fomc minutes · February 6, 1961
FOMC Minutes
A meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee was held in the
offices of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in
Washington on Tuesday, February 7, 1961, at 10:00 a.m.
PRESENT:
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Martin, Chairman
Hayes, Vice Chairman
Balderston
Bopp
Fulton
King
Leedy
Mills
Robert son
Shepardson
Szymczak
Irons, Alternate to Mr. Bryan
Messrs. Leach, Allen, and Mangels, Alternate
Members of the Federal Open Market Committee
Messrs. Erickson, Johns, and Deming, Presidents of
the Federal Reserve Banks of Boston, St. Louis,
and Minneapolis, respectively
Mr. Young, Secretary
Mr. Sherman, Assistant Secretary
Mr. Kenyon, Assistant Secretary
Mr. Hexter, Assistant General Counsel
Mr. Thomas, Economist
Messrs. Brandt, Eastburn, Hostetler, Marget,
Noyes, and Tow, Associate Economists
Mr. Rouse, Manager, System Open Market Account
Mr. Molony, Assistant to the Board of Governors
Mr. Koch, Adviser, Division of Research and
Statistics, Board of Governors
Mr. Knipe, Consultant to the Chairman, Board of
Governors
Mr. Yager, Economist, Division of Research and
Statistics, Board of Governors
Mr. Petersen, Special Assistant, Office of the
Secretary, Board of Governors
Messrs. Wayne, Patterson, and Swan, First Vice
Presidents of the Federal Reserve Banks of
Richmond, Atlanta, and San Francisco,
respectively
-2
2/7/61
Messrs. Ellis, Baughman, Jones, Parsons, Clay,
and Walker, Vice Presidents of the Federal
Reserve Banks of Boston, Chicago, St. Louis,
Minneapolis, Kansas City, and Dallas,
respectively
Mr. Garvy, Adviser, Federal Reserve Bank of New York
Mr. Rudy, General Counsel, Federal Reserve Bank of
Dallas
Mr. Stone, Manager, Securities Department, Federal
Reserve Bank of New York
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the
minutes of the meeting of the Federal Open
Market Committee held on January 10, 1961,
were approved unanimously.
Before this meeting there had been distributed to the members of
the Committee a report of open market operations covering the period
January 24 through February 6, 1961.
A copy has been placed in the files
of the Committee.
Supplementing the written report, Mr.
Rouse commented as follows:
Experience since the last meeting indicates that the
Committee's dual concern over the level of short-term rates
and the availability of reserves requires an increasingly
Over much of
flexible approach to open market operations.
the period, the money market was easy because of storm
induced float, and although this ease spilled over into the
market at times, short-term rates tended to rise on
bill
Last Wednesday and Thursday, on the other hand,
balance.
there was an evident need to supply reserves at a time when
Treasury bill rates were moving lower. The repurchase agree
ment provided a convenient mechanism for inserting funds.
As to the more general effects of recent System operations,
I think that we can take it as an encouraging sign that
required reserves have been holding up better than could
be expected on seasonal grounds, despite substantial
fluctuations in free reserves.
As might be expected, there was considerable interest,
and some skepticism, in the market over the portions of the
2/7/61
-3
President's economic message that dealt with the relation
ships between short- and long-term interest rates. The
immediate reaction was that prices of long-term bonds moved
up in moderate trading as much as 1 point (or down about .06
per cent in yield) last Thursday and Friday, mainly on short
covering by dealers and small speculative buying. Yesterday,
however, prices edged down by a few 32nds, principally on
small offers by holders anxious to acquire the new 18-month
Treasury note offered by the Treasury. Although the message
had little
effect on short rates, partly because the market
was already well conditioned to the official attitude toward
that sector, it appears that the long-term rate has already
seen some of the adjustment that the President considers
The President's balance-of-payments message yester
desirable.
day--suggesting that the Treasury might offer foreign official
holders of dollar balances special certificates at attractive
rates--had a more visible impact on short-term rates. Partly
because of this, the average rates in yesterday's auction
were established at 2.37 per cent and 2.57 per cent for three
and six-month bills, respectively, in each case about 7 basis
points above the previous auction. Whether this trend of
long and short rates will follow through remains to be seen.
The Treasury offering was considered very generously
priced by the market, and the main question raised was the
size of allotments to the public. Subscriptions received at
the New York Bank yesterday were unusually heavy, and it
appeared that some dealers were not waiting until the last
minute to enter their subscriptions, as is the usual practice.
There was only a modest reaction in prices of issues of
comparable maturity to the new 3-1/4 per cent notes offered
Market guesses were that the new
by the Treasury at par.
issue would start off in when-issued trading at a substantial
premium; first quotations this morning of par 6 bid and par 8
The Treasury,
offered appear to bear out that expectation.
of course, had hoped that as a result of concentrating the
refinancing in a single short-term issue--properly pricedthere would be a favorable impact on both short- and long
term rates.
The System rolled over its holdings of $3.6 billion of
the maturing 4-7/8 per cent certificates into the new issue.
I might add that the market has apparently not had any great
difficulty in adjusting to the cash refunding method this
time, even though some holders of maturing issues may not
If cash
be able to roll over their maturing holdings.
2/7/61
refunding should become a normal Treasury technique, there
may be possibilities for the System under more normal con
ditions to reduce its large holdings of some individual
issues by permitting some run-off of the maturing issue
in future refinancings and replacement with bills.
Subscriptions already received at the New York Bank
total more than $10 billion, including the $3.6 billion
subscription entered by the System. On the basis of these
subscriptions alone, allotments to the public would be around
50 per cent, and this figure will, of course, be reduced by
subscriptions in other districts and by subscriptions from
others entitled to 100 per cent allotments.
Mr.
Robertson, referring to the change in the free reserve position
that occurred between the first
asked whether it
and second weeks of the preceding period,
was just float that caused this decline.
Mr. Rouse replied that float was responsible for the decline
in the amount of free reserves between the two weeks.
float during the first
were collected.
The bulge in
part of the period was erased when the checks
The Management was faced with the problem during last
week of having to furnish reserves even though Treasury bill
were moving lower.
Large repurchase agreements were used on Wednesday
and Thursday to meet this problem.
up.
rates
This brought the free reserve figure
The market turned easy and on Friday over $150 million of those
repurchase agreements were lost.
Mr. Robertson then asked if one of the reasons for letting
reserves get so low and not trying to put them back was a desire to
bring the bill rate back up.
Mr. Rouse replied that the bill
rate was a factor.
-5
2/7/61
Thereupon, upon motion duly made and
seconded, the open market transactions
during the period January 24 through
February 6, 1961, were approved, ratified,
and confirmed.
A staff memorandum on recent economic and financial developments
had been distributed under date of February 3, 1961.
With further
reference to economic developments, Mr. Noyes presented the following
statement:
The more optimistic sentiment in business and financial
markets which has continued in recent weeks is well illustrated
by the 6 per cent increase in stock prices that occurred in
the month of January. This has been attributed to both the
conservative and the aggressive nature of the task force
reports to the new President and his own statements. Some
observers seem to be appraising the future more optimistically
because the Administration appears to have rejected radical
proposals which they feared might be adopted, while others
are pleased that prompt action is being taken to employ con
ventional antirecessionary weapons. The result has been a
widespread further shift toward confidence in the economic
outlook, despite the fact that there has been little or no
improvement in the underlying facts with respect to output,
trade and employment.
In January, steel mill operations were up 6 per cent
from the depressed December level, an adjustment that seemed
long overdue to those who have followed the relation between
steel consumption and production since last spring. On the
other hand, auto assemblies were down 20 per cent from the
already curtailed volume. Even the earliest preliminary
figure for total industrial production is still incomplete,
but it now appears most likely that the index will decline
one point. With auto sales down more than seasonally and
department store sales off sharply in the last two weeks,
total retail trade for the month is almost certain to be
down, due in part, of course, to the severe weather con
ditions in many areas.
The 900,000 increase in unemployed resulted in a slight
decline in the seasonally adjusted annual rate of unemployment,
from 6.8 to 6.6 per cent, but this amount of change is not
regarded by technicians familiar with the behavior of the
2/7/61
-6
series as a significant improvement.
Long-term unemployment
continued to increase.
Thus, it seems clear that the more optimistic appraisals
of the outlook in January were based on expectations of an
early upturn, rather than on any significant improvement in
general business conditions during the month. Of course, it
does not follow from this fact alone that these brighter
expectations will not be realized. Greater optimism itself
provides some stimulus to the economy. There is also evidence
that rates of decline are less severe in the case of many
industries, and some have leveled out. It may be significant,
for example, that on average sensitive commodity prices have
not declined further in recent weeks. Furthermore, there is
no doubt that the recommendations in the President's economic
message a week ago, though moderate, are generally of a
stimulative nature; and some, such as the accelerated G.I.
insurance dividend payment and the extension of unemployment
insurance benefits, will serve to bolster the demand for
goods and services in the near-term future. The length of
time that may be required for other parts of the program
to take effect is more difficult to estimate.
Previous
experience with expediting Government procurement and public
works programs to improve their countercyclical effects has
not been altogether favorable.
One potential danger in the present situation seems to
me to be that overly optimistic expectations for a strong
early reversal of the downward trend will be disappointed.
The easing at the end of last week and yesterday's rather
abrupt decline in stock prices suggests that some reappraisal
of the very bullish attitude of the preceding weeks may
already be under way.
While there may be good reason to suspect that many
measures of economic activity are currently at or near their
cyclical low points, and will not decline much further, there
is, as yet, little
basis for projecting a rapid or vigorous
recovery, either as a result of natural forces or measures
already undertaken by Government.
In this connection, it
is worth remembering that the very rapid turnaround in 1958
was unusual and followed an unusually sharp decline. While
there is no immutable reason that recessions and recoveries
must be symmetrical, there is also no reason to suppose
that one recovery will necessarily follow the pattern of
its immediate predecessor. As one surveys the various
elements of potential strength in the economy, none of them
seems poised for a rapid upward surge. Put another way,
there are very few components of total output that have
-7
2/7/61
been depressed to such a point that substantial upward
adjustment seems imminent.
Unless the Administration is provoked to much more
drastic and overtly inflationary measures than have been
proposed thus far, some further decline in the current quarter,
followed by a more gradual--and perhaps healthier--upturn than
in 1958 seems the more likely possibility.
Mr. Thomas then presented the following statement on the monetary
situation:
Recent developments in the financial sectors of the
economy may be reviewed in terms of the three prongs of the
objectives--or aspirations--of current System policy.
(1) To foster credit and monetary expansion.Contraction of credit and money has been somewhat smaller
than is customary at this time of the year. In other words,
there has been a seasonally-adjusted expansion.
(2) To avoid lowering short-term interest rates in
order not to add to the outflow of gold.--Short-term interest
rates have not declined in recent weeks, although some decline
generally occurs in January. The gold outflow has perceptibly
slackened in the past two weeks.
(3) To foster, so far as possible, further easing
of long-term credit markets. This is a more indirect result
of Federal Reserve operations. So far long-term rates have
not declined, but their variations have shown a relation
ship to short-term rates that is consistent with the record
of the past.
Taking up these three facets in reverse order, the situ
ation with respect to long-term interest rates is somewhat mixed.
Yields on U. S. Government bonds, which declined in December,
turned up in January, as did also yields on State and local
government bonds. During the last few days, however, since the
President's statement regarding the desirability of lower long
term rates, prices of Treasury bonds have risen somewhat, i.e.,
yields have declined. Yields on both U.S. and State and local
government bonds are above the low levels reached last summer.
In contrast, yields on outstanding high-grade corporate bonds,
which tended to rise in December, have declined in January
and are at approximately the low of last August. This decline
in corporate bond yields is apparently related to the reduced
volume of new issues offered and in prospect since the turn
of the year. New issues of State and local government securi
ties, on the other hand, have been in somewhat larger volume
than in the last quarter of 1960.
Stock prices have risen fairly steadily since October and
the more comprehensive averages are higher than at any previous
time. Trading activity has been at an exceptionally high level.
Yields on stocks at recent prices and dividend returns have
fallen to an average of about 3-1/8 per cent--close to the low
est levels of recent years.
The margin between yields on
stocks and those on highgrade corporate bonds has widened
appreciably.
Some easing of the mortgage market is indicated by FNMA
operations in December.
Offerings and purchases continued to
decline and were less than two-fifths the high volume of early
1960.
Sales by FNMA, which have been negligible, increased in
December to half the volume of purchases. With reduction in
the maximum permissible rate on FHA mortgages from 5-3/4 per
cent to 5-1/2 per cent, FNMA has set its purchase prices for
the 5-1/2 per cent mortgages at a slightly smaller differential
from prices for 5-3/4 per cent paper than would be indicated
This may provide a slight nudge toward
by the rate difference.
a broader reduction in mortgage rates.
With respect to shorter-term rates, yields on 3-5 year
Treasury issues rose somewhat in January, after declining in
December, contrary to the usual seasonal pattern. Treasury
bill rates, after declining in December, have fluctuated in
January at or above the low levels previously reached. These
fluctuations have shown some correspondence with variations
in the reserve positions of banks. Rates on finance company
paper were further reduced in January to the lowest level since
1958. The maintenance of Treasury bill rates has no doubt
been aided by increases, aggregating $500 million, in weekly
bill offerings, as well as by reductions in the Federal Reserve
portfolio, which has tended to reduce somewhat the availability
of reserves relative to demands.
Bank credit, after allowance for seasonal variations,
Total loans and investments of
has expanded in recent months.
banks, after increasing more than usual in December, seem to
have declined less than usual in January. Loans declined sub
stantially, after only a moderate increase in December, but
banks continued to add to their holdings of Government securi
ties, which usually are reduced in January. The reduction
in business loans corresponded roughly to the usual seasonal
pattern, and decreases in loans to finance companies and to
brokers and dealers in securities followed rather large increases
in December. Bank loans to dealers in Government securities,
however, have remained rather large, while loans to other dealers
in securities are relatively small.
2/7/61
-9
The bulk of the January increase in holdings of U.S. Govern
ment securities at city banks was in Treasury bills. There were
also increases in other short-term issues and in notes and bonds
maturing within one to five years, with a further decline in
holdings of longer-term issues.
In maturity distribution of
securities held, banks have substantially improved their liquidity
positions during the past year. The increase in bank holdings
of Treasury bills and other short-term securities may have tended
to keep bill rates down, but at the same time sales of bills by
the Federal Reserve and the less than seasonal decline in the
money supply and in required reserves have operated in the
opposite direction.
Demand deposits at banks decreased much less than usual in
January, and time deposits continued to show a sizable increase.
It is evident that the seasonally adjusted money supply increased
by a substantial amount in January. Preliminary figures show it
may have increased by $1 billion. By the beginning of February,
the money supply was probably larger than a year ago. Time
deposits at commercial banks increased by about $900 million in
In the same month of previous years, changes have
January.
varied between increases of $400 million and decreases of a
similar amount. In the week ending February 1 there was a
further sharp increase of over $500 million in time deposits at
city banks, reflecting principally a special large-scale trans
action by Sears Roebuck with a number of banks whereby the banks
took over customer paper, thereby increasing their consumer
loans and their time deposits.
United States Government deposits, which were larger than
usual at the end of December, declined substantially in January
but turned up last week. Interbank balances did not decline as
much as usual in January of this year. At the same time banks
These are other
reduced their borrowings from other banks.
indications of relative improvement in bank liquidity.
Bank reserve positions continued relatively easy on the
average during the past month, but showed rather wide week-to
week fluctuations and are now somewhat tighter than they have
been for some time. Free reserves varied from close to $1
billion in the weeks ending January 4 and January 25 down to
around $400 million last week. They may average even less
this week; we would say about $300 million. Required reserves,
which increased by more than estimated seasonal needs in December,
are now over $200 million larger than the figure projected from
the December average on the basis of the usual seasonal pattern.
2/7/61
-10
Reserves were made available during the past 5 weeks by
the seasonal return flow of currency and decline in required
reserves and were absorbed by a less than seasonal decrease in
float, by the gold drain of around $400 million, and by a
reduction in the System portfolio, which aggregated about $800
million in the four weeks ending February 1. As a net result,
while required reserves are now more than $200 million above
the projected level, excess reserves are below the assumed
$700 million figure by a somewhat larger amount, giving total
reserves of close to the projected figure.
In projecting reserve needs for the period ahead, it
seems appropriate to make some allowance for the higher level
that required reserves have reached, since an aim of policy is
to achieve credit expansion. The level of January 25 has been
used as a base; this is more than $100 million above the December
base, but is below the level actually reached in the week of
February 1 by about $100 million. Excess reserves of $700
million have been added to the January 25 figure for required
If the gain in required
reserves to give a total reserve base.
reserves attained last week is maintained, the projected figure
of total reserves needed will leave excess reserves of less than
$600 million and free reserves of less than $550 million.
In the current week, some $400 million of Federal Reserve
credit would be needed to offset normal market factors draining
reserves and bring total reserves to the projected figure, but
System
$100 million of this could be taken out next week.
operations to date, which have included substantial repurchase
contracts and moderate outright purchases, will supply over
$200 million (on a daily average basis) this week and nearly
$60 million more next week, if the repurchase contracts remain
On this basis, free reserves
until maturity, mostly February 16.
might average close to $300 million this week and nearly $500
In the week ending February 22, the run-off
million next week.
of repurchase contracts would absorb reserves supplied by market
factors, and free reserves would remain close to $500 million.
In the subsequent two weeks (ending March 1 and March 8), System
purchases of nearly $500 million would be needed to maintain
reserves at the levels indicated.
Most of the reserve variations during the next three
months are temporary. Except for perhaps about $100 million
of additional purchases during the next few weeks, there would
need to be no sustained increase in the System portfolio until
early May in order to cover seasonal reserve needs and allow
for an estimated gold drain of about $40 million a week.
The Committee may wish to consider whether it wishes to
provide more or less inducement to credit expansion in supplying
2/7/61
-11
reserves. The amount of reserves supplied in recent weeks has
permitted or perhaps encouraged monetary expansion, relative to
the usual seasonal pattern, without actually depressing bill
rates. The $700 million of excess reserves assumed have not
been available in the past two weeks largely because they have
been absorbed by the higher than projected level of required
reserves. Unless required reserves decline in the period ahead,
the total reserve needs projected will make possible little
more
than $500 million of free reserves.
If credit demands should be
greater than seasonal, somewhat more reserves might be needed
during the next month. Decision as to when and how to supply
those needs can be made by the Account Management on the basis
of developments in the market.
Mr. Marget presented the following statement concerning the balance
of payments and related international developments:
In January, the U. S. Treasury sold $320 million of gold to
foreign countries. This compares with a December level of $440
million (if we leave out the special sale of $300 million in gold
to the United States by the International Monetary Fund), and a
November level--the worst we have seen thus far--of over $490
million. It is true that there has been a slackening of gold
sales since January 24, but it is not possible to conclude from
that fact alone, or from the mere fact that there has been some
improvement as compared with the appalling figures for November
and December, that the worst is now over. January 24 is still
too recent a date to permit any such conclusion, and, while $320
million is less than $440 million and $490 million, respectively,
it is still
much too high for comfort.
If any comfort is to be
found, it is with respect to the nature of the forces that may
be working toward a reduction in the rate of gold outflow in
the immediate future.
There is some comfort, to begin with, in the fact that
December did not witness a repetition of the disturbing develop
ment that I reported to this Committee a month ago: namely, that
time since our balance of
November saw, for virtually the first
payments situation became a matter of serious concern, an actual
diminution in the level of foreign dollar balances, by as much as
$470 million--clear evidence, obviously, that existing foreign
owned dollar balances were being converted on a large scale into
In December, on the other hand, while the sum of the gold
gold.
outflow and the increase in foreign dollar balances reached a
record high, the level of existing dollar balances, instead of
2/7/ 6 1
-12-
showing a sharp decrease comparable to that shown in November,
actually showed a significant increase.
(While privately
owned foreign dollar balances declined by $82 million,
official dollar balances rose by $290 million.) We do not
yet have the complete January figures on foreign-owned dollar
balances, but the fact that foreign dollar holdings with the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York remained virtually unchanged
in January gives at least reason to hope that the mass con
version of dollar balances into gold that we feared might
have started in November is, for the moment at least, in
abeyance.
There is some comfort, also, in the action of a country
such as Japan, which, with holdings of almost $1.9 billion, is
second only to Germany (with around $3.5 billion) in the size of
its dollar holdings convertible into gold. As I reported last
time, the Japanese Finance Minister had announced on December 20
last, in reply to an interpellation in Parliament, that the
Government of Japan wished to increase the ratio of gold in
Japan's reserves from the present 14 per cent to 30 per cent,
"following the example of other countries." On the other hand,
as I also reported last time, the Minister had added that he was
"in no hurry to purchase gold right now."
In fact, a struggle
was then going on within the Japanese Government as to whether
the Japanese should or should not convert dollar balances into
gold at this time. It is comforting to learn that, at least for
the moment, the opponents of conversion into gold have won out.
We are informed that, while Japan intends to bring its gold ratio
up to 30 per cent "eventually," it does not propose to make any
gold purchases for the time being.
Finally, for what it is worth, there is the evidence pro
vided by the London gold market concerning what is described in
the financial press as a "dampening of speculative enthusiasm"
with respect to the price of gold. Since last Friday, the price
in London has been such, after payment of brokerage and handling
charges, as to yield a net price of about the United States par.
What these developments add up to, clearly, is the suggestion
that we may possibly--I stress the word "possibly"--be moving into
a period of a slackened rate of gold outflow, while the inter
national financial community holds its breath to see which way
"Things," in this context, must mean,
things are going to move.
for our purpose, the course of the United States balance of
payments.
For in the case of a country like the United States,
possesses, and with the
with the immense reserves that it still
determination to use these reserves in the defense of the dollar
at its present parity as freely as the President has declared it
to be our determination to use them, what should matter is not such
2/7/61
-13
expectations of speculators as rest on nothing more substantial
than guesses as to how other speculators may act, but the answer
to the basic question which has been facing us ever since the
developments of 1958 awakened us to a realization that we, too,
can have a balance of payments problem: namely, are we, or are
we not, moving toward a position of reasonable equilibrium in
our international accounts?
As we all know, it is the movements on capital account which
have had the effect of obscuring the very real progress toward
such equilibrium that we have been having in the sector which
would ordinarily have been characterized as the most difficult
and intractable part of our problem: namely, the trade sector.
But while this may be irritating, it can hardly be ignored.
Capital movements do affect the balance of payments, and there
fore the international movement of dollars and gold. We do have
to begin, therefore, by asking what we are likely to see, in the
period immediately ahead, in the way of capital movements.
This, in turn, requires some judgment as to the nature of
the forces which have been behind the very large outflow of
capital that we have been witnessing. Specifically, if those
commentators were right who have discussed the capital outflow
of recent months as if it were solely a result of interest-rate
differentials as between this country and abroad, we should not
expect any relief in this quarter until there is a marked shift
in the international structure of interest rates in our favor.
But the evidence is quite clear that the recent capital outflow
has not been solely the result of interest-rate differentials;
that, on the contrary, the element of confidence in our basic
domestic policies, as well as in our policy with respect to the
dollar price of gold, has played a very considerable role. It
is, therefore, not beyond the realm of possibility that the
evidence I cited at the outset for believing that the "flight
from the dollar" that had begun, particularly last November, to
loom up as a most unpleasant reality, may for the moment be in
abeyance, could mean that the confidence factor, which has been
working against us in balance-of-payments terms, may now begin
to work in our favor. But this is something that we shall be
able to cheer about only when it happens. Thus far, to be sure,
the statements by the President, particularly with respect to
the official dollar price of gold, seem to have had a calming
effect. But on occasions of this kind, one is always reminded
of a remark of Voltaire's that Alfred Marshall, the great economist
of the last generation, was fond of quoting. "An incantation,"
said Voltaire, "will kill a flock of sheep, provided that it is
accompanied by a dose of arsenic." Thus far, it is principally
2/7/61
-14
the incantation that has been so favorably received. What will
be watched from now on will be the application of the arsenic,
and the effects thereof.
Within the field of Federal Reserve responsibility, the
arsenic involved--namely, monetary policy--is bound to have its
effect on interest rates, which in turn have certainly had their
effects upon capital movements, although not nearly to the extent
implied by so many commentators.
Here I would note only that in
January there were reductions in the discount rate by both
Germany and Japan.
In both cases, the action was taken, not
because of a significant slackening in the strength of the
domestic economic situation in those two countries, but--in
the words of the announcement by the German Bundesbank-- in
order "to reduce the continuing inflow of foreign exchange and
the export of funds."
In this respect too, then,
to facilitate
with proper policies on our side, there is no reason to expect
a further deterioration in the capital account of our balance
of payments, and, over a period, we may even expect an improve
ment.
is said, it is our position on current
But, when all
account, and particularly on trade account, that is going to
be really decisive. And here I recommend a perusal of the
figures given on page 28 of the current Staff Report on Recent
Economic and Financial Developments, with respect to what happened
during the last quarter of 1960 to what is called there the "basic
deficit" in our balance of payments--that is, the deficit after
exclusion of recorded U. S. private short-term capital outflow
two
The latter
and estimated unrecorded capital outflows.
items amounted to a full billion in the quarter; without them,
the "basic deficit" would have been $0.4 billion, or around
(It should be noted that this
$1-1/2 billion annual rate.
figure of $0.4 billion for the fourth quarter includes the
Ford transaction; without that, the "basic deficit" for the
quarter would have been virtually zero.) It has been recently
estimated, moreover, that, taking as a basis the projection for
U. S. foreign trade for the year 1961 that was made recently
by the Balance of Payments Group of the National Foreign Trade
that if the
Council, one arrives at the following result:
capital movements in response to doubts about the dollar and
those in response to interest-rate differentials were to dry
to a
year, the over-all deficit for the year can fall
up this
not
level in the neighborhood of $1 billion. This is still
the zero deficit that we must have in order to be able to say
that we have reached that position of reasonable equilibrium
in our international accounts which we have set as our goal;
2/7/61
-15
and it is still
further removed from the actual surplus in
our international accounts that we must obtain in "good"
years in order to balance the moderate deficits that we may
expect when the cyclical constellation with respect to trade
prospects may be less favorable than it is now. But it is
also a picture vastly different from that of the low point
in our balance-of-payments experience since 1958 (as in the
second quarter of 1959) when, instead of running an export
surplus at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of nearly $6
billion, as we did in the fourth quarter of 1960, we had
virtually no surplus on trade account at all. There has
certainly been adjustment since that low point; and the
direction and degree of adjustment have not been unrelated
to the policies that were being followed during the period
in question. Given time, and unremitting adherence to those
policies, in all fields, which alone can assure that our
products will maintain, and indeed improve, their competitive
position vis-a-vis those of our principal trading partners, we
can solve our balance-of-payments problem, and with it the
vexing problem of apparent conflict between internal and
external policy goals which is now so much with us. But
those two conditions--the right policies, and enough time to
let them work out to the desired result--are of the essence.
Mr. Hackley then entered the room and Mr. Hexter withdrew.
Chairman Martin said that the ad hoc Subcommittee appointed at
the meeting on January 10, 1961, had had two meetings and wanted to dis
cuss Committee operating procedures at the end of this session.
Therefore,
he would suggest that there be an executive session at the end of this
meeting with attendance limited to the members of the Committee, the
other Reserve Bank Presidents, the four incoming Presidents, and Messrs.
Young, Thomas, and Rouse.
No objection to this procedure was indicated.
Mr.
Hayes then presented the following statement of his views on
the economic situation and credit policy:
2/7/61
-16
It
seems to me that the basic conditions which should
determine our policies have not changed materially in the
brief interval since our last
meeting, although there has
certainly been an important gain, for the time being at
least, in foreign confidence in the dollar following the
President's strong statements on this subject.
The domestic business picture does not seem to have
brightened and may, in fact, have turned a little
darker.
For example, retail
sales have been relatively weak, and the
retail inventory-sales ratio has reached the highest level
since the summer of 1958. The general inventory situation
suggests that the inventory adjustment process has not yet
reached completion, even though this point may not be very
far in the future.
Meanwhile there is always the risk that
the high level of unemployment may add a further secondary
push to what has been up to now an inventory recession, or at
least that it makes a business turnaround more remote in the
absence of special stimulating forces--this despite the high
rate of personal savings over the past year, which could of
course finance a revival of large-scale consumer spending.
Oddly enough, the stock market has continued to ignore these
more gloomy possibilities, but it is not clear to what extent
the buoyant market in equities reflects business optimism as
distinguished from fears of inflationary developments.
Despite the gratifying recovery in foreign confidence in
the dollar, this remains a matter of great delicacy. We have
made only a start toward correcting the heavy balance-of-payments
deficit; and moreover, if the recession at home should deepen,
and particularly if it should bring on a sizable Treasury
deficit, this
would put the strength of the dollar to a further
test.
Some deficit in the Federal Budget is to be expected, but
if it should begin to approach the magnitude reached in 1958 we
might face increasing skepticism abroad on the strength of our
And of course the same risk would arise if we were
currency.
a
decline in short-term interest rates with a conse
permit
to
Thus the
quent stimulus to a renewed outflow of capital.
balance of payments must remain a major consideration in our
policy decisions.
It seems to me that the policies pursued by the System
over the last
month or two have been appropriate for the twin
objectives posed by the domestic recession and the international
status of the dollar. Banks have been supplied with a rising
fund of reserves, their liquidity positions have improved, and
The behavior of total
the money supply has been increasing.
bank credit at weekly reporting banks in January was considerably
stronger than the seasonal pattern, primarily because of continued
2/7/61
-17
acquisitions of Government securities by the banks--and
this followed a record breaking expansion of bank credit in
December. Time deposits moved up again strongly in early
January, and I understand that the money supply will show a
substantial rise in the second half of the month in contrast
with the slight dip in the first half. We have also witnessed
a decline in the velocity of money, a development associated
with the diminished pressure on the cash balances of the public
at large. Moreover, it has proved possible to hold the bill
rate at around the 2-1/4 per cent level without interfering
with the liquidity needs of the domestic economy.
In the light of the Treasury's recent financing announce
ment and our long-standing "even keel" policy, it is clear that
in the next week or so we should try to maintain about the same
atmosphere in the market that has prevailed during the recent
past. The projections suggest that this may not be too diffi
cult, although there is always a danger that the bill rate may
slip lower while at the same time the position of bank reserves
may not leave much scope for net selling of bills designed to
counteract such a tendency. I would continue to place the main
emphasis on the bill rate. Looking beyond this immediate situ
ation, I think it is incumbent upon us to grapple now with the
difficult implications of a continuing delicate international
situation and a possibly deepening recession. At the risk of
repetition, I would like again to stress the need for flexi
bility in our policies. We are confronted with an increased
emphasis on experimentation in public policy, particularly in
fiscal policy and debt management. While we should welcome
these innovations to the extent that they may relieve monetary
policy from carrying the whole load of countercyclical action,
we should not let an inactive or an inflexible posture on our
part encourage unwise actions in these other areas of public
policy.
At this point I had intended to comment on the desirability
of experimentation in open market operations along the lines of
suggestions which have been made at the last few meetings, but
I shall defer these remarks until the executive session scheduled
immediately following this meeting.
I see no reason now to consider a change in the discount
rate or in the directive--apart from the longer-range question
as to the proper form which the directive should take. We
should, I believe, have in mind the possibility that, in the
event of a renewed large-scale flight of short-term capital,
the System might wish to consider an increase in the discount
rate in order to put upward pressure on short-term market
rates--but hopefully this can be avoided, if present favorable
trends continue.
2/7/61
-18
Mr. Erickson commented to the effect that it
was necessary to give
consideration to the extremely severe weather conditions that had prevailed
recently in the First District when making any evaluation of business
conditions.
still
Continuing, he said that employment and production figures
showed an unfavorable trend.
On the other hand,
in the weeks ended
January 21 and 28 there were rather substantial increases in electric power
output over year-ago levels, and the January poll of New England purchasing
agents was more optimistic than the December poll.
Construction was down
in December; for the year, residential was off 4.6 per cent,
was up 17 per cent, and public utility
cent.
nonresidential
and heavy engineering were down 33 per
The over-all decline for the year was 3.4 per cent.
Department store
sales had been erratic due to weather conditions.
Mr.
Erickson said the December survey of mutual savings banks showed
a deposit gain of 5.9 per cent compared with December 1959.
The comparative
percentage gains had gone up gradually from the low of 4.4 per cent in May.
At the end of the year,
mutuals showed an increase of better than 11 per
cent in mortgage loans from the previous year.
The average rate on con
ventional mortgages was between 5-1/2 and 6 per cent, but four small banks
had cut their prime mortgage rate to 5-1/4 per cent.
Commercial and
industrial loans of reporting member banks showed a rise in January,
contrast to a decline last year,
of a year ago.
in
and on January 25 were 7 per cent ahead
-19
2/7/61
After expressing the opinion that the Desk had done a good job in
the past two weeks, Mr. Erickson said that he would not favor a change in
the discount rate or the directive at this time.
He would instruct the Desk
to supply reserves as needed, bearing in mind the short-term rate more than
any free reserve figure.
Mr. Irons reported that on balance there had been no particularly
significant changes in the Eleventh District.
Construction in the past
month was good; awards were very high in January.
to petroleum stocks showed some improvement,
severe weather in other parts of the country.
The situation in regard
with demand reflecting the
Employment had increased, but
there was also a slight increase in unemployment;
in Texas, unemployment
was averaging about 5.3 per cent of the labor force.
It
seemed doubtful
that there would be any great improvement over the next few months, but
neither was any particularly unfavorable trend foreseen.
The industrial
production index for the District was up for the most recent month.
Depart
ment store sales, however, were down, with unfavorable weather a factor.
Agriculture had been affected by unusually heavy rains.
Mr.
Irons stated that the banking situation remained easy.
Borrow
ings at the Reserve Bank were low and District banks were net sellers of
Federal funds.
However,
their net sales aggregated about $150 million less
than in the preceding two-week period.
Demand deposits had shown some down
ward movement, with most of the decline accounted for by interbank deposits.
Time deposits,
on the other hand, continued to rise substantially, building
-20
2/7/61
up liquidity to a higher level than the money supply alone would indicate.
While there had been some decline in loans, it was no wore than seasonal,
and investments were up.
Turning to policy for the next period, Mr. Irons commented that the
Treasury financing suggested maintenance of the status quo.
He felt the
Account had done a creditable job in the past two weeks; after getting over
the float problem during the earlier week, conditions were about as they
should be.
He would like to see about the same degree of reserve availa
bility maintained as in the past week or so, with any deviations on the
side of less aggressive ease but no overt action in that direction.
As far
as guides were concerned, he would favor using the short-term rate, as
reflected by the bill rate, and he would like to see the bill rate around
2-1/2 per cent.
Also, he would like to see the Federal funds rate in the
area of 2-1/2 to 3 per cent.
As far as free reserves were concerned, he
would prefer the $450-$500 million range to the $600-$700 million range.
He felt this would indicate a better relationship and that it would provide
adequate reserve availability to the banking system.
The Account should
have considerable leeway in the forthcoming period, but he would urge
avoiding anything that would put pressure on the Treasury bill rate.
He
would recommend no change in the directive or in the discount rate.
Mr. Mangels reported that developments in the Twelfth District
were not significantly different from the rest of the country.
The
Pacific Coast had shown a slight improvement in employment and a slight
-21
2/7/61
drop in unemployment.
However, this was no cause for optimism as it
reflected increased payrolls in the food processing industries due to
seasonal factors.
hand, was down.
Aircraft and manufacturing employment,
on the other
The net effect of these movements kept unemployment in
relation to the total labor force at a 6 per cent figure.
District steel
mills in the week ended January 28 were operating at 84 per cent of the
1957-59 average, which marked a leveling off after the rise during the
first two weeks of January.
The lumber industry remained in the doldrums,
with production down and the volume of unfilled and new orders not offering
any encouragement.
present time.
As to agriculture,
farmers were not suffering at the
Pacific Northwest wheat farmers in particular were doing
well, since wheat prices were 17-22 cents above support prices, largely
as a result of export demand.
per cent from 1959.
Total construction in December was up 1
Although residential construction was down 13 per
cent and nonresidential was down 3 per cent,
works and utilities offset those declines.
construction of public
In the area of retail sales,
latest figures indicated that both department stores and automotive sales
were down somewhat in January.
Mr. Mangels indicated that there had been a sharp decrease ($180
million) in bank loans during the last two weeks of January, this being
twice the decline during the comparable 1960 period.
Demand for commercial
loans was slack, and the demand for consumer and real estate loans was not
encouraging.
However, banks added about $100 million to their holdings of
bills and certificates.
Demand deposits held about even during this period,
-22
2/7/61
although expectations were for a more rapid decline in bank deposits in
the next month or six weeks than in the past.
Time deposits, on the other
hand, were up somewhat despite a continuing decline in savings deposits.
Only two banks, both country banks, resorted to borrowing from the Reserve
Bank in January.
It was reported that there had been some talk among the
banking fraternity of a cut in the prime rate during the next 30 or 60
days.
However, it
seemed to be felt generally that if the Administration's
programs were implemented and the Government needed new money for them,
interest rates would be higher at the end of the year than at present.
Turning to policy, Mr.
Mangels said that in view of the Treasury
financing situation, he would maintain an even keel for the next week or
so.
He would define this as meaning free reserves somewhere around
$600-800 million, with the bill rate around 2-1/4 per cent.
no change in the discount rate or the directive at this time.
He would make
However, by
the time of the next meeting he felt that in the absence of unforeseen
developments he would be inclined to move to a somewhat easier position
in order to encourage recovery of the domestic situation.
Mr. Deming reported that in the Ninth District there were some
optimistic appraisals of the outlook, coming mostly from the business
community.
However, he did not believe that this was a general feeling
on the part of the public; in fact, he could paint a fairly black picture
of the outlook for the District on the basis of available information.
A recent newspaper poll indicated that a substantial percentage of the
2/7/61
-23
respondents thought the outlook for the current year was not too good.
Of those interviewed in January 1961, 57 per cent indicated that they
thought the outlook was good compared with 79 per cent during the same
month in 1960 and 71 per cent in 1959.
In evaluating conditions at the
present time (good, bad, or indifferent), 64 per cent thought that times
were good in 1960 compared with 39 per cent in 1961.
Only 15 per cent
thought that times were bad in 1960, while 31 per cent felt that way in
1961.
Also, the District's natural resource industries were not experiencing
a great amount of activity, showing declines from preceding periods, so the
outlook there was not too optimistic.
The agricultural picture could be
quite good, although there might be a moisture problem in the spring.
In discussing the banking situation, Mr. Deming remarked that the
bank loan picture indicated a softerning of activity.
While loans at city
banks usually fall during January, they fell faster this year, the dollar
amount of decline being almost 6 times as large as the average decline
over the past thirteen years.
It was thought that this might reflect a
shift by borrowers to other markets for funds.
The banks were happy about
the improvement in liquidity, but not particularly happy about the decline
in loan demand.
On balance, Mr.
Deming said, it
appeared that the District situation
was about the same as the situation in other areas.
He doubted that there
was a firm basis for optimism at this time on the part of business and the
2/7/61
-24
stock market, and he could not see what underlying factors were used in
arriving at this optimism.
Mr. Deming indicated that he had no disagreement with the views
of Messrs. Hayes, Erickson, or Irons.
In his opinion, the prescription
that the Committee was following was the right one.
He would not change
the directive or the discount rate at this time, and he would favor using
the bill rate, rather than the level of free reserves, as a guide for
open market operations.
He added that he felt the Desk had done a good
job in the past two weeks under conditions that were somewhat less than
favorable.
Mr. Allen indicated that in the short interval since the last
meeting there was little
new in the Seventh District.
Total economic
activity continued to decline in January, with the automobile industry
contributing the most important depressing development.
Automobile sales
in January were 369,000 units, 19 per cent below last year.
Some improve
ment was expected in February and March., with guesses that 1,250,000 cars
will be sold in the first
the first
quarter, but that would be 16 per cent below
quarter of 1960.
Inventories continued relatively static, at
a little over 1,000,000 units.
sales, and on that basis first
The industry was gearing production to
quarter production would not exceed
1,300,000 units--35 per cent below last year.
Automobile analysts in
Detroit felt that the bottom was being scraped in terms of production and
sales and that conditions would not get worse.
There was much the same
-25
2/7/61
attitude throughout the District generally, with no evidence that business
men or consumers believed that a major slump was in the making.
January
saw some improvement in farm machinery and household appliances and a
number of industries increased orders for steel, but the over-all
production rate was held down by reductions in orders from auto producers.
Mr. Allen mentioned that there were diverse views among mortgage
lenders in the Chicago market as to the probable effect of the recent
reduction of the ceiling rate on FHA mortgages.
The most general view
was that it would merely increase the prevailing discount for such
mortgages by about 2 points.
However, the president of a large mortgage
company believed that the reduction might be just what was needed to set
in motion a downward adjustment in home mortgage rates, and an important
builder considered the move beneficial as part of a package of official
measures designed to bolster consumer expectations.
Reports at a meeting
of the nation's major lenders to agriculture, held at the Chicago Bank
last week, indicated that delinquencies and foreclosures of farm real
estate mortgages were at low levels, that interest rates had declined
recently and were expected to decline somewhat further, that activity in
farm real estate was slow, and that the supply of agricultural credit,
both long-term and short-term, was adequate for 1961 and was somewhat
larger relative to prospective demand than in 1960.
Mr. Allen remarked that these factors, together with movements in
the long-term securities markets,
seemed to indicate response, slow
2/7/61
-26
though it might be, to monetary ease.
However, the demand for bank credit
continued weaker than normal for this time of year.
Business loans at
District reporting banks dropped $132 million in the four weeks ended
January 25, compared with $22 million last year, but the basic deficit
of Chicago central reserve city banks rose to an average of $82 million
for the period ended February 1.
These banks had begun to buy bills in
anticipation of the April 1 tax date and the Sears financing on January
31 generated pressure.
Eight Seventh District banks purchased $316
million of the $1.1 billion total of Sears' customer contracts sold.
Turning to policy, Mr. Allen stated that in his opinion the
reasons so generally expressed two weeks ago for continuing the status
quo continued to be valid and controlling.
He would not favor a change
in the discount rate, the directive, or the degree of ease.
Mr. Allen then referred to the many expressions heard to the
effect that longer-term rates were too high and must be reduced.
was not at all sure that they were too high if
He
the savings-investment
process so important in our way of life was to be nourished.
In any case,
the word "confidence" was all-important, and by this he meant real confidence,
not psychological hoop-la or "incantations," to use the word Mr. Marget had
quoted from Voltaire.
Bank reserves were plentiful, savings had increased
substantially in the past year, and it
seemed that the requisites for
investment in the long-term area were present except for the one that was
most necessary--confidence.
It was, of course, important that the System,
2/7/61
in
-27
its limited sphere,
do whatever it
could to increase confidence on the
part of the saver and investor, and refrain from doing anything that would
impair confidence.
Mr. Allen added that under present conditions, difficult
as they were, he felt that the Committee could make its maximum contribution
by continuing to operate until its
next meeting, at least, as it
had been
operating for the past several weeks.
Mr. Leedy commented that it
had been recommended at the end of
January that the Kansas City metropolitan area be classified as a sub
stantial labor surplus area.
It was estimated that about 8 per cent of
the labor force was unemployed on January 15.
If the city was so
classified, it would be the first metropolitan area in the District
to be classified as an area of substantial labor surplus since 1959.
Regarding the banking picture in his District, Mr. Leedy said it
followed much the same pattern as the neighboring Districts.
There had
been a substantial reduction in loans since the first of the year, demand
deposits were under the year-ago levels, largely as the result of a
substantial drop in interbank deposits, and there was an unusually large
increase in time deposits.
Mr. Leedy recommended that the Committee continue to do what it
had been attempting to do since the January 24 meeting.
As he saw it,
recent developments, including the attitude indicated by the President in
his statements regarding the need to protect the dollar, were working in
-28
2/7/61
the System's favor and were tending to minimize its problem.
Nevertheless,
the System still had a responsibility in this area that it must continue to
fulfill.
In his opinion, the Committee should pursue about the same policy
that it had been following, being sensitive to any downward movement in the
bill rate of a material nature and also keeping watch on the Federal funds
rate, which he felt need be only slightly lower than the discount rate.
The level of net free reserves that might eventuate from pursuing such a
policy would not concern him too much.
Mr. Leach reported that business activity in the Fifth District
continued to decline slowly, although a few indicators showed some slight
improvement.
Man-hours, seasonally adjusted, had declined in the durable
goods industries, but furniture factories collectively had improved a
little.
In the nondurables field, activity had held up well in food and
tobacco manufacturing but had declined in other groups.
The small volume
of forward buying continued to restrain activity in the textile industry
generally, although yarn mills recently had a sizable increase in their
backlog of orders.
While total employment had declined, employment in the
fields of trade, finance, and services remained stable or increased
slightly. January department store sales slowed sharply under adverse
weather conditions after a favorable early start.
The position of
District banks continued to ease.
Mr. Leach expressed the view that monetary policy had done its
job, and a good job at that.
In his opinion, any further easing at this
2/7/61
-29
point would be a grave mistake.
It was unlikely that it would stimulate
employment, and on the basis of recent experience it
expand time deposits rather than the money supply.
probably would
With loan demand
relatively weak, banks presumably would channel most new funds into short
term investments,
thus aggravating the balance-of-payments problem by
further depressing short-term rates.
further ease, he did not think it
However, while he was opposed to
would be advisable at the present time
to adopt a positive program to mop up reserves solely to push rates higher
than they now were.
Although he hesitated to say anything about reserves,
he believed $700 million of excess reserves was a little high; it seemed
to him that a range of $500-600 million would be an appropriate benchmark.
However, he would play down the present importance of the free reserve
figure as an indicator compared with short-term interest rates, particularly
the 90-day bill rate.
Although the 90-day rate was recently as low as 2.13
per cent, he was pleased that it had risen to a substantially higher level.
Considering existing levels of interest rates abroad, he believed the
System should seriously consider offsetting action if the bill rate
approached 2 per cent.
This did not mean that he favored a 2 per cent
peg, or any other peg, but the 2 per cent figure had acquired inter
national psychological importance.
In view of the balance-of-payments
problem and the current Treasury financing, a reduction in the discount
rate was entirely out of the question, and he saw no immediate need to
change the directive.
2/7/61
-30
Mr. Leach added that, inasmuch as this was probably the last
Committee meeting he would attend, he would like to say that while he
thought the System's policy actions since last spring had been as
appropriate as any one could reasonably expect, he believed that there
was much room for improvement in the manner of handling the directive to
the New York Bank.
Mr. Mills said he was heartened by what he sensed to be a spread
ing awareness of the necessity that the Open Market Committee focus its
attention on the international financial situation.
To that end,
it
was
his belief that the objective should be to develop a level of positive
free reserves in the range of $400 to $500 million, which conceivably
would be reflected in a Federal funds rate approaching 3 per cent and, he
would hope, a 90-day bill rate in the range of 2-1/2 per cent.
In his
belief, the pursuit of that objective would not do violence to those who
espoused the view that reserves should be supplied in greater abundance
and who endorsed a level of positive free reserves of $700 or $800 million
or even more.
His reasoning was that in reverting back to past experience
it was clear that where a level of positive free reserves in the range of
$400 to $500 million had been maintained constantly over any considerable
period, a more than ample stimulus had been given to the expansion of
bank loans and investments.
Again, as at the January 24 meeting, he
wished to call attention to the chart of positive free reserves and
negative free reserves over a period of several years.
This chart
2/7/61
-31
indicated that on the occasions when the System had permitted positive free
reserves to remain for a long period at a high level it had produced con
ditions that were followed by a vigorous counter policy and by attendant
difficulties and problems.
With regard to the international situation, Mr. Mills said it
seemed to him that the Committee was fortunate in the erudite presentations
that it received concerning the statistical movements of domestic and
international financial affairs.
However, it might also be well to turn
back to the perceptiveness that comes from reading economic history.
If
it is true that history repeats itself, it seemed not at all improbable
that the country was moving into a situation that would find its friends
abroad again saying that "when America sneezes, Europe and other parts of
the world have pneumonia."
There were definite signs of deterioration in
economic activity abroad, both in England and Western Europe, and in his
opinion the economy of Japan was poised at a very narrow balance.
If the
movement of recessionary influences continued its downward path in the
United States, history would suggest that at some point the market for
foreign goods would be so impaired that the balance of trade would turn
in favor of this country, possibly more violently than one would choose
of his own accord.
Accordingly, Mr. Mills said, his concern was more with
the possibility that in the future this country would experience an inflow
of gold than that it would experience a continued outflow.
In the mean
time, however, he thought it was of critical importance that the System
2/7/61
-32
bring the short-term interest rate structure of the United States, to the
extent of its
powers, to a level that was competitive with the rate
structures in Great Britain and on the Continent.
Mr. Robertson said that he would not comment on economic conditions,
or debate them, except to say that there was still
indication of an upturn.
no upturn or any immediate
The turnaround had not yet been made.
to him, as he had pointed out before, that it
It
seemed
was a grave mistake on the
part of the Committee to attempt to use the bill rate as the controlling
guide for monetary policy.
In his opinion, this had prevented monetary
policy from making the kind of contribution it was capable of making
toward a reversal of the economic downturn by increasing the availability
and lowering the cost of money.
This failure would serve to prolong the
recession.
For several months he had been urging that the Committee provide
the banking system with a more ample supply of reserves in order to
enable monetary policy to make whatever contribution it could toward
reversing the economic trend.
He still believed in the validity of that
course of action, and if it resulted in driving the bill rate to 2 per
cent or below, he would not be concerned.
He felt that the Committee, in
pressing to hold up the bill rate, had set up a "bogey," based on no good
reasons that he had heard in the discussions around the table.
He was not
impressed with the argument that a lower bill rate would stimulate a
further outflow of capital or even accentuate the outflow of gold.
2/7/61
-33
Furthermore, he believed that any outflow of capital based on interest
rates would flow back when rates here rose--as they would when the
economy began to move upward.
if
The outflow of gold would reverse itself
and when the world learned that this country meant to manage its
internal affairs in a way that would revitalize the economy and at the
same time maintain the stability of the dollar.
Also, he did not believe that long-term rates could be lowered
significantly and effectively while the System was pegging short-term
rates.
Therefore,
the System should have the courage to permit short
term rates to go lower.
In his view, it
would not require much lower
short-term rates to achieve the desired effect on longer-term rates.
In
fact, even the policy that the System had been following was apparently
beginning, belatedly, to exert some slight impact.
Mr.
Robertson commented that during the past several months he
had joined in voting for renewal of the policy directive.
He had done
so because the language of the directive was sufficiently broad to
encompass his position.
The statute, he noted, requires a statement of
the reasons for the policy actions taken by the Committee.
Although his
reasons would not be in the policy record submitted to the Congress, he
had voted for renewal of the directive on the basis that he had just
explained, as clearly shown by the minutes of those meetings.
the minute record of this meeting to make it
He wanted
doubly clear that, although
he did agree with the economic policy specified in the language of the
-34
2/7/61
policy directive, which called for encouraging monetary expansion, the
direction of open market policy had not been fully in accord with his
views.
Mr. Shepardson expressed the view that a policy of additional
ease might only stimulate a sudden burst of growth that would be
incompatible with the longer-run objective of sustainable economic
growth.
Continuing, he said that his concern about the course of mone
tary policy went not only to the international problem arising out of the
balance of payments but also to the problem of fostering the sound growth
of the domestic economy.
It seemed to him there were certain fundamental
adjustments that must take place, and that those adjustments were in
process.
After the 1957-58 recession a quick turnaround occurred, but
the country shortly found itself
faced with another problem, and he was
not convinced that on this occasion a sudden turnaround would be desirable.
Mr. Shepardson stated that he felt the policy the Federal Reserve
had been following was sound and that he would strongly urge its
continuation.
In his opinion attention should be given to the short-term rate not only
because of its
international implications but because it
was important in
the evolution of the domestic economy not to strive toward too sudden a
change.
Mr.
Shepardson then commented on his favorable reaction to the
statements of the President that looked toward placing American industry
-35
2/7/61
on a competitive basis in world markets.
This, of course, was a longer
range objective that could not be accomplished immediately.
Conversely,
he was concerned about some of the palliatives that had been suggested
which would have the effect of removing forces that hopefully would bring
about basic adjustments.
As he had said, those adjustments were important
from the standpoint of international relations.
In addition, however,
they were essential to the kind of growth that was wanted in this country,
based on increased productivity and increased efficiency.
After indicating that he would not favor a change in the directive
or in the discount rate at this time, Mr. Shepardson said it
him that the degree of ease had been fully adequate.
himself with the view that it
would be preferable if
seemed to
He wished to associate
the level of free
reserves were on the low side of $500 million rather than on the high
side.
The Federal funds rate should be somewhat below the discount rate,
but it
should not be in the low range that had prevailed at some times in
the recent past.
Mr.
King said that although there were many important problems
with which the Open Market Committee could concern itself, he felt that
the principal problems at present were the general state of the domestic
economy and the position of the United States in international finance.
Given these problems, he had been wondering how the Committee would meet
its responsibility.
Now, as demonstrated by the instructions to the
Desk, particularly in regard to the short-term rate, the Committee had
2/7/61
-36
indicated that it
was stopping at approximately this point in the pursuit
of further ease, or that it
stopped at a good point.
had already stopped.
In his view, it
had
Although, as he had stated previously, he felt
that the recessionary influences in this country might well continue
through this year, when the upturn occurred he believed it would be more
soundly based and of longer duration than the upturn that followed the
recession of 1957-58, when Federal Reserve policy appeared to have
involved a greater degree of ease than had prevailed during the past
several months.
Mr.
financing,
King went on to say that, in view of the imminent Treasury
it
was clear to him that this was not a time for overt actions.
This point of view, he noted, had already been expressed by others around
the table.
He would hope that the level of free reserves might be in the
range of $400-500 million rather than $600-700 million.
After indicating
that he would not favor a change in the discount rate or the directive at
this time, Mr.
King concluded by saying that in his opinion the Committee's
position with respect to maintenance of the bill
rate represented one of
the greatest contributions that the Committee could make in the present
period.
Mr. Fulton, in reviewing developments in the Fourth District,
indicated there was nothing to cause much joy.
rise in the production of steel.
There had been a faltering
Department store sales, on the other
hand, had been adversely affected by the weather and for the year to date
2/7/61
-37
were 5 per cent below a year ago.
Unemployment was still
high, although
on a seasonally adjusted basis there had been a slight improvement.
In
Youngstown, for example, the steel mills were now making inventories for
themselves in anticipation of having to shut down completely at a later
date for the installation of a new rolling mill, so the temporary decline
in unemployment could not be classed as solid improvement.
The machine
tool industry was going along fairly well, receiving stimulus from foreign
orders for tools.
Domestic orders, however, were not coming in.
New
orders in the steel industry in January were about 2 per cent above
but shipments so far in Feburary had been the lowest for many
December,
months.
A number of orders had been deferred from February to March
delivery.
In one of the large mills about 25 per cent of the employees
had been laid off, and in other mills about 40 per cent, and the super
visors, office help, and officials had received wage reductions.
Due to
the falling off of automobile production and sales, that industry had been
deferring and cutting back orders from steel mills and foundries.
There
was one gleam of hope in the fact that a number of other users of steel
were coming in with rush orders, indicating a shortage in their inventory
positions.
If this condition was widespread, there could be some sub
stantial buying of basic metals.
However, it was understood that those
who were ordering did not have more orders themselves.
Their production
was being maintained at low levels, but their inventories were so low they
had to get more materials with which to work.
Many complaints were heard
2/7/61
-38
about the profit squeeze resulting from high operating costs and price
concessions.
Turning to policy, Mr. Fulton indicated that he did not believe
that the discount rate should be changed at this time.
He would like to
see free reserves in the neighborhood of $500-600 million, a level that
he felt would give the banking system adequate liquidity.
gested,
He again sug
as he had done at the January 24 meeting, that the language of
clause (b) of the directive be changed to substitute the word "recovery"
for "sustainable growth."
Mr.
Bopp commented briefly on weather conditions in the Third
District, noting that for 16 days the temperature had nor risen above
freezing.
Department store sales during the week ended January 21 were
27 per cent below the previous year, and in the following week they were
16 per cent below the year-ago level.
per cent below 1960 figures.
Mr.
For the year to date, they were 11
Unemployment was high and rising.
Bopp said, the domestic situation was not one of great hope.
there was the problem of the balance of payments.
Certainly,
Unfortunately,
In terms of policy, he
would not favor a change in the directive or the discount rate at this time.
He felt
that the present degree of ease should be maintained, and that the
primary measure of that ease should be the level of short-term rates.
Mr.
Patterson said that the recession in
economic activity in the
Sixth District appeared to have continued in January.
report on some of the District figures.
However,
He had prepared a
after hearing the other
2/7/61
-39
reports, there appeared to be no differences of sufficient importance to
warrant going into detail concerning Sixth District developments.
Mr. Johns said that although there were some in the Eighth District
who claimed to discern some improvement in the business outlook, it
difficult to find facts to support such contentions.
was
Recently, he said,
the newspapers had focused attention on a report that 8.4 per cent of the
labor force in the St. Louis area was now unemployed.
After summarizing
comments in this regard that had been made by a local employment official,
Mr. Johns expressed the view that the attention directed to this matter
was almost certain to affect the general feeling about the economic
situation, particularly if the matter continued to receive as much
attention as it
had.
Mr. Johns then commented on the unemployment problem
that had existed for some time in Evansville,
Indiana, following which
he noted that although total credit at Eighth District member banks
increased slightly more than $80 million in
November and December, most
of the increase was in bank investment portfolios as loans rose less
than seasonally.
During January, total credit at weekly reporting banks
declined more than seasonally, with the banks selling securities on
balance.
Mr. Johns said that as he reviewed developments in the Eighth
District and in the nation, he did not see much hope for an early upturn.
Therefore,
he continued to believe that the policy directive, which
called for encouraging bank credit expansion, was appropriate.
After
referring to the reserve porjections that had been distributed before this
meeting, he said it
continued to be his view that "total reserves needed"
2/7/61
-40
should be increased modestly.
to make it
In expressing this view, however, he wished
clear that he was not advocating more than a moderate expansion.
He did not care to suggest any specific target, and instead would say
merely that he would like to see "total reserves needed" increased
modestly and continuously until further order.
Mr.
Szymczak expressed the view that System policy had been going
along in the right way.
He believed it
was becoming more and more clear
that the thinking of the Committee was in terms of supplying enough reserves
to the banking system, but, in view of the balance-of-payments problem, not
going so far as to contribute to a downward movement of the short-term rate.
He would subscribe to a continuation of present policy for this reason and
also because the Treasury financing called for maintenance of an even keel.
Mr. Balderston commented that he assumed an even keel should be
maintained during the first part of the forthcoming period because of
the Treasury financing, even though the pricing of the issue offered by
the Treasury might make the maintenance of an even keel less necessary
than usual.
Once the Treasury financing was past, however, he hoped
that the views of Messrs. Hayes and Irons and others who had spoken in
the same vein would be followed by the Committee.
While it was not
possible to tell at this juncture whether the turnaround in domestic
economic conditions, when it occurred, would involve a quick recovery
or a slow one, it was his view that the liquidity that bad been supplied
to the banking system was sufficient for the present and that the element
of aggressiveness should be removed from the System's policy of ease
until such time as the economy seemed to be putting the added reserves
-41
2/7/61
to good use.
As to tests, he suggested first the bill rate because of
its international significance.
He would also suggest the Federal funds
rate, which he would like to see closer to the discount rate than it
been at some times during recent weeks.
had
Further, he would suggest that
the Committee watch the extent to which banks were buying bills.
During
the month of January, he noted, the banks had bought about $500 million
of Government securities, principally bills.
His own concept for the
period ahead was that System policy should be one of neutrality, and such
a policy might mean only small additions to bank holdings of Government
securities.
In terms of free reserves, the effect of such a policy might
be to reduce the level below $500 million, perhaps to the $300-400 million
range.
However, this was difficult to determine because of the fundamental
change that had occurred in allowing member banks to count their vault
cash as part of required reserves.
Accordingly, he agreed with those
who had suggested that for the time being it would be better to watch
the bill rate than the level of free reserves.
Mr. King withdrew from the meeting at this point.
Chairman Martin indicated that he had little to add to the dis
cussion.
In his opinion the bill rate was the crucial point.
A difficult
problem was involved in the use of words such as "pegging" or "influencing,"
but under present circumstances he felt that the System should influence
the short-term rate.
He also felt that at this time the short-term rate
provided a better benchmark of System policy than the free reserve
-42
2/7/61
figure, which he suggested might have about outrun its usefulness as an
effective measurement.
Chairman Martin said it
appeared that the consensus favored no
change in the discount rate and no change in the directive.
It
also
appeared to be the consensus that the measuring benchmark of open market
policy should be primarily the bill
rate.
The Chairman then inquired whether anyone wished to be recorded
as dissenting from the consensus, and Mr. Robertson said he agreed that
the statement by the Chairman represented the consensus.
He did not
agree, however, with the direction of System policy.
Chairman Martin asked whether there were others who wished to
comment on the consensus, and no comments were heard.
The Chairman next referred to the policy directive,
and Mr.
Robertson said that he agreed with the policy directive because he felt
that its language encompassed his own position.
The Chairman said it was
his understanding that it was on the general implementation of the
directive that Mr. Robertson wanted to record his dissent, and Mr.
Robertson indicated that this was correct.
The Chairman then inquired whether there were others who wished to
record themselves similarly, and Mr. Johns remarked that he was not at this
time a member of the Committee.
Chairman Martin indicated that Mr. Johns'
views on open market policy, as expressed earlier during the meeting, would
of course be reflected in the minutes.
2/7/61
-3
Thereupon, upon motion duly made and
seconded, it was voted unanimously to direct
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York until
otherwise directed by the Committee:
(1) To make such purchases, sales, or exchanges (including
replacement of maturing securities, and allowing maturities to
run off without replacement) for the System Open Market Account
in the open market or, in the case of maturing securities, by
direct exchange with the Treasury, as may be necessary in the
light of current and prospective economic conditions and the
general credit situation of the country, with a view (a) to
relating the supply of funds in the market to the needs of
commerce and business, (b) to encouraging monetary expansion
for the purpose of fostering sustainable growth in economic
activity and employment, while taking into consideration
current international developments, and (c) to the practical
administration of the Account; provided that the aggregate
amount of securities held in the System Account (including
commitments for the purchase or sale of securities for the
Account) at the close of this date, other than special short
term certificates of indebtedness purchased from time to time
for the temporary accommodation of the Treasury, shall not be
increased or decreased by more than $1 billion;
(2) To purchase direct from the Treasury for the account of
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (with discretion, in cases
where it seems desirable, to issue participations to one or more
Federal Reserve Banks) such amounts of special short-term certifi
cates of indebtedness as may be necessary from time to time for
the temporary accommodation of the Treasury; provided that the
total amount of such certificates held at any one time by the
Federal Reserve Banks shall not exceed in the aggregate $500
million.
Secretary's Note:
The Chairman then
called for a session at which attendance
would be limited. The minutes of that
session begin on the following page.
2/7/61
-44
The meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee reconvened in
the offices of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in
Washington at 12:20 p.m. on February 7,
1961,
with the following in
attendance:
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Martin, Chairman
Hayes, Vice Chairman
Balderston
Bopp
Fulton
Leedy
Mills
Robertson
Shepardson
Szymczak
Irons, alternate for Mr.
Bryan
Messrs. Leach, Allen, and Mangels,
Federal Open Market Committee
Alternate Members of the
Messrs. Deming, Erickson, and Johns, Presidents of the Federal
Reserve Banks of Minneapolis, Boston, and St. Louis,
respectively, and Messrs. Ellis, Wayne, Clay, and Swan
Presidents-elect of the Federal Reserve Banks of Boston,
Richmond, Kansas City, and San Francisco, respectively
Mr. Young, Secretary
Mr. Thomas, Economist
Mr. Rouse, Manager, System Open Market Account
In
opening this session, Chairman Martin noted that Mr.
Bryan
was absent on account of illness and that, in view of the meeting of the
Ad Hoc Subcommittee called for yesterday,
he had requested Mr. Irons,
who is the alternate for Mr. Bryan at the regular meetings, to serve for
him at the Subcommittee's meeting.
Chairman Martin then stated that he had called this Committee
meeting to receive an interim report from its
Ad Hoc Subcommittee.
The
2/7/61
-45
Subcommittee, he said, had held two meetings, had had the help of
documents submitted by Mr. Young and Mr. Rouse for its consideration,
and had taken into account the very heavy barrage both from within
and outside Government, against the System for the uncompromising
position it
allegedly took towards its own operating procedures and
policies.
In the light of its discussions and evaluations,
the several
members of the Subcommittee were unanimous in the view that the System
had to give some further tangible indication of open-mindedness and
willingness to experiment.
The whole issue of operations, they agreed,
had become one of conceptual contention and, therefore, no progress
could be made in resolving it by the device of papers, studies, or
committee reports.
There had to be evidence accumulated from actual
experiment or testing to enable the System to escape from the charge of
doctrinaire commitment to a laissez faire, free private market position
in confining operations to short-term securities.
Therefore, the
sooner the System got busy at the task of obtaining empirical data
the better it
would be.
Since that was the Subcommittee's undivided
view, Mr. Rouse had been requested to propose an appropriate program
of action and to set forth the requisite implemental procedures for
carrying it
out.
Accordingly, he would ask Mr. Rouse to report on his
recommendations shortly.
2/7/61
-46
Chairman Martin next observed that, while the Subcommittee was
unanimous in feeling that inauguration of a period of experiment was
the only feasible course, feelings were mixed as to what the experiment
would demonstrate.
He himself had doubts about the outcome; at the
same time, he could not prove at this time that these doubts were
justified.
From his discussions with dealers, he would gather that
they were divided in their judgments as to whether the area of operations
should remain limited as in the past eight years or should be broadened.
The Subcommittee members, the Chairman further stated, were
particularly concerned about what experimental transactions outside the
bill
area involved with regard to System relations with the market.
After all of these years of operating primarily in bills, how could
the System, in experimenting with transactions outside the bill
be fair to the market?
area,
Even if the Federal Open Market Committee had
stated that its procedures could be changed or superseded at any time,
was there in fact a commitment not to change without publicly-issued
notice?
Chairman Martin then asked the several members of the Ad Hoc
Subcommittee to offer any comment they cared to about their own views.
Mr. Mills commented to the effect that any market experiment
undertaken now would have the objective of seeing whether the long rate
could be moved down relative to the short rate in the present market
context.
While he had consistently supported the limitation of Federal
2/7/61
-47
Open Market Committee operations to short securities, he now felt that
experiment to move long relative to short rates had to be made.
Subcommittee was only divided as to its
The
views about how the experiment
should get under way--whether cautiously or boldly.
Personally, he
favored a bold approach.
Mr. Irons commented that Subcommittee member differences related
mainly to degree of experiment.
While he believed strongly in present
Federal Open Market Committee procedures, he still felt that we must
explore pragmatically possibilities of operations in longer sectors.
Such probing should be accomplished without publicity or at least with
as little publicity as possible.
His counsel in undertaking experiment
would be to begin in the 3-to-5 year area, then try the 5-to-8 year sector,
and finally move to the 8-to-10 year maturity.
Further stretching out
could be pursued if desirable, but it was quite possible objectives
could be reached within the intermediate range.
Mr. Balderston remarked that, as he saw it, the problem had two
sides:
first, experimentation with market procedure; second, public
understanding of the Open Market Committee's procedures. The Ad Hoc
Subcommittee has recommended experimentation with the Committee's
procedures and is,
therefore, reporting only with respect to the first
half of the problem,
and not the second.
The latter
should be given
attention at the Committee's organization meeting in March.
In con
ducting the experiment, he favored operations in Governments of
-48
2/7/61
intermediate term.
in
Avoidance of public announcement would be desirable
his opinion, and he would strongly favor leaning over backward to
be fair
to dealers and using the go-around for any transactions engaged
in outside the short area.
Mr.
Hayes reaffirmed the position he had earlier expressed to
the Committee favoring flexibility
operations,
in Federal Open Market Committee
and he stated that any experiment and demonstration under
taken in present circumstances would be altogether consistent with his
views.
Experiment now, he felt, was both urgent and timely.
Experiment
was urgent because of the System's public relations problem and timely
because it might serve to lift some of the down-pressure on the short
rate and put some down-pressure on the long rate, and so stimulate some
long-term borrowing.
He stressed that any experimental operations should
be limited, be of nudging character,
rates,
as regards both short and long
and should give no hint of pegging; pegging or establishing a pre
determined level of rates was the last
thing that the Federal Open Market
Committee wanted.
The problem of public announcement troubled him greatly, Mr.
Hayes said, because experiment constituted important, even if temporary,
departure from what was now long-established Committee operating policy.
As to maturity area that might serve as a limit to experiment,
he thought
maybe 10 years was long enough because market impact here should certainly
communicate through the rest
of the maturity range.
If
results of
2/7/61
-49
initial experiment should suggest a need for transactions in still longer
maturities, experiment could be extended then to that area.
At this point, Chairman Martin asked Mr. Rouse to present his
plan for experiment, and Mr. Rouse reported as follows:
In line with the discussion yesterday afternoon at the
meeting of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee, the following program is
submitted. In this outline I have endeavored to follow what
seemed to me to be the trend of thinking in the Subcommittee.
The program is based on the conviction that at this time the
interest rate structure in relation to the balance of payments
is paramount and that current short-term interest rates must
be maintained and, preferably, allowed to rise somewhat. While
it is conceivable that this might be accomplished by reducing
somewhat the availability of reserves to the banking system,
the needs of the domestic business situation may render this
impracticable, thus pointing to the necessity of making
purchases in areas outside of the shortest maturities. The
advantage of such procedure is further pointed out by the
Subcommittee's wish to make a cautious test of the feasibility
of influencing longer-term rates in a downward direction in
recognition of the widespread comment on the Committee's
current procedures and alleged doctrinaire inflexibility.
The suggested program, which obviously must be experimental,
follows:
FIRST--The Desk would be authorized to extend its oper
ations to securities having maturities up to perhaps ten years,
but initially it would be made known to the market in terms of
only up to five and one-half years by means of a "go-around"
in which all dealers would be asked for offerings in the range
of one to five and one-half years. The amounts purchased would
not need to be large. It is anticipated that the dealers there
after will tend to keep the Desk informed of current bids and
offers in that range and beyond. They will not be surprised as
they are expecting something of this sort in view of the press
comment of recent days.
It is not contemplated that probing operations in the five
and one-half to ten year range be begun until after the market
has become somewhat used to the changed frame of operations.
Nevertheless it might develop that such experiments could be
started prior to the next meeting of the Committee. The Desk
is to keep clearly in mind that all such operations are to be
modest in amount and only for the purpose and in the manner
indicated,
2/7/61
-50
SECOND--The prospective amount of additions to the System
Open Market Account in the next few months is small, and most
of the gross purchases or sales will need to be offset fairly
promptly. Therefore if this program is to be carried out, the
logic of removing temporarily at least, the prohibition against
"offsetting purchases and sales of securities for the purpose
of altering the maturity pattern of the System portfolio"
becomes apparent, i.e., if longer securities are to be purchased,
shorter securities will have to be sold or run off in order to
make room. Futhermore, it may be noted that such purchases
are designed primarily to affect the rate structure rather
than to provide reserves.
THIRD--As an illustration--the general idea of the proposed
operation is to encourage the development of a slightly higher
under
rate and Federal funds rate (but still
91-day Treasury bill
the discount rate) and at the same time to direct purchase
operations of the System Open Market Account toward somewhat
longer-term securities. This does not mean that we would ever
try to, or ever could, peg rates or determinedly hold them within
Any result will be the combined product of
particular ranges.
our influence and the market's reactions.
FOURTH--As I have stated, this approach is experimental and
is to be carried out in relatively modest amounts. I figure that
the new authorization should include the power to purchase up to
$400 million securities maturing beyond fifteen months and up to
five and one-half years, and an additional $100 million securities
maturing beyond five and one-half years and up to ten years.
In suggesting these figures I assume that our next meeting will
take place on March 7th. These operations are to be handled
with the utmost care so as to avoid charges of unfairness to any
one dealer or group of dealers and so as to avoid any charges or
implication of favoritism. Detailed records are to be kept of
all transactions.
I recommend that the Secretary of the Treasury and the
Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Joint Economic Committee
be advised promptly if this or a similar program is adopted.
Incidentally, in light of the "open mouth operation" in
the press the past few days and the expectations which it has
engendered in the market--that is--of System operations through
out the maturity range--I suggest that the Committee consider
the issuance of a statement--for the news ticker in the first
instance--such as the following:
"In the light of changes in the international and
domestic situations the F.O.M.C. in recent months has
been examining the implications of its operating
objectives and procedures. It is suspending its
-51
2/7/61
existing operating policies in this respect pending the
conclusion of its review. In the meantime operations
may be carried out in an extended range of maturities."
FIFTH--Referring again to the intermediate range of maturities
(five and one-half to ten years), it is in this area that the System
could be most helpful to the Treasury, having in mind the Treasury's
urgent need to do successfully a sizable junior advance refunding at
the earliest feasible date.
SIXTH--Finally, the execution of the proposed program will be
difficult and must be delicately handled. The Desk will need all
the help it can get and all the tools at the disposal of the System.
Following Mr. Rouse's report, Chairman Martin suggested a round
table discussion, with Mr. Allen volunteering to comment first.
Mr. Allen
stated that he was not at present a member of the Committee, and so was
not entitled to vote, but he gathered that it would be in order for him
to express his opinion.
He assumed that, since the Chairman had stated
that the Subcommittee was making only an interim report, a final report
would be forthcoming at a later date and he welcomed the prospect of
having time to study the recommendations which he had just heard on such
an important subject.
Chairman Martin then said that no such time would be available
and that a decision would have to be made at the present meeting.
Mr. Allen resumed his statement by saying that since the reacti
vation of the Subcommittee on January 10 he had studied the subject under
discussion to the extent that time and his eyes permitted, and that he
had read again the original report of the Subcommittee, a great deal of
the Chairman's testimony on the subject before various Congressional
committees, Mr. Riefler's paper delivered in Minneapolis on May 3, 1958,
and other memoranda including that of Mr. Thomas dated November 23, 1960.
-52
2/7/61
Mr. Allen said that in the light of what he had been able to find on the
subject, as well as his own experience, he did not favor the proposed
operations.
He mentioned that the word "nudge" did not appeal to him,
for he thought it could result either in simply annoyance or in an
avalanche, neither of which would be desirable.
Mr. Allen referred to the
assertion that empirical evidence was lacking, and stated that Mr. Riefler
had mentioned empirical evidence in supporting his argument that the
Committee should not operate in long-term securities.
Mr. Allen
concluded by saying that if the Committee decided to follow the recom
mendation of the Subcommittee he shared what he understood to be the
feeling of Messrs. Hayes and Rouse that a public statement regarding the
change in area of Committee operations should be made.
Mr. Erickson stated that he would favor the experiment but
thought that a public announcement was quite unnecessary for a temporary
deviation from established practice.
Chairman Martin observed that he really leaned against a public
announcement himself, but thought that everyone should express his view
before any voting was done on it.
Mr. Szymczak stated that he thought market experiment in the
present environment was wise but that any public statement about it would
be injudicious because the Federal Open Market Committee wanted the
market to be affected by operations and not by any statement.
2/7/61
-53
Mr. Johns expressed himself as being sympathetic to experiment
though doubtful as to its
efficacy.
If
the Committee did engage in
experiment, he definitely thought that it
had a responsibility for
making some statement to inform the market and the public.
Chairman Martin noted that there was really not much that a
Federal Open Market Committee statement could add to the publicity that
had already been given to the possibility of System experiment to
influence interest rate paterns through recent Administration statements
and press commentary.
But Mr. Hayes doubted whether this disposed of the question of
System statement or announcement because once the press knew that trans
actions in the intermediate or longer area had actually transpired,
there would be questions put to the Board and Reserve Banks that would
have to be answered.
To this, Chairman Martin replied that the risk in a statement
was that it
might be interpreted as making a commitment to continue
indefinitely the operations in the long terms and as a commitment to
support the whole market.
Mr. Deming commented that, while favorable to experiment, he
did hope that our instruction to the Manager of the Account would be in
terms of amount of operations and not in terms of effect on market
interest rates.
From the discussion that he had heard and despite
protestations to the contrary, he thought the Federal Open Market Com
mittee was treading awfully close to a peg of market interest rates.
In
2/7/61
-54
view of all the risks of mininterpretation and misunderstanding, it
would be most unwise in his view to issue any statement.
Who does the
Committee want to inform? he asked. Foreign financial observers?
System condition statement would do this.
go-arounds would do this.
The public?
Market dealers?
The
The Desk's
In his opinion, the System had
better have "no comment" for the public.
Mr. Leach observed briefly that, in his judgment, the time was
ripe for experiment, but that no statement should be issued since, as
Mr. Szymczak had noted, we didn't know what to say.
Mr. Bopp, while favoring experiment, was of the opinion that a
public statement would be essential.
Questions will be numerous, he
said, and we can't afford not to respond to them.
Furthermore, he
stressed that the initial reaction to a given operation that reflected
a change of procedure might differ significantly from the reaction to
the same operation that was part of a standard procedure.
Consequently,
he did not feel that significant conclusions could be drawn in a matter
of weeks.
He felt also that no relevant conclusions could be drawn
from a program that was launched with an announcement that it was
experimental.
The announcement that he had in mind would state that
the new procedure was undertaken to stimulate the domestic economy
without aggravating problems concerning our balance of payments.
Chairman Martin again expressed reservations against a statement,
saying that the Committee was on record in its continuing operating
-55
2/7/61
procedures and policies, reaffirmed each year, as being prepared to
change policies at any time.
He also noted that the language of the
Committee's directive adopted at each meeting was flexible enough to
embrace transactions outside the short area.
But Mr. Hayes interposed that it was not a question of a very
elaborate statement; in fact, the less formal and elaborate it was the
more satisfied he would be with it.
At this juncture, Mr. Robertson stated that he would like to
present his views.
In his opinion, he said, there would be justification
for experiment (a) if the Committee in its own view had doubts about the
substance and reason of its existing position, or (b) if the Committee
was threatened with dire political consequences if
it
were unable to
bring forward empirical evidence favorable to its view.
these bases of experiment is present, he contended.
the Committee, he felt, was retrogression.
Neither of
The real danger to
There is no reason why the
Committee should feel that the burden of proof was on it
rather than
on its critics.
As regards the matter of public announcement, Mr. Robertson
expressed himself as strongly favoring some statement to press, saying
that an experiment was under way to deal in all areas of market.
What
really disturbed him, he said, was that no one at the table thought
that much could be accomplished by the experiment, but they were still
willing to engage in it.
2/7/61
-56
Mr. Leedy observed that the System confronts an unprecedented
operating problem stemming out of balance-of-payments developments.
Since the System has done all that it
can to provide adequate reserves
to the banking system to foster economic recovery, the fact that it
has to make some adjustments now to deal with the balance-of-payments
problem should meet with sympathetic reception.
The System would be in
a defensible position, as he saw it, and the System should not hesitate
to defend itself.
Mr. Shepardson stated that he felt the present policy had been
a correct one.
He recognized, however, the difficulty of proving its
validity and that some experimentation might be necessary to demonstrate
the effect, if any, of a different approach.
Mention had been made of
a cautious as compared with a bold approach.
It seemed doubtful to him
that a cautious approach would produce any measurable results and that
if we were to experiment it should be done on the more extensive basis.
Furthermore, it seemed to him that some statement was necessary if we
were to avoid serious misunderstanding.
At this point, Mr. Mills emphasized the great difficulties in
compromising in a public statement the different points of view and
shadings of opinion that had been expressed.
Chairman Martin next asked Mr.
Rouse how he thought sophisticated
investors would respond to knowledge that the System was operating out
side the short area, whether they would respond by testing System
2/7/61
-57
position, and whether there was any hazard of such tests reaching
avalanche volume.
Mr. Rouse responded by saying that, in his opinion, there would
be testing but that it would be cautious and not avalanche in character.
Mr. Allen stated that he continued to have a worry about the
press relations angle of the matter.
Either the Presidents should have
a common line in writing from which to answer press queries or there
should be a spokesman for the Federal Open Market Committee to whom
the queries should be referred.
From his standpoint, the only answer
he could now give to any queries would be:
"I am not the spokesman
for the Federal Open Market Committee."
Mr. Szymczak observed that it was only necessary to admit that
transactions in intermediate- or longer-term securities were a departure
from established practice and to point to the country's balance of
payments as justifying it.
At this stage, Chairman Martin stated that he thought the
discussion had proceeded far enough and if there was no further comment
that members considered to be important, he would like to put the issue
to a vote.
There followed some roundtable discussion about the scope of the
directive that might be given to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for
operations in the Account. The discussion consensus was that the
directive should provide adequate latitude for an effective testing.
2/7/61
-58
This was resolved to be an authority for change,
between this
date and
the next meeting of the Committee to be held on March 7, 1961,
Account's holdings of intermediate-
in
the
and longer-term securities not to
exceed $500 million and an authority to acquire securities of this
category up to a maturity of 10 years.
Question was raised of Mr. Rouse whether his plan would be first
to probe in the shorter intermediate range and then later
to probe
longer, to which his answer was in the affirmative.
Both Chairman Martin and Mr. Hayes individually emphasized that
the authority was not intended to change monetary policy and that any
transactions carried out need to be consistent with the general monetary
policy expressed in the Committee's directive approved at the regular
meeting just held.
System portfolio,
In the absence of the need for net additions to the
the operations would involve, it was explained, either
concurrent sales at the short end to offset purchases in the longer
area or offsetting operations after an interval probably not longer
than a few days.
Thereupon, Chairman Martin polled the members of the Committee,
the alternate members present, and the other Presidents present
concerning their views of the Ad Hoc Subcommittee's recommendation and
the program of action proposed by Mr. Rouse.
Votes favoring the recommendation:
Members Martin, Hayes,
Balderston, Bopp, Fulton, Leedy, Mills, Shepardson, and Szymczak;
2/7/61
-59
Alternate Members Irons, Leach, and Mangels; and nonmember Presidents
Deming, Erickson,
and Johns.
Votes against the recommendation:
Member
Robertson and Alternate Member Allen.
In voting against the recommendation, Mr. Robertson argued along
the following lines, which he later submitted in written form:
It was his opinion (1) that the established operating procedures
and policies of the Committee were,
in fact, the product of careful
empirical and analytical study, (2) that they had proved in practice to
be sound both in terms of monetary policy and in terms of fair dealing
with the market,
(3)
that in deviating from its established policies
the Federal Open Market Committee was asserting, without reason or
conviction, that it
made a critically incorrect judgment eight years
ago and had pursued incorrect operating practices since, and (4) that
critics of present methods of operating in the market were relying on
the simplest theories of determination of market interest rates and
making allegations on postulates having little if any basis in empirical
fact.
Mr. Robertson further stated that he, for one, believed that
this departure from established operating techniques would not con
structively influence market rates, and he gathered from the discussion
that not many (if
any) at the table were confident of such a result.
What he was confident of, however, was that the Committee was running
serious risk (a) of undermining domestic and foreign confidence in the
2/7/61
-60
System's integrity and judgment, and the reliability of the new
Administration's assertions of an intent to maintain the stability of
the dollar, (b) of impairing the market for Government securities by
placing dealers and investors in the position of having to guess which
area of the market the Federal Reserve was going to enter and hence
affect prices, and (c)
of impeding Government financing by making it
extremely difficult for the Treasury to determine objectively appropriate
market rates for future intermediate- and long-term financing.
It was
his view that these risks were too large to run.
He also felt that the reversal of such a fundamental position
as this should not be taken without a public announcement of the nature
of the Open Market Committee's future operating procedures and the
reasons therefor, for otherwise there would be grave doubt concerning
the purpose and extent of the System's operations in other than the
short-term area of the Government securities market with a consequent
adverse effect on general public confidence, the diminution of which
can be ill afforded at this time.
In addition, he believed it to be inadvisable for the Committee
virtually to abdicate its
authority and responsibility by giving
practically unlimited authority to the Manager of the Open Market
Account (1) to buy and sell securities in any area of the market up
to 10 years, as he saw fit, for the stated purpose of affecting rates
as distinguished from providing or withdrawing reserves from the banking
-61
2/7/61
system, and (2) to engage in "swap" transactions--i.e., buying securities
in one maturity area and selling in another--to effectuate changes in
rates and hence marshal the System's portfolio of Government securities
against market forces.
Chairman Martin then put the question as to whether a statement
should be issued explaining the departure from established operating
procedures of the Federal Open Market Committee.
From the roundtable
discussion that had preceded and which then further took place, the
majority sentiment, the Chairman thought, was clearly against such a
statement and, without objection, he so ruled.
In this concluding
discussion, it was brought out and strongly emphasized that there was
a real risk that this test might be frustrated if word got around the
market that System purchases of longer terms were just an experiment.
For the test to provide useful empirical evidence, the market needed to
look upon the transactions as a change in Federal Open Market Committee
practice.
In concluding the discussion, Chairman Martin stated that the
documentation that the Subcommittee had had before it
would be distributed
to all of the members and nonmember Presidents for their information.
The meeting then adjourned.
Secretary's Note: The Manager of the Open Market
Account commenced open market operations in
longer-term Government securities on the after
noon of February 20, 1961.
At that time he
issued the following statement:
2/7/61
-62
At the direction of the Chairman of the Open Market Committee
of the Federal Reserve System, the following announcement was
made today by the Manager of the System Open Market Account
for the information of the public and all participants in
the market for Government securities:
"The System Open Market Account is purchasing in
the open market U. S. Government notes and bonds of
varying maturities, some of which will exceed 5
years.
"Price quotations and offerings are being
requested of all primary dealers in U. S. Government
securities. Determination as to which offerings
to purchase is being governed by the prices that
appear most advantageous, i.e., the lowest prices.
Net amounts of all transactions for System account
will be shown as usual in the condition statements
issued every Thursday.
"During recent years transactions for the System
Account, except in correction of disorderly markets,
have been made in short-term U. S. Government securities.
Authority for transactions in securities of longer
maturity has been granted by the Open Market Committee
of the Federal Reserve System in the light of conditions
that have developed in the domestic economy and in the
U. S. balance of payments with other countries."
The decision to issue a statement, which
reversed the understanding reached at the
February 7 meeting, was made in the light of
subsequent discussions between Chairman Martin,
Vice Chairman Hayes, Mr. Rouse, Manager of the
System Open Market Account, and Mr. Roosa,
Under Secretary of the Treasury. The consider
ation weighing most heavily in the decision was
the desirability that all market participants
be informed at the same time that the Trading
Desk was engaging in transactions outside the
usual short-term sector and that no market group
gain any trading advantage in the operations by
virtue of information not known by the whole
market.
Secretary
Cite this document
APA
Federal Reserve (1961, February 6). FOMC Minutes. Fomc Minutes, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/fomc_minutes_19610207
BibTeX
@misc{wtfs_fomc_minutes_19610207,
author = {Federal Reserve},
title = {FOMC Minutes},
year = {1961},
month = {Feb},
howpublished = {Fomc Minutes, Federal Reserve},
url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/fomc_minutes_19610207},
note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}