View original document

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

The Functions of the
Federal Reserve System




H O N . EDMUND PLATT,

Vice-Qovernor

FEDERAL RESERVE B O A R D

PUBLISHED BY
FEDERAL RESERVE B A N K
OF

PHILADELPHIA

The Functions of the
Federal Reserve System




HON* EDMUND PLATT,

Vice-Qovernor

FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD

oAn oAddress delivered
before the West Virginia
Bankers' Association, at
Charleston, West Virginia
SEPTEMBER 16,

1920

PUBLISHED BY
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
OF PHILADELPHIA




The Functions of the
Federal Reserve System
Following a brief introduction relating to banking
conditions in West Virginia, Mr. Piatt spoke as
follows:
W I T H O U T the Federal reserve system, or some similar central banking system, I think we shall all agree,
the war could not have been financed on a gold basis,
and the system has very properly been described as a
wonderful success. I t has been ably administered, but
we must not forget that the system is still on trial.
I t has never yet had a chance to function normally
and has only within the past year begun to be a determining influence in the stabilization or regulation
of credit. The war thrust upon it enormous business,
of a kind not contemplated when the Act was passed
—a business based not upon self-liquidating commercial paper but upon government bonds, and at
rates abnormally low considering the demand. As the
Board's last report says "In order that the member
banks might carry the burden of undigested Government securities they were obliged to rediscount with
the Federal reserve banks and in order that such rediscounting should not involve them in heavy loss it
was essential that as long as the banks were lending
to bond subscribers at coupon rates the rediscount rate
should be related to the bond rates. The rediscount
rates of the Federal reserve banks, therefore, instead
of being higher than the market rates, as in theory and
normal practice they should have been, were made
lower than the market rates." This enforced departure from sound banking principles necessarily led to
enormous expansion of credit—or inflation, if you
prefer that term, and the problem has been ever since




[3]

The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

how to get away from it. Of course it is entirely
contrary to the principles on which the Federal Reserve Act was founded to make loans on bonds, even
if government bonds, at lower rates than on commercial paper, yet in some districts we are still doing it.
And indirectly we are issuing currency based upon
these bonds, though that was one of the very things
the Federal Reserve Act was expected to put a stop
to. As much was said in Congress and out, while
the Federal reserve bills were under discussion, about
providing an elastic currency which would expand
and contract in accordance with the demands of business as about any other feature of the bill, and the
currency contemplated in the Act was to be issued
only upon the rediscounting of short-time paper
growing out of actual business transactions, paper
that was expected to be self-liquidating when the
transactions were completed by the sale of goods.
The whole scheme was upset by the flood of government securities, and furthermore central banking
principles and practice being unfamiliar to most of
our business men and bankers, a great many people
got the idea that Federal reserve bank rates should be
permanently lower than market rates, so as to make
rediscounting attractive and profitable to the member banks and so as to make the borrowing of money
for any and all purposes easier, and many also got
the idea that Liberty bonds should be carried indefinitely at the coupon rates. It is not necessary for me
to say to an audience of bankers that if the Federal
reserve system should be conducted in accordance
with such ideas the final result would be a crash such
as we have never had before in the history of the country. The system contains the possibilities of enormous expansion of credit, as the war financing has
demonstrated. It remains to be seen whether it can
[4]




The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

be brought back to sound normal conditions gradually
and without producing any serious hardship.
We are now almost at the peak of the demand for
credit and currency caused by the movement of crops,
and it is easy to see that the situation might have
been serious had there not been a general increase of
reserve bank rates beginning about a year ago. There
was some grumbling over the increase of rates on
"war paper," but it had to be made and in due time
should go further, in my opinion, so that there should
be at least no preference shown to bond secured paper.
The great issues of Liberty bonds are gradually being
digested, going into the hands of investors who intend
to hold them, and there has been a gradual reduction
of loans on "war paper." Apparently about $16,000,000,000 of Liberty bonds and Victory notes have been
actually paid for and are out of the banks—a really
stupendous achievement, which we would not have
thought possible a few years ago. The Comptroller
brought this fact out in an address before the Maine
Banker's Association in June. According to his figures there remained less than two billions of these
securities in the national banks, counting bonds on
which the banks were making loans and bonds owned
by the banks, and he estimated about an equal amount
in the state banks and trust companies. Splendid
as the showing of saving and absorption of Liberty
bonds has been, however, it must be realized that the
four billions left in the banks, together with the Treasury certificates, still cause a very serious displacement
of credit, which can only be made good by continued
steady saving and investment on the part of the people. The high record of bills discounted based on
Government obligations by the 800 reporting member
banks was made in June, 1919, $1,438,000,000, and
the high mark for the present year was made on Jan-




[5]

The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

uary 2nd when these banks had loaned $1,289,000,000.
The low mark was August 20th when these loans to
individual borrowers on Government paper had declined to $959,000,000, a decrease for this year of
$330,000,000. If all banks were included I suppose
the decrease would probably be twice that figure, or
about $600,000,000, showing what seems to me very
gratifying progress in the payment for bonds. Some
part of the decline must be due to the reduction of the
outstanding Treasury certificates but certificates were
largely held by the banks themselves until their interest rates were raised, and have not entered very
largely into collateral for loans to individual borrowers from the banks. Federal reserve rediscounts
based on war paper reached their high mark on
May 16, 1919, at $1,863,476,000 during the Victory Loan campaign. On June 18, 1920, these
war paper rediscounts had been reduced to $1,231,841,000 or $631,000,000 less. Since June 18th
there has been some natural increase due doubtless to the increased demand for credit as the harvest progressed and the crop moving season advanced. The remarkable thing is that the reduction
in war loans has been very much more than made up
in increased loans on commercial paper. A year ago
September 5th, the reserve bank rediscounts on commercial paper were only $212,185,000, about oneeighth of the loans on war paper, which then stood at
$1,635,233,000. On September 3, 1920, the commercial paper rediscounts had advanced to $1,412,035,000, or nearly seven times as large as last year at this
time, and more than $79,000,000 greater than the rediscounts on war paper, though the latter had increased more than $100,000,000 from the low mark of
$1,231,841,000 of June 18th to $1,332,892,000. Commercial paper rediscounts passed the war paper bills
[6]




The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

in the reserve banks for the first time on July 30th
when they reached $1,250,613,000, against $1,241,017,000 war paper bills. They seesawed afterwards
for a few weeks but the commercial bills seem now
to have taken the lead permanently. I t should be
added that the recent increase of a hundred million
in war paper loans is probably also to be considered
chiefly commercial—bonds merely being used as a
convenient collateral.
Although some increase of commercial loans was
expected and some increase in the rates of interest was
predicted, I do not recall that any banker or financial
writer during the year following the conclusion of the
war predicted a continuous expansion of credit that
would much more than take up the slack created by
the payment made to the banks for Government
bonds. I t was generally expected that rediscounts
with the Federal reserve banks would diminish almost if not quite as fast as the bonds and notes of the
Government were absorbed by investors.
On the whole, however, the policies of the Federal
Reserve Board and of the Federal reserve banks seem
to be working well. In the face of an enormous and
unprecedented demand for commercial credit the reserves have held pretty steady with only slight declines week by week. There appears to be credit
enough for all legitimate demands without encroaching on the legal reserves, but no surplus for speculation, or for profiteering, or for holding any unusual
amount of harvested crops from the market. Though
the percentage of decrease of reserves each week has
been in tenths there has been a steady decrease each
week since July 23rd. I t should be remembered that
the reserve banks of the crop moving sections are being sustained today chiefly by help from the Boston
and Cleveland reserve banks. New York has helped




[7]

The Functions of the Federal Reserve System
until recently, and Philadelphia and San Francisco
still are helping some through purchases of acceptances from the west and south. The Boston reserve
bank is charging its own member banks 7 per cent
for rediscounts of commercial paper and is loaning
its surplus to western and southern reserve banks,
which make most of their rediscounts to member
banks at 6 per cent. That doesn't seem quite right.
I n accordance with strict business principles, or with
economic principles, if you like that term, the rates
ought to be highest where the demand is greatest.
Boston's surplus of credit comes partly from dull business, textile plants closed down, etc., and there is
naturally some grumbling at its high rediscount rate
maintained at present largely for the benefit of the
rest of the country. I t should not be forgotten that
the regional reserve system is not exactly the same
as a central reserve bank with branches. When considering the present situation, furthermore, it is well
to bear in mind that as a result of the high (7 per
cent) reserve bank rate in New York and of curtailment of loans for speculation the stock market is absorbing a billion dollars less credit than last fall, and
that billion dollars is now in use financing the movement of crops, and financing production generally.
Securities, including Liberty bonds, are at a very low
point—the only things in the country that are really
cheap, judged by prewar standards.
Falling Prices
As I have said, some of the surplus of credit in Boston which is now helping Federal reserve banks in the
west and south results from dull business in manufacturing lines, and the same is true of Cleveland and
Philadelphia, and to some degree also of other dis[8]




The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

tricts where there is much manufacturing. There is
evidence that we have entered upon a period of readjustment of values. The people have rebelled against
the ever mounting prices and have so diminished demand for many articles, particularly clothing and
shoes, that some factories have been compelled to
close or run on part time for lack of orders for the
time being. This has been charged as due to restriction of credit, but I think there is ample evidence
that the movement is deeper and more wide-spread.
There has been a decrease of prices all over the world
to some extent. It began, I think, with the collapse
of the silk market in Japan in the winter and early
spring. The big drop in raw silk was naturally followed by a drop in wool and in leather, and the movement spread from one thing to another. Cotton,
though a somewhat shorter crop than usual, naturally
came in line for a drop following wool and we hear
cries from the rubber and automobile industries and
from some others. Sugar and coffee have gone down,
and the pressure on the breakfast table has perceptibly
relaxed. All this I believe is in accordance with
economic laws. How far the price recession will go
remains to be seen. A lower range of prices will ease
up the credit situation considerably, but will at the
same time perhaps increase grumbling and criticism.
We have all complained of high prices and of the high
cost of living and have charged inflation, profiteering,
etc., but we all like to see somebody else's prices go
down. When the prices of things we ourselves sell
or produce also go down—why that's all wrong. W e
can't sell them below the cost of production, you
know! People like to find a "goat" somewhere to
blame when things go against them, and some of them,
perhaps naturally enough, turn their criticisms against
the Federal Reserve Board or the Federal reserve




[9]

The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

banks. The war taught people to look to the Government for everything and now-a-days when a man can't
"hock" his last winter's overcoat for as much as he
thinks it ought to bring he writes to the Federal Reserve Board and says it is outrageous that money is
so tight.
Criticisms of the Federal Reserve Board
There are several classes of critics of the Federal
Reserve Board, some of whom know something about
banking and about economic laws and some of whom
do not. Perhaps they may be divided roughly into
three classes. One class wants lower rates—cheap
money—regardless of economic laws, or the reserve
requirements of the Federal Reserve Act; another
class declares that rates were not advanced quickly
enough after the war financing was finished, and are
not yet high enough to control credit fully; a third
class just criticises on general principles, perhaps
mostly for political effect.
This third class is not troubled by any particular
regard for consistency or for laws of any kind. The
same persons have declared that enormous inflation
has been promoted by the Board and has been the
cause of high prices—pointing to the great volume of
outstanding Federal reserve notes—and then when
prices began to fall they declared that the Board was
stifling business by refusing credit for production and
causing deflation. The chief stock in trade, however,
of the third class of critics is the charge of "profiteering." They point to the fact that the net earnings
of the Federal reserve banks, the excess of earnings
over current expenses, for the half year ended June
30th totaled $68,583,111 or at the yearly rate of
151.2 per cent on an average paid-in capital of $91,165,000, and that they made 92 per cent in the cor[10]




The Functions

of the Federal

Reserve

System

responding period last year. Well, if you can "profiteer" by having your rates or your prices too low, and
when practically all your profits go to the Government as a franchise tax, there may be something in the
charge. T h e reserve banks before the war were not
making their dividends, as a rule, and one member
bank u p in my old Congressional District charged
off its reserve bank stock to profit and loss, and said
it was no good as an investment. Profits were forced
on the reserve banks by the war, and have been made
at rates lower than good banking practice would have
dictated—rates which attracted business instead of
stabilizing credit.
I t is proper in this connection that I should call
attention to the very extraordinary nature of the
Federal reserve banks considered as corporations.
T h e stockholders are the member banks, but those
member banks not only subscribed the capital, on
which the reserve banks began operations, but furnish
all the deposits from which loans are made. Suppose
the stockholders of one of your banks were the only
depositors, how would you reckon the profits of the
institution? The Richmond reserve bank during the
first half of the fiscal year made a profit of $2,610,000
or 113.6 per cent based on its paid-in capital alone—
which averaged $4,622,000 during the six months ending J u n e 30th. Based on capital and surplus, $12,689,000, it's current net earnings were at the rate of
41.4 per cent. Based on its capital and reserve balances—and these reserve balances were all furnished
by the stockholders—the earnings were at the rate of
only 8.1 per cent, or based on combined paid-in capital, surplus and reserve balances the rate was 7.2 per
cent—not such a very impressive figure, but higher
than the average rate for the whole 12 reserve banks,
which was 6.4 per cent. On either of the last two




in]

The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

bases of reckoning the highest percentages were made
by the Philadelphia and Atlanta reserve banks.
You will perhaps say that if the Richmond reserve
bank makes 8.1 per cent on its capital and reserve
balances—which you furnish—you ought to have a
larger return than 6 per cent on the capital, but this
brings up a question which I shall not discuss today.
I introduced a bill in the last session of Congress that
would have allowed extra dividends of not to exceed
three per cent from reserve banks that had accumulated the full 100 per cent reserve, but I should add
that my position as a member of Congress on such
measures must not be understood as necessarily indicating my position as a member of the Federal Reserve Board. You remember that Salmon P . Chase
as Secretary of the Treasury issued greenbacks which
later as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court he declared unconstitutional. I t is very important that
there should be no motive for running the reserve
banks for the purpose of making a profit. An extra
dividend bill if passed should be carefully safeguarded. Lower rates than those at present prevailing would probably bring larger profits by attracting
more business, but the reserve banks have the custody
of your reserves—of the reserves of the banks of the
country, and those reserves must be conserved if the
system is to be managed with safety. There must be
no inducement for the expansion of credit merely for
the sake of profit.
The first class of critics of the Federal Reserve
Board mentioned above deserve some attention as
well as the last class—the class that wants cheap
money, regardless of laws, economic or statutory. A
very well known United States Senator has recently
contributed an article to an industrial journal, published in Baltimore, in which he urges that the reserve
[12]




The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

bank rates should be lowered to where they were before the war, or at least during the war. In one part
of the article he says that the policy of the Board has
had the effect of "breaking down the price of securities"—which is tantamount to saying that speculation
in Wall Street has been cheeked—in another place he
says that "there is no sense whatever in retiring credits which are employed in production." Well, obviously if you should open the flood gates of credit for
speculation the price of securities would advance, but
such an advance at this time would absorb credit
needed in moving the crops and in productive enterprises. The policy of the Board has been throughout
to conserve credit for production and orderly marketing. Reserve bank rates must be fixed with the purpose of maintaining safe reserves—the reserves required by law—otherwise we should have such inflation and speculation as could end only in disaster.
The Senator urges Chambers of Commerce throughout the country to pass resolutions in favor of lower
rates. Chambers of Commerce are composed of business men and bankers and it will be interesting to see
what response they make. They are not as a rule inflationists and I shall be surprised if they do not recognize the necessity of the application of sound principles—of maintaining sound conditions of credit.
They know that the banks have been meeting all demands for credit for sound productive enterprise, and
have been curtailing credit only for speculation or for
non-essentials. They know that with reserves lower
than they should be, and with loans outstanding far
greater than ever before in the history of the country
there has been no "retirement of credits which are employed in production," where conditions were sound.
Personally, I can't help having some doubt whether
all has been done that could be done to curtail specu-




[13]

The Function* of the Federal Reserve

System

lative and other unnecessary credits. The enormous
expansion of all bank loans since the end of the war
and the fact, already stated, that Federal reserve
bank loans on commercial paper have increased nearly
seven fold in a year, or about $1,300,000,000, makes
it hard to believe that all that additional credit can
possibly be used in useful productive enterprise. Certainly there is no evidence of restriction, in these
figures, but strong evidence to the contrary.
The total loans of the Federal reserve banks are at
their highest now—higher than at any time during
the war, the highest in the history of the system. All
previous records of "total bills on hand" were passed
in the statement of August 27th, and again on September 3rd, and on September 10th. They passed
three billion dollars for the first time on the 3rd. The
figures are so high, in fact, that they seem to constitute strong prima facie evidence of undue expansion.
This brings me to some consideration of the criticisms of the second class of critics mentioned above,
critics who include some of the leading students of
economics and a few of the leading bankers of the
country. They maintain that the rates of the reserve
banks were not advanced soon enough after the war,
and some of them maintain that they are not yet
high enough in all districts to give the necessary check
to dangerous expansion. I am personally of the opinion that these criticisms are useful. The hindsight of
these college professors and bankers is often better
than their foresight, and like the rest of us they frequently find it easier to point out mistakes long after
they occur than at the time. Their criticisms often
fail also to take into consideration practical difficulties,
but on the whole, as an abstract proposition, I agree
with them that conditions would probably be better
today, if the check to expansion had been started by
[14]




The Functions

of the Federal

Reserve

System

a somewhat earlier increase of rates after the war. I
agree with them also that reserve bank rates should
be higher than they are today in some of the districts
where the demand for credit is greatest and where
legal rates of interest are 7, 8, and even 10 per cent,
as in the Sixth Federal Reserve District, and in several others. Practical difficulties, however, have to
be considered. Some people, and some banks, got
themselves pretty badly overloaded with Liberty
bonds through patriotic motives, and must be given
more time to work out. The habits engendered during the war can't be thrown off at once, and people
must be given time to understand what the purposes
of the Federal reserve system are and what the principles are which must guide it. If we can succeed in
keeping the reserves of the system within safe limits
without again raising rates, it may be better to do so.
One thing I want to say as a new member of the
Federal Reserve Board, though I am sure it is not
necessary to say it to this audience. There is absolutely no politics in the administration of the affairs
of the Board. I was in close touch with the Board
for considerably more than a year as Chairman of the
Committee on Banking and Currency of the H o u s e
of Representatives and in frequent consultation with
Governor H a r d i n g , with regard to proposed amendments to the Federal Reserve Act. You don't need to
be told that I am a Republican and that I should have
scented partisanship long ago if there had been any. I f
the time ever comes when the Federal Reserve Board
yields to partisan pressure and fixes its policies with
relation to their influence on elections, rather than the
security and soundness of the banking system of the
country—then there will be danger ahead. I do not
believe such a time ever will come. I do not believe
the policies of the system today would be appreci-




[15]

The Functions of the Federal Reserve

System

ably different if Mr. Hughes had been elected President four years ago instead of Mr. Wilson.
The Federal Reserve Act majrnot be 100 per cent
perfect, but it works well and needs only such minor
amendments as suggest themselves from its administration from time to time. No changes will be made
in its main features for many years, if ever, in my
opinion, unless Socialists or some other radical or
destructive party should gain control of the country—
which I don't expect will happen in my time or in
yours.




The Holmes PrtM
Philadelphia