m e b a c k t

w e will take excess collateral

right f r o m the start i

while t h e y are i n perfectly g o o d

condition, b u t while w e ere i n a position t o point o u t
that while w e d o not neec i’ ~

that they a r e liable

+o have a repstition o f that eaime thing
some b a d years, a n d those people m a y g o
Spend t h e money that they have made. I

want t o establish


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

als
@ precedent b y demanding excess collateral right a t
the start.

I

f there i s a n y objection t o the demand

for excess collateral against rediscounts w e will just
payable, a n c they c a n make » 15-day
paper a n d »,ut u p collateral

o n the basis o f one a n d a

half for one, o r something o f that. sort.

ur. Backer. I n order to get my own mind clear, the
excess collateral y o u are n o w speaking o f i s a n excess
of paper?

Governor Harding.
wie, Baker,

Yes.

O n the theory that i f hard times come

up there again you will have established the precedent?
Governor Harding.

I f the 1924 conditions had con—

s4inued t h o s e v a n k s w o u l d h a v e a l l b e e n i n s o l v e n t

b y this

time. Theyr liabilities were s u c h that t h e y could not
possibly h a v e n u l l e d through,

hice Baker.

Y o u would make this distinction:

I f

they offered Government bonds a s collateral y o u would
not want a n y excess.

Mr. Harding. W o , not o n Govemment bonds, but they
do not have Government bonds, A l l they h a v e g o t a r e t h e


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

notes

o f

f a r m e r s .

T h e farmers

Then your question comes d o m t o this:
o

any impute
t

growing o u t

h
Th

eral o f t h e k i n d

a

f ‘“<norLedgs against your b a n k
t v o u demand excess collat—

hich expsrience hes shown you

tendency t o get frozen f r o m seasonal causes?

I n answer

i s n o imputation

question T would s a y no, t h e

I think t h e »ropsr administration o f
your S a n k would require y o u

m

o

r

e o f that x i n d

of collateral, w h e n i t depends w o n anvthing a s seasonal
as t h e

success o f the votato c r o p i n Aroostook County,

Maine.

Governor
s

money not a g
a orao that

n the South, when danks lend

I

e croo,actually made b u t against

h

h o p e i s going t o b e made, t h e y always

Raker,
ie
S S

T h e y demand t h a t excess collateral b e -

nature

o f t h e colletsral r a t h e r t h a n t h e

*

condition o f the ban‘,
Governor “erding. H e r e i s another situation, a n c
nractical case,

T h e

of P u t n a m ,

@


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

230
donnscticut, got i n trouble i n Ausust o f 1924.

O n Wed-

5

nesday a f t e r n o o n t h e Bxanins

7

: ae

h

e previous

e x

aminations h a d
but t h e reserved were always cerried intact a n d the
paper

i t h t h e F e d e r a l R e s e r v ? S a n z w a s satisfactory,

it turned out + 0 b e good vaper because w e collected
practically a l l o f it. W h e n t h

they found that his weoulations, e s at f i z t h o u g h t

were about $40,000 and the National Bant-Zxaniner stated
thet a s far as he snev the oanc w e s solvent; that the
lossés that they h a d “is e r e d w e r e about $40,000, which
was i

t i e n e r e d b v ths surplus profit.

T h e checks

were beginning t o come i n through the Boston Bans t o b e
men dorvn thers s o
to bina. T h e Tiret d a y they
checxs o n @& ban’
they: had a n account,

i n Boston where

T h e second d a y they dicnit

money i n any b a n : account t o pay the checks with.

cheexs came i n i n increasing volume.
hac’ ¢ sinand p a y n e n t

tested non-payment,

morning.’

Y o u can see i f we

i n cash f o r those checks e n d p r o

~ e oulc have

e c . the ban’s wionday

T h e Banx Exeminer steted the i

h a d dis—


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

e321
covered losses amounting t o a hundred a n d twenty thous—

and dollars, but they still thought the bank was solvent,
He said they were going t o get t h e directors together
do somsthing. T h a t d a y w e had $43,000 worth o f checks
the bank which w e sent d o r m there.

W e had o u r agent

cars o f the checks
we had them
them/send i n some vaper, n o t b y way o f excess collateral,
but merely paper that ~ e could p u t t o their credit i n
case w e needed t h e funds t o p e y these current checks
that were coming in. T h e p o i n t Iwant t o >ring o u t i s

this:

T h e paper w e took was not paper that the bank

had taken a

day o r two before t h e y finally closec;

it

was n o t sight draft o r demand craft, b u t i t was paper
of the manufacturing c o n c e m w h i c h they h a d there f o r

over two months, a n d was renewal o f paper that they had
been carrying f o r a year o r 80.

W e toox care o f those

chects a n d finally o n Tuesday t h e bank directors closed
the vant.

W e had n o trouble w i t h the checks that w e got

on Monday oecause o u r

L

and they were sent back,

o

v h e r e protested t h e m all

T h e moins w a s thet w e had

@ little disoute trith the pecoxrle whose note w e had dis—


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

3

counted o n this iionday, They claimed that our discount
had Geprived them of their right o f offset; that they
hed a

deposit o f $4500 i n the Putnam Bank and that w e

had tacen $15,000 worth o f their paper; t h e y said i f

we had not taten the naper they woulc have had a n off
set against that bani: of $4500 that thet bank owed them,
y said our taxing t h e paper deprived t h e n o f this
right o f offset.

W e temporized with t h e m b y telling

that i f we aanaged t o collect our dest i n other
we would b e glad t o release the paper.

The

finally adjusted and we came out without a n y
loss,

i

t was a very ticklish situation,

A s I under-

stand i t , in the Grimm Alfalfa case the discounts were
demand drafts.
Yes,
Governor Hardin. T h e discount h e r e w a s not a

sight

ox demand draft but nart o f a customer's regular line
of paper. T

he bank h a d this varticular paper i n its

possession f o r o v e r t w o m o n t h s a n d i t w e s a

renewal

of

a loan that the dank hed been carrying for several months,
or pSérhens years.
tTconfess t h a t I. do not s e e any spe-


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2235

cial differsnee between the two casés, that i s to say,
you believed that this particular ban’t was insolvent
time y o u w e r e taxcing i t s vaper.

Governor Harding.
insolvent o r not.

W e dic not xnow whether i t was

W e were i n a bad fix, because the

. not n o w , T h i s m a n d i c not c e s a n y books

of these transactions, o u t a s cashier h e received deposits a n d nut t h e n i n his pocket a n d they were n o t s h o m
on t h e books.

T h e bans had a

liability w h i c h w a s n o t

shown o n its books.
Mr, { B a k e e

I

t i s ea difficult question.

elements aecessary for liability;

t

The

i F i r s t , the

bank must i n fact b e insolvent; second, i t s own officers
and Girectors must know it i s insolvent, o r believe i t
to be; third, y o u m s t knov both that the bank i s insolvent a n d that i t s officers x<now it.

I n the case y o u

officers and Girectors o f tne bank itself did not
cnor that i t was insolvent, d i d not believe i t was insolvent, but belisved otherwise.
Governor Zarding, T h e o n l y m a n who ‘cnew i t was i n solvent h a d s h o t h i m s e l f

i n the head a n d was then i n a


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

comatose condition.
Wir. Baker,

T h e case that y o u put plainly w a s not

the tind o f knowledges, a s a matter o f abstract law, that
covers,
fore a

B u t i f that case h a d ever gotten be.

jury, a n d they h a d had a l l the xnowledge produced

before them which you had, whether o r not t h e y would have
taxen the position that you should have know,

i s a ques—

tion that deals w i t h t h e human element a n d which n o one
can a n s w e r ,

Governor Harding,

O n t h e q u e s t i o n o f excess c o l .

lateral, i f a bans i n an agricultural region takes excess collateral o n a, farm crop which i e not produced,
why i s not t h e Federal Reserve B a n k clearly entitled t o
take excess collateral f r o n the bank whose entire loans
are with those farmers o n their crops?
Mr, Baker, I

think i t is. I

think wherever t h e

Cenand f o r excess collateral i s due t o the character o f

collateral that you are perfectly within your rights
and there i s n o indication o f «nowledge i n that demand
for excess collateral.
The Onairman.

I f i t were possible —

I

do not k n o w

whether i t would be,because practices o f reserve banks


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

differ cuite aaterial

t

h

deal differ i n the d i f

\ i s t r i c t s

were »~ostlidls t o p r e p a r é a

e situati

i

n which they

b u t if i t

statement w h i c h w o u l d m a k e

fairly clear what t h e »ractices o f each Federal Reserve

on these various noints, i f that could b e
in. £

shan:

i

t woulda d e illuminating

danger, a n y special danger t o b e guarded
against,

d o y o u t h i n s i t w o u l d b e possible f o r y o u t 9

review all o f them and give u s some sort o f suggestion
course?
seway o f a question
naire?

M r .

WA

2

things,, a
n
d if they ¥
some time with them. I

3 practical

G a n e

t h e s e

e n t t o him he and I could s e n d
think h e would d e glad t o d o

that,

The Qnairnan. T h a t i s exactly what I

had i n mind:

That w e arrange a t this meeting some scheme b y which
each F e d e r a l R e s e r v e B a n k c o u l d s u b m i t

accurate statemer

t o My. W y a t t

an

t h e i r attitude o n these matters,

how t h e y h a n d l e t h e n i n t h e ban'cs, a n d i n f a c t g e t t h e

saformation u o i n intelligible f o r m s o that y o u would
not have t o g o over a mass o f papers. I

was wondering


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

226-4227

whether ir, Wyatt a n d yourself micht n o t advise a l l o f

the Reserve Banks i n this natter.
I an wondering, a n d I a m willing t o
think o u t l o u d a b o u t i t , a n d s o m e o f t h e q u e s t i o n s I

ask M a y b e very foolish t o you practical benkers, b u t I
am wondering whether i t would b e »vossible t o nut i n the
pplication a certificate t o b e signed b y the avplying
anz that i t was t h e o m e r o f the paper.

The Cheirman. quite possible.
iit. Baker.

T h a t avoids t h e question a s t o whether

the paper i s there f o r collection o r whether i t i s »vaper

that i s owned b y the bank.

I n this case, f o r instance,

ifthe Grimm-Alfalfa paper had been sent to the Stanrod
Bank and the Stanrod Bank had Sent i t t o the Federal
Reserve B a n k with a statement o n the application that

it was the omer o f that paper, i t would have eliminated
half a

dozen confusing questions f r o m the case when i t

came t o b e tried.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

;:
nese M a t t e r s ,

BWorks pide CSens


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

200
Bans t o a

nenber b a n k w h i c h i s c l o s e t o t h e p o i n t o f i n -

solvency a n c vet i t b e a n incividual l o a n i n the sense
that

i t i s well s s c u r e d

have n o logs.

D o e s this m e a n that s u c h l o a n Shall b e

Made t o a bank which i s not safe, although the indivi-_
Cual loan may >
eserve B

a

D

o

n t’ sm a
:
u kme a

e

s i t mean that t h e Federal

loan,

o r according

t o the lan-

ge i n t h e Act, s h a l l e x t e n c t o 6 e c h imeinber b a n k s u c h

ts, a n d s o forth, a s may v e safely made? T h e
question t h a t i t raises i n m y mind is, under t h e various
circumstances t h a t l e a d t h e m e m b e r b a n c s

t o come t o @

Federal Reserve B a n s f o r accommodation, w h a t constitutes
a safe l o a n ?

Governor Strong,
with f r a u d w o u l d n o t b e

ofWa) this Grimm Alfalfa case eoplied they were

| with xnowledge that i t was cistinctly unsafe, t h e
Statute would not imoose any mandatory obligation t o make
@ loan u n d e r t h o s s circumstances.
wonder w h e t h e r t h e r e i s a n y t h i n g

Mr. Miller. I

mandatory there.

Mr, Baker.

n

i

_ T h a t statute has t o be


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Bok

read a c though i t was turned about, that the Federal
Reserve Banl’* s h a l l n o t refuse t o extend t o a menber
dation

ieee j

bank a m y discount o r advancement

o f accoumo/ o n any

other ground than that i t i s not safe o r reasonable.

The mandate i s that you are t o assist the Dank where 1 %
can s a f e l y a n d r e a s o n a b l y

b e dons, b u t y o u a r e n o t u n d e r

mandatory obligation t o assist bansxs i n all cases.
W h a t d o y o u s e y a s t o the distinction

oir. Mgller.
between a

Laan thet i s safe a n d a bans that i s not safe?

wr. Baker. I

do not think thet distinction i s there.

I think t h e reasonableness o f the extension o f the dis.
the advancement o f the accommodation h a s t o d o
condition o f t h e bank.
Willer.

ir. B a k e r

W i t h t h e c o n d i t i o n o f t h e bank?

Y e s . Obviously

that t h e y should accept a

i t w o u l d never b e

piece o f naper that w a s not i n

itself safe.

Wir, Miller.

O f course that i s done, t h e paper i s

not safe i n the sense that i t unquestionably will Ligqui-

Gate itself a t maturity, a n d the Reserve Bank therefore
demands woat i s called excess collateral, because
doubt a s to that paper.

I n addition t o that, ir, Baker,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

BoB
in connection w i t h this intsrpretation, a l l o f the paper
from a Meader b a n k comes i n

the wenber banx!'s endorsement, a n d the
minute i t exacts excess collateral docs n o t that s u g _

gest a question i n the mind o f the Fedsral R e
safety o f that banc?
Eotains 20%,
stiller,
Mr. Baker. &
not necessarily. I

Y o u thins, not?
think i t might i n certain cases, b u t
think G o v e r n o r C a l z i n t s o r o s o s i t i o n

illustrates t h e situation.

H i s Utah banx had

the center o f the district whsre everything w e s
and e v e r y t h i n g frozen,

a n d t h e d u t y o f t h a t Dans, u n d e r

this A c t a s a part o f the gencral fiscal agency o f the
Government, s e e m s t o a e t o have deen that o f ticing o v e r
het situation i n the national interests.

is the first duty o f that bank.

[ I think that

I t is a duty that car-

rics with i t the regoonsibility and lixelinooc o f loss,
and such loss a s the Federal Ressrve Benk o f San Francis—
co hés suffered b y reason o f
soread situation affecting that section,
seems t o m s a

;

it

that i s expected b y. the statute t h a t


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

. Reserve

B e n should

A

yh

m o s t that the

with t h a t s i t u a t i o n
reasonableness,
freasonable!

Fortun.

a s well

a s

any facts that Governor Cal<sins coulc s h o w
that t h e situation that havops L

in t h e Midcle West that

happened i n such and such a year, that t h e situation had
Changed favorably a n d h e could o n past history anticipate
a sufficiently favorable c h a n g e i n the situation t o j u s t

ify the extension o f credit, then I think that history
of what h a d happened i n the past w o u l d impose that
liability u p o n hin.

Governor Calzins. w i r , Bakor, I would lice t o say
vou t a l k a s i f y o u h a d b e e n r u n n i n g t h e F e d e r a l R e -

San Francisco curing t h e period t o w i c h
referred.

Y o u have stated t h e volicy followed
in that situation almost

actly. However, I

e x

would l i s t o return t o the c x rucial

question with which w e are dealing, a n d that i s what i s
ound upon which y o u must determine tna s o l v e n c y
or insolvency o f a member bank.

T h i s Grimm Alfalfa


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

*
case, a n c the other cases w e

hinged entirely u p o n the question
question w a s s o l v e n t

o r insolvent

at a

csrtain moment,

Now, Istated m y two causes for, o r my two cinds o f insolvency, a n d you added one more, I
that. I

o

realize satoree

f

am wondering i f you will under
Ban

insolvency under certain conditions a s you escribed, a n d

for the purpose o f illustration, I woulc like to say this:
We have another bank, a n d this i s a good illustration

of the point I a m trying t o mae,

i n the same t o m i n

which
which the Stanrod Bank i s located, t h e officers o f

were desparately incompetent. T h e bank was i n a terribly
over extended condition, i n fact i t found itself i n almost t h e same difficult situation i n which t h e Stanrod

president
Ban found itself, B u t i t happened that the
of t h i s ovank, a

man 8 6 y e a r s o l d ,

fortume, a n d that man said, "This |
close; I

is a

%

man w i t h a n ample

i s not going t o

have sufficient fortune t O ] g i e s

t

I
protect ell o f its depositors a n d stoczholders,

o
will

that I have
pledge, without a n y reservation, everything
+
this bank. "
o
f
depositors
and
creditors
the
to orotect


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

B25
Anc h e dic tha

T h a t bank tocay i s i n first class con-

dition a n d coesn!t o w e a cent t o anybody,
the condition o f a cank, t h e xnorledge o f

had, that ban't was
as truly insolvent a s the Stanrod Bank ever was, a n d yet
was insolvent.

T h i s i s a crucial question i n our

the member banks i n extended condition.
is i n a dangerous c o n -

dition first, because then we must

a d d i t i o n a l :

caution, a n d second, what puts u s o n notice that a a bank
is insolvent, because then w e must stop Mating a n y f u rre)

ther advances t o it. T h e whole thing boils itself dom,
in m y opinion,
this:

i n these cases a n d c o m e r a d l e cases t o

W h a t facts m a y w e apply t o A

or m o r e p a r k i c u l a r l y t h e insolvency,

I go bvack and s a y t h a h e r e a

aeons
o f a

t h e solvency,
meaber d a n k ?

w o < i n d s o f bank in-—

solvency known t o those w h o practice banxing,
insolvency a s e v i d e n c e d

O n e is

b y a n act o f insolvency a n d

second i s insolvency because o f t h e declaration o f

constituted authority, s u c h a s the Comptroller o f
Currency o r the superintendsnt o f banking, t h a t a
bank i s insolvent.

I a m still somewhat a t a

loss t o find


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

some Cebatable ground woon which w e may determine
a vanz i s insolvent,
£ do not t h i n

c a n b e any answer

there

each c a s e h a s t o s t a n d o n i t s

own facts.

I t i s just a

question o f exsrcising sound

judgment w i t h r e g a r d t o e a c h case.

Bank case.
do,

T a k e t h e Stanrod

Y o u recall t h e exact facts better than I

b u t someone

and dollars

sent

i n a

draft r

t o b e collected a n d +

ten

o r twelve t h o u s - ?

p r o c e e d s ranitted,.

They d i d not v e t t h e renittance
Governor Cglrins.

as would anpéal t o a jury a s
solvency b u t which,

as a

matt:

L

i

c n o t c o n s ti-

tute a n act o f insolvency, because a s you will recall,
was not yvaid was that a

junior

officer o f the Stanrod Bank h a c misapnliec t h e funds

provided t o meet the draft and the other officers held
back p a y m e n t

o f that draft i n orcer t o avply pressurs

to

the father o f the junior officer w h o h a d misapplied t h e
'

mace h i m c e t t h e m o n e y back.

That

was n o t i n fact a n act o f insolvency, b u t i t appeared
4o the jury a s such a n acte


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

While t h e exclanation
ressure veiling applied t

cord i n just that form, i t was a

a s t e n c e that was

known, b u t n o t n u t i n the record
aced facts that stood i n the
Circuit Court o f Appeals puts t h e m i n alongside o f o n e
draft f o r ten thousand dollars w a s sent t o

another s A

T h e trans—

the Stanrod Bank a n d n o remittance followed.
mitter o f the draft sent a

personal agent d o w n t o find

out w h y they didnit e e t their money.

T h e y were told
ould not

pay i t immediately b u t ~ould i n a fer cays,

I n a few days

But concurrently vith that, abouts the same
endeavoring to borrow $10,000
Court o f
meals n u t those t w o ‘ceirounss
att h e y were i n effect

the s a m e t i m e

the Federal’ Reserve Banx.

W h e n things

as that i t is n o t strange that a
as r e l a t e d t o o n e another.

m

e a

f o m a n e =

ju e g a r d s t h e m

I f y o u a r e unfortunate e n o u g h


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

4

to have those t w o things happen a t the
freedom o f y o u r j u d g m e n t

i s n o t a l w a y s eredited,

Governor Young. WNaturaliy Minneapolis i s very m u c h
interested

as w e l l a s w e c a n o u r s e l v e s

vent, b u t I thins I
reports
that I

W e attempt

t o work i t o u t

a s t o when a

bank i s i n s o l —

i n t h i s question.

can s a y with safety that s o far a s

o n National b a n k s a n d S t a t e b a n k s a r e c o n c e r n e d
have n e v e r s e e n o n e w h i c h s h o w e d a n insolvent

condition, even with 206 closed banks.

N o w that i s not

any r e t l e c t i o n

o n t h e Comotroller!s o f f i c e o r the National

Bank Examiner.

I t i s a n extremely difficult thing t o set

up l o s s e s

in a

bank unless t h e directors

o f that i n s t i t u

tion w a n t t o admit t h e losses.

ses,

S o f a r a s t h e Examiners!

r e o o r t s a r e concerned I

never
any
have/nad
think our bank could safely say that we
xnowledge

o f insolvency o f a n y o f t h e 2 0 6 banks t h a t h a v e


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

259-240

Let u s assume that a

man discounted a

note i n a

menber ban, vayable t o the bank, that they sent i t
we rediscounted it. 2

C

;

fense v e r y rell that h e had n i m

n o t e i n the

and could collect i t uvon himself,
far a s 9 9 yer cent o

é

up the

J I do not think, s o

notes that w e get a r e concerned

in the Ninth District, that we are assuming any liability.
But

Those veople have got to vay those notes. / in the transit
2
n
i
e tor T e y , a t t e n .
department
It think
there/bo liability.
Wir. Baker. I

c o not feel a s confident a s y o u seem

to feel ebout y o u r safety when i t i s a custo mer'ts o m
note that i s Cis counted.
Ssuopose h e has n o dealings w i t h
is simoly a

customer o f the bank

a negotiable instrument,

H e does n o t

Thet i s a cifferent question,
Governor Y o u n g ,

have t h e offset
anount t h a t

O n 9 9 » * r cent o f the notes t h e y

p

a

y down t o t h e

w e have

~josition where r e c a

s

h

e naper t o the Receiver
But


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

there i s another feature o f the situation that has
concerned u s a good deal,

W e are dealing w i t h a great

number o f banks t h a t a r e s l o w i n paying.

« I n the N o r t h

vest t h e grain trade i s financed b y the country elevators.
They d r a w a

draft

o n a

car o f w h e a t w i t h 6

bill o f l a d i n g

attached a n d send that i n t o u s for collection, t h e same
as i n t h e G r i m m A l f a l f a case.

T h e y d o not a s x f o r a n y

time credit, t h e y d o not a s c u s t o rediscount b u t simply

want u s t o prssent it, collect the nroceeds and place t o
their credit,

N o w i t seems

t o m e that there i s a

great

liability o n our part i n handling these non-cash items
and vassing credit t o a menber bank that v e are o n notice
is insolvent,

A m iI correct i n that?

wir. Baker. , Do y o u thins there i s a n y danger i f
you d o n o t v a s s c r e d i t

t o t h e menoer S a n k until after

tne collection i s made?
Governor Y o u n g . I
ITwould l i k e t o x n o w I

should t h i n k s o , T h a t i s w h a t
d o not x n o w whether

i t belongs

.

to the bank o r belongs t o the customer, H e r e i s a n insol—
vent ban< and w e have g o t t o find out t o whom i t belonged.

We are nandling millions o f dollars worth o f that every
day.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

B43

Mir. Baker, That does not seem to me to impose lia+
bility.

Y o u have d o n e what y o u were

are s e l e c t e d

a s t h e agent

t o collect t h e money,

Y o u have

turned t h e money o v e r t o the vernon y o u were authorized
I t certainly cainot

to t u r n i t o v e r to.

b e your d u t y

to g o t o the m a n w h o started that collection a n d tell h i m
that t h e agent t h a t h e vicked o u t a n d selected w a s not
worthy, t h a t y o u could not operave througan h i m and that
therefore y o u would have t o seex h i m out a n d turn 1 %
over t o him personally.
A n d there would b e n o liability i n

Governor Young.
that?
Mr. Baker. I

should n o t think so.

@overnor Young. ‘then I a m satisfied.
Mr. Beare. I

think i t would b e imoortant f o r y o u t o

get some concurrence,

i n m y judgment , I

to follow i t through a s y o u stated it. I

a m just trying
had not thought

of i t b e f o r e .

Governor Seay,

N o t t o multiply suppositious cases,

but along t h e lines o f Governor

L

k i n q u i r y as to

what definite thing constitutse notice o f insolvency,
as-—
when t h e Comotroller's examiner veports t h a t h e has


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

245

certained t h a t t h e d o u b t f u l v a p e r

i n the b a n k i s more

than sufficient t o wipe out the capital o f the bank,
and yet t h e Comptroller h a s taken n o steps t o close that
bank, w o u l d that constitute,
of insolvency,

i n your opinion, n o t i c e

o r merely evidence o f insulvency?

Mr. Baker. I

should think that t h e wiping o u t o f

the complets capital a n d surplus o f a vank would b e s o

striking a suggestion that i t rrould impose the duty
upon y o u o f a s s u r i n g y o u r s e l f

o f conditions

b y proper

do not think the impairment of capital

inquiry, I

would b e enough t o put y o u o n inquiry. I

a m surprised

that n o Comptroller's report ever showed that. W h e n you
speak o f never h a v i n g s e e n a
solvent condition,

report w h i c h s h o w e d a n i n -

i t seems t o m e o f course t h a t t h a t

is s o because i f t h e E x a m i n e r ' s r e o o r t s h o w e d i n s o l v e n c y
the C o m o t r o l l e r w o u l d c l o s e t h a t b a n k b e f o r e h e m a d e t h e
renort t o you.
Governor Y o u n g e G o v e r n o r S e a y w a s i n q u i r i n g a b o u t

doubtful paper. I

d o not k n o w whether y o u would b e justi-

fied i n calling i t doubtful paper, b u t much o f
the paver i n the Northwest i s paper that t h a t i s vory
to

adifficult/tell whether it is good or bad,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

It denends

Governor Young.

o n whose d o u b t

it

Y o u have t o wait t o s e e whether i t

is bad o r not bad. T y a t i s the only way y o u can deter—

mine whether i t i s good
denends

MT. B a k e r . i

o n whose d o u b t

it

is. C e r t a i n l y a Federal Reserve Bank i s not clothed

with such cnowledge o f the widespread clientile o f a
merber b a n < s u c h a s t o e n a b l e

i t t o assay a l l t h e c o m m e r

cial D a p e r t h a t i s vresented.

That is a

and y o u haventt t h a t information. I

human e l e m e n t

do not believe

the burden goes that fare Y o u r examination o f the bank
shows apparently g o o d paper a n d nothing about t h e paper
of
or nothing about t h e banks t o suggest t h e ~ossibility
I d o not think i t i s u p t o you t o
Es)
trace o u t each niece o f vaper a n d find out f o r yourself

it i s g o o d paver.

U n t i l y o u r attention

i s challenged

by something i n the bank which shows i t t o b e indulging
condition —
in a dangerous practice o r i s i n a n extended
are p u t
and i f that i s called t o your attention, t h e n y o u
on notice,
Governor Young,
department.

Y o u always have that i n the transit

Y o u cannot avoic notice.

I t i s right there.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

245
Governor M Dougal.

T h e practice established many

years a g o b y the Comotroller's Department, a n d I think
lixewise b y many o f the State departments,

t o determine

solvency o r insolvency, w a s first t o det«rmine a fair appraisal o f the assets a n d then t o find o u t whether those
assets, b a s e d o n that aopraisal, w e r e o f sufficiamt value
or,
known l o s s e s w e r e e q u a l

> ai

n o t h e r words,

i n amount

o r greater

i f
than

d e c l a r e d t o b e incapital a n d surplus then t h e | n k W y
N o w i t seems t o n e that a s the result o f this

solvent.

decision t h e F e d e r a l R e s
ibility t h a n e v e r b e f o r e
oredit

B a n k s have @
$

i n the

t o their m e n b e r oanks,.

I

e f

r e s p o n s —
extending

t seens t o m e also that

have b e e n
we o r o b a b l y h a v e g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a n ‘ve

a n d insol—
aware o f i n the matter V e t e r m i n i n g solvency

vency, I

about
think w e ought t o have sole understanding

that constithat a n d I would Llixe t o get your views w o n
tutes insolvency,

T h e r e have been times w h e n a bank i n

able t o vay a t the
@ifficult c i r c u m s t a n c e s h a s n o t y s e n

later,
moment the checks that were oresented, b u t hours
t o vay t h e m
or possibly t h e next day, t h e y have been a b l e
constitute i n I have « n o m c a s e s o f that sort that might


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

246
solvency according
but I

would like

t o t h e decision quoted i n this oninion,

k n o w J

c o n s t i t u t e s insolvency

in your o w n mind, M r ,
ir. Baker.

W o u l d y o u mind reserving that q u e s t i o n

until Governor Strong's suggestion i s carried out,
is that a n examination b e made o f the vractices o f all
the banks, w i t h a view o f inacing suggestions that will
protect t h e banks s o far a s they c a n b e protected i n
these situations? I

want t o include i n that t h e tradition-

al a n d e s t a b l i s h e d d e f i n i t i o n

o f insolvency a n d ascertain

if they apply t o the Federal Reserve Banks i n view o f
the facilities nlaced a t their disposal.
Governor wicDougal, T h a t would b e entirely satisfactory
46: We,

d s ehogla- Tike. t6.26..e Jittisc f u r t h e r a n d s a y

that m y experience o v e r a number d

years h a s been i n

accordance with that o f Governor Young. I
seen a
ed a

report

have never

o f t h e National B e n k Examiner w h i c h report—

case o f i n s o l v e n c y f r o m t h e s t a n d p o i n t t h a t I

have

pointed out, w i t h respect t o which w e have been called
wpon t o render a n y assistance, and, o f course, u n d e r

those circumstances, w e could not and would not d o it,
Governor Crissinger.

a n

b a n g o f that k i n d that


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

wes running along f o r t w o o r three years t o your xnowledge,
are a

i n a very extended condition; y o u know that things
little s l i p s h o d

i n t h e bank, a n d y o u m a k e n o effort

to a s c e r t a i n f r o m y o u r o v m e x a m i n i n g d e p a r t m e n t t h e c o n d i -

tion o f the bank, a n d don't y o u think y o u create liability
in that way?
wir. Baker.

Y o u cannot e s t a b l i s h i n s o l v e n c y

N o , y o u cannot, b u t y o u c a n

Governor Urissinger.
make y o u r s e l f n e g l i g e n t

i n that

i n n o t c h e c k i n g u p o n that bank,

can y o u n o t ?
Governor McDougal,

T h e r e a r e n o c a s e s o f that s o r t

where w e d o n o t c h e c k t h e m up.
Mr. Baker.

i

n t h e G r i m m Alfalfa c a s e w e were satis~

fied with the appraisal made b y the bank authoritieis —
Governor weDougal,
necessarily insolvency,

B u t i t does not constitute
A

hag demonstrated t h e fact,

s a

matter

o f fact experience

i n connection w i t h closed banks,

that their insolvency frequently i s not known before the
closing b u t c a n o n l y b e determined b y closing t h e bank
and t h e r e b y f o r c i n g t h e m t o maze

a n appraisal

o f the

assets o f the bank through a n outside authority, t h e b a n k


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

or somcbody

Vices Governor Platt,
is closed a n d they subsequently p e y ouly 4 5 t o 5 0 cents

on the dcliar, i t would seem t o indicate that the
must h a v e been insolvent f o r a

year, anyway, before i t

was closéd,
Governor wicDuvgal,

and directors themselves d o n o t admit insolvency a n d t h e
reoorts o f the Exeminers d o n o t s h o w insolvency.
Mr. willer.

D o e s i t not m e a n a little more than that?

Isn't insolvency something l i k e human death?

W e don't

have t o wait until somebody certifies t o t h e death o f a
man i n order t o satisfy ourselves that h e i s dead.
is a

question o f judgment

I t

o f value o f assets s e t elong-

side liability,

Mr. Baker.

I t i s a question o f judgment, u n t i l a n

act o f insolvency i s committed, a s Governor Calkins has
said.
Mr. Miller. I

rather refer t o your statement t o the

effect that a s the Federal Roserve banks legally a r e
equipped with t h e power t o inform theaselves a t first hand,

if they s o desire, o f the condition o f their member banks,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

BAD
they a r e i n a

position w h e r e t h e y c a n f o r m a

judgment

as

to whether o r not t h e bank i n question i s solvent o r insolvent,

o r ayproaching insolvency, a n d therefore t h e y

are not obliged t o wait until that fact i s declared b y
do not understand t h a t t h e declaration

some authority. I

+

of that fact b y a State superintendent o r b y the Comptrol—
ler o f the Currency makes a

bank insolvent.

I t i s simply

a public announcement o f the fact, m a d e u p o n his best

belief and judgment after a n examination o f the bank and
after certain facts have been brought

t o his attention,

or after s o m e a c t u a l a c t s h o r s t h a t t h e b a n k cannot v a y
its o b l i g a t i o n s a n d ,

as a

matter

o f fact,

i s insolvent,

think t h a t i s o e r f e c t l y true.

Mr. B a k e r . I

T h e

determination b y the Comotroller o r the State bank exam-

iner that a bank i s insolvent, m a y i n fact b e erroneous,
Mma gay lier, Y e s , i t may,
ir. B a k e r ,

B u t i t i s r a r e l y erroneous,

Governor S e a y ,

A j p u l d you thin

i t desirable

to

attemot b y statute t o define technical insolvency o f
a bank?

wie. Baker,

1 . do not think so. I

think t h e Supreme

Court o f the United States - - a n d I a m speaking n o w just


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

250
from general recollection —

h a s stated what constitutes

insolvency s o authoritatively, t h a s a statute could nowt
Clarify i t very much,

Governor Norris. ‘ T h e Federal Reserve Act, i n its
general title, states that there
supervision o f ban’cing, a n d then i t vrovides,

a s a condi-—

tion ‘of membership, that such bank shal]. likewise b e
ject t o e x a m i n a t i o n m a d e a t t h e d i r e c t i o n

o f the Fede

Reserve Board o r the Federal Reserve bank. T h e n as t o
orovides that w h e n t h e directors o f the
Federal R e s e r v e B a n k s h u l l a p v r o v e e x a m i n a t i o n s m a d e b y

State authorities, t h e y m a y b e accepted i n lieu o f examina-

tions made b y the examiner o f the Board.

Y o u do not think,

do you, that anywhere i n that act there i s any duty imposed u p o n us, o r even authority given t o us, i f we wanted
+o exercise,

t o constitute ourselves t h e pcwer a n d author—

ity t o d e t e r m i n e w h e n a

bank i s insolvent a n d t o t a k e s u c h

action a s would result i n closing that bank?

Mir. Baker, N o , c h i n k n e w x
was p l a i n l y p a s s e d f o r t h e p u r p o s e

exclude t h e banks f r o m the orivi :
system w h i c h d i a n o t l i

think thet statute
o f enabling youto

P f ments

i

p i n the


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

BOL
members; a n d when y o u have determined that y o u won't h a v e
a bank i n the System I think that i s a s f a r a s y o u c a n
gO,

T h e question o f determining t h e insolvency o f that

bank is, i n the case o f i+ n a t i o n a l b a n s placed u p o n t h e
Comptroller a n d i n the case o f a state bank upon the State
bank examiner,

b y authority o f Congress, a n d not u p o n

the Federal Reserve Bans.
Governor Norris.

O n e m o r e question,

a s t o banks

that are not o n the special examination list o f the C o m p
troller

o r o f t h e State departments T h e y certainly a r e e n -

titled t o a »presumotion o f solvency until they show some
evidence o f insolvency.

I f i n the course o f operations

of their transit department o r otherwise any suspicious
circumstances arise that give u s a doubt a s t o the condi-

tion o f a bank

2 t i s supposed t o be i n good condition,

we immediately request either the local chief examiner
or the State banking department t o make a special examina.
tion o f that bank; i f the circumstances that l e a d u s t o
Make that request a r e substantial,

while —

o r they think i t worth

i n fact, almost without exception they have

always made those examinations, t h e r e never h a s been a
case w h e r e s u c h

a n examination disclosed

t h e fact that t h e


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

252
bank w a s insolvent,
amount

o f pia: v e r

b u t i t shows that t h e r e i s a

3

i n which c e r t a i nP l o g s

certain

i s estimated,

d

o r

there i s a certain peper that i s slow, b u t the Comptroller
or the State department d o e s n o t regard that benk a s insolvent a n d does n o t make a n y objection t o the bank continuing i n business; t h e y m a y impose some conditions w i t h
regard t o a chenge o f officere o r a change o f policy o r
something o f that sort; b u t t h e y d o not report that b a n k
as insolvent, a n d i f that report appears o n its face t o
us t o b e a
authority,

fair a n d i n t e l l i g e n t r e p o r t , m a d e b y proper
a r e w e not absolutely justified

i n relying

o n

it?
Mr. B a k e z ,

E n t i r e l y so,

i n m y judgment.

Y o u have

met t h e e n t i r e b u r d e n b y y o u r action.

Governor Young.

I s m y interpretation o f the ruling

of t h e S u p r e m e C o u r t c o r r e c t , t h a t i n s o l v e n c y m a y b e d e termined b y t h e i n a b i l i t y o f t h e b a n k t o m e e t i t s d u e o b -

ligations?
Mt. B a k e r s

Y e s .

Governor Young.

T h a t i s correct?

Mx. Bexkers = Tere

Governor Young.

L e t u s assume that w e take t h e spe-


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

cific c a s e t h a t G o v e r n o r N o r r i s h a s cited. 1 E n e :

sume that w e find t h e assets o f the bank satisfa
but w e find that t h e bank h a s n o reserve, t h a t i t has
many c a s h i t e m s u n p a i d h i c h h a v e b e e n u n v a i d f o r s e v e r a l

days, haven't y o u got pretty good *xnowledge that that
bank i s insolvent f r o m a
words,

financial s t a n d o o i n t ?

I n other

y o u have g o t t o lend t h e m some m o n e y t o pay t h o s e

obligations.
The Chairman,

W o b a n k c a n p a y a l l o f i t s depositors

overnight i f they have a run.
Mr. weaker,

N o ,

i t is 2

look a t the bansx's assets;

question o f judgment,

y o u f i n c that those assets a r e

perfectly good according t o + t
ercise b u t the; c

Y o u

s

t judgment y o u c a n e x —

f i c i e n t l y f l u i d a n d flowing

+o meet t h e demands a s rapidly a s apolications a r e made,
then y o u can tide that b a n k over with perfect safety,
If you take a mistake where y o u have exercised reasonable
discretion, I
liability.

thins y o u have relieved yourself o f a n y

D o e s t h e t answer t h e question?

Governor Young, Y e s , I. thin i t does,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Mr.

Bakor: But the question I want t o raise, e n d I want t o
do i t f o r m y o m m information,

i s a

practical question.

situation would arise lice that i n the case

Suppose a

of the Stanrod Bank, a n extended bank where, d u e t o the
view o f the Circuit o f Appeals, t h e Federal Reserve Bank
had xnowledge o f the perilous, i f not the insolvent condition, o f the Stanrod Bank, i s i t imprecticable for the
Federal Reserve Bank, which i s appealed t o for assistance,
to s a y t o t h e bank, w i t h r e g a r d t o t h e p a p e r mresented,

"Where did you get this; h o w did you come t o have it?
Was there a n y deposit liability created a t t h e time y o u

got it, which still omists?"

A

n

d t o taxe only paper

which d i d n o t c o m e c o n c u r r e n t l y w i t h t h e c r e a t i o n o f a

condition
devosit liability after t h e dangerous/of t h a t bank w a s
known ?

I

s that imoracticable?

Governor Seay,

A s t o the existing deposit liabil-

ity, I think that i s impracticable; b u t i t certainly
is not impracticable t o require a

statement that t h e

paver was discounted, because w e have already done that
and d o i t now.

W e d o require t h e statement that this

paper h a s b e e n d i s c o u n t e d f o r s o a n d so, b u t w e d o n o t


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

now, a n d never have, n o r d o I believe h e s a n y Federal
Reserve Banc, required a n y statement a s t o the contingent
Sep0sit liability o f the aoplying bank.
wir. Baker.

S u c h a statement required might b e help—

ful but i t would n o t b e conclusive.

T h e Stanrod Bank

would undoubtedly have told the San Francisco Bank that
it w a s t h e o w n e r o f t h a t paper.
Governor B a i l e y , D i d n ' t t h e e v i d e n c e s h o w t h a t t h e y

never lost title t o that paper until they actually g o t

the money? D i d n ' t they have that xind o f a n agreement?
afr. Baker,

There is a

statement

o f that k i n d i n t h e

opinion o f t h e C i r c u i t C o u r t o f Aopsals,

o r something

that looks i n that direction i n the evidence; b u t i t i s
also i n evidence i h that c a s e that t h e Grimm Alfalfa Assoclation c n e w that that never ~"as going t o the ban’ f o r
discount a n d had cone nothing t o out t h e Federal Reserve
Bank o n notice t h a t t h e y h a d a n y c l a i m t o t h e vaver.

Governor Young.
said before,

F r o m a practical standpoint,

as I

i n our district t h e offsets a r e f e w and f a r

betreen, because t h e borrowers a s a rule a r e not heavy

depositors. W h a t w e d o i s t o just get i t paid down t o
the offset, get the money and turn the balance o f it back


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

to the receiver,

i n cases where w e are n o t g0i

it vaid out i n full, W h e r e w e think w e have the right
to collect from the banker, which may involve a hundred
dollars o r two hundred dollars, a n d i t i s a question o f
paying

a n attorney a

thousand d o l l a i s

t o collect t h e

$200, w e just forget i t and ‘ceep o n forgetting it.
Governor Crissinger. ‘ T h a t i s rather hard o n the at—torneys.

My. Baker.

Y e

Governor Hardin;

i

t i s g o o d for the bank.

W i t h regard t o the Grimm Alfalfa

case, suppose instead o f drefts t h a t they h a d made their
fifteen d e y note a n d nut t h e diafis u p a s collateral
for t h e note; t h e n t h e note w i t h drafts attached was sent
to t h e F e d e r a l R e s e r v e Bank,

T h e bank could have collected

draft just t h e same, a n a i t seems t o m

t h a t they

would have been barred f r o m maxing t h e plea that t h e F e d
eral Reserve B a n k h a d 7iscounted a

note o f a n institution

that t h e y k n e w was insolvent» h e y could n o t have said
that t h e bank was o n notice +
Me, Baker.

W h y not?

h i s w a s their »roperty.

I n the case a s y o u put i t they

deposited t h e draft a s collatcral security.
Governor H a r d i n g ,

B u t i f t h e y rade their fifteen-day


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

258

vote t o the Stanrod Bank, which discounted the note and
gave.them credit f o r t h e proceeds, a n d put u p a s col—

lateral the drafts, then they would send the note with
drafts a t t a c h e d

t o t h e Selt L a k e C i t y oranch o f the R e -

serve Bank o f San Francisco, t h e Salt Lake City bank would
give the Stanrod Bank credit for the proceeds o f the note,
and then proceed t o collect t h e collateral.
Mir. Baker.

H o w ~ould t h e Stanrod B a n k get title

to t h a t collateral i t h t h e reserve bank?

Governor Harding. ‘ h e n they discounted the note
to which t h e drafts were attached a s collateral.
Mr. Baker.

T h e n the Grimm Alfalfa Association n o t e

is itself discounted with the Federal Reserve Bank?
Governor Harding, Y e s .
Mr. Baker.

A n d carries t h e collateral w i t h it.

Governor Seay,

T h e note o f the menber b a n k i s dis—

counted f o r the menber bank a n d carries t h e assignment

of the Grimm-Alfalfa Association.
Governor Harding,

I n s t e a d o f putting t h e draft u n

they g e t t h e Stanrod Bank t o take their n o t e f o r fifteen
dayse

Governor Zailey,

T h e Court went s o f a r as t o say

that the Stanrod Bank was not rich enough t o loan $30,000.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

I think implication o f xnorledge i n
very remote.

T h e Circuit C o u r t o f Appeals

edeval Reserve B a n c h a d knowledge o f the
that t h e Stanrod Bank could not have paid the note
because

i t didn't h a v e m o n e y e n o u g h t o v a y i t , a n d

think that i s going pretty far.
Governor Bailey. O r d i n a r i l y i f notes o f that x i n e
come t o our bank w e give t h e m credit, i f t h e y have drafts
attached o f that ‘ind, b u t ~ e don't pass t h e money over.
ir. Baker. ‘ t h e case which Governor Harding h a s put
I have n o t gotten straight i n m y head.

T h e Grimm Alfalfa

Association maxes its own note for $30,000?
Governor Harding.
And discounts that w i t h t h e Stanrod
Banik.
Governor Farding. -Yes.

I t taxes credit f o r i t a n d

secures that note w i t h these drafts.
Mr. Baker.

t h a t relation does t h e Stanrod Bank have

to the Federal Reserve Bank o f San Francisco?

Governor Yarding,

T h e Stenrod H a n would send that

collateral note — -

With the collateral, t h e note and the
collateral’?


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Governor Harding.

Y e s , t o the Federal Reserve Bank,

which would immediately p u t that colleteral i n nrocess

of collection, a n d when they collected the collateral
they would p a y o f f t h e note.

iir. Baker. I

don't quite see that the fact that i t

was t h e note o f t h e Grimm Alfalfa Association which w a s
discounted would make i t a n y d i f f e r m t f r o m the draft o f

Side party, beceuse the note i s a collectable note;
the Grimm Alfalfa Association would have t o pay that
note unless i t was naid o u t o f the collateral. I

do not

see that i t would make a n y substantial difference whether
it i 8 a note o r whether i t was a

draft endorsed b y it,

There may be something nractical that I have missed i n
it, but I do not see that i t would b e differmt,
Governor Harding. S u p p o s e i t had been a case o f
bonds; t h a t t h e y h a d the bonds i n the bank f o r safekeeping,
the bank h a d sent t h e bonds t o the Reserve Bank and borrowed money a n d sold t h e bonds t o the Reserve Bank? T h e n
the m a n could s a y "Those a

n o t t h e oroperty o f the

bank; t h o s e a r e m y bonds. I

hac t h e m there f o r safekeeping

end they h a d n o authority t o negotiate them,"
man h a s gone ahead a n d made a

B u t i f that

note a n d nut t h e bonis u p a s


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

261
barred
from showing
the bonds,

wr. Baker, Y e s , I think h e would b e barred from
that.

T h a t i s not quits t h e questi

G o v e Harding.

The question that f a c
first b a n k o f discount a n d the customer.

N o w i f those

relations a r e fraudulent a n d t h e Federal Ressrve B a n k
has xnowledge o f t h e fraud, t h e n that transaction i s a
thing that becomes infirm.

i f I g o t o a bans a n d give m y

note for $30,000 and deposit Government bonds t o secure
that note; t h e y discount i t a n d dlace t o m y oredit $30,000
and fahl t h e né

s y , a n d t n e w a t the t i m e that I put m y

note i n there a n d they vut that $30,000 t o m y credit a s

a depositor that they were going t o fail, a n d that t hey
were insolvent, t h a t i s certainly fraud.
Governor Harding. I

can s e e where y o u might raise

the question that the bank hed denrived you of your right
of offset,

Governor Crissinger.
soes t o a question o f fraud, + t i
ever passed.

n é d i t i o n that nothing


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

wir. Baker, N o t h i n g e v e r passed.

V h a t they a r e

entitled t o h a ew b e c k i s their note a n d their bond a n d

have the deposit cancelled as though it had never been
I f that n o t e a n d those bonds h a d gotten i n t o t h e

made.

hands o f the Federal Reserve B a n k with notice o f fraud,
then t h e y a r e entitled t o come back f r o m the Federal R e —

serve Bank. a n d i f the Federal Reserve Bank, with ‘cnowledge o f the fraud, h a s disyvosed o f those bonds a n d
changed that situation, t h e y a r e liable t o make good
out o f their o w n f u n d s t h a t i s d u e t o t h e d e p o s i t o r

by

reason o f their cnovledge o f a n d varticipation i n the
T h e a t i s the w a y t h e proposition works

original fraud.
Out.

Mr, s&ller, W h a t i s going t o havpen i n the Grimm
Alfalfa case?

I s i t going t o b e anpealed?

Mr. Batter,

W e tried t o get t h e Suoreme Court o f t h e

United States t o take i t in. G o v e r n o r Cal*ins d i d not
think they would. I

think I

t o l d Governor Calkins I

thought w e had a fifty-fifty chance -—- that w e had better
than a

fiftyefifty chance t o get i t i n and a fifty—fifty

chance t o reverse i t after w e got i t in.
ir. Miller.

O n what grounds d i d t h e y refuse?


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2035
Mr. Baker.

T h e y never assign g r o u n d s w h e n they de-

cline a writ o f certicrari.
they t o o k t h

m

e

n

t

i d%

judgment i s that

w t e i n e d i n the opinion o f

the Circuit. Court o f Appeals, that the verdict o f the

jury was taken as a Special finding f a c t , and they
took that statement o f fact a s being some, evidence a n d

let i t g o o n the question o f fact.
Governor Crissinger.
you want t o bring u p a t this meeting?

I f not i t i s about

time t o adjourn f o r lunch.

(Whereupon, a t 12:50 o'clock ».m., the Conference
recessed until 2:30 o'clock p.m. o f the same ‘ay,)
the m e i t b e r s

o f t h e Federal Reserve B o a r d

retiring from the conference room.)

a n d ms. B a k e r


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis