The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Minutes for December 2, 1959. To: Members of the Board From: Office of the Secretary Attached is a copy of the minutes of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on the above date. It is not proposed to include a statement with respect to any of the entries in this set of minutes in the record of policy actions required to be maintained pursuant to section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act. Should you have any question with regard to the minutes, it will be appreciated if you will advise the secretary's Office. Otherwise, please initial below. If you were present at the meeting, your initials will indicate approval of the minutes. If you were not present, Your initials will indicate only that you have seen the minutes. Chin. Martin Gov. Szymczak Gov. Mills Gov. Robertson Gov. Balderston Gov. Shepardson Gov. King Minutes of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on Wednesday, December 2, 1959. PRESENT: Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. Mr. The Board met in the Board Room at 10:00 a.m. Martin, Chairman 1/ Balderston, Vice -Chairman Szymczak Mills Robertson Shepardson King Mr. Sherman, Secretary Mr. Shay, Legislative Counsel Mr. Young, Director, Division of Research and Statistics Mr. Hackley, General Counsel Mr. Farrell, Director, Division of Bank Operations Mr. Solomon, Director, Division of Examinations Mr. Noyes, Adviser, Division of Research and Statistics Mr. Hexter, Assistant General Counsel Mr. Conkling, Assistant Director, Division of Bank Operations Mr. Nelson, Assistant Director, Division of Examinations Mr. Landry, Assistant to the Secretary Mr. Collier, Chief, Current Series Section, Division of Bank Operations Miss Hart, Assistant Counsel Items circulated to the Board. been The following items, which had circulated to the Board and copies of which are attached to these minutes under the respective item numbers indicated, were approved unanimously: Item No. Letter to the Bank of Eldon, Eldon, Missouri, aPProving an investment in bank premises. ITIWITITTIT—F/7Om meeting 1 and reentered at points indicated in minutes. 12/2/59 Item No. Letter to the State Bank of Anoka, Anoka, Minnesota, approving an investment in bank premises. Interpretation of Regulation T (Item No. 3). 2 There had been distributed a memorandum dated November 30, 1959, from Miss Hart regarding an interpretation of section 220.6(e) of Regulation T, Credit by Brokers, Dealers, and Members of National Securities Exchanges, in connection with a proposed transaction. Miss Hart explained that a telegram had been received from the San Francisco Reserve Bank on November 24, 1959, asking that an answer be sent by wire "as early as may be convenient" to two questions concerning the application of section 220.6(e) of Regulation T to a Proposed transaction in stock of the Matson Navigation Company. Matson had offered to purchase and redeem about 45 per cent of its outstanding capital stock, which is registered on a national securities exchange, in exchange for stock in each of three other companies, plus cash; and stock in tvo of the three companies was neither registered on a national securities exchange nor exempted under Regulation T and did not, t herefore, have loan value for purposes of the Regulation. The telegram had asked (1) whether the San Francisco Bank was correct in believing that the proposed exchange would be a "recapitalization" under section 220.6(e), and (2) how the unregistered, nonexempted shares received in exchange for the Matson stock were to be treated under the Regulation. -3- 12/2/59 On the first question, the Legal Division believed that the San Francisco Bank was correct in concluding that the proposed exchange 'would meet any ordinary definition of "recapitalization" and that the term as used in the Regulation was not intended to have any unusual OX technical significance. The answer to the second question fell into two parts: What happened during the 60-day period stipulated in section 220.6(e) of Regulation T, and what happened after the 60 daYs had passed. Bank In this connection, the San Francisco Reserve had asked whether the language of section 220.6(e) meant that after gn the -,,-day period ended the securities acquired in exchange for Matson stock would no longer have loan value in the account, so that an account which had been fully margined might become undermargined or the status an undermargined account would worsen. The draft reply telegram to the Reserve Bank stated that this result was required by the Regulation. were However, it was not entirely clear whether the securities to be treated in all respects as registered securities during the 60-day Period, that is to say, whether they would have loan value in the account 'baring that time. The recommendation of the Legal Division was that the Board take the position that the securities acquired in exchange could be treated, under Regulation T, as registered securities for 60 daYs following their acquisition. Mr. Molony, Assistant to the Board, entered the room at this Point. 12/2/59 -4Governor Mills commented that he had some concern about the status of the unregistered stock in a margin account following expiration of the 60-day period, since at the end of this period the stock vould no longer be treated as registered stock, and he raised the question whether a debtor should be penalized by circumstances beyond his control at the end of the 60-day period. Mr. Solomon observed that section 220.6(e) offers "a two-way street." Although there is a disadvantage in the securities becoming u nregistered following termination of the 60-day period, thereby reducing tha loan value in the account, there is an offsetting advantage in that the security is released from all limitations with respect to withdrawal and substitution. The Chairman withdrew from the meeting during the foregoing dis- In further comments, Mr. Solomon stated that the investor could sell the securities and use the proceeds to build up the account to a stronger position. the After noting that the 60-day clause was included in Regulation as a means of providing a transition period, he commented that in this case there was no obligation on the part of the holder of Matson stock to accept the exchange offer. Should the holder wish to 'flaintain his position, he could simply retain his Matson stock. Unanimous approval was then given to the recommendation of the Legal Division that the Board send a wire to the San Francisco Bank in 12/2/59 -5- the form attached as Item No. 3, confirming the interpretation (1) that the proposed exchange would be a recapitalization within the meaning of section 220.6(e) of Regulation T, and (2) that unregistered, nonexempted securities acquired as a result of the exchange would be regarded under the Regulation as registered securities for 60 days following their acquisition and as unregistered, nonexempted securities thereafter. Messrs. Hexter and Nelson and Miss Hart withdrew from the meeting at this point. Letter to Senator Douglas. There had been distributed under date of November 24, 1959, a memorandum from Mr. Noyes submitting a draft of letter to Senator Douglas, Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee, concerning the relationship of monetary policy to imperfections in the pricing mechanism and periodic surges in the demand for loanable funds from the private sector. Mr. Noyes pointed out that Senator Douglas had not requested Board comment on his letter ot November 5, 1959, in which he expressed aPPraciation for the Boardts contribution to the Joint Ecomomic Committee's study of employment growth, and price levels. However, MI% Riefler felt that it might be desirable to send a letter along the lines of the draft, and it was believed that the staff of the Committee would welcome such a letter. 12/2/59 -6The Chairman having reentered the room, Governor Balderston noted that the Board members had not yet commented on the proposed letter. The Chairman then called for such comments, observing that although a letter was not required it could be helpful. Following certain comments by the Board members, the Chairman Pointed out that the studies of the Joint Economic Committee were published and circulated to a wide audience and could not fail to leave a strong impression. This being the case, he saw merit in presenting the views that would be set forth in the proposed letter. Following further comments and suggestions as to the wording of the letter to Senator Douglas, it was agreed that the letter should be redrafted to incorporate changes that had been suggested, with the und erstanding that the revised draft would be considered at the Board meeting on December 7, 1959. Applications to carry reduced reserves (Items 4 through 8). There had been distributed memoranda from the Division of Bank Operations dated November 6 and November 13, 1959, regarding applications by certain banks in Miami, Florida, Chicago, Illinois, and El Paso, Texas, to carry reduced reserves. It was noted that the Miami and Chicago aPPlications were similar in nature in that relatively small banks were involved when measured by demand deposits, including or excluding interbank deposits. It was also pointed out that the applications probably °uld have been granted prior to the July 28, 1959, legislation on member bank reserves if, in the Miami cases, there had not been the outlying 12/2/59 -7- area limitation in the law; and if, in the Chicago case, the Reserve Bank had not been reluctant to draw geographic lines to distinguish reserve city and country areas in that city. These were the first applications of existing banks since Public Law 86-114 was passed, Other permissions recently granted to carry reduced reserves having been for new banks in outlying areas, as was the case with the instant application of the Northgate National Bank of El Paso, El Paso, Texas. The major difference between the cases in Miami and Chicago was that the applicant Mimi banks were in the business and financial area of the city, whereas the Chicago applicant was at the edge of the city, with principal competition coming from Evanston banks that maintained country bank reserves. It was suggested by the Division of Bank Oper- ations that the Board's action on the Miami and Chicago applications be the subject of a letter to all Federal Reserve Banks. Mr. Thomas commented that the criteria listed in the memorandum relat4— Julg specifically to the North Shore National Bank of Chicago were likely to be pertinent under any standards finally decided upon by the Board. He also felt that the recommendation of the Division of Bank Operations that permission be granted to declassify all present reserve and reserve city banks with demand deposits of $25 million or less was a defensible position. He added that he thought it would be well to eend a letter to the Reserve Banks to this effect. 12/2/59 -8Governor Balderston remarked that the reference to $25 million On demand deposits seemed to suggest that size alone was regarded as an adequate criterion. Mr. Thomas replied to the effect that size might be quite a satisfactory criterion in dealing with rather obvious cases. In border-line cases, however, other criteria probably would have to be taken into consideration, and he contemplated additional study of such criteria by the staffs of the Board and the Reserve Banks. Governor Robertson then asked how long it would take to establish appropriate standards of general applicability, observing that every action taken on individual cases tended to defer the final soluti°n. to He suggested that a "crash program" be launched by the System formulate such standards, and Mr. Thomas replied that he thought aboutsix months might be needed. In reply to a question from Governor Shepardson as to What new statistical information needed to be developed, Mr. Thomas said it was not so much a question of gathering extensive additional information as Of exercising judgment and providing the Reserve Banks an opportunity to express their opinions. He noted further that the various criteria that might be applied in this connection could easily overlap. A discussiOn then ensued as to when turnover data would be available on an individual bank basis for calendar 1959. During the course of this discussion, Mr. Conkling observed that a major obstacle 12/2/59 -9- to resolution of the question of reclassification of member banks was that the individual Reserve Banks had differing ideas as to the way in 'which this problem should be handled. He indicated that the Division Of Bank Operations was attempting to clear up the noncontroversial cases, and in 80 doing to provide ground rules for the Reserve Banks. The more difficult cases could then be studied at greater length. Governor Mills suggested that it might be desirable, as an interim step, to permit any small central reserve city bank to drop back to a reserve city classification inasmuch as within three years the central reserve city classification would have to be terminated under the terms of Public Law 86-114. Further discussion followed with respect to means of expediting the staff study of general standards for the classification of cities and banks for reserve purposes, and with respect to interim procedures that might be appropriate pending the adoption of general standards. Chairman Martin then inquired as to the disadvantages involved, 8(1) far as 'working out general standards was concerned, of approving individual requests to carry reduced reserves on a piecemeal basis, and the reply by Mr. Conkling was to the effect that there would seem to be no serious problem. The Chairman then expressed the view that a piecemeal approach vould seem desirable unless serious handicaps were foreseen with respect to setting general standards. He added that he was not trying to rush 12/2/59 -10- a decision on this question, but it would seem desirable to get off "dead center." He added that the sending of a letter to the Reserve Bank Presidents, as a supplement to the Board's letter of July 31, 1959, with particular reference to applications by individual banks to carry reduced reserves would be agreeable to him. Mr. Conkling noted that the July 31 letter had advised the Reserve Banks that applications from member banks for authorization to carrY reduced reserves should be held up unless a real hardship was involved. If the Board should agree that member banks with demand deposits of less than $25 million should not be required to maintain reserves required of banks in the reserve city classification, there would be no need to limit applications to hardship cases. that He felt if a general letter were sent at this time, it would bring in a good many individual applications for reduced reserves. His view was that it would be desirable to relieve all banks having demand deposits °f less than $25 million of the reserve city reserve requirements. Mr. Farrell added the comment that if the Board was willing to accept a $25 million figure as a basis for authorizing banks with denland deposits below that amount to carry reduced reserves, a general letter of the type proposed would be in order. Chairman Martin said that if he were doing this on his own, he 140u1d send such a letter and stir up some applications. At this juncture 12/2/59 -11- his feeling was that the more that was stirred up in the way of such applications, the better. Governor Mills said that this would be making a dividing line of $25 million of demand deposits. He had reservations about setting such a size limit without considering other factors. Personally, he felt it would be helpftl to have the advice of the Federal Reserve Banks that would be encouraged by further study of the subject before the Board made a rule of this sort. In response to a question from Governor Shepardson as to whether he felt that 25 million of demand deposits conceivably might be too low for such a dividing line, Governor Mills said that his point was that other considerations should enter into a decision. The Board might come to a point of view that a dollar limit was not a satisfactory criterion. The type or character of business done was an important consideration, he said, and the mere fact that a bank was small in size was not necessarily a reason for classifying it d ifferently from a larger bank. Governor Shepardson said that he still was in favor of going ahead with the applications before the Board and with a general letter tQ the Reserve Banks that might invite further applications. Chairman Martin then suggested that the Board act on the specific requests of banks to carry reduced reserves in line with the memorandum from the Division of Bank Operations. The letter to all Reserve Banks /4as a matter of judgment, but he would repeat his view that the Board might do well to stir up some of these applications. 12/2/59 -12Governor Robertson said that he did not think the question of the letter to all Reserve Banks was important except that the Board Should get started on the job. This might be a way of moving ahead. Governor King said that he would favor approving the current applications for reduced reserves as recommended by the Division of Bank Operations. Set a He would still be inclined to leave out anything that 25 million limit unless the Board was absolutely sure that this would be a satisfactory criterion. He could see no merit in issuing a ruling which, after further study, might not be satisfactory. There- fore, he would not object to a letter to all Reserve Banks but he would leave out any reference to a definite amount as a guide line for classifYihg banks. Governor Szymczak said he would approve the individual applicati) ha before the Board and also the letter to the Reserve Banks as Pr°Posed, and he would hope that this would result in getting in some aPplications and getting along faster on the studies that the Board wished to make. Governor Balderston reaffirmed his view that the general letter should be sent to the Federal Reserve Banks. He would be happier if the letter were simply to indicate that the Board would be willing to consider a pplications from additional banks for permission to carry reduced reserves, rather than to try to set out a formula. Chairman Martin said that it was one thing to invite applications and to stir up discussion, and it was another thing to try to set a 12/2/59 -13- formula at this time. He was not suggesting a formula and he felt that the Board would have to deal with this problem on a piecemeal basis, but getting in more applications would help. Governor Mills commented that if the Federal Reserve Banks got the idea that the Board had set $25 million as the dividing line, they would tend to cling to that figure and that any bank that came in vould think of it as an "open sesame" to getting permission to carry reduced reserves. He thought it better not to cross this bridge at the present time. Mr. Farrell suggested that, as Governor Mills indicated, use Of the $25 million figure would imply that the Board had adopted a rule. 1118 opinion was that this would simplify the entire problem of carrying out the legislation and he would favor the Boardsa taking a position that any bank having less than $25 million of demand deposits should be authorized to carry reduced reserves. the If the Board took that position, staff could then proceed to work on the larger problem of classifi- cation standards. Further consideration then was given to sending a letter to all Pederal Reserve Banks informing them that the Board had granted permis8ion to two banks in Miami, Florida, and one bank in Chicago, Illinois, to maintain the same reserves as are required to be maintained by banks Outside central reserve and reserve cities. Following this discussion, it 148.8 decided to send a letter in the form attached as Item No. 4, as .4 12/2/59 , the Industrial well as letters to the Metropolitan Bank of Miami nal Bank of Chicago, National Bank of Miami, the North Shore Natio ssion and the Northgate National Bank of El Paso granting them permi to maintain reduced reserves. ctive Copies of the letters to the respe member banks are attached as Items 5 through 8. The meeting then adjourned. rdson today Secretaryss Note: Governor Shepa following the Board the of f behal approved on ifems: from Mr. Noyes, Adviser, Division Memorandum dated November 25, 1959, acceptance of the resignaOf Research and Statistics, recommending the effective Novemtion of Nancy H. Teeters, Economist in that Division, ber 25, 1959. an (attached Items 9 Letters to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago and Herbert A. d 10) approving the appointment of Jerry C. Bradshaw Dolowy as examiners. Secretary -"Jo, BOARD OF GOVERNORS 44400*** OF THE ,44 430t Item No. 1 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Nr *, 'A iR 4 4 44 *# 12/2/59 WASHINGTON 25. D. C. ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD 0 0 0 4.1.fttst .t14,44** December 2, 1959. Board of Directors, Bank of Eldon, Eldon, Missouri. Gentlemen: Pursuant to your request submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, the Board of Governors, under the provisions of Section 24A of the Federal Reserve Act, approves an ,nvestment in bank premises by Bank of Eldon of not to exceed 1 1068,750 for the purpose of constructing new banking quarters. It is understood that the investment in banking quarters Will be reduced by the proceeds of the sale of your present bank building. Very truly yours, (Signed) Kenneth A. Kenyon Kenneth A. Kenyon, Assistant Secretary. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Item No. 2 12/2/59 WASHINGTON 25. D. C. ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORREISPONDENCE TO THE BOARD December 2, 1959. Board of Directors, State Bank of Anoka, Anckal Minnesota. Gentlemen: Pursuant to your request submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System approves, under the provisions of Section 24A of the Federal Reserve Act, an additional investment in bank premises by State Bank of Anoka, of not to exceed $125,000, for the purpose of expanding and remodeling present quarters. It is understood that the additional investment will include architect's fees, the cost of acquisition of LI°t 4, and the net cost of acquisition of Lot 5 after disposal of Lots I and II. Very truly yours, (Signed) Kenneth A. Kenyon Kenneth A. Kenyon, Assistant Secretary. 4190 TELEGRAM LEASED WIRE SERVICE SYSTEM BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE WASHINGTON December 2, Item No. 3 12/2/59 1959 Merritt — San Francisco Reurtel received Nov. 24 in reference to offer by Matson Navigation Co. to purchase and redeem about 45 per cent of its outstanding stock for Shares of certain listed and unlisted stocks plus cash. You are correct in suggesting that (1) proposed exchange would be a urecapitalizationu under section 220.6(e) of Regulation T, and (2) unregistered, nonexempted securities received as result of such exchange by customers accepting Matson's offer are to be treated as registered securities for purposes of Regulation T for 6o days following such acquisition and as unregistered, nonexempted securities thereafter. (Sit;ned) iierritt Sherman Sherman BOARD OF GOVERNORS lzt4f,,,,,, to 444atrtz OF THE 4 ., FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM A* * 4 4 4 WASHINGTON 25. D. C. Item No. 4 12/2/59 ADDRESS OFFICIAL. CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD December 31 1959. Dear Sir: This is to supplement the Board's letter of July 31, 1959, with Particular reference to applications by individual banks to carry reduced reserves. For your information, the Board has granted permission to two banks in Miami, Florida, and to one reserve city bank in Chicago, Illinois, too maintain the same reserves as are required to be maintained by banks utSide central reserve and reserve cities. The applicants were similar in nature in that they were all relatively small in size when measured by demand deposits, either includ'g or excluding interbank deposits. Their applications probably would fie been granted in the past if in Miami there had not been the outlying :-rea provision in the law, and if in Chicago it had not been so difficult to draw geographic lines as between reserve city and country areas. The major differences were that the Miami banks are in the busi, _ the " ss and financial area ea of the city, thus raising the question as to the co mpetitive advantage over other banks in the same area. In contrast, tio Chicago applicant is at the edge of the city, with the major competin from Evanston banks that maintain country bank reserves. These were the first permissions granted by the Board to existing banks since the new law was passed. Other permissions recently IT':nted to carry reduced reserves have been for banks just opening for u lness in outlying areas. Very truly yours, Merritt Secr an, BOARD OF GOVERNORS 14 OF THE CI 04,4'4,, 4 4 4 s4„ .tt Item No. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 5 12/2/59 WASH I NGTON 25, 0. C. * * VP tt a! i II nit ADDRESS OfFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE il TO THE BOARD December 3: 1959 Mr. G. James Hughes, President, Metropolitan Bank of Miami, 117 Northeast First Avenue, Miami 32, Florida. Dear Mr. Hughes: Pursuant to your request submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the Board of Governors, acting under the provisions of Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act, grants permission to your bank to maintain the same reserves against deposits as are required to be maintained by banks located outside of central reserve and reserve cities, effec, t:ive with the first semimonthly reserve computation period uegirming after the date of this letter. Your attention is called to the fact that such perT&38ion is subject to revocation by the Board of Governors of he Federal Reserve System. Very truly yours, (Signed) lierritt 3henriaxi Merritt Sherman, Secretary. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE CO 40;0°4 r ;4 ft ti o * it 1. ' * * * Item No. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM WASHINGTON 25, D. C. ADDRESS 0 orriciAL TO THE CORRESPONDENCE aCIARD ' *t7v,kt kat „at -40o**4 December 3, 1959 Mr. Michael J. Franco, President, Industrial National Bank of Miami, Miami, Florida. Dear Mr. Franco: Pursuant to your request submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, the Board of Governors, acting Under the provisions of Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act, grants permission to your bank to maintain the same reserves against deposits as are required to be maintained by banks located outside of central reserve and reserve cities, effecve vith the first semimonthly reserve computation period ue ginning after the date of this letter. Your attention is called to the fact that such peris subject to revocation by the Board of Governors of wle Federal Reserve System. 6 12/2/59 Very truly yours, (Signed) nerritt Sherman Merritt Sherman, Secretary. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE Item No. 7 12/2/59 FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM WASHINGTON 25, D. C. ADDRESS orrIciAL CORRESPONDENCE TO THE EIOARD December 3, 1959 Mr. N. R. Oberwortmann, President, The North Shore National Bank of Chicago, Chicago) Illinois. Dear Mr. Oberwortmann: Pursuant to your request submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, the Board of Governors, acting under the provisions of Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act, grants Permission to your bank to maintain the same reserves against deposits as are required to be maintained by banks located outside of central reserve and reserve cities, effective with the first semimonthly reserve computation period beginning after the date of this letter. Your attention is called to the fact that such permissio,, is , subject to revocation by the Board of Governors of the r ederal Reserve System. Very truly yours, (Signed) Merritt Sherman Merritt Sherman, Secretary. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE te4"4, Item No. FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 8 12/2/59 WASHINGTON 25, D. C. 4 8 ACIORESEI OFFICIAL CORRESPONEHENCE TO THE BOARD Ltat * ' 284444 December 2, Mx. W. L. Sibley, President, Northgate National Bank of El Paso, El Paso, Texas. Dear Mr. Sibley: Pursuant to your request submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the Board of Governors, acting under the provisions of Section 19 of the Federal Reserve Act, grants permission to your bank to maintain the same reserves against deposits as are required to be maintained by banks located outside of central reserve and reserve cities, effective as of the date your bank opens for business. Your attention is called to the fact that such permission is subject to revocation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Very truly yours, (Signed) Merritt Sherman, Merritt Sherman, Secretary. 1959. 4196 BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Item No. 9 12/2/59 WASHINGTON 25, D. C. ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD December 21 1959. CONFIDENTIAL (FR) Mr. W. R. Diercks, Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Chicago 90, Illinois. Dear Mr. Diercks: In accordance with the request contained in your letter of November 27, 1959, the Board approves the appointment of Jerry C. Bradshaw, at present an assistant examiner, as an examiner for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, effective January 1, 1960. It is noted that Mr. Bradshaw is indebted to the Buckley State Bank, Buckley, Illinois, a nonmember bank, ln the amount of $2,800. Accordingly, the Board's approval of the appointment of Mr. Bradshaw is given with the understanding that he will not participate in any examination of Buckley State Bank until his indebtedness has boon liquidated. Very truly yours, (Signed) Kenneth A. Kenyon Kenneth A. Kenyon, Assistant Secretary. BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM Item No. 10 12/2/59 WASHINGTON 25, D. C. ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD December 2, Mi. W. R. Diercks, Vice President, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, Chicago 90, Illinois. Dear Mr. Diercks: In accordance with the request contained in your letter of November 27, 1959, the Board approves the appointment of Herbert A. Dolowy, at present an assistant examiner, as an examiner for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, effective January 1, 1960. Very truly yours, (Signed) Kenneth A. Kenyon Kenneth A. Kenyon, Assistant Secretary. 1959.
@FedFRASER