View original document

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

1413

A meeting of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Syswas held in Washington on Tuesday, October 8, 1946, at 10:35 a•rn•
PPESENT:

Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.

Eccles, Chairman
Ransom, Vice Chairman
Draper
Evans
Vardaman
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.

Carpenter, Secretary
Sherman, Assistant Secretary
Morrill, Special Adviser
Thurston, Assistant to the Chairman
Parry, Director of the Division of
Security Loans
Vest, General Counsel
Thomas, Director of the Division of
Research and Statistics
Leonard, Director of the Division of
Examinations
Nelson, Director of the Division of
Personnel Administration
Tolmsend, Assistant General Counsel

Chairman Eccles stated that following the meeting of the Board
On Allguet 20, 1946, at which there was a discussion of the question
Mether the National
Labor Relations Act applied to the Federal Reserve
Banks: he had a further telephone conversation with Mr. Herzog, Chairman
f the National Labor Relations Board, as a result of which the latter
agreed that further consideration of the question should be held until
rte./. he
(Chairman Eccles) returned from the West. He also said that
l'eeentl,Y he had received a request from Mr. Herzog for a further contoren,
'e on the matter, that he had replied that he would try to meet
this
reek on the matter, and that in the meantime there had been a
c°171ience attended by Mr. hansom and attorneys for the Board of




1414
10/8/46

-2-

Governors and the National
Labor Relations Board, the substance of
Which

would be reported by Mr. Vest.
Ur. Vest stated that Mr. Ransom, Mr. Townsend and he met with

Mr* VanArkel, General Counsel, and another attorney from the National
Labor

Relations Board on September 30, at which time it was stated

that the
Labor Board had not reached a decision as to the application
of the
National Labor Relations Act to the Federal Reserve Banks, and
the impression was gained by the representatives of the Board at that
eMference that there was at least some chance that the decision of
the Labor Board
would be that the Act did not apply.

The attorneys

for the Labor
Board, Mr. Vest said, were interested in discussing what the
Procedure would be in the event the decision of the Labor Board was that
the Act did apply, and had stated that the Labor Board was faced not
°44 with the legal question, but also whether it should decline to
take jurisdiction in the matter because of considerations of policy.
vest also said that it appeared from the discussion that there
were
three possible courses available to the Labor Board, (1) a ruling
that the Act did or did not apply, (2) a decision by the Labor Board
that it would not take jurisdiction in the matter, and (3) to let the
cas_
take its usual course, in which event there mould be an election
at the
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas to determine whether the labor
Unto
,
- represented the majority of the employees, and in the event it
did) the
Federal Reserve Bank would decline to bargain with repre-




1415
10/8/46

-3-

set-tives
of the union, which would constitute an unfair labor practice
an would
form a basis on which the question of the applicability of the
National Labor Relations Act to the Federal Reserve Banks could be taken
to court,
either by the Federal Reserve Bank or the labor union.

Mr.

Vest went on
to say that the representatives of the Labor Board sug—
gested the possibility of a stipulation of the facts by the labor union
ahd the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas on the basis on which the matter
Could be considered by the Labor Board, but that it was felt that a
forma record
of that kind would not produce any additional information
that
not available in the briefs already filed.
Mr. Vest added that the specific question for consideration by
the Board of Governors was whether it wished to suggest any procedure
Other than
that the case follow the normal course in the event the
Labor Board should decide that the Act was applicable, and that it was
the NA
4vv of himself and Mr. Townsend that one or more of the members
r the Board of Governors should meet with members of the National
Labor Relations Board for the purpose of attempting to persuade the
latter that nothing would be gained by placing the question in the
eciurts for the reason that the employees of the Federal Reserve Banks
were relatively
very few in number, the docket of the cases of the
Lab°
r Board was already very far behind, and nothing would be gained
br the labor union in the event it was held by the courts that the Act
WaS

aPPlicable to the Reserve banks.




1416

10/8/46
In the discussion which ensued there was general agreement
that nothing would be gained by an undertaking to stipulate the facts
in the
case.
Chairman Eccles stated that he had stated to the Chairman of
the Labor Board that, in his opinion, nothing would be gained by litieetion of the Question involved, that the Board would carry the case
to the Supreme Court if necessary, and that even if the decision were
against the Federal Reserve Bank, the labor union would have gained
n°thing for the reason that the Federal Reserve Bank was without
au
thority to make binding agreements regarding salaries of its emnloyees as all salaries were subject to the approval of the Board, and that
if
-“Y contmversy with resnect to salaries were carried to a point
Where
there was a strike at a Federal Reserve Bank it undoubtedly
w°uld result in legislation by Congress to make it clear that the
Federal Reserve Banks were part of the United States for the purposes
the National
Labor Relations Act.

It was possible, he said, that

Congress in order to bring that about might see fit to redeem the stock
of the

Federal Reserve Banks so as to make it clear that the ownership

°f the Reserve banks rested with the United States Government.
During the course of a discussion Chairmen Eccles suggested
that

he advise the Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board that

the
Board

of Governors had considered the matter carefully and was unan-

1111°1181Y of the opinion (1) that the Labor Board should find some way of




1417
10/8/46

-5-

aliQiding the necessity of having the question taken into the courts,
and should
recognize that it would be a service to the labor unions
to prevent the litigation of a question which the unions could not
mgardless of the court decision, as the ultimate outcome would
clilY be an amendment to the law to make it clear that the Federal
Reserve Banks were a part of the United States, and (2) that if the
Labor Board were
not willing to follow that suggestion the only other
alternative would be to let the matter take the normal course in which
case at the proper time the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas would refuse
to
bargain with the labor union.
Mr. Vardaman enquired whether, if the question of an election
arose, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas should not refuse to permit
the election in order to avoid any question of submitting to the jurisclicti°n of the National Labor Relations Act. Messrs. Vest and Townsend
tated the reasons why, in their opinion, the question of jurisdiction
eculd not be tested in the courts until it was determined by an election
that the labor union represented a majority of the employees of the Bank
arid.
the Bank refused to bargain with the union.
It was agreed during the discussion that the question whether
841 election should be permitted on the premises of the Dallas Bank was
clie that should be left to the Board of Directors of the Bank for decision.




1418
10/8/46

—6—
At the conclusion of the discussion
it was agreed unanimously that in the
forthcoming conference with the Chairman
of the National Labor Relations Board
the position of the Board should be
stated by Chairman Eccles as suggested
by him at this meeting.
Under date of October 4, 1946, Mr. C. F. 14ente, Senior Vice

?resident of Bank of America National Trust and Savings Association,
San Francisco, sent a letter to each of the members of the Board of
Governors, enclosing a cony of a letter which the bank sent under date
Of October
3 to the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, requesting
that the
Reserve Bank send to the national bank a nomination certificate

similar to that sent to other member banks in group 1 in order

that the national bank might enter a nomination in the coming election
Of a Class A director of the Federal Reserve Bank.

A nomination

certificate had not been sent to the national bank for the reason that
Tra
nsamerica Corporation, a holding company affiliate, had designated

the National Bank of Tacoma, Washington, as the affiliated bank in
gl
'
°1-1P 1 which would participate in the nomination and election of
Class A and E directors of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco,
therefore,
under the provis5ons of section 4 of the Federal Reserve

Act the Bank of America National Trust & Savings Association, was not
atit
horized to participate in the nomination or election.

In its letter

Of October 3, 1946 the national bank took the position that it was not
affiliated with Transamerica Corporation, and, therefore, was author-




1419
1°/8/46

—7—

'zed to parLiciate in the election.

A copy of the letter from the

national bank was forwarded to the Board by First Vice President
Earhart of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco with a letter
dated October 5, 1946, in which he said that the Board's wire of
October 1, 1946, stating that the Board had not changed its position
ia the matter had been received, but in view of the national bank's
written request for a nomination blank, further instructions by wire
would be appreciated.
The matter was considered in the light of the decisions of
the Board in November 1943, and May and October 1944, that Transwas a holding company affiliate of the national bank, and
having designated another bank to participate in the election of
directors
by banks in group 1, Bank of America was not authorized
to part
icipate. It was stated that while it might be true that
Transamerica did not own a majority of the stock of the national
bank, it was clear that it controlled in one way or another the
election of a majority of the directors of the bank, and therefore
e°fltinued to be a holding company affiliate of the bank.
Mr. Townsend stated that the letter of October

4, 1946,

frelll Bank of America, which was addressed to each of the members of

the Board by registered mail, return receipt requested, was an indication that the bank probably would carry the case into the courts,
and that, therefore, the Board should consider whether in the event




1420
10/8/46

of

—8—

a law suit it would be possible to prove that Transamerica did in

fact control the election of a majority of the directors of the
national bank.
This question was discussed and Chairman Eccles suggested that
if the
affiliation did in fact continue, it should be subject to demonstration
on the basis of the information that had been collected by

the

examiners for the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and the

Board.
At the conclusion of the discussion,
it was agreed unanimously that no action
would be taken by the Board in the matter until Messrs. Vest and Townsend had
had an opportunity to consider the question which Mr. Townsend had raised, it
being understood that when that had been
done counsel would submit a recommendation to the Board as to the action to be
taken.
In taking this action it was also
understood that Mr. Earhart would be
advised by wire that the matter presented in his letter of October 5 was
having consideration and he would be
advised as soon as practicable.
At this point Mr. Townsend left the meeting.
Chairman Eccles stated that under date of September 30, 1946,
he,
-,
'ceived a letter from Mr. Caldwell, Chairman of the Federal Reserve
bank of Kansas City, and Chairman of the Chairmen's Conference, stating

that

the executive committee of the Conference would meet in Washington

t1 October 14 to arrange the program for the next meeting of the Chairmen




1421
10/8/46

—gwhich it was contemplated would be held in Washington within approximately two weeks from that date.

The letter, Chairman Eccles said,

requested that he, or some other member of the Board whom he might
designate, meet with the executive committee for the purpose of
al'ranging a program.
It was the unanimous view of the
members of the Board that a meeting of
the Chairmen's Conference should be held
and, upon motion by Mr. Vardaman, Mr.
Ransom was requested to meet with the
executive committee of the Chairmen's
Conference for the purpose of working
out a program. October 28 and 29 were
suggested as the dates of the Conference,
with the thought that the procedure followed in connection with the more recent
conferences of the Chairmen of having the
conference consisting of two morning sessions and a dinner at one of the hotels on
the evening of the first day would be desirable. The suggestion was also made that
the first session might be devoted to matters of particular interest to the Federal
Reserve Banks and the second session to
matters of more general interest.

Mr. Carpenter stated that following the meeting with the Federal
Achrie°rY Council yesterday, inquiry was made by the Acting Secretary of

the c
°uncil whether it would be agreeable to the Board if the executive
e°ramittee of the Council met in Washington on November 6, with the
Understanding that it would meet with the Board at 12 o'clock noon on
that aay.




1422

-10While the members of the Board felt that
no objection to the meeting should be raised
at this time, the matter of meetings of the
executive committee of the Federal Advisory
Council between the regular meetings of the
full Council should be taken up at the next
meeting of the Council and the suggestion
made that the interim meetings of the executive committee, which were inaugurated during
the war period, were no longer necessary and
should be discontinued.
In connection with the above matter, Chairman Eccles referred
t° the discussion at the meeting of the Board with the Federal Advisory Council yesterday at which a number of questions were asked by
the
111‘=Ders of the Council and the members of the Board were more or
leee
cross-examined with respect to its current policies, particularly
eel
ective credit controls. Chairman Eccles expressed the opinion that

the Present members of the Council were drifting away from the original
PUrPose of
the Council of making recommendations to the Board and, inStead
were using the meetings with the Board to obtain information as
tQ the
views of the Board in connection with problems currently before
it, It was his view that this tendency should be corrected and that,
if agreeable to the other members of the Board, he should take the matte? UP with Mr. Brown as President of the Council and say to him that

the 80ard felt the Council was drifting away from the purpose for which
it "
14
created of making recommendations to the Board, that the Board
1%18 glad

to receive the views and recommendations of the Council as

l'ePriesentatives of the bankers, that instead of the procedure recently




1423
10/8/46
followed the joint meetings of the Council and the Board should be
for the
purpose of discussing such recommendations, and that it would
be appreciated if in the future the recommendations of the Council
were
the

submitted in writing for consideration at the joint meeting of

Council and the Board.
Chairman Eccles' suggestion was
approved unanimously with the understanding that the changed procedure
would not prevent a free discussion
with the Council of matters presented
by it to the Board.
In accordance with the action taken at the meeting of the

Board On

August

20, 1946, Mr. Draper submitted a memorandum under

date of
September 301 1946, reading as follows:
"In compliance with a request from the Board, this
memorandum (prepared on September 30, 1946) reviews developments during recent months which have a bearing on
the Board's policy in the field of stock-market credit.
It covers in general the 8-month period since the middle
of last January when the Board raised its margin requirements to the 100 per cent level.
"During that period, the level of stock prices first
rose somewhat further, by less than 6 per cent. It then
declined sharply--by about 24 per cent. This decline was
!-bout as much as the market had risen since August of
4.8-st year, or about one-third as much as it had risen
i
snce
the middle of 1942. The volume of stock-market
?redit has declined continuously and substantially, but
ls still about half as large as it was at the prewar peak
of stock prices in the spring of 1937. For the year to
date, the volume of trading on the New York Stock Exchange
has been
the largest in about 8 years. Interest rates,
hough showing firmer tendencies, continue at record low
levels. Corporate profits for the half-year have been
down from a year ago. The volume of new corporate security issues has been the largest in many years. Some




1424

10/8/46

-12-

"of these developments, particularly the decline in stock
Prices, have given rise to the suggestion that the Board's
margin recuirements should now be reduced.
"During this same period, the volume of industrial
production has increased, practically full employment has
prevailed, the national income has expanded, consumer expenditures have risen sharply to ne:, high levels, the
Public's holdings of liquid assets (already unprecedented)
have increased further, and the general level of commodity
Prices has risen more rapidly than at any other time in
recent years. The rise in commodity prices has reflected
in Part, but only in part, the weakening of direct price
controls. Inflationary pressures have continued to be
strong and are at least as strong at present as at any
time since the beginning of the war. None of these dev?lopments suggest that there should be, at the present
time, any relaxaticn in the Government's anti-inflation
Policies, or in the Board's general credit policy.
"Viewing the situation as a whole, it is difficult
to be persuaded by the arguments that have been brought
forward by proponents of lowering margin requirements.
These arguments, which come mainly from brokers and from
some, but relatively few, bankers, seem to be open to
question. The 'thin-market' argument in particular can
be discounted because it is a matter of common knowledge
".11at the market is always thin, on the buying side, when
it is declining after a long-continued bull movement, and
for some time thereafter. In the autumn of 1929, for example, the market was certainly thin on the buying side
even though margin requirements were not subject to
0vernment regulation and were comparatively low. It is
Important to note in this connection that in every substantial
decline for which we have statistics on margin
trading) margin traders have aggravated the decline by
selling more than they bought.
"Speaking, of course, as only one member of the
!
°ard, I believe that to lower margin requirements at
uhis time would not be a constructive move. I question
also whether it would be in compliance with the letter
spirit of the law, which says 'the Board....may, from
time to time, .... prescribe such lower margin re‘tuirements as it deems necessary or apr,ropriate for the accommodation of commerce and industry having due regard
to the general credit situation of the country (undersupplied).' I am nryself unable to see, as of
'Ile present time, how a reduction in the Board's margin
requirements could be justified under this legislative
fcrmula.

9




1425
10/8/46

-13-

"For all these reasons, my own recommendation would
be to take no action by way of lowering the margin requirements at this time but to make plans for reviewing
the situation from time to time, as conditions change.
I.would also recommend that the Board review the uhole
situation again at some specified time -- for example,
as Soon as the volume of credit extended by brokers,
which at the end of August was at the $725 million level,
shall have declined to a new low level. That would be a
decline to a figure below the 000 million level, at
which it stood at the low point in the summer of 1942,
and seems likely to be reached within a few more months."
In connection with Mr. Draper's recommendations, reference was
fliade to the
suggestions made at the meeting of the Board with the Presidente of the
Federal Reserve Banks on October 4, 1946, and at the meeting with the Federal Advisory Council yesterday that there be some relaxation of the prohibition in the regulations of the substitution of
securities in under-margined accounts and the extension of credit to
enable the holders of securities to exercise rights issued to them, and
Mrs Draper stated that he had not made a recommendation on these points
4a

it was
desired to give them further consideration before that was done.
The reasons for the present limitations in the regulations with

l'eaPect to the substitution of securities in under-margined accounts and

the eXtension of credit in connection with the exercise of rights by the
°11-gina1 holder were discussed and it was the consensus of the members of
the Board that if it were practicable to amend the regulations to cover

the latter point that should be done, but that the other amendment proP°8ed by the Presidents should not be made at this time.




Upon motion by Mr. Vardaman, Messrs.
Draper and Parry uere requested to investigate this matter and to present a recommendation at the next meeting of the Board as to
the desirability of such an amendment and if

1426
10/8/46

-14it was felt that some relaxation should
be provided by an amendment, what the
intent of the relaxation should be.
Mr. Vardaman stated that he felt that consideration should

he gtby the
Board to what its position would be in the event the
Charge was
made before Congress that the Board had exceeded its authority under the
law in eliminating margin trading.

It was his

thought that the Board should give consideration to the question
whether its position would not be stronger if the margin requirewere fixed at some point below 100 per cent. He also suggested
that it might be desirable for the Board to point out to the
collgress through the proper channels that the Board had no authority
over the
extension of credit in connection with the purchase of real
estate or other
commodities, that if it had had such authority it
wculd have exercised it to substantially the same extent as its
allth°ritY to regulate the use of credit for the purpose of purchasing
44d carrying securities, and that as long as the present situation
e°11tinued it was operating to the detriment of listed securities in
relation to other forms of investment.

A third question raised by

41
'4 Vardaman
related to the conditions under which the Board would
act to
reduce margin requirements.
Chairman Eccles stated that in hearings and otherwise the Congress

hail been put on notice that the Board had no authority over credit used
trl the Purchase of real estate or other commodities and that the Board
titer
Treted the law as giving it authority to eliminate margin trading,
6° that
he did not think the Board could be criticized as having exceeded




1427
10/8/46
—15—
its

the

authority.

There was a discussion of the legislative history of

provisions of the Securities Exchange Act relating to the questions

raised by Mr. Vardaman but no action with respect to them was taken by
the Board•
At this point Mr. Vardaman left the meeting.
Mr. Evans stated that with the approval of the Board, Messrs.
Triffin and Grove went to Guatemala in 1945 for the purpose of assisting
he Guatemalan Government in a proposed reorganization of the monetary
ell(1 banking
system of that country and had been instrumental in the draft—
ing of a Monetary Law and a Central Bank Law.

A draft of a proposed

General Banking Law was later submitted to the Guatemalans by Mr. Grove,
When he
returned to Guatemala in July of this year for a period of six
weeks. Following the departure of Mr. Grove, Mr. Evms said, Mr. Prebisch,
f"PaerlY of the Central Bank of Argentina, visited Guatemala and after
l'elriewing the proposed legislation made a number of suggestions for
changes which did not appear to Messrs. Grove and Knapp, of the Board's
Divi .
elon of Research and Statistics, as being practicable or desirable,
4nd that there
was a question whether Mr. Grove should return to Guatemala
for the
Purpose of assisting in finding a satisfactory solution.
Mr. Thomas expressed a view that the changes proposed by Mr.
131'ehisch were in some respects unworkable, that it was widely known that
IsePresentatives
from the United States had worked on the formulation of
the
.
-glslation, and that if it were adopted with the changes proposed by
4r. p
re°3-SCh it might result in a misunderstanding that the representative
8 from the United States had proposed impracticable legislation.




1428
10/8/46

-16Mr. Evans stated that it would be his suggestion that Mr. Grove,

in his personal capacity, write a letter to the proper authorities of
Guatemala pointing out the proposed changes which it was felt were unworkable and what might be done to correct the situation. It would be
understood, Mr. Evans said, that copies of the letter would be sent to

he State Department and to the American Embassy in Guatemala.
The members of the Board present
agreed unanimously that the matter
should be handled in this way.
At this point Messrs. Parry, Vest, Thomas, Leonard and Nelson
withdrew from the meeting and the action stated with respect to each
°t the
matters hereinafter set forth was then taken by the Board:
The minutes of the meeting of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System held on October 4, 1946, were approved unanimously.
The minutes of the meeting of the Board of Governors of the Fed'
1 41 Reserve System
with the Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks

held on October
4, 1946, were approved unanimously.
The minutes of the meeting of the Board of Governors of the
Pede
ral Reserve System with the Federal Advisory Council held on
Octob
er 7, 1946, were approved unanimously.
Memorandum dated October 3, 1946, from Mr. Bethea, Director of

the

pg

'
4-vl8ion of Administrative Services, submitting the resignation of
George
Re Kay, reservation clerk in that Division, and recommending that

it be
accepted to become effective, in accordance with his request, at

the

Close of business October 11, 1946, with the understanding that a
Ilamn
811111 payment would be made for annual leave remaining to his credit

4 of

that date.




Approved unanimously.

1429
1O/8/46

-17Telegram to Mr. Gilbert, President of the Federal Reserve Bank

cr Dallas,
stating that, subject to conditions of membership numbered
1 to 6
contained in the Board's Regulation H, the Board approved the
aPPlication of the "Fidelity Bank and Trust Company", Houston, Texas,
for membership
in the Federal Reserve System and for the appropriate

azount of stock in the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. The telegram
raqueted that the Federal Reserve Bank advise the applicant bank of
the 14
-csrd's approval of the application and conditions of membership
Prescribed, together with necessary instructions as to the procedure
fclr accomplishing membership, and stated that a letter containing detailed advice regarding such approval mould be forwarded to the apal ant bank
through the Reserve bank.
Approved unanimously.
Letter to the "Bank of Syosset, New York", Syosset, New York,
arld the

"American Bank and Trust Company", Bessemer, Alabama, reading

falOWS:

"The Board is glad to learn that you have completed
all arrangements for the admission of your bank to memberIn the Federal Reserve System and takes pleasure in
'
rahsmitting herewith a formal certificate of your membership.
. "It will be appreciated if you will acknowledge receipt of this certificate."




Approved unanimously.

1430
10/8/46

-LBLetter dated October 7, 1946, to "The National Bank of i.est-

field", c/o Westfield Office of the Union Trust Company of Jamestown,
'he
stfield, New York, reading as follows:
"This refers to the resolution adopted on June 17,
1944, by the board of directors of your bank, signifying
the bank's desire to surrender its right to exercise fiduciary powers heretofore granted to it.
. "The Board, understanding that your bank has been
discharged or otherwise nrooerly relieved in accordance
with the law of all of its duties as fiduciary, has isTued a formal certificate to your bank certifying that
it is no longer authorized to exercise any of the fiduciary powers covered by the provisions of section 11(k)
of the Federal Reserve Act, as amended. This certificate
is enclosed herewith.
"In this connection, your attention is called to
the fact that, under the provisions of section 11(k) of
the Federal Reserve Act, as amended, when such a certificate has been issued by the Board of Governors of the
Federal Reserve System to a national bank, such bank
(1) shall no longer be subject to the provisions of
section 11(k) or the regulations of the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System made pursuant thereto,
()shall be entitled to have returned to it any securities which it may have deposited with the State
authorities for the protection of private or court
trusts, and (3) shall not exercise hereafter any of
the Powers granted by section 11(k) without first apPlying for and obtaining a new permit to exercise such
Powers pursuant to the provisions of section 11(k).
"Since it may be necessary for you to file a
certified copy of the Board's certificate with the
State authorities in connection with the release of
the securities which you have deposited with them,
such a copy is enclosed herewith."




Approved unanimously.

1431
10/8/46

-19Letter to Mr. A. Claflin, Secretary, French American Banking

C°rPoration, 31 Nassau Street, New York 5, New York, reading as follows:
"Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of September 25, 1946, advising of the resignation of Mr.
Daniel A. de Menocal as a director of your corporat4 on
and the election of Mr. Charles E. Spencer, Jr. to
take his place. Your courtesy in supplying the information is appreciated.
"In view of the fact that a list of the directors
is submitted with the semi-annual report of condition,
it will not be necessary in the future to advise the
Board of changes in the directors which do not have any
Particular significance on the management of the corporaHowever, the Board will appreciate advice of any
changes in your board when they do have a significant
bearing on the direction and management of your corporation.”
Approved unanimously.
Letter dated October 7, 1946, to the Comptroller of the Curreading as follows:
"It is respectfully requested that you place an
order with the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, supplementing the order of June 13, 1946, for printing
of 442,000,000 of Federal Reserve notes of the 1934
Series for the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond in
the 4100 denomination."
Approved unanj 'ously.

Thereupon the meeting a

dr,oi

,/
secretary.

Ap




'
0 A
41

Chairman.