The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Minutes for
To:
Members of the Board
From:
Office of the Secretary
May 26, 1965.
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
indicate
You were not present, your initials
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
Minutes of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System on Wednesday, May 26, 1965.
The Board met in the Board Room
at 10:00 a.m.
PRESENT:
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Martin, Chairman
Balderston, Vice Chairman
Robertson
Shepardson
Mitchell
Daane
Maisel
Sherman, Secretary
Kenyon, Assistant Secretary
Molony, Assistant to the Board
Cardon, Legislative Counsel
Hackley, General Counsel
Farrell, Director, Division of Bank
Operations
Mr. Solomon, Director, Division of Examinations
Mr. Hexter, Assistant General Counsel
Mr. O'Connell, Assistant General Counsel
Mr. Shay, Assistant General Counsel
Mr. Daniels, Assistant Director, Division of
Bank Operations
Mr. Leavitt, Assistant Director, Division of
Examinations
Mrs. Semia, Technical Assistant, Office of the
Secretary
Miss Hart and Mr. Via, Senior Attorneys, Legal
Division
Mr. Robinson, Attorney, Legal Division
Mr. Smith, Senior Economist, Division of
Research and Statistics
Mr. Wiles, Economist, Division of Research and
Statistics
Messrs. Egertson and McClintock, Supervisory
Review Examiners, Division of Examinations
Messrs. Lyon and Poundstone, Review Examiners,
Division of Examinations
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Discount rates.
The establishment without change by the Federal
Rese_
'ye Bank of Boston on May 24, 1965, of the rates on discounts and
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-2-
advances in its existing schedule was approved unanimously, with the
understanding that appropriate advice would be sent to that Bank.
Circulated or distributed items.
The following items, copies
of which are attached to these minutes under the respective item
numbers indicated, were approved unanimously:
Item No.
Letter to Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Company,
Louisville, Kentucky, approving the establishment
°f a branch in the Westport Road Shopping Center,
Jefferson County.
1
Letter to Industrial State Bank of Kalamazoo,
41amazoo, Michigan, approving the establishment
°f a branch on East Crosstown Parkway.
2
Letter to Wells Fargo Bank, San Francisco, California,
aPProving the establishment of a branch in Middletown.
3
10,etter to Morgan Guaranty International Banking
t°rPoration, New York, New York, granting permission
s° Purchase additional shares of Credito Bursatil
-*A., Mexico, D.F., Mexico.
4
Letter to Midland National Bank, Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
!Titing its request for permission to maintain
uced reserves.
5
Let
2r ter to Northeast National Bank, San Antonio, Texas,
6
;,...anting its request for permission to maintain reduced
-s
erves.
Letf--
e Ler to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
r
8agrding the application of The Farmers and Merchants
14111K, Boswell, Indiana, for continuation of deposit
pe:urance after withdrawal from membership in the
eral Reserve System.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
5/26/65
-3Item No.
8
Letter to the Bureau of the Budget reporting on
II. R. 6497, an enrolled bill "To amend the Bretton
Woods Agreements Act to authorize an increase in the
International Monetary Fund quota of the United
States."
Application of Denver U. S. Bancorporation (Items 9-11).
There
had been distributed drafts of an order and statement reflecting the
Board's approval on April 27, 1965, of the application of Denver U. S.
Bancorporation, Inc., Denver, Colorado, for permission to acquire at
last 50 per cent of the voting shares of Weld County Bank, Greeley,
Colorado.
A concurring statement by Governor Robertson had also been
distributed.
The issuance of the order and statement was authorized.
°f the documents are attached as Items 9 and 10.
Copies
A copy of Governor
4bertson's concurring statement is attached as Item No. 11.
Messrs. Lyon and Poundstone then withdrew from the meeting.
Large denomination Federal Reserve notes (Item No. 12).
On
Ilarch 15, 1965, on the basis of a distributed memorandum from Mr. Farrell
dated March 11, 1965, the Board discussed a question raised by President
Sea"1 n
of the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago as to the continued avail-
abilitY of Federal Reserve notes in denominations of $500 and $1,000.
No new
notes in those denominations had been printed since 1945, and of
the
remaining stocks some Reserve Banks had only a few notes while the
York and Boston Banks had a relatively large supply.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The matter
5/26/65
-4-
involved questions whether the need for large denomination notes was
8° limited that their issuance should be discontinued and notes now in
circulation retired as they reached the Reserve Banks; whether, as the
Treasury Department surmised, the notes were used to a significant extent
for purposes such as tax evasion; and whether there was sufficient
evidence of such misuse to suggest that large bills now in circulation
should be called for redemption.
In a letter of March 17, 1965, the
Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks were asked for information
bearing
on these questions.
There had now been circulated a memorandum dated May 11, 1965,
in which the Division of Bank Operations summarized the replies of the
Reserve Bank Presidents.
The Chicago and Dallas Banks would prefer to
c°11tinue issuance of the large denomination notes, while the other 10
ilanks concluded that their issuance might be discontinued on a System
baa4_
Is and notes received from circulation retired.
favored calling in the notes for redemption.
None of the Banks
The Reserve Banks had
little specific knowledge of the purposes for which the bills were
Isequested, but a variety of known legitimate uses were mentioned.
Att
achea to the memorandum was a draft of letter to President Bopp,
Chairman
of the Conference of Presidents, requesting that the subject
be
placed on the agenda for the meeting of the Conference on June 14,
1965.
Governor Mitchell inquired why the Reserve Bank Presidents
sholo
'Id be asked to discuss the subject at their forthcoming meeting
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
unless the Board had a specific proposal to offer, which did not seem
to be the case.
As he read the comments that had been made, it would
be difficult to withdraw the higher denomination notes from circulation
except on the ground that they were being used for illegal transactions.
AnY such uses presumably could be controlled through the reports of
unusual currency transactions that banks had made for many years pursuant to a request from the Treasury Department (the TCR reports).
There ensued a discussion of the possibility of redistributing
arno g the Reserve Banks the present stock of large denomination notes.
It appeared that such a redistribution would enable all of the Reserve
Banks to
continue to pay out the notes upon request for some time to
come.
However, a Reserve Bank might be reluctant to supply its notes,
against which it must maintain gold reserves, to another Reserve Bank.
The reserves of the Banks were at present comfortably above the statutory
Min.
lmum, since Public Law 89-3, approved on March 3, 1965, had removed
the reserve requirement as to deposit liabilities, but there could be
a tirne in the future when a pinch again would be felt.
It was observed that President Scanlon's position had been that
either issuance of the large denomination notes should be discontinued
at
all Federal Reserve Banks or it should be made possible for each
-417e Bank to have a stock to enable it to continue issuance.
The
Ilillingness indicated by 10 of the Reserve Banks to discontinue issuing
larg
e notes had not been based on possibilities of misuse of the notes
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-6-
but rather on the lack of apparent need for the notes and consequently
the lack of justification for the administrative burden.
Comment was
made that, although the Board had not taken a position on the question
raised by President Scanlon, the Federal Reserve Loose-Leaf Service
contained a letter of June 26, 1946 (S-920), in which the Board stated
that, after considering viewpoints solicited from the Federal Reserve
Banks, it would adhere to its previous action directing that no further
Printings of notes in denominations of $500 and over be requested.
How-
ever, it would offer no objection to the paying out of currency in such
ilehominations by the Federal Reserve Banks as long as the present stocks
lasted.
After further discussion relating principally to the history
Of
views expressed by the Treasury Department, it was agreed to request
hat the Conference of Presidents discuss the possibility of having
Reserve Banks that wished to have large denomination bills available,
but
lacked the necessary stocks, purchase such stocks from other Reserve
"
13 ks that had sufficient supplies.
Pursuant to this action a letter
14es sent to Chairman Bopp of the Conference of Presidents in the form
attached as Item No. 12.
Application of Riverside Trust Company.
There had been dis-
trib
uted a memorandum from the Division of Examinations dated May 11,
1963
'regarding the application of Riverside Trust Company, Hartford,
C°one
cticut, to merge with Bristol Bank and Trust Company, Bristol,
Connecticut.
esulting
The Division recommended approval.
(The title of the
bank would be United Bank & Trust Company.)
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
Summary comments by Mr. Leavitt were followed by questions, to
which the staff responded, on the extent to which banks in Hartford drew
business from Bristol and on what definite information was available in
support of the alleged need for a larger loan limit in Bristol.
Governor Robertson then stated that he would approve the application.
He did not regard the banking factors as strong, but there
might be some need for a larger loan limit in Bristol.
aspects did not appear to be strongly adverse.
The competitive
He much preferred to see
Riverside Trust, rather than one of the two large banks in Hartford,
each of which was more than ten times the size of Riverside Trust, seek
4 merger with the Bristol bank.
However, the circumstance that he felt
gave greatest weight toward approval was the strength of the mutual
savings bank that operated in Bristol, which now held more than twothirds of the community's total deposits.
Governor Shepardson said that he would approve.
He thought the
merger would probably serve a definite community interest, and the comPetitive factor did not seem strongly adverse.
Governor Mitchell indicated that he would approve.
that
He believed
a stronger commercial bank in Bristol might generate more local
business.
Governor Daane said that he would approve on the grounds that
had
already been cited; he placed a little more stress on the needs of
the Bristol community than the Division of Examinations apparently had
Placed
on this factor.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
5/26/65
-8Governor Maisel stated that he would disapprove.
It concerned
him that in 1950 there had been 112 commercial banks in Connecticut,
and at the end of 1964 only 66 remained; yet during the same period the
Population of Connecticut had increased by about one-third and income
had more than doubled.
Thus it appeared to him that the question of
Potential competition was significant.
cally neutral.
The other factors appeared basi-
These banks were strong enough to compete, and therefore
it seemed to Governor Maisel that only a strong reason would justify
aPProving a merger.
Governor Balderston commented that he would approve, largely
for the reasons Governor Robertson had mentioned.
H
(Governor Balderston)
did not believe that the banking situation in Hartford would be improved,
but he did think that industrial firms in the Bristol area would get
better service.
approval
Therefore there would seem to be a slight edge toward
on the basis of service and the public interest.
Chairman Martin stated that he would approve because he thought
th at
a stronger bank in Bristol would help to develop the economy of that
eity.
The application of Riverside Trust Company was thereupon approved,
COver nor
Maisel dissenting. It was understood that an order and statement
refiecti g
this decision would be drafted for the Board's consideration,
and that a
statement regarding the dissent of Governor Maisel also would
be
Prepared
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-9Miss Hart and Messrs. Smith, Wiles, Egertson, and McClintock
then withdrew from the meeting and Mr. Brill, Director, Division of
Research and Statistics, entered the room.
Civil Rights Act.
At the meetings of the Board on March 30 and
April 1, 1965, there had been preliminary discussion, on the basis of a
distributed memorandum from Mr. Hackley dated March 10, 1965, of applicability to the Federal Reserve Banks of Title VI of the Civil Rights
Act of
1964.
The memorandum stated that in July 1964 the Board had
received from the Department of Justice a "Guide for Issuance of Regulations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964," which indicated
that "each department or agency administering any program or activity subject to Title VI shall submit its proposed regulations" to the Bureau of
the Budget and the Department of Justice for review, and that "each departtilent Or agency is requested to submit a statement listing every program
or activity involving direct or indirect financial assistance which it
h
as determined to be outside the scope of Title VI, together with the
reaacas for that determination."
By letter of July 16, 1964, the Board
iliformed the Bureau of the Budget that prompt attention would be given
to
'ne Interpretation and application of Title VI insofar as applicable
to the Federal Reserve System, and that, if it was ascertained that
eatilations were required to be issued, they would be submitted for
app
roval by the President in accordance with the requirements of Title VI.
The matter was referred to the Conference of Presidents, the memoranduRI
continued, and an Ad Hoc Subcommittee of Counsel was appointed to
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-10-
study the question.
In a report of August 25, 1964, the Subcommittee
concluded (1) that Title VI was inapplicable to the Reserve Banks
"because the Banks are not Federal agencies empowered to extend Federal
financial assistance to any program or activity by way of grant, loan
Or contract within the meaning of that Title," and (2) that the Reserve
Banks were employers as defined in Title VII of the Act and, on July 2,
1965) would become subject to its provisions prohibiting discrimination as
to employment practices.
The Conference of Presidents accepted the report
4nd concurred in its conclusions.
Mr. Hackley's March 10 memorandum stated that despite the apparentlY unanimous conclusion of the Conference of Presidents (and also, it
was
did
understood, the conclusion of all Reserve Bank Counsel) that Title VI
not apply to the Reserve Banks, the legal validity of that conclusion
was bY no means crystal clear.
In support of the position that the Title
Was
'
applicable it might be argued that the Banks were "Federal agencies";
that they made
advances to member banks and extended other forms of financial assistance to such banks pursuant to provisions of Federal law; that
the broad intent of Title VI was to prohibit racial discrimination by any
Petaons or corporations receiving Federal financial assistance; and that
the
tanks therefore should be regarded as "Federal agencies" that provided
4Ped eral
financial assistance" to a "program or activity" within the
"g of the Title.
In support of the position that Title VI did not
aPPlv
- to the Reserve Banks, it might be argued that they were not "Federal
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A
5 /26/65
.1. Ok.)7
-11-
agencie8" in the sense in which that term was normally used; that extensions of Reserve Bank credit to member banks were designed to aid the
economy generally rather than to provide Federal financial assistance to
anY particular individual beneficiaries; that there was at least some
evidence in the legislative history of the Civil Rights Act that Title VI
as not intended to apply
to banks or to programs not financed with
aPPropriated funds; and that application of the Title to Reserve Bank
advances
would be inconsistent with the objectives of the provisions of
the Federal Reserve Act relating to discounts and advances.
After noting that there was a difference of opinion on the
qllestion within the Legal Division, Mr. Via concurring in the conclusion
(pf Reserve Bank Counsel that Title VI was not applicable to the Reserve
Banks, while Mr. Hexter held the opposite
view, Mr. Hackley's memorandum
stated that on balance it was his view that Title VI did not apply to
the
Reserve Banks.
VieW.
He listed three considerations in support of that
First, he thought it questionable whether a Reserve Bank should be
"
e sidered a
"Federal agency" within the meaning of the Title.
that
The fact
the law referred to each "Federal department and agency" suggested
that co
tigress had in mind an "agency" which, like a "department," was a
Part of
the Federal Government -- an agency whose employees were Federal
er4P10Yees -- rather than an
instrumentality of the Government like a
Itese,
'ye Bank.
411
Second, he doubted that the operations of member banks
Within the ordinary meaning of a "program" and thought that the
"
ding reference to an "activity" should be construed in the light
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-12-
of its association with the reference to a "program."
Third, the terms
Federal agency," "Federal financial assistance," and "program or activity"
were not defined in the Act.
However, as far as there was any legislative
history that might throw light on the intent of Congress, that history
suggested that Title VI was not intended to apply to the activities of
banks and, to some extent though not conclusively, that it was meant to
cover only Federal financial assistance provided through the use of
appropriated funds.
Attached to the memorandum were a draft of letter
t° the Bureau of the Budget that would reflect Mr. Hackley's conclusion
and supporting reasoning, and a draft of letter to the Federal Reserve
Bank Presidents that would transmit a copy of the letter sent to the
Bureau of the Budget and would state that the Board concurred in the conclusion of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee of Counsel and the Conference of
Presidents that the Reserve Banks would be subject to Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act.
Among other attachments were memoranda from Messrs.
BeXter and Via setting forth arguments in support of their opposing
views
as to the applicability of Title VI to the Reserve Banks.
There had also been distributed a memorandum from Mr. Hackley
dated April 6, 1965, attaching an alternative draft of letter to the
eau of
the Budget prepared in the light of the Board's preliminary
4iscuss10n on April 1.
The alternative would omit any reference to the
question whether the Reserve Banks were "Federal agencies," as well as
z'eference to the legislative history of the Act in support of the arguraents
that it was intended to apply only to financial assistance provided
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1 (t
5/ 26/65
-13-
through appropriated funds and was not intended to apply to banks.
The alternative draft would be based solely on the ground that the
Operations of member banks are not a "program or activity" to which
the Reserve Banks extend financial assistance within the purview of
the Act.
At the Board's request Mr. Hackley reviewed the deliberations
that had brought the matter to its present status.
The legal question
turned on four particular points in the language of the Civil Rights
Act:
whether the Federal Reserve Banks were Federal agencies for the
Purposes of the Act; whether they extended Federal financial assistance;
whe ther member banks that received Federal Reserve discounts and ad/lances were engaged in any "program or activity" within the meaning of
the
Act; and whether applicability of Title VI to the Reserve Banks
14°uld be inconsistent with the achievement of the objectives of the
4der
al Reserve Act.
He summarized the arguments presented in his
memorandum of March 10, 1965, and reiterated his conclusion that Title
V/
was not
applicable to the Federal Reserve Banks and his recommendation
that in a letter to the Bureau of the Budget the Board base such a
1
ion solely on the ground that activities of member banks are not
11°gram or activity within the meaning of the Civil Rights Act.
}lackley
Mr.
brought out also that in the letter of July 16, 1964, to the
kre
ati of
the Budget the Board had already taken the position that the
lloard
itself was not a "Federal
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
. . agency which is empowered to
5/26/65
-14-
extend Federal financial assistance to any program or activity" within
the purview of Title VI.
The present question, therefore, related only
t° applicability of the Title to the Federal Reserve Banks, and if it
was concluded that the Title was applicable it would be the Reserve
Ranks individually that would be required to issue implementing regulations.
Quite apart from legal questions, however, there were delicate
licY questions involved.
"
In view of such considerations, if the
Board should concur in the position taken by the Conference of Presidents that Title VI was inapplicable, Mr. Hackley suggested that
c°nsideration might be given to adding to the draft letter a paragraph
indicating that the System was nevertheless wholly sympathetic with
the objectives of the Civil Rights Act and that the Federal Reserve
Banks
would, of course, take all steps toward achievement of that
ob jective
consistent with the proper discharge of their functions.
Mr. Via then summarized the points made in his memorandum in
support of his view that Title VI did not apply to the Federal Reserve
hnks.
Of the four points as to coverage specified in the statute,
he did not find it necessary to test the first, namely, whether or
110
t Reserve Banks were Federal departments or agencies, because if
any of the other points did not apply to a particular entity, the
irement that regulations be issued did not apply to that entity.
Re co
ncluded that the second point, the extension of Federal finan-
eta],
assistance, did not apply to the Federal Reserve Banks, on the
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-15-
ground that they did not extend appropriated funds.
Even if it should
be held that loans and discounts constituted Federal
financial assistance,
Mr. Via believed that such assistance was not extended to any "program or
activity," which was the third point of coverage.
These phrases were not
defined in the Civil Rights Act, nor could much help as to their meaning
be found in the legislative history.
However, he believed that the normal
meaning of program or activity contemplated more than the business of a
commercial bank; it would seem to imply a welfare benefit such as a school
lunch program.
Mr. Via then cited, as had his memorandum, a number of points of
legislative history that seemed to indicate Congressional intent that
Title VI was not to apply to banks.
He reasoned that if the legislative
history contained positive statements by the framers of the Act to the
e
ta
e t that this Title was to be applicable to banks or to Federal Reserve
-s, it would be incumbent upon the Board to have regard for those state-
ments; conversely, statements pointing to an intent that Title VI be inapPlicable to banks or to Federal Reserve Banks should be given weight. ArguMentS that Title VI was intended to apply to the Federal Reserve Banks had
be,
based on a finding that a broad remedial purpose was expressed in secti" 601. That section, however, had to be read in conjunction with section
602
, which gave the Act effect and told Federal agencies what they must do,
4td in section 602 one immediately ran into the problems of definition of
the
terms "Federal department or agency," "Federal financial assistance,"
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
'PtI
5/26/65
-16-
and "program or activity."
Therefore, Mr. Via could not agree that section
601, when read in the light of section 602, contained any definition of a
broad remedial purpose.
Mr. Hexter commented that important as the Civil Rights Act was,
he did not regard it as especially complex.
The keynote of Title VI was
in section 601: "No person in the United States shall, on the ground of
race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be
denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance."
It was to him
inescapable that the simple meaning of that passage was that the Federal
G°verument should not lend financial assistance to activities that disel'iminated on account of race or color; if an activity did so discriminate,
Pederal agencies were to see to it, through regulations, that the Federal
G°vernment did not lend financial assistance.
Federal Reserve Bank counsel
had dissected this simple tenet in support of their contention that the
Title was inapplicable to the Reserve Banks, saying first that the Reserve
4flk5 were not Federal agencies; but if they were held to be so, the credit
they
extended was not Federal financial assistance; but if it was held to
be so, it was not to aid a program or activity.
It was difficult for Mr.
Rexter to support these positions.
The civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice had expressed
the
°Pinion that any lending program by a Federal agency constituted Federal
-ncial assistance.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Moreover, the Civil Rights statute itself mentioned
5/26/65
-17-
assistance in the form of loans.
Nor could Mr. Hexter give weight to
the argument that the Federal Reserve System made loans and discounts
for the purpose of aiding the economy generally through the banking
System.
There was a wide spectrum of Federal activities by way of
loans to various segments of the economy -- the housing industry, transportation, agriculture -- the ultimate beneficiaries of which were the
country generally, yet there seemed to be no doubt that these activities
constituted Federal financial assistance.
Viewed from the simple premise
that Congress did not intend any activity of the Federal Government to
r
eceive Federal financial assistance if that activity discriminated because of race, it seemed to Mr. Hexter that a reasonable interpretation
Of that purpose led to the conclusion that the Federal Reserve Banks were
subject to the requirements of Title VI.
Mr. Molony distributed a suggested revision of certain parts of
the alternative draft letter to the Bureau of the Budget.
better
It would be
in his opinion, not to include discussion of the question whether
or not the Reserve Banks were Federal agencies, and he questioned the
appropriateness of language that might seem to imply that ownership of
Pederal Reserve Bank stock by member banks carried with it a proprietorshiP interest.
Also, he thought it would be undesirable to include in
the letter a paragraph indicating sympathy with the objectives of the
Civil Rights Act; if the conclusion reached was that Title VI was inappli"ble to the Reserve Banks, such a statement might seem hypocritical.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
I
5/26/65
-18Governor Mitchell said he did not believe that the draft letter
Properly described the financial relations between member banks and the
Federal Reserve System, which in his opinion did not involve Federal
financial assistance.
If the Civil Rights Act was viewed in terms of
its objectives, he could not see how discounts by Reserve Banks to member banks on the security of eligible paper could properly be regarded
as Federal financial assistance.
Governor Daane, in response to an observation by Mr. Hexter that
the Department of Justice had said specifically that loans by any Federal
agency for any purpose were Federal financial assistance, remarked that
Over the years there had been efforts to trace the purpose of Reserve
'Ink advances, which it had not been found possible to pinpoint satisfa
ctorily.
He agreed with Governor Mitchell that the kind of money ad-
vanced through the discount window, generally collateralled by Government
securities and enabling a bank to adjust its reserve position, was entirely
different from a loan to provide financial aid to a borrower.
He would
ttlake that point the principal ground for holding Title VI inapplicable.
Mr. Hackley commented that the Reserve Banks did make loans, and
the Civil Rights Act specifically covered loans.
He agreed with Governor
balle, however, that the purpose of Reserve Bank advances was different
fl
'(1141 the type
of assistance contemplated by the law.
That was the argu-
41ent he recommended be used to support the conclusion that Title VI was
ilt4PPlicable to
the Reserve Banks.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-19Governor Maisel expressed objection to use of any language
d isclaiming that
the Reserve Banks were Federal instrumentalities.
He
felt, however, that some weight could be given to the legislative history
that Mr. Via had cited in support of a position that Title VI was inapplicable.
The letter might say, in essence, that while Congress could have
made the Reserve Banks subject to the requirements of the Title, the
le gislative history indicated that it had not so intended.
Mr. Hackley said that he had not meant to give the impression
that he would place no reliance on the legislative history, only that
it would not be his primary reliance.
There ensued a discussion of various facets of the legislative
history, including the question whether financial assistance other than
through the use of appropriated funds was contemplated as being covered.
Cc)rmrient was made that since it had been made clear that insurance provided
by
the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and by the Federal Savings
and Loan
Insurance Corporation was not considered Federal financial
assistance for purposes of the Act, it might seem rather technical to
11°1d
that Federal Reserve discounts were to be so considered, especially
ill the absence of positive statements to that effect by the legislators.
Governor Robertson stated at this point that he found it difficult
to read
the statute in anything but its literal language. He believed
the
was no question whatever that Reserve Banks were Federal agencies,
nor
could it be disputed that the statute mentioned loans, or that the
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-20-
Federal Reserve Banks did make loans.
The only argument against appli-
cability of the Title that might have some validity was that banking
was not an activity to which Federal assistance was being granted, and
he did not believe that was a sound contention.
The reasons given by
Reserve Bank Counsel in support of that contention were not convincing.
It seemed to Governor Robertson that it would not be any great task for
the Reserve Banks to apply the statute:
they need only require that banks
[tat came to the discount window furnish a statement that they were not
discriminating because of race.
He thought that for the Board to hold
that the
Title did not apply to the Reserve Banks was contrary to the
whole purpose
of the Act and required a strained construction of the law.
After further discussion during which members of the Board
re
iterated their previously expressed views, it was understood that a
new draft of letter to the Bureau of the Budget taking the position that
Title VI was not applicable to the Federal Reserve Banks but reflecting
changes along lines suggested at this meeting would be submitted for the
Ilciard's consideration.
All members of the staff then withdrew and the Board went into
exe
cutive session.
The Secretary was advised later that during the executive session
the
,ollnwing actions were taken:
Standards of ethical conduct.
In a statement accompanying
txecUt.
-Ive Order 11222, "Prescribing Standards of Ethical Conduct for
OV
eminent Officers and Employees," President Johnson said:
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
"One of
5/26/65
-21-
the main purposes of the executive order is to encourage individuals
faced with questions involving subjective judgment to seek counsel and
guidance.
Thus, the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission has been
instructed to work with each department and agency head to establish
within his organization designated individuals who can provide the guidance and interpretation necessary to relate general principles to specific
situations."
In a letter to Chairman Martin dated May 20, 1965, Chairman Macy
Of the Civil Service Commission stated that it was essential that the
head of each department and agency designate the individual mentioned by
the President as soon as possible. The role of such person would be to
Provide counsel, guidance, and interpretation on matters relating to the
ethical conduct of officers and employees.
The designated individual
Should be a top-ranking person with appropriate experience, preferably
ihc luding legal capability.
During the executive session Howard H. Hackley, General Counsel,
Was
.s-1 1,EaLLs1
to provide counsel, guidance, and interpretation on matters
relating to the ethical conduct of officers and employees of the Board,
14ith the understanding that advice of this designation would be sent by
letter to Chairman Macy.
foreign travel by Mr. McIntosh.
The Board authorized attendance
by j
allies A. McIntosh, Technical Assistant in the Division of Bank Operations,
the Sixth SEANZA Central Banking Course, to be held in Wellington, New
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-22-
Zealand, from September 20 to November 26, 1965, with the understanding
that when details on the costs of the course were available a recommendation would be made to the Board by its staff on whether Mr. McIntosh
should be authorized to travel on a per diem or an actual expense basis.
Foreign travel by Mr. Katz.
The Board authorized foreign travel
by Samuel I. Katz, Adviser in the Division of International Finance, to
attend a meeting on the Euro-currency market to be held at the Bank for
International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, beginning Friday, July
9, 1965, and to visit the German Federal Bank.
The meeting then adjourned.
Secretary's Notes: On May 24, 1965, Governor
Shepardson approved on behalf of the Board the
following items:
Letter to the Presidents of all Federal Reserve Banks (attached
Item N
regarding the procedure for handling requests for copies
(') material filed by member State banks under Regulation F, Securities
ct Member State Banks, and by insured State nonmember banks under the
°rresponding regulations of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Letter to the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston (attached Item No. 14)
a
PProving the designation of four employees as special assistant examiners.
a_
Letter to the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (attached Item No. 15)
PProving the designation of five employees as special assistant examiners.
No
Letter to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (attached Item
approving the appointment of Davis Lawrence Shikles as assistant
-4miner.
Memorandum from the Division of Research and Statistics dated
ej
t 20, 1965, recommending that an additional economist position be
4b n-shed in the Banking Section of that Division.
Governor Shepardson today approved on behalf
of the Board the following items:
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5/26/65
-23-
Letter to the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (attached Item No. 17)
aPproving the appointment of Elisabeth B. Peterson as assistant examiner.
Letter to the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (attached Item
-112,4_213) approving the appointment of Kenneth Lee Swenson as assistant
examiner.
Memoranda recommending the following actions relating to the Board's
staff:
Transfer
Enid J. Halota, from the position of Secretary in the Office of the
Secretary to the position of Secretary in the Division of Examinations,
With an increase in basic annual salary from $5,660 to $6,060, effective
June 1, 1965.
ACC
--_2.ptance
of resignation
St
Penny Brogan, Statistical Assistant, Division of Research and
atistics, effective at the close of business May 29, 1965.
At the meeting on February 15, 1965, the Board
approved the issuance of a set of directives to
the staff regarding responsibilities for examining Federal Reserve Banks and exercising supervision over them, with the understanding that
the directives would be issued in a form satisfactory to Governor Shepardson after modification
in the light of conclusions reached during the
discussion at the February 15 meeting. The
directives were issued on May 26, 1965, in the
form attached as Item No. 19. Copies were sent
to heads of divisions of the Board's staff and
also to the Federal Reserve Banks.
Secretary
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 1
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20351
ADDRBBS orriciAL OORRCBRONDICNCE
TO THE BOARD
May 26, 1965
Board of Directors,
Citizens Fidelity Bank and Trust Company,
Louisville, Kentucky.
Gentlemen:
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System approves the establishment by Citizens Fidelity
Bank and Trust Company, Louisville, Kentucky, of a branch
in the Westport Road Shopping Center on Westport Road near
Goose Creek Road, Jefferson County, Kentucky, provided
the branch is established within one year from the date of
this letter.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
(The letter to the Reserve Bank stated that the
Board also had approved a six-month extension
of the period allowed to establish the branch;
and that if an extension should be requested,
the procedure prescribed in the Board's letter
Of November 9, 1962 (S-1846), should be followed.)
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 2
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADO EON
°maw,OORRESPONOCNCE
TO THE 00A00
May 26, 1965
Board of Directors,
Industrial State Bank of Kalamazoo,
Kalamazoo, Michigan.
Gentlemen:
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System approves the establishment by Industrial State
Bank of Kalamazoo, Kalamazoo, Michigan, of a branch at
601 East Crosstown Parkway, Kalamazoo, Michigan, provided the branch is established within six months from
the date of this letter.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
(The letter to the Reserve Bank stated that the
Board also had approved a six-month extension
of the period allowed to establish the branch;
and that if an extension should be requested,
the procedure prescribed in the Board's letter
of November 9, 1962 (S-1846), should be followed
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 3
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
AODRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 26, 1965
Board of Directors,
Wells Fargo Bank,
San Francisco, California.
Gentlemen:
The Board of Governors of the Federal
Reserve System approves the establishment by Wells
Fargo Bank, San Francisco, California, of a branch
on Main Street, Middletown, Lake County, California,
Provided the branch is established within one year
from the date of this letter.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
(The letter to the Reserve Bank stated that the
Board also had approved a six-month extension
of the period allowed to establish the branch;
and that if an extension should be requested,
the procedure prescribed in the Board's letter
of November 9, 1962 (S-1846), should be followed.)
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 4
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONOENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 26, 1965.
Morgan Guaranty International
Banking Corporation,
23 Wall Street,
New York 15, New York.
Gentlemen:
In accordance with the request and on the basis of the
information furnished in your letter of May 6, 1965, transmitted
through the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, the Board of Governors
grants consent for your Corporation to purchase and hold 12,000
additional shares, par value Mexican Pesos 100 each, of the capital
stock of Credito Bursatil, S.A., Mexico, D.F., Mexico, at a cost of
approximately US$144,000, provided such stock is acquired within
°Ile year from the date of this letter.
The Board also approves the purchase and holding of shares
of Credito Bursatil, S.A. within the terms of the above consent in
excess of 10 per cent of your Corporation's capital and surplus.
The foregoing consent is given with the understanding
that the foreign loans and investments of your Corporation, combined
With those of Morgan Guaranty Trust Company of New York and Morgan
Guaranty International Finance Corporation, including the invest'Tient now being approved, will not exceed the guidelines established
under the voluntary foreign credit restraint effort now in effect.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
d
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 5
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 26, 1965
Board of Directors,
Midland National Bank,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Gentlemen:
With reference to your request submitted through
the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, the Board of Governors,
acting under the provisions of Section 19 of the Federal
Reserve Act, grants permission to the Midland National Bank
to maintain the same reserves against deposits as are required to be maintained by nonreserve city banks, effective
With the first biweekly reserve computation period beginning
after the date of this letter.
Your attention is called to the fact that such
Permission is subject to revocation by the Board of Governors.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 6
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS
orinctAL
CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 26, 1965
Board of Directors,
Northeast National Bank,
San Antonio, Texas.
Gentlemen:
With reference to your request submitted through
the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, the Board of Governors,
,
,
acting under the provisions of Section 19 of the Federal
Reserve Act, grants permission to the Northeast National
Batik to maintain the same reserves against deposits as are
required to be maintained by nonreserve city banks, effective as of the date it opens for business.
Your attention is called to the fact that such
Permission is subject to revocation by the Board of Governors.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 7
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS
orrtcsAL
CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 26, 1965
The Honorable K. A. Randall, Chairman,
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation,
20429
Washington, D. C.
Dear Mr. Randall:
Reference is made to your letter of May 5, 1965,
concerning the application of The Farmers and Merchants Bank,
Boswell, Indiana, for continuance of deposit insurance after
Withdrawal from membership in the Federal Reserve System.
There have been no corrective programs urged upon
the bank, or agreed to by it, which have not been fully
consummated, and there are no such programs that the Board
would advise be incorporated as conditions of admitting the
bank to membership in the Corporation as a nonmember of the
Federal Reserve System.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 8
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON
OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN
May 26, 1965
Hr. Phillip S. Hughes,
Assistant Director for
Legislative Reference,
Bureau of the Budget,
Washington, D. C. 20503
Dear Mr. Hughes:
This is to advise in response to your communication
of May 25, 1965, that the Board recommends that the President
aPprove the enrolled bill, H. R. 6497, "To amend the Bretton
Woods Agreements Act to authorize an increase in the International
Monetary Fund quota of the United States."
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) Wm. McC. Martin, Jr.
Wm. McC. Martin, Jr.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 9
5/26/65
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDEFAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C.
In the Matter of the Application of
bum,
, vat U. S. BANCORPORATION, INC.,
uenver, Colorado
f(3r approval of the acquisition of
,
17°ting shares of Weld County Bank,
,reeley,
Colorado
ORDER APPROVING APPLICATION UNDER
BANK HOLDING COMPANY ACT
There has come before the Board of Governors, pursuant to
sectioa 3(a)(2) of the Dank Holding Company Act of 1956
(12 U.S.C. 1842(a)(2)) and section 222.4(a)(2) of Federal Reserve
4tuiation Y (12 CFR 222.4(0(2)), an application by Denver U. S.
e°r poratien, Inc., Denver, Colorado, a registered bank holdins company,
for
the Board's prior approval of the acquisition of at least 50 per cent
°f the
voting shares of Weld County Bank, Greeley, Colorado.
As required by section 3(b) of the Act, the Board notified the
stat
e Bank Commissioner of Colorado of receipt of the application and
rectti
ested his views and recommendation.
The Commissioner expressed the
°1444
“111 on behalf of the Colorado Banking Board and the Banking Department
that the
proposed acquisition "would be beneficial to the bank", and that
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
752
-2-
neither the Banking Board nor the Banking Department opposed the
Proposed acquisition.
Notice of receipt of the application was published in the
Pederal Register of February 5, 1965 (30 F.R. 1271), providing an
411Portunity for interested persons to submit comments and views with
tesPect to the proposed acquisition.
The time for filing such comments
444 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 approved,
Provided that the acquisition so approved shall not be consummated
(4) Within seven calendar days after the date of this Order or (b) later
tIlan three months after said date.
Dated at Washington, D. C., this 26th day of May, 1965.
By order of the Board of Governors.
Voting for this action: Chairman Martin, and
Governors Balderston, Robertson, Shepardson,
Mitchell, and Daane.
Governor Maisel did not participate in this action.
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
(SEAL)
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
e
Item No. 10
5/26/65
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
APPLICATION BY DENVER U. S. BANCORPORATION, INC.,
DENVER, COLORADO, FOR APPROVAL OF ACQUISITION OF
SHARES OF WELD COUNTY BANK, GREELEY, COLORADO
STATEMENT
Denver U. S. Bancorporation, Inc. ("Applicant"), Denver,
Co
lorado, a registered bank holding company, has filed with the Board,
PUrsuant to
section 3(a)(2) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956
("the Act"), an application for approval of the acquisition of at least
SO Per cent of the voting shares of Weld County Bank ("Bank"), Greeley,
Co
lorado.
Views and recommendation of supervisory authority. - As
Nuired by section 3(b) of the Act, notice of receipt of the application
1448 given to, and views and recommendation requested of, the State Bank
Cohn,.
--118sioner.
The Commissioner advised that neither the Banking Board
11°1' the Banking Department opposed approval of the application.
Statutory factors. - Section 3(c) of the Act requires
the
Board to take into consideration the following factors in acting
°4 t•
his application: (1) the financial history and condition of
the ,
uolding company and the banks concerned; (2) their prospects;
(3) the
character of their management; (4) the convenience, needs,
kld
,
"elfare of the communities and the area concerned; and (5) whether
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the effect of the proposed acquisition would be to expand the size
or extent of the bank holding company system beyond limits consistent
with adequate and sound banking, the public interest, and the preservation of competition in the field of banking.
Financial history, condition, prospects, and management
holding company
12-f--Aaalj____.oantand Bank. - Applicant became a bank
On February 5, 1964, and its financial history, albeit short, is
sat isfactory.
Applicant's holding company system is composed of
three banks, one located in Denver, and two in nearby suburban comThese banking subsidiaries held combined deposits of
munities.
1/
$366 million at June 30, 1964.
Based on the satisfactory finan-
cial condition of its subsidiary banks, Applicant's financial
ondition is satisfactory.
Applicant's prospects depend largely upon the prospects
Of its subsidiary banks.
Inasmuch as Applicant's three subsidiary
bellks reflect sound growth and earnings and favorable prospects,
the Board concludes that Applicant's prospects are also favorable.
The managetrents of Applicant and its subsidiary banks
at'e considered experienced and well qualified.
Bank was organized some 75 years ago and has present
dePosits of about $17 million. Its deposit growth in recent years
0
111Pares favorably with its two larger local competitors. Despite
Bent.
s favorable deposit growth, the Colorado Bank Commissioner
1/ T,
uni
are as of
thin 'ess otherwise indicated, all banking data noted
date.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
considers Bank's financial condition and prospects as somewhat unfavorable in view of a need found by the Commissioner for additional
capital and somewhat stronger management direction in certain of the
Bank's operations.
The Commissioner concluded that in these two
respects, the acquisition of Bank by Applicant "would be beneficial
to the bank."
While the Board, on the basis of the record before it,
finds that Bank's present financial condition, prospects, and manage-.
mcnt are fairly satisfactory, the Board finds reasonable the concern
exPressed by Applicant regarding the management problem that could
"Ise in Bank in the event of the death or resignation of Bank's chief
executive officer, and agrees that this problem is accentuated by the
Potential retirement of, and less active management participation by,
certain of Bank's other executive officers, particularly in the light
Of the anticipated continued growth of Bank.
While the Board is of
the opinion that Applicant's proposed acquisition of Bank is but one
Of the solutions to Bank's capital need and management succession
°b1ems, the Board finds that Applicant's ownership of Bank offers
'
131
sufficiently reasonable assurance of more immediate and certain
Solutions to these problems as to constitute a consideration favorable
to approval of the application.
Convenience, needs,, and welfare of the communities and,
the
concerned. - Bank is located in downtown Greeley, about
58 miles north of the City of Denver in the west-central area of
14e1d County.
Greeley is the center for large farming, ranching,
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1 f 3X3
-4--
and feeding enterprises, and the location of many retail stores and
d istributors of farm machinery, automobiles and trucks, appliances,
and other kinds of machinery and equipment.
mated population of 30,000,
Greeley has an esti-
2/
Bank's primary service area, with
an estimated population of 32,000, encompasses Greeley and four
rural route zones extending a maximum of nine miles from downtown Greeley.
In addition to Bank, four other banks are located in the primary
service area.
are
According to Applicant, three of these four banks
affiliated.
The Board's earlier finding regarding the beneficial
effect of Applicant's ownership of Bank in respect to providing
"Pital funds and rendering assistance as to management succession
14
Bank, bears also upon the convenience and needs of the area
eoncerned.
Applicant states that it can assist Bank in such areas
Saddvertising, computer services, auditing, advice regarding Bank's
b°nd Portfolio, trust investments, employee benefits, and in respect
to such other banking services as to which a need for assistance may
ari
On the basis of the record present, the Board is satisfied
that APplicant s rendition of the assistance it proposes in respect
to s
ervices to be available through Bank would prove beneficial to
the residents and businesses of Bank's primary service area.
This
'result lends weight toward approval of the application; however,
the
affirmative weight is somewhat lessened by the absence in
origiZt::ea from which an estimated 75 per cent of Bank's IPC deposits
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-5-
the record of evidence indicating that any of the major banking needs
Of the area concerned are presently going unserved.
On balance, it is
the Board's conclusion that the resulting benefit to the convenience
and general welfare of the area likely to result from consummation of
APPlicant's proposal weighs somewhat in favor of approval.
Effect of proposed acquisition on adequate and sound banking,
aterest, and banking competition. - The aggregate deposits of
$366 million held by Applicant's three banks would, by the addition of
Bank to
Applicant's system, be increased to $333 million, an increase
°Ilm 14.3 to 15 per cent in Applicant's control of the deposits of all
insured
banks in Colorado.
Applicant and the other two registered bank
holding companies with subsidiary banks in Colorado presently control
4 Per cent of the deposits of all insured banks in the State.
'
21
This
e°11centration would be increased to 22 per cent through Applicant's
41111eition of Bank. The acquisition would give Applicant control of
Per cent
of the 14 insured banks in Weld County, 18 per cent
417 mi11i0n) of the deposits of those banks, and would result in Bank
being the only holding company subsidiary in Weld County.
At the time of the Board's approval in November 1963 of
441'
Leant's formation, the Board concluded that while a sizable portion
°f "le total deposits and loans of all banks in the State of Colorado
is —
11uncentrated in a relatively few banks, the largest five of which
ate 4
11 Denver and include Applicant's subsidiary, Denver U. S. National
%) lt did not appear that any single banking institution was dominant
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-6-
in the Denver area or in the State as a whole.
Then,as now, Denver
U. S. National Bank was the second largest bank in the State. (With
the acquisition of control of Bank's $17 million of deposits, Applicant's
sYstem would control deposits aggregating $4 million less than those
The Board concluded that there was no
of the State's largest bank.)
reasonable basis to believe that formation of Applicant's system, including Denver U. S. National Bank, would be inimical to the proven
\Igor of banking competition in the areas concerned.
The record before the Board in this case requires no different
conclusion regarding the probable impact on banking competition of
sting and proposed concentrations of banking resources.
Viewed on
a State-wide basis or when restricted to Weld County, the minimal increase in concentrations of banking resources that would result from
ecnsummation of the proposed acquisition does not represent a consideration
44verse to approval of the proposal.
Considering next the extent to which Applicant's ownership of
441k would eliminate existing competition or foreclose future competition between Bank and Applicant's subsidiaries, for the reasons
her_
uafter mentioned, the Board concludes that these considerations
heaent no bar to approval of the application.
Bank is located approxi-
'tell' 58 miles from Applicant's nearest and largest subsidiary,
"
Deliver U. S. National Bank.
The remaining two subsidiaries of Appli-
%It)
First Bank of Aurora and Arapahoe County Bank, are 65 and 72
respectively,from Bank.
dr
awS
None of Applicant's subsidiaries
a significant amount of its deposits or loans from Bank's
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
9
-7-
Primary service area and only to a minor extent do Bank's loans and
dep08its originate in Applicant's subsidiaries' primary service
areas.
Accordingly, the amount of existing competition between Bank
and Applicant's subsidiaries that would be eliminated following con..
summation of Applicant's proposal is minimal.
Nor is there reason to
believe that future competition between Bank and Applicant's subsidiaries would be measurably greater than at present, particularly in
respect to Applicant's two smaller subsidiaries because of their size
and the relatively great distance separating them from Bank.
Bank now competes with the following banks located in
the City
of Greeley: (1) Greeley National Bank, with deposits of
$28 million, (2) the latter bank's two affiliates, with combined
dePosits of $3 million, and (3) First National Bank, with deposits
f $26 million.
Bank also competes with other banks located from
5 to 26 miles from Greeley, within Weld County, having deposits
‘la Ying from $360,000 to $4 million.
In view of the fact that
tankss two principal Greeley competitors each has deposits of some
1-°111i1li0n more than Bank, and the fact that its two smaller Greeley
"41Petitors are affiliated with one of the larger Greeley banks, and
441"
no subsidiary of Applicant competes to any significant extent
in
- the area concerned, the Board concludes that consummation of the
1)0
P°sed acquisition would not significantly alter the present comPetitive picture in the area concerned.
The Board concludes that the foregoing considerations
talit a finding that the acquisition proposed would not result
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
760
in an expansion of the size or extent of Applicant's system
inconsistent with adequate and sound banking, the public interest,
or the preservation of banking competition.
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 propoaed transaction would be consistent with the public
interest, ond that the application should, therefore, be approved.
IleY 26, 1965.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
i
Item No. 11
5/26/65
CONCURRING STATEMENT OF GOVERNOR ROBERTSON
majority actioa
In November 1963 I dissented from the Board's
others, that
approving Applicant's formation for the reason, among
Applicant to seek
the Board's action constituted an open invitation to
further expansion of its system within Colorado, a State wherein a
was controlled by a few
444J°r Portion of the total banking resources
4qe institutions.
Further acquisition of banks by this holding company
"uld be foreseen then.
I have voted for approval of Applicant's owner-
8114 and operation of the Weld County Bank because of the assertions of
the
nt with respect to
Colorado Banking Board and the Banking Depcxtme
the.
be beneficial
conclusion that consummation of this proposal would
to the Weld County Bank and eliminate some of its existing problems.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 12
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS
orriciAL CORRESPONDENCE
To THE BOARD
May 26, 1965.
Mr. Earl R. Bopp, Chairman,
Conference of Presidents,
Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia,
19101.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Dear Mr. Bopp:
With the Board's letter of March 17, 1965, there was
furnished a proposal by President Scanlon concerning the continued
availability of Federal Reserve notes in denominations over $100.
While comments were subsequently submitted by the individual Banks
in regard to this matter, there were some differences of opinion
expressed in these comments. Accordingly, the Board believes it
Would be desirable to have the topic placed on the agenda for the
June 14, 1965, meeting of the Conference of Presidents. In particular, the Board would like to have the views of the Conference with
respect to the possible desirability of an arrangement under which
Reserve Banks wanting such bills, and not having any, would purchase
them from other Banks with a large supply.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Merritt Sherman
Merritt Sherman,
Secretary.
cc:
Mr. Lawrence C. Murdoch, Jr.,
Secretary, Conference of Presidents.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 13
5/26/65
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20551
ADDRESS orrscIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 25, 1965.
Dear Sir:
Questions have been raised by several Reserve Banks regarding
the handling of requests for copies of registration statements and other
material filed by commercial banks in compliance with provisions of the
Board's Regulation F, "Securities of Member State Banks." While it'is
not yet possible to estimate accurately the volume of requests for
copies that may be expected, it seems desirable to develop a tentative
Procedure for handling requests of this type throughout the System.
As you know, copies of the material filed by member State
banks under Regulation F and by insured State nonmember banks (under
corresponding regulations of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation)
are available for public inspection at the FDIC offices in Washington.
The staff of the Corporation has indicated a willingness to prepare
without charge a xerox copy of any Regulation F material filed by a
member State bank or an insured nonmember bank that may be requested
at the Corporation or at the Board.
For the sake of uniformity, it is suggested that, until
further notice, the Federal Reserve Banks follow a similar procedure
in complying with reasonable requests for copies of Regulation F material
filed by member banks and by insured nonmember banks. The Board will
a ppreciate being advised from time to time regarding the volume of
"quests received at the Reserve Banks.
Very truly yours,
Merritt Sh man,
Secretary.
Digitized for 10
FRASER
THE PRESIDENTS
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
OF ALL FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS
Item No. 14
5/26/65
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS arrichat. CORRCUPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 24, 1965
Mr. Luther M. Hoyle, Jr., Vice President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Boston,
02106
Boston, Massachusetts.
Dear Mr. Hoyle:
In accordance with the request contained in
your letter of May 13, 1965, the Board approves the
designation of each of the following employees as a
special assistant examiner for the Federal Reserve Bank
of Boston:
Ronald Bacon
Joseph E. Brown, Jr.
Ronald A. Burnett
James T. Timberlake
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
if)
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
Item No. 15
5/26/65
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20551
ADDRESS OrrICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE !BOARD
May 24, 1965
Mr. John L. Nosker, Vice President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond,
23213
Richmond, Virginia.
Dear Mr. Nosker:
In accordance with the request contained in
es the
your letter of May 18, 1965, the Board approv
as a
ees
employ
ing
follow
the
designation of each of
e Bank
l
Reserv
Federa
the
for
special assistant examiner
of Richmond:
H. Christian Breschel
Charles T. Poole
Robert L. Rapp
Melvin B. Turner
T. Henry Wilkinson
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
TY0
Item No. 16
5/26/65
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20551
ADDRESS arrtcom. CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 24, 1965
Mr. George D. Royer, Jr., Vice President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City,
Kansas City, Missouri.
64106
Dear Mr. Royer:
In accordance with the request contained in
your letter of May 17, 1965, the Board approves the
appointment of Davis Lawrence Shikles as an assistant
examiner for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
Please advise the salary rate and the effective date of
the appointment.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
/67
Item No. 17
5/26/65
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, 0. C. 20551
ADORES!, orricIAL CORRLIIIPONDENCE
TO THE SOAR°
May 27, 1965
Mr. Leland M. Ross, Vice President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago,
Chicago, Illinois,
60690
Dear Mr. Ross:
In accordance with the request contained in
your letter of May 21, 1965, the Board approves the
appointment of Mrs. Elisabeth B. Peterson as an assistant examiner for the Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago.
Please advise the effective date of the appointment.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Item No. 18
5/26/65
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE
Ov O01:4.!
FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
0
WASHINGTON, O. C. 20551
2:
00
ADDRESS
orriciAt. CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD
May 27, 1965
Mr. George D. Royer, Jr., Vice President,
Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City,
Kansas City, Missouri. 64106
Dear Mr. Royer:
In accordance with the request contained
in your letter of May 20, 1965, the Board approves
the appointment of Kenneth Lee Swenson as an assistant
examiner for the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City.
Please advise the salary rate and the effective date
of the appointment.
Very truly yours,
(Signed) Karl E. Bakke
Karl E. Bakke,
Assistant Secretary.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
, .1.613
1_
Item No. 19
5/26/65
May 26, 1965.
SYSTEM
DIRECTIVES FROM BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE
TO ITS STAFF REGARDING RESPONSIBILITIES FOR EXAMINING
FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS AND EXERCISING SUPERVISION OVER THEM
Statutory Regponsibilities
authorized
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System is
t0 exercise general supervision over • • • Federal Reserve Banks" (Federal
Reserve Act, 11(j)), "to examine at its discretion the accounts, books and
4ffairs of each Federal Reserve Bank .. • and to require such statements
44d reports as it may deem necessary." (Federal Reserve Act, 11(a))
The
hoard "shall, at least once each year, order an examination of each Federal
Iteserve Bank." (Federal Reserve Act, 21)
supervision
There also are statutory provisions relating to special
by the Board in particular areas or to functions the Reserve Banks perform
elsentially as field representatives of the Board. Some examples are:
ding projects of Reserve Banks (Federal Reserve Act, 10); issuance of
rict settlelieral Reserve notes by Reserve Banks and operation of interdist
rilerlt fund (Federal Reserve Act, 16); compensation to Reserve Bank directors,
fficers and employees (Federal Reserve Act, 4); relationships and transac401is of
(Federal Reserve
Reserve Banks with foreign banks or bankers
Act) 14(g)); supervision of commercial banks and related organizations.
(Pederal Reserve Act and related statutes)
II
' General Assignments
The Board considers the work of its several Divisions as a
c'I'clinated activity in assisting the Board to discharge its responsibiliin examining the Federal Reserve Banks and in exercising supervision
'
Over
them.
that
This requires cooperation among the Divisions to the end
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-2
(1) the work of one Division does not unnecessarily duplicate or conflict
n
With that of other Divisions, and (2) information coming to the attentio
of one Division, of significant value to other Divisions, is brought to
their attention.
Therefore, any such information coming to the attention
of one Division having to do with the responsibilities of another Division
Should be reported as promptly as the situation may require to the other
the first
Division. If the matter does not involve responsibilities of
Reserve
Division, that Division should not take it up directly with the
Bank.
III, Division Assipments
Responsibilities of the various Divisions for advising and assisting the Board with respect to the supervision of the Reserve Banks are as
follows:
A. Office of the Secretary has responsibility to of the Board
Clear and conduct official correspondence on behalf
and serve generally as the administrative office of the Board in its relations with the Federal Reserve Banks.
B. Division of Examinations has responsibility to 1.
Conduct examinations of the Federal Reserve Banks and report
thereon to the Board.
a.
of
The examination of a Federal Reserve Bank by the Division
to develop
Examinations shall be so conducted as to enable the Division
an informed opinion as to the financial condition of the Reserve Bank
as of the date of the examination and the fair presentation of its income and expenses for the intervening period since the previous
examination.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 3 13. Division of Examinations
(continued)
The examination should be made in conformity with generally
b.
accepted auditing standards, and accordingly should include such
as
tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures
the Division considers necessary in the circumstances.
of
c. An examination of this kind would require careful review
the internal controls and audit procedures of the Reserve Bank, and
with due regard to the effectiveness thereof, the application of
work
examination procedures by the Division that would avoid excess
and undue duplication of effective and acceptable verifications made
through the Reserve Bank's own audit processes.
Such an examination
would cover, among other things, (i) verification (using appropriate
includtesting procedures where applicable) of assets and liabilities,
Bank
ing liabilities as custodian, (ii) proper discharge by the Reserve
of its responsibilities as Fiscal Agent of the United States, (iii)conadopted
formance in the protection function of the Reserve Bank with
Safety
nt
provisions and standards, and (iv) compliance by the manageme
Of the Reserve Bank with provisions of law, regulations of the Board of
finances
Governors, and other requirements affecting the Reserve Bank's
and accounting, including financial relations with member banks.
d.
The Examination procedures referred to above should be appro-
Board's
Priately extended whenever this should be necessary to meet the
need for additional examination assurance with respect to certain
classes of transactions or other matters, such as the examination of
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
IL i
- 4 B.
Division of Examinations
(continued)
additional disbursement vouchers where this is considered necessary
to provide the assurance required that a Reserve Bank's expenditures
conform to Board policy.
e.
In addition, the Division should investigate or review other
related matters the Board may direct or authorize it to cover, such
as the development of information and opinions that would assist the
Board in making an appraisal of management.
Between annual examina-
tions the Division should review, and bring to the attention of the
Board, as appropriate, information regarding conformance of Reserve
Bank lending to the principles of Regulation A.
by
2. Promote most desirable internal audit policies and practices
the Reserve Banks and keep informed on Reserve Bank activities as treated in
reports of audits by internal audit departments of Reserve Banks.
a.
Review the audit function at each annual examination of the
ions of
Reserve Banks, supplementing such review by suitable observat
the conduct of internal audits.
b.
Review reports of internal audits.
c.
Review, in cooperation with Division of Bank Operations,
budget reports of internal audit departments.
d.
Work with (i) the Conference of Chairmen and Deputy Chair-
men of the Federal Reserve Banks in regard to the responsibility of
ce
Boards of Directors for the audit function, and (ii) the Conferen
of General Auditors of the Federal Reserve Banks and the Standing
Committee thereof.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-5. Division of Examinations
3.
(continued)
Advise and assist the Board with respect to activities of the
Reserve Banks as the Board's field representatives in implementation of the
Doardts statutory responsibilities and corresponding policies for supervising commercial banks and related organizations.
a. Promote most desirable policies and practices by the Reserve
Banks in (i) examinations, and follow-up thereof, of State member banks,
bank holding companies, and foreign banking or financing corporations;
(ii) maintaining familiarity with general condition of national banks;
(iii) processing of various applications such as for branches, mergers,
and holding company expansion; and (iv) general bank supervision,
including prevention and correction of unsafe or unsound banking
practices or conditions.
b.
Review reports of examinations made by Reserve Banks and
measures taken by Reserve Banks to obtain needed corrections.
c.
Develop improvements in form of reports of examination.
d.
Review, in cooperation with Division of Bank Operations,
budget reports of bank examination departments.
e.
Process proposed appointments of examiners at the Reserve
Banks for action by the Board; assist Reserve Banks in training of
examiners through System and/or interagency training programs.
Q.
Division of Bark Operations has responsibility to 1.
Advise the Board with respect to, and otherwise promote, the
4ectiveness of those operations of the Reserve Banks as to which such
I813(3nsibility has not been specifically or implicitly
Iiivisions of the Board.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
assigned to other
- 6 C.
Division of Bank Operations
(continued)
that will
2. Maintain a cost accounting and reporting system
well as intra-Bank comparisons
Permit significant inter-Bank comparisons as
on a retrospective basis.
e Banks of sufficient
3. Make operational surveys at the Reserv
p and report to the Board
scope and depth to enable the Division to develo
effectiveness of the
an informed opinion with regard to the quality and
activities concerned, and make
Procedures and personnel employed in the
suggestions for improvement where appropriate.
of Examinations where
4. Review, in cooperation with the Division
y of the protection funcappropriate, the operational efficiency and econom
tion within adopted safety provisions and standards.
with other Divisions of
5. Analyze and summarize, in cooperation
other
the Board where appropriate, budget and expense reports and any
Reserve Bank operations for
material that may bear upon the effectiveness of
and
the purpose of focusing appropriate attention on changes in cost trends
Other significant developments.
6.
concerned between
Act as liaison where operating matters are
ents of the Federal
the Board and Committees of the Conference of Presid
departments and agencies.
Reserve Banks and between the Board and Government
7.
Federal Reserve notes
Develop the annual printing order for
ry currency and
and arrange for the distribution and shipment of Treasu
Pederal Reserve notes.
8.
fund and process transMaintain the interdistrict settlement
transactions in the gold
for the Treasurer's General Account and other
certificate fund apart from the daily interdistrict settlement.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-7 C. Division of Bank Operations (continued)
9. Maintain the Accounting Manual and formulate or revise
Accounting Manual instructions, consulting where appropriate with the
Subcommittee on Accounting of the Conference of Presidents of the Federal
4serve Banks,
10.
Review and summarize for Board action Reserve Bank building
hcTosals, consulting where appropriate with representatives of the Reserve
Darats and the Board's consulting architect.
P].Vision of Personnel Administration has responsibility to 1.
Review, through periodic visits, the personnel programs of
he Reserve Banks to evaluate personnel operations, exchange ideas, and probetter mutual understanding.
2.
Analyze, through origination of special studies or otherwise,
11418ion8 of official salaries and structures, and recommend action by the
catt'cle
3. Analyze all changes in employee salary structures to determine
that they are fairly administered and properly maintained, and that sound
1)1`iliciples of salary administration are followed; recommend Board approval
OtdisaPproval of the proposed ranges.
4. Review new, or changing, fringe benefits, particularly life
41841.enee, retirement, hospitalization, and medical insurance programs subtlItted by the Reserve Banks for approval.
5.
Review appointments of Federal Reserve Agent's Assistants,
Alt
e nates, and Representatives proposed by the Federal Reserve Agent
rMan of the Board of Directors) at each Reserve Bank
(it
till°ti
by the Board of Governors.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
and recommend
- 8 D. Division of Personnel Administration (continued)
6.
Serve as a clearing house for the exchange of personnel
ural improveideas and experience to promote rapid dissemination of proced
ments, changes in personnel philosophy, etc.
nel
7. Perform staff functions in connection with other person
activities, as follows:
a.
Review, in cooperation with the Division of Bank Operations,
budget reports of Personnel Departments.
on
b. Maintain biographical sketches, photographs, and positi
descriptions of Reserve Bank officers.
c.
On behalf of the Chairman of the Board of Governors, grant
security clearances.
d.
Prepare statistical reports of personnel data.
e.
with
Handle miscellaneous Board supervisory responsibilities
m treatment of
respect to: (i) Employee loan plans; (ii) Unifor
Reserve Bank
employees called for military service; (iii) Service of
business and
employees with Government departments; and (iv) Outside
teaching activities.
E.
to Division of Research and Statistics has responsibility
1.
s
Advise the Board of the scope, quality, and effectivenes
in cooperaof the research programs of the Reserve Banks, including review,
s.
tion with Division of Bank Operations, of research department budget report
cy of
2. Advise the Board as to the qualifications and adequa
oumber of research personnel at the Reserve Banks.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 9 R. Division of Research and Statistics
3.
(continued)
Review articles for publication in the monthly reviews of
Reserve Banks and other important manuscripts prepared by Reserve Bank
research personnel, and advise the Banks as to accuracy of fact and conformallee with System policy.
4.
Advise the Board, after consultation with Reserve Bank
research personnel, as to what statistical data should be collected on a
Systemwide basis and on the progress of such statistical programs.
5.
Coordinate System-wide research and data collecting activities
vith a view to avoiding duplication (except where it serves a useful purpose)
end to
employing the facilities and personnel of each Bank and of the Board
t° the greatest advantage.
6. Exercise leadership within the System in the delineating of
h°131ems whose solutions will be helpful to formulation and execution of
tr*Iletary policy, in the development of new research methodology and
1."earch programs that will help to solve these problems, in the recruit-
of qualified research personnel, and in communication of research
tesuirs to the academic and general public
P.
•
*Yision of International Finance has responsibility to 1.
Advise and assist the Board with respect to the Board's
l'eePonsibility to:
a.
Exercise special supervision over the relationships and
transactions entered into by any Reserve Bank, and especially by
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, with any foreign bank or banker,
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 10 P. Division of International Finance (continued)
b. Obtain reports on conferences and negotiations and on
understandings or agreements arrived at or transactions agreed upon
between any Reserve Bank and any foreign bank or banker.
2, Review, in cooperation with Division of Research and Statistics
and other
articles for publication in the monthly reviews of Reserve Banks
important manuscripts prepared by Reserve Bank personnel, in the field of
international economics and finance.
3. Advise the Board, after consultation with Reserve Bank
research personnel, as to statistical data in the field of international
economics and finance to be collected on a System-wide basis and on the
Progress of such statistical programs.
4. Advise the Board on Reserve Bank technical assistance to
foreign countries.
G. Division of Data Processing has responsibility to I. Implement and supervise the collection of economic data in the
financial area; review and edit current data from Reserve Banks; establish
uniform procedures for collection of data in the interest of high-quality
financial data,
2. Develop and maintain data records of key financial series on an
for joint
individual firm basis and develop information retrieval programs
use of research personnel at Reserve Banks and Board.
3. Provide professional specialists at the Reserve Banks with
technical support, consultation, and training on:
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
- 11 G. Division of Data Processing
a.
(continued)
data
The application of electronic computer techniques to
processing and economic research.
b. Programming systems.
c.
Sampling.
d. Other types of mathematically oriented functions.
gy and promote
4. Foster continuing education in computer technolo
the
sharing of programs among the Reserve Banks and Board.
5.
from
Coordinate the "calls" for quarterly reports of condition
lized
State member banks; revieu and standardize procedures for the decentra
e4Iting and keypunching of State member
and national bank reports and pro-
/114e centralizcd processing therefor.
6.
of
Coordinate and supervise the collection of annual reports
41come and dividends of State member banks; review and standardize proand
cedillres for the decentralized editing and keypunching of State member
riaticma1 bank reports and provide centralized processing therefor.
7.
Provide data on selective basis to Reserve Banks to fill outside
(acaA
uemic) requests; advise on confidentiality and release of data.
8.
Provide consultation and foster continuing improvement in the
tise of modern graphic design for the communication of research and statisti41 analyses.
114 te al Division has responsibility to
1. Promote, to the extent feasible, uniform approach by Reserve
tatit
counsel to legal questions arising in connection with Reserve Bank
"s, including questions of interpretation of law and Board regulations.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
-12 4. Legal Division (continued)
2.
from
Process, and make recommendations with respect to, requests
the Reserve Banks for Board approval of the employment of outside counsel in
Particular cases.
3.
Banks,
Review reports regarding litigation involving the Reserve
48 contained in examination reports and special reports by Reserve Bank
counsel.
s of interest
4. Review the adequacy of arrangements to avoid conflict
1/ Possible misuse of confidential information on the part of Reserve Bank
directors and develop such Board statements or instructions on this subject
48 IneY be desirable.
5.
ion
Solicit assistance from Reserve Bank counsel in the preparat
compilations of State laws relating to various subjects.
to litigation
6. Keep Reserve Bank counsel informed with respect
it114)1ving the Board and other legal matters of general System interest.
I, 0
ffice of Defense Planning has responsibility to g changes in
1. Provide Reserve Banks with information, includin
their
liati"al Plans and in vulnerability studies, needed by them to keep
e414rtency plans current and to improve their preparedness.
and pre2. Review and evaluate the emergency plans, circulars,
SS measures of Reserve Banks.
for
3. Review for control purposes requests from Reserve Banks
44Tfit-
-4' clearances.
suggest4. Assist Reserve Banks with their preparedness programs by
tta 4
44Provements where indicated, and by representing the views of Reserve
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
81
- 13 -
I.
Office of Defense Planning (continued)
Banks in the interagency considerations of proposed emergency documents
affecting Reserve Bank operations.
5. Maintain liaison with Reserve Banks through the Committee on
Emergency Operations of the Presidents' Conference, and its Subcommittees,
emergency planning officers, and Reserve Banks' representatives assigned
to the Board's Liaison Office.
6.
Advise the Board on the state of Reserve Bank preparedness and
Prepare for the Board's consideration reports on Reserve Bank prePeredness as a part of the Board's semiannual report to the Office of
Emergency Planning and its Annual Report to the Joint Committee on
afense Production, Congress of the United States.
J. Assistant to the Board has responsibility to 1.
Review the scope of bank relations and public information
activities of the Reserve Banks as reflected in their budget reports,
meetings of related System committees, in Reserve Bank publications,
and in other information supplied by the Reserve Banks.
IC
Division of Administrative Services has responsibility to 1.
Serve as Board representative
on Subcommittee of the Conference
°f Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks, charged with operation of the
Pederal Reserve Leased Wire System.
2. Maintain and contract for the Federal Reserve Leased Wire
System.
3.
Serve as liaison representative for communications between the
Getlerel Services Administration and the Federal Reserve System.
http://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
@FedFRASER