The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
t 609
Minutes for
To:
Members of the Board
From:
Office of the Secretary
January 4, 1966.
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.
Chm. Martin
Gov, Robertson
Gov. Balderston
Gov. Shepardson
Gov. Mitchell
Gov, Daane
Gov. Maisel
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11
Minutes of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
on Tuesday, January 4, 1966.
PRESENT:
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
The Board met in the Board Room at 10:00 a.m.
Martin, Chairman
Balderston, Vice Chairman
Robertson
Shepardson
Mitchell
Daane
Maisel
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Sherman, Secretary
Molony, Assistant to the Board
Cardon, Legislative Counsel
Fauver, Assistant to the Board
Hackley, General Counsel
Brill, Director, Division of Research and
Statistics
Mr. Farrell, Director, Division of Bank Operations
Mr. Solomon, Director, Division of Examinations
Mr. Hexter, Associate General Counsel
Messrs. O'Connell, Shay, and Hooff, Assistant
General Counsel
Mr. Sammons, Associate Director, Division of
International Finance
Mr. Daniels, Assistant Director, Division of
Bank Operations
Messrs. Goodman, Leavitt, and Thompson, Assistant
Directors, Division of Examinations
Mrs. Semia, Technical Assistant, Office of the
Secretary
Messrs. Forrestal, Heyde, Sanders, and Smith of
the Legal Division
Mr. Dahl, Chief, Special Studies and Operations
Section, Division of International Finance
Messrs. Lyon and Poundstone of the Division of
Examinations
Discount rates.
The establishment without change by the Federal
Reserve Bank of Atlanta on December 31, 1965, and by the Federal Reserve
Bank of Boston on January 3, 1966, of the rates on discounts and advances
in their existing schedules was approved unanimously, with the understanding that appropriate advice would be sent to those Banks.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12
1/4/66
-2Circulated or distributed items.
The following items, copies
of which are attached to these minut
es under the respective item
numbers indicated, were approved unanimously:
Item No.
Letter to Chase Manhattan Overseas Banking
Corporation, New York, New York, granting
permission to amend its articles of association
and to purchase shares of Banqu
e de Commerce,
Antwerp, Belgium. (The letter in the form
approved included an additional sentence
suggested by Governor Robertson during discussion.)
Letter to Chase Manhattan Overseas Banking
Corporation, New York, New York, regarding the
Board's letter of November 20, 1964, granting
consent for the corporation to purchase shares
of Banco Continental, Lima,
Peru.
Letter to the Chairman of the Senate Committee on
the Judiciary repor
ting on H. R. 10104, a bill
that would codify "the general and permanent
laws
relating to the organization of the Government of
the United States and to its civil
ian officers
and employees."
Letter to the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland
approving an annual depreciation rate of 10 per
cent to be applied against the allocated cost
of
the Schmidt Building (Fifth and Main Stree
ts,
Cincinnati, Ohio).
Application of Central Wisconsin Bankshares (Items 5-7).
1
2
3
4
On
January 3, 1966, the Board discussed drafts of an order and statement
reflecting the Board's denial on October 13, 1965, of the application
of Central Wisco
nsin Bankshares, Inc., Wausau, Wisconsin, for permission
to acquire voting shares
of Central National Bank of Stettin, Stettin,
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
13
1/4/66
-3-
Wisconsin, a proposed new bank.
At the conclusion of the discussion the
staff was requested to review certain portions of the proposed statement,
and revised pages had now been distributed.
The issuance of the order, and of the statement in the revised
form, was authorized.
Copies of the documents in the form in which
they were issued are attached as Items 5 and 6.
A copy of Governor
Mitchell's dissenting statement is attached as Item No. 7.
Section 301 determinations (Items 8-24).
Mr. Solomon referred
to the Board's decision on December 17, 1965, that, pending an over-all
review of general policy with respect to section 301 determinations in
one -bank holding company cases, temporary determinations would be granted.
There had been some uncertainty among the staff, he said, as to whether
the Board's decision applied only to applications as to which the staff
had already submitted recommendations to the Board or also to others
that had been received and were in process of analysis by the staff.
Three applications in the latter category therefore had been placed on
today's agenda.
Comments by members of the Board indicated that it had been
contemplated that until the completion of the over-all review temporary
section 301 determinations would be granted in all cases involving onebank situations without submitting the cases specifically to the Board
unless extraordinary circumstances were present.
confirmed.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
This procedure was
14
1/4/66
-4Unanimous approval then was given to letters granting temporary
determinations in two of the three cases on today's agenda.
Copies of
the letters sent to those two applicants (Miller Co., Tipton, Iowa,
and Plains States Financial Corporation, Omaha, Nebraska) are attached
as Items 8 and 9.
Secretary's Note: Attached as Items 10 through 23
are copies of additional letters sent subsequent to
this meeting pursuant to the Board's authorization.
Mr. Solomon stated that there were unusual circumstances, which
he described, in regard to the third application, from Motor Finance
Corporation, Westfield, New Jersey.
The Federal Reserve Bank of New
York recommended disapproval of the request for a section 301 determination.
The Division of Examinations considered the case close, and
although it had recommended approval, it might not have done so if
anything more than a temporary action had been at issue.
The circum-
stances were such that the applicant could have requested a limited
voting permit as readily as a section 301 determination.
After discussion bearing upon the likelihood of an early
opportunity for reappraisal of the over-all one-bank policy, there was
general agreement with a suggestion that a limited voting permit be
issued to Motor Finance Corporation as an alternative to a temporary
section 301 determination.
Unanimous approval was thereupon given to a telegram, in the
form attached as Item No. 24, authorizing the Federal Reserve Agent at
New York to issue such a permit.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
15
1/4/66
-5Messrs. O'Connell, Shay, Sammons, Goodman, Thompson, Heyde,
Smith, Dahl, Lyon, and Poundstone then withdrew from the meeting and
the following entered the room:
Mr. Young, Senior Adviser to the Board and Director,
Division of International Finance
Mr. Holland, Adviser to the Board
Mr. Solomon, Adviser to the Board
Mr. Partee, Associate Director, Division of Research
and Statistics
Mr. Eckert, Chief, Banking Section, Division of Research
and Statistics
Appointment of director.
It having developed that it would not
be feasible to appoint certain other persons about whom inquiries had
been made, the Board agreed that it should be ascertained through the
Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis whether Owen Meredith
Wilson, President, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota, would
accept appointment, if tendered, as a Class C director of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Minneapolis for the three-year term beginning January 1,
1966, with the understanding that if it were found that Dr. Wilson would
accept, the appointment would be made.
The Board also agreed that, in the
event Dr. Wilson was not able to serve, a similar procedure would be
followed with respect to Stephen F. Keating, President, Honeywell, Inc.,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Regulation Q.
At today's meeting the Board continued its recent
series of discussions regarding possible amendments to Regulation Q,
Payment of Interest on Deposits (with conforming amendments to Regulation D,
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16
1/4/66
-6-
Reserves of Member Banks).
The latest of various distributed memoranda
bearing upon the subject were one dated January 3, 1966, in which the
Division of Examinations summarized replies from the Federal Reserve
Banks to an inquiry as to the use being made by member banks of the
provision of Regulation Q under which a time deposit may be paid before
maturity to prevent hardship to the depositor, and one dated January 4,
1966, from Mr. Holland outlining what he termed the "90x90" alternative for
sharpening distinctions between savings and time deposits.
That alterna-
tive would (1) define as a savings deposit rather than a time deposit
any deposit that provided optional interim maturities or automatic
renewal dates that were less than 90 days apart; and (2) stiffen the
interest forfeiture in case of prematurity redemptions in hardship
cases to a maximum of 90 days' interest earned, whether paid or unpaid.
A draft of amendment reflecting this alternative proposal was distributed
during the meeting.
Comments today touched upon many facets of the over-all problem,
beginning with positions reported to have been taken by the Comptroller
of the Currency and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation with regard
to classification of funds of national banks in Iowa in the light of a
State law providing that any time deposit on which interest is paid at
a rate of more than 4 per cent shall be considered borrowed money.
During today's discussion Governor Mitchell expressed himself in
favor of dropping from consideration the proposal to amend the provision
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
17
1/4/66
-7-
of Regulation Q allowing for payment
of a time deposit before maturity
in emergency.
The information received from the Reserve Banks indicated
that relatively little use was made of that provision.
Mr. Hackley
agreed that there seemed to be no evidence that the provision gave rise
to any problem.
Comments were made also regarding the relative economic usefulness of various savings instruments, the classes
of savers whose needs
they served, and regional patterns in the use
of such instruments.
Governor Mitchell observed that certificates of deposit provided
for corporations a useful placement
of temporarily idle funds, not
available to them through passbook savings accounts.
He also believed
that savings bonds and certificates
were a useful device.
Therefore,
he could not subscrib
e to some of the recent proposals that would have
the practical effect
of preventing the issuance of such bonds or certificates.
Governor Daane concurred in the latter view and said he would
dislike to see the Federal Reserve inhibit the development of instruments
that would encourage
savings.
He did not feel that the use of savings
certificates would become too widespread or, if it did, that this would
necessarily be harmful.
However, he was somewhat concerned about the
substitut
ion of certificates of deposit for other forms of saving.
It
seemed to him that to allow a corporate treasurer to have the same rate
O n 30-day
money as on 90-day money put the Federal Reserve in the position
of being the guarantor of bank liquidity.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
He did not believe the Board
18
1/4/66
-8-
should stand aside completely and let the market forces take over; he
was still interested in the suggestion that time deposits be limited
to a single maturity, with no renewal option.
Governor Maisel cited the experience of the savings and loan
industry in providing a variety of savings instruments, which had been
largely discarded in the interests of simplicity and avoidance of public
confusion.
It seemed to him that the Board's regulations should facili-
tate the simplest possible savings structure.
Governor Robertson reiterated the view he had expressed during
other discussions that the only essential action was to provide for
distinguishing, on a rational basis, between savings accounts, on which
member banks were allowed to pay no more than 4 per cent interest, and
time deposits, on which they were permitted to pay up to 5-1/2 per cent.
He believed that this required two steps.
First, the penalty for with-
drawal of time deposits before maturity should be eliminated.
Second,
provision should be made that if a savings bond or certificate were
redeemed before maturity the rate of interest could not be greater
than the maximum rate permissible for savings accounts.
There ensued a lengthy discussion relating to the proposals
specifically before the Board, variations that had been suggested earlier
or were suggested at this meeting, the objectives of such proposals and
the validity of those objectives, the results likely to be achieved, and
the desirability or undesirability of such results in terms of the banking
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
19
1/4/66
-9-
system, competing savings institutions, and the public.
Consideration
also was given to factors suggesting a need for early action by the
Board and to factors counselling delay.
Reference then was made to the proposal, which the Board had
recently tentatively agreed to publish in the Federal Register for
comment, to cover promissory notes issued by banks in the definition
of the term "deposit."
Various considerations bearing upon the timing
of such publication were mentioned, and it was brought out that the
New York Reserve Bank had cautioned in a letter of December 31, 1965,
that an adverse money market impact might be occasioned by publication
of the notice, especially at the present time when the market was under
substantial pressure.
The Reserve Bank had suggested deferring the
announcement, or as an alternative, that the proposal be modified to
apply only to promissory notes and exclude repurchase agreements.
The
views of the Board's staff were divided on this latter suggestion.
The discussion turned to the question whether there had been
sufficient meeting of the minds among the members of the Board on any
of the proposals, except the proposal on promissory notes, to warrant
reporting to the interagency Coordinating Coumdttee in the bank supervisory area at a meeting to be held this afternoon that such proposals
were under consideration (the Committee members had already been furnished a draft of the proposal regarding promissory notes).
A suggestion
was made that the Board first seek the views of the Presidents of the
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
20
1/4/66
-10-
Federal Reserve Banks, who were to be in Washington next week for a
meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee.
There was unanimous agreement that a meeting with the Presidents
Should be scheduled.
All members of the staff except Messrs. Sherman and Fauver then
Withdrew from the meeting.
Appointment of Deputy Chairman at Atlanta.
The Board appointed
Edwin Irby Hatch as Deputy Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of
Atlanta for the remainder of the year 1966.
The meeting then adjourned.
Secretary's Notes: On December 30, 1965,
Governor Shepardson approved on behalf of
the Board a memorandum from the Division of
Research and Statistics dated December 27,
1965, recommending that an additional
economist position be established in the
Flow of Funds and Savings Section.
Governor Shepardson today approved on behalf
of the Board a letter to the Federal Reserve
Bank of Chicago (copy attached as Item No. 25)
approving the appointment of Dennis E. Beatty
as assistant examiner.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
t%
Item No. 1
1/4/66
21
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
• ituRts••
January 4, 1966.
Chase Manhattan Overseas Banking Corporation,
I Chase Manhattan Plaza,
New York, New York. 10005
Gentlemen:
Reference is made to your letter dated December 3, 1965,
enclosing a consent signed under date of December 3, 1965, on behalf
of The Chase Manhattan Bank (National Association), sole shareholder
of your Corporation, consenting to the amendment of the Articles of
Association of your Corporation to increase the capital stock to
$13,254,000 consisting of 13,254 shares of the par value of $1,000
each. The Board of Governors approves the amendment to Article
SEVENTH of your Articles of Association. Please advise the Board
of Governors when the capital increase has been effected.
As requested in your letter, the Board of Governors grants
consent for Chase Manhattan Overseas Banking Corporation ("CMOBC")
to purchase and hold, directly or indirectly, up to 50 per cent of
the shares of Banque de Commerce ("BdeC"), Antwerp, Belgium, at a
cost of approximately US$5,400,000, provided such shares are acquired
Within one year from the date of this letter. In this connection,
the Board also approves the purchase and holding of such shares in
excess of 15 per cent of CMOBC's capital and surplus.
The Board's consent to the proposed purchase and holding
Of shares of BdeC by CMOBC is granted subject to the following conditions:
(1)
That CMOBC shall not hold, directly or indirectly,
any shares of stock in BdeC if BdeC at any time fails
to restrict its activities to those permissible to a
corporation in which a corporation organized under
Section 25(a) of the Federal Reserve Act could, with
the consent of the Board of Governors, purchase and
hold stock, or if BdeC establishes any branch or
agency or takes any action or undertakes any operation in Belgium or elsewhere, in any manner, which
at the time would not be permissible to CMOBC.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD
or
GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Chase Manhattan Overseas
Banking Corporation
22
-2-
(2) That, when required by the Board of Governors, CMOBC
will cause BdeC (a) to permit examiners selected or
auditors approved by the Board of Governors to examine BdeC and (b) to furnish the Board of Governors
with such reports as it may require from time to
time; and
(3) That any share acquisitions or dispositions by BdeC
be reported under Section 211.8(d) of Regulation K
in the same manner as if BdeC were a corporation
organized under Section 25(a) of the Federal Reserve
Act.
Upon completion of the proposed transaction, it is requested
that the Board of Governors be furnished a translation
of the amended
Articles of Association and By-Laws of BdeC. If CMOBC acquires the
stock of BdeC through an intermediary corporation, please furnish
Pertinent details regarding the corporation, including copies of the
Articles of Association and By-Laws and a list of officers and directors.
Subject to continuing observation and review, the Board suspends, until further notice, the provisions of subparagraph (1) of the
third paragraph of this
letter so far as they relate to restrictions
on loans granted
by BdeC in Belgium in the currency of that country.
The foregoing consent is given with the understanding that
the investment
now being approved, combined with other foreign loans
and investments
of your Corporation, The Chase Manhattan Bank (National
Association), and Chase International Investment Corporation will not
cause the total of such loans and investments to exceed the guidelines
established under the voluntary foreign credit restraint effort now
in effect and that
due consideration is being given to the priorities
contained therein. The Board considers that compliance with the
Priorities expressed in Guideline 4 would require that total nonexport
credits to developed countries in Continental Western Europe not exceed the amount
of such loans and investments as of the end of 1965, unless this can be done without inhibiting the bank's ability to meet all
reasonable requests for priority credits within the over-all target.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(3
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 2
1/4/66
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS
OFFICIAL
CORREOPONOENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 4, 1966.
Chase Manhattan Overseas Banking Corporation,
I Chase Manhattan Plaza,
New York, New York. 10005
Gentlemen:
Reference is made to the Board's letter of November 20,
1964, granting consent for your Corporation to purchase and hold
approximately 51 per cent of the 'voting shares of Banco Continental
("Banco"), Lima, Peru. Subparagraph (1) of the third paragraph of
the Board's letter contained
the following condition:
"(1)
That CMOBC shall not hold, directly or indirectly,
any shares of stock in Banco if Banco at any time
fails to restrict its activities to those permissible
to a corporation in which a corporation organized
under Section 25(a) of the Federal Reserve Act could,
with the consent of the Board of Governors, purchase
and hold stock, or if Banco establishes any branch
or agency or takes any action or undertakes any operation in Peru or elsewhere, in any manner, which at
the time would not be permissible if Banco were a
corporation organized under said Section 25(a1;"
(underscoring supplied)
Mr. Roy C. Haberkern, of Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy,
counsel for your Corporation, has inquired informally whether the
underscored
portion of the above condition (which differed from
conditions prescribed in consents to acquire shares of a South
African bank and a Brazilian bank) indicated a change in the Board's
P°sition that loan limitations should be based on the capital and
surplus of CMOBC and not of the subsidiary banks (except with respect to the modification permitting a temporary suspension of the
re
strictions on loans granted in the country of domicile in the
currency of that country). It continues to be the Board's view
that loan limitations should be based on the capital
and surplus
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD
or
GOVERNORS Or THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
24
Chase Manhattan Overseas
Banking Corporation
Of CMOBC and not the subsidiary bank concerned. However, in order
that there may be no question concerning the meaning of the Board's
letter of November 20, 1964, the underscored portion of the subparagraph above quoted is hereby amended to read: "would not be
permissible to CMOBC."
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
21,
Item No. 3
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN
January 5, 1966
The Honorable James O. Eastland, Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
United States Senate,
Washington, D. C. 20510
Dear Mr. Chairman:
This is in reply to your letter of October 4, 1965,
requesting the comments or suggestions of the Board in regard
to H.R. 10104, a bill to "enact title 5, United States Code,
'Government Organization and Employees', codifying the general
and permanent laws relating to the organization of the Government
Of the United States and to its civilian officers and employees".
The Board has reviewed the proposed legislation and
favors its objective. As no substantive change in presently
existing law is contemplated by enactment of H.R. 10104, the
Board has no suggestions in regard to the bill.
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) Wm. McC. Martin, Jr.
WM. McC. Martin, Jr.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Item No. 4
1/4/66
26
WASHINGTON, D. C. 205151
ADDRESS
orruct.m. CORRIESPONOCNOC
TO THE HOARD
January 4, 1966
Mr- W. Braddock,Hickman, President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland,
Cleveland, Ohio. 44101
Dear Mr. Hickman:
This refers to your letter of December 20, 1965, about
allocation of the cost of the Schmidt Building (Fifth and Main
Streets, Cincinnati, Ohio) purchased by the Reserve Bank in
SepteMber 1965, and requesting approval of a 10 per cent rate of
depreciation on the building.
It is noted that the Bank proposes to allocate the purchase
price of the property on the basis of an appraisal made for this
Purpose in November 1965.
In view of the circumstances described in your letter,
the Board approves an annual depreciation rate of 10 per cent
to be applied against the allocated cost of the building.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
27
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Item No. 5
1/4/66
BEFORE THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C.
----------------1
In the Matter
of the Application of
1
CENTRAL WISCONSIN BANKSHARES, INC.,
WAUSAU, WISCONSIN,
for approval
of the acquisition of
voting shares of Central National
Bank of Stettin,
Stettin, Wisconsin,
a proposed
new bank.
1
1
1
-----------------
ORDER DENYING APPLICATION UNDER
BANK HOLDING COMPANY ACT
There has come before the Board of Governors, pursuant
to section
3(a)(2) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956
(12 U.S.C.
1842(a)(/)) and section 222.4(a)(2) of Federal Reserve
Regulation Y (12 CFR 222.4(a)(2)), an application on behalf of
Central Wisconsin Bankshares, Inc., Wausau, Wisconsin, a registered
bank holding
company, for the Board's approval of the acquisition
of up to 100
per cent of the 20,000 voting shares of the Central
National Bank of Stettin, Stettin, Wisconsin, a proposed new bank.
As required by section 3(b) of the Act, notice of receipt
°f the application
was given to the Comptroller of the Currency with
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28
-2a request for his
views and recommendation.
The Comptroller recommended
approval of the application.
Notice of receipt of the application was published in the
Federal Register on June 16, 1965 (30 F.R. 7770), providing an
°PPortunity for interested persons to submit comments and views with
respect to the proposed acquisition.
The time for filing such comments
and views has
expired and all those received have been considered by
the Board.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, for the reasons set forth in the Board's
Statement of this date, that said application be and hereby is denied.
Dated at 17ashington, D. C., this 4th day of January, 1966.
By order of the Board of Governors.
Voting for this action: Chairman Martin, and
Governors Balderston, Robertson, Shepardson, Daane, and Maisel.
Voting against this action:
Governor Mitchell.
(Signed)
Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
(SEAL)
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 6
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
APPLICATION BY CENTRAL WISCONSIN BANKSHARES, INC.,
FOR APPROVAL OF THE ACQUISITION OF VOTING SHARES OF
CENTRAL NATIONAL BANK OF STETTIN
STATEMENT
Central Wisconsin Bankshares, Inc., Wausau, Wisconsin
("Applicant"
), a registered bank holding company, has applied to the
Board of Governors,
pursuant to section 3(a)(2) of the Bank Holding
Company Act of 1956 ("the Act"), for permission to acquire up to
100 per
cent of the voting stock to be issued by the Central
National Bank of Stettin, Stettin, Wisconsin ("Bank"), a proposed
new bank.
Views and recommendation of su ervisory authority. - As
required
by section 3(b) of the Act, the Board notified the Comptroller
of the
Currency of receipt of the application and requested his views and
recommendation thereon.
The Comptroller recommended approval of the
a
Pplication.
Statutory factors. - Section 3(c) of the Act requires the
Board to
take into consideration the following five factors:
financial
(1) the
history and condition of the holding company and the banks
concerned.
(2) their prospects; (3) the character of their management;
(4) the
convenience, needs, and welfare of the communities and the area
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
29
30
-2concerned; and (5) whether or not the effect of the proposed acquisition
would be to expand the size or extent of the bank holding company system
involved beyond limits consistent with adequate and sound banking, the
Public interest, and the preservation of competition in the field of
banking.
Applicant became a bank holding company in September 1961
and presently
controls two banks, namely, the First American National
Bank, Wausau ("American National"), a commercial bank with total deposits
of $53 million at December 31, 1964,11and
the Wisconsin Valley Trust
Company, Wausau ("Trust Company"), a trust company with total deposits
of $175,000.
Trust Company is primarily engaged in a fiduciary business
and cannot,
under its charter, accept demand deposits.
su
bsidiaries are located in a common building
Applicant's
in the portion of the
City of
Wausau lying east of the Wisconsin River.
Preliminary approval of a national bank charter for Bank
has been
granted by the Comptroller of the Currency.
As proposed,
Bank will be
situated just outside the city limits of the portion of
Wausau lying west
of the Wisconsin River.
Although none of Bank's
20,000 shares has
been issued, all have been subscribed for by certain
d
irectors or officers of Applicant or its subsidiary banks. Applicant
states that
Bank will be opened for business regardless of the Board's
acp4
--on on this application, and that if the application is denied and
Bankt s organizers decide to sell their shares, they will give purchase
Pri°ritY to the present shareholders of Applicant.
lj Unless otherwise indicated, all banking data noted are as of this date.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
31
-3.-
Financial history, condition, and prospects of Applicant
and Bank. Applicant's brief financial history is satisfactory.
In the
four-year period ending December 31, 1964, the aggregate
deposits of its subsidiary banks increased from $35 million to
$53 million.
Based upon the sound condition reflected in Applicant's
balance sheet and the satisfactory condition of its subsidiary banks,
the Board finds
that Applicant's financial condition is satisfactory.
Applicant's largest subsidiary, American National, is by far
the dominant
bank in Wausau and in Marathon County.
In the past five
calendar years its deposits increased from $32 million to $53 million,
or 64 per
cent.
In the same five-year period the book value of
fiduciary accounts serviced by Trust Company increased from $27.4 million
to $28.5
million.
Both banks appear to be operating profitably.
The
Population in the Wausau area has grown from 42,197 in 1950 to
48,758
in 1960, and is presently estimated at about 51,000 persons.
Based on the
favorable growth prospects of the subsidiary banks and
the area they
serve, it is concluded that Applicant's prospects for
continued growth and satisfactory earnings are satisfactory.
Regarding the proposed new Bank, Applicant projects that it
will have
total deposits of about $4.7 million at the end of three years
of operation and
that it will show a net profit of about $11,000 for
its third year
of operation.
On the basis of these and additional
Projections set forth in the record, the Board concludes that Bank's
condition and its future prospects will be satisfactory.
Bearing on
Bank's favorable prospects is the fact that it is proposed to be
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
32
-4-
established on a tract of land owned by Employers Mutuals of Wausau,
a leading
writer of comprehensive insurance.
The company, with an
annual payroll of nearly $6 million, plans to construct new main
Office facilities on the site.
Employers Mutuals
There also will be developed on the
tract a 40-acre shopping center containing, among
Other commercial
outlets, a department store, supermarket, and motel.
The tract also
will contain commercial office space, a medical center,
and multiple
family housing units.
Although it is indicated that
the Wausau City
Council has approved the annexation of this complex
to the
city, and Employers Mutuals is expected to occupy its new
quarters in 1966, the cumulative effect of the complex is not expected
to be
experienced most strongly until after 1970.
As earlier stated, it is proposed that Bank will be
established even if the present application is denied. Since, as
1/
hereafter discussed, Bank's primary service area
will encompass
he abovementioned commercial development - a fact auguring well for
Bank's Prospects
- and inasmuch as Bank probably will be owned and
controlled initially by shareholders of Applicant if this application
is denied, and thus operated
in close harmony wiLn Applicant's other
subs
idiaries, the considerations relative to Bank's prospects as a
Subsidiary
of Applicant are not viewed as offering significant support
for approval
of the application.
,12h? area from which Applicant estimates that 75 per cent of Bank's
0!
I sits of individuals, partnerships, and corporations ("IPC deposits")
rlginate.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
33
-5-
Management. - Applicant's management is drawn primarily
from its subsidiary banks and, based upon the sound financial record
Of the banks, the
Board concludes that management of Applicant is
satisfactory.
Likewise, inasmuch as Applicant states that Bank's
management also will be drawn from Applicant's subsidiary banks,
and this
apparently regardless of the Board's action on Applicant's
proposal, the Board concludes that management of Bank will be satisfactory regardless of whether or not the acquisition is approved and
consummated.
Consequently, while considerations relating to Bank's
management under Applicant's plan of acquisition are consistent with
approval of the application, they do not offer strong support therefor.
iy_et
,Cop
.2._and welfare of the area concerned. -
Bank's primary service area consists of that part of the greater
Wausau area lying west of the Wisconsin River, extending from Bank's
proposed site some five to six miles north, south, and west, and
one mile to
the east.
The area encompasses portions of the townships
of Maine,
Berlin, Stettin, Marathon, and Rib Mountain.
The eastern
portion of the area, along the west bank of the river, contains
several large industrial plants, as well as some retail establishments.
Also along the river and to the west of Bank's proposed site are a large
number of
residential properties, and still farther west is an agricultural area.
Bank's primary service area contains about 24,000 per-
Sons, a majority of whom are located within the City of Wausau.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
34
-6Although recent growth in the area has been moderate, the prospects
are for rather
significant growth resulting from establishment of the
Employers Mutuals complex.
Applicant estimates that within ten years
after the opening of Bank the population in its primary service area will
be approximately 36,000, and that employment will increase to or exceed
8,600 during the same
time.
Two banks are now located in Bank's designated service area Peoples State Bank, Stettin (deposits of $3.7 million), situated six-tenths
of a mile from Bank's proposed site; and Citizens State Bank and Trust
Company, Wausau (deposits
of $15.5 million), situated about one mile from
Bank's
proposed site.
Four other banks, including Applicant's subsidiaries,
are located
outside of, but compete within, Bank's primary service
area.
Applicant's two subsidiaries are located within 1.8 miles of the
Proposed site of Bank, as is the third in size of the six competing
banks - First
National Bank, Wausau, which has deposits of $5.7 million.
Since there are
several bridges joining the eastern and western sections
f the City of
Wausau, any of the banks named would appear to be readily
accessible to prospective customers within Bank's designated primary
service area.
Applicant asserts that due to the small size of the banks
located in Bank's designated primary service area, they are unable to
furnish the specialized services which are, or will be, required by
heir
customers.
On the other hand, according to Applicant, through
Bank's affiliation with Applicant's two subsidiary banks, complete
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
35
-7banking services would be made available to the area's industrial,
commercial, and residential customers.
Among the services that Applicant
proposes to make available through or to Bank are computer processing
of certain loan
and deposit accounts, advice and assistance in handling
special credit problems, assistance in advertising, auditing, accounting,
and legal matters, and the availability of a full range of trust services.
A study of the record before the Board, including the character
of the area
facilities
primarily to be served by Bank and the banking
now available to the present and prospective occupants of that area,
leads to the reasonable conclusion that the major banking requirements
of the area
are presently being served, and that foreseeable requirements
can be met by
Bank, operating independently of Applicant's system,
together
with other of the area's banks.
Even though Bank might, as a
subsidiary of Applicant, more immediately offer certain of the services
Proffered by and through Applicant than would bc the case if Bank were
operated outside of Applicant's system, the Board is unable to find that
customers
any si
gnificant disadvantage would occur to Bank's prospective
from such independent operation.
With respect to the businesses and
individuals to be located in the proposed Employers Mutuals complex,
since Bank will be established in the complex regardless of the Board's
action on
prospective
this application, the probable benefits to
Occupants and customers of the complex from consummation of Applicant's
Proposal lend but slight support for approval thereof.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36
-8The same conclusion of minimal benefit from Applicant's
acquisition of Bank is, in the Board's judgment, equally applicable to
Bank's prospective customers other than those who would be drawn to
Bank primarily
because of the Employers Mutuals development.
These
customers will have not only the services offered by Bank, but they
Will have convenient access, as the Board now finds they have, to all
major banking services
through Applicant's two existing subsidiaries,
Which constitute the area's largest commercial bank and trust institution, both located
within two miles of Bank's proposed site, and to the
area's second largest commercial bank, with $15 million of deposits,
located within one mile of Bank's site. In addition, a number of the
banking services required by the area's inhabitants can be obtained
Within one-half mile of Bankls site from a bank with nearly $4 million
of
deposits.
On the basis of the foregoing, it is the Board's judgment
that c
onsiderations bearing on the convenience, needs, and welfare of
he
community and area concerned, while consistent with approval of
the application, lend no tangible support for such approval.
Effect on adequate and sound banking, the public interest,
and bankin
of s
head
com etition. - Applicant, in terms of aggregate deposits
ubsidiary banks, is fifth in size of six bank holding companies
quartered in Wisconsin.
Its present two banking offices, with
aggregate deposits of $53 million, represent, respectively, less than
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3'?
in the
1 per cent of the offices and deposits of all commercial banks
State.
deposits projected
Were Applicant's deposits to include the
for Bank's first three years of operation ($4,650,000), the percentage
at
of commercial bank deposits controlled by Applicant would remain
less than 1 per cent of all deposits in the State.
The six bank hold-
cent of the
ing companies domiciled in Wisconsin control about 8 per
commercial banks,
Offices and 35 per cent of the deposits of Wisconsin
and two other holding companies headquartered outside the State, but
cent of such
oPerating three offices therein, hold less than 1 per
commercial bank deposits.
On a State-wide scale, the acquisition here
extent of
Proposed would not, in the Board's judgment, expand the
by all holding
control of banking resources either by Applicant or
company systems operating in Wisconsin beyond limits consistent with
g competition.
adequate and sound banking or the preservation of bankin
ant's proposal,
The market area most directly affected by Applic
s
and in relation to which the Board has determined the probable effect
Applicant
of that proposal, is that portion of Marathon County which
of
has designated as the respective primary service areas of Bank and
APPlicant's two subsidiaries.
Bank's designated primary area, except
for portions of the westernmost boundary thereof, lies wholly within
the common primary service area designated for American National and
Trust Company, Applicant's two subsidiaries.
This area, common to
ter referred to
all three banks in the aforementioned respect, is hereaf
as the Wausau area.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
38
-10-
Within the Wausau area and in Marathon County, American
National is the dominant factor in the ccmmercial banking structure,
CS is its affiliated Trust Company in respect to fiduciary accounts.
American National's deposits of $53 million represent more than 50 per
cent of the total deposits, and nearly 58 per cent of the demand IPC
deposits of the 16 banks in Marathon County.
Its deposits are more than
three times greater than those of the County's second largest bank
($15.5 million), and nearly ten times greater than those of the County's
third largest bank ($5.7 million).
In the Wausau area, there are now located six banks.
These
banks hold, in the aggregate, total deposits of nearly $82 million and
IPC deposits of about $71 million.
The deposits held by American
National represent 65 per cent, respectively, of the aforementioned total
and IPC deposits, and 71 per cent of the demand IPC deposits.
Applicant
has stated that of American National's total IPC deposits, about
$12.5 million, or more than 25 per cent of such total, were estimated
to be derived from Bank's designated primary service area.
Thus, American
National derives in IPC deposits nearly three times the dollar volume
of total deposits projected for Bank at the end of three years of
Operation.
Applicant states that more than one-half of the near
$12.5 million IPC deposits derived from Bank's service area are accounts
ot other than large customers.
On the basis of the foregoing, the
Board finds that Applicant's system so dominates the banking structures
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
39
-11ly small
of Marathon County and the Wausau area that even the relative
increase in Applicant's control of banking resources in both areas
that would result from consummation of its proposed acquisition of
Bank would prove inimical to the preservation of banking competition
in those areas.
A similar conclusion was reached by the Wisconsin
Commissioner of Banks who recommended denial of the application for
the reason that its consummation "would give [Applicant] an increased
of
dominant position over banking operations within the immediate area
the City of Jausau" and "would represent a further detriment to the
best interests of the other independent banks operating within this
area".
Additional considerations relevant to the Board's decision
on this application are the extent to which competition between
by the
APPlicant's present subsidiaries and Bank would be precluded
comacquisition proposed, and the effect of such acquisition on the
petitive abilities of other banks in the Wausau area.
Inasmuch as
this proposal involves the acquisition of a new bank, no existing
Competition between it and Applicant's banks is involved.
Respecting
might
future competition between and among these institutions which
arise if this application is denied, the Board recognizes that the
institution are
individuals who would control Bank as an independent
at
the same time officers, directors, and stockholders of Applicant
end/or its banks.
While such affiliation might reasonably be expected
to preclude the future growth of any substantial competition between
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
40
-12-
Bank and either or both of Applicant's subsidiaries, the nature of the
affiliation that would exist if this application is denied is such as
to permit some competition between Applicant's banks and Bank.
In view
of the dominant position now occupied by Applicant in this area, action
by the Board that would preclude the development of even minimal future
competition would be contrary to the public interest, unless accompanied
by overriding favorable considerations.
No such considerations are found
to be present in this case.
The Board finds that even the slight stengthening of Applicant's
already dominant position that would occur upon its acquisition of Bank
Portends sufficiently adverse competitive consequences as to outweigh the
foreseeably slight contribution to the convenience of the communities
and area concerned.
On the basis of all the relevant facts as contained
in the record before the Board, and in the light of the factors set forth
In section 3(c) of the Act, it is the Board's judgment that the proposed
transaction would not be consistent with the public interest and that the
application should therefore be denied.
January 4, 1966.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 74j
1/4/66
DISSENTING STATEMENT OF GOVERNOR MITCHELL
Wisconsin
My dissent from the Board's action denying Central
Bankshares' application is based on two judgments:
first, the inability
t
of the Board, by its action in this case, to change, to any significan
second, that
degree, the competitive situation in the Wausau area; and,
assumption
the Board's action is premised on the unsupported and implicit
that Applicant's dominant position in the area is per se evidence of a
Monopolistic and predaceous operation.
I would agree with the majority
that the applicant has not established that the convenience and needs
Of the community would be measurably affected one way or the other by
affiliation of Central National Bank of Stettin with the Holding Ccmpany.
not hostile
However, I conclude from this that, since this transaction is
l
to the public interest, Applicant's business judgment and operationa
acumen should be permitted to prevail.
On the first point, Bank will open with an identity of the
and,
Corporate interest controlling the Holding Company and the Bank
sense between
therefore, there will be no competition in any meaningful
Bank and Holding Company.
It serves no useful purpose to pretend
Otherwise.
On the second point, the Board's denial of Applicant's proposal
the dominant
assumes a premise not established in the record, namely, that
se
Position occupied by Applicant's system in the Wausau area is per
evidence of a position hostile to the public interest.
It could have
service
been, however, that the dominant position reflected the superior
contradicted
Provided by Applicant's banks to the community, a fact not
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
42
-2-
in the record.
The Comptroller of the Currency presumably determined
that the banking requirements of the area to be served by Bank were such
that the opening of the bank would not produce an overbanked condition.
That decision is not subject to review by the Board.
However, under the
Bank Holding Company Act, judgments of the banking needs of the area involved, and of the probable effect of consummation of the proposal on
the adequacy and soundness of banking, bring into being a reconsideration
Of the need or advisability of permitting Applicant's ownership and
operation of a new bank at the proposed location.
In my opinion, before asserting that the technical assent sought
by the Holding Company was adverse to the public interest, the Board should
have held a public hearing on this application to elicit direct, pertinent
testimony and other evidence on the competitive issue.
Such a hearing
Would have supplied this type of evidence, regrettably absent in the record
before the Board, and perhaps would have enabled the Board to judge more
reasonably the question of whether Applicant's position in the Wausau area
is the result of a service rendition substantially superior to its competitors.
Absent evidence that this is not the fact, Applicant's operating
Preferences should not be impeded by unsupported administrative assumption.
January 4, 1966.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Item No. 8
1/4/66
43
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADORES!! OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 4, 1966
Mr. Wayne F. Miller,
President and Secretary-Treasurer,
Miller Co.,
Tipton, Iowa.
Dear Mr. Miller:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 3, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Chicago, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Miller Co. as a holding
company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Miller Co. is engaged in servicing some notes receivable and
holds some real estate; that it is a holding company affiliate by
reason of the fact that it owns 518 of the 1,000 outstanding shares
of capital stock of the First National Bank of Tipton, Tipton,
Iowa; and that it does not, directly or indirectly, own or control
any stock of, or manage or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
type, that Miller Co. is not engaged, directly or indirectly, as
a business in holding the stock of, or managing or controlling
banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust companies.
Accordingly, Miller Co. is not deemed to be a holding company
affiliate except for the purposes of section 23A of the Federal
Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need a voting permit
from the Board of Governors in order to vote the bank stock which
it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
44
Mr. Wayne F. Miller
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is under
review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is possible that
the Board's interpretation of the statute may be so modified that
companies such as Miller Co. would not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph of section 2(c). In that event,
the Board may rescind the determination referred to in the preceding
paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Miller Co. might be so engaged, this
matter should again be submitted to the Board for another determination
in the light of the new facts. A change in facts would include, among
other things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock even though not
constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 9
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
45
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 4, 1966
Mr. Sidney H. Sweet, Secretary-Treasurer,
Plains States Financial Corporation,
3528 Dodge Street,
Omaha, Nebraska.
Dear Mr. Sweet:
Reference is made to the request contained in your letter
of March 10, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Plains States Financial
Corporation as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands that
Plains States Financial Corporation owns majority control of a company engaged in the insurance and real estate agency business; that
it is a holding company affiliate by reason of the fact that it owns
925 of the 1,000 outstanding shares of capital stock of First
National Bank in Walsenburg, Walsenburg, Colorado; and that it does
not, directly or indirectly, own or control any stock of, or manage
or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation of
the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933, as
amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that provision
of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its interpretation
of that statutory provision in prior cases of this type, that Plains
States Financial Corporation is not engaged, directly or indirectly,
as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or controlling
banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust companies.
Accordingly, Plains States Financial Corporation is not deemed to be
a holding company affiliate except for the purposes of section 23A
of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need a
voting permit from the Board of Governors in order to vote the bank
stock which it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. Sidney H. Sweet
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
so
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
Corporal
modified that companies such as Plains States Financia
tion would not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under
the last paragraph of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may
rescind the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Plains States Financial Corporato
tion might be so engaged, this matter should again be submitted
facts.
new
the
of
light
the Board for another determination in the
al
A change in facts would include, among other things, any addition
control.
ting
constitu
not
acquisitions of bank stock even though
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
46
Item No. 104V1
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE HOARD
January 13, 1966,
Fostoria Corporation,
1200 North Main Street,
Fostoria, Ohio. 44830
Tr -County Financial Corporation,
1200 North Main Street,
Fostoria, Ohio. 44830
Gentlemen:
This refers to the request contained in Mr. Carter's
letter of December 15, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve
Bank of Cleveland, for determinations by the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System as to the future status of Fostoria
Corporation ("Fostoria") and Tr -County Financial Corporation
("Financial") as holding company affiliates.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Fostoria is an industrial corporation engaged in the business
of manufacturing infrared heating systems and lighting equipment
largely for industrial use; that Financial is its wholly owned
subsidiary created for the purpose of chartering a new national
bank, Hancock-Seneca-Wood National Bank (into which Tr -County
National Bank, Fostoria, Ohio, would be merged under the charter
of the former and the title of the latter); that Fostoria and
Financial will become holding company affiliates when the latter
acquires ownership or control of a majority of the stock of the
new national bank; and that neither Fostoria nor Financial will,
directly or indirectly, own or control any stock of, or manage
or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for determinations pursuant to that
provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
48
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
-2-
such companies, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
type, that Fostoria and Financial will not be engaged, directly
or indirectly, as a business in holding the stock of, or managing
or controlling banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
companies. Accordingly, Fostoria and Financial will not be deemed
to be holding company affiliates except for the purposes of section
23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. .371c) and will not need
voting permits from the Board of Governors in order to vote the
bank stock which they will own or control under the proposed plan.
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be so
modified that companies such as Fostoria and Financial would not
be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph
of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind the determinations referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Fostoria and Financial might be
so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board
for other determinations in the light of the new facts. A change
in facts would include, among other things, any additional
acquisitions of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Item No. 11
1/4/66
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL. CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 10, 1966.
Mr. Alfred E. Tonti, President,
Greater Ohio River Co.,
3035 West Broad Street,
Columbus, Ohio.
Dear Mr. Tonti:
Reference is
letter of December 21,
Bank of Cleveland, for
of the Federal Reserve
River Co. as a holding
made to the request contained in your
1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve
a determination by the Board of Governors
System as to the status of Greater Ohio
company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Greater Ohio River Co. is a holding company affiliate by
reason of the fact that it owns 47,643 of the 63,000 outstanding
shares of capital stock of First National Bank in Marietta,
Marietta, Ohio, and that it does not, directly or indirectly, own
or control any stock of, or manage or control, any other banking
institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
inconvenience
provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might
with its
e
acL1rdanc
your company, the Board has determined, in
of this
cases
prior
in
interpretation of that statutory provision
or indirectly
engaged,
type, that Greater Ohio River Co. is not
or
managing
or
of,
stock
directly, as a business in holding the
trust
or
banks,
savings
controlling banks, banking associations,
deemed to
companies. Accordingly, Greater Ohio River Co. is not
section 23A
of
purposes
be a holding company affiliate except for the
a
need
not
does
and
of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c)
the
vote
to
order
voting permit from the Board of Governors in
bank stock which it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mx. Alfred E. Tonti
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as Greater Ohio River Co. would
not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last
paragraph of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind
the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change
in such manner as to indicate that Greater Ohio River Co. might
be so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board
for another determination in the light of the new facts. A change
in facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
50
Item No. 1251
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS
orriciAL
CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD.
January 10, 1966.
Mr. Joseph Weintraub,
Chairman of the Board,
Atico Financial Corporation,
P. 0. Box 3131,
Miami, Florida. 33101
Dear Mr. Weintraub:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 8, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Atlanta, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Atico Financial
Corporation as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Atico Financial Corporation was organized primarily to own
title insurance companies and to carry on other business originating
and servicing mortgage loans; that it is a holding company affiliate
by reason of the fact that it owns 100,600 of the 200,000 outstanding
shares of capital stock of the Pan American Bank of Miami, Miami,
Florida; that is owns 502 of the 200,000 outstanding shares of capital
stock of the Mercantile National Bank of Miami Beach, Miami Beach,
Florida (these shares are to be sold on January 8, 1966); and that
it does not, directly or indirectly own or control any stock of, or
manage or control, any other banking institutioL..
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
Your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
type, that Atico Financial Corporation is not engaged, directly or
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
52
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. Joseph Weintraub
-2-
indirectly, as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or
controlling banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
companies. Accordingly, Atico Finacial Corporation is not deemed
to be a holding company affiliate except for the purposes of
section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does
not need a voting permit from the Board of Governors in order to
vote the bank stock which it owns.
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as Atico Financial Corporation
would not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the
last paragraph of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may
rescind the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change
in such manner as to indicate that Atico Financial Corporation
might be so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to
the Board for another determination in the light of the new facts.
A change in facts would include, among other things, any additional
acquisitions of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
53
Item No. 13
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
1/4/66
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 17, 1966.
Mr. Raymond Mason, President,
The Charter Company,
555 Osceola Street,
P. 0. Box 1489,
32201
Jacksonville, Florida.
Dear Mr. Mason:
letter of
This refers to the request contained in your
of
Bank
ve
Reser
al
January 3, 1966, submitted through the Feder
the
of
nors
Gover
Atlanta, for a determination by the Board of
Charter Company as a
Federal Reserve System as to the status of The
holding company affiliate.
understands
From the information presented, the Board
ipally engaged
princ
are
es,
that The Charter Company and its subsidiari
business;
cing
servi
and
in the real estate and mortgage originating
that it
fact
the
of
n
reaso
that it is a holding company affiliate by
of
stock
al
capit
of
s
owns 33,000 of the 40,000 outstanding share
owns,
also
it
that
da;
Flori
Jacksonville National Bank, Jacksonville,
g
andin
outst
the
of
cent
directly and indirectly, less than 1 per
Beach Bank, Jacksonville
shares of capital stock of First National
tly or indirectly, own or
direc
Beach, Florida; and that it does not,
any other banking instituol,
contr
control any stock of, or manage or
tion.
interpretation of
The Board is in process of reviewing its
ng Act of 1933, as
the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banki
to situations similar to that
amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies
ion pursuant to that propresented by your request for a determinat
that might inconvenience your
vision of law. In order to avoid delay
accordance with its interpretation
company, the Board has determined, in
of this type, that The
of that statutory provision in prior cases
tly or indirectly, as a business
Charter Company is not engaged, direc
controlling banks, banking
in holding the stock of, or managing or
companies. Accordingly, The
associations, savings banks, or trust
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SYSTEM
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE
54
Mr. Raymond Mason
-2-
Charter Company is not deemed to be a holding company affiliate except for the purposes of section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act
of
(12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need a voting permit from the Board
owns.
it
which
Governors in order to vote the bank stock
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is under
e that
review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is possibl
that
d
modifie
so
be
the Board's interpretation of the statute may
d to
companies such as The Charter Company would not be entitle
n 2(c).
sectio
of
ph
paragra
"favorable" determinations under the last
d to in
referre
nation
determi
In that event, the Board may rescind the
the preceding paragraph.
in such
In any event, if the facts should at any time change
d,
engage
so
be
might
y
Compan
manner as to indicate that The Charter
deteranother
for
Board
the
to
this matter should again be submitted
in facts would inmination in the light of the new facts. A change
of bank stock
tions
acquisi
clude, among other things, any additional
even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
55
Item No. 14
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 11, 1966
Mr. Byrne Litschgi, Attorney,
Shackleford, Farrior, Stallings,
Glos & Evans,
Marine Bank Building,
Post Office Box 3324,
Tampa, Florida. 33601
Dear Sir:
This refers to the request contained in your letter
of December 5, 1965, addressed to Mr. Frederic Solomon, Director
of the Board's Division of Examinations, for a determination by
the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System as to the
status of Paradise Fruit Company, Inc., a Florida corporation as
a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Paradise Fruit Company, Inc., is primarily engaged in the
business of processing citrus fruit into forms used by the baking
industry, essentially glazed fruit, and the sale of the glazed
fruit and fruit mixes; that it is a holding company affiliate by
reason of the fact that is owns or controls a majority of the
outstanding shares of Capital National Bank of Tampa, Tampa, Florida,
and that it does not, directly or indirectly, own or control any
stock of, or manage or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
Paradise Fruit Company, Inc., the Board has determined, in accordance
with its interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of
this type, that such Company, is not engaged, directly or indirectly,
as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or controlling
banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust companies.
Accordingly, Paradise Fruit Company, Inc., is not deemed to be a holding
company affiliate except for the purposes of section 23A of the Federal
Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need a voting permit from the
Board of Governors in order to vote the bank stock which it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
56
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. Byrne Litschgi, Attorney
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be so
modified that companies such as Paradise Fruit Company, Inc., would
not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last
paragraph of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind the
determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Paradise Fruit Company, Inc., might
be so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board
for another determination in the light of the new facts. A change
in facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions
of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
—
1)
<-----
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Merritt Sherman/
Secretary.
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 15
1/4/66
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
CE
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDEN
TO THE BOARD
January 10, 1966.
Mr. B. W. Koeneman, Chairman of the Board,
•B. W. K. Company,
8740 State Street,
East St. Louis, Illinois.
Dear Mr. Koeneman:
letter of
This refers to the request contained in your
Federal Reserve Bank of
December 28, 1965, submitted through the
Governors of the
St. Louis, for a determination by the Board of
W. K. Company, as
Federal Reserve System as to the status of B.
a holding company affiliate.
understands
From the information presented, the Board
are confined to holdthat B. W. K. Company's present activities
stock of The First
ing 3,184 of the 4,000 outstanding shares of
ois; and that it does not,
National Bank of Lebanon, Lebanon, Illin
any stock of, or manage or
directly or indirectly, own or control
control, any other banking institution.
interpretation
The Board is in process of reviewing its
Banking Act of 1933,
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the
situations like that
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to
ion pursuant to that propresented by your request for a determinat
that might inconvenience
vision of law. In order to avoid delay
in accordance with its
Your company, the Board has determined,
in prior cases of this
interpretation of that statutory provision
directly or indirectly,
ed,
type, that B. W. K. Company is not engag
ng or controlling
managi
or
as a business in holding the stock of,
companies.
trust
or
,
banks
banks, banking associations, savings
g company
holdin
a
be
to
deemed
Accordingly, B. W. K. Company is not
al
Feder
the
of
23A
on
secti
affiliate except for the purposes of
t
permi
voting
a
need
not
does
Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and
which
stock
bank
the
vote
to
from the Board of Governors in order
it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. B. W. Koeneman
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as B. W. K. Company would not be
entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph
of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that B. W. K. Company might be so
engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board for
another determination in the light of the new facts. A change
in facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
58
Item No. 16
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD,
January 10, 1966.
Mr. David L. Mitchell, President,
BD. Inc., of Batron,
P. 0. Box 56,
Barron, Wisconsin. 54812
Dear Mr. Mitchell:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 7, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of BD. Inc., of Barron as
a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that BD. Inc., of Barron manages a general insurance agency; that
it provides management services for the trustees of two testamentary
trusts; that it is a holding company affiliate by reason of the fact
that it owns 568-1/2 of the 1,000 outstanding shares of capital
stock of the First National Bank of Barron, Barron, Wisconsin; and
that it does not, directly or indirectly, own or control any stock
of, or manage or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
propresented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
nce
inconvenie
vision of law. In order to avoid delay that might
its
Your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with
this
of
cases
prior
interpretation of that statutory provision in
,
indirectly
or
directly
type, that BD. Inc., of Barron is not engaged,
g
controllin
as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or
companies.
banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
holding comAccordingly, BD. Inc., of Barron is not deemed to be a
the Federal
of
pany affiliate except for the purposes of section 23A
from
permit
voting
Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need a
it
awns.
which
the Board of Governors in order to vote the bank stock
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
59
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF
HE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
60
Mr. David L. Mitchell
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c)
is under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as BD. Inc., of Barron would not
be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph
of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change
in such manner as to indicate that BD. Inc., of Barron might be
so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board
for another determination in the light of the new facts. A change
in facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
61
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 17
1/4/66
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 10, 1966.
Mr. Harold L. Hanson, President,
First National Agency of Baudette, Inc.,
Baudette, Minnesota.
Dear Mr. Hanson:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 13, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Minneapolis, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of First National Agency
of Baudette, Inc., as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that First National Agency of Baudette, Inc., operates a general
e
insurance sales business; that it is a holding company affiliat
ing
outstand
1,000
the
of
800
by reason of the fact that it owns
shares of capital stock of The First National Bank of Baudette,
ly,
Baudette, Minnesota; and that it does not, directly or indirect
other
any
,
control
own or control any stock of, or manage or
banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
to that propresented by your request for a determination pursuant
ience
inconven
might
that
delay
vision of law. In order to avoid
its
with
nce
ac%.orda
in
ned,
your company, the Board has determi
this
of
cases
prior
in
n
provisio
interpretation of that statutory
,
engaged
not
is
Inc.,
e,
Baudett
of
type, that First National Agency
or
of,
stock
the
holding
in
business
directly or indirectly, as a
ions, savings banks,
managing or controlling banks, banking associat
Agency of Baudette,
National
or trust companies. Accordingly, First
e except for
affiliat
company
Inc., is not deemed to be a holding
(12 U.S.C. 371c)
Act
Reserve
the purposes of section 23A of the Federal
s in order
Governor
of
Board
the
and does not need a voting permit from
owns.
to vote the bank stock which it
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD
OF GOVERNORS
OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
62
Mr. Harold L. Hanson
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c)
is under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as First National Agency of
Baudette, Inc., would not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph of section 2(c). In that event,
the Board may rescind the determination referred to in the
preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change
in such manner as to indicate that First National Agency of
Baudette, Inc., might be so engaged, this matter should again
be submitted to the Board for another determination in the light
of the new facts. A change in facts would include, among other
things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock even though
not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
63
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 18
1/4/66
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD,
January 10, 1966.
Mr. C. I. Lokken, President,
Sioux Enterprises, Inc.,
1103 East 8th Street,
Sioux Falls, South Dakota.
Dear Mr. Lokken:
This refers to the request contained in your letter
December 20, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank
Minneapolis, for a determination by the Board of Governors of
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Sioux Enterprises,
as a holding company affiliate.
of
of
the
Inc.,
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Sioux Enterprises, Inc., was formed to engage in the business
Of buying, selling, trading, and dealing in, and to acquire, hold,
sell, and dispose of all kinds of property; that it is a holding
company affiliate by reason of the fact that it owns 751 of the
1)500 outstanding shares of capital stock of the Valley State Bank,
Yankton, South Dakota; and that it does not, directly or indirectly,
own or control any stock of, or manage or control, any other banking
institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
Presented by your request for a determination vrsuant to that provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
Your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
tYpe, that Sioux Enterprises, Inc., is not engaged, directly or
indirectly, as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or
controlling banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
companies. Accordingly, Sioux Enterprises, Inc., is not deemed
to be a holding company affiliate except for the purposes of
section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does
ilot need a voting permit from the Board of Governors in order to
Vote the bank stock which it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
HOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
C. I. Lokken
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as Sioux Enterprises, Inc., would
not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last
paragraph of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind
the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Sioux Enterprises, Inc., might be
so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board for
another determination in the light of the new facts. A change in
facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions
of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
64
Item No. 19
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
65
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 11, 1966.
Mr. Philip C. Sorensen,
Attorney at Law,
537 Stuart Building,
Lincoln, Nebraska. 68508
Dear Mr. Sorensen:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 8, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Buckley Investment Corporation,
Lincoln, Nebraska, as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Buckley Investment Corporation owns and operates an insurance
agency; that it is a holding company affiliate by reason of the fact
that it owns 166 of the 250 outstanding shares of capital stock of
The First National Bank of Wilcox, Wilcox, Nebraska; and that it
does not, directly or indirectly, own or control any stock of, or
manage or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation of
the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933, as .
amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that presented
by your request for a determination pursuant to that provision of law.
In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience Buckley Investment
Corporation, the Board has determined, in accordance with its interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this type, that such
Company is not engaged, directly or indirectly, as a business in holding
the stock of, or managing or controlling banks, banking associations,
savings banks, or trust companies. Accordingly, Buckley Investment
Corporation is not deemed to be a holding company affiliate except for
the purposes of section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c)
and does not need a voting permit from the Board of Governors in order
to vote the bank stock which it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD
or
GOVERNORS
Mr. Philip C. Sorensen
or
THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
66
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is possible
that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be so modified that
companies such as Buckley Investment Corporation would not be entitled
to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph of section 2(c).
In that event, the Board may rescind the determination referred to in
the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in such
manner as to indicate that Buckley Investment Corporation might be so
engaged, this matter should again be .submitted to the Board for another
determination in the light of the new facts. A change in facts would
include, among other things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock
even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 20
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONOENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 13, 1966.
Mr. John C. Watson,
Assistant Secretary and Treasurer,
O'Neill Properties, Inc.,
O'Neill, Nebraska.
Dear Mr. Watson:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
January 4, 1966, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of O'Neill Properties,
Inc., as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that O'Neill Properties, Inc., will be engaged primarily in the
insurance and real estate business; that it is a holding company
affiliate by reason of the fact that it owns 327 of the 500 outstanding shares of capital stock of The First National Bank of
O'Neill, O'Neill, Nebraska; and that it does not, directly or indirectly, own or control any stock of, or manage or control, any
Other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
proPresented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
inconvenience
might
vision of law. In order to avoid delay that
Your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
type, that O'Neill Properties, Inc., is not engaged, directly or
or
indirectly, as a business in holding the stock of, or managing
trust
or
banks,
controlling banks, banking associations, savings
deemed
companies. Accordingly, O'Neill Properties, Inc., is not
of
purposes
the
to be a holding company affiliate except for
does
and
371c)
U.S.C.
section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12
to
order
in
Governors
not need a voting permit from the Board of
vote the bank stock which it owns.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
67
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
68
Mr, John C. Watson
-2-
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
Possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be
so modified that companies such as O'Neill Properties, Inc.,
would not be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the
last paragraph of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may
rescind the determination referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change
in such manner as to indicate that O'Neill Properties, Inc.,
might be so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to
the Board for another determination in the light of the new facts.
A change in facts would include, among other things, any addiing
tional acquisitions of bank stock even though not constitut
control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 21
1/4/66
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE ODARD ,
January 10, 1966.
Mr. Earl C. Herman, President,
Wakefield Agency, Inc.,
Box 127,
Wakefield, Kansas.
Dear Mr. Herman:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 14, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Kansas City, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Wakefield Agency, Inc.,
as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Wakefield Agency, Inc., was organized to conduct insurance
business, real estate business, and any other activities it deems
wise to engage in; that it is a holding company affiliate by reason
of the fact that it owns 346 shares of the 500 outstanding shares
of capital stock of The Farmers and Merchants State Bank, Wakefield,
Kansas; and that it does not, directly or indirectly, own or control
any stock of, or manage or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
type, that Wakefield Agency, Inc., is not engaged, directly or
indirectly, as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or
controlling banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD
OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. Earl C. Herman
-2-
companies. Accordingly, Wakefield Agency, Inc., is not deemed to,
be a holding company affiliate except for the purposes of section
. 23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need
a voting permit from the Board of Governors in order to vote the
bank stock which it owns.
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
possible that the Board's interpretation of the stattitemay be so
modified that companies such as Wakefield Agency, Inc., would not
be entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph
of section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind the determination
referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Wakefield Agency, Inc., might be
so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board
for another determination in the light of the new facts. A change
in facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
71
Item No. 22
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 13, 1966,
Mr. Alfred L. Raney, President,
Alltex Mortgage Company, Inc.,
6631 South Main Street,
P. 0. Box 25125,
Houston, Texas.
77005
Dear Mr. Raney:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
August 17, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Alltex Mortgage Company, Inc., as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Alltex Mortgage Company, Inc., is engaged principally in
the real estate loan business; that it is a holding company affiliate by reason of the fact that it owns 20,012 of the 25,000 outstanding shares of capital stock of The First National Bank of
Levelland, Levelland, Texas; that it owns 16,876 of the 80,000 outstanding shares of capital stock of Medical Center National Bank,
Houston, Texas; that it owns 500 of the 100,250 outstanding shares
of capital stock of American Bank of Commerce, Albuquerque, New
Mexico; that it owns 100 shares of the Tr -County Savings & Loan
Association, Muleshoe, Texas; and that it does not, directly or
indirectly, own or control any stock of, or manage or control,
any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933, as
amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
Presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that provision of law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience your
company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this type, that
Alltex Mortgage Company, Inc., is not engaged, directly or indirectly,
as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or controlling
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD
OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. Alfred L. Raney
-2-
companies.
banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
to be a
deemed
not
is
Accordingly, Alltex Mortgage Company, Inc.,
23A of
section
of
s
purpose
holding company affiliate except for the
voting
a
need
not
does
and
the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c)
stock
bank
the
vote
to
order
permit from the Board of Governors in
which it owns.
is unAs stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c)
e
possibl
is
it
review,
that
of
result
a
As
der review by the Board.
be so modified
that the Board's interpretation of the statute may
would not be enInc,
,
Company
e
Mortgag
Alltex
that companies such as
paragraph of
titled to "favorable" determinations under the last
the determination
section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind
referred to in the preceding paragraph.
change in
In any event, if the facts should at any time
,
Company Inc., might
such manner as to indicate that Alltex Mortgage
Board for
be so engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the
in
change
A
facts.
another determination in the light of the new
tions
acquisi
nal
additio
facts would include, among other things, any
.
Of bank stock even though not constituting control
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
72
73
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Item No. 23
1/4/66
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS orricIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 10, 1966.
Mr. C. Q. Abernathy,
Chairman of the Board,
Carthage Loan Company,
P. 0. Box 635,
Carthage, Texas.
Dear Mr. Abernathy:
This refers to the request contained in your letter of
December 13, 1965, submitted through the Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas, for a determination by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System as to the status of Carthage Loan Company
as a holding company affiliate.
From the information presented, the Board understands
that Carthage Loan Company was, as stated in its Charter, organized
to accumulate and lend money, purchase, sell and deal in notes,
bonds and securities, but without banking and discounting privileges;
that it is a holding company affiliate by reason of the fact that
it owns 4,980 shares of stock of The First National Bank of
Carthage, Carthage, Texas, which is more than 50 per cent of the
number of shares voted for the election of directors of such bank
at the last annual shareholders' meeting held in January 1965; and
that it does not, directly or indirectly, own or control any stock
of, or manage or control, any other banking institution.
The Board is in process of reviewing its interpretation
of the last paragraph of section 2(c) of the Banking Act of 1933,
as amended (12 U.S.C. 221a), as it applies to situations like that
presented by your request for a determination pursuant to that
provisionof law. In order to avoid delay that might inconvenience
Your company, the Board has determined, in accordance with its
interpretation of that statutory provision in prior cases of this
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
Mr. C. Q. Abernathy
-2-
type, that Carthage Loan Company is not engaged, directly or
indirectly, as a business in holding the stock of, or managing or'
controlling banks, banking associations, savings banks, or trust
companies. Accordingly, Carthage Loan Company is not deemed to
be a holding company affiliate except for the purposes of section
23A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 371c) and does not need
a voting permit from the Board of Governors in order to vote the
bank stock which it owns.
As stated above, the interpretation of section 2(c) is
under review by the Board. As a result of that review, it is
Possible that the Board's interpretation of the statute may be so
modified that companies such as Carthage Loan Company would not be
entitled to "favorable" determinations under the last paragraph of
section 2(c). In that event, the Board may rescind the determination
referred to in the preceding paragraph.
In any event, if the facts should at any time change in
such manner as to indicate that Carthage Loan Company might be so
engaged, this matter should again be submitted to the Board for
another determination in the light of the new facts. A change in
facts would include, among other things, any additional acquisitions
of bank stock even though not constituting control.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
74
LEGRAM
TE
LEASED WIRE SERVICE
Item No. 24
BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON
75
1/4/66
January 4, 1966
REED - NEW YORK
KECEA
A.
"Motor Finance Corporation," Westfield, New Jersey.
B.
"The First National Bank of Dunellen," Dunellen, New Jersey.
C.
None.
D.
At any time prior to May 1, 1966, at the annual meeting of
to
shareholders of such bank, or any adjournments thereof,
of a
elect directors, and to act thereat upon such matters
l
routine nature as are ordinarily acted upon at the annua
meeting of such bank.
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
BAKKE
Definition of KECEA:
nce of a limited voting permit,
The Board authorizes the issua
5144 of the Revised Statutes
under the provisions of section
holding company affiliate named
of the United States, to the
entitling such organization to
below after the letter "fi:',
controls of the bank(s) named
vote the stock which it owns or
subject to the condition(s) stated
below after the letter "8",
permit authorized hereunder
below after the latter "C". The
r
afte
d
state
time and the purposes
is limited to the period of
ed in accordance with the instrucproce
the letter "D". Please
's letter of March 10, 1947, (S-964).
tions contained in the Board
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 25
1/4/66
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ACORES/3
orrtoiAL
CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
January 5, 1966.
Mr. Leland M. Ross, Vice President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago,
Chicago, Illinois. 60690
Dear Mx. Ross:
In accordance with the request contained in
Your letter of December 29, 1965, the Board approves the
aPPointment of Dennis E. Beatty as an assistant examiner
for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago. Please advise
the effective date of the appointment.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Elizabeth L. Carmichael
Elizabeth L. Carmichael,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
76
@FedFRASER