View original document

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

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OPERATIONS
Speech by Darryl R. Francis to the
Central Banking Seminar at the Dallas Federal Reserve Sank
March 16, 1970
The Federal Reserve System, in addition to conducting
monetary policy and supervising banks, performs a variety of
regular services for member banks, the U. S. Government,
and the public. My assignment is to discuss some of the principal
service functions — called operations — of the Federal Reserve
Banks.
In addition to reviewing a few of the major operations
of the Reserve Banks — collecting and transferring funds,
distributing currency, handling member bank reserves, and
fiscal agency functions — I will relate some aspects of each
to the major functions of the System — that is, monetary
policy. I note that open market operations and the discounting
function are covered in other parts of your program, and
therefore will not comment on them. Certain other activities,
such as safekeeping of securities for member banks, protection,
and personnel administration, need little explanation and have
little bearing on monetary policy. I will omit these also.
Collecting and Transferring Funds
The largest operation of a Reserve Bank, measured by
number of employees, is collecting and transferring funds.




-2Most large financial transactions and many small purchases are
conducted by transferring bank deposits. By value, over 95 per
cent of all transactions are conducted by checks drawn on, or
by other transfers of, demand deposits in commercial banks.
The use of checking accounts by individuals and
businesses is facilitated by the service of the Federal Reserve
8anks in clearing and collecting checks, in providing wire
transfer services, and by furnishing a mechanism through
which commercial banks settle for the funds cleared and collected.
The procedure is simple. Suppose a manufacturer in
Dallas sells $30,000 of equipment to a dealer in St. Louis and
receives in payment a checK drawn on a St. Louis bank. The
manufacturer deposits the check in his Dallas bank. The
Dallas commercial bank sends the check to the Federal Reserve
Bank of Dallas for credit in its reserve account. The Dallas
Reserve Bank forwards the check to the Federal Reserve Bank
of St. Louis, which in turn sends it to the St. Louis commercial
bank. The St. Louis commercial bank charges the check to
the account of the dealer who wrote it and has the amount charged
to its own reserve account at the St. Louis Federal Reserve.
The St. Louis "Fed" remits the amount to the Dallas "Fed"
through the Interdistrict Settlement Fund. Of course, at times
the procedure is shortened and simplified by the Dallas commercial




-3bank sending the check directly to the St. Louis Federal Reserve
for collection, but the above description outlines the basic
check collection procedure.
The volume of checks handled by the Federal Reserve
Banks has grown rapidly over the years. In 1940, the System
handled 1.2 billion checks and last year, 6.5 billion. In dollar
amount, the upward trend has been more pronounced, from
$280 billion in 1940 to almost $3 trillion in 1969.
Over the years the process of clearing and collecting
checks has been greatly shortened and simplified by innovations
such as the conversion to electronic equipment for the processing
of checks. At the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank we are
currently processing about 97 per cent of our checks on high-speed
computers.
There is much talk about electronic impulses replacing
checks. Some expect this "checkless society" to appear at
some dramatic moment eight or ten years from now, when it
becomes economically feasible, and the burden of check handling
becomes unbearable. Actually, the process of electronic take-over
is quite far advanced. There has been a growing emphasis on
telegraphic transfer of funds — another service which the
System provides to banks in order to speed the movement of funds
around the country. In 1969 the dollar volume of checks at the




-4St. Louis bank was 3.4 per cent greater than in 1968, while
the wire transfer of funds rose 45 per cent. In 1969 the St.
Louis Bank transferred $245 billion by wire, or 70 per cent
more than the $140 billion of checks processed. The shift to
automation is proceeding at an accelerated pace.
Reserve Banks do not give immediate credit for all
checks deposited with them for collection. Credit is deferred
for one or two business days within the continental U. S. to allow
time for out-of-town checks to reach the banks on which they
are drawn. After that, the member bank's reserve account is
automatically credited. In our illustration, the Dallas
commercial bank would be given credit for the check drawn in
St. Louis after one day.
Since the time actually taken to collect checks is often
longer than that allowed in the schedule, a type of Federal
Reserve credit - called float - comes into existence, adding
directly to member bank reserves just as do gold inflows and
System purchases of Government securities. The average level
of float, $2.5 billion in 1969, is no problem for monetary management
the System merely holds fewer securities than it would if float
were less or did not exist.
However, wide fluctuations in float have been of concern
to monetary managers. Movements in float are dependent upon
any factor affecting the amount of checks handled and their




-5collection time, such as changes in the number of checks written,
rail or airline strikes, weather conditions which affect airline
schedules, and varying speeds of check handling. Float frequently
changes as much as $400 million a day, sometimes moving more
than $800 million within a brief period.
Because float is the biggest factor influencing bank
reserves on many days, monetary managers have given it much
attention, addressing themselves to such questions as "How
can it be practically eliminated or its fluctuations reduced in
amplitude?" or "How can its movements be predicted so that
offsetting actions can be taken?"
Some who have been concerned about float have felt
that the prime emphasis in monetary management should be to
attain and maintain a given tone or pressure in the money
market, as measured by Federal funds rates, other short-term
interest rates, free reserves of member banks and feelings of
major money market participants. Movements in float affect
these variables greatly nearly every day and every week.
Another view of monetary management, and one which I
prefer, is that the central bank should have only a secondary
interest in day-to-day money market conditions. Although
float affects total member bank reserves rather drastically in
short periods of time, the subject has probably been given more
emphasis than it deserves. Equating short-run fluctuations in




-6the demands and supplies of funds is the function of the
commercial banks, especially the large correspondent banks,
Government bond dealers, and other money market participants.
The central bank should only enter this market so as to avoid
serious knots which might cause disruption in economic
activity and not merely to reduce fluctuations in short-term
interest rates.
The prime function of monetary management, according
to this second view, is to influence economic activity through
controlling the growth of monetary aggregates, such as total
member bank reserves, commercial bank credit, and the money
supply. In this quantitative approach less emphasis is given
to short-run control — both because daily data are not available
on most aggregates and because our theories of effect on
economic activity are based on longer term trends. Injections
or withdrawals of reserves because of float are nearly always
temporary. Hence, even though float movements do affect
monetary aggregates we tend to be less concerned about it
because over a relevant period of monetary control, say three
or four months, it is likely to have little influence on the rate
of increase in the monetary aggregates.
Distributing Currency




A second major operation of a Reserve Bank is the

-7distribution of currency and coin. The ready availability of
currency at Reserve Banks enables commercial banks to provide
the amounts and kinds of currency that people in their communities
desire.
When member banks need to replenish their currency
supply, they order it from their Reserve Bank and have it charged
to their reserve account. Conversely, if a bank has excess
currency on hand, it may deposit currency in the Reserve Bank
and receive credit in its reserve account. Last year the twelve
Federal Reserve banks handled $1.4 billion of coin and $43 billion
of currency.
Movements of currency into and out of the banking
system have a two-fold monetary impact. First, movements of
currency between the public and banks affect the volume of bank
reserves, the base upon which monetary expansion is built.
Second, currency in the hands of the public is part of the money
supply, a crucial monetary variable.
The effect of currency on member bank reserves can
easily be overemphasized. Currency movements, unlike those
in float, may proceed in one direction for an extended period.
For example, for several months every fall there is a pronounced
flow of currency into circulation, reaching a peak just before
Christmas. Also, an expanding economy will produce a trend flow
of currency into circulation. These broad seasonal and trend




-8movements can be readily detected and their impact offset,
and generally they do not cause the monetary managers much
concern.
On the other hand, like float, there are many irregular
movements of currency between banks and the public. Such
movements raise great problems for those seeking to foster
a given degree of money market restraint or ease from day-to-day
or even week-to-week. To those of us focusing on growth rates
of bank reserves, bank credit and money over several months,
however, these movements are of relatively little importance
since they are largely offsetting.
Currency — as previously stated — has a second
implication for monetary management. Currency is part of the
nation's money supply, and consequently some feel it is of
particular importance to monetary authorities. Although we at
St. Louis are strong believers in the monetary aggregate approach
and follow money developments closely, we feel that currency
has been overstressed in the literature on money and banking.
Our studies indicate the varying growth rates of currency
have reflected primarily changes in the demand for a hand-to-hand
medium of exchange. When sales which typically utilize currency
have risen, currency in circulation has usually increased. When
such sales have declined, currency has declined. Actions of the
Federal Reserve in supplying reserves to the banking system have




-9had little direct influence on the volume of currency outstanding.
On the other hand, the rates of change in demand deposits
are related to changes in member bank reserves available for
demand deposits. The desire by the public for demand deposits
under any given conditions either to hold or to spend has
orobably had only a slight impact on the total volume of demand
deposits.
Since 1950, changes in the rate of growth in currency
have tended to coincide with, or lag slightly behind, movements
in spending. Over the same period, changes in the growth rates
of demand deposits have usually preceded changes in economic
activity.
The amount of currency holdings — like most other
assets — is determined by the holder on the basis of his income,
interest rates, prices of other goods, tastes, and other conditions.
He is in equilibrium until one or more of these factors change.
The aggregate volume of demand deposits, however,
does not respond automatically to changes in the public's desire
for them. Movements in these deposits initially reflect changes
in reserves available to banks. Hence, the public may temporarily
hold more or less of its wealth in these balances than it
prefers, given existing incomes, interest rates and so forth.
The resulting disequilibrium position may be a factor in stimulating
or dampening economic activity as individuals increase or decrease




-10their spending or investing in an effort to adjust their deposit
balances to desired levels. Thus, demand deposits may be a
key monetary variable in our economic system, distinct in
nature from currency and other assets.
We have generally accepted movements in money, as
generally defined to include demand deposits plus currency, as
a measure of the thrust of monetary action. This is because money
generally moves at about the same rate as the demand deposit
component, and money is used by a wider group of analysts.
However, if movements of currency deviate so greatly that
money and demand deposits move in significantly different ways,
our evidence would indicate a preference for relying more
heavily on the demand deposit component and largely disregarding
movements in currency.
Member Bank Reserve Accounts
The third operation we might discuss is member bank
reserve accounts. A substantial part of the daily work of a
Reserve Bank relates to member bank reserve accounts. Member
banks use their reserve accounts — that is, their deposits in
Reserve Banks — much as individuals use their checking
accounts in day-to-day transactions. Banks draw on them
for making payments and replenish them with funds that are
received. For example, entries are made in these accounts as
member banks obtain currency to pay out to their customers
or as they redeposit currency in excess of the amount needed



-IIfor circulation, and as checks are collected and cleared.
Other entries arise as Treasurydepositsare transferred from
member banks to the Federal Reserve Banks, or as funds are
transferred by telegraph from a bank in one Reserve district
to another, or as a bank borrows from, or makes repayment to,
a Reserve Bank.
By law, member banks must keep a portion of their
deposits in reserves, either in the form of cash in vault or
reserves (deposits) in their Reserve Bank. For reserve city
banks, reserves at the present time must average at least
3 per cent of savings deposits and of the first $5 million of
time deposits and 6 per cent of the excess and 17 per cent of the
first $5 million of demanddepositsand 17 1/2 per cent of the excess.
For other member banks, reserves must also average 3 per cent
of savings deposits and of the first $5 million of time deposits
and 6 per cent of the excess. These so-called country banks
must hold 12 1/2 per cent of the first $5 million of demand deposits
and 13 per cent of the excess.
The System derives some benefits in the monetary
policy area from handling member bank reserve accounts.
Monetary actions - - whether open market operations, discounting, or changing reserve requirement percentages —
have their initial impact on demand for or supply of bank reserves.
Bank reserves, in turn, set a maximum on, and determine to a




-12great extent, bank deposits, bank credit and the money supply.
These proximate variables affect spending, employment, prices
and other economic conditions.
Monetary policy, then, is largely a matter of proper
control of the reserves of member banks. By processing the
flows of funds through these reserve balances, the forces affecting
reserves can be isolated, analyzed, and offset or supplemented as
desired. Much of the effort in monetary management is devoted
to controling member bank reserves. Some have felt that great
emphasis should be devoted to attaining a level and minimizing
short-run movements in free reserves (that is, excess reserves
less borrowings). We at St. Louis feel that such measures of
"tone" and "pressure" areinadequateand frequently misleading,
since most movements come from changing credit demands. As
a result, growth of bank credit and money may proceed at almost
any rate with a given free reserve level, depending on demands
for credit.
The major focus, in our view, should be on seeking
a trend in the growth of total reserves over a period of several
months, which will cause the growth rate of money to accelerate
if economic expansion is desired and to decelerate if economic
restraint is desired. In short, we feel monetary actions are more
appropriately judged by rates of change in money rather than the
feel of the market which may be largely influenced by feedback
effects from the rest of the economy.



-13Changing reserve requirement percentages, as you know,
is one of the major policy tools of the System, and since this
tool was not listed on the agenda for discussion at this Seminar,
I shall comment on it briefly. At one time, it was thought that
reserve requirements were beneficial in that they assured a
desirable minimum of commercial bank liquidity. However, funds
that were legally impounded by requirements could not be
utilized for meeting cash needs, and other more efficient methods
provide bank liquidity, such as lending by the Reserve Banks.
Reserve requirements, however, limit the bank credit
and money expansion from a given reserve base, and have been
retained for this purpose. Questions might be raised whether or
not a specific reserve requirement is actually needed or is most
efficient, but most monetary theorists have felt that requirements
are of some aid in managing the money stock.
In recent years, it appears that requirements have been
changing their function again, and we at the St. Louis bank are
not certain that the changes have been for the better. It seems
that most changes have been in the direction of weakening the
link between bank reserves and money, and of utilizing this
mechanism for influencing the allocation of credit.
Weakening of the link between reserves and money has
resulted from a proliferation of requirements, bytypeof bank,
by type of deposit, and by size of deposit. Hence, as funds flow
through the economy, the amount of money that can be supported



-14by a given volume of reserves changes. Then, too, reserve
requirements have been changed from a percentage of deposits
currently held to a percentage of deposits held two reserve periods
earlier with a 2 per cent carry forward of excesses or deficiencies.
This was presumably instituted to aid banks in keeping excess
reserves to a minimum, but such a procedure complicates
control of the money stock by the Federal Reserve System.
Recent examples of the use of reserve requirements for
credit control purposes include the following. Placing a 10 per
cent reserve requirement on increases in certain Euro-dollar
borrowings. This was intended to moderate the flow of Eurodollars to U. S. banks in light of heavy reliance of some U. S.
banks on Euro-dollar borrowings to avoid credit stringency, and
to curb the repercussions on foreign monetary reserves and
financial markets. Another change involves including certain
Federal funds acquisitions as deposits for reserve requirement
purposes. In addition, the Board has proposed placing reserve
requirements on certain types of bank related commercial paper
and including more subordinated notes and debentures as
deposits subject to reserve requirements. Also, I understand
there is a proposal in Congress to provide some reduction in
required reserves for those funds lent to finance housing.




We seriously question this trend toward using reserve

-15requirements as a selective credit control. Not only do they raise
problems of enforcement, requiring more and more regulations
to prevent ingenious market participants from avoiding their
effect, but they also misallocate funds. In addition, they reduce
the relationship between System actions and the movement of
key monetary aggregates.
Fiscal Agency Functions
The last operation I plan to discuss is that of fiscal
agency. The twelve Federal Reserve Banks carry the principal
checking accounts of the U. S. Treasury, handle much of the
work entailed in issuing and redeeming Government obligations,
and perform numerous other important fiscal duties for the
U. S. Government.
The Government is continuously receiving and spending
funds in all parts of the United States. Its receipts come mainly
from taxpayers and purchasers of Government securities and
are deposited eventually in the Federal Reserve Banks to the credit
of the Treasury. Its funds are disbursed mostly by check, and
the checks are charged to Treasury accounts at the Reserve Banks.
When the Treasury offers a new issue of Government
securities, the Reserve Banks send out subscription forms;
receive applications from those who wish to buy; make allotments
of securities in accordance with instructions from the Treasury;




-16deliver the securities to the purchasers; receive payment for
them; credit the amounts received to Treasury accounts; make
exchanges of denominations or kinds; pay interest coupons by
charging the Treasury's account; and redeem securities as they
mature.
Each Federal Reserve Bank administers for the Treasury
the "tax and loan" deposit accounts of the banks in its district.
Tax and loan accounts are merely Treasury demand deposits
in commercial banks. The main purpose of these deposits is to
permit the withdrawal of funds from commercial banks by the
Treasury to be timed closer to Treasury expenditures which inject
funds into the System. Thus, some tax funds and receipts from
security sales are left temporarily in tax and loan deposits in
commercial banks. When the Treasury desires to increase its
demand deposit account at the Federal Reserve Bank, they are
"called" into the Reserve Banks. In this way the impact on
the money market of Treasury receipts and expenditures that
come at different times is reduced.
When Treasury funds are transferred from commercial
banks into the Reserve Banks, member bank reserves are reduced.
On the other hand, Treasury expenditures from funds in Reserve




Banks add to member bank reserves. These activities have an
impact on reserves similar to that of float movements and irregular
fluctuations in currency. As with float and currency, those

-17monetary managers who desire a prescribed market tone, as a
measure of monetary action, find these short-run fluctuations
in the Treasury's balances at the Reserve Banks of extreme
importance. But, as you probably realize by now, I feel monetary
management should concern itself much more with trends in
total reserves and other aggregative measures over a period of
several months.
Because of the relationship between the Treasury and
Federal Reserve and the need of the Treasury to borrow very large
amounts of funds from time-to-time, a practice called "even keel"
during periods of Treasury financing has developed. Even keel
means not changing, or giving the impression of changing monetary
policy during a period of Treasury financing. In practice, it means
attempting to prevent significant changes in market interest
rates and other market conditions for a period beginning just
before a new issue is announced until it is distributed and a
reasonable time has elapsed for "digestion." Even keel has the
disadvantage of shifting to periods before or after such financings
whatever changes in monetary action may be appropriate in the
prevailing economic situation from the standpoint of the public
interest.
There is no legal authority for even keel, but it has
a long tradition both in this country and abroad. It is primarily
based on a lack of faith in the ability of a free market to handle




-18efficiently large Government financings.
We at St. Louis feel the practice should be discontinued
or at least moderated greatly. The Treasury is a frequent
borrower, and when combined with other periods of constraint
on action, it was found that 55 per cent of the time from early
1962 to the end of 1969 the Federal Reserve was "even keeling."
Even keel is a serious impediment in the path of monetary action,
and for those of us who feel that proper monetary action is
desirable for the public good, the price of even keel is high.
Oddly enough, even keel, although it does constrain
monetary policy, has not been effective as a market stabilizing
device. Short-term interest rates have fluctuated nearly as much
under even keel as in other periods. There does not appear to be
any benefit to the Treasury from such operations in terms of
obtaining funds at a lower average rate; the ultimate buyer of
securities is not fooled by such activities.
In conclusion, I have reviewed briefly four of our
major service functions — collecting and transferring funds,
currency and coin, member bank reserve accounts and fiscal
agency. They all relate to the primary objective of the System —
that is, sound monetary actions.
Reference has been made to the two broad schools of
monetary management. First, those who believe monetary




-19authorities should focus on market forces in the short-run,
seeking firmer conditions when the economy is booming, and
seeking easier conditions when the economy has slackened.
These analysts are constantly examining movements in float,
currency, Treasury deposits and the other forces affecting
member banks reserves.
The other school places stress on controlling monetary
aggregates over a period of several months, increasing the rates
of growth if expansion is desired and reducing them if restraint
is desired. Concentration on the market forces from day-to-day,
according to this group, may be misleading since with any degree
of pressure in the money market the aggregates may expand at
any rate, depending on the strength of credit demands. Consequently, those in the second school place much less emphasis
on the day-to-day movements in float, currency and Treasury
deposits.
The difference between the two views is more than academic
or semantic. From early 1967 to early 1969, the "pressure" school
said monetary actions become more restrictive, as evidenced by
the rise in interest rates and the tighter money market conditions.
The "aggregate" group came to the exactly opposite interpretation,
that is, monetary actions became more expansive, as evidenced by
the rapid rate of growth in bank reserves, bank credit and money.




-20I contend that if more attention had been placed on monetary
aggregates and less on the pressure of transient indicators,
we could have avoided much of the current inflation.