ANNUAL REPORT OF THE 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

1971

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
LETTER OF T R A N S M I T T A L

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 

Washington, D. C., June 15, 1972

SIRS: Pursuant to the provisions of Section 17(a) of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is pleased to submit 

its report for the calendar year 1971.

Respectfully yours,

FRANK WILLE 

Chairman

THE PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE

THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

III

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Chairm an.......................................................................... Frank Wilie

D ire c to r....................................................................Irvine H. Sprague

Comptroller o f the Currency .................................William B. Camp

OFFICIALS

Assistant to the Chairman ................................... Robert E. Barnett

Special Assistant to the Chairman ..........................Paul M. Rooney

Assistant to the Director ........................................... Alan R. Miller

Assistant to the Director

(Comptroller o f the Currency) ........................Albert J. Faulstich

Director, Division o f Bank Supervision............... Edward J. Roddy

General Counsel.................................................... William E. Murane

Controller........................................................ Edward F. Phelps, Jr.

Director, Division o f Research.................................Paul M. Horvitz

Chief, Division o f Liquidation .................................John J. Slocum

Secretary ...................................................................... E. F. Downey

Auditor (Acting) .................................................. John D. Roderick

Senior Advisor to the Board.......................... Raymond E. Hengren

Executive Assistant to the B o a rd............. Timothy J. Reardon, Jr.

Assistant to the B o a rd..................................... William M. Moroney

June 15, 1972

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION REGIONS

REGIONAL DIRECTORS

Atlanta

Lewis C. Beasley

2 Peachtree St., N.W., Suite 3030 

Atlanta, Georgia 30303 

Boston

Mark J. Laverick 

2 Center Plaza, Room 810 

Boston, Massachusetts 02108 

Chicago

John J. Early

164 West Jackson Blvd., Rm. 1500 

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Columbus

William D. Allen 

37 West Broad Street, Suite 600 

Columbus, Ohio 43215 

Dallas

Quinton Thompson 

300 North Ervay Street,Suite 3300 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Madison

Wallace A. Ryen 

110 E. Main Street, Room 715 

Madison, Wisconsin 53703 

Memphis

James W. Thompson

165 Madison Avenue, Suite 1010 

Memphis, Tennessee 38103

Minneapolis

Roger B. West

109 South 7th Street, Suite 710 

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 

New York

Claude C. Phil I ippe 

345 Park Avenue 

New York, New York 10022 

Omaha

Burton L. Blasingame 

1700 Farnam Street, Suite 1200 

Omaha, Nebraska 68102 

Philadelphia

Charles E. Doster 

5 Penn Center Plaza, Suite 2901 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103 

Richmond

James A. Davis 

908 E. Main Street, Suite 435 

Richmond, Virginia 23219 

St. Louis

Robert V. Shumway 

720 Olive Street, Suite 2909 

St. Louis, Missouri 63101 

San Francisco 

Walter W. Smith

44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3600 

San Francisco, California 94104

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

M a in O f f ic e : 550 1 7 th S tre e t, N. W„ W a s h in g to n , D. C. 2 0 4 29

Digitized 

VI

for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
CONTENTS

Banking offices— bank performance— 1971................................. xi

Deposit insurance participation and coverage............................ xu

PART ONE 

OPERATIONS OF THE CORPORATION

Deposit insurance disbursements................................................ 3

Supervisory activities.................................................................... 6

Administration of the Corporation.............................................. 18

Finances of the Corporation......................................................... 19

PART TWO

MERGER DECISIONS OF THE CORPORATION

Bank absorptions approved by the Corporation........................ 34

Bank absorptions denied by the C orporation............................ 147

PART THREE 

LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS

Federal legislation (summary)— 1971 ......................................... 173

Rules and regulations of the Corporation (summary)— 1971 . . . 176

PART FOUR

STATISTICS OF BANKS AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE

Number of banks and branches .................................................. 180

Assets and liabilities of banks...................................................... 201

Income of insured banks ............................................................. 223

Banks closed because of financial difficulties;

deposit insurance disbursements..............................................239

Digitized 

VII

for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
TABLES

DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS:

1. Insured banks closed during 1971 requiring disbursements by the

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.............................................. 4

2. Protection of depositors of insured banks requiring disbursements by

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 1934-1971 ................. 5

3. Analysis of disbursements, recoveries, and losses in deposit insurance

transactions, January 1, 1934-December 31, 1971 .......................... 6

SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES:

4. Bank examination activities of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in 1970 and 1971 ........................................................................ 9

5. Cease-and-desist orders and actions to correct specific unsafe or

unsound practices or violations of law or regulations, 1971............. 9

6. Actions to terminate insured status of banks charged with unsafe or

unsound banking practices or violations of law or regulations, 

1936-1971 ................................................................................... 10

7. Mergers, consolidations, acquisitions of assets and assumptions of

liabilities approved under section 18(c) of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance A c t during 1971 ................................................................. 14

8. Approvals under section 18(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act

during 1971— banks grouped by size and in States according to 

status of branch banking...................................................................... 15

ADMINISTRATION OF THE CORPORATION:

9. Number of officers and employees of the Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation, December 31, 1970 and 1971 ..................................... 18

FINANCES OF THE CORPORATION:

10. Statement of financial condition, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, December 31, 1971 .................................................................... 19

11. Statement of income and the deposit insurance fund, Federal Deposit

Insurance Corporation, year ended December 31, 1971 ................. 21

12. Determination and distribution of net assessment income, Federal

Deposit Insurance Corporation, year ended December 31, 1971 . . . 21

13. Sources and application of funds, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, year ended December 31, 1971 ................................................ 22

14. Income and expenses, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, by

year, from beginning of operations, September 11, 1933, to 

December 31, 1971, adjusted to December 31, 1971 ...................... 23

15. Insured deposits and the deposit insurance fund, 1934-1971 ............... 25

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES:

Explanatory note .............................................................................................. 180

101. Changes in number and classification of banks and branches in the

United States (States and other areas) during 1971........................ 182

102. Changes in number of commercial banks and branches in the United

States (States and other areas) during 1971, by S ta te ....................184

103. Number of banking offices in the United States (States and other

areas), December 31, 1971

Grouped according to insurance status and class o f bank, and

by State or area and type o f o ffic e .................................................. 186

104. Number and deposits of all commercial and mutual savings banks

(States and other areas), December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by class and deposit s iz e ................................... 195

105. Number and deposits of all commercial banks in the United States

(States and others areas), December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by deposit size and S tate...................................196

ASSETS AND LIABI LITIES OF BANKS:

Explanatory note ..............................................................................................201

106. Assets and liabilities of all commercial banks in the United States

(States and other areas), June 30, 1971

Banks grouped by insurance status and class of bank............... 203

107. Assets and liabilities of all commercial banks in the United States

(States and other areas), December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by insurance status and class of bank ............. 207

108. Assets and liabilities of all mutual savings banks in the United States

(States and other areas), June 30, 1971, and December 31, 1971 

Banks grouped by insurance s ta tu s ............................................211

109. Assets and liabilities of insured commercial banks in the United

States (States and other areas), December call dates, 1961, 1967- 

1971 .................................................................................................... 213

110. Assets and liabilities of insured mutual savings banks in the United

States (States and other areas), December call dates, 1967-1971. . 216

111. Percentages of assets and liabilities of insured commercial banks

operating throughout 1971 in the United States (States and other 

areas), December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by amoun t of deposits ..................................... 218

112. Percentages of assets and liabilities of insured mutual savings banks

operating throughout 1971 in the United States (States and other 

areas), December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by amount of deposits ..................................... 219

113. Distribution of insured commercial banks in the United States

(States and other areas), December 31, 1971

Banks grouped according to amount o f deposits and by ratios

o f selected items to assets or deposits..............................................220

IX

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
INCOME OF INSURED BANKS:

Explanatory note ..............................................................................................223

114. Income of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and

other areas), 1963-1971 .................................................................... 226

115. Ratios of income of insured commercial banks in the United States

(States and other areas), 1963-1971 ................................................ 228

116. Income of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and

other areas), 1971

Banks grouped by class of bank ................................................ 229

117. Income of insured commercial banks operating throughout 1971 in

the United States (States and other areas)

Banks grouped by amount of deposits ..................................... 231

118. Ratios of income of insured commercial banks operating throughout

1971 in the United States (States and other areas)

Banks grouped according to amount o f deposits......................233

119. Income of insured mutual savings banks in the United States (States

and other areas), 1967-1971 ............................................................. 235

120. Ratios of income of insured mutual savings banks in the United

States (States and other areas), 1967-1971 ..................................... 237

BANKS CLOSED BECAUSE OF FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES;

DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS:

Explanatory note ..............................................................................................239

121. Number and deposits of banks closed because of financial difficulties,

1934-1971 .......................................................................................... 241

122. Insured banks requiring disbursements by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation during 1971 ......................................................... 242

123. Depositors, deposits, and disbursements in insured banks requiring

disbursements by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 

1934-1971

Banks grouped by class o f bank, year o f deposit payoff or

deposit assumption, amount o f deposits, and State........................244

124. Recoveries and losses by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

on principal disbursements for protection of depositors, 1934- 

1971...................................................................................................... 247

Digitized 

x

for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANKING OFFICES— BANK PERFORMANCE-1971

For the second straight year, the number of operating commercial banks in the United States rose, after annual declines from 

1965 to 1969. The total increased by 99, to 13,804 in operation at 

the end of the year. The number of commercial banks beginning 

operations (203) was the largest since 1964, while the number ceasing operations (104) was the smallest since 1951. Mutual savings 

banks declined by four during 1971, leaving 490 in operation at the 

end of the year. Branches of commercial banks increased by 1,490, 

to a total of 23,370.

Insured commercial banks beginning operations during 1971 exceeded banks ceasing operations by 95, and in addition, six previously noninsured banks became insured, bringing the number of 

these insured banks to 13,612 at the end of the year. Although 37 

new national banks began operations in 1971, the merging of more 

than 40 national banks and the net shifting of 11 national banks to 

State charters caused a net decrease of 21 national banks. State 

member banks of the Federal Reserve System were reduced by 19, 

due to net changes in supervisory status, while the number of Statechartered banks that were admitted to Federal Reserve membership 

was offset by an equal number of banks that were absorbed through 

mergers.

The number of insured nonmember commercial banks rose by 

141. This growth reflected a gain of 150 new banks beginning 

operations and of 36 banks changing supervisory status, and a reduction of 45 banks mainly through mergers. Noninsured commercial banks and nondeposit trust companies declined by two, 

leaving 192 at the end of 1971.

Additional details of changes in numbers of banks and branches 

during 1971 are shown in tables 101 and 102 of this report.

Commercial banks operated within an environment of declining 

interest rates and easy money market conditions during much of 

1971. A t the same time, the money and capital markets were generally free of the disruptive financial crises that had occurred in 

previous years. These conditions enabled banks to post substantial 

increases in time and savings deposits in 1971, since rates paid by 

banks compared favorably with those of competing money market 

institutions. These deposits grew by almost $42 billion, or 17.8 

percent, during the year. A t the same time, demand deposits increased by more than 6 percent (see table 109).

Total assets of insured commercial banks increased by almost 

$64 billion, or 11 percent, between December 1970 and December 

1971. Although virtually all types of bank assets showed sizeable 

gains during the year, the greatest percentage increases occurred in 

municipal holdings, government agency issues, real estate loans, and

XI

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

certain categories of consumer loans. Because of lower rates on 

loans, operating revenue rose by less than half of the increase in 

total assets in 1971. Net current operating earnings increased by a 

modest 1.4 percent for the year. After taking account of net profits 

on securities (compared to losses in 1970), net income of insured 

commercial banks increased by 8.2 percent in 1971 (see table 114).

The declines in interest rates, particularly in the short-term sector, together with a high personal savings rate, contributed to favorable deposit inflows into savings banks during 1971. Deposits of all 

mutual savings banks increased by $9.9 billion (13.7 percent) in 

1971, compared to a $4.5 billion (6.7 percent) gain in 1970 (see 

table 110). This was by far the largest dollar gain experienced by 

savings banks in a single calendar year.

A large share of the increased funds available to savings banks 

went into investments, which increased by 33.8 percent. Corporate 

bonds increased by 49.1 percent. At the same time, real estate loans 

increased by about 7 percent, considerably less than the percentage 

growth in deposits. The fact that yields on high-quality corporate 

bonds were relatively high, compared to rates on mortgages, undoubtedly contributed to the heavy emphasis on investments by 

savings banks.

Even though interest rates declined in 1971, savings banks were 

able to increase significantly their gross yield on assets. The large 

inflow of funds enabled savings banks to acquire a substantial volume of assets affording returns that were higher than the average 

rate on existing loan and investment portfolios, although interest 

rates declined in 1971. Although tax liabilities were greater, net 

current operating revenue increased considerably in 1971 (see table 

119).

Several changes in the mutual savings bank condition and income 

report formats were implemented at year-end 1971, making it impossible to measure precisely year-to-year changes in income items 

and certain balance sheet items. A discussion of these changes is 

contained on pages 202 and 225 of this report.

DEPOSIT INSURANCE PARTICIPATION AND COVERAGE

About 98.6 percent of all commercial banks in operation in the 

United States, and about two-thirds of mutual savings banks, were 

insured by the Corporation at the end of 1971. All except one of 

the noninsured mutuals were located in Massachusetts and were 

covered by that State's deposit insurance program. Eight mutual 

savings banks in Massachusetts were insured by the Corporation.

Based upon the Corporation's survey of deposits in mid-1970, it 

is estimated that over 99 percent of depositors in insured banks 

were fully protected by Federal deposit insurance on December 31,

XII

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
DEPOSIT INSURANCE PARTICIPATION AND COVERAGE

1971. Each depositor is protected by Federal deposit insurance on 

accounts held in the same right and capacity in each insured bank 

up to the maximum limit of insurance as provided by the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act (as amended). Several increases in the insurance lim it— most recently from $15,000 to $20,000 on December 

23, 1969— have resulted in a continuing high level of depositor protection.

The insured portion of total deposits in all insured banks was 

estimated to be 64.4 percent at the end of the year. This percentage 

varies considerably among different types of accounts; for example, 

at the time of the deposit survey, over 94 percent of savings deposits in insured commercial banks, but only about 55 percent of 

demand deposits of individuals and businesses, were insured.

XIII

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
OPERATIONS OF THE CORPORATION

PART ONE

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3

DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS

Methods of protecting depositors. The Federal Deposit Insurance 

Act provides two principal methods of protecting depositors in insured banks which encounter financial difficulties— by paying off 

depositors directly and by assisting in bank absorptions.

When an insured bank fails and is closed by the chartering 

authority, the Corporation, after it has verified the bank's records 

and after the depositors have presented their claims, pays depositors 

the amount of their insured deposits. The Corporation may make 

this payment in cash, or, as is more customary, it may make payment through transfer of the depositor's account to another insured 

bank in the same community. The Corporation acts as receiver for 

all insured national banks that are placed in receivership, and as 

receiver for closed State banks when so appointed by State authorities.

In the second method of protecting depositors, the Corporation 

facilitates the absorption of the distressed bank by another insured 

bank. Under section 13(e) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 

the Corporation has the authority to facilitate such an absorption, 

by means of the purchase of assets or granting a loan secured by 

assets of the distressed bank. Use of this method is authorized 

whenever, in the judgment of the Board of Directors, it will reduce 

the risk or avert a threatened loss to the Corporation.

Banks failing in 1971. To protect depositors during 1971, the 

Corporation made disbursements in six cases (see table 1). The 

amount disbursed through December 31, including some estimated 

additional required disbursements, totaled almost $163 million. 

Five banks were placed in liquidation, and in three of these cases, 

the Corporation was designated as receiver. In the sixth case, which 

involved by far the largest Corporation disbursement, another operating insured bank assumed the deposit liability of the failing bank, 

and the Corporation as receiver is liquidating the assets.

In four of the six failures, there had existed self-serving, unsafe, 

and unsound loan practices and policies. Three of these four cases 

involved brokered funds which tied in to adversely classified loans 

made by the banks. A contributing factor in one of these cases was 

a runoff of deposits, unfavorable publicity involving the controlling 

stockholder, his corporate interests, and others. In the fourth case, 

contributing factors were depreciation in long-term municipal securities, forward loan commitments, and unwarranted cash dividend 

payments based on unrealized and contingent future income tax 

benefits. The remaining two failures involved defalcations.

Since 1934 the Corporation has made disbursements in 495 

cases. Involved in these cases were 1.78 million depositors, or accounts, having total deposits of about $1,063 million. From insurance payments, secured or preferred status, offsets, and liquidating

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Table 1. INSURED BANKS CLOSED DURING 1971 REQUIRING 

DISBURSEMENTS BY THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION1

Case

number

Name and 

location

Date of 

closing 

or deposit 

assumption

Number 

of depositors

Amount 

of deposits 

(in thousands)2

Date of first payment to depositors 

or disbursement by 

FDIC

Depositors receiving 

full recovery

Deposits 

paid 

(in thousands)2

71,842 $131,874 65,514 $116,435

Deposit payoff

293 Sharpstown State Bank 

Houston, Texas

January 25, 1971 27,403 66,903 February 2, 1971 23,515 55,685

295 Farmers State Bank of 

Carlock

Carlock, Illinois

February 17, 1971 1,102 2,077 February 22, 1971 1,017 1,941

296 Bank of Salem 

Salem, Nebraska

April 5, 1971 413 584 April 7,1971 388 540

297 The First National Bank of

Cripple Creek

Cripple Creek, Colorado

November 30, 1971 863 1,275 December 2,1971 494 722

298 First Community State 

Bank of Savannah 

Savannah, Missouri

December 30, 1971 1,961 3,488 January 4, 1972 O3 O3

Deposit assumption

202 Birmingham-Bloomfieid

Bank

Birmingham, Michigan

February 16, 1971 40,100 57,547 February 16, 1971 40,100 57,547

1 Figures adjusted to and as of December 31, 1971.

includes $49,887 thousand paid by FDIC claim agents in deposit payoff cases. All deposits were made available in full through 

assuming bank, with FDIC assistance, in deposit assumption case.

3Deposit payoff not begun until January 4, 1972.

distributions, 97.1 percent of these deposits have been paid or made 

available to depositors through the end of 1971 (see chart A). In 

293 deposit payoff cases, 98.1 percent of depositors have received 

their deposits in full, and 91.4 percent of the total deposits in these

C h a rt A

DEPOSITS AND LOSSES IN FAILED INSURED BANKS 

1934-1971

DEPOSITORS

Total Deposits in

Failed Banks

Recoveries by Depositors

Am ounts Not Yet M ade

Available to or

Lost by Depositors

$1,063.2

million

$1,032.3

million

$ 30.9

million

FDIC

Total Disbursem ents

by FD IC

Recoveries by FDIC

Losses by FD IC

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS 5

banks have been paid or made available as of the end of 1971. All 

deposits were made available in full in the 202 deposit assumption 

cases.

Corporation disbursements in the 495 cases have amounted to 

$685 million, of which $254 million was disbursed in payoff cases 

and $431 million in assumption cases. Details on the extent and 

method of deposit insurance protection are shown in tables 2 and 3.

Aid to operating insured bank. In July 1971, the Board of 

Directors of the Corporation approved a loan of $1.5 million to 

Unity Bank and Trust Company, Boston (Roxbury), Massachusetts. 

Unity Bank, acting through its duly appointed conservator, applied 

to the Corporation for assistance under section 13(c) of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act. This section authorizes the Corporation to 

provide financial assistance to an insured operating bank in danger 

of closing whenever, in the opinion of the Board of Directors, the 

continued operation of such a bank is essential to providing#adequate banking service in the community. The action under section

Table 2. PROTECTION OF DEPOSITORS OF INSURED BANKS REQUIRING 

DISBURSEMENTS BY THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 

1934-1971

All cases 

(495 banks)

Deposit 

payoff cases 

(293 banks)

Number

Percent

Deposit 

assumption cases 

(202 banks)

Number

Percent

Number of depositors or accounts-total1 ...........

Full recovery received or available..................

From FDIC2 ..................................................

From offset4 ..................................................

From security or preference5.......................

From asset liquidation6 ................................

Full recovery not received as of December 31,

1 9 7 1 ................................................................

Terminated cases...........................................

Active cases.....................................................

Amount of deposits (in thousands)-total...........

Paid or made available.........................................

By FDIC2. .......................................................

By offset8 .......................................................

By security or preference9............................

By asset liquidation1 0..................................

Not paid as of December 3 1 ,1 9 7 1 ..................

Terminated cases...........................................

Active cases11 ................................................

1,775,856

1,765,029

1,718,608

40,484

3,044

2,893

10,827

3,406

7,421

$1,063,225

1,032,307

950,993

17,617

33,793

29,904

30,918

2,348

28,570

100.0

99.4

96.8

2.3

0.2

0.1

0.6

0.2

0.4

100.0

97.1

89.4

1.7

3.2

2.8

2.9

0.2

2.7

560,447

549,620

503,1993 

40,484 

3,044 

2,893

10,827

3,406

7,421

$360,451

329,533

248,2197 

17,617 

33,793 

29,904

30,918

2,348

28,570

100.0

98.1

89.8

7.2

0.6

0.5

0.6

1.3

100.0

91.4

68.8

4.9

9.4 

8.3

8.6

0.7

7.9

1.215.409

1.215.409

1.215.409

$702,774

702.774

702.774

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

1 Number of depositors in deposit payoff cases; number of accounts in deposit assumption cases.

2Through direct payment to depositors in deposit payoff cases; through assumption of deposits by other insured banks, facilitated 

by FDIC disbursements of $374,320 thousand, in deposit assumption cases,

inclu de s 59,559 depositors in terminated cases who failed to claim their insured deposits (see note 7).

inclu de s only depositors with claims offset in full; most of these would have been fully protected by insurance in the absence of 

offsets.

5Excludes depositors paid in part by FDIC whose deposit balances were less than the insurance maximum.

6The insured portions of these depositor claims were paid by the Corporation,

inclu de s $225 thousand unclaimed insured deposits in terminated cases (see note 3).

inclu de s all amounts paid by offset.

in clu d e s all secured and preferred claims paid from asset liquidation; excludes secured and preferred claims paid by the 

Corporation.

1 °lncludes unclaimed deposits paid to authorized public custodians.

111ncludes $19,655 thousand representing deposits available, expected through offset, or expected from proceeds of liquidations.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
6 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Table 3. A N A L Y S IS OF D IS B U R S E M E N T S , R E C O V E R IE S , A N D LOSSES 

IN D E P O S IT IN S U R A N C E T R A N S A C T IO N S ,

J A N U A R Y 1, 1934— D E C E M B E R 31, 1971 

(In thousands)

Type of disbursement Disbursements Recoveries1 Losses

All disbursements-total ................................................................................................ $685,755 $610,105 $75,650

Principal disbursements in deposit assumption and payoff ca se s-to ta l......... 623,211 553,426 69,785

Equity in assets acquired under agreements with insured banks (202 

deposit assumption cases):

To December 31, 1971 ................................................................................

Estimated a dd itio n a l....................................................................................

374,320 261,833

90,089

148,858

52,646

54,235

22,398

Deposits paid (293 deposit payoff cases):

To December 31, 1971 ................................................................................

Estimated add itio na l....................................................................................

247,278

1,613

60,257

47,387

Advances and expenses in deposit assumption and payoff cases-total............ 6,022

Expenses in liquidating assets:

Advances to protect assets........................................................................... 36,010

18,225

1,737

4,285

36,010

18,225

(2)

Liquidation expenses.....................................................................................

Insurance expenses .......................................................................................

Field payoff and other insurance expenses in 293 deposit payoff cases...

1,737

4,285

Other disbursements-total....................................................................................... 2,287 2,444 (157)

Assets purchased to facilitate termination of liquidations:

To December 31, 1971 ................................................................................

Estimated a dditional.....................................................................................

1,774 2,428

16

(670)

Unallocated insurance expenses ....................................................................... 513 (2) 513

1Excludes amounts returned to closed bank equity holders and $10.3 million of interest and allowable return received by FDIC. 

2Not recoverable.

13(c) was the Corporation's first use of this authority, which was 

given to it in 1950 when the Federal deposit insurance laws were 

revised and reenacted. Unity Bank, a $9.3 million deposit institution, was established in 1968 as a community venture to serve the 

black community of the Roxbury-Dorchester area of Boston.

The loan is unsecured and subordinated to the claims of depositors and other general creditors of the bank, and it matures not 

later than December 31, 1976. The loan is part of an assistance 

program under which additional financial aid, including approximately $500 thousand, was provided by a group of Massachusetts 

banks.

SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has supervisory responsibilities primarily for insured State banks that are not members of the Federal Reserve System; State member banks are supervised by the Federal Reserve. All State-chartered banks are also 

supervised by the banking authorities of their respective States. 

National banks are chartered and supervised by the Office of the 

Comptroller of the Currency.

Bank examinations. The Corporation is empowered, under the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act, to examine any insured bank for 

insurance purposes. In practice, however, the Corporation has rarely 

examined national or State member banks. Banks examined by the 

Corporation comprise almost three-fifths of all insured banks. On 

the average, these banks are considerably smaller than member

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES 7

banks of the Federal Reserve System (which include national banks 

and State member banks— see chart B).

In about half of the States, and in Puerto Rico, the duplication 

of examining activity is reduced because the Corporation and the 

State authorities conduct their examinations on a joint or concurrent basis. The Corporation conducts independent examinations 

in the other States, usually after consultation with the banking 

authorities in those States. The Corporation also reviews the reports 

of examinations made by other Federal supervisory agencies.

The bank examination provides information that enables the Corporation to exercise its supervisory responsibilities and to evaluate 

its risks as an insurer of depositors. In examination reports, the 

major concerns are the quality of a bank's assets, the effectiveness 

of its internal management controls, the adequacy of its fidelity 

bonds, and the bank's compliance with pertinent banking laws and 

regulations. A substantial volume of additional examining and investigating activity is required for processing applications for deposit insurance, mergers, branches, and other actions by insured 

banks for which the prior approval of the Corporation is required. 

During the past decade, examination activities have been considerably expanded because of added legal responsibilities for mergers and because of increased numbers of various applications.

Chart B

SUPERVISION OF COMMERCIAL BANKS 

IN THE UNITED STATES 

December 31, 1971

NUM BER OF BANKS

13,804

ASSETS OF BANKS

$646 BILLION

1.4°/

Examined by and reporting to:

State authorities and Federal Reserve

C om ptroller o f the Currency I I State authorities and FDIC

f 1 State authorities o nly

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

During 1971, the total number of examinations and investigations increased by 8.4 percent from the previous year (see table 4). 

While regular examinations of insured banks increased by only 

about 2 percent, examinations of departments and branches and 

investigations were up more than 14 percent from 1970.

Cease-and-desist and termination-of-deposit-insurance proceedings. When an insured State nonmember bank violates a law or 

regulation or engages in an unsafe or unsound banking practice, the 

Corporation usually attempts correction through consultation between appropriate supervisory authorities and the bank's management. If these efforts fail, the Corporation may initiate cease-anddesist or termination-of-deposit-insurance proceedings pursuant to 

sections 8(b) or 8(a), respectively, of the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Act. In certain instances, the Corporation and a bank may agree, in 

writing, on a specific corrective program to which the bank must 

adhere. Violation of a written agreement can itself be the basis for 

instituting cease-and-desist or termination-of-deposit-insurance proceedings.

The Corporation may initiate cease-and-desist proceedings by 

issuing and serving a Notice of Charges on the bank. The Notice of 

Charges specifies what unsafe or unsound practices the bank has 

engaged in and what applicable laws it has violated. The notice also 

specifies a time for an administrative hearing. After the administrative hearing, or upon the bank's formal consent to the issuance of a 

corrective order, the Corporation may order the bank not only to 

stop the violation or practice but also to take affirmative action to 

correct the conditions that had resulted. In 1971 the Corporation 

issued section 8(b) orders against seven banks. The Corporation also 

entered into a formal written agreement with one bank (see table 

5).

The Board of Directors may initiate termination-of-depositinsurance proceedings against any insured bank. The bank concerned, as well as the appropriate Federal and State agencies, are 

formally notified and a specified time is designated for the bank to 

correct the specified unsafe or unsound practices, conditions, or 

violations. If full corrective action is not taken within the prescribed time period, the bank is afforded an administrative hearing 

before insurance may be terminated. If the Board of Directors finds 

that any specified unsafe or unsound practice, condition, or violation has been established and has not been corrected within the 

time prescribed in which to make such corrections, it may order 

that the insured status of the bank be terminated. If the bank's 

deposit insurance is terminated, the insured deposits in the bank, 

less any subsequent withdrawals, shall continue to be insured for 

two years from the date of termination.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES 9

Table 4. BANK EXAMINATION ACTIVITIES OF 

THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION 

IN 1970 AND 1971

Activity

Number

1971 1970

Field examinations and investigations-total ........................................................................... 19,173 17,688

Examinations of main o ffic e s -to ta l.................................................................................... 8,217 8,078

Regular examinations of insured banks not members of Federal Reserve System.. 7,971 7,807

Reexaminations or other than regular examinations.................................................... 226 215

Entrance examinations of operating noninsured banks................................................ 14 43

Special examinations........................................................................................................... 6 13

Examinations of departments and branches......................................................................... 7,513 6,953

Examinations of trust departments.................................................................................... 1,506 1,441

Examinations of branches.................................................................................................. 6,007 5,512

Investigations............................................................................................................................. 3,443 2,657

New bank investigations.................................................................................................... 241 225

State banks members of Federal Reserve System.................................................... 8 13

Banks not members of Federal Reserve System....................................................... 233 212

New branch investigations.................................................................................................. 816 636

Mergers and consolidations................................................................................................ 174 190

Miscellaneous investigations............................................................................................. 2,212 1,606

Since 1934, the Corporation has initiated termination-of-depositinsurance proceedings against 215 banks. The majority of these 

cases were settled when the bank voluntarily took corrective action 

or when the bank was absorbed by another bank (see table 6). In 

only 13 cases was a date actually set for termination of insurance.

In the eight cases open at the end of 1970, five banks voluntarily 

complied with the Corporation's corrective orders, and deposit insurance was therefore not terminated. Section 8(a) action against 

one bank was discontinued when a consent cease-and-desist order 

was issued under the provisions of section 8(b). In another case, the 

section 8(a) proceedings against one bank were discontinued when 

the bank failed. The assets of the latter were absorbed by another 

bank with the financial aid of the Corporation.

During 1971, the Corporation initiated five new termination-ofdeposit-insurance proceedings. Section 8(a) action was discontinued 

against one bank when it was sold. Section 8(a) proceedings against 

another bank were discontinued when the bank took necessary 

corrective action. At the end of the year, termination action against 

three banks awaited either the completion of the corrective period 

and reexamination or the analysis of the examination report.

Table 5. CEASE-AND-DESIST ORDERS AND ACTIONS TO CORRECT SPECIFIC UNSAFE OR 

UNSOUND PRACTICES OR VIOLATIONS OF LAW OR REGULATIONS, 1971

Total actions taken............................................................................................................................................................................................. 9

Cease-and-desist orders issued1 .................................................................................................................................................................. 1

Cease-and-desist orders outstanding December 31, 1 971................................................................................................................ {

Cease-and-desist orders discontinued.................................................................................................................................................. ;

Formal written agreements outstanding December 3 1 ,19712 ............................................................................................................. \

1The Corporation's authority to issue cease-and-desist orders was added in 1966 (12 U.S.C. 1818(b)). The first use of this authorit 

commenced in 1971.

2Qne written agreement was imposed in lieu of § 8(a) proceeding and the proceeding discontinued on this basis.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Table 6. ACTIONS TO TERMINATE INSURED STATUS OF BANKS CHARGED 

WITH UNSAFE OR UNSOUND BANKING PRACTICES OR VIOLATIONS 

OF LAW OR REGULATIONS, 1936-1971

Disposition or status 1936— 19711

Started 

during 1971

Total banks against which action was ta k e n ........................................................................................... 215 5

Cases closed.............................................................................................................................................. 212 2

Corrections m ade.............................................................................................................................. 87 1

Banks absorbed or succeeded by other banks.............................................................................. 73 1

With financial aid of the C orporation.................................................................................... 64 1

Without financial aid of the Corporation .............................................................................. 9

Banks suspended prior to setting date of termination of insured status by Corporation . . . 37

Insured status terminated, or date for such termination set by Corporation, for

failure to make correction:?................................................................................................ 13

Banks suspended prior to or on date of termination of insured status..............................

Banks continued in operation- .......................................................................................

9

4

Formal written corrective program imposed and 8(a) action discontinued...........................

Cease-and-desist order issued and 8(a) action discontinued.......................................................

1

1

Cases not closed December 3 1 ,1 9 7 1 .................................................................................................. 3 3

Action deferred pending analysis of exam ination....................................................................... 3 3

1 No action to terminate the insured status of any bank was taken before 1936. In 5 cases where initial action was replaced by 

action based upon additional charges, only the latter action is included.

20ne of these suspended 4 months after its insured status was terminated.

Applications for deposit insurance. As provided by section 4(b) 

of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, Federal deposit insurance is 

mandatory for all national banks and for all State banks that are 

members of the Federal Reserve System. Upon receiving a national 

charter or, if a State bank, being admitted to membership in the 

Federal Reserve System, a bank becomes insured upon certification 

by the deciding Federal agency that several factors have been considered. These factors, specified in section 6 of the Act, are: the 

financial history and condition of the bank, the adequacy of its 

capital structure, its future earnings prospects, the general character 

of its management, the convenience and needs of the community, 

and finally, the consistency of the bank's corporate powers with the 

purposes of the Act. State-chartered nonmember banks apply directly to the Corporation for deposit insurance.

In 1971, the Corporation approved 159 applications (20 more 

than in 1970) from new banks for deposit insurance. Four applications from previously noninsured banks were approved during the 

year, bringing the total number of approvals for deposit insurance 

to 163.

Most new-bank applications for deposit insurance originated in 

States where unit banking is prevalent. The largest State group originated in Illinois (26), followed by Florida (25) and Texas (18).

Applications for branches. Before establishing or moving a 

branch office, an insured bank must obtain the prior approval of 

the appropriate Federal supervisory agency. Under section 3(o) of 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, a branch includes “ any branch 

place of business . . . at which deposits are received, checks paid, or 

money lent.” The Act (section 18(d)) requires that the Corporation 

consider the same six factors itemized in section 6 (application for

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES 11

deposit insurance) when it passes upon an insured nonmember bank 

application to establish or to move a branch.

Whether branching is permitted, and if so, its geographic extent, 

are determined by the laws of each State. Long-standing Federal 

legislation provides that the branching of national banks shall be 

governed in these respects by the laws of each State, in the same 

manner as State banks. A t present, 35 States and the District of 

Columbia permit some form of branching, and unit banking is prevalent (certain limited-service facilities or offices are not defined as 

branches in some States) in 15 States.

The number of branches of commercial banks in the United 

States rose from less than 5,000 in 1950 to more than 23,000 in 

1971. In 1950, about one quarter of all commercial banking offices 

were branches; by 1971, almost two out of every three offices were 

branches. These trends are reflected in approvals by the Corporation for deposit insurance and branches (see chart C).

Applications for new branches approved by the Corporation 

totaled more than 750 during 1971, approximately 42 percent 

above the 1970 figure. This number includes approvals for tellers' 

windows and other such limited-service offices. In 1971, these facilities accounted for less than a fifth of the total, but the number 

rose faster than regular branch approvals. In addition, 21 branches 

resulted from conversion of main offices in bank mergers approved

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
12 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

by the Corporation. Over one-fourth of the increase in regular 

branch approvals in 1971, as compared to the number in 1970, was 

due to a sharp rise in applications from the State of Georgia where 

amended banking laws permitting somewhat more branching became effective early in the year.

Mergers. Under provisions of the Bank Merger Act of 1960, 

which amended section 18(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 

approval by a Federal bank supervisory agency is required before 

any insured bank may engage in a merger transaction. The prior 

approval of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation is required if 

the resulting bank is to be an insured bank that is not a member of 

the Federal Reserve System (outside the District of Columbia), and 

in any merger of an insured bank with a noninsured institution.

To encourage uniform standards, the Act requires the responsible 

Federal agency to request, from each of the two nondeciding 

agencies and the Attorney General, a report on the competitive 

factors involved in each proposed merger transaction. This report, 

which is normally due within 30 days after the request has been 

made, and within ten days in an emergency, can be dispensed with 

if the responsible agency believes that immediate action is necessary 

to prevent a failure of one of the merging banks.

In 1966, Congress moved to resolve certain differences in the 

interpretation of the Bank Merger Act with reference to the specific 

criteria that are applicable to the treatment of merger proposals by 

the three Federal agencies and the courts. Amendments to the Act 

in that year provided in part that a merger whose effect may be to 

substantially lessen competition in any section of the country, or 

may tend to create a monopoly, may be approved, but only if the 

deciding agency finds that these anticompetitive effects are clearly 

outweighed in the public interest by the probable effects on the 

needs and convenience of the community to be served. As judicially 

construed, the amendments preclude the approval of such a merger 

unless the probable effect of the transaction in meeting convenience 

and needs is likely to benefit all seekers of banking services in the 

area of competitive impact, and unless the expected gains cannot be 

achieved through other, less anticompetitive means. The deciding 

agency cannot, under any circumstances, approve a merger which 

would result in monopoly or which involves a combination or conspiracy to attempt to monopolize the business of banking in any 

part of the United States. Under the Act as amended, the Justice 

Department may bring action under the antitrust laws to prevent 

the merger of an insured bank within 30 days (or, in emergency 

situations, within 5 days) after the merger has been approved by a 

Federal supervisory agency.

Since 1960, the Corporation has approved merger cases involving 

the absorption of more than 460 operating banks. These mergers

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES 13

comprise slightly over one quarter of the total mergers approved by 

the Federal bank supervisory agencies (see chart D). (The merger 

statistics used in this section do not include corporate reorganizations of individual banking institutions, such as banks in process of 

forming one-bank holding companies, which do not have the effect 

of lessening the number of existing operating banks.)

The Corporation approved slightly fewer mergers in 1971 than it 

had in 1970. Moreover, the combined total merger approvals by the 

Federal agencies declined by more than one-fifth from the figure in

1970, and the total was the lowest number for any full year since 

the passage of the Bank Merger Act in 1960. Details of approvals in 

1971 are shown in tables 7 and 8; descriptions of cases approved or 

denied by the Corporation are contained in pages 29-169.

Regulation of bank securities. In 1964 the provisions of the 

Securities Exchange Act of 1934 were extended by statute to cover 

securities traded in the over-the-counter market. Administration of 

the Act with respect to insured banks was made the responsibility 

of the Federal bank supervisory agencies. Corporations now having 

500 or more stockholders and more than $1 million in assets are 

covered.

During 1971, the Corporation received registration statements 

from 29 insured State nonmember banks. This brought the year-end 

total to 229, compared to 209 at the end of 1970. One registered 

bank which withdrew from the Federal Reserve System was added

3 MERGERS APPROVED BY

FEDERAL BANK SUPERVISORY AGENCIES, 1960-1971

Number of Approvals Number of Approvals

1960’ 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971

•Period beginning May 13, 1960, to end of year.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Table 7. MERGERS, CONSOLIDATIONS, ACQUISITIONS OF ASSETS AND 

ASSUMPTIONS OF LIABILITIES APPROVED UNDER SECTION 18(c) 

OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT DURING 1971

Offices operated

Banks

Number of 

banks

Resources 

(in thousands)

Prior to 

transaction

After

transaction

ALL CASES1

Banks invo lved ....................................................................................... 217 $42,690,881 2937 2944

Absorbing b a n ks.............................................................................. 992 38,429,0013 25303 29443

Absorbed banks................................................................................ 118 4,261,880 407

N ational....................................................................................... 46 1,306,456 165

State member FRS..................................................................... 10 539,678 41

Not member FR S ....................................................................... 55 2,310,707 192

Noninsured in s titu tio n s ........................................................... 74 105,039 9

CASES WITH RESULTING BANK 

A NATIONAL BANK

Banks invo lved ....................................................................................... 113 31,060,958 2326 2336

Absorbing b an ks.............................................................................. 52 28,289,201 2024 2336

Absorbed banks................................................................................ 61 2,771,757 302

N ational....................................................................................... 31 1,050,201 135

State member FRS..................................................................... 6 405,334 23

Not member FRS....................................................................... 23 1,309,756 143

Noninsured in s titu tio n s ........................................................... 14 6,466 1

CASES WITH RESULTING BANK 

A STATE BANK MEMBER OF THE 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Banks invo lved ....................................................................................... 23 4.509.538 158 156

Absorbing b an ks.............................................................................. 10 4,325,192 139 156

Absorbed banks................................................................................ 13 184,346 19

National....................................................................................... 2 48,036 3

State member FRS..................................................................... 1 4,711 1

Not member FRS....................................................................... 10 131,599 15

CASES WITH RESULTING BANK 

l\IOT A MEMBER OF THE 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM5

Banks involved....................................................................................... 83 7,358,846 482 481

Absorbing b a n ks.............................................................................. 38 6,046,603 395 481

Absorbed banks................................................................................ 45 1,312,243s 876

N ational....................................................................................... 13 208,219 27

State member FRS..................................................................... 3 129,6336 176

Not member FRS....................................................................... 22 869,352 34

Noninsured in s titu tio n s ............................................................ V 105,039 9

10mitted are corporate reorganizations and other absorptions involving banks which prior to the transaction did not individually 

operate an office in the United States.

2The number of absorbing banks is smaller than the number of cases because a few banks participated in more than one case.

3Where an absorbing bank engaged in more than one transaction, the resources included are those of the bank before the latest 

transaction, and the number of offices before the first and after the latest transaction.

4The case involving a noninsured bank reported as an approval by the Comptroller of the Currency was also included in approvals 

reported by the Corporation. This case is included only once in the totals of this table.

5ln two cases involving the absorption of noninsured institutions, the surviving banks were member banks of the FRS.

6ln one case, approval was given for an operating bank to acquire four branches of another bank; these branches and resources are 

included in this table.

includes three savings and loan assaciations.

to the total during the year, and the registration of 10 banks was 

terminated. Termination resulted primarily from registered banks' 

merging into other operating banks or becoming subsidiaries of 

bank holding companies.

In addition to registration statements, banks, as well as individuals, are required by the Corporation to file substantial information 

for public inspection. For example, registered banks regularly file 

annual reports and documents used in soliciting shareholder proxies; 

officers, directors, and major shareholders report acquisitions and 

dispositions of a registered bank's outstanding shares; and persons 

who have acquired, or who are attempting by tender offer to acDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES 15

quire, a sizeable part of a registered bank's outstanding shares file 

required information.

Changes in bank ownership and loans secured by bank stock. 

Under Public Law 88-593, enacted in 1964, each insured bank is 

required to report to the appropriate Federal bank supervisory 

agency any of its outstanding voting stock changes which would 

result in an alteration in stock control. Such reports must include 

any change or replacement of the bank's chief executive officer, or 

any director, that occurs during a 12-month period following the 

change in control. The law also requires insured banks to report any 

loans secured by 25 percent or more of the outstanding voting 

stock of an insured bank. The Corporation received 479 such notices of change in control involving insured nonmember banks during 1971.

Other supervisory activities. Bank security. The Bank Protection 

Act of 1968 directs the Federal bank supervisory agencies to promulgate rules that establish minimum standards with which banks 

under their supervision must comply. These standards cover installation, maintenance, and operation of security devices and procedures 

to discourage certain bank crimes and to assist in apprehending

Table 8. APPROVALS UNDER SECTION 18(c) OF THE FEDERAL 

DEPOSIT INSURANCE ACT DURING 1971,

BANKS GROUPED BY SIZE AND IN STATES 

ACCORDING TO STATUS OF BRANCH BANKING

A bsorbing banks Absorbed banks

Number of banks by 

size (resources in $ m il)1

Number

of

banks

Number

of

branches

Resources

(in

thousands)

Number of banks by size 

(resources in $mil)

- 5 5 -1 0 10-25 25-100

Over

100

Total-U.S. 99 118 289 $4,261,880 27 31 36 18 6

- 5 .................................. 1 1 1 4,440 1 0 0 0 0

5 - 1 0 .................................. 6 6 3 35,634 3 3 0 0 0

1 0-25 .................................. 5 5 2 105,994 2 1 0 2 0

2 5-100 .................................. 39 46 68 1,071,763 11 13 14 6 2

100-500 .................................. 26 27 81 1,393,673 5 7 9 4 2

Over 500 .................................. 22 33 134 1,650,376 5 7 13 6 2

(A) Statewide

branching2 34 40 208 2,346,059 6 10 16 4 4

25-100 .................................... 8 10 20 349,859 3 3 3 0 1

100-500 .................................... 11 10 61 486,102 1 5 3 0 1

Over 500 .................................. 15 20 127 1,510,098 2 2 10 4 2

(B)Limited-area

branching2 62 75 81 1,847,302 20 21 19 13 2

- 5 .................................... 1 1 1 4,440 1 0 0 0 0

5 - 1 0 .................................... 5 5 3 30,923 2 3 0 0 0

10-25 .................................... 4 4 2 61,975 2 1 0 1 0

25-10 0 .................................... 30 35 48 702,115 8 10 10 6 1

100-500 .................................... 15 17 20 907,571 4 2 6 4 1

Over 500 .................................... 7 13 7 140,278 3 5 3 2 0

(C) Unit

banking2 3 3 0 68,519 1 0 1 1 0

5 - 1 0 .................................... 1 1 0 4,711 1 0 0 0 0

1 0-25 .................................... 1 1 0 44,019 0 0 0 1 0

25-100 .................................... 1 1 0 19,789 0 0 1 0 0

1See table 7, note 1.

2 For the purpose of describing branching patterns, 19 States and the District of Columbia were included in group A, 16 in group B, 

and 15 in group C. It should be noted that for other purposes the classification of some States might differ from that used here.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

persons who commit these crimes. During 1971, the Corporation 

received 713 crime reports filed pursuant to its regulations.

Truth in lending. Under the provisions of Title 1 of the Consummer Credit Protection Act (Truth-in-Lending Act), the Corporation acquired certain responsibilities for protecting consumers in 

their use of credit. Creditors are required to disclose, in a prescribed 

manner, the cost of credit they extend to individuals for personal, 

family, household, or agricultural purposes. Although the Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve System is responsible for issuing 

regulations implementing the law, various Federal agencies share 

administrative responsibility for enforcing the law. The Corporation 

is responsible for enforcing the law with respect to insured State 

banks that are not members of the Federal Reserve System.

Nondiscrimination in lending for housing. Under the Civil Rights 

Act of 1968, the Corporation was given certain responsibilities to 

assist in preventing discriminatory practices in lending for housing 

purposes. In December 1971, the Corporation published notice of 

its intention to formulate regulations to cover several areas incidental to real estate financing by insured nonmember banks. The Corporation also issued a policy statement relating to the advertising of 

real estate lending services, a summary of which is contained on 

page 178 of this report.

Training programs for examiners. The Corporation conducts a 

comprehensive formal training program for its examination staff. At 

various stages in their careers, examiners undergo intensive classroom training conducted in the Corporation's modern and versatile 

training center, which is located in a nearby suburb of Washington, 

D.C. These training programs include four divisions of the Bank 

Examination School: a basic three-week course dealing with fundamentals of banking and bank accounting, for new trainees; a twoweek session emphasizing audit techniques and bank operations, for 

assistant examiners; a three-week program centering on credit 

analysis and asset appraisal, for senior assistant examiners; and a 

two-week course stressing the more sophisticated problem areas 

confronting examiners, for commissioned examiners. In addition, 

specialized training offered includes two courses (basic and advanced) in examining computerized banks, and two sessions (basic 

and advanced) in examining trust departments. All but the basic 

course in examining computerized banks are two-week courses. 

Over 700 examiners from the FDIC, State banking departments, 

other Federal agencies, and foreign central banks participated in 

these programs during 1971.

Each year, 31 examiners are enrolled in the various graduate 

schools of banking which are conducted on major college campuses 

throughout the country. During the past 22 years, over 400 Corporation examiners have graduated from these programs, which inDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
SUPERVISORY ACTIVITIES 17

volve two-week resident sessions over three years and a considerable 

amount of extension work.

Publications and statistical reports from banks. Each insured 

bank reports its assets and liabilities at each quarter, and income 

and expenses at the end of the year. These reports are submitted to 

the appropriate Federal bank supervisory agency. Under an agreement among the Federal supervisory agencies, the Corporation is 

responsible for assembling and publishing these data for all banks. 

The Corporation also obtains semiannual information on assets and 

liabilities, but not income, of noninsured banks.

The Report of Condition for December 31, 1971, and the 1971 

Report of Income for mutual savings banks were revised. The revisions, which affect comparability of some items listed in the 

tables at the back of this report, are discussed on pages 202 and 

224.

Tabulations of midyear and year-end reports of condition of all 

banks are published semiannually in Assets and LiabilitiesCommercial and Mutual Savings Banks. Income data for insured 

banks are published in the issue of Assets and Liabilities that contains year-end report of condition figures.

During the past year, the Corporation continued a program, initiated in 1967, of providing each reporting bank with individual 

operating statistics based on midyear and year-end reports of condition. A package of tables is tailored to provide a comparison of each 

bank's operations with those of similar-sized banks, nationally, by 

State, and by areas within States where branching is limited. The 

national, State, and area tables for insured commercial banks are 

published for year-end data in Bank Operating Statistics. Comparable summary data for mutual savings banks may be obtained 

upon request to the Division of Research.

In 1971 the Corporation published Trust Assets o f Insured Commercial Banks-1970, which summarized the results of a survey of all 

banks holding trust assets. This survey, conducted in conjunction 

with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the 

Comptroller of the Currency, was the third one for which comparable statistics of trust assets have been compiled and published.

During 1971 the FDIC continued its monthly survey of mortgage 

lending activity for a selected panel of insured commercial banks 

and mutual savings banks. The survey, which was started in 1969, 

collects detailed data on acquisitions and dispositions, as well as 

outstanding balances, of construction and long-term mortgage loans 

at banks.

The quarterly surveys of interest rates paid on savings and other 

time deposits held by individuals and businesses at insured nonmember commercial banks and FDIC-insured mutual savings banks 

were continued in 1971. Survey results for insured nonmember

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
18 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

commercial banks were combined with those for Federal Reserve 

member banks, and summary findings were published by the Board 

of Governors. Tabulated information obtained from the surveys, 

together with a text summary of current savings developments, was 

sent to each reporting bank at each quarter.

In the interest of improving the quality of information available 

to the bank supervisory agencies and the banking community, the 

Corporation has, for several years, awarded annually a number of 

fellowships for research in banking and related fields. Four fellowships were awarded to doctoral candidates during 1971. The successful applicants were selected on the basis of the importance of 

their proposed research, the relevancy of their research to the 

interests of the Corporation, and the expected ability of the applicants to complete their projects successfully.

ADMINISTRATION OF THE CORPORATION

Structure and employees. Management of the Corporation is 

vested in a Board of Directors that consists of the Chairman, the 

Director, and the Comptroller of the Currency, who serves ex

officio as a member. The Chairman and the Director are appointed 

by the President of the United States, with the advice and consent 

of the Senate, for six-year terms; the Comptroller of the Currency, 

also a Presidential appointee, serves a five-year term of office.

There was no change in the membership of the Board in 1971. 

The terms of office of Chairman Frank Willeand Director Irvine H. 

Sprague began on April 1, 1970, and September 27, 1968, respectively. Mr. William B. Camp's appointment as Comptroller of the 

Currency was due to continue until February 1, 1972.

Corporation officials, Regional Directors, and Regional offices, 

are listed on pages v and vi.

Employment of the Corporation on December 31, 1971 was 99 

above a year earlier, with over half of this increase occurring among 

field personnel of the Division of Liquidation (see table 9). ApproxTable 9. NUMBER OF OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES 

OF THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 

DECEMBER 31, 1970 AND 1971

Unit

Total

Washington

office

Regional and other 

field offices

1971 1970 1971 1970 1971 1970

Total ......................................................... 2,6071 2,5081 644 621 1,963 1,887

D irectors.............................................. 3 3 3 3 0 0

Executive O ffice s.............................. 45 46 45 46 0 0

Legal D ivision..................................... 63 54 59 48 4 6

Division of Bank S upervision......... 1,908 1,890 102 109 1,806 1,781

Division of Liquidation..................... 230 175 88 85 142 90

Division of Research......................... 182 176 182 176 0 0

Office of the Controller..................... 176 164 165 154 11 10

includes 133 nonpermanent employees serving on a short-term appointment or when actually employed basis in 1971 and 129 in 

1970. Nonpermanent employees include college students participating in the work-study program, clerical workers employed on 

a temporary basis at banks in process of liquidation, and other personnel.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FINANCES OF THE CORPORATION 19

imately three-fourths of the Corporation's employees are assigned 

to the Division of Bank Supervision, within which almost 95 percent of the personnel are field employees. At the end of 1971, the 

Corporation employed 1,581 bank examiners, including 94 women.

The turnover rate for field examiners was 7.0 percent, down 

significantly from the 10.0 percent recorded the year before, and 

15.8 percent in 1969. For all employees, exclusive of nonpermanent employees, the turnover rate was 11.4 percent in 1971, compared to 15.9 percent in 1970 and 20.1 percent in 1969.

FINANCES OF THE CORPORATION

Assets and liabilities. The Corporation's assets amounted to 

$4,993 million on December 31, 1971 (see table 10). Cash holdings 

were $10 million, and U.S. Government obligations, at amortized 

cost value, amounted to $4,831 million. Various assets acquired in

Table 10. STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL CONDITION, 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 

DECEMBER 31, 1971

ASSETS

Cash.............................................................................................................................................. $ 10,292,846

U.S. Government obligations:

Securities at amortized cost (face value $4,786,437,000; cost $4,753,022,806) . . . 

Accrued interest receivable................................................................................................

$4,770,811,832

60,194,345 4,831,006,177

Assets acquired in receivership and deposit assumption transactions:1

Special assistance to insured banks....................................................................................

Subrogated claims of depositors against closed insured banks......................... ...........

Net insured balances of depositors in closed insured banks, to be subrogated

when paid-see related lia b ility ....................................................................................

Equity in assets acquired under purchase agreements with insured b an ks................

Assets purchased o u trig h t..................................................................................................

8,014,385

82,053,079

1,612,723

93,596,201

15,898

Less reserves for losses.........................................................................................................

$ 185,292,286 

42,539,000 142,753,286

Assistance to operating insured bank...................................................................................... 1,500,000

Miscellaneous assets .................................................................................................................. 464,109

Land and office building, less depreciation on building....................................................... 7,229,291

Furniture, fixtures and equipment......................................................................................... 1

Total assets......................................................................................................... $4,993,245,710

LIABILITIES AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE FUND2

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities................................................................................ $ 3,372,962

Earnest money, escrow funds, and collections held for others......................................... 1,257,734

Accrued annual leave of employees......................................................................................... 2,391,063

Due insured banks:

Net assessment income credits available July 1, 1972 (see table 1 2 ).........................

Other assessment credits available im m ediately..............................................................

$ 241,358,942 

3,392,984 244,751,926

Net insured balances of depositors in closed insured banks-see related asset................ 1,612,723

Total liabilities.................................................................................................... $ 253,386,408

Deposit insurance fund, net income accumulated since inception (see table 11)........... 4,739,859,302

Total liabilities and deposit insurance fu n d .................................................. $4,993,245,710

1 Reported hereunder is the book value of assets in process of liquidation. An analysis of all assets acquired in receivership and 

deposit assumption transactions, including those assets which have been liquidated, is furnished in table 3.

2Capital stock was retired by payments to the United States Treasury in 1947 and 1948.

NOTE: These statements do not include accountability for the assets and liabilities of the closed insured banks for which the 

Corporation acts as receiver or liquidating agent.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
20 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

receivership and deposit assumption transactions, consisting primarily of equity in assets acquired under purchase agreements with 

insured banks, and subrogated claims of depositors against closed 

insured banks, totaled approximately $143 million after allowance 

for reserves for losses. Land and the headquarters building in 

Washington, D.C., less depreciation on the building, were carried at 

slightly over $7 million.

The Corporation's liabilities on December 31 were $253 million. 

More than $244 million of this total were net assessment credits 

due insured banks, of which less than 2 percent of these credits 

were available immediately; the remainder are to become available 

on July 1,1972.

The deposit insurance fund, which consists of the excess amount 

of total assets over liabilities, amounted to $4,740 million at yearend. Additional resources for protecting depositors are available to 

the Corporation by virtue of its authority to borrow up to $3 

billion from the U.S. Treasury. Under provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized 

and directed to make the loan when, in the judgment of the Corporation's Board of Directors, the funds are required for insurance 

purposes.

Income and expenses. The Corporation's total income in 1971 

was $415 million, including U.S. Government securities income of 

$239 million and net assessment income of almost $176 million 

(see table 11). Administrative and operating expenses, together with 

a net provision for insurance losses and other expenses incurred to 

protect depositors, totaled slightly less than $55 million. The excess 

of income over expenses and insurance losses added $360 million to 

the deposit insurance fund during the year.

The basic assessment rate established by Federal statute in 1935 

is 1/12 of one percent of total assessable deposits. Legislation enacted in 1950 reduced the effective rate of assessments by providing 

for a credit to be applied against the gross assessments levied each 

year. The credit, set initially at 60 percent, was raised to 66-2/3 

percent effective December 31, 1961. The percentage is applied to 

the gross assessments due in the calendar year after subtracting the 

Corporation's administrative and operating expenses and insurance 

losses and reserves for losses in such calendar year. Assessments 

were paid by insured banks, after allowance for the assessment 

credit, at a rate of 1/29 of one percent of assessable deposits in

1971.

Assessments, which are due in January and July of each year, 

cover the deposit insurance for the ensuing six months. Assessments 

are paid in cash or by a charge against a bank's available credit. 

Thus, the cash payment on each date is the assessment due, less the 

credit available as of that date. Because the assessment credits become available primarily at midyear, the cash flow to the CorporaDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FINANCES OF THE CORPORATION 21

Table 11. STATEMENT OF INCOME AND THE DEPOSIT INSURANCE FUND, 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION,

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1971

Income:

Deposit insurance assessments:

Assessments earned in 1 9 7 1 ................................................

Less net assessment income credits to insured b a n ks.......................................................

$416,870,060

241,350,441 $ 175,519,619

Adjustments of assessments earned in prior years ........................................................... 38,850

Net income from U.S. Government securities.........................................................................

Other income..................................................................................................................................

$ 175,558,469

239,180,585

399,838

Total income................................................................................................................ $ 415,138,892

Expenses and losses:

Administrative and operating expenses:

Salaries and wages ......................... ...........................................

Civil Service retirement fund and FICA paym ents.............................

Travel expenses .......................................................................................................................

Office rentals, communications and other expenses............................

$ 31,071,262 

2,136,961 

7,691,145 

6,002,212 $ 46,901,580

Provisions for insurance losses:

Applicable to banks assisted in 1971 ........................................

Adjustments applicable to banks assisted in prior years..................................................

$ 17,250,000 

-10,285,000 6,965,000

Nonrecoverable insurance expenses incurred to protect d epositors-net............. 982,818

Total expenses and losses........................................................................................... $ 54,849,398

Net addition to the deposit insurance fu n d -1 9 7 1 .........................................................................

Deposit insurance fund, January 1,1971.........................................................................................

$ 360,289,494 

4,379,569,808

Deposit insurance fund, December 31,1971, net income accumulated since inception......... $4,739,859,302

tion from assessments occurs primarily at the beginning of the year.

The determination and the allocation of net assessment income 

in 1971 are shown in table 12. Sources and application of the 

Corporation's funds in 1971 are shown in table 13 and chart E.

Table 12. DETERMINATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF NET ASSESSMENT INCOME, 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION,

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1971

Determination of net assessment income:

Total assessments which became due during the calendar year....................................... $416,870,059

Less:

Administrative and operating expenses.......................................................................

Net additions to reserve to provide for insurance losses:

Provisions applicable to banks assisted in 1971..................................................

Adjustments to provisions for banks assisted in prior years..............................

$ 17,250,000 

-10,290,000

$ 46,901,580 

6,960,000

Insurance expenses.................................................. ...................................................... 982,818

Total deductions................................................................................................ $ 54,844,398

Net assessment income for 1 971............................................................................................. $362,025,661

Distribution of net assessment income, December 31,1971:

Net assessment income for 1971:

33 1/3% transferred to the deposit insurance fu n d ..................................................

66 2/3% credited to insured banks.............................................................................

$120,675,220

241,350,441

T o ta l.................................................................................................................... $362,025,661

Allocation of net assessment income credit among insured banks, December 31,1971:

Percentage of 

total assessment becoming 

due in 1971

Credit for 1 9 7 1 ....................................................................................................................

Adjustments of credits for prior years..............................................................................

$241,350,441

8,501

57.89585

.00203

T o ta l..................................................................................................................... $241,358,942 57.89788

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
22 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Table 13. SOURCES AND APPLICATION OF FUNDS, 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 

YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1971

Funds provided by: Percent

Net deposit insurance assessments................................................................................................

Income from U.S. Government securities, less amortized net discounts..............................

Maturities and sales of U.S. Government securities..................................................................

Collections on assets acquired in receivership and deposit assumption transactions............

$175,558,468 

240,611,272 ^ 

477,902,849 

55,218,588

18.5

25.4

50.3

5.8

Total funds provided..................................................................................................... $949,291,177 100.0

Funds applied to:

Administrative, operating and insurance expenses, less miscellaneous cre d its.....................

Acquisition of assets in receivership and deposit assumption transactions...........................

Purchase of U.S. Government securities;.....................................................................................

Net changes in other assets and lia b ilitie s ..................................................................................

Decrease in assessment credits due insured banks.....................................................................

$ 47,349,356 

166,001,967 

732,495,437 

3,134,475 

309,942

5.0

17.5

77.2

0.3

Total funds applied....................................................................................................... $949,291,177 100.0

Income and the deposit insurance fund, 1933-1971. The Corporation's net income, after expenses and insurance losses are deducted, is transferred to the deposit insurance fund, and the amount 

of the fund represents the accumulated total of such additions (see 

table 14). Gross assessments earned by the Corporation have exceeded income from assessments by the amount of the deposit 

insurance credit, which has totaled more than $2.8 billion since

Chart E

SOURCES AND USES OF INCOM E 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

1971

SOURCES USES

Net

Assessment Income

Income 86.8% 13.2%

0.1%

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FINANCES OF THE CORPORATION 23

Table 14. INCOME AND EXPENSES, 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 

BY YEAR, FROM BEGINNING OF OPERATIONS, 

SEPTEMBER 11, 1933, TO DECEMBER 31, 1971 

ADJUSTED TO DECEMBER 31, 1971 

(In millions)

Year

Income Expenses and losses Net 

income 

added to 

deposit 

insurance 

fund4

Total

Deposit

insurance

assessments1

Investments

and

other

sources2

Total

Deposit 

insurance 

losses and 

expenses

Interest 

on capital 

stock3

Administrative

and

operating

expenses

1 9 3 3 -7 1 ... $5,325.7 $3,023.8 $2,301.9 $585.9 $75.6 $80.6 $429.7 $4,739.8

1971............ 415.1 175.6 239.5 65.2 18.3 46.9 349.9

1970............ 382.7 159.3 223.4 48.9 6.7 42.2 333.8

1969 ............ 335.8 144.0 191.8 34.9 1.4 33.5 300.9

1968............ 295.0 132.4 162.6 29.6 0.6 29.0 265.4

1967 263.0 120.7 142.3 29.7 5.3 24.4 233.3

1966 241.0 111.7 129.3 24.0 4.2 19.8 217.0

1965 214.6 102.2 112.4 22.9 5.2 17.7 191.7

1964 197.1 93.0 104.1 18.4 2.9 15.5 178.7

1963 181.9 84.2 97.7 15.1 0.7 14.4 166.8

1962 161.1 76.5 84.6 13.8 0.1 13.7 147.3

1961 147.3 73.4 73.9 14.8 1.6 13.2 132.5

1960 144.6 79.6 65.0 12.5 0.1 12.4 132.1

1959 136.5 78.6 57.9 12.1 0.2 11.9 124.4

1958 126.8 73.8 53.0 11.6 11.6 115.2

1957 117.3 69.1 48.2 9.7 0.1 9.6 107.6

1956 111.9 68.2 43.7 9.4 0.3 9.1 102.5

1955 105.7 66.1 39.6 9.0 0.3 8.7 96.7

1954 99.7 62.4 37.3 7.8 0.1 7.7 91.9

1953 94.2 60.2 34.0 7.3 0.1 7.2 86.9

1952 88.6 57.3 31.3 7.8 0.8 7.0 80.8

1951 83.5 54.3 29.2 6.6 6.6 76.9

1950 84.8 54.2 30.6 7.8 1.4 6.4 77.0

1949 151.1 122.7 28.4 6.4 0.3 6.1 144.7

1948 145.6 119.3 26.3 7.0 0.7 ‘ ’ 0.6 5.7 138.6

1947 157.5 114.4 43.1 9.9 0.1 4.8 5.0 147.6

1946 130.7 107.0 23.7 10.0 0.1 5.8 4.1 120.7

1945 121.0 93.7 27.3 9.4 0.1 5.8 3.5 111.6

1944 99.3 80.9 18.4 9.3 0.1 5.8 3.4 90.0

1943 86.6 70.0 16.6 9.8 0.2 5.8 3.8 76.8

1942 69.1 56.5 12.6 10.1 0.5 5.8 3.8 59.0

1941 62.0 51.4 10.6 10.1 0.6 5.8 3.7 51.9

1940 55.9 46.2 9.7 12.9 3.5 5.8 3.6 43.0

1939 51.2 40.7 10.5 16.4 7.2 5.8 3.4 34.8

1938 47.7 38.3 9.4 11.3 2.5 5.8 3.0 36.4

1937 48.2 38.8 9.4 12.2 3.7 5.8 2.7 36.0

1936 43.8 35.6 8.2 10.9 2.6 5.8 2.5 32.9

1935 20.8 11.5 9.3 11.3 2.8 5.8 2.7 9.5

1 9 3 3 -3 4 ... 7.0 (4 ) 7.0 10.0 0.2 5.6 4.25 -3 .0

1For the period from 1950 to 1971, inclusive, figures are net after deducting the portion of net assessment income credited to 

insured banks pursuant to provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act of 1950, as amended. Assessment credits to insured 

banks for these years amount to $2,844 million.

inclu de s $9.3 million of interest and allowable return received on funds advanced to receivership and deposit assumption cases by 

the Corporation.

3Paid in 1950 and 1951, but allocated among years to which it applies. Initial capital of $289 million was retired by payments to 

the U.S. Treasury in 1947 and 1948.

Assessments collected from members of the temporary insurance funds which became insured under the permanent plan were 

credited to their accounts at the termination of the temporary funds and were applied toward payment of subsequent assessments 

becoming due under the permanent insurance fund, resulting in no income to the Corporation from assessments during the 

existence of the temporary insurance funds.

5Net after deducting the portion of expenses and losses charged to banks withdrawing from the temporary insurance funds on June 

30, 1934.

1950. Since around 1961, the majority of the Corporation's income each year has been derived from interest on U.S. Government securities held, rather than from assessments as was previously 

the case.

During 1971, deposits in insured banks rose by 12 percent, to a 

total of $610 billion (see table 15). Insured deposits grew at a 

slightly faster pace, and at the end of the year the estimated amount of these deposits represented about 64.4 percent of total

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
24 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Chart F TOTAL DEPOSITS IN INSURED BANKS

AND INSURED DEPOSITS, 1934-1971

Billions 

of Oollars 

700------------

/

/

/

TOTAL / /

INSURED

_/

o l l H H I l l - M -H 1 I "I 'H - H I I H H H H H -H I H I H I H I H

1934 ‘36 '38 '40 '42 '44 '46 '48 '50 '52 '54 '56 '58 '60 62 '64 '66 '68 '70

RATIO OF INSURED DEPOSITS 

TO TOTAL DEPOSITS IN INSURED BANKS

Percent 

10 0-------

0— H I "I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I M I I I"" I .H

1934 '36 '38 '40 '42 '44 '46 '48 '50 '52 '54 '56 '58 '60 '62 '64 '66 '68 '70

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 15. IN S U R E D DEPOSITS A N D T H E D E P O S IT IN S U R A N C E F U N D , 1 9 3 4 -1 9 7 1

FINANCES OF THE CORPORATION 25

Year 

(Dec. 31)

Deposits in 

insured banks 

(in millions)

Percent

of

deposits

insured

Deposit

insurance

fund

(in

millions)

Ratio of deposit 

insurance fund t o -

Total

deposits

Insured

Total Insured1 deposits

1971..................... $610,685 $393,276 64.4% $4,739.9 .78% 1.21%

1970..................... 545,198 349,581 64.1 4,379.6 .80 1.25

1969 ..................... 495,858 313,085 63.1 4,051.1 .82 1.29

1968 ..................... 491,513 296,701 60.2 3,749.2 .76 1.26

1967 ..................... 448,709 261,149 58.2 3,485.5 .78 1.33

1966 ..................... 401,096 234,150 58.4 3,252.0 .81 1.39

1965 ..................... 377,400 209,690 55.6 3,036.3 .80 1.45

1964..................... 348,981 191,787 55.0 2,844.7 .82 1.48

1963 ..................... 313,3042 177,381 56.6 2,667.9 .85 1.50

1962..................... 297,5483 170,2104 57.24 2,502.0 .84 1.474

1961..................... 281,304 160.3094 57.04 2,353.8 .84 1.474

1960 ..................... 260,495 149,684 57.5 2,222.2 .85 1.48

1959 ..................... 247,589 142,131 57.4 2,089.8 .84 1.47

1958 ..................... 242,445 137,698 56.8 1,965.4 .81 1.43

1957 ..................... 225,507 127,055 56.3 1,850.5 .82 1.46

1956 ..................... 219,393 121,008 55.2 1,742.1 .79 1.44

1955..................... 212,226 116,380 54.8 1,639.6 .77 1.41

1954 ..................... 203,195 110,973 54.6 1,542.7 .76 1.39

1953 ..................... 193,466 105,610 54.6 1,450.7 .75 1.37

1952 ..................... 188,142 101,842 54.1 1,363.5 .72 1.34

1951..................... 178,540 96,713 54.2 1,282.2 .72 1.33

1950..................... 167,818 91,359 54.4 1,243.9 .74 1.36

1949 ..................... 156,786 76,589 48.8 1,203.9 .77 1.57

1948 ..................... 153,454 75,320 49.1 1,065.9 .69 1.42

1947 ..................... 154,096 76,254 49.5 1,006.1 .65 1.32

1946 ..................... 148,458 73,759 49.7 1,058.5 .71 1.44

1945 ..................... 157,174 67,021 42.4 929.2 .59 1.39

1944..................... 134,662 56,398 41.9 804.3 .60 1.43

1943 ..................... 111,650 48,440 43.4 703.1 .63 1.45

1942 ..................... 89,869 32,837 36.5 616.9 .69 1.88

1941..................... 71,209 28,249 39.7 553.5 .78 1.96

1940..................... 65,288 26,638 40.8 496.0 .76 1.86

1939 ..................... 57,485 24,650 42.9 452.7 .79 1.84

1938 ..................... 50,791 23,121 45.5 420.5 .83 1.82

1937 ..................... 48,228 22,557 46.8 383.1 .79 1.70

1936 ..................... 50,281 22,330 44.4 343.4 .68 1.54

1935..................... 45,125 20,158 44.7 306.0 .68 1.52

1934 ..................... 40,060 18,075 45.1 333.0 .83 1.84

1 Figures estimated by applying to the deposits in the various types of account at the regular call dates the percentages insured as 

determined from special reports secured from insured banks.

2December 20, 1963.

3December 28, 1962.

4 Revised.

deposits in insured banks. Increases in the proportion of insured 

deposits to total deposits in insured banks have occurred primarily 

because of the statutory raises— in 1935, 1950, 1966, and 1969— in 

the maximum deposit insurance per depositor (see chart F). This 

amount, originally at $2,500, is now at $20,000. In most other 

years, the percentage has been virtually stable, as from the mid— 

1950's through 1965, or it has increased only gradually.

Audit. Each year, financial transactions of the Corporation are 

audited by the General Accounting Office. A continuous internal 

audit is provided by the Office of the Auditor.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MERGER DECISIONS OF THE CORPORATION

PART TWO

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 29

BANKS INVOLVED IN ABSORPTIONS 

APPROVED BY THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

IN 1971

State Town or City Bank Page

Alaska Anchorage National Bank of Alaska 122

Petersburg Bank of Petersburg 122

California Los Angeles Union Bank 90

San Diego San Diego Bank (change title to San

Diego Trust & Savings Bank) 125

San Diego Trust & Savings Bank 125

San Francisco California Canadian Bank 90

Connecticut Bridgeport The Columbus Industrial Bank 100

Falls Village Falls Village Savings Bank 43

Hartford The Connecticut Bank and Trust

Company 100

Torrington The Torrington Savings Bank 43

Georgia Atlanta The Citizens and Southern Emory

Bank 95

The Citizens and Southern Park

National Bank 95

Chamblee The Citizens and Southern Bank

of Chamblee 95

Decatur The Citizens and Southern South

DeKalb Bank 95

East Point The Citizens and Southern Bank of

East Point 97

Roswell The Citizens and Southern Bank of

North Fulton 97

Sandy Springs The Citizens and Southern Bank of

Sandy Springs 97

Illinois Chicago Civic Center Bank and Trust Co. 83

The South East National Bank of

Chicago 83

Louisiana Houma Bank of Terrebonne & Trust

Company 102

Terrebonne Bank and Trust

Company 102

Maryland Baltimore Fayette Trust Company (change

title to The Equitable Trust

Company) 139

The EquitableTrust Company 53, 139,

Clinton The Clinton Bank 140

Stevensville Tidewater Bank 53

Massachusetts Arlington The Arlington National Bank 68

Boston Barclay Bank and Trust Company

of Boston (change title to

United States Trust Company) 126

United States Trust Company 126

Cambridge Cambridge Savings Bank 55

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
30 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

State Town or City Bank Page

Cambridge North Avenue Savings Bank 55

Everett Industrial Bank and Trust Company 47

Watertown Coolidge Bank and Trust Company 47, 68

Michigan Birmingham Birmingham Bloomfield Bank 36

Fidelity Bank of Michigan 36

Carson City The State Bank of Carson City 85

Ionia First Security Bank 85

Mississippi Houston The Bank of Houston 72

Magnolia Citizens Savings Bank, Magnolia,

Mississippi 103

Magnolia Bank (change title to

Southwest Mississippi Bank) 103

Tupelo Bank of Mississippi 72

Missouri Jefferson City Capital City Trust Company

(change title to The

Central Trust Bank) 128

The Central Trust Bank 128

New Jersey Franklin Township Franklin State Bank 75

Matawan Township The Farmers and Merchants

National Bank of Matawan 75

New York Albany Home Savings Bank of Upstate

New York 45

Mechanics Exchange Savings Bank 58

Buffalo The Western New York Savings Bank 39

Cobleskill Cobleskill Savings and Loan

Association 58

Hoosick Falls The Permanent Savings and Loan

Association of Hoosick Falls 45

New Paltz New Paltz Savings Bank 86

New York Kings Highway Savings Bank

(Brooklyn) (change title to Franklin

Savings Bank of New York) 60

New York Barclays Bank of New York 38

(Manhattan) European-American Bank & Trust

Company 133

The Franklin Savings Bank in the

City of New York 60

Niagara Falls The First Federal Savings and Loan

Association of Niagara County 39

Ossining The Bank for Savings of Westchester 41

Port Jervis Co-Operative Loan and Savings

Society 86

Tarrytown Westchester County Savings Bank 41

Troy The Troy Savings Bank 88

Whitehall Whitehall Co-Operative Savings

and Loan Association 88

North Carolina Fayetteville Cape Fear Bank & Trust Company 113

Cumberland Bank (change title to Cape 

Fear Bank & Trust Company) -| -j 3

Ohio Bergholz The Bergholz State Bank Company 134

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 31

State

Oregon

Pennsylvania

Town or City Bank Page

Canal Winchester The Canal State Bank (change title

to The Canal Winchester Bank) 129

The Canal Winchester Bank 129

Cleveland The Midwest Bank & Trust Company 106 

The M. W. Bank & Trust Company 

(change title to The Midwest

Bank & Trust Company) 106

Huron F. C. Bank Co. (change title to The

Firelands Community Bank) 107

The Firelands Community Bank 107

Sal i nevil le The Citizens Banking Company 134

Zanesville The First Trust and Savings Bank 

The First Trust State Bank (change 

title to The First Trust and

108

Savings Bank) 108

Clatskanie First National Bank in Clatskanie 62

Coos Bay Western Bank 62

Dallas Polk County State Bank 48

Eugene Citizens Bank of Oregon 70

Harrisburg First National Bank of Harrisburg 70

Portland The Oregon Bank 48

Bethlehem First Valley Bank 64, 79

Dalmatia Farmers' State Bank of Dalmatia 109

Lansford The First National Bank of Lansford 64

Lock Haven Lock Haven Trust Company

(change title to Central Counties

Bank) 50

Mahanoy City American Bank 142

Millers burg Millersburg Trust Company 

(change title to Mid Penn

Bank) 109

Muncy Commonwealth Bank and Trust

Company 114

Nesquehoning The First National Bank of

Nesquehoning 79

New Castle Lawrence Savings and Trust

Company 116

Oil City First Seneca Bank and Trust

Company 116

Reading American Bank and Trust Co. of Pa. 76, 14^

Sayre The First National Bank of Sayre 114

Scranton East Scranton State Bank 

South Side Bank and Trust 

Company (change title to 

Penn Security Bank and Trust

34

Company) 34

Slatington Slatington National Bank and Trust

Company 76

State College The First National Bank of State

College 50

Chester The Commercial Bank 136

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
32 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

State Town or City Bank Page

Greenville Southern Bank and Trust Company 110

Laurens The First National Bank of Laurens 110

McColl McColl State Bank 136

Orangeburg American Bank & Trust 136

Tennessee Jonesboro Jonesboro Bank & Trust Company 

(change title to The Banking & 

Trust Company)

The Banking & Trust Company

145

145

Utah Ogden Commercial Security Bank 130

Salt Lake City Granite National Bank 130

Virginia Bailey's Crossroads Bailey's Crossroads Bank (change 

title to Hamilton Bank and 

Trust Company)

Hamilton Bank and Trust Company

67

67

Bland Bank of Bland County 

First County Bank (change title to 

Bank of Bland County)

82

82

Colonial Beach The Bank of Westmoreland 

Westmoreland County Bank 

(change title to The Bank 

of Westmoreland)

94

94

Front Royal Bank of Warren

The Bank of Front Royal (change 

title to Bank of Warren)

93

93

Surry Bank of Surry County, Inc.

First Bank of Surry (change title to 

Bank of Surry County, Inc.)

120

120

Whaleyville Bank of Whaleyville, Inc. 

The Bank of Virginia of the 

Southeast

121

121

Wisconsin Gleason Gleason State Bank 36

Merrill Lincoln County Bank 36

O ther

England London Barclays Bank, D.C.O. 38

France Paris Societe Generale pour Favoriser le 

Developpement du Commerce 

et de I'lndustrie en France 133

BANKS INVOLVED IN ABSORPTIONS 

DENIED BY THE FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

IN 1971

Georgia Atlanta The Citizens and Southern Emory

Bank 152

Tucker The Citizens and Southern Bank of

Tucker 152

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 33

State Town or City Bank Page

Indiana Anderson Anderson Banking Company 150

Lapel The State Bank of Lapel 150

Maryland Westminster The Union National Bank of 

Westminster 

Westminster Trust Company 

(change title to Northern 

Maryland Bank and Trust 

Company)

147

147

North Carolina Lucama

Smithfield

The Lucama-Kenly Bank 

First-Citizens Bank & Trust 

Company

159

159

Pennsylvania Norristown Continental Bank 155

Reading Bank of Pennsylvania 155

BANKS INVOLVED IN ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED 

BY THE CORPORATION IN 1971

North Carolina Lucama

Smithfield

The Lucama-Kenly Bank 

First-Citizens Bank & Trust 

Company

159

159

Washington Aberdeen Grays Harbor Savings and Loan 

Association 164

Seattle Washington Mutual Savings Bank 164

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
34 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION

Resources

(in

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

South Side Bank and Trust Company

Scranton, Pennsylvania 

(change title to Penn Security Bank 

and Trust Company)

48,925 2 3

to merge with

East Scranton State Bank

C/>i*on + An

10,608 1

Scranton

Summary report by Attorney General, August 19, 1970 

The head offices of the merging banks are located only one mile from each 

other in Scranton proper. It is apparent, therefore, that some existing competition would be eliminated by the proposed transaction.

As of June 30, 1968, ten commercial banks operated 11 banking offices in 

Scranton-Dunmore. The three largest of such banks held about 65 per cent of 

the total commercial bank deposits in this market. South Side, the third 

largest, controlled about 8.1 per cent of such deposits, while State Bank, the 

smallest, held about 2.3 per cent.

The proposed merger would, thus, give the resulting bank about 10.5 per 

cent of commercial bank deposits in Scranton-Dunmore and would increase the 

already high degree of banking concentration existing in that market. We conclude that the proposed merger may have an adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, January 8, 1971 

South Side Bank and Trust Company, Scranton, Pennsylvania ("South Side 

Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $44,900,000, 

has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with East 

Scranton State Bank, Scranton, Pennsylvania ("East Scranton Bank"), which 

has total deposits of $9,500,000. The banks would merge under the charter of 

South Side Bank and under the title "Penn Security Bank and Trust Company." As an incident to the merger, the only office of East Scranton Bank 

would become a branch of the resulting bank.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 35

Competition. Each bank has its main office in the city of Scranton, located 

in Lackawanna County, the northeastern part of Pennsylvania. South Side 

Bank also has a branch office in Moscow, Pennsylvania, a small community 9 

miles southeast of Scranton. The economy of Lackawanna County has been 

relatively static in recent years, with a small decrease in population and some 

influx of new plants to replace the area's prior dependence on anthracite 

mining. The textile industry is the area's largest employer.

South Side Bank derives the major portion of its business from the city of 

Scranton (1970 estimated population: 102,294) and the contiguous community of Dunmore (1970 estimated population: 17,296), to the east of Scranton. East Scranton Bank derives the major volume of its business from a 

residential area in the eastern part of the city of Scranton; however, some 

business is also obtained from other sections of the city as well as the Dunmore 

community. The main office of East Scranton Bank is only 1 mile northeast of 

South Side Bank's main office, and the primary service area of East Scranton 

Bank is wholly within the service area of South Side Bank. The proposed 

merger would eliminate existing competition between the two banks and also 

the potential for increased competition through de novo branching, at least on 

the part of South Side Bank, into East Scranton Bank's service area.

Ten commercial banks, however, serve the Scranton-Dunmore area, all of 

them headquartered within 3 miles of South Side Bank's main office. South 

Side Bank is the third largest of these 10 banks, holding 9.4 percent of the 

total deposits held at all commercial bank offices in the two communities as of 

July 30, 1970 (the first and second largest held 39.8 percent and 17.8 percent, 

respectively, of such deposits). East Scranton Bank, on the other hand, is the 

smallest of the 10 banks, holding 2.3 percent of such deposits. The amount of 

direct competition between the two banks that would be eliminated by their 

proposed merger may thus be viewed as relatively insubstantial, and the same 

conclusion may be drawn with respect to the amount of potential competition 

that would be eliminated in view of the proximity of the present offices of the 

two banks and the fact that nine banks, of varying sizes, would continue to 

serve the Scranton-Dunmore area.

Banks headquartered in Lackawanna County or any of five adjacent 

counties, moreover, may branch or merge into the Scranton-Dunmore area 

under Pennsylvania law. Within this larger area, the resulting bank would hold 

only 3.4 percent of total commercial bank deposits in the six counties, four 

banks, not presently represented in Lackawanna County, would be larger than 

the resulting bank, and three of them (those headquartered in nearby WilkesBarre) may be considered potential entrants into the Scranton-Dunmore area 

either by merger or by de novo branching.

Under these circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that 

the proposed merger would not substantially lessen competition, tend to create 

a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Financial and managerial resources are regarded as satisfactory with respect to both participating 

banks and are so projected for the resulting bank. Future prospects of the 

resulting bank may also be regarded as satisfactory.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would replace a limited-service unit bank with a larger branch bank 

offering a wider range of banking services, including home improvement loans

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

and education loans, a larger lending limit, trust services, computer services, and 

higher rates of interest on certain types of time accounts. While customers of 

East Scranton Bank will benefit from these changes, the same services are 

conveniently available only a short distance from the bank's office and the 

increment to community needs and convenience must be viewed as modest. In 

the Board's judgment, however, they outweigh the limited anticompetitive 

effects of the proposed merger.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Fidelity Bank of Michigan

Birmingham, Michigan 

(in organization)

4,000 — 5

to acquire certain assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

Birmingham Bloomfield Bank

Birmingham

109,739 5

Approved under emergency provisions. No report requested from the A tto rney General.

Basis for Corporation approval, February 12, 1971

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 

applications have been made by Fidelity Bank of Michigan for Federal deposit 

insurance and for consent to purchase certain assets and assume the deposit 

liabilities of Birmingham Bloomfield Bank, Birmingham, Michigan, an insured 

nonmember bank which has been closed and is in the hands of the Receiver.

A conservator was appointed for and closed the Birmingham Bloomfield 

Bank on February 11, 1971, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation 

was appointed Receiver pursuant to the order of the Circuit Court for the 

County of Oakland, Michigan, entered February 12, 1971. It is expected that 

Fidelity Bank of Michigan will successfully replace Birmingham Bloomfield 

Bank.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the applications is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Lincoln County Bank

Merrill, Wisconsin

14,238 1 1

to consolidate with

Gleason State Bank 

Gleason

1,976 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 37

Summary report by Attorney General, November 3, 1970 

The self-defined service areas of the two banks overlap, and each draws 

some business from the other's area. Furthermore, the application indicates 

that banking customers in the Gleason area may be expected to use Merrill 

banks more in the future. (Application p. 12). In addition, the two banks in 

Merrill are the closest banking alternatives for residents of the Gleason area. 

Hence, this acquisition will eliminate some existing competition.

In addition, the Gleason State Bank is one of only four banks presently 

serving Lincoln County. Its merger with a bank already serving that county will 

eliminate the possibility of its being used as a foothold for entry by a banking 

organization not presently serving the county.

Basis for Corporation approval, February 12, 1971 

Lincoln County Bank, Merrill, Wisconsin (“ Lincoln Bank"), an insured State 

nonmember bank with total deposits of $12,989,000, has applied, pursuant to 

Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior approval to consolidate with Gleason State Bank, 

Gleason, Wisconsin (“ Gleason Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank which 

has total deposits of $1,735,000. The banks would consolidate under the charter and title of Lincoln Bank, and subsequent to the consolidation, Lincoln 

Bank will apply to establish a branch in Gleason Bank's sole office.

Competition. The consolidating banks are located 15 miles apart in Lincoln 

County in the north-central section of Wisconsin. Merrill has a population of 

approximately 9,500 persons and has some diversified industry, while Gleason 

is a small residential community of approximately 300 persons. The combined 

Merrill-Gleason market area is devoted primarily to dairy farming.

The areas served by the two banks are largely separate, but there is a limited 

degree of overlap and a number of common customers attributable to persons 

who have moved from one location to the other, commuters, and borrowers 

whose requirements exceed the lending limits of Gleason Bank.

Consummation of this proposal would result in two banks of approximately 

equal size serving the Merrill-Gleason market. Five banks and one trust company with combined deposits of approximately $140 million, however, are 

headquartered in Wausau, located 16 miles south of Merrill, and these institutions offer residents of the Merrill-Gleason area banking options. Under 

Wisconsin law, an alternative merger with an out-of-county bank whose principal office was more than 25 miles away might leave Gleason without the 

banking services it has at present.

In view of the small size of Gleason Bank, its limited capabilities as a 

competitor, the availability of several banking options in Wausau, and the 

limitations which would apply on the maintenance of a branch at Gleason if a 

distant, out-of-county bank sought to consolidate with Gleason Bank, the 

Board of Directors is of the opinion that the proposed merger would not, in 

any section of the country, substantially lessen competition, tend to create a 

monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. The financial and 

managerial resources of both banks and the future prospects of Lincoln Bank 

are satisfactory. The future prospects of Gleason Bank as an independent 

institution are limited in view of the lack of growth potential in the immediate 

Gleason area.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
38 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. If the consolidation is consummated, Lincoln Bank proposes to establish a branch in Gleason 

Bank's sole office as soon as legally possible, so that banking service there will 

be continued. Due to the $22,000 lending lim it of the Gleason Bank, some 

larger potential borrowers have sought credit elsewhere. In other instances, 

loans have had to be participated with outside banks. This proposal would 

increase the credit lim it available to farm operators in the Gleason area more 

than tenfold and would permit general economies of scale.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n kin g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Barclays Bank of New York

New York (Manhattan), New York 

(proposed new bank)

5,267 — 1

to acquire certain assets and assume

certain deposit liabilities of

Barclays Bank D.C.O.

London, England

19,0931 11

Summary report by Attorney General, December 31, 1970 

The proposed transaction is part of a reorganization of the banking business 

presently carried on in New York by Barclays Bank, D.C.O. and will only result 

in the transfer of banking business from an existing subsidiary of the Barclays 

group to a new subsidiary. As such, it will have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, February 19, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, applications have been filed in behalf of Barclays Bank of 

New York, New York (Manhattan), New York ("Applicant"), a proposed new 

bank, for Federal deposit insurance and for the Corporation's prior consent for 

the proposed new bank to acquire certain assets of and to assume the liability 

to pay certain deposits made in a branch office located at 300 Park Avenue, 

New York (Manhattan), New York, of Barclays Bank D.C.O., London, 

England ("DCO"), an operating noninsured foreign bank, under the Applicant's charter and title, The new bank will assume an existing lease and occupy 

the quarters presently used by the aforementioned branch office. DCO will 

continue to conduct operations in New York from its remaining two branches 

located at 120 Broadway, New York (Manhattan), New York, and at the John 

F. Kennedy International Airport, Jamaica (Queens), New York. All the stock 

of Applicant, except directors' qualifying shares, will be owned by DCO.

Competition. Approval of the subject proposals would enable Barclays Bank 

to expand the services it may offer under New York law and to enter the local 

New York market more vigorously, especially as to individual and small 

business accounts. Close affiliation with the internationally prominent Barclays 

organization would continue.

1 Assets and office to be transferred.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 39

Open only since 1964, the branch site to be converted now claims $30 

million in deposits and $28 million in loans. It is located in the uptown financial area of Manhattan, surrounded by commercial activity and high-rise office 

buildings. Banking competition in the 27-square-block service area immediately 

surrounding the site is intense, with 10 commercial banks and three foreign 

branches operating a total of 21 offices. The largest New York City commercial 

banks all have offices in the immediate vicinity. Favorable action would not 

eliminate any existing office but should allow Barclays Bank to compete more 

effectively by offering a wider variety of services.

For the reasons indicated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

has been resolved favorably to the Applicant.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Applicant, like the 

prior branch office, would continue to serve the convenience and needs of its 

market, with the added authority to offer all the services authorized by New 

York law to be offered by a State-chartered commercial bank.

On the basis of the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that 

approval of the application is warranted.

Resources 

( i n

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

1 n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

ope ra te d

The Western N ew Y o rk Savings Bank

Buffalo, New York

399,011 5 6

to merge with

The First Federal Savings and Loan 

Association of Niagara County

Niagara Falls

13,408 1

Summary report by Attorney General, December 15, 1970 

The main offices of Western and First Federal are approximately 20 miles 

apart, and the closest office of Western is approximately 15 miles from First 

Federal. The service area of First Federal is limited to Niagara Falls, from 

which Western derives only a limited amount of deposits. Moreover, there are 

several banking offices in the intervening areas between the offices of Western 

and First Federal. The proposed merger should, therefore, have no significantly 

adverse effect on existing competition.

New York law, with exceptions not relevant here, does not permit savings 

banks to open de novo branches beyond the county in which their head offices 

are located. Western, therefore, may not branch de novo into Niagara County 

in which First Federal principally operates.

Western is the third largest savings institution in Erie County and holds 

about 11 per cent of the county's total savings deposits. First Federal is the

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
40 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

smallest savings institution in Niagara Falls, and holds about 3 per cent of total 

savings deposits in Niagara County. We do not believe that the proposed merger 

would have a significantly adverse effect on potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, March 1, 1971

The Western New York Savings Bank, Buffalo, New York ("Western"), an 

insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $373,027,000, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with The First Federal 

Savings and Loan Association of Niagara County, Niagara Falls, New York 

("Federal"), a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, which has 

total deposits of $12,615,000. The institutions would merge under the charter 

and title of Western and, as an incident to the merger, the only office of 

Federal would become a branch of Western, increasing the number of its 

offices to six.

Competition. Western is the third largest mutual th rift institution in New 

York's Ninth Banking District. It presently operates a total of five offices in 

Erie County (1970 population: 1,100,597), with its main office and two 

branches in the city of Buffalo and two other branches in the suburban communities of Amherst and West Seneca. Under State law, Western has one remaining de novo branching privilege, its use being limited to a location in Erie 

County.

Federal's only office is located in the city of Niagara Falls, Niagara County. 

Its primary trade area is the city of Niagara Falls and the southwestern portion 

of Niagara County, which has an estimated population of 160,000. It is the 

smallest of the four mutual th rift institutions in this area, its three larger 

competitors having deposits of approximately $91 million, $80 million, and 

$69 million.

The nearest Western office is about 14 miles from Federal's office, and there 

are several offices of other financial institutions in the intervening area. Neither 

Western nor Federal derives a significant amount of deposit business from the 

areas served by the other, and Federal holds only a negligible amount of 

mortgage loans from the Western service area. While Western has more mortgage loans on Niagara County properties than Federal, the amounts involved, 

and Federal's recent inactivity in the local mortgage market, indicate that little 

competition between the two institutions in that market would be eliminated 

by their proposed merger. A merger of Western and Federal, therefore, would 

not eliminate significant existing competition between them.

Nor would the proposed merger eliminate any significant potential for increased competition between Western and Federal in the future. Western 

cannot branch into Federal's trade area since, under State law, its one remaining de novo privilege must be utilized in Erie County. While Federal could 

legally branch de novo into Erie County, this is not likely to occur in view of 

Federal's comparatively limited financial resources and its lack of management 

depth. While an alternative merger could strengthen the competitive position of 

Federal's merger partner relative to Western and the two larger mutual savings 

banks in the Ninth Banking District, the only realistic alternatives are the three 

competing mutual institutions in Niagara County; and a merger of any one of 

them with Federal would undoubtedly eliminate substantial existing competition. The much smaller savings and loan associations elsewhere in the district

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(with which Federal might also merge under New York law) could not easily 

absorb Federal's low net worth position or its lack of management depth.

The proposed merger would increase slightly an already high degree of 

concentration among the three largest mutual th rift institutions in the Ninth 

Banking District, which together hold 80.2 percent of all mutual institution 

deposits. Western's 14.6 percent share of this total would be increased, if the 

proposed merger is approved, to 15.1 percent. While this is an adverse consequence of the proposed merger, its importance is substantially reduced by the 

lack of realistic, less anticompetitive merger alternatives open to Federal and 

the likelihood that Western's entry into Niagara County will enhance competition among the mutual th rift institutions in that county.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Federal, established 

in 1960, has a low net worth position and inadequate management. Without 

assistance, its future prospects are not favorable. The resulting bank, however, 

would have satisfactory financial and managerial resources. Its prospects in the 

Niagara Falls area are good.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would have little, if any, effect upon the present customers of Western; 

but in the Niagara Falls area, the resulting bank would provide a number of 

services not now offered by Federal, such as savings bank life insurance, school 

savings, and on-line EDP facilities. Western, moreover, pays 5 percent on dayof-deposit-to-day-of-withdrawal accounts and on Christmas and vacation club 

accounts (Federal pays 4% percent on the former, and no interest on club 

accounts). The other three mutual institutions in the Niagara Falls area offer 

one or more of these services and rates, but none offers them all. The increased 

competition caused by Western's entry should, therefore, redound to the 

benefit of Niagara County residents generally. Western, in addition, would have 

a significantly greater capacity than Federal to satisfy local mortgage credit 

demands.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 41

R esources / j «

B a n k in g O ffic e s

Un

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Westchester County Savings Bank

Tarrytown, New York

32,644 1 3

to merge with

The Bank for Savings of Westchester 76,319 2

Ossining

Summary report by Attorney General, December 31, 1970 

Both offices of Ossining Bank are located within seven miles from the office 

Digitized for FRASER 

of Tarrytown Bank. Neither bank, however, receives any substantial amount or

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
42 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

number of savings deposits from the areas served by the other. Nor does it 

appear that the applicant banks solicit savings deposits from each other's area.

While precise figures on the origin of mortgage loans are not readily available, it is apparent that the geographic distribution of such loans is considerably wider than that for savings accounts. The two banks probably compete to 

some extent for mortgage loan business. The immediate service areas of the 

applicant banks each contain no other mutual savings banks, but each have one 

savings and loan association and several offices of large commercial banks.

Under the New York law, no savings bank may branch de novo into any city 

or village with a population of one million or less in which is already located 

the principal office of another savings bank. Thus, both Tarrytown and 

Ossining are closed to de novo branching by savings banks at the present time. 

While there are a number of communities served by each bank which are open 

to de novo branching, such communities are also open to de novo branching by 

other Westchester County savings banks, as well as by the many large savings 

institutions headquartered in New York City. The proposed merger would 

remove the home office protection afforded to Ossining by Ossining Bank.

In view of the short distance separating the applicant banks and the fact 

that some existing competition for mortgage loans will be eliminated, we conclude that the proposed transaction may have some adverse effect on 

competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, March 1, 1971

Westchester County Savings Bank, Tarrytown, New York ("Applicant"), an 

insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $30,426,000, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with The Bank for 

Savings of Westchester, Ossining, New York ("Bank for Savings"), an insured 

mutual savings bank with total deposits of $69,726,000. The institutions 

would merge under the charter and title of Applicant and, as an incident to the 

merger, the two offices of Bank for Savings would become branch offices of 

the Applicant, increasing the number of its offices to three.

Competition. Applicant's main office is about 6V2 miles south of the nearest 

office of Bank for Savings, both of which are located in older, relatively static 

communities along the Hudson River in suburban Westchester County (1970 

population: 890,000). Applicant and Bank for Savings claim adjacent trade 

areas of 30,000 and 40,000, respectively, with sectors of commercial and residential growth lying chiefly in and around the northern portion of Bank for 

Savings7 primary service area.

Bank for Savings is the ninth largest, and Applicant the 16th largest, of the 

mutual th rift institutions headquartered in Westchester County. The two banks 

together account for about 5.9 percent of the deposits and 5.5 percent of the 

offices of the 28 mutual th rift institutions with offices in Westchester County, 

while their share of total deposits held by all mutual th rift institutions in the 

larger metropolitan New York City area would be less than 1 percent.

The proposed merger would not eliminate significant existing competition 

between the two banks. Their primary service areas do not overlap, although 

each derives a moderate amount of deposit and loan business from throughout 

Westchester County. Such business, however, is not substantial relative to the 

total amount of th rift institution deposits and loans estimated to originate in

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 43

Westchester County. T hrift institutions in Westchester County, moreover, are 

subject to competition for the deposit and loan business of commuters from 

savings banks and savings and loan associations located in New York City.

Some potential for increased competition between the two banks would be 

eliminated by their proposed merger since each has unused de novo branch 

privileges which could be exercised elsewhere in Westchester County, particularly its growing areas in the north. This potential competition is not significant, however, when consideration is given to the fact that 28 different mutual 

institutions presently have offices in Westchester County, when many of those 

headquartered in the county also have unused de novo branch privileges remaining, when significant competition for Westchester County business is 

offered by New York City th rift institutions, and when a significant number of 

New York City th rift institutions presently without offices in Westchester 

County can also establish de novo branches there with appropriate supervisory 

approvals.

Considering the foregoing, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. While management 

succession at Applicant has been a source of supervisory concern, the institution to be formed by the proposed merger would have adequate financial and 

managerial resources, and favorable future prospects.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would bring to the Tarrytown public th rift institution services not 

presently offered by Applicant. These include origination of FHA and VA 

loans, larger size mortgage loans, mortgage loans on commercial properties, 5 

percent day-of-deposit-to-day-of-withdrawal accounts, 5% percent 90-day savings certificates, on-line EDP facilities, and safe deposit services. While most 

of these services are available either at competing institutions in Tarrytown or 

nearby, the proposed merger would provide a convenient, alternative source for 

all of them.

On the basis of the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that 

approval of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The Torrington Savings Bank

Torrington, Connecticut

42,758 2 3

to consolidate with

Falls Village Savings Bank 

\ /:11

5,152 1

Summary report by Attorney General, December 18, 1970 

The closest offices of the merging institutions are located about 20 miles

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
44 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

apart, with several other banks in the intervening area. The application indicates that they draw little business from each other's service area. Thus, it 

would not appear that any substantial existing competition will be eliminated.

While Torrington Bank could be permitted to branch de novo into the area 

served by Falls Village Bank, such expansion appears unlikely in view of the 

modest size of the acquiring bank, Connecticut's home office protection laws, 

and the relatively rural character of the Falls Village area. For these reasons, as 

well as the small size of the bank to be acquired, we do not believe that the 

proposed merger would result in the loss of substantial potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, March 10, 1971

The Torrington Savings Bank, Torrington, Connecticut (“ Applicant"), an 

insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $38,969,000, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to consolidate with Falls Village 

Savings Bank, Falls Village, Town of Canaan, Connecticut ("Other Bank"), also 

an insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $4,845,000. The banks 

would consolidate under the charter and title of Applicant and, as an incident 

thereto, the only office of Other Bank would become a branch of Applicant, 

increasing the number of its offices to three.

Competition. The two offices of Applicant are in Torrington, Connecticut. 

The sole office of Other Bank, which is the smallest mutual savings bank in 

Connecticut, is approximately 20 miles northwest in Falls Village. The offices 

of the participating banks are separated by a State forest and a State park, with 

only a two-lane highway as a connector. Their trade areas consist of essentially 

separate areas, and there is no significant existing competition between the 

banks.

The proposed consolidation would have its greatest impact in the sparsely 

populated exurban trade area of Other Bank, which consists of the towns of 

Canaan, Cornwall, North Canaan, Salisbury, and Sharon (combined 1970 populations: 10,824).

Canaan Savings Bank, three times the size of Other Bank, is the only other 

th rift institution in this area. In recent years, Other Bank's share of its deposit 

market has been declining relative to Canaan Savings Bank, largely due to time 

lags in raising dividend rates to depositors. The proposed consolidation should 

stimulate th rift institution competition in the Falls Village area without reducing the number of alternatives in the area for th rift institution services.

Applicant's trade area is centered in the city of Torrington, and includes the 

towns of Goshen, Harwinton, and New Hartford. Total population of this area 

in 1970 was 40,373. Applicant is slightly larger than the only other th rift 

institution serving the same area, First Federal Savings and Loan Association, 

but the proposed consolidation should not adversely affect the ability of that 

institution to compete with Applicant.

"Home office protection" in Connecticut makes it impossible for either 

participating bank to branch into the principal community served by the other. 

While each could branch de novo into areas surrounding such communities, 

Other Bank lacks the resources to do so, while Applicant is unlikely to be 

attracted to the sparsely populated communities open to it in Other Bank's 

trade area. The proposed consolidation is unlikely, therefore, to eliminate any 

significant potential for future competition between the two institutions 

through de novo branching.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 45

On the other hand, the proposed consolidation would reduce the number of 

alternative th rift institutions in the combined service areas from four to three 

and enhance Applicant's present position as the largest th rift institution among 

the four now competing there. Continued growth in Applicant's trade area is 

likely, however, to attract additional competition from among the numerous 

other mutual th rift institutions in Connecticut which have legal authority to 

branch de novo into such areas of growth, thereby increasing the total number 

of th rift institution alternatives in the combined area. In that connection, it is 

relevant to note that a mutual th rift institution contemplating de novo entry 

into the Torrington-Falls Village area is likely to be significantly larger than 

either Applicant or Other Bank, whose combined deposits represent less than 1 

percent of the total deposits of all mutual savings banks in Connecticut.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable with respect to Applicant. Other Bank has in recent times encountered problems with respect to limited earnings, noncompetitive dividend 

rates, and a static deposit structure leading to limited funds to supply the 

credit needs of the community. Its net worth position is also below average. 

For the consolidated bank, all of these factors would be favorable.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The customers of 

Other Bank would be provided with broader services as a result of the proposed 

consolidation since Other Bank does not now offer 5% percent notice accounts or personal, educational, or installment loans. In addition, the resulting 

bank should be better able than the Falls Village institution to satisfy the 

credit needs of its trade area, since it would have more funds available to lend 

and a higher lim it on the size of acceptable loans.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources / jnB a n k in g O ffic e s

\\n

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Home Savings Bank of Upstate New York

Albany, New York

122,272 4 5

to merge with

The Permanent Savings and Loan 

Association of Hoosick Falls

Hoosick Falls

1,127 1

Summary report by Attorney General, February 16, 1971 

The proposal would merge Permanent, the smallest of four savings and loan 

associations operating in Rensselaer County, with Home Savings, the sixth

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
46 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

largest of eight mutual savings banks operating in the Albany-SchenectadyTroy area.

The head offices of the merging institutions are about 25 miles apart and 

the closest offices are about 17 miles apart. Neither institution obtains substantial business from the areas immediately served by the other, and there are 

other savings institutions operating in the intervening areas. It would not 

appear, therefore, that significant direct competition would be eliminated by 

the merger of the two institutions.

New York law does not permit a mutual savings bank to establish de novo

branches outside of the county where its main office is located. Home Savings, 

therefore, could not establish de novo offices in Rensselaer County. In view of 

this fact, and the size and limited service area of Permanent, we conclude 

that the proposed merger would be unlikely to have any significantly adverse 

effect on potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, March 12, 1971

Home Savings Bank of Upstate New York, Albany, New York ("Home"), an 

insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $114,520,000, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with The Permanent 

Savings and Loan Association of Hoosick Falls, Hoosick Falls, New York 

("Permanent S&L"), a federally insured State-chartered savings and loan association with total deposits of $1,015,000. The institutions would merge under 

the charter and title of Home and, as an incident to the merger, the only office 

of Permanent S&L would become a branch of Home, increasing the number of 

its offices to five.

Competition. Home operates its main office and one branch in the city of 

Albany, an additional branch in the town of Colonie, an Albany suburb, and a 

third branch in Washington County, which it recently acquired by merger with 

the Greenwich Savings and Loan Association. Under New York law, it may 

open de novo branches only in Albany County but can acquire branches by 

merger anywhere in the State's Fourth Banking District.

Permanent S&L operates its only office in Hoosick Falls, Rensselaer 

County, New York, and serves a stable agricultural and vacation area of 23,000 

persons in Hoosick Falls and its environs. The area also includes a few small 

industrial plants. Under State law, Permanent S&L could open a de novo

branch within 50 miles of its main office, including those portions of Albany 

County not subject to "home office protection." Permanent S&L is by far the 

smallest of five mutual th rift institutions serving Rensselaer County.

Hoosick Falls is 35 miles from the city of Albany, and 20 miles southeast of 

the nearest Home office in Greenwich, Washington County. The primary trade 

areas of the two institutions do not overlap, although there is some overlap in 

outlying areas served by Home's Greenwich office and by Permanent S&L. 

While Home had more than a nominal amount of deposits from the Hoosick 

Falls area, this is attributable to past differences in dividend rates between the 

two institutions. Except for such deposits, neither draws any significant business from areas served by the other, and there is almost no prospect of increased competition between them in the future because of the branching 

restrictions on Home and because of Permanent S&L's limited resources.

Home is the fourth largest savings bank headquartered in the city of Albany

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 47

and the sixth largest mutual institution headquartered in the Fourth Banking 

District. A t year-end 1969, it held 5.9 percent of all the deposits held by 

mutual savings institutions in the district, while the comparable percentage for 

Permanent S&L was less than 0.1.

The most immediate impact of the proposed merger will be in the Hoosick 

Falls area, where larger size mortgage loans and the introduction of services not 

before available at Permanent S&L will increase the competition between resulting bank's branch, nearby commercial banks, and a nearby th rift institution in Bennington, Vermont.

The Board of Directors is of the opinion that the proposed merger would 

not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen competition, tend to 

create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. The overall financial 

and managerial position of each institution, and of the resulting bank, is considered satisfactory. The future prospects of each institution, and of the resulting bank, are also considered satisfactory.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The major benefits 

which would accrue to customers of Permanent S&L include more liberal 

mortgage lending policies with more lendable funds available, larger size m ortgage loans, and additional services, such as FHA and VA loans, a 5 percent 

day-of-deposit-to-day-of-withdrawal account, time deposits, savings bank life 

insurance, student and home improvement loans, and on-line deposit facilities.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Coolidge Bank and Trust Company

Watertown, Massachusetts

75,938 5 6

to merge with

Industrial Bank and Trust Company

Everett

9,122 1

Approved under emergency provisions. No report rendered by the Attorney 

General.

Basis for Corporation approval, March 31, 1971 

Coolidge Bank and Trust Company, Watertown, Massachusetts ("Coolidge"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $61,206,000, 

has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with 

Industrial Bank and Trust Company, Everett, Massachusetts ("Industrial"), an 

insured State nonmember bank which has total deposits of $8,002,000. The 

institutions would merge under the charter and title of Coolidge and, as an

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
48 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

incident to the merger, the only office of Industrial would become a branch of 

Coolidge, increasing the number of its offices to six.

The Board of Directors of this Corporation has found that it must act 

immediately in order to prevent the probable failure of Industrial and, pursuant to Section 18(c) (3) and (4) of the FDIC Act, has waived customary 

publication and requests for reports on the competitive factors involved from 

the Comptroller of the Currency, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, and the Attorney General. The three agencies were advised in 

advance of the Corporation's action and given the opportunity to submit 

opinions; no adverse comments were received.

R esources

/ j n

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

The Oregon Bank

Portland, Oregon

132,916 21 22

to merge with

Polk County State Bank 

Dallas

8,919 1

Summary report by Attorney General, November 16, 1970

The office of Polk County State Bank ("State") is about 15 miles from the 

Salem branch of Oregon Bank, with several other banking offices located in the 

intervening area. Thus, it would not appear that any substantial existing competition will be eliminated by the proposed merger.

Oregon Bank has shown a tendency to branch de novo and it has the size 

and ability to do so anywhere in the state. State law prohibits it from branching directly into Dallas itself. However, Oregon Bank could branch into areas 

adjacent to Dallas ^nd if such areas were subsequently annexed to the city, the 

branch could then be moved anywhere in the city.

Commercial banking in Oregon is dominated by United States National 

Bank of Oregon (total deposits as of December 31, 1969 of $1.5 billion) and 

First National Bank of Oregon, Portland, Oregon (total deposits as of 

December 31, 1969 of $1.6 billion). United States National has an office in 

Polk County already and First National has an office as close to Dallas as does 

Oregon Bank.

Oregon Bank, although much smaller than the other two, is the third largest 

bank headquartered in the State and the only other bank approaching statewide coverage. Of the remaining banks headquartered in the State, only one 

has deposits in excess of $60 million, and only six banks have deposits in 

excess of $25 million. Given this extraordinarily concentrated statewide structure, continued acquisitions by Oregon Bank, which must now be considered 

one of the leading banks in the State, can result in some adverse competitive 

effects; such acquisitions will tend to foreclose the opportunity that any other 

banks of comparable size can be created in Oregon to challenge Oregon Bank 

and the statewide leaders on a local or statewide basis. This acquisition will

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 49

eliminate State as a possible participant in such an organization, and it will 

remove existing potential competition between Oregon Bank and State.

Basis for Corporation approval, April 9, 1971

The Oregon Bank, Portland, Oregon ("Oregon Bank"), an insured State 

nonmember bank with total deposits of $118,757,000, has applied, pursuant 

to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior approval to merge with Polk County State Bank, 

Dallas, Oregon ("Polk Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total 

deposits of $7,919,000. The banks would merge under the title and charter of 

Oregon Bank. Application is also made under Section 18(d) of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act to establish Polk Bank's sole office as a branch of the 

resulting bank.

Competition. Oregon Bank's 21 offices serve nine separate and distinct 

areas, the largest and most important of which is the Portland metropolitan 

area. Oregon Bank has no office in Polk County (population 34,950), where 

Polk Bank is located. The closest office of Oregon Bank to Polk Bank is in 

Salem, the State capital, 15 miles east of Dallas. This recently established office 

holds the smallest share of local commercial bank deposits (1.6 percent) and 

competes with offices of Oregon's two largest banks, which have about 78 

percent of such local deposits. The immediate service areas of Polk Bank and 

Oregon Bank's Salem branch do not overlap, and there is no present competition between them which would be eliminated by the proposed merger. The 

potential, moreover, for future competition between the two banks through 

the establishment of de novo branches is limited. Oregon Bank cannot branch 

de novo into Dallas, and the below average population per commercial bank 

office in Polk County makes de novo branching elsewhere in the county 

relatively unattractive in the near future. Polk Bank's small size makes extensive de novo branch activity on its part remote in any event.

Banking in Oregon is concentrated in two statewide branch systems which, 

combined, held 79.2 percent of total commercial bank deposits in the State on 

June 30, 1970. Oregon Bank, with only 2.9 percent of the State's commercial 

bank deposits, ranks fourth in deposit size and competes against one or both 

of these two large banks in all but one of its nine service areas.

The acquisition of Polk Bank would have no significant effect on competition in areas presently served by Oregon Bank. The greatest impact of the 

proposed merger would be in Polk County and the Salem SMSA (consisting of 

Polk and Marion counties).

Polk Bank has the largest share of commercial bank deposits (about 38.0 

percent) in its immediate service area, but United States National Bank, the 

second-ranking bank in terms of local deposits, holds the largest share of commercial bank loans in the area. In the combined two-county SMSA, the resulting bank would have two of the 37 commercial bank offices and about 3.5 

percent of local commercial bank deposits. In neither of these areas would the 

proposed merger be likely to have any significant adverse competitive effect. 

Competition with United States National Bank in the immediate Dallas area 

should actually be enhanced.

The proposed merger would reduce by one the limited number of independent banks remaining in the State of Oregon, a highly concentrated banking 

market by virtue of the shares of total commercial bank deposits and loans

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
50 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

controlled by the two largest banks in the State. Although holding a very small 

share of the same market, Oregon Bank is the fourth largest bank in terms of 

commercial bank deposits held (Bank of California, N.A., has a substantial 

branch office operation in Portland). It is half again as large as First State Bank 

of Oregon, the fifth largest commercial bank in the State, which holds about

2.0 percent of total commercial bank deposits. Forty-five other commercial 

banks of varying deposit size are also headquartered in the State. Against this 

background, while each proposed merger with Oregon Bank must be carefully 

scrutinized by the regulatory agencies so as not to foreclose the development 

of additional banks that could compete with it in the intermediate size range, 

the Corporation does not view this particular acquisition as substantially affecting the possible growth of such competition. Polk Bank is a relatively small 

bank, and some 20 commercial banks in Oregon having more than $10 million 

in deposits would remain actual or potential competitors of Oregon Bank.

The Board of Directors, accordingly, is of the opinion that the proposed 

transaction would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. These factors are 

considered satisfactory for both banks and, accordingly, for the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The public in the 

area served by Polk Bank would benefit from having locally available an alternative to United States National Bank for larger size loans, FHA and VA 

mortgage loans, trust department services, bank credit card services, and certain 

international banking services. A t the same time, the proposed merger would 

not reduce the number of commercial bank offices or the number of alternative banking sources in Polk County.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Lock Haven Trust Company

Lock Haven, Pennsylvania 

(change title to Central Counties 

Bank)

32,475 2 7

to merge with

The First National Bank of 

State College

State College

29,224 5

Summary report by Attorney General, November 3, 1970 

The head offices of the two banks are about 30 miles apart and the closest 

offices are about 20 miles apart. Only two banking offices intervene between

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 51

the closest offices, however, and it appears that there is presently a limited 

amount of competition between the two banks which would be eliminated by 

the merger.

Each bank could expand de novo into the area served by the other, and each 

holds the largest share, by a small margin, of deposits in its market. Because of 

the relatively small size of the two banks, however, and because several other 

banks exist which could be considered potential entrants into each market, the 

effect of the merger on potential competition would not be significantly 

adverse.

Basis for Corporation approval, April 9, 1971

Lock Haven Trust Company, Lock Haven, Pennsylvania (“ Trust Company"), 

an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $26,363,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The First 

National Bank of State College, State College, Pennsylvania (“ First National"), 

which has total deposits of $26,115,000. The banks would merge under the 

charter of Trust Company and with the title “ Central Counties Bank,'' but the 

main office of First National would be the main office of the resulting bank. 

Trust Company's main office and the four branches of First National would 

become branches of the resulting bank, which would have a total of seven 

offices, not including one approved but unopened branch.

Competition. Trust Company's main office is in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, 

a small manufacturing community of 11,302 people in southeastern Clinton 

County. Its only branch is located in Mill Hall, also in Clinton County, 4 miles 

southwest of Lock Haven. Trust Company, in addition, has an authorized but 

unopened branch in Renovo, another Clinton County community, 28 road 

miles northwest of Lock Haven. After Trust Company opens its Renovo 

branch, its trade area will consist of all of Clinton County, the southwestern 

portions of Lycoming County, and the northeastern portions of Centre 

County. The population of Clinton County in 1970 was 37,481, a decline of 

0.4 percent since 1960.

First National operates a total of five offices in the central portion of Centre 

County: three in State College and one each in Nittany Mall and Milesburg. 

Largely because of the stimulus provided by the increase in enrollments and 

year-round operation of Pennsylvania State University (whose main campus is 

in State College), the population of Centre County increased 26.3 percent 

between 1960 and 1970 (from 78,580 to 99,267), and the population of State 

College increased 50.7 percent (from 22,409 to 33,778). There is also light 

industry and dairy farming in the First National trade area.

The nearest offices of Trust Company and First National are 21 road miles 

apart, being separated by a mountainous and sparsely populated area in which 

other commercial banks have offices. Neither of the two banks has actively 

sought business beyond the immediate environs of their respective offices, and 

each can be said to serve separate, although adjacent, areas. The two banks 

draw only nominal business from each other's service areas, and their merger 

would not eliminate any significant existing competition between them.

The proposed merger would, however, eliminate the possibility of increased 

competition between the two banks which might occur if either opened de

novo branches in areas served by the other. While Trust Company is more

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
52 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

likely to be interested in the possibility of branching de novo into Centre 

County than First National would be in branching de novo into Clinton 

County because of the differing growth rates of the two counties, neither 

possibility can be considered probable in the near future. The population per 

commercial bank office is already low in both counties, First National's management lacks the aggressiveness and depth necessary for out-of-area expansion, 

and Trust Company, because of the terrain and its present service area, might 

find a more natural area for expansion in the direction of Williamsport, in 

Lycoming County. Moreover, if future growth warrants de novo branching in 

either county, there are numerous banks both within and without the two 

counties that could undertake such expansion. Accordingly, the fact that the 

proposed merger would eliminate potential competition between the two participating banks through de novo branching is not a significant consideration 

under the facts presented.

Trust Company controls about 21 percent of the total deposits held at 19 

commercial bank offices within its trade area, ranking second among 13 banks 

in that deposit market. In the separate trade area it serves, First National holds 

a similar share of the total deposits at 25 commercial bank offices within its 

trade area, ranking second among 11 banks. The $102 million deposit MidState Bank & Trust Company, headquartered in Altoona, holds the largest 

share of local deposits in each trade area. For this reason, the proposed merger 

should have no adverse competitive effect on other banks within the two 

service areas.

While the merger would create the largest bank headquartered in Centre 

County, the area of potential competition for the resulting bank would include 

also the six surrounding counties, since Pennsylvania law permits banks headquartered in Centre County to branch or merge throughout the seven-county 

area. In that seven-county area, the combined bank would hold 7.4 percent of 

total commercial bank deposits, ranking third to the 15.1 percent share held by 

Mid-State Bank & Trust Company and the 7.6 percent share held by The First 

National Bank of Altoona. Thirty-eight other commercial banks presently compete in the same seven-county area, with 10 of them larger than $20 million in 

deposit size. Under the circumstances, the proposed merger would not result in 

any undue concentration of banking resources within the area of potential 

competition, nor establish a precedent which might lead to such concentration 

in the future. Numerous options would remain available to the banking public, 

both in the immediate and the foreseeable future.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating banks has adequate financial resources, and while First National lacks 

adequate management succession, the resulting bank would have greater management depth and adequate managerial resources overall. The future prospects 

for the resulting bank would be favorable.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Trust Company 

has been more aggressive in the lending field than has First National, which 

should benefit the State College area, since it has a strong demand for large 

amounts of credit to finance housing projects, including high-rise apartments.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 53

The resulting bank, in addition, would have a legal lending lim it almost twice as 

large as either of the participating banks, which should be beneficial to both 

the Lock Haven and State College areas. The resulting bank, in short, should 

compete more vigorously than First National within the State College area, 

while the people in the Lock Haven area should enjoy also the benefits of 

enhanced competition with larger banks at the eastern edge of that market.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The Equitable Trust Company

Baltimore, Maryland

684,371 64 65

to acquire the assets and assume the

deposit liabilities of

Tidewater Bank

Stevensville

5,507 1

Summary report by Attorney General, March 4, 1971

Tidewater's sole office is located on Kent Island, on the Eastern Shore of 

the Chesapeake Bay. Equitable operates no offices on the Eastern Shore; its 

closest offices are in Anne Arundel County across the Bay at some distance 

from Tidewater. It does not appear that any substantial existing competition 

would be eliminated by the proposed merger.

Under applicable state law, Equitable could be permitted to open de novo

branch offices on or near Kent Island, as could any other commercial bank in 

the state. Equitable ranks among the most significant potential entrants into 

areas it does not presently serve.

Tidewater is the only bank on Kent Island. Its closest competitor is located 

in nearby Queen Annes County, and is of comparable size. The application 

indicates that some competition is afforded by branches of two of Maryland's 

largest banks in Chestertown and Easton, the closest communities of substantial size on the Eastern Shore. Banking offices across the Bay in the Annapolis 

area may provide alternatives for some customers, although Kent Island is more 

closely integrated into the Eastern Shore community and passage across the 

bridge to Annapolis requires payment of a toll.

Basis for Corporation approval, April 25, 1971

The Equitable Trust Company, Baltimore, Maryland ("Equitable"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total resources of $684,371,000 and total deposits of $597,995,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other 

provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior 

consent to acquire the assets and assume the liability to pay deposits of 

Tidewater Bank, Stevensville, Maryland ("Tidewater"), an insured State 

nonmember bank with total resources of $5,507,000 and total deposits of

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
54 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

$4,909,000. Application is also made, under Section 18(d) of*the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, to establish Tidewater's sole office as a branch of the 

resulting bank, and to the temporary retirement of 14,062 shares of 

Equitable's capital stock. After the merger, the resulting bank would have 73 

authorized offices.

Competition. Equitable is the third largest bank in Maryland, holding approximately 11.0 percent of all commercial bank deposits in the State. Its 

branches are concentrated in the Baltimore area and in the densely populated 

corridor between Baltimore and the District of Columbia. None of Equitable's 

branches are located on Kent Island or in Eastern Maryland.

Tidewater is a unit bank headquartered in Stevensville on Kent Island, approximately 12 miles west of Annapolis, in Chesapeake Bay. It is the only bank 

with an office on the island. The population of Kent Island is estimated at 

4,800, with 2,500 residing in Stevensville. The island is largely rural, with 

agricultural and seafood activities predominating. Its economy has shown little 

development in the past, and only a modest new industrial park is planned for 

the future. Toll bridges connect the island to the Western Shore, while toll-free 

bridges connect it to the much closer Eastern Shore.

Travel to the nearby Eastern Shore communities of Grasonville and 

Queenstown is relatively easy for Kent Island residents, with Queenstown Bank 

of Maryland, a $7.2 million deposit institution, serving both communities. 

Both Tidewater and Queenstown Bank of Maryland, in turn, are affected by 

the competition offered in Centreville, some 7 miles northeast of Queenstown, 

by the Centreville National Bank of Maryland, a $9.8 million deposit institution. Tidewater is the smallest of these three banks.

The Equitable office nearest to Kent Island is some 20 miles to the west, 

with intervening commercial bank offices and little local travel between the 

two locations. Neither draws any significant bank business from areas served by 

the other, and their proposed merger, accordingly, would not eliminate any 

meaningful present competition between the two banks.

While Equitable has successfully demonstrated its de novo branching capabilities and must be considered, in view of Maryland's statewide branching 

laws, the most likely entrant into eastern Maryland (its two larger statewide 

competitors already being represented), the proposed merger is not likely to 

eliminate any significant potential for increased competition in the future 

between Tidewater and Equitable through the de novo branching route. Other 

Eastern Shore communities, with more substantial population and economic 

development, offer greater incentives to Equitable for de novo branching than 

Kent Island, which already has a significantly lower population per commercial 

bank office than the State of Maryland as a whole. Tidewater has not branched 

since its organization in 1903 and cannot reasonably be expected, because of 

its limited resources, to branch de novo into areas now served by Equitable.

Competition between Equitable and Tidewater could arise in the future, 

however, through Tidewater's possible merger with another bank that presently 

competes with Equitable or could be expected to compete with Equitable in 

the future. In this connection, the Corporation notes that in the past 15 years, 

61 commercial banks in Maryland have been absorbed by merger (while only 

24 have been chartered) and that in the same period of time the percentage of 

statewide commercial bank deposits held by the three largest banks in 

Maryland, of which Equitable is one, has increased from 36.3 percent to 42.6

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 55

percent. The percentage of such deposits held by the five largest commercial 

banks in Maryland has increased over the same period of time from 49.0 

percent to 60.3 percent. Generally speaking, adding to the resources of any one 

of these banks by merger encourages the further concentration of banking 

assets in the State, with potentially adverse consequences to the long-run structure of Maryland banking and to the public's choice of alternative banking 

facilities. The merger of significant local banks with any of the larger banks in 

the State should, accordingly, be apprroached with the most careful regulatory 

scrutiny.

The Corporation does not believe, however, under the facts presented, that 

the proposed merger would establish a significant precedent adversely affecting 

the future structure of commercial banking in the State of Maryland or that 

the proposed merger would adversely affect the ability of other banks in that 

State to compete in the future with the largest statewide banks. Equitable has 

merged only three banks since 1955, and none since 1963. Tidewater is the 

smallest of three banks that compete in the vicinity of Kent Island. Equitable 

does not compete in that market, and the proposed merger would eliminate no 

existing competition between them and no reasonable likelihood of future 

competition between them brought about by de novo branching. Statewide, 

Tidewater's share of commercial bank deposits is insignificant and Equitable's 

share is not so high as to preclude this additional acquisition.

Under these circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed transaction would not, in any section of the country, substantially 

lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable for Equitable, for Tidewater, and for the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would replace a small unit bank with a branch office of a full-service 

institution not presently serving the same market or its environs. Equitable 

should be able to bring to Tidewater's present customers a significant volume 

of lendable funds, thereby relieving local demands for credit, which have resulted in a loan-deposit ratio at Tidewater of 89.6 percent. Trust services, not 

presently available from Tidewater or its two competitors, would also become 

conveniently available to residents of this part of Maryland. The resulting bank 

would, in addition, have a much higher lending lim it and a wider variety of 

loan services than any of the three banks presently in the area.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Cambridge Savings Bank

Cambridge, Massachusetts

172,680 1 3

to consolidate with

North Avenue Savings Bank

Cambridge

62,445 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
56 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Summary report by Attorney General, October 30, 1970

All of the offices of the merging banks are in Cambridge, the closest about 

one mile apart. The application indicates that their service areas overlap substantially; indeed, each of the seven communities which are included in the 

service area of North Avenue is also within the service area of Cambridge Bank. 

The proposed merger would eliminate competition between the banks for 

savings deposits and mortgage loans.

Although all offices of the merging banks are located in Cambridge, the 

application indicates that they draw about two-thirds of their deposits from 

neighboring communities, including Arlington, Belmont, Boston, Brookline, 

Lexington, Medford, Newton, Somerville, Watertown and Winchester. Because 

of this fact and the status of Cambridge as a shopping center and commuter 

terminal for these nearby areas, the competitive effect of the proposed merger 

may be approximated by examining the effect on concentration therein. 

Twenty-seven savings banks, plus numerous other th rift institutions operate 

offices in Cambridge and the above listed communities. The application indicates that Cambridge Bank holds about 2.9 per cent of total savings deposits 

held by th rift institutions in this area, while North Avenue holds about 1 per 

cent. These figures would be slightly reduced if time and savings deposits in 

commercial banks are included.

These percentages, however, would appear to understate the effects of the 

proposed merger, in view of the proximity of the offices of the merging banks. 

The merging banks are two of four savings banks operating offices in 

Cambridge. One savings and loan association and three cooperative banks are 

located in Cambridge. We conclude that the proposed merger is likely to have 

some adverse effect on competition for time and savings deposits and residential mortgage loans.

Basis for Corporation approval, April 30, 1971

Cambridge Savings Bank, Cambridge, Massachusetts ("Applicant"), an insured mutual savings bank with total resources of $172,680,000, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to consolidate with North 

Avenue Savings Bank, Cambridge, Massachusetts ("North Avenue"), a noninsured mutual savings bank with total resources of $62,445,360, under the 

charter and title of Applicant, and to establish the two offices of North Avenue 

as branches of the resulting bank, increasing the number of its offices to three.

Competition. Applicant's sole office is in Harvard Square, Cambridge, 

Massachusetts, while North Avenue's two offices are in Porter Square, 1 mile 

away, and Kendall Square, both also located within the city of Cambridge. 

Two other savings banks and two cooperative banks also have offices in 

Cambridge, but the resulting bank would be the largest th rift institution in the 

city and would have three of the eight th rift institution offices located there. 

The two participating banks have offices in different parts of Cambridge and 

draw substantial deposits from outside Cambridge, but their proposed merger 

would undoubtedly eliminate some existing competition between them, particularly in the four-town area of Arlington, Belmont, Cambridge, and Somerville, 

from which each draws more than half its deposits.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 57

The proposed merger however, is unlikely to have a substantial anticompetitive effect. The city of Cambridge lies in the center of the Boston 

metropolitan area, separated from the downtown core only by the Charles 

River. Underground and surface transportation allow relatively easy commutation between Cambridge and Boston and between neighboring suburbs and 

Cambridge. A sampling of the 15 mutual th rift institutions located in Boston 

indicates that collectively they draw significant deposit business from the fourtown area previously described. Based on this sample and the probable draw of 

th rift institutions near but outside the four-town area, the resulting bank is not 

likely to have more than 20 percent of the th rift institution deposits that 

originate within the four towns, an area whose limited size results in a figure 

overstating the actual competitive impact of the proposed merger. In a larger 

market area consisting of the city of Boston and suburban communities 

immediately to the north and west of Boston, the resulting bank would have 

somewhat less than 4 percent of all th rift institution deposits. This figure, on 

the other hand, probably underestimates the actual competitive impact of the 

proposed merger because of the relatively large total deposit figures of the 

th rift institutions headquartered throughout the city of Boston.

In addition to competing with th rift institutions in Boston and in suburban 

areas near but outside the four towns, the resulting bank would be subject to 

possible competition from th rift institutions headquartered in Middlesex 

County (1970 population: 1,388,129), since Massachusetts law permits each of 

them to branch de novo anywhere within the county. There are 70 such 

institutions (other than the two participating banks) headquartered in Middlesex County, at least 16 of which exceed $50 million in deposit size. These 70 

institutions operate a total of 131 offices within the county. Federal savings 

and loan associations, moreover, are not limited in the location of their offices 

by the geographic restrictions of Massachusetts law and those headquartered 

outside Middlesex County, including those headquartered in the city of 

Boston, could also establish branch offices in Cambridge. As a result, the 

Cambridge public will undoubtedly continue to have convenient access to 

numerous th rift institution options even if the proposed merger is approved.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable with respect to the consolidating banks and is so projected for the 

resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger should encourage the resulting bank to be more active than either 

constituent bank in establishing de novo branches in the growing suburban 

areas of Middlesex County, thereby increasing competition for th rift institution deposits within the county. The resulting bank should also be better able 

to maintain the 5% percent dividend rate now being paid on regular savings 

accounts, in accordance with Federal rate regulations applicable to 

Massachusetts th rift institutions. North Side depositors, in addition, would gain 

the protections and assurances of Federal deposit insurance.

Under the circumstances, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the application is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
58 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

R esources

/ { n

B a n k in g O ffic e s

\ III

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Mechanics Exchange Savings Bank 

Albany, New York

117,288 4 5

to merge with

Cobleskill Savings and Loan 

Association

Cobleskill

3,623 1

Summary report by Attorney General, March 3, 1971 

Cobleskill and Albany are about 42 miles apart. The application indicates 

that neither institution derives any business from the service area of the other. 

Thus, it appears that the merger would not eliminate any existing competition.

New York law would not permit Mechanics Bank to branch de novo into 

Schoharie County. This fact and the size and limited service area of Cobleskill 

Savings together with the existence of other large savings banks in Albany 

indicate that no substantial potential competition would be eliminated by the 

proposed merger.

Basis for Corporation approval, May 14, 1971 

Mechanics Exchange Savings Bank, Albany, New York (“ Mechanics Exchange"), an insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $107,324,000, 

has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with 

Cobleskill Savings and Loan Association, Cobleskill, New York ("Savings and 

Loan"), an insured savings and loan association with total deposits of 

$3,378,000. The institutions would merge under the charter and title of 

Mechanics Exchange and, as an incident to the merger, the only office of 

Savings and Loan would become a branch of Mechanics Exchange, increasing 

the number of its offices to five.

Competition. Mechanics Exchange, headquartered in the city of Albany, in 

New York State's Fourth Banking District, serves an area encompassing the 

three counties of Albany, Schenectady, and Rensselaer (1970 population: 

590,179), including the cities of Albany, Schenectady, and Troy. It presently 

operates a total of four offices in Albany County, with its main office and one 

branch in the city of Albany and one branch each in the suburban communities 

of Guilderland and Colonie. Under State law, Mechanics Exchange has one 

remaining de novo branching privilege, but the franchise must be exercised in 

Albany County. It may merge, however, with a savings and loan association 

headquartered anywhere in the Fourth Banking District. Mechanics Exchange 

ranks seventh in deposit size of the eight mutual savings banks operating in the 

three-county area, and holds about 5.3 percent of all mutual institution assets 

in the Fourth Banking District. Its larger competitors all derive the bulk of 

their business from the three-county area.

Savings and Loan's only office is located in the village of Cobleskill (population 4,322) in Schoharie County, adjacent to Albany County on the west. It is 

the only mutual th rift institution in Schoharie County, and its service area

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 59

extends to a radius of 15 miles from Cobleskill. Four commercial banks, operating six offices in Schoharie County, also offer time and savings deposits to 

local residents. While Cobleskill and Schoharie County as a whole experienced 

no population growth in the 1960s, a new branch of the State university has 

been established at Cobleskill, with some promise for the future development 

of the surrounding area. This educational facility has a current enrollment of 

1,700.

The service areas of the participating institutions do not overlap and the 

nearest offices are 36 miles apart. There are offices of other financial institutions in the intervening territory, few common depositors, and no common 

borrowers. Mechanics Exchange has approximately $900,000 in deposits from 

the area served by Savings and Loan, attributable primarily to past differences 

in savings rates and bank-by-mail campaigns. In view of the distance between 

the two institutions, and the relatively small amount of deposit business held 

by Mechanics Exchange from Savings and Loan's area, the proposed merger 

would not eliminate significant existing competition between them.

The potential for increased competition between the two participating institutions in the future is limited. Mechanics Exchange cannot branch de novo

into Savings and Loan's trade area, and there is no other mutual th rift institution in Schoharie County with which Mechanics Exchange might merge so as to 

provide an alternative means of entry. Savings and Loan has the legal authority 

to branch de novo into the trade area of Mechanics Exchange, but this must be 

considered remote in view of the small size of Savings and Loan and the 

vigorous competition that now exists among th rift institutions already serving 

Albany, Schenectady, and Rensselaer counties.

The effects of the proposed merger on banking concentration among th rift 

institutions in the Albany-Schenectady-Rensselaer area and in the State's 

Fourth Banking District would be minimal. While Savings and Loan has numerous merger alternatives among mutual th rift institutions in the Fourth Banking 

District, the relative size of Mechanics Exchange is not so large as to make 

some other merger preferable, as a competitive matter, to the one proposed.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating banks has adequate financial and managerial resources, as would the 

resulting bank. The future prospects of the resulting bank would be more 

favorable than for Savings and Loan as an independent institution.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. This proposed 

transaction will have little effect on present customers served by Mechanics 

Exchange, but it should benefit the Cobleskill area served by Savings and Loan. 

The resulting bank would offer all the services which mutual savings banks are 

permitted by statute to offer, including the following services not now offered 

in the Cobleskill area: 6 percent time deposits, 5 percent day-of-deposit-today-of-withdrawal accounts, 5 percent Christmas club accounts, and savings 

bank life insurance. The resulting bank would also provide another convenient 

alternative for the following services offered by commercial banks in the 

Cobleskill area, thereby stimulating competition for such services: FHA and 

VA mortgage loans, student loans, safe-deposit boxes, and money order serDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
60 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

vices. It would also have a greater capacity than Savings and Loan to help meet 

the increased mortgage lending requirements of the area resulting from the 

growth of the State university branch at Cobleskill.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

i; n

B a n kin g O ffic e s

un

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Kings Highway Savings Bank

New York (Brooklyn), New York 

(change title to Franklin Savings 

Bank of New York)

423,263 4 9

to merge with

The Franklin Savings Bank in the 

City of New York

New York (Manhattan)

607,919 5

Summary report by Attorney General, March 19, 1971 

The distance between the main office of Franklin Savings and the Kings 

Savings branch at Second Avenue and 25th Street is 2.0 miles; the newlyapproved branch of Franklin Savings will be 1.8 miles distant from the same 

Kings Savings branch.

Franklin Savings derives $4.6 million in deposits from the Brooklyn primary 

service area of Kings Savings (or 1.57 per cent of Kings Savings' deposits in that 

area) and $3.6 million in deposits from the secondary area served by Kings 

Savings (or 7.51 per cent of Kings Savings in that area). Since the primary and 

secondary service areas of Kings Savings are located entirely within the secondary area served by Franklin Savings, there is some overlap in deposits derived 

by Kings Savings from the area served by Franklin Savings.

The mortgage loan portfolio of Franklin Savings indicates that $70.4 million 

of its loans are in New York State, with the great bulk, $435.6 million, going 

out-of-state. Kings Savings exhibits $76.2 million in New York State with 

$262.3 million to customers outside New York.

Thus, some direct competition exists between the merging banks for savings 

accounts and for loans which will be eliminated by consummation of the 

proposed merger.

Franklin Savings is the twelfth largest mutual savings bank headquartered in 

Manhattan, and holds about 3.5 per cent of IPC time and savings deposits in 

Manhattan savings bank offices. Kings Savings holds about 4 per cent of such 

deposits in Brooklyn.

Basis for Corporation approval, May 14, 1971 

Kings Highway Savings Bank, New York (Brooklyn), New York, ("Kings

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 61

Highway"), an insured mutual savings bank having total deposits of $387 

million, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge 

with The Franklin Savings Bank in the City of New York, New York (Manhattan), New York ("Franklin"), an insured mutual savings bank having total 

deposits of $543 million, under the charter of Kings Highway, but with the 

title "Franklin Savings Bank of New York." This procedure preserves for the 

resulting bank the four unused de novo branching privileges that Kings Highway has under New York law. Application is also made for consent to establish 

Franklin's six authorized offices as branches (including one approved but unopened). Request is also made that, following the merger, the main office of 

Kings Highway be designated a branch and that the office at Eighth Avenue 

and 42nd Street, New York (Manhattan), New York (the present main office 

of Franklin), be designated as the main office of the resulting bank.

Competition. Franklin, the larger of the two banks, has five offices, with a 

sixth to be opened in September of 1971. All six offices are in Manhattan. 

Franklin ranks 12th of the 17 mutual savings banks headquartered in Manhattan (with 3.5 percent of their aggregate deposits) and 23rd among the 44 

headquartered in all of New York City (with 1.7 percent of their aggregate 

deposits).

Kings Highway has four offices: two in Brooklyn, one in Manhattan (at 441 

Second Avenue), and one in Nassau County. Kings Highway ranks 11th in size 

among the 15 mutual savings banks headquartered in Brooklyn (with 3.6 percent of their aggregate deposits) and 31st among the 44 mutual savings banks 

headquartered in New York City (with 1.2 percent of their aggregate deposits).

The resulting bank would be the 12th largest in terms of deposits, of 43 

mutual savings banks headquartered in New York City, having total deposits of 

approximately $930 million and nine offices. Its total deposits would represent 

2.9 percent of all mutual savings bank deposits in New York City and approximately 2.5 percent of the combined deposits of all mutual th rift institutions, 

including savings and loan associations, headquartered there.

The nearest offices of the two banks are in Manhattan, approximately 2 

miles apart. The approved but unopened office of Franklin at 38th Street and 

Eighth Avenue would, however, be 1.8 miles distant from the Kings Highway 

office at 441 Second Avenue. These offices, as well as the other offices of the 

two banks, serve essentially separate and distinct areas, with very little direct 

competition existing. There are only four common borrowers, while common 

deposits of the two banks approximate 0.75 percent of total deposits of the 

merged banks. Each bank draws more than 75 percent of its total deposits 

from its home borough, but they both draw some deposits, because of commuting patterns or bank-by-mail convenience, from the primary area served by 

the other. This direct competition is relatively insubstantial, however, in view 

of the small share of the market held by the two banks, either separately or in 

combination.

The proposed merger would eliminate the potential for increased competition between Franklin and Kings Highway through de novo branching, since 

each may exercise its unused privileges under New York law anywhere in New 

York City. But almost one hundred other mutual institutions, including 12 of 

larger size, would remain available as th rift institution alternatives in New York 

City, and each would be a source of potential competition to the resulting

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
62 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

bank in the future. Because of this and because of the limited share of the 

market held, or likely to be held, by the resulting bank, the elimination of such 

potential competition is not competitively significant.

Under these circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable for the merging banks and is so projected for the resulting bank. If 

the proposed merger is approved, a below-average surplus position for Kings 

Highway will be raised to the approximate level of all New York City savings 

banks.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Both banks generally offer all savings bank services permitted by New York law. However, the 

New York City public should benefit from the additional source made available 

for larger size real estate loans and 61/2 percent passbook loans, as well as for 

expanded services in the property improvement loan and savings bank life 

insurance field. A network of 10 offices at locations in Brooklyn, Manhattan, 

and Nassau County should also serve the convenience of many present and 

potential customers.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resou rces 

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Western Bank

Coos Bay, Oregon

47,483 11 12

to merge with

First National Bank in Clatskanie

Clatskanie

6,144 1

Summary report by Attorney General, March 4, 1971 

The closest offices of the two banks are 275 miles apart. According to the 

application, neither bank draws any business from the service area of the other. 

Thus, the proposed merger would not eliminate any significant existing competition between the two banks.

Commercial banking in Oregon is dominated by two Portland banks, First 

National Bank of Oregon (total deposits as of June 30, 1970, $1.5 billion) and 

United States National Bank of Oregon (total deposits as of June 30, 1970, 

$1.4 billion). Western Bank, although much smaller than either of these, is the 

sixth largest of 48 Oregon commercial banks.

Western Bank could branch de novo into Columbia County, in competition 

with Clatskanie Bank. It has shown a willingness to expand elsewhere de

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 63

novo. However, the relatively small size of Clatskanie Bank and the limited 

population and economic base in the northern part of Columbia County operate to lim it the potential competition between the two banks. Thus, the effect 

of the proposed merger on competition would not be significantly adverse.

Basis for Corporation approval, May 14, 1971

Western Bank, Coos Bay, Oregon ("Western Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $42,474,000, has applied, pursuant to 

Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, 

for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with First National Bank in 

C latskanie, C latskanie, Oregon, ("Clatskanie Bank"), total deposits 

$5,604,000. The banks would merge under the title and charter of Western 

Bank. Application is also made under Section 18(d) of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act to establish Clatskanie Bank's sole office as a branch of the 

resulting bank.

Competition. Western Bank, the seventh largest commercial bank operating 

in the State of Oregon operates 11 offices, serving six separate and distinct 

areas in the southwestern, eastern, and northeastern sections of the State. 

Clatskanie Bank, with only one office, serves the northern portion of Columbia 

County, in northwestern Oregon.

The closest office of Western Bank to Clatskanie (1970 population: 1,286) 

is located at North Bend, 271 miles south. The distance involved suggests, and 

an analysis of deposit and loan business confirms, that there is no overlap in 

areas served and that the proposed merger, accordingly, would not eliminate 

any existing competition between the two banks. Furthermore, there is little 

potential for increased competition between the two banks in the future. 

Western Bank is precluded by Oregon's home office protection law from entering Clatskanie on a de novo basis and has little incentive to enter the unincorporated areas served by that bank in view of the sparse population in such 

areas and the commercial bank competition presently offered by United States 

National Bank of Oregon, Clatskanie Bank, and The Oregon Bank in Rainier. 

For its part, Clatskanie Bank, because of its limited resources and lack of any 

branching experience, is unlikely to undertake de novo branching into areas 

served by Western Bank.

In the Clatskanie area, the proposed merger would provide a third fu ll: 

service bank conveniently available to the public and replace a relatively unaggressive local bank having an 18 percent loan-deposit ratio with a much 

more aggressive emergent statewide bank. Commercial bank competition in the 

area should be stimulated as a result.

Commercial banking statewide in Oregon is dominated by two large branch 

banks (First National Bank of Oregon and United States National Bank of 

Oregon) which, combined, held 79.2 percent of the total commercial bank 

deposits in the State on December 31, 1970. Western Bank, which held only

1.0 percent of such deposits, competes against both of these large banks in all 

but one of its service areas. Approval of the proposed merger would increase 

the resulting bank's share of statewide deposits to only 1.1 percent.

In view of the above, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any way be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Western Bank's

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
64 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

financial and managerial resources are considered satisfactory. The financial 

resources of Clatskanie Bank are satisfactory, but present management is beyond normal retirement age and successor management appears to be lacking. 

The proposed merger would provide a solution to this succession problem. The 

future prospects of the resulting bank are favorable, and the growth of its 

Clatskanie office should surpass that of Clatskanie Bank as an independent 

institution.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The resulting bank 

would offer, in Clatskanie, the following services not now offered by Clatskanie Bank: loans in excess of the latter's lending lim it (currently $25,000), 

passbook savings at the maximum rate allowed by Federal interest rate regulations, trust services, additional types of loans, including government insured 

and guaranteed mortgage loans, and a credit card program. The resulting bank 

would serve as a convenient alternative for these services to United States 

National Bank's office in Clatskanie and to The Oregon Bank's recently acquired office in Rainier, some 15 miles to the east.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources B a n kin g O ffic e s

Un 

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

First Valley Bank

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

160,108 11 12

to merge with

The First National Bank of Lansford

Lansford

6,260 1

Summary report by Attorney General, February 16, 1971

Lansford is about 45 miles from Bethlehem, and several banking offices 

intervene between the offices of the two merging banks. A t the present time 

the two banks have only three common customers. It does not appear that the 

proposed merger would eliminate a significant amount of existing competition 

between the two banks.

Under applicable Pennsylvania law, First Valley Bank could be permitted to 

open de novo branches in Carbon County in closer proximity to Lansford 

Bank, thus bringing the two banks into direct competition. There are also 

several other large banks equally capable of entering Carbon County in this 

manner.

Twelve banks operate a total of 15 banking offices in Carbon County, 

including two relatively large banks headquartered in nearby Hazelton. Lansford Bank is one of three banks of approximately equal size in Lansford, and 

holds about 5 per cent of total county deposits.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 65

In view of the size and limited service area of Lansford Bank, and the 

existence of other potential de novo entrants into Carbon County, we do not 

believe that the proposed merger would have a significantly adverse effect on 

potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, May 14, 1971

First Valley Bank, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania ("Valley Bank"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total resources of $160,107,900, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The First National 

Bank of Lansford, Lansford, Pennsylvania ("FNB Lansford"), with total resources of $6,260,400. The banks would merge under the charter and title of 

Valley Bank and, as an incident to the merger, the one office of FNB Lansford 

would become a branch of the resulting bank, increasing the number of its 

offices to 12.

Competition. Valley Bank operates 10 offices in and near Bethlehem, in 

North Northampton County (population 213,022), and one office in Allentown, in Lehigh County (population 253,057). Valley Bank also has the necessary approvals to establish two de novo branches, one in Bethlehem and the 

other in Fogelsville, 4 miles southwest of Allentown, in Lehigh County. Valley 

Bank's service area today is confined to Lehigh and Northampton counties, in 

the eastern section of Pennsylvania near the New Jersey border.

FNB Lansford operates only one office, located in the Borough of Lansford 

(1970 population: 5,094), in the southwestern part of Carbon County (1970 

population: 50,021) close to the Schuykill County border. Lansford is in the 

midst of the once prosperous anthracite coal fields, but the mining there has 

now been reduced to a few small independent operations. Two local manufacturing firms employ a total of 1,600 persons, but the resident population in 

the immediate Lansford area showed a decline of 14.5 percent between 1960 

and 1970. The prospects for any significant economic development in Lansford 

in the near future are not bright. FNB Lansford serves an area of approximately 5 miles radius around Lansford.

The office of Valley Bank nearest to Lansford is in Allentown, about 40 

miles southeast, while the approved but unopened Fogelsville branch would be 

about 35 miles from Lansford. Valley Bank and FNB Lansford serve different 

trade areas, separated by topographical barriers, with a number of banking 

alternatives in the intervening area. There is no significant competition between 

the two banks today, and their proposed merger would not eliminate significant existing competition.

FNB Lansford is the smallest of three commercial banks with offices in 

Lansford. It also competes with branches of American Bank & Trust Company, 

a $438 million institution in Coaldale, 2 miles west, and Tamaqua, 5 miles 

west, and with branches, in Tamaqua, of Pennsylvania National Bank and Trust 

Company, a $108 million institution, and The Miners National Bank of Pottsville, a $43 million institution. The entry of another full-service commercial 

bank should stimulate commercial bank competition in the area now served by 

FNB Lansford.

Northampton County is contiguous to Carbon County, so that each of the 

participating banks under Pennsylvania law could branch de novo into the

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
66 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

trade area of the other. In view of the relatively small size of FNB Lansford, 

and the competition it could anticipate from much larger institutions now 

operating in Lehigh and Northampton counties, however, its entry de novo

into the Bethlehem metropolitan area seems remote. Similarly, the stagnant 

economy of the Lansfoird area, the limited and declining population there, and 

the sizeable number of competitors already serving the same market make it 

unlikely that Valley Bank would branch de novo into the Lansford area in the 

foreseeable future. Accordingly, it appears unlikely that the proposed merger 

would eliminate any significant potential for increased competition between 

Valley Bank and FNB Lansford in the future.

The effect of the proposed merger on banking concentration in the area is 

also not significant. Valley Bank is the largest commercial bank headquartered 

in Northampton County, but the area of potential competition for the resulting bank would include the four surrounding counties as well, since Pennsylvania law permits banks headquartered in Northampton County to branch 

or merge throughout the five-county area. In that five-county area, as of June 

30, 1970, the two participating banks held 7.6 percent of total commercial 

bank deposits and only 12 of 187 commercial bank offices, with two banks 

headquartered in Allentown holding a significantly larger deposit share. Thirtyeight other commercial banks are headquartered in the same five-county area, 

and 15 commercial banks not headquartered in the five-county area already 

operate offices in one or more of the five counties under Pennsylvania law. 

Under the circumstances, the proposed merger would not result in any undue 

concentration of banking resources within the area of potential competition 

nor establish a precedent which might lead to such concentration in the future. 

Numerous options would remain available to the banking public, both in the 

immediate and the foreseeable future.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

satisfactory financial and managerial resources for the business they do as 

independent institutions, and this would also be the case for the resulting bank. 

Each of the participating banks should remain profitable in the future, but the 

prospects of FNB Lansford would appear to be more favorable as part of the 

resulting bank than as an independent institution.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Consummation of 

this proposed transaction would Viot affect present or potential customers of 

Valley Bank, but it would bring to Lansford residents a convenient source for 

certain bank services not presently available in the borough, such as trust 

services, 5 percent time accounts, certificates of deposit at maximum rates 

permitted by Federal interest rate regulations, charge card services, and specialized commercial loan services. For residents of Coaldale and Tamaqua, 

Valley Bank's entry into the area would provide a nearby alternative for such 

services and stimulate competition.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 67

R esources

I'm

B a n k in g O ffic e s

Un

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Bailey's Crossroads Bank

Bailey's Crossroads, Virginia 

(in organization; change title to

Hamilton Bank and Trust Company)

50 2

to merge with

Hamilton Bank and Trust Company

Bailey's Crossroads

13,167 2

Summary report by Attorney General, April 13, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Bailey's Crossroads 

Bank would become a subsidiary of Northern Virginia Bankshares, Inc., a bank 

holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an 

existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard to 

the acquisition of the surviving bank by Northern Virginia Bankshares, Inc., it 

would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, May 14, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for Bailey's Crossroads Bank, Bailey's Crossroads, Virginia ("Bailey"), a proposed new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger with Hamilton 

Bank and Trust Company, Bailey's Crossroads, Virginia ("Ham ilton"), total 

resources $13,167,000, under Bailey's charter and Hamilton's title. The resulting bank will operate from the present main office, one existing branch, and 

two approved but unopened branches of Hamilton.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means for 

Northern Virginia Bankshares, Inc., Bailey's Crossroads, Virginia, to acquire 

control of Hamilton. Virginia Bankshares, Inc., received approval on April 8, 

1971, from the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System to become a 

registered bank holding company and, concurrent with the approval, received 

consent to acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of the successor bank to 

this merger. Bailey will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the 

merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking 

business at the existing and proposed locations of Hamilton, and with the same 

management. The proposal will not, per se, change the banking services which 

Hamilton has provided usefully and conveniently to the Bailey's Crossroads 

and Falls Church areas. All factors required to be considered pertinent to each 

application are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the application is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
68 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Resources

(in

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Coolidge Bank and Trust Company

Watertown, Massachusetts

85,060 6 9

to acquire the assets and assume the

deposit liabilities of

The Arlington National Bank 

Arlington

16,092 3

Summary report by Attorney General, March 18, 1971 

The proposed merger would eliminate some direct competition between 

these banks which operate in some adjacent communities. Moreover, the service areas of the two banks (as defined in their application) overlap in Belmont, 

four miles south of Arlington, four miles west of Cambridge, and four miles 

north of Watertown; neither bank has an office in Belmont. The application 

states that about 5 per cent (approximately $2.4 million) of Coolidge's total 

deposits originates in Arlington Bank's service area, and about 7 per cent 

(approximately $1 million) of Arlington Bank's total deposits originates in 

Coolidge's service area. This competition would be eliminated by the proposed 

acquisition.

In addition, Massachusetts law, which allows countywide branching, would 

permit Coolidge to enter Arlington Bank's area by de novo branching and 

thereby increase the existing amount of direct competition.

The resulting bank will have 14.5 per cent of total I PC demand deposits of 

commercial banks within the Arlington-Watertown-Cambridge-Belmont area. 

This represents an increase of 2.7 per cent for Coolidge. Within this area, it will 

compete with larger subsidiaries of the state's two largest holding companies, 

and to a lesser extent it may also compete against banks in nearby Boston.

We believe that the effect of the proposed acquisition would have at least 

some adverse effect on competition in the Arlington-Watertown-CambridgeBelmont area.

Basis for Corporation approval, May 21, 1971 

Coolidge Bank and Trust Company, Watertown, Massachusetts ("Coolidge"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $85,060,300 

and total deposits of $69,207,900, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and 

other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's 

prior consent to purchase the assets and assume liability to pay deposits made 

in The Arlington National Bank, Arlington, Massachusetts ("Arlington Bank"), 

which has total resources of $16,092,000 and total deposits of $13,827,000. 

The resulting bank would retain the charter and title of Coolidge and the main 

office of Coolidge would continue as the main office of the resulting bank. 

Arlington Bank's main office and two branches would become branches of the 

resulting bank, increasing the number of its offices to nine.

Competition. Coolidge was organized in 1960 and presently operates its 

main office and one branch in Watertown, a branch in Everett, and three

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 69

branches in Cambridge. In addition to these communities, the service area 

extends into Newton, Waltham, and Belmont. With the exception of the 

branch in Everett, which is 8 miles away and was acquired by merger earlier 

this year, all of Coolidge's branches are within a 5-mile radius of the main 

office. The towns served by Coolidge are suburbs of Boston, having a combined 

population of approximately 385,000, which represents a slight increase over 

the 1960 population of 380,000. While the communities are generally wholesale and retail centers, some economic support is provided by several large 

nationally known manufacturing concerns, including B.F. Goodrich Company 

and Western Electric Company. Several institutions of higher learning also are 

located in the area served.

In addition to its main office in Arlington, Arlington Bank operates 

branches in Lexington and Bedford. All of Arlington Bank's offices are in close 

proximity, but the area served by the bank extends to West Medford and 

Belmont. The population of Arlington Bank's service area is about 100,000, 

with only slight growth since 1960. These communities are also wholesale and 

retail centers for local residents who work in this area or commute to Boston 

for employment. A large military installation and a Veterans Administration 

hospital are prominent employers within Arlington Bank's service area.

The distance between the nearest offices of the two banks is 21/2 miles, but 

with only a slight overlap of their respective service areas in and around the 

town of Belmont. Neither bank has an office in that community, and there are 

a number of intervening commercial bank offices. Both service areas are 

densely populated, and traffic congestion is heavy. The proposed merger would 

eliminate some existing competition between the two banks, but the amounts 

involved are not a significant percentage of the total deposit or loan business 

originating in the areas of overlap.

Coolidge holds approximately 12 percent of total I PC deposits in its service 

area, while Arlington Bank holds approximately 15 percent of the total IPC 

deposits in its service area. Each is the third-ranking bank in its service area in 

terms of local IPC deposits, their two larger competitors in each case being 

affiliates of large statewide holding companies. The Coolidge area is served by 

12 other commercial banks, the Arlington Bank service area by eight other 

commercial banks. Arlington Bank has shown little deposit growth in recent 

years and is not considered an aggressive competitor.

In both service areas, affiliates of Baystate Corporation and Shawmut Association, Inc., two large registered bank holding companies in Massachusetts, 

dominate. The eight banks that they operate in the combined area account for 

38 of 63 commercial banking offices and 68.6 percent of total commercial 

bank IPC deposits. By contrast, in the combined service area, the resulting 

bank would operate only nine offices controlling 13.6 percent of total commercial bank IPC deposits.

While Coolidge and Arlington Bank could legally establish de novo branches 

in each other's service area, since they are both headquartered within Middlesex County, there are 37 commercial banks within the county which would 

remain as actual or potential competitors of the resulting bank.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
70 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating banks has acceptable financial and managerial resources, as would the 

resulting bank. The future prospects of the Arlington Bank offices would be 

more favorable as branches of Coolidge than if they continued to operate as an 

independent institution.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The resulting bank 

would replace a lethargic competitor with Coolidge's aggressive and innovative 

policies. Services to be extended to customers of Arlington Bank would include 

no-charge, no-minimum balance checking accounts, longer banking hours, interest concessions on certain loans which are paid on time, and the extension 

of education loans to graduate students. The lending lim it of the resulting bank 

would be significantly higher than the present lending lim it of either bank, and 

it should be possible to expand the limited trust services now offered by 

Coolidge. To the extent alternative sources presently exist for such services, the 

public would benefit by having conveniently available an additional source, 

thereby stimulating competition.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

1 n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Citizens Bank of Oregon

Eugene, Oregon

42,401 6 7

to acquire the assets and assume the

deposit liabilities of

First National Bank of Harrisburg

Harrisburg

9,544 1

Summary report by Attorney General, January 20, 1971 

Harrisburg Bank, which is just across the Lane County line, is 20 miles north 

of Citizens Bank's main office and 15 miles north of Citizens Bank's nearest 

office. There are three competitive banking offices between the merging banks' 

nearest offices. Partly because of its low service charges, Harrisburg Bank obtains $873,000 in deposits, or about 10 per cent of its total deposits, from 

Citizens Bank's service area. Harrisburg Bank is, for this reason, a disturbing or 

disruptive element in the market served by Citizens Bank. The application 

makes clear that these low service charges will be phased out by Citizens Bank.

As of June 30, 1968, Citizens Bank was the third largest of seven banks in 

Lane County, and held 12 per cent of total county deposits. Oregon's two 

dominant banks held 83 per cent of county deposits. In the light of this high 

level of concentration, the acquisition of the one disturbing element in the 

market by one of the established competitors already serving that market 

would appear to have an adverse effect upon competition.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 71

Basis for Corporation approval, June 25, 1971

Citizens Bank of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon ("Citizens"), an insured State 

nonmember bank with total deposits of $37,007,000, has applied, pursuant to 

Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior approval to acquire the assets and to assume the liability to pay deposits made in First National Bank of Harrisburg, Harrisburg, 

Oregon ("Harrisburg Bank"), which has total deposits of $8,932,000. As an 

incident to the transaction, the only office of Harrisburg Bank would become a 

branch of applicant, increasing the number of its offices to seven.

Competition. Citizens' main office and four branches are located in the 

Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area, some 115 miles south of Portland, and 

its remaining office is located in Veneta, 15 miles west of Eugene. In this 

banking market, Citizens competes with three much larger commercial banks 

although it is the third ranking of the four in terms of local area deposits. 

Harrisburg Bank has only one office, located in Harrisburg (population 1,311), 

approximately 21 miles north of Eugene. Its immediate competition comes 

from a branch of United States National Bank of Oregon, the second largest 

bank in the State, at Junction City, 4 miles away, and from a branch in Halsey,

10 miles north, of the Citizens Valley Bank of Albany, a $48 million institution and the sixth largest bank operating in Oregon. Citizens' closest office to 

Harrisburg is its River Road Branch, 15 miles south of Harrisburg.

The areas served by the two banks are basically separate and distinct. 

Citizens derives only a nominal amount of business from the Harrisburg area, 

although Harrisburg Bank draws $873,000 of its total deposits and $456,000 

of its total loans from the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. Most of these 

account relationships originated as a result of the very liberal service charge 

policy Harrisburg Bank had on checking accounts under its former management. They represent approximately 0.4 percent of the deposits and 0.2 percent of the loans held by all commercial banks operating in the EugeneSpringfield area. In view of the amounts involved and the likelihood that the 

low service charge policy followed by Harrisburg Bank will be changed in any 

event, the Corporation is of the opinion that the degree of present competition 

likely to be eliminated by the proposed merger is not significant. The proposed 

merger, moreover, should enhance competition in the Harrisburg HalseyJunction City area.

Under Oregon law, which permits statewide branching subject to home 

office and branch office protection, Citizens is prohibited from branching de

novo into Harrisburg itself, and the limited population of the unincorporated 

areas surrounding Harrisburg makes it unreasonable to expect Citizens to open 

a de novo office there. For its part, Harrisburg Bank cannot realistically be 

considered a potential de novo entrant into the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area. It has limited resources, no branching experience, and would be 

entering a market in which the three largest banks headquartered in the State 

compete. Accordingly, the potential for increased competition between 

Citizens and Harrisburg Bank through the de novo branching route may be 

considered almost nonexistent.

An alternative merger between Harrisburg Bank and some bank not already 

represented in Lane or Linn counties might be considered preferable to the 

merger proposed, since Citizens is one of only four commercial banks in the 

Eugene-Springfield area, and the entry of additional banks into Lane County

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
72 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

and Linn County banking markets would be desirable. Eugene itself, however, 

is not closed to de novo branching under Oregon law and it is there, rather than 

in Harrisburg, that new' competition can be expected. Realistic merger alternatives for Harrisburg Bank are relatively few in number and probably limited to 

those banks of larger size than Harrisburg Bank already operating in Lane 

County, Linn County, or, possibly, adjacent Benton County. Several of these 

alternatives would present a similar competitive question, while others would 

definitely be less desirable competitively than the merger proposed because of 

the relative size, statewide, of the possible acquiring bank. Citizens has less 

than 1 percent of total statewide commercial bank deposits, and the addition 

of an $8.9 million bank would not materially change that percentage or create 

an adverse precedent for the commercial bank structure in Oregon, a structure 

presently dominated by the State's two largest banks, which together hold 

approximately 77.8 percent of all commercial bank deposits in Oregon.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed transaction would not, in any section of the country, substantially 

lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in 

restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

with regard to Citizens and the resulting bank may be regarded as favorable. 

The managerial resources of Harrisburg Bank have become strained in recent 

years, its classified assets are excessive, and its earnings have been below average. The proposed merger would supply necessary management strength and 

additional capital, and bring about a reallocation of assets which should significantly improve the earnings of the resulting branch.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would bring to the residents of the Harrisburg-Halsey-Junction City 

area a more aggressive lending institution, with a significantly larger percentage 

of its funds devoted to installment loans, than Harrisburg Bank, thus enhancing competition with the Halsey branch of Citizens Valley Bank of Albany 

and the Junction City branch of United States National Bank of Oregon. In 

addition, the resulting bank would offer a number of deposit services, specialized loan services, electronic data processing services, and a much higher 

lending lim it than Harrisburg Bank now offers, thereby providing a third convenient alternative for many of these services to area residents.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that the 

approval of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Bank of Mississippi

Tupelo, Mississippi 

to merge with

71,555 15 18

The Bank of Houston

Houston

7,710 3

Summary report by Attorney General, March 4, 1971 

The closest branches of the participating banks are approximately 18 road

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 73

miles apart. There are, however, no intervening banks. Thus, it appears that 

some existing competition between the two banks would be eliminated by this 

merger.

Mississippi law permits branch banks to be established within a radius of 

100 miles of the parent bank; branch offices are permitted to be established 

within limits of the county or any adjacent county to the county of domicile 

of the parent branch. However, a bank is barred from establishing a branch 

bank in any town or city of less than 3,100 population where there is one or 

more banks in operation. Thus, Mississippi Bank could not establish ade novo

branch in Houston or Okolona, the largest towns in Chickasaw County at this 

time.

Mississippi Bank is, however, the sixth largest bank in the state, and the 

largest in the northeastern portion of Mississippi. It holds about 25 per cent of 

the total deposits in the northeastern Mississippi area. Since both banks could 

branch into other parts of the area, the merger would eliminate some potential 

competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, July 12, 1971

Bank of Mississippi, Tupelo, Mississippi, an insured State nonmember bank 

with total resources of $71,555,000 and total deposits of $61,621,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The Bank of 

Houston, Houston, Mississippi ("Houston Bank"), which has total resources of 

$7,710,000 and total deposits of $6,860,000. The banks would merge under 

the charter and title of Bank of Mississippi and the main office of Houston 

Bank and its two branches at Houlka and Vardaman would become branches of 

the resulting bank. The resulting bank would have 18 offices, not including two 

approved but unopened branches.

Competition. Bank of Mississippi currently operates 14 branches in five 

northeastern counties of the State of Mississippi and has the necessary approvals to establish two additional branches within the corporate limits of 

Tupelo (Lee County).

Houston Bank operates a total of three offices, with its main office and one 

branch in western Chickasaw County (population 16,805) and another branch 

in Vardaman, in the east-central portion of Calhoun County (population 

14,623). Bank of Mississippi has no offices in Chickasaw County, but it acquired one branch in Calhoun County, at Bruce, by merger in 1968.

The nearest Bank of Mississippi office to an office of Houston Bank is its 

Calhoun County office at Bruce, 18 miles northwest of Vardaman, with the 

Calhoun City branch of the $77.5 million deposit Grenada Bank intervening. 

All three of these Calhoun County communities are sparsely populated, with 

low family incomes. A very small second bank also serves Bruce, but because of 

the road system, neither of the offices in Bruce represents a convenient banking alternative for the people in and around Vardaman. Houston Bank's main 

office is subject to competition from Houston State Bank and Bank of Mantee,

11 miles south, in Webster County. It holds 29.2 percent of the local area 

deposits held at commercial bank offices in Calhoun City, Vardaman, Mantee, 

Houston, and Houlka. Other parts of northeast Mississippi served by Bank of 

Mississippi are separated from Houston Bank's service area in Calhoun and 

Chickasaw counties by the Tombigbee National Forest. Under these circumstances, the proposed merger would not eliminate significant existing competiDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
74 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

tion between Houston Bank and Bank of Mississippi. The only common customers are seven borrowers, all from the Houston area, whose credit requirements exceeded the lending lim it of Houston Bank.

The likelihood of increased competition in the future between Bank of 

Mississippi and Houston Bank through de novo branching is remote. Neither of 

the two locations in Chickasaw County where Houston Bank has offices is 

open to de novo branching by outside banks under Mississippi law, nor is 

Okolona, the only other community of more than 2,500 population in the 

county. In counties which are not adjacent to its home county, a Mississippi 

bank is limited in the number of de novo branches it can open, and this 

limitation would make other nonadjacent counties, with greater growth and 

disposable income, more attractive to Bank of Mississippi for this purpose than 

Calhoun County. Houston Bank, because of limited resources, natural barriers, 

the restraints of Mississippi's home office and branch protection law and its 

lack of experience in de novo branching, is unlikely on its part to establish de

novo branches in the more populated and competitive locations where Bank of 

Mississippi derives the bulk of its business.

While Bank of Mississippi is the largest of the three banks headquartered in 

Tupelo, its Lee County deposits are only slightly greater than those of the 

second largest Tupelo bank. Moreover, in each of the counties served by Bank 

of Mississippi, including populous Lee County (with 46,148 people), the possibility exists that Grenada Bank and the $30 million First-Columbus National 

Bank, as well as other banks within the 100-mile lim it set forth in Mississippi 

law, may seek entry by merger, thereby subjecting Bank of Mississippi to new 

and increased competition in the future. In the 18-county northeast quadrant 

of Mississippi, bounded by Marshall, Tishomingo, Lowndes, and Webster 

counties, Bank of Mississippi holds 12.1 percent of all commercial bank deposits, while in the State of Mississippi as a whole it holds 2.0 percent of all 

commercial bank deposits.

Under these circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any manner be in restraint of 

trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating banks has adequate financial resources, as would the resulting bank. 

Houston Bank lacks management succession and depth, but Bank of Mississippi 

could remedy this deficiency. The future prospects of the resulting bank, in 

terms of earnings and capitalization, should be more favorable than for either 

bank operating independently.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The resulting bank 

would provide services to the people of the Houston area which are not now 

available at Houston State Bank or Bank of Mantee, principally savings accounts for passbook savers and trust services. To customers of Houston Bank, 

the resulting bank would also bring a new emphasis on installment loans, more 

specialized loan services, a higher lending limit, and computerized bookkeeping. To the extent these items of banking services are available at the 

Calhoun City branch of Grenada Bank, the proposed merger would add a 

second convenient source for these services in the Houlka-Houston-Vardaman 

area, thereby enhancing competition and service in the local banking market.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 75

Resources

(in

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Franklin State Bank

Franklin Township, New Jersey

95,586 10 15

to merge with

The Farmers and Merchants National 

Bank of Matawan

Matawan Township

33,711 5

Summary report by Attorney General, April 28, 1971 

The closest office of Franklin to an office of Farmers is about 10 miles 

distant, with numerous banking offices intervening. It does not appear that the 

proposed merger would eliminate substantial existing competition.

Franklin could enter Monmouth County de novo rather than through the 

proposed merger. However, due to the presence of numerous larger potential 

entrants, and Farmers' modest market position, we conclude that the proposed 

merger would not have a significantly adverse effect on potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, July 19, 1971 

Franklin State Bank, Franklin Township (P.O. Somerset), New Jersey 

("Franklin Bank"), a State nonmember bank with total deposits of $82,346,000, 

has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge under its 

charter and title with The Farmers and Merchants National Bank of Matawan, 

Matawan Township, New Jersey ("Matawan Bank"), total deposits $29,755,000, 

and for consent to establish branches at the five locations where Matawan Bank is 

presently operating. Matawan Bank has a small trust department, and Franklin 

Bank has also requested the Corporation's consent to exercise trust powers.

Competition. Franklin Bank operates 10 offices in Middlesex, Union, and 

Somerset counties, in New Jersey's Second Banking District. Matawan Bank 

maintains five offices, all located in Monmouth County, which is also a part of 

New Jersey's Second Banking District. Most of the areas served by the two 

banks are rapidly growing residential areas, with light industry nearby, and 

expanding. Matawan Bank held about 3.4 percent of all commercial bank IPC 

deposits in Monmouth County as of June 30, 1970.

There is no overlap at the present time in any of the areas served by the two 

banks. Their closest offices are 17 road miles apart and separated by major 

north-south highways. Loans and deposits originating in areas served by the 

other are negligible in amount, and there are no common accounts of individuals, partnerships, or corporations. The proposed merger, accordingly, would 

eliminate no existing competition between Franklin Bank and Matawan Bank.

In view of the growth potential of the areas served by both banks and 

Franklin Bank's vigorous de novo branching activity since its organization in 

1963, the proposed merger is likely to eliminate some potential for increased 

competition between the two banks in the future through de novo branching,

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
76 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

although each would be barred from the immediate environs of the other's 

head office under New Jersey law. However, nine of the 10 largest commercial 

banks headquartered in the Second Banking District and four subsidiaries of 

large statewide bank holding companies now compete in areas that would be 

served by the resulting bank, and each of them may also be considered likely 

de novo entrants into other growth areas served by Franklin Bank and 

Matawan Bank. The proposed merger, moreover, would open Matawan Bank's 

home office community to de novo branching by outside banks. Under these 

circumstances, the loss of potential competition between Franklin Bank and 

Matawan Bank through de novo branch activity in the future is not significant.

A t year-end 1970, there were 65 insured commercial banks headquartered 

in New Jersey's Second Banking District. Franklin Bank held 1.7 percent of 

their I PC deposits and Matawan Bank held 0.8 percent of such deposits. The 

resulting bank, with 2.5 percent of total commercial bank deposits in the 

district, would be the 10th largest bank headquartered therein, with a growing 

number of small second district banks being controlled by much larger banks in 

other districts through a parent holding company.

In view of the foregoing, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Financial and managerial resources are adequate with respect to the participating banks and are so 

projected for the resulting bank. Future prospects for the resulting bank are 

favorable.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would bring to customers of Matawan Bank low-cost checking account 

services, a greater willingness to make commercial and industrial loans, and the 

convenience of evening and Saturday banking hours, while customers of Franklin Bank would gain the use of a small but growing trust department. Business 

customers of both banks would have another source for $1 million loans, the 

approximate lending lim it of the resulting bank. To the extent these services 

are available at other institutions within the areas served, the proposed merger 

would provide an additional alternative for the banking public.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that the 

application to merge Franklin Bank and Matawan Bank should be approved, as 

well as Franklin Bank's application to exercise trust powers upon consummation of the merger.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n kin g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

op e ra te d

American Bank and Trust Co. of Pa.

Reading, Pennsylvania

621,961 34 35

to merge with

Slatington National ESank and Trust 

Company

Slatington

11,085 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 77

Summary report by Attorney General, June 4, 1971

Slatington National serves the adjacent communities of Slatington and 

Walnutport, and the surrounding vicinity. The closest office of American is in 

Coaldale, Schuylkill County, about 19 miles from Slatington. No substantial 

existing competition presently exists between the two banks.

American will soon enter Lehigh County through the opening of its new de

novo offices in Alburtis and Allentown (if approval of the latter is obtained), 

which are about 18 and 13 miles, respectively, from Slatington. In view of 

American's substantial size and capabilities, it is probable that, absent the 

proposed merger, its new offices in the county would compete to some extent 

with Slatington National, particularly in view of the commuter pattern of 

Allentown. American could also extend its de novo branching activities in the 

county to its northern area, where Slatington National is located, but the other 

large banks in Allentown also provide important sources of potential competition in this area.

Slatington National is slightly the larger of the two banks in Slatington, and 

the largest of the three banks in the vicinity of that town. It is the tenth largest 

of the 12 banks operating offices in Lehigh County, and holds about 1.8 per 

cent of county deposits.

Basis for Corporation approval, July 19, 1971

American Bank and Trust Co. of Pa., Reading, Pennsylvania (“ American"), 

an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $621,961,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with Slatington 

National Bank and Trust Company, Slatington, Pennsylvania (“ Slatington 

National"), with total resources of $11,085,000. The banks would merge under 

the charter and title of American and, as an incident to the merger, the one 

office of Slatington National would become a branch of the resulting bank, 

increasing the number of its authorized offices to 38.

Competition. American operates 34 offices in six of the seven counties 

where it may legally branch or merge under Pennsylvania law, i.e., Berks, 

Schuylkill, Montgomery, Lebanon, Lancaster, and Chester counties. American 

also has regulatory approval to establish two branch offices in Lehigh County, 

the last remaining county open to it under Pennsylvania law. In addition, it has 

an additional authorized but unopened office in Montgomery County. American is an aggressive, full-service bank with a large trust department.

Slatington National is a unit bank located in Slatington, a borough of 4,687 

persons in the northeast corner of Lehigh County. Slatington National holds 

only 1.7 percent of all commercial bank deposits in Lehigh County and serves 

an area of some 10,000 population, which includes adjacent Berlinsvilie and 

Walnutport, in Northampton County, and the borough of Neffs, some 5 miles 

to the south in Lehigh County. Slatington National is the second largest of four 

commercial banks serving these 10,000 persons. The area today is primarily 

residential, with limited farm and factory employment. Most of its residents 

commute to work in Allentown or Bethlehem, some 12-15 miles to the southeast.

The nearest American office to Slatington is in Coaldale, Schuylkill County, 

about 22 miles west. A t present, the two banks serve separate trade areas, and 

neither derives any significant business from communities served by the other.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
78 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

The proposed merger, accordingly, would not eliminate any existing competition between American and Slatington National.

While Slatington National is unlikely, because of its limited resources, lack 

of management, and absence of branching experience, to branch de novo into 

areas served by American, American has demonstrated a capacity to branch de

novo throughout its seven-county branching and merging area. It might find 

the immediate area around Slatington to be relatively unattractive for de novo

branching in view of its limited population and growth potential, but American's proposed office in Allentown will bring American into competition with 

Slatington National at least for the banking business of Slatington residents 

who commute to Allentown. The proposed merger would eliminate this potential for increased competition between the two banks in the future, but the 

significance of this aspect of the application is reduced by the presence of 

seven other commercial banks in Allentown and Bethlehem, the presence of 

four large banks headquartered in Montgomery County, which can now enter 

Lehigh County for the first time, and the small share of total Lehigh County 

deposits presently held by Slatington National.

Within the seven-county area where American may branch or merge, there 

were as of June 30, 1970, 404 offices of 103 commercial banks with total IPC 

deposits of slightly over $4 billion. American held about 8 percent of the 

commercial bank offices and about 10 percent of total IPC deposits. In Montgomery County, however, where American has 10 authorized offices, it faces 

competition from six larger banks, including four previously headquartered in 

Philadelphia. By moving their main offices to Montgomery County, these 

banks now have become eligible to branch into Berks, Lehigh, and Chester 

counties. Banks headquartered in Harrisburg may similarly enter Lebanon and 

Lancaster counties. American may thus face increasing competition throughout 

its seven-county area, including the Allentown-Slatington area of Lehigh 

County, with the result that its present share of IPC deposits in the sevencounty area may decline, rather than increase, in the future.

Under these circumstances, the acquisition of a $12 million unit bank, 

located in a county from which American derives only $1.4 million in deposits 

today, is not likely to result in such a concentration of assets in the sevencounty area as to foreclose effective commercial bank competition in the 

future.

In accordance with Corporation policy enunciated in its decision of 

December 1, 1970, with respect to the proposed merger of The Pennsylvania 

Bank and Trust Company, Titusville, and The Exchange Bank and Trust Company, Franklin, American would be required, if this application is approved, to 

divest itself, within a reasonable period of time, of the stock it holds in any 

Pennsylvania bank which can branch or merge under Pennsylvania law into one 

or more of the seven counties indicated. This requirement, in view of the share 

of the seven-county market which American would control after the proposed 

merger, is considered advisable in order to avoid any artificial restraint on 

banking competition in that area and to discourage the further concentration 

of its commercial bank resources.

For the reasons stated, and with the contemplated divestiture of American's 

investment in the stock of actual and potential competitors, the Board of 

Directors is of the opinion that the proposed merger would not, in any section 

of the country, substantially lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or 

in any other manner be in restraint of trade.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 79

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. American has satisfactory financial and managerial resources, as would the resulting bank. Slatington National lacks a qualified senior executive officer or an experienced loan 

officer at present, its earnings performance has been unimpressive, and its 

future prospects appear more favorable as part of the resulting bank than as an 

independent bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Consummation of 

the proposed merger would bring to customers of Slatington National significantly larger lending limits, bank credit cards, computer services not presently 

available, and access to a much larger and more sophisticated management 

staff. Present activity in FHA loans, installment credit, dealer financing, and 

fiduciary services should be expanded as a result. To the extent such services 

are presently available at established banks in the Allentown-Bethlehem area, 

the Slatington area public will benefit from the convenient availability of 

another competitor offering the same services.

Based on the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded 

that approval of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

First Valley Bank

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania

166,368 12 13

to merge with

The First National Bank of Nesquehoning

Nesquehoning

4,822 1

Summary report by Attorney General, June 22, 1971 

First National is approximately 39 miles northwest of both Bethlehem and 

Allentown. First National is, however, the only bank in Nesquehoning. The 

nearest banking alternatives for residents of Nesquehoning are approximately 

four to five miles west in Summit Hill and Lansford and about five miles east in 

Jim Thorpe. All of these cities lie along the Nesquehoning Creek; all are within 

the service area of First National. If Valley's pending application to acquire 

Lansford Bank is approved, as well as the instant application, existing competition for deposits and loans in this area will be eliminated.

Eight banks operate single offices in the service area of First National, a 

rectangular area from Lansford to Jim Thorpe, paralleling Nesquehoning Creek. 

The Jim Thorpe National Bank (deposits $12 million) holds the leading share 

of deposits in these offices (about 25 per cent); the shares of the seven other 

banks graduate from 7 to 14 per cent. First National holds about 8.6 per cent 

of these deposits, while Lansford Bank holds about 11 per cent. The combined 

shares of these two banks in First National's service area amount to about 20 

per cent; in Carbon County as a whole, this total share is about 9 per cent.

Valley seeks approval of mergers with Lansford Bank and First National. 

Consummation of both mergers would have an adverse effect on competition

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
80 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

in west-central Carbon County. The extent of this effect, however, would 

depend on the competitive ability of First National, which may be presently 

impaired by the tenuous condition of its loan portfolio.

Basis for Corporation approval, August 13, 1971

First Valley Bank, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania ("Valley Bank"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total resources of $166,368,000, has applied, 

pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The First National 

Bank of Nesquehoning, Nesquehoning, Pennsylvania ("FNB Nesquehoning"), 

with total resources of $4,822,000. The banks would merge under the charter 

and title of Valley Bank and, as an incident to the merger, the one office of 

FNB Nesquehoning would become a branch of the resulting bank, increasing 

the number of its authorized offices to 15.

Competition. Valley Bank operates 10 offices in and nearby Bethlehem, in 

Northampton County (population 214,368), and one office in Allentown, in 

Lehigh County (population 255,304). Valley Bank also has the necessary approvals to establish two de novo branches, one to be located in Bethlehem and 

the other in Fogelsville, 4 miles southwest of Allentown, in Lehigh County. On 

June 24, 1971, Valley Bank merged with The First National Bank of Lansford, 

Lansford, Pennsylvania, a unit bank with total resources of $6.3 million, located in Carbon County, and established the sole office of the latter as a 

branch. Valley Bank's service area today is confined to Lehigh and Northampton counties, in the eastern section of Pennsylvania near the New Jersey 

border, and the western portion of Carbon County surrounding Lansford.

FNB Nesquehoning operates only one office, located in the Borough of 

Nesquehoning (1970 population: 3,338), in the central western part of Carbon 

County (1970 population: 50,573). Nesquehoning is in the midst of onceprosperous anthracite fields, but the mining there has now been reduced to a 

few small independent operations. The local community supplies only about 

200 jobs, and the resident population in the immediate Nesquehoning area 

declined approximately 10 percent between 1960 and 1970. The prospects for 

any significant economic development in Nesquehoning in the near future are 

not bright. FNB Nesquehoning derives virtually all of its banking business from 

the immediate Nesquehoning area. FNB Nesquehoning's growth through the 

years has remained relatively stagnant, as has the growth of most other small 

unit banks in the surrounding areas of Carbon County.

All Valley Bank offices, except the one recently acquired by merger in 

Lansford, are at least 40 miles from Nesquehoning. The Lansford office, however, is only 4 miles to the west. While neither this office nor FNB Nesquehoning derives any significant business from the localized area served by the 

other, residents of Nesquehoning have relatively convenient access to both of 

these offices and to 16 other banking offices within a 10-mile radius, including 

those of much larger banks in Tamaqua and Coaldale, in nearby Schuylkill 

County. This 10-mile area best approximates the market within which the 

proposed merger would have any immediate competitive impact.

Within that area, Valley Bank's Lansford office and FNB Nesquehoning 

together hold 8.9 percent of local I PC deposits. Ten other banks are represented, including two local banks in Lansford, two local banks in Jim 

Thorpe, 5 miles to the east of Nesquehoning, and the larger banks previously

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 81

mentioned in Coaldale and Tamaqua. While the proposed merger would eliminate some degree of choice for residents of the area and some slight existing 

competition between the Valley Bank office in Lansford and FNB Nesquehoning, neither factor is of overriding significance. FNB Nesquehoning has 

been a weak competitor, burdened by significant asset and management problems. The share of area deposits held by the two offices is not unduly high, and 

a significant number of meaningful options would remain.

Under Pennsylvania law, each bank could legally branch de novo into trade 

areas served by the other. Such activity on FNB Nesquehoning's part is considered unrealistic, in view of its limited resources, its asset condition, and the 

competition from much larger banks it could expect in places attractive for de

novo branching. Similarly, the stagnant economy of the Nesquehoning area, 

the limited and declining population there, and the relatively large number of 

competitors with conveniently accessible offices, make it unlikely that Valley 

Bank would find de novo branching into the area served by FNB Nesquehoning 

attractive in the foreseeable future. For these reasons, the proposed merger 

would not eliminate any significant potential for increased competition in the 

future between Valley Bank and FNB Nesquehoning through de novo

branching.

The effect of the proposed merger on banking concentration in relevant 

areas is almost not significant. Valley Bank is the largest commercial bank 

headquartered in Northampton County, but the area of potential competition 

for the resulting bank would include the four surrounding counties as well, 

since Pennsylvania law permits banks headquartered in Northampton County 

to branch or merge throughout the five-county area. In that five-county area, 

as of June 30, 1970, the two participating banks held 8.2 percent of total 

commercial bank deposits (after adjusting for Valley Bank's merger with the 

First National Bank of Lansford), and only 13 of 187 commercial bank offices, 

with two banks headquartered in Allentown holding a significantly larger deposit share. Thirty-seven other commercial banks are headquartered in the 

same five-county area, and 15 commercial banks not headquartered in the 

five-county area already operate offices in one or more of the five counties 

under Pennsylvania law. The proposed merger, accordingly, would not result in 

any undue concentration of banking resources within the area of potential 

competition nor establish a precedent which might lead to such concentration 

in the future.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would bring to customers of FNB Nesquehoning certain services not 

now available to them, such as trust department services, Master Charge, shortterm certificates of deposit, and a greater willingness and capacity to make 

commercial and industrial loans. These services, however, are conveniently 

available to Nesquehoning residents at offices of other banks within a 10-mile 

radius, including Valley Bank's office in Lansford. The increase in community 

convenience and needs resulting from the proposed merger must, therefore, be 

considered nominal and of no significant weight in favor of approval.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. FNB Nesquehoning

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
82 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

has an unsatisfactory capital position in the light of its classified assets and no 

management depth. Past earnings have been poor and its earnings potential is 

not impressive. Valley Bank would provide aggressive and capable supervision 

of FNB Nesquehoning's loan portfolio; and with Valley Bank's financial and 

managerial resources predominant, the resulting bank should have adequate 

capital, satisfactory earnings, good management, and favorable future prospects. The banking factors presented by the application weigh clearly in favor 

of approval.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

1 n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

First County Bank

Bland, Virginia

(in organization; change title to 

Bank of Bland County)

370 2

to merge with

Bank of Bland County

Bland

4,501 2

Summary report by Attorney General, June 4, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which First County Bank 

(org.) would become a subsidiary of First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, a 

bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine 

an existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such, and without regard 

to the acquisition of the surviving bank by First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, August 13, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal Deposit Insurance 

for First County Bank, Bland, Virginia ("First Bank"), a proposed new bank in 

organization, and for consent to its merger with Bank of Bland County, Bland, 

Virginia ("Second Bank"), total resources $4,501,000, under First Bank's charter and Second Bank's title. The resulting bank is to operate from the present 

main office and one existing branch of Second Bank.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means by 

which First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, Arlington, Virginia, a registered 

bank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of the 

bank resulting from the proposed merger pursuant to authority recently 

granted by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. First Bank 

will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business at the existing locations of Second Bank, and with the same management. The proposal 

will not, per se, change the competitive structure of commercial banking in

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 83

Bland County nor affect the banking services which Second Bank has provided 

to Bland County residents in the past. All factors considered pertinent specifically to the two subject applications are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Resources

(in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Civic Center Bank and Trust Co.

Chicago, Illinois

10,313 1 1

to merge with

The South East National Bank of 

Chicago

Chicago

44,019 1

Summary report by Attorney General, March 18, 1971

The offices of the merging banks are five miles apart and there are many 

banking alternatives in the intervening area. Hence, it is unlikely that the 

proposed merger would eliminate any significant competition between the two 

banks.

As of June 30, 1968, Civic Center held about .1 per cent of total commercial bank deposits in the City of Chicago, while National Bank held about 

.4 per cent of such deposits. Thus, the resulting bank's share of the Chicago 

market, post-merger, would still be less than one-half of one per cent.

We conclude that the proposed merger would not have a significantly adverse effect upon competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, August 20, 1971

Civic Center Bank and Trust Co., Chicago, Illinois (“ Civic"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total resources of $10,313,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The South East 

National Bank of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois (“ Southeast"), a national banking 

association with total resources of $44,019,000. The banks would merge under 

the charter and title of Civic and, as an incident to the merger, the one office 

of Southeast would be closed.

Competition. Civic's only office is located in the downtown business district 

of Chicago, known as the Loop, and it draws its banking business primarily 

from a daytime population estimated at 100,000 persons who work nearby. 

Some business is also drawn from several adjacent residential developments. 

Illinois banking statutes do not permit branch banking, except for limited teller 

facilities within 1,500 feet of the bank's main office. Because of these restricDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
84 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

tions, all Chicago banks make an effort to advertise and compete throughout 

the city and its environs. Civic, however, established in 1966, has less than 0.1 

percent of the total deposits held by all commercial banks in its immediate 

vicinity.

Southeast's only office is located in the Woodlawn section of Chicago, 

about 9 miles south-southeast of Civic's quarters. This is a blighted and deteriorating area with a high crime rate, extensive vandalism, and declining population. Southeast serves primarily a 12-square mile area surrounding its office, 

with a population estimated at 260,000, down 13.9 percent from 1960.

The primary service areas of the two banks do not overlap, and their secondary service areas coincide only to a slight extent. The proposed merger would 

not appear to eliminate any substantial amount of direct competition between 

the two banks, and Illinois banking statutes make impossible any increase in 

competition between them through the establishment of de novo branch 

offices.

Civic and Southeast each hold a minuscule percentage of the total deposits 

held by the 95 commercial banks headquartered in Chicago or by the 205 

commercial banks headquartered in Cook County. Their proposed merger 

would have no competitive impact except possibly to redistribute a portion of 

Southeast's banking business among the nine other commercial banks which 

operate in its primary service area in Woodlawn. Less than 50 percent of 

Southeast's deposit volume, however, originated in this area, and the manner in 

which such business will be redistributed, if not retained by the resulting bank, 

cannot be predicted.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

satisfactory financial resources for the business they do as independent institutions, as would the resulting bank. Recent litigation and publicity involving the 

directors and controlling interest of Civic have been a significant factor, however, in its 50 percent deposit decline since 1968 and in its recent unsatisfactory earnings performance. Largely because of its location, Southeast has 

also shown a significant drop in deposits over the same period. Each bank has 

management weaknesses, but the proposed consolidation of offices, management, and financial resources should permit favorable development in all areas 

of weakness in the future.

Convenience and Needs of the Community to be Served. The community to 

be served by the resultant bank would be largely the community presently 

served by Civic, whose customers would benefit from the greater lending capacity, higher lending limit, and, possibly, more efficient management and operations of the resultant bank. In the community presently served by Southeast, 

the banks remaining would continue to provide adequate banking service to 

local residents. Some Southeast customers, however, are likely to be inconvenienced by the greater distance to Civic's office or the greater distance to 

Woodlawn offices of competing banks. Consideration of community needs and 

convenience weigh neither significantly for nor significantly against approval. 

The Board of Directors has concluded, because of the banking factors presented by the proposed merger, that approval of the application is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 85

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

First Security Bank

Ionia, Michigan

34,396 4 5

to consolidate with

The State Bank of Carson City 

Carson City

6,387 1

Summary report by Attorney General, June 22, 1971 

Security, which operates four of the ten banking offices in Ionia County, is 

the largest bank operating there, accounting for 45 per cent of the county's 

deposits and 67 per cent of the deposits held by the two banks in the City of 

Ionia. State Bank is the fifth largest of the ten banks operating in Montcalm 

County.

Ionia and Carson City are 22 miles apart, and Security's office in Lyons is 

located about 20 miles south of Carson City. There is one intervening bank and 

competition between the two consolidating banks appears to be insignificant.

Since Michigan law prohibits the establishment of a branch in a city or 

village in which a state or national bank is in operation, Security's entry into 

Carson City by the branching method is barred. However, recent legislation 

makes de novo entry by the holding company device an alternative method for 

entry; thus, Security may be considered a potential entrant into the Montcalm 

county market. Nevertheless, this consolidation with one of the smaller banks 

in the market would not appear to have a seriously adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, August 20, 1971 

First Security Bank, Ionia, Michigan ("First Security"), an insured nonmember bank with total deposits of about $30,968,000, has applied, pursuant 

to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior consent to consolidate with The State Bank of Carson 

City, Carson City, Michigan ("State Bank"), which has total deposits of about 

$5,590,000. The banks would consolidate under the charter and title of First 

Security and, as an incident to the consolidation, the single office of State 

Bank would become a branch of First Security.

Competition. First Security is headquartered in Ionia (population 6,361), 

which is situated about 35 miles east of Grand Rapids and 45 miles northwest 

of Lansing. In addition to its main office, First Security operates branches in 

Belding, Lyons, and Saranac. All four of its offices are located in Ionia County 

(population 45,848), where First Security is the second largest bank in terms 

of overall size but the largest in terms of Ionia County deposits. State Bank's 

single office is in Carson City (population 1,217), which is situated in adjacent 

Montcalm County (population 39,660) about 24 miles northeast of Ionia. It is 

the sixth largest of 10 commercial banks operating in Montcalm County. 

Neither bank has a trust department.

The office of First Security nearest to State Bank is 17 miles away, and 

there are two offices of competing banks intervening. First Security and State 

Bank serve separate markets, although their service areas overlap slightly in the

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
86 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

sparsely populated northeast corner of Ionia County. Neither bank has any 

significant loan or deposit business from areas served by the other, and their 

proposed merger will eliminate little, if any, existing competition between 

them. The possibility of increased competition developing between the two 

banks through de novo branching is unlikely, since State law prohibits a bank 

from branching de novo into another city or village in which there is located an 

office of another bank.

The proposed merger would have its most immediate impact in Carson City 

and surrounding towns, where the higher lending lim it of the resulting bank 

and First Security's broader range of services should stimulate competition 

with the larger banks in that market with which State Bank presently competes. Within a 15-mile radius of Carson City, six commercial banks, ranging in 

deposit size from $5.6 million to $37.7 million, operate a total of 12 offices. 

The proposed merger would not affect the number of alternative sources of 

banking service available to residents of this area, nor would the proposed 

merger result in any undue concentration of banking resources in any relevant 

geographic area.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed consolidation would not, in any section of the country, substantially 

lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other way be in 

restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable with respect to the consolidating banks and is so projected for the 

resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. First Security 

plans to provide State Bank customers with modern banking quarters, including drive-in facilities. It would also utilize its on-premises electronic data 

processing facilities to process accounts maintained at the Carson City office 

and would extend the lending services of State Bank. Customers of State Bank 

would further benefit from First Security's policy of paying interest on completed Christmas Club accounts and of computing passbook savings interest on 

a daily basis.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

New Paltz Savings Bank

New Paltz, New York

48,729 2 3

to merge with

Co-Operative Loan and Savings Society

Port Jervis

9,890 1

Summary report by Attorney General, July 6, 1971 

The distance between the closest offices of Co-Operative Loan and New 

Paltz Bank is approximately 50 miles. The service areas of the two institutions 

do not appear to overlap significantly. Deposits are not drawn by either party 

from the other's service area, and the amount of loans made by either party in

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 87

the other's service area is negligible. Thus, it appears that the merger would not 

eliminate significant existing competition.

New York law would not presently permit New Paltz Bank to branch de

novo into Orange County. This fact and the size and limited service area of 

Co-Operative Loan, together with the existence of other large savings banks in 

the area indicate that no substantial potential competition would be eliminated 

by the proposed merger.

Basis for Corporation approval, August 20, 1971

New Paltz Savings Bank, New Paltz, New York, an insured mutual savings 

bank with total deposits of $45,222,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 

18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with Co-Operative Loan and Savings 

Society, Port Jervis, New York ("S & L") an insured savings and loan association 

with total deposits of $9,096,000. The institutions would merge under the 

charter and title of New Paltz Savings Bank and, as an incident to the merger, 

the only office of S&L would become a branch of the former, increasing the 

number of its offices to three.

Competition. New Paltz Savings Bank, headquartered in the town of New 

Paltz, in New York's Ulster County, has one branch in the community of 

Woodstock, 28 miles north of New Paltz, and serves an area consisting of the 

towns and cities of New Paltz, Woodstock, Kingston, Rosendale, Modena, 

Highland, Poughkeepsie, and Newburgh, all of which are located in the Hudson 

River Valley. Under New York law, mutual savings banks may merge with 

savings and loan associations headquartered in the same banking district, and 

both institutions here proposed to be merged are in the State's Third Banking 

District. New Paltz Savings Bank is the third largest of nine mutual th rift 

institutions headquartered in Ulster County, and the 19th largest such institution headquartered in the Third Banking District, with 1.4 percent of the 

district's total th rift institution deposits.

S&L's only office is located in the town of Port Jervis (1970 population: 

8,852), in the southwest corner of Orange County. It is the fourth largest of 

seven th rift institutions headquartered in the Third Banking District. Principal 

business activities of the area include the manufacture of cosmetics, glass, silver 

plating, television tubes, and containers for military and aerospace equipment.

The areas presently served by New Paltz Savings Bank and S&L do not 

overlap, and their nearest offices are 50 miles apart. Offices of other mutual 

th rift institutions are located in the intervening territory, and there are no 

common depositors or borrowers. New Paltz Savings Bank has approximately 

$515,000 in loans from the area served by S&L, and the latter has about 

$155,000 in loans from MSB's area. In view of the distance between the two 

institutions, and the relatively small amount of loan business originated by 

each institution from areas served by the other, it is concluded that the proposed merger would not eliminate significant existing competition between 

them.

Under a recent change in New York law, effective January 1, 1972, mutual 

savings banks and savings and loan associations may establish one branch de

novo each year anywhere within their multicounty home banking districts. 

S&L has not established a branch since it was organized, and the likelihood of 

its doing so in the New Paltz area is remote in view of its small size and the

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
88 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

distance involved. Absent the proposed merger, however, New Paltz Savings 

Bank could branch de novo into the Port Jervis area, which presently has no 

mutual savings bank. The proposed merger would eliminate that potential for 

increased competition between the two institutions, but this is not a factor of 

competitive significance in view of the large number of mutual savings banks 

and savings and loan associations in the Third Banking District which will gain 

the same legal authority after January 1, 1972, and in view of the fact that 

larger th rift institutions than New Paltz Savings Bank are more likely entrants 

into the Port Jervis area.

The effects of the proposed merger on banking concentration among th rift 

institutions in the State's Third Banking District would be minimal.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating institutions has adequate financial and managerial resources, as would 

the resulting institution. The future prospects of S&L would be more favorable 

as a branch of the resulting institution than as an independent unit.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

transaction would have little effect on present customers of New Paltz Savings 

Bank, but it should benefit residents of the Port Jervis area served by S&L. The 

resulting institution would offer most of the services which mututal savings 

banks are permitted by statute to offer, including 5 percent day-of-deposit-today-of-withdrawal accounts and savings bank life insurance, not now offered in 

the Port Jervis area. The resulting institution would also provide another convenient alternative for the following services offered by other financial institutions in the Port Jervis area, thereby stimulating competition for such services: 

6 percent time deposits, FHA mortgage and home improvement loans, student 

loans, and computerized on-line banking facilities. It would also have a greater 

capacity than S&L to help meet the growing mortgage lending requirements of 

the area.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The Troy Savings Bank

Troy, New York

178,213 2 3

to merge with

Whitehall Co-Operative Savings and

Loan Association

Whitehall

319 1

Summary report by Attorney General, June 22, 1971 

The closest offices of the merging institutions are over 70 miles apart. Due 

to this distance, and the very small size of Whitehall Savings, there is probably 

little or no existing competition between the parties.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 89

No savings banks operate offices in Washington County; one insured savings 

and loan association (deposits $4 million) is located therein. Under New York 

law, Troy Savings is presently unable to branch de novo into Washington 

County. In view of this fact and the size and competitive significance of Whitehall Savings, we conclude that the proposed merger is unlikely to have any 

significant adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, August 20, 1971

The Troy Savings Bank, Troy, New York (“ Troy Savings Bank"), an insured 

mutual savings bank with total deposits of $163,857,000, has applied, pursuant 

to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior approval to merge with Whitehall Co-Operative Savings 

and Loan Association, Whitehall, New York ("S & L"), a noninsured savings and 

loan association with total deposits of $265,000. The institutions would merge 

under the charter and title of Troy Savings Bank, and, as an incident to the 

merger, S&L's only office would become a branch of Troy Savings Bank, to be 

relocated to 184 Broadway Street, Whitehall, New York, a distance of about 1 

mile from S&L's present location. The number of Troy Savings Bank's offices 

would be increased to three.

Competition. Troy Savings Bank, headquartered in the city of Troy, in New 

York's Fourth Banking District, presently operates two offices in Rensselaer 

County (population 152,510): its main office in the city of Troy and a branch 

in the suburban community of East Greenbush, 10 miles south of Troy. Under 

New York law, Troy Savings Bank may merge with a savings and loan association headquartered anywhere in the Fourth Banking District. Troy Savings 

Bank is the largest mutual th rift institution headquartered in Rensselaer 

County and the fourth largest headquartered in the Fourth Banking District, 

with 8.1 percent of all mutual institution deposits therein.

S&L's one office is located in the village of Whitehall (population 3,764), 

along the northern boundary of Washington County, which adjoins Rensselaer 

County on the north. It is the only th rift institution in the Whitehall area and 

draws virtually all its deposit and loan business from the same area. One commercial bank office is also located in Whitehall. The majority of S&L's accounts earn interest at the rate of 4 percent per annum.

The areas served by the two participating institutions do not overlap and 

their nearest offices are 70 miles apart. Offices of other mutual th rift institutions are located in the intervening territory, and the merging institutions have 

few depositors and borrowers from each other's service areas. In view of the 

distance between the two institutions, and the small amount of deposit volume 

($13,900) held by Troy Savings Bank from S&L's service area, it can be concluded that the proposed merger would not eliminate any significant existing 

competition between them.

Effective January 1, 1972, mutual savings banks and savings banks and 

savings and loan associations in New York will be allowed to branch de novo

anywhere within the multicounty banking districts in which they are headquartered. S&L has not established a branch since it was organized and the 

likelihood of its doing so in the Troy area is remote in view of its small size and 

the distance involved. Troy Savings Bank has the capacity to branch de novo

into the Whitehall area, but the size of the institution being absorbed and its 

ineffectiveness as a competitor make its acquisition the equivalent of de novo

entry by Troy Savings Bank into Washington County. Mutual th rift institutions

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
90 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

in New York, moreover, are limited to opening one de novo branch per year, 

and the small community of Whitehall would be a relatively unattractive location to Troy Savings Bank for the exercise of such an annual privilege.

The effects of the proposed merger on banking concentration among th rift 

institutions in the State's Fourth Banking District would be minimal. S&L has 

numerous merger alternatives among mutual th rift institutions in the Fourth 

Banking District, but it is the smallest such institution in the district, and the 

relative size of Troy Savings is not so large as to make some other merger 

preferable, as a competitive matter, to the one proposed.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any manner be in restraint of 

trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating institutions has adequate financial and managerial resources for the 

business they transact, as would the resulting bank. The future prospects of 

S&L as a branch of the resulting bank would be much more favorable than as 

an independent institution.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would have little effect in the areas now served by Troy Savings Bank 

but it should benefit residents of the Whitehall area. The resulting bank would 

offer all the services which mutual savings banks are permitted by statute to 

offer, including the following services not now offered in the Whitehall area: 6 

percent time deposits, 5 percent day-of-deposit-to-day-of-withdrawal accounts, 

5 percent regular savings accounts, and savings bank life insurance. The resulting bank would also provide another convenient alternative for the following 

services offered by the commercial bank branch in Whitehall, thereby stimulating competition: FHA and VA mortgage loans, student loans, safe deposit 

boxes, and money order and travelers' check services. It would also have a 

greater capacity than S&L to help meet the mortgage lending requirements of 

the area.

The proposed relocation of S&L's office, moreover, would replace an institution open for business only one evening per week for 3 hours and located in 

an antiquated and inadequate office with a modern full-service savings bank 

facility open 5 days a week, thereby adding significantly to the convenience of 

local residents.

Based on the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded 

that approval of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

California Canadian Bank

San Francisco, California

118,911 12 16

to acquire a portion of the assets and assume

a portion of the deposit liabilities of

Union Bank 

Los Angeles

17,8502 4 2

2Resources of four branches of Union Bank to be purchased by California Canadian Bank.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 91

Summary report by Attorney General, June 7, 1971

The four offices of Union to be acquired by CCB are all in different areas. 

Some competition exists between CCB and the San Francisco office of Union 

which it seeks to acquire, which is about 1.5 miles from CCB's home office. 

However, the proposed acquisition would not eliminate Union as a banking 

alternative in San Francisco, nor appreciably increase concentration in San 

Francisco banking.

Two CCB offices in Contra Costa County are two and ten miles distant from 

the Contra Costa County office of Union which CCB proposed to acquire. This 

proposed acquisition would eliminate competition between the parties to this 

transaction in Contra Costa county, but would not increase the share of county 

deposits held by CCB significantly.

CCB does not operate offices in either Marin or Sonoma County, the locations of the other two Union offices which it seeks to acquire, but could be 

permitted to open de novo branches in these counties. However, the proposed 

acquisition of these two offices represents essentially the replacement of Union 

by CCB in these counties, and would leave Union capable of reentering the 

counties itself. Thus, the positions of the banks as present competitor and 

potential entrant in or into Marin and Sonoma Counties will be reversed, 

resulting in no significantly adverse effect on potential competition in these 

areas.

Basis for Corporation approval, September 3, 1971

California Canadian Bank, San Francisco, California ("Canadian"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of approximately $104 

million, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to purchase 

a portion of the assets of and assume the liability to pay a portion of the 

deposits made in Union Bank, Los Angeles, California ("U nion"). Incident to 

this proposal, four offices of Union, having total deposits of $17,565,000, 

would become branches of Canadian, increasing the number of its operating 

offices to 16.

Competition. Canadian's head office and one of its branches are located in 

San Francisco. It also operates five branches in other communities located 

within or adjacent to the San Francisco Bay area, as well as three branches in 

San Diego and two branches in Los Angeles. In addition, de novo branches in 

El Cajon, San Jose, and Sacramento have been approved but have not yet been 

opened. Union, headquartered in Los Angeles, is the sixth largest bank in 

California, with approximately $2 billion in total deposits and 29 offices. The 

four branches it seeks to dispose of in the proposed transaction were acquired 

by merger in 1970.

The four branches are located in the Fisherman's Wharf area of San Francisco and in the communities of Pleasant Hill (Contra Costa County, San 

Rafael (Marin County), and Santa Rosa (Sonoma County), Canadian has no 

offices in Marin County, Sonoma County, or within 15 or 55 miles, respectively, of the two Union branches last mentioned; and as to them, no existing 

competition between Canadian and Union would be eliminated by the proposed transaction.

The Fisherman's Wharf branch of Union, which serves a limited population, 

is less than 2 miles from Canadian's main office in the downtown financial

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
92 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

section of San Francisco and only a slightly greater distance from Canadian's 

Parkside branch. The three offices serve quite different neighborhoods and 

clientele, however, and Bank of America and First Western Bank and Trust 

Company also maintain branch offices in the Fisherman's Wharf area. If the 

proposed acquisition is approved, Canadian would operate only three of the 

173 commercial banking offices in San Francisco, holding less than 1 percent 

of the city's total commercial bank deposits. In addition, Union would remain 

an alternative source of commercial bank services with three offices in or near 

the downtown financial section of the city. Any elimination of existing or 

potential competition within the San Francisco banking market would accordingly be inconsequential.

Union's Pleasant Hill office is only 1.7 miles from Canadian's Concord 

office and 4 miles from Canadian's Lafayette office, both of which are also 

located in Contra Costa County. The proposed transaction would eliminate 

some existing competition between the two banks in the Concord-Pleasant Hill 

area, a middle-income residential area of some 110,000 people. A t present, area 

residents are also served by offices of four large statewide branch banks. A 

smaller, fifth bank has been authorized a branch which is not yet open. 

Canadian's share of the local IPC deposit market would increase to about 17 

percent, substantially outdistanced only by the share of the local market held 

by two Bank of America offices. With the continued growth in this area expected from the opening of the Bay Area Rapid Transit System, however, new 

entrants into the area by banks much larger than Canadian and not presently 

represented there can be expected. If the proposed acquisition is approved, 

Canadian's three offices in Contra Costa County would still have less than 1 

percent of total county IPC deposits.

In the case of all four branches, competition for the retail banking business 

of individuals and small businesses may be significantly enhanced because 

Canadian's management actively seeks such business, whereas Union's management does not— a difference which explains Union's willingness to divest itself 

of the four branches here involved.

On a statewide basis, the transfer of these four offices would represent a 

slight deconcentration in the banking resources held by the State's 10 largest 

banks. Canadian itself ranks 21st among California's 154 commercial banks and 

holds 0.2 percent of total statewide commercial bank deposits.

Overall, the Board of Directors finds the limited anticompetitive effect of 

the proposed acquisition of Union's Pleasant Hill branch outweighed by the 

various procompetitive factors mentioned above. In the Board's opinion, the 

proposed transaction would not lessen competition substantially in any section 

of California, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. These factors are 

satisfactory with respect to both participating banks, as they would be for the 

resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs of the Community to be Served. All of the services 

presently provided by Union at the four offices involved in this proposed 

transaction would be provided by Canadian, and Canadian proposes to offer 

trust services as well, which are not presently provided at any of the four Union 

offices. It appears, moreover, that Canadian would compete more aggressively 

than Union for the retail banking business characteristic of the areas served by

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the four offices, and among other things, would give more emphasis to consumer lending.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 93

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

op e ra te d

The Bank of Front Royal

Front Royal, Virginia 

(in organization; change title to 

Bank of Warren)

50 2

to merge with

Bank of Warren 

Front Royal

15,276 2

Summary report by Attorney General, July 14, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Bank of Front Royal 

(org.) would become a subsidiary of Virginia Commonwealth Bankshares, a 

bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine 

an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such and without regard to 

the acquisition of the surviving bank by Virginia Commonwealth Bankshares, it 

would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, September 20, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for The Bank of Front Royal, Front Royal, Virginia ("New Bank"), a proposed 

new bank in organization, and for prior consent to its merger with Bank of 

Warren, Front Royal, Virginia ("Other Bank"), a State member bank, total 

resources $15,276,000 as of April 20, 1971, under New Bank's charter and 

Other Bank's title. The resulting bank will operate Other Bank's two existing 

offices and, incident to the merger, will be an insured State nonmember bank 

and the initial capital of New Bank will be retired.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means by 

which Virginia Commonwealth Bankshares, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, a registered bank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of 

the successor bank to this merger. Application is pending before the Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve System for approval of the acquisition by the 

holding company. New Bank will not be in operation as a commercial bank 

prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same 

banking business at the existing locations of Other Bank and with the same 

management. The proposal will not, per se, change the banking services which 

Other Bank has provided usefully and conveniently to the Front Royal area. All 

factors required to be considered pertinent to each application are favorably 

resolved.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
94 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

R esources

(in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Westmoreland County Bank

Colonial Beach, Virginia 

(in organization; change title to 

The Bank of Westmoreland)

1,476 5

to merge with

The Bank of Westmoreland

Colonial Beach

24,473 5

Summary report by Attorney General, August 17, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Westmoreland County 

Bank (org.) would become a subsidiary of First Virginia Bancshares, a bank 

holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an 

existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such and without regard to 

the acquisition of the surviving bank by First Virginia Bankshares. it would 

have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, September 23, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance for 

Westmoreland County Bank, Colonial Beach, Virginia ("First Bank"), a proposed new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger with The Bank 

o f W estm oreland, Colonial Beach ("Second Bank"), total resources 

$24,473,000, under First Bank's charter and Second Bank's title. The resulting 

bank will operate from the present main office and four existing branches of 

Second Bank.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means by 

which First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, Arlington, Virginia, a registered 

bank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of the 

bank resulting from the proposed merger. Application for such acquisition is 

pending before the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. First 

Bank will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but 

subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business at the 

existing locations of Second Bank and with the same management. The proposal will not, per se, change the competitive structure of commercial banking 

in the trade area served by Second Bank or affect the banking services which 

Second Bank has provided to Westmoreland, King George, and Northumberland counties' residents in the past. All factors considered pertinent specifically 

to the two subject applications are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 95

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The Citizens and Southern Emory Bank

Atlanta, Georgia

41,894 3 8

to acquire the assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

The Citizens and Southern Bank of 

Chamblee 

Chamblee

24,659 2

and

The Citizens and Southern Park 

National Bank

Atlanta

12,589 1

and

The Citizens and Southern South 

DeKalb Bank

Decatur

6,653 2

Summary report by Attorney General, March 12, 1971

The proposed mergers would eliminate present and future competition 

between (i) C&S and its subsidiaries, and (ii) the banks which it seeks to merge 

into its subsidiaries. Consummation of these mergers would allow C&S, which 

already is the dominant bank in Atlanta, to transfer its dominance to North 

Fulton County, and to increase its share of DeKalb County deposits from 25% 

to over 41%. (Even within the five-county Atlanta SMSA, an area which clearly 

overstates the market, these mergers would increase C&S' leading share from 

26% to 28%.)

Moreover, this merger must be evaluated in the context of the other pending 

merger proposals of First National and Trust Company. If all the proposed 

mergers were consummated, these banks which now dominate Atlanta would, 

together or separately, obtain positions*of dominance in both North Fulton 

County and DeKalb County. These three Atlanta banks account for 53% of 

DeKalb County deposits now and would control almost 82% if all the proposed 

“ affiliate" mergers were consummated. The same three banks' control of North 

Fulton County would increase from 0% to over 50%. These proposed mergers, 

involving three banks accounting for 54% of North Fulton County's deposits 

and nine banks accounting for over 28% of DeKalb County's deposits, would 

forever eliminate the possibility that significant numbers of Fulton or DeKalb 

“ affiliates" of the major Atlanta banks could become independent sources of 

new competition. If they were all approved, few significant sources of deconcentration would remain in either Fulton or DeKalb Counties.

For the foregoing reasons, we believe that the C&S mergers would have a 

significantly adverse effect on competition in North Fulton County, DeKalb 

County and the Atlanta area generally.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
96 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Basis for Corporation approval, October 4, 1971

The Citizens and Southern Emory Bank, Atlanta, Georgia ("Emory Bank"), 

an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $34,800,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to acquire the assets of, 

and to assume the liability to pay deposits made in: The Citizens and Southern 

Bank of Chamblee, Chamblee, Georgia ("Chamblee Bank"), an insured State 

nonmember bank with total deposits of $21,700,000; The Citizens and Southern Park National Bank, Atlanta, Georgia ("Park National Bank"), which has 

total deposits of $11,300,000; and The Citizens and Southern South DeKalb 

Bank, Decatur, Georgia (“ South DeKalb Bank"), an insured State nonmember 

bank with total deposits of $5,100,000. Application also is made under Section 

18(d) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to operate as branches of Emory 

Bank: the main office and branch of Chamblee Bank; the sole office of Park 

National Bank; and the main office and branch of South DeKalb Bank.

Competition. The Citizens and Southern National Bank ("C&S National"), 

Savannah, Georgia, is the owner of all the outstanding stock of Citizens and 

Southern Holding Company ("C&S Holding"), Savannah, Georgia, which in 

turn owns 95.14 percent of the stock of Emory Bank, and 5 percent each of 

the stock of Chamblee Bank, Park National Bank, and South DeKalb Bank. 

The three offices of Emory Bank and all offices of the three banks it proposes 

to acquire are located in DeKalb County. The C&S system, including its 5 

percent affiliates, presently controls 41.8 percent of all deposits held at DeKalb 

County commercial bank offices and operates 25.4 percent of the commercial 

bank offices in the county making it by far the largest banking system in 

DeKalb County.

Because the C&S system has such a large share of the banking resources of 

DeKalb County, proposed new acquisitions of nonaffiliated banks in the same 

market would raise the most serious competitive problems under the Bank 

Merger Act as amended and under Section 7 of the Clayton Act. Whether 

similar considerations require the Corporation to deny the proposed acquisitions by a C&S subsidiary of three banks in which C&S Holding has only 5 

percent stock interest is the question raised by the present applications.

Emory Bank and the three banks proposed to be acquired together serve 

nearly the whole of DeKalb County; with the exception of South DeKalb 

Bank, they draw their business from overlapping areas in the county. Emory 

Bank holds 12.8 percent of total DeKalb County deposits; Chamblee Bank 

(organized in 1960) holds 5.8 percent, Park National Bank (organized in 1967)

2.8 percent, and South DeKalb Bank (organized in 1969) 1.1 percent, respectively, of total DeKalb County deposits. These four banks, however, do not 

compete today and never have competed in the past.

Except that these four banks are located in DeKalb County, rather than 

Fulton County, substantially the same facts are presented as to the organization of the banks, the close working relationship between them, the lack of 

competition between them, and the unlikely prospect of voluntary disaffiliation, as were presented by the proposals to merge the Citizens and Southern 

Bank of North Fulton, Roswell, Georgia ("North Fulton Bank"), and other 

C&S Banks in Fulton County, approved today by the Corporation.

Following the reasoning set down in the basis in that matter, the Corporation concludes that the proposed acquisitions would not be anticompetitive,

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 97

either as to existing or as to potential competition and that since the other 

factors to be considered weigh neither for approval nor denial, approval of the 

applications is warranted. See In Re: The Citizens and Southern Bank of East 

Point, East Point, Georgia; Application for Consent to Acquisition of Assets 

and Assumption of Liability to Pay Deposits and to Establish Two Branches, 

decided October 4, 1971.

Resources

/in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

[in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

The Citizens and Southern Bank of 

East Point 33,672 2 4

East Point, Georgia

to acquire the assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

The Citizens and Southern Bank of 

North Fulton 8,613 1

Roswell

and

The Citizens and Southern Bank of 

Sandy Springs 23,940 1

Sandy Springs

Summary report by Attorney General, March 12, 1971

The proposed mergers would eliminate present and future competition between (i) C&S and its subsidiaries, and (ii) the banks which it seeks to merge 

into its subsidiaries. Consummation of these mergers would allow C&S, which 

already is the dominant bank in Atlanta, to transfer its dominance to North 

Fulton County, and to increase its share of DeKalb County deposits from 25% 

to over 41%. (Even within the five-county Atlanta SMSA, an area which clearly 

overstates the market, these mergers would increase C&S' leading share from 

26% to 28%.)

Moreover, this merger must be evaluated in the context of the other pending 

merger proposals of First National and Trust Company. If all the proposed 

mergers were consummated, these banks which now dominate Atlanta would, 

together or separately, obtain positions of dominance in both North Fulton 

County and DeKalb County. These three Atlanta banks account for 53% of 

DeKalb County deposits now and would control almost 82% if all the proposed 

"affiliate" mergers were consummated. The same three banks' control of North 

Fulton County would increase from 0% to over 50%. These proposed mergers, 

involving three banks accounting for 54% of North Fulton County's deposits 

and nine banks accounting for over 28% of DeKalb County's deposits, would 

forever eliminate the possibility that significant numbers of Fulton or DeKalb 

"affiliates" of the major Atlanta banks could become independent sources of 

new competition. If they were all approved, few significant sources of deconcentration would remain in either Fulton or DeKalb Counties.

For the foregoing reasons, we believe that the C&S mergers would have a 

significantly adverse effect on competition in North Fulton County, DeKalb 

County and the Atlanta area generally.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
98 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Basis for Corporation approval, October 4, 1971

The Citizens and Southern Bank of East Point, East Point, Georgia ("East 

Point Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of 

$27,606,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to 

acquire the assets of and to assume the liability to pay deposits made in The 

Citizens and Southern Bank of North Fulton, Roswell, Georgia ("North Fulton 

Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $7,013,000, 

and The Citizens and Southern Bank of Sandy Springs, Sandy Springs, Georgia 

("Sandy Springs Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits 

of $21,001,000. Application is made also under Section 18(d) of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act to operate the main, and only, offices of the North 

Fulton Bank and Sandy Springs Bank as branches of the resulting bank, increasing the number of its authorized offices to five.

Competition. The Citizens and Southern National Bank ("C&S National"), 

Savannah, Georgia, is the owner of all the outstanding stock of Citizens and 

Southern Holding Company ("C&S Holding"), Savannah, Georgia, which in 

turn owns 90.25 percent of the stock of East Point Bank and 5.0 percent each 

of the stock of North Fulton Bank and Sandy Springs Bank.

The proposed mergers would consolidate, in East Point Bank, the Fulton 

County activities of the C&S system outside the city of Atlanta. That system in 

the aggregate presently controls 30.2 percent of all deposits held at Fulton 

County commercial bank offices and 28.6 percent of all commercial bank 

offices in the county, making it the largest banking system in the county.

Because the C&S system has such a large share of the banking resources in 

Fulton County, proposed new acquisitions of nonaffiliated banks in the same 

market would raise the most serious competitive problems under the Bank 

Merger Act as amended and under Section 7 of the Clayton Act. Whether 

similar considerations require the Corporation to deny the proposed mergers 

into a C&S subsidiary of two banks in which C&S Holding has only a 5.0 

percent stock interest is the question raised by the present applications.

East Point Bank operates a main office and one branch, both located in East 

Point, a suburban community of about 39,400 population, bordering on 

Atlanta and about 6 miles south of that city's downtown section. East Point 

Bank presently holds 1.0 percent of total Fulton County deposits. The two 

banks it seeks to merge have offices to the north of the city of Atlanta, where 

East Point Bank also has an authorized but unopened branch.

North Fulton Bank is a unit bank located at Roswell (population 5,430), 

about 9 miles north of the city of Atlanta along U.S. Route 19. Established in 

1967, it has 0.2 percent of the total commercial bank deposits in Fulton 

County. Saqdy Springs Bank, also a unit bank, is about 8 miles south of 

Roswell and lies just north of the city of Atlanta. Established in 1959, it 

controls 0.8 percent of the total commercial bank deposits in Fulton County. 

The authorized branch of East Point Bank lies approximately midway between 

Roswell and Sandy Springs. These three offices service a combined area in 

which six other commercial banks, i.e., the second, third, fourth, and fifth 

largest Atlanta banks, as well as two local banks in Roswell, have eight authorized offices.

The banks involved in the proposed mergers do not compete today and 

never have competed in the past. The two smaller banks were both organized

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 99

under C&S guidance and direction at a time when Georgia law did not permit 

C&S National or any other Atlanta bank to branch outside the city of Atlanta. 

A close working relationship has existed ever since, and a majority of the stock 

in each bank has been held continuously by directors, officers, and employees 

of C&S National, directors, officers, and employees of subsidiary banks of C&S 

Holding, and a number of influential customers who maintain significant banking relationships with one or more such banks. The remaining stock is well 

dispersed, with no significant blocs held independently of the C&S system. 

From the inception of both banks, their management has been drawn from the 

C&S system, C&S National has hired all their employees, and these employees 

participate fully in the various employee benefits provided by the C&S system. 

Customers seeking services not provided by Sandy Springs Bank or North 

Fulton Bank are referred to C&S National, and that bank provides credit 

services, investment advice, and numerous other services for the two smaller, 

banks in much the same manner as it does for its own branches or subsidiary 

banks. Like the other banks in the C&S system, these 5 percent banks use the 

C&S name and logo and advertise jointly. More than 40 percent of their 

respective loan portfolios are loans purchased from C&S National, while their 

buildings have been leased from other C&S entities. When additional capital 

became desirable, C&S National subscribed to capital notes of each bank. In 

short, North Fulton Bank and Sandy Springs Bank have been recognized by the 

public and C&S National as part of the C&S system since their inception.

Under these circumstances, the proposed mergers of these two 5 percent 

banks into a majority-owned C&S subsidiary would not eliminate any existing 

competition between them or between either bank and any other C&S unit. 

Such mergers would not alter the existing competitive structure of Fulton 

County in any way or add to the concentration of banking resources now held 

by the C&S system. The Corporation also finds that the opening of these two 

de novo banks served the convenience and needs of their respective communities and enhanced competition in both areas without increasing the percentage of Fulton County deposits then controlled by the C&S system.

Furthermore, the Corporation finds no reasonable probability that North 

Fulton Bank or Sandy Springs Bank would become disassociated from the C&S 

system in the future if the proposed mergers are denied. This conclusion is 

based in part on the close working relationship described above and the continuing nature of that relationship throughout the history of both banks. The 

following considerations also appear relevant.

The relationship between each bank and the C&S system has been mutually 

advantageous; voluntary disaffiliation would run the risk of significant transfers 

of banking relationships and official staff, and a consequent weakening of the 

ability of both banks to compete in the new and intensely competitive climate 

of countywide branching.

Neither bank has had significant transfers of stock since it was organized, 

and there is some evidence that persons who bought shares initially expected a 

merger into C&S National or a C&S majority-owned subsidiary whenever 

Georgia law was changed to permit it. The virtually unanimous vote of the 

shareholders of both banks approving the proposed merger into East Point 

Bank tends to confirm this expectation and attests to the complete acceptance 

of C&S direction by shareholders as well as directors of the two banks.

In the one recent example of voluntary disaffiliation by a 5 percent bank 

from the C&S system— out of more than 30 possibilities statewide— that bank

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
100 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

had a very significant bloc of stock held independently of C&S influence and a 

history of local independence on the part of its board of directors and top 

management. Its disaffiliation does not increase the likelihood of disaffiliation 

of North Fulton Bank or Sandy Springs Bank if the present mergers are denied.

If voluntary disaffiliation represents no more than an unlikely possibility, 

the Corporation finds itself unable to conclude that the proposed mergers 

would eliminate any significant potential for increased competition between 

the two banks or between either of them and the rest of the C&S system 

banks.

The Corporation concludes that the proposed mergers would not be anticompetitive either as to existing or as to potential competition.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. These factors are 

satisfactory with respect to each of the banks involved and are so projected for 

the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. In view of the 

close working relationship that presently exists between the C&S system and 

these two banks, consummation of the mergers proposed would not change, in 

any significant way, the ability of Sandy Springs Bank or North Fulton Bank 

to serve the convenience and needs of Fulton County residents.

With the various factors to be considered weighing neither for approval nor 

denial, the Corporation concludes that the management decision to restructure 

the existing C&S system in the manner proposed should be honored. Accordingly, approval of the applications appears to be warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The Connecticut Bank and Trust 

Company

Hartford, Connecticut

1,114,463 60 61

to merge with

The Columbus Industrial Bank

Bridgeport

100 1

Summary report by Attorney General, June 22, 1971 

Connecticut Bank arid Trust Company does not now operate any offices in 

the vicinity of Bridgeport. The closest offices of Connecticut Bank and Trust 

Company are in New Haven, about 20 miles northeast. It does not appear that 

Connecticut Bank and Trust Company's offices in New Haven draw substantial 

business from Bridgeport. Moreover, Columbus Bank's service area is confined 

to its immediate vicinity. Therefore, we conclude that the proposed merger is 

unlikely to eliminate significant existing competition.

Under Connecticut law, commercial banks may open de novo branches 

throughout the state, except in communities subject to home office protection. 

Connecticut Bank and Trust Company is patently capable of establishing de

novo branches, and has received approval to open new branches in Fairfield, 

adjacent to Bridgeport, and in Milford, about nine miles east of Bridgeport. 

Because of home office protection, Connecticut Bank and Trust Company is

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 101

precluded from branching into Bridgeport itself, but it may be possible for 

entry into Bridgeport itself to be accomplished via the holding company 

device.

However, Columbus Bank is very small, and, from a competitive standpoint, 

its acquisition is tantamount to de novo entry into the City of Bridgeport. 

Therefore, although Connecticut Bank and Trust Company would appear 

capable of entering the broader Bridgeport area absent the proposed merger, 

we conclude that this merger would have no significant adverse effect on 

potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 8, 1971

The Connecticut Bank and Trust Company, Hartford, Connecticut 

("Connecticut Bank"), a State member bank with total resources of 

$1,114,463,000 and total deposits of $929,007,000, has applied, pursuant to 

Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The Columbus Industrial Bank, 

Bridgeport, Connecticut ("Columbus"), a State noninsured bank with total 

resources of $100,000. The banks would merge under the charter and title of 

Connecticut Bank and, as an incident to the merger, the one office of Columbus would become a branch of the resulting bank, increasing the number of its 

offices to 61.

Competition. Connecticut Bank operates 60 offices which serve all of central Connecticut from Enfield, Somers, and Stafford, which border on Massachusetts, through the capitol region surrounding Hartford to New Haven, the 

principal city of south-central Connecticut. Other areas served are southeastern 

Connecticut around New London and Norwich; northeastern Connecticut near 

Brooklyn and Killingly; Winchester and Torrington in northwestern Connecticut; and Mansfield and Windham in the east-central portion of the State. While 

urban centers in Connecticut generally declined in population between 1960 

and 1970, the growth of suburban communities around these urban centers 

increased substantially, with the State as a whole growing by 19.6 percent. The 

following are growth rates in the 10-year period for Standard Metropolitan 

Statistical Areas (SMSAs) served by Connecticut Bank: Hartford 20.9 percent, 

New Haven 10.8 percent, New London-Groton-Norwich 21.9 percent.

Connecticut Bank is the second largest bank in Connecticut, holding 17.7 

percent of all deposits at insured commercial banks as of June 30, 1971. 

Connecticut law permits statewide de novo branching subject to home office 

protection. Connecticut Bank, because of this home office protection feature, 

is barred from branching de novo into Bridgeport, the State's second largest 

city and most important manufacturing center.

Columbus, an uninsured industrial bank, operates only one office in Bridgeport, which is located 18 miles southwest of New Haven on Long Island Sound. 

The population of Bridgeport was substantially the same in 1970 as it was in 

1960, but the Bridgeport SMSA experienced a population gain of 15.1 percent 

in the same decade. Although classified as an area of substantial unemployment, Bridgeport is expected to remain strong as an industrial center.

The office of Connecticut Bank nearest to Bridgeport is its recently opened 

Fairfield Branch, about 3 miles to the west. Columbus, however, has no deposits, no trust department, and a loan portfolio of less than $100,000. For this 

reason and because Connecticut Bank appears to draw very little business from

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
102 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Bridgeport, the proposed merger would not eliminate any significant existing 

competition between the two institutions.

As previously noted, commercial banks may branch de novo throughout the 

State, except in communities subject to home office protection. Thus, each of 

the participating banks could legally branch de novo into the trade areas served 

by the other although not into their respective home office communities. This 

is most unlikely for Columbus because of its small size and limited services. 

While Connecticut Bank is currently branching de novo outside Bridgeport, its 

draw at these offices is not likely to bring it into increased competition with 

Columbus. Thus, their proposed merger is not likely to have any adverse effect 

on the potential for increased competition between the two institutions in the 

future.

Because of Columbus's small size and limited services, the proposed merger 

is the practical equivalent of de novo entry by Connecticut Bank into the city 

of Bridgeport, which is now served by only four commercial banks, the largest 

of which rank fourth, fifth, and eighth among all commercial banks in the 

State. The proposed merger, by replacing an industrial bank of $100,000 which 

does not accept deposits with a branch of a commercial bank having resources 

of over $1 billion, should be a significant stimulant to future competition 

within the city of Bridgeport.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

satisfactory financial and managerial resources for the business they do as 

independent institutions, as would the resulting bank. The small size and ineffectiveness of Columbus within its trade area indicate that its future prospects should be better as part of the resulting bank than as an independent 

unit.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Consummation of 

this proposed transaction would bring to the customers of Columbus a complete range of commercial banking services, covering the retail, wholesale, and 

trust requirements of all potential customers. In addition, the proposed transaction would offer to all residents of Bridgeport an additional option for such 

services.

Based on the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded 

that approval of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Terrebonne Bank and Trust Company

Houma, Louisiana 

(in organization)

200 9

to merge with

Bank of Terrebonne & Trust Company

Houma

73,674 9

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 103

Summary report by Attorney General, July 19, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Terrebonne Bank & 

Trust Company (org.) would become a subsidiary of a bank holding company. 

The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a 

non-operating institution; as such and without regard to the acquisition of the 

surviving bank by a bank holding company, it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 8, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for Terrebonne Bank and Trust Company, Houma, Louisiana ("New Bank"), a 

proposed new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger with Bank of 

Terrebonne & Trust Company, Houma, Louisiana ("Other Bank"), total resources $73,674,000, under New Bank's charter and title. The resulting bank 

will operate from the present main office and eight existing branches of Other 

Bank.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means for The 

Terrebonne Corporation, Houma, Louisiana, which has an application pending 

before the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System for prior approval to become a one-bank holding company, to acquire 100 percent of the 

voting stock of the successor bank to this merger. New Bank will not be in 

operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business at the existing locations 

of Other Bank, and with the same management. The proposal will not, perse, 

change the banking services Other Bank has provided usefully and conveniently 

to the Terrebonne Parish area. All factors required to be considered pertinent 

to each application are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n kin g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Magnolia Bank

Magnolia, Mississippi 

(change title to Southwest 

Mississippi Bank)

8,242 2 3

to consolidate with

Citizens Savings Bank, Magnolia,

Mississippi

Magnolia

4,362 1

Summary report by Attorney General, December 4, 1970 

The head offices of the merging banks are located one-half block apart in the 

town of Magnolia. Both banks operate in the same service and banking market

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
104 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

area, and it is estimated that 30 per cent of their deposit and loan customers 

maintain common accounts in both banks. Therefore, it would appear that this 

merger will eliminate substantial direct competition between the merging 

banks.

An appropriate market in which to measure the competitive effects of the 

merger is Pike County, wherein all offices of the participating banks are 

located. As of December 31, 1969, Deposit Guaranty National Bank (with an 

office in McComb) held 48.5 per cent of total county deposits and First 

National Bank (also with an office in McComb) held 42.9 per cent of such 

deposits. Their combined share of these deposits was in excess of 90 per 

cent. As of the same date, Magnolia Bank held 1 per cent of such deposits and 

Citizens Savings Bank .36 per cent. The two other banks in Pike County are 

larger than either of the participants and controlled 4.6 and 1.1 per cent of 

total county I PC deposits.

These concentration figures may understate the competitive effects of this 

merger, for competition between the merging banks would appear to be most 

direct in Magnolia itself, where there are no other commercial banking alternatives. The proposed merger would combine the only competitive alternatives in 

Magnolia, and would tend to deter the development of a more competitive 

commercial banking structure in that community.

Since this merger would combine two direct competitors, we conclude that 

it would have an adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 8, 1971

Magnolia Bank, Magnolia, Mississippi ("Applicant'7), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $8,242,000 and total deposits of 

$7,423,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to consolidate with Citizens Savings Bank, Magnolia, Mississippi ("Citizens"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $4,362,000 and total 

deposits of $3,988,000, under the charter of Applicant and with the title 

"Southwest Mississippi Bank." The one office of Citizens would become a 

branch of the resulting bank, increasing the number of its offices to three.

Competition. Each of the banks which seek to merge has its main office in 

Magnolia, a small town of 1,913 population in the southern part of Pike 

County, Mississippi. In addition, Applicant operates a branch office in Osyka, 

an even smaller community 10 miles south of Magnolia, near the Louisiana 

border. Although Magnolia is the county seat, the economic center of this part 

of Mississippi is McComb, about 6 miles north of Magnolia. McComb has three 

commercial banks: branches of Deposit Guaranty National Bank and First 

National Bank of Jackson, the two largest banks in Mississippi, and the independent, local Bank of McComb. Six miles south of Osyka, the Guaranty Bank 

and Trust Company of Hammond, Louisiana, has a branch at Kentwood, a 

community of 2,736 persons. All of these communities are connected in a 

north-south direction by Interstate Highway 55 and U.S. Route 51. The proposed merger would thus have its most immediate impact in a banking market 

consisting of Pike County and the Kentwood portion of northern Tangipahoa 

Parish in Louisiana. This market contains a population of approximately

35,000 persons.

Pike County and the town of Magnolia both experienced declines in population from 1960 to 1970, while Kentwood, Louisiana, increased in population

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 105

by only 129 persons. There has been some influx of light industry into the 

area, but an offsetting decline in agricultural activity makes it likely that the 

area's future economic prospects will be relatively static. In addition, effective 

buying income for Pike County families is lower than the Mississippi average 

and, for both areas, is significantly below the nationwide average.

The proposed merger of the two banks in Magnolia would reduce the number of separate banks in this limited market from six to five, but it does not 

appear that competition would be significantly affected. Both banks offer 

limited services, the same rates on loans and deposits and identical service 

charges. Both banks have been inaggressive competitors in Magnolia and in the 

relevant geographic market, both have small staffs, and Citizens in particular 

has the additional handicaps of minimal net income and a deteriorated physical 

plant.

The two large Jackson Banks in McComb dominate the relevant geographic 

market, holding between them about 58.2 percent of local IPC deposits. The 

Bank of McComb holds about 15.8 percent of such deposits, the Kentwood 

branch of Guaranty Bank & Trust Company about 10.6 percent, Applicant 

about 10.2 percent, and Citizens about 5.2 percent. The proposed merger 

would increase Applicant's share of total IPC deposits in the market, but the 

resulting bank would continue to rank far behind the two large branch banks in 

McComb, while overcoming the advantage of size, which Bank of McComb 

presently enjoys with respect to Applicant.

The proposed merger should enable the resulting bank to realize, in time, 

certain limited economies of scale, since a majority of the assets of both 

Applicant and Citizens are in real estate loans and business loans— the two 

functions in which the Corporation's research indicates some savings as volume 

increases. This might enable the resulting bank to increase its range of services 

and to open one or two de novo branches elsewhere in the market, thus 

enhancing competition with the remaining four commercial banks.

While these same benefits might be realized by some alternative merger with 

banks not presently in the market, only the two banks in Brookhaven, some 30 

miles away to the north of Magnolia, appear to present realistic possibilities for 

such mergers. One of these is closely held by its controlling family, and a 

merger with Applicant of Citizens would probably require a significant dilution 

of their control position.

Given the static economic conditions and limited population in the relevant 

geographic market, the small size of both banks, the lack of vigorous competition between them, the presence of four remaining alternatives, and the very 

limited number of less anticompetitive merger options likely to be available to 

either bank, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the proposed transaction would not substantially lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or 

in any other manner be in restraint of trade in any section of the country.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

satisfactory financial and managerial resources for the business they do as 

independent institutions. Citizens is ill-equipped for the future, however, 

because its limited size and earnings restrict its ability to attract additional 

staff, to renovate its physical plant and equipment, and to expand its service 

offerings. The resulting bank, however, would have satisfactory prospects for 

the future.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
106 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. While the proposed 

transaction would reduce the number of separate banks in the relevant geographic market from six to five, the resulting bank should prove better able to 

service the customers of both Applicant and Citizens and is more likely to 

provide a realistic alternative to the three banks in McComb than either bank 

separately. Better installment lending service, longer banking hours, a credit 

card service, and more attractive and convenient facilities are likely subsequent 

to the merger.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The M. W. Bank & Trust Company

Cleveland, Ohio 

(in organization; change title to

The Midwest Bank & Trust Company)

500 1

to merge with

The Midwest Bank & Trust Company

Cleveland

35,231 1

Summary report by Attorney General, August 13, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which M. W. Bank & Trust 

Company would become a subsidiary of Midwest Bancorporation (of Ohio), 

Inc., a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely 

combine an existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such and without 

regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by Midwest Bancorporation (of 

Ohio), Inc., it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 8, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for The M. W. Bank & Trust Company, Cleveland, Ohio ("New Bank"), a 

proposed new bank in organization, and for prior consent to its merger with 

The Midwest Bank & Trust Company, Cleveland, Ohio, ("Other Bank"), a 

State nomember bank, total resources $35,231,000 as of June 30, 1971, under 

New Bank's charter and Other Bank's title. The resulting bank will operate 

Other Bank's one existing office and one approved branch, and initial Class A 

capital of New Bank will be retired.

The new bank formation and merger are being utilized by Midwest Bancorporation (of Ohio), Inc. ("Holding Company"), solely as a means to acquire 

control of Other Bank. Holding Company's application to become a registered 

bank holding company and to acquire control of Other Bank is now pending 

before the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. New Bank will 

not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 107

to consummation it will operate the same banking business of Other Bank at its 

one existing office and one approved branch, and with the same management. 

The proposal will not, per se, change the banking services Other Bank has 

provided to the Cleveland area. All factors required to be considered pertinent 

to each application are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

F. C. Bank Co.

Huron, Ohio

(in organization; change title to 

The Firelands Community Bank)

250 2

to merge with

The Firelands Community Bank

Huron

18,361 2

Summary report by Attorney General, August 13, 1971

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which F. C. Bank Company 

(Org.) would become a subsidiary of Midwest Bancorporation (of Ohio), Inc., a 

bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine 

an existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such and without regard 

to the acquisition of the surviving bank by Midwest Bancorporation (of Ohio), 

Inc., it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 8, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for F. C. Bank Company, Huron, Ohio ("New Bank"), a proposed new bank in 

organization, and for prior consent to its merger with The Firelands Community Bank, Huron, Ohio, ("Other Bank"), a State nonmember bank, total 

resources $18,361,000 as of June 30, 1971, under New Bank's charter and 

Other Bank's title. The resulting bank will operate Other Bank's two existing 

offices, and initial Class A capital of New Bank will be retired.

The new bank formation and merger are being utilized by Midwest Bancorporation (of Ohio), Inc. ("Holding Company"), solely as a means to acquire 

control of Other Bank. Holding Company's application to become a registered 

bank holding company and to acquire control of Other Bank is now pending 

before the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. New Bank will 

not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent 

to consummation it will operate the same banking business of Other Bank at its 

existing locations and with the same management. The proposal will not, per 

se, change the banking services which Other Bank has provided to the Erie

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
108 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

County area. All factors required to be considered pertinent to each application are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

op e ra te d

The First Trust State Bank 

Zanesville, Ohio 

(in organization; change title to 

The First Trust and Savings Bank)

600 5

to merge with

The First Trust and Savings Bank

Zanesville

27,058 5

Summary report by Attorney General, June 22, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which First Trust State Bank 

(org.) would become a holding company. The instant merger, however, would 

merely combine an existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such, and 

without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by Central Bancorporation, Inc., it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 15, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, applications have been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for The First Trust State Bank, Zanesville, Ohio ("New Bank"), a proposed 

new bank in organization, and for prior consent to its merger with The First 

Trust and Savings Bank, Zanesville, Ohio ("Other Bank"), total resources as of 

April 20, 1971, $27,058,000, under New Bank's charter and Other Bank's title. 

The resulting bank will operate from the present main office and four existing 

branches of Other Bank,.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means for the 

Central Bancorporation, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio, a registered bank holding company, to acquire Other Bank. The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 

System has approved the holding company's acquisition of 100 percent of the 

voting stock of the successor bank to this merger. New Bank will not be in 

operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business at the existing locations 

of Other Bank and with the same management. The proposal will not, perse, 

change the banking services which Other Bank has provided usefully and conveniently to the Zanesville area. All factors required to be considered as to each 

application are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 109

Resources

(in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Millersburg Trust Company

Millersburg, Pennsylvania 

(change title to Mid Penn Bank)

15,202 2 3

to merge with

Farmers' State Bank of Dalmatia

Dalmatia

5,306 1

Summary report by Attorney General, April 28, 1971

The head offices of the two banks are only ten miles apart, with nro banking 

offices intervening. The Mahantango Mountain forms a geographical barrier 

between the two areas, however. Nevertheless, the banks have a total of 91 

common customers, and it appears that there is some existing competition 

between the banks which will be eliminated by the merger.

Both banks could branch de novo into the communities served by the other, 

thus coming more fully into competition with each other. In view of the 

relatively small size of these banks and of the communities involved, however, 

such potential competition is not considered significant.

Accordingly, it is our view that the merger may have some adverse effect on 

competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 15, 1971

Millersburg Trust Company, Millersburg, Pennsylvania ("Trust Company"), 

an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $15,202,000 and 

total deposits of $13,533,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other 

provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior 

approval to merge with Farmers' State Bank Dalmatia, Dalmatia, Pennsylvania, 

("Farmers"), which has total resources of $5,306,000 and total deposits of 

$4,578,000. The banks would merge under the charter of Trust Company and 

with the title "M id Penn Bank." The sole office of Farmers would become a 

branch of the resulting bank.

Competition. Trust Company operates two offices: the main office in 

Millersburg (population 3,074) and one branch in Elizabethville (population

1,629). Its trade area extends eastward from the Susquehanna River, covering 

the northern portion of Dauphin County and a small portion of northwestern 

Schuylkill County. Industrial employment is available in Millersburg and 

Elizabethville, while the surrounding area is principally agricultural.

Farmers operates its sole office in Dalmatia, a small village of about 500 

persons, which is located on the eastern side of the Susquehanna River, about

10 miles north of Millersburg, in lower Northumberland County. The local 

economy is largely agricultural, but there is a blouse factory and a chickenprocessing plant as well.

The proposed merger would affect the public's choice of banking services 

only within a sparsely populated area on the eastern side of the Susquehanna 

River, consisting of Dalmatia and neighboring communities within a radius of 

15 miles. Including both Millersburg and Elizabethville in the population count 

of this area, there are an estimated 7,800 people who are served by five comDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
110 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

mercial banks. These five banks include the two applicants, the $13.6 million 

Upper Dauphin National Bank, headquartered in Millers burg, the $3.9 million 

Halifax National Bank, and the $4.5 million Herndon National Bank. While the 

two applicants are both located within this area, their main offices are 10 miles 

apart and are separated by a range of mountains. Neither appears to draw much 

business from the primary service area of the other, although there are a 

number of common customers. Their proposed merger, accordingly, would not 

eliminate significant existing competition between them.

Under Pennsylvania law, banks may branch de novo in their headquarters 

county and in any adjacent county, but, given the small size of the communities here involved, increased competition between Trust Company and 

Farmers through de novo branching appears remote.

The proposed merger would make Trust Company the largest bank within 

15 miles of Dalmatia, on the eastern side of the Susquehanna, and would 

reduce from five to four the number of separate banks operating therein, but 

the number of such options is still high for 7,800 people. Should the future 

growth of the area warrant new banking offices, several banks larger than the 

resulting bank would remain as potential retrants into the area, including banks 

headquartered in Harrisburg and Sunbury.

Within the nine-county area in which Trust Company can establish offices, 

it would hold, together with Farmers, only 0.6 percent of aggregate commercial bank deposits.

In light of these circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that 

the proposed merger would not, in any economically significant section of the 

country, substantially lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any 

other manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. The financial and 

managerial resources for the applicant banks, as well as their future prospects, 

are satisfactory, as they would be for the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would substitute for Farmers Bank a more aggressive branch bank with 

greater lending capacity, a higher percentage of its assets in loans, and with 

trust services, a bank credit card, automatic savings plans, and a computer 

service for deposit accounts. This broadening of the range of services now 

offered by Farmers Bank should prove convenient to most Farmers Bank customers.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Southern Bank and Trust Company

Greenville, South Carolina

105,769 20 23

to merge with

The First National Bank of Laurens

Laurens

5,612 3

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 111

Summary report by Attorney General, July 7, 1971

Southern Bank's closest branch to First National is located in Gray Court, 

Laurens County, seven miles northwest of the City of Laurens, with a major 

highway and no intervening banks between the two cities. If the merger is 

consummated, therefore, some direct competition will be eliminated.

As of June 30, 1970, Southern Bank was the second largest of three banks 

serving the City of Greenville with 16.1 per cent of the city's total deposits, 

ranked third in size out of seven banks in Greenville County, and controlled 15 

per cent of the county's total deposits. Its Gray Court branch held 1.9 per cent 

of Laurens County's total deposits. First National was the second largest of 

two banks serving the City of Laurens, with 25.2 per cent of the city's total 

deposits. It ranked third in size out of six banks in Laurens County, and held

11.5 per cent of the county's total deposits. Four banks held 94.5 per cent of 

such deposits (as of June 30, 1970) and this merger would increase that share 

to 96.4 per cent.

Based upon the elimination of some banking competition between two 

banks holding about 2 per cent and 11.5 per cent of bank deposits in Laurens 

County, together with the resulting increase in concentration by the four 

largest banks in Laurens County from 94 to 96 per cent have an adverse effect 

on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 15, 1971

Southern Bank and Trust Company, Greenville, South Carolina ("Southern"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $105,769,000, 

has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The 

First National Bank of Laurens, Laurens, South Carolina ("FNB Laurens"), 

with total resources of $5,612,000. The banks would merge under the charter 

and title of Southern and, as an incident to the merger, the three offices of 

FNB Laurens would become branches of the resulting bank, increasing the 

number of its offices to 23.

Competition. Southern, the sixth largest bank in South Carolina, operates 

20 offices in seven of the 46 counties in the State, all in its northwest section. 

The area served by these offices is largely dependent on the textile and related 

industries, bordering on and converging with the fast-growing Piedmont Industrial Crescent, of which Greenville, the site of Southern's main office, is a part. 

With 3.7 percent of statewide commercial bank deposits, Southern ranks behind the five larger banks in the State, which hold, respectively, 22.5 percent,

13.3 percent, 9.6 percent, 8.7 percent, and 3.7 percent of these deposits.

FNB Laurens was organized in 1961 and its offices are all situated in the 

city of Laurens (population 10,298), which is the seat of Laurens County. The 

economy of this area is described as primarily industrial, with textiles and 

related manufacturing industries predominating.

A slight overlap exists in the service areas of the two banks. Southern's 

nearest office to Laurens is in Gray Court, 9 miles northwest, but'the intervening area is sparsely populated and originates little banking business. Gray 

Court's population is only 859. The deposits held by Southern's branch office 

there, acquired by merger in 1964, amounted to approximately $740,000 by 

June 30, 1970, which was only 1.9 percent of total Laurens County comDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
112 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

mercial bank deposits on that date. While FNB Laurens holds some $100,000 

in deposits originating in the Gray Court area, Southern reports no business 

derived from the area served by FNB Laurens. Hence it appears that the proposal would eliminate little, if any, existing competition between them.

The proposed merger, because of the disparate size of the two banks, would 

have no competitive effect in Southern's present service area and should serve 

to stimulate competition in the Laurens area, where FNB Laurens, a small, 

conservative bank, presently competes with two local banks at least three times 

larger. These two banks hold 39.6 percent and 34.0 percent of total Laurens 

County commercial bank deposits, respectively, while FNB Laurens holds 11.5 

percent of such deposits. FNB Laurens also competes with a branch of First 

National Bank of South Carolina, the State's third largest commercial bank, in 

Clinton, 8 miles from Laurens, and with a branch of Bankers Trust of South 

Carolina, the State's fourth largest commercial bank, in Joanna, 10 miles southeast of Laurens.

South Carolina law permits statewide branch banking, but the limited resources and conservative management of FNB Laurens make it unlikely that 

FNB Laurens would attempt de novo branching beyond the Laurens area, and 

certainly not into the sparsely populated and unpromising Gray Court area. 

Southern, on the other hand, has a history of aggressive expansion, by both 

merger and de novo branching. While the section of Laurens County served by 

FNB Laurens is growing fairly rapidly and has bright economic prospects, it is 

considered improbable that such growth would be sufficient in the near future 

to justify the establishment of any significant number of additional de novo

offices. Should such growth warrant new branch offices, the State's two largest 

banks and at least two other banks of approximately the same size as Southern, 

but not presently represented in Laurens County, are also potential entrants 

into this market. For this reason, the loss of potential competition between 

Southern and FNB Laurens through de novo branching and the reduction from 

six to five in the number of banking alternatives in Laurens County is not 

likely to have any adverse effect on commercial bank competition in the 

county over the long run.

Moreover, in view of the relatively small share of the statewide banking 

market held by Southern, the proposed merger would have no adverse effect 

on the competitive structure of commercial banking in the State of South 

Carolina as a whole.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

satisfactory financial and managerial resources for their functions as independent banks, and satisfactory future prospects, as would the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would bring to residents of the city of Laurens an aggressive, full-service 

bank with specialized loan services, trust services, and an increased lending 

lim it not now available at any of the three banks serving the city. Similar 

services are available elsewhere in Laurens County, at locations at least 8 miles 

away, but their convenient availability at the county seat should benefit all 

residents of the immediate area.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 113

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs

B a n kin g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Cumberland Bank

Fayetteville, North Carolina 

(in organization; change title to

Cape Fear Bank & Trust Company)

450 3

to merge with

Cape Fear Bank & Trust Company

Fayetteville

17,857 3

Summary report by Attorney General, July 6, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which The Cumberland Bank 

would become a subsidiary of United Carolina Bancshares Corporation, a bank 

holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an 

existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such, and without regard to 

the acquisition of the surviving bank by United Carolina Bancshares Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 27, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, applications have been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for Cumberland Bank, Fayetteville, North Carolina ("Cumberland"), a proposed new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger with Cape Fear 

Bank & Trust Company, Fayetteville, North Carolina ("Cape Fear"), total 

resources $17,857,000, under Cumberland's charter and Cape Fear's title. The 

resulting bank will operate from the present main office and two branches of 

Cape Fear.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means for 

United Carolina Bancshares Corporation, Whiteville, North Carolina, a registered bank holding company, to acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of the 

successor bank to this merger. Cumberland will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business at the existing locations of Cape Fear, and with 

the same management. The proposal wll not, per se, change the banking services which Cape Fear has provided usefully and conveniently to the Fayetteville and Clinton areas. All factors required to be considered pertinent to each 

application are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
114 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Resources

/in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

v in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Commonwealth Bank and Trust Company

Muncy, Pennsylvania

57,348 8 10

to merge with

The First National Bank of Sayre

Sayre

17,717 2

Summary report by Attorney General, July 16, 1971

Commonwealth operates no offices in Bradford County. The closest offices 

of the two banks are approximately 35 miles apart with one or two banks in 

the intervening area. Therefore, the amount of direct competition between the 

banks is probably limited.

Under Pennsylvania statutes, a bank may branch throughout its home office 

county and in contiguous counties. Commonwealth is the fourth largest bank 

able to open a de novo branch in Bradford County which does not already 

operate therein. The three larger banks have total deposits 6f $70, $51 and $50 

million.

As of June 30, 1970, First National was the fourth largest bank in the 

county in terms of total deposits with 13.4 per cent of the county's total 

deposits and the second largest in terms of I PC demand deposits with 17.4 per 

cent. The four largest banks account for 61.6 per cent of total deposits and

66.7 per cent of I PC demand deposits. First National is the largest bank in the 

Sayre area (including one New York bank just across the Pennsylvania border) 

with 35.5 per cent of the total deposits and 40.0 per cent of the IPC demand 

deposits. There are seven banks smaller than First National headquartered in 

Bradford County, including two headquartered in the Sayre area.

Basis for Corporation approval, October 29, 1971

Commonwealth Bank and Trust Company, Muncy, Pennsylvania ("Commonwealth"), a State nonmember bank with total resources of $57,348,000 

and total IPC deposits of $45,787,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) 

and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The First National Bank of Sayre, Sayre, 

Pennsylvania ("FNB Sayre"), with total resources of $17,717,000 and total 

IPC deposits of $15,093,000. The banks would merge under the charter and 

title of Commonwealth and, as an incident to the merger, the two offices of 

FNB Sayre would become branches of Commonwealth, increasing the number 

of its offices to 10.

Competition. Commonwealth operates eight offices, serving communities in 

widely separated areas in Lycoming and Tioga counties and the east-central 

portion of Potter County, Pennsylvania. Their economies are diverse, ranging 

from agricultural, dairy farming, and lumbering activities to manufacturing and 

industry.

Both of FNB Sayre's offices are located in Sayre (1970 population: 7,473), 

the largest borough in Bradford County, which is situated in northeastern

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 115

Pennsylvania on the New York State border. The county is predominantly 

rural and sparsely populated, with only limited amounts of industry. A substantial number of area residents apparently commute northwest to Elmira, 

New York, northeast to Owego, New York, and south to Towanda, Pennsylvania, to work. Including offices in these three communities as well as others 

within a 20-mile radius of Sayre, FNB Sayre would be the fifth largest of 15 

commercial banks in terms of area deposits, with 6.0 percent of total IPC 

deposits held at commercial bank offices within the relevant market area.

The nearest offices of Commonwealth to FNB Sayre are approximately 40 

miles west and southwest in neighboring Tioga County, and travel between 

them is not convenient. The two banks serve separate trade areas, and the 

proposed merger would not eliminate any existing competition between Commonwealth and FNB Sayre. The proposed merger should, in fact, stimulate 

competition in the Sayre banking market in which FNB Sayre competes with 

much larger banks having a larger share of area IPC deposits.

Under Pennsylvania law, Commonwealth has legal authority to branch de

novo into the Sayre market and FNB Sayre has legal authority to branch de

novo into Tioga and Lycoming, two of the counties in which Commonwealth 

has offices today.

Such de novo branching on the part of FNB Sayre is considered remote 

because of its limited resources and the distances that would be involved. Such 

de novo branching on the part of Commonwealth also seems unlikely because 

of the limited population of the Sayre market, the presence of a large number 

of competing banks in that market, and the relatively greater attractiveness of 

other locations for de novo branching in the 10-county area in which banks 

headquartered in Lycoming County can branch or merge under Pennsylvania 

law. The proposed merger, for these reasons, is not likely to eliminate any 

significant potential for increased competition between the two institutions 

through de novo branching.

While an alternative merger by FNB Sayre might bring the resulting bank 

into increased competition in the future with Commonwealth, neither FNB 

Sayre nor Commonwealth has such a large percentage of the banking resources 

in its respective branching or merging area as to require denial of the proposed 

merger. In its 10-county area of potential competition, Commonwealth would 

increase its percentage share of total commercial bank deposits held at offices 

therein from 4.8 percent to 6.2 percent, ranking second in this respect, after 

Northern Central Bank and Trust Company, Williamsport.

In reviewing the application, the Corporation has noted the ownership, by 

Commonwealth, of stock in five banks within this relevant 10-county area. 

Three of these banks may be considered significant actual or potential competitors. While Commonwealth does not control 10 percent or more of the commercial bank deposits in its overall banking and merging area, and so does not 

fall within the precise language of the Corporation's policy requiring a divestiture of all stocks which such a bank might own in other banks within its 

branching and merging area,3 the Corporation nonetheless considers it advis3 See the Corporation's decision of December 1, 1970, with respect to the proposed 

merger of The Pennsylvania Bank and Trust Company, Titusville, and The Exchange 

Bank and Trust Company, Franklin, and its decision of July 19, 1971, with respect to 

American Bank and Trust Company of Pennsylvania, Reading, and Slatington National 

Bank and Trust Company, Slatington.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
116 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

able, if the proposed merger is approved, to require Commonwealth to divest 

itself, within a reasonable period of time, of the stock it now holds in the three 

banks which may be considered significant actual or potential competitors, 

thereby avoiding any artificial restraint on banking competition in the future in 

this relevant 10-county area.

For the reasons stated, and with such a divestiture of stock in actual and 

potential competitors, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Commonwealth has 

satisfactory financial and managerial resources, as would the resulting bank. 

FNB Sayre's management weaknesses would be eliminated by the proposed 

merger. Future prospects for the resulting bank would be favorable.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Consummation of 

the proposed merger would bring to customers of FNB Sayre access to a much 

larger and more sophisticated management team, additional computer services 

not presently available, and significantly larger lending limits. According to the 

application, lower interest rates would be paid on regular savings accounts, but 

area competition should provide dissatisfied depositors with other alternatives.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

First Seneca Bank and Trust Company

Oil City, Pennsylvania

143,742 15 23

to merge with

Lawrence Savings and Trust Company

New Castle

49,414 8

Summary report by Attorney General, January 20, 1971 

First Seneca estimates that its Grove City and Sharon branches, located in 

Mercer County, draw approximately $300,000 in deposits from the Lawrence 

Trust service area, while the Volant office of Lawrence Trust draws approximately $120,000 in deposits from the areas serviced by the Grove City and 

Sharon branches of First Seneca. The distances between Lawrence Trust's 

Volant branch and the Grove City and Sharon offices of First Seneca are 

approximately ten miles and 16 miles, respectively, with several banks intervening. Thus, it would appear that only an insignificant amount of direct 

competition would be eliminated by the proposed merger.

Linder Pennsylvania law, Lawrence Trust could be permitted to open de

novo branches in Mercer, Butler and Beaver Counties. First Seneca operates six 

branches in Mercer County, and as of June 30, 1968, held about 19 per cent of 

commercial bank deposits therein. Thus, the proposed merger would eliminate

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 117

some potential competition in Mercer County. However, Lawrence Trust is not 

among the very largest potential entrants into Mercer County, which does not 

appear to be growing at a fast rate.

First Seneca is presently unable to open branch offices in Lawrence County 

but would become eligible to do so if the proposed relocation of its home 

office into Butler County takes place. (This relocation is necessary for 

consummation of the proposed merger with Lawrence Trust.) First Seneca 

could effect such a move without giving up any of its existing branches; its 

present ability to branch northwards into Crawford, Warren and Forrest 

Counties would be lost in return for the opportunity to expand into Lawrence 

County and other counties to the south in the vicinity of Pittsburgh. Thus, if 

First Seneca moves its home office to Butler, it would become one of the 

largest possible entrants into Lawrence County.

Banking in Lawrence County is concentrated; Lawrence Trust holds the 

second largest share of county deposits, about 28 per cent. The other three 

banks hold shares of 33 per cent, 25 per cent and 14 per cent.

Thus, this particular merger would combine a bank with a substantial share 

of the deposits in Lawrence County with one of the largest and most capable 

banks which could enter the county de novo, although such entry would 

require a change of home office. There is some question as to the state of the 

economy and population of Lawrence County, but it appears to be evolving 

from a relatively static position to one of some growth. In these circumstances, 

we conclude that the proposed merger would have an adverse effect on 

potential competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 3, 1971

First Seneca Bank and Trust Company, Oil City, Pennsylvania ("First 

Seneca"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of 

$143,742,000 and total deposits of $125,060,000, has applied, pursuant to 

Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior approval to merge with Lawrence Savings and Trust 

Company, New Castle, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania ("Lawrence Savings"), 

an insured State member bank with total resources of $49,414,000 and total 

deposits of $42,320,000. The banks would merge under the charter and title of 

First Seneca. Application also is made under Section 18(d) of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act to establish Lawrence Savings' eight offices as branches 

of the resulting bank and to relocate the main office of the resulting bank from

Oil City, Venango County, Pennsylvania, to Butler, Butler County, Pennsylvania, where First Seneca has recently opened a de novo branch.

Competition. First Seneca presently operates 15 offices in the northwestern 

section of Pennsylvania, six of which are located in Clarion County (population 

38,414, up 2.7 percent since 1960), six of which are located in Mercer County 

(population 127,175, down 0.3 percent since 1960), two of which are located 

in Venango County (population 62,353, down 4.5 percent since 1960), and 

one of which, a recently opened de novo office which First Seneca desires to 

make its main office, is located in Butler County (population 127,941, up 11.6 

percent since 1960). Within these four counties, First Seneca holds approximately 17.2 percent of all commercial bank deposits and operates 19.0 percent 

of all commercial bank offices, ranking first with regard to the total deposits 

held at commercial bank offices in these four counties and second with regard

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
118 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

to the total number of commercial bank offices located within such counties. 

Larger banks than First Seneca, however, operate offices in one or more of the 

four counties indicated. First Seneca has no offices in three counties presently 

open to it under Pennsylvania law (Crawford, Warren, and Forest countie.s to 

the north and east of its present headquarters county of Venango).

Lawrence Savings operates seven offices within Lawrence County and one 

office within Beaver County, which is adjacent to Lawrence County on the 

south. Lawrence County experienced a 4.9 percent decline in population between 1960 and 1970, and now has 107,374 people. The city of New Castle, in 

which Lawrence Savings is headquartered, had a population of 38,559 in 1970, 

down 13.9 percent since the 1960 census. Twenty offices of four commercial 

banks, all headquartered in New Castle, are located in Lawrence County. The 

First National Bank of Lawrence County is the largest, with deposits of 

$46,467,000, or 32.5 percent of all commercial bank deposits in the county. 

Lawrence Savings is the second largest, with deposits of $37,990,000, or 26.6 

percent of the county total. Peoples Bank of Western Pennsylvania (deposits 

$37,674,000) and The Citizens National Bank of New Castle (deposits 

$20,788,000) rank third and fourth, respectively, with 26.4 percent and 14.5 

percent of such deposits. Lawrence County borders the Ohio State line and 

adjoins only three Pennsylvania counties: Mercer to the north, Butler to the 

east, and Beaver to the south. During the 1960s, Mercer County lost slightly in 

population, Beaver County gained slightly in population, while Butler County 

had impressive growth.

Thus, the area within which Lawrence Savings has its eight offices and the 

area within which First Seneca has all but one of its 15 offices are both 

relatively stagnant in terms of economic growth and prospects. Both areas are 

now dependent on diversified manufacturing activities although agriculture is 

still important.

The closest offices of the two banks— First Seneca's Grove City Office in 

Mercer County and Lawrence Savings' Volant office in Lawrence County— are

10 miles apart but serve separate trade areas. Neither bank draws more than 

minimal deposit or loan business from areas served by the other. A large utility 

firm operating throughout western Pennsylvania is the only common depositor. 

While both banks operate trust departments, neither holds any trust business 

originating in areas served by the other. Their proposed merger would obviously not eliminate any significant existing competition between them.

The proposed merger, on the other hand, would eliminate the possibility of 

increased competition between the two banks in the future, through de novo

branching by First Seneca or by an alternative merger on the part of Lawrence 

Savings.

First Seneca cannot consummate the proposed merger without first moving 

its main office, as it proposes, to a county adjacent to Lawrence County. In 

view of the stable, if not stagnant, economies of the three counties (Crawford, 

Warren, and Forest) in which it would lose the right to branch or merge by 

virtue of a move to Butler County, and in view of the fact that a home office in 

Butler County would open up, to First Seneca, five counties of much greater 

aggregate population and deposit potential (Allegheny, Westmoreland, Armstrong, Beaver, and Lawrence), the proposed move appears reasonably probable 

whether or not the proposed merger is approved. First Seneca is an aggressive, 

well-managed bank that has in the past sought to expand by both the merger

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 119

route and de novo branching. Since its opportunities to continue to do so 

without a move of its main office are limited, the Corporation considers it 

reasonable to conclude that its main office is likely to be moved to Butler 

County whether or not the proposed merger is approved.

Once headquartered in Butler County, First Seneca would be the largest 

bank with legal authority to enter Lawrence County by merger or de novo

branching and would therefore become the most likely potential entrant into 

Lawrence County. Since the Lawrence County banking market is highly concentrated among four banks, it would be clearly preferable, as a competitive 

matter, to require First Seneca to enter Lawrence County by de novo branching rather than by merger with the second largest bank already competing in 

the market. Moreover, the present population (5,370 persons) for each commercial bank office in Lawrence County, and the income levels prevailing in 

the county (which approximate the statewide average), do not appear to preclude additional de novo branching in Lawrence County despite its 1960-1970 

decline in population. In addition, other, less anticompetitive, merger alternatives from among banks headquartered in Mercer, Butler, or Beaver County are 

probably available to Lawrence Savings, in which case the resulting bank would 

be likely to offer increased competition to First Seneca throughout the area.

While a reasonable probability of increased competition between Lawrence 

Savings and First Seneca would thus be eliminated by the proposed merger, 

there is another competitive aspect of the proposal which weighs significantly 

in favor of approval. A move of its main office to Butler County would place 

First Seneca in a position not only to enter Lawrence County, but also to enter 

Pittsburgh and surrounding areas in Allegheny, Beaver, Westmoreland, and 

Armstrong counties. The banking market in these locations, which serves many 

more people than the banks in Lawrence County, is effectively concentrated in 

the four largest Pittsburgh banks: Mellon National Bank and Trust Company, a 

$4.4 billion institution, Pittsburgh National Bank, a $1.8 billion institution, 

Western Pennsylvania National Bank, a $1.0 billion institution, and The Union 

National Bank of Pittsburgh, a $821 million institution. Among them, these 

four banks control 88.4 percent of the commercial bank deposits and operate

71.3 percent of the offices in Allegheny, Beaver, Westmoreland, and Armstrong 

counties, an area with a total population of 2,265,959 people. Were First 

Seneca and Lawrence Savings permitted to merge, the resulting bank would be 

the next largest commercial bank able to enter these four counties and the 

bank most likely, in time, to offer residents and businessmen in these four 

counties another alternative for many of the services now provided only by the 

four large Pittsburgh banks. As such, the resulting bank would also be a vehicle 

for deconcentration in this four-county area. First Seneca's desire and w illingness to enter these four counties as an aggressive competitor is likely to 

increase in direct proportion to its own size, management sophistication, and 

ability to offer a comparable range of services. The resulting bank's increased 

capitalization, moreover, would improve \ts de novo branching capabilities.

In weighing these two conflicting competitive consequences of the proposed 

merger, the Corporation has concluded that it should affirmatively encourage 

First Seneca's entry into the populous and highly concentrated Pittsburgh 

banking market and in particular the areas around Pittsburgh in Allegheny and 

Westmoreland counties, where future expansion possibilities appear far brighter 

than in less populated Lawrence County. While additional competitors in all of

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
120 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

these counties are desirable, the Corporation considers it significant that residents and businessmen in Lawrence County are in reasonably close proximity 

to three major banks headquartered 20 miles away in Youngstown, Ohio, each 

with* more than $100 million in deposits. Branch offices of these banks are 

even closer, in Poland and New Middletown, Ohio, only 15 miles from New 

Castle, as contrasted with the longer distance from New Castle to Butler City 

or Pittsburgh.

Even without the entrance of a fifth bank directly into Lawrence County, the 

public there appears to have a sizeable number of banking alternatives to which 

they can turn for their banking needs.

Overall, the Board of Directors believes that the conflicting competitive 

factors presented by the application weigh in favor of approval, rather than 

denial, of the application.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable for both banks involved in this proposal, and they are so projected 

for the resulting bank. The proposed merger would, however, resolve an emerging management succession problem at Lawrence Savings.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would bring to residents and businessmen of Lawrence County an 

aggressive competitor, larger than any of the four banks presently operating in 

the county, and with a broader range of capabilities and services than the 

existing banks. Thus the resulting bank would possess lending limits sufficient 

to service most local credits that now accrue to out-of-area banks or must be 

granted by the existing banks on a participated basis. Trust services would be 

expanded and improved so that larger estates and trusts originating in Lawrence County, but which heretofore have been placed with banks outside the 

county, could be accepted. A t the same time, the number of alternative sources 

of banking service available to Lawrence County residents and businessmen 

would not be reduced.

Moreover, as pointed out in the discussion on competition, the merger 

would provide a significant competitor for Allegheny, Westmoreland, Beaver, 

and Armstrong counties.

On the basis of the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that 

approval of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

op e ra te d

First Bank of Surry

Surry, Virginia

(in organization; change title to 

Bank of Surry County, Inc.)

477 1

to merge with

Bank of Surry County, Inc.

Surry

5,214 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 121

Summary report by Attorney General, August 27, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which First Bank of Surry 

(org.) would become a subsidiary of First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, a 

bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine 

an existing bank with a nonoperating institution; as such, and without regard 

to the acquisition of the surviving bank by First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 24, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, applications have been filed for Federal Deposit Insurance 

for First Bank of Surry, Surry, Virginia ("First"), a proposed new bank in 

organization, and for consent to its merger with Bank of Surry County, Inc., 

Surry, Virginia ("County"), total resources $5,214,000, under First's charter 

and County's title. The resulting bank is to operate from the present sole office 

of County.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as means by which 

First Virginia Bankshares Corporation, Arlington, Virginia ("Bankshares"), a 

registered multibank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting 

stock of the bank resulting from the proposed merger pursuant to authority 

granted by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. First will 

not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent 

to consummation thereof it will operate the same banking business at the 

existing location of County, plus additional banking services including a trust 

department, and with the same management.

The proposal will not, per se, change the competitive structure of commercial banking in Surry County. All factors considered pertinent to the subject applications are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

op e ra te d

The Bank of Virginia of the Southeast

Whaleyville, Virginia 

(in organization)

50 — 1

to merge with

Bank of Whaleyville, Inc.

Whaleyville

4,292 1

Summary report by Attorney General, September 27, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which The Bank of Virginia 

of the Southeast would become a subsidiary of Virginia Commonwealth Bankshares, a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely 

combine an existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such and without

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
122 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by Virginia Commonwealth 

Bankshares, it would have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 24, 1971

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for The Bank of Virginia of the Southeast, Whaleyville, Virginia ("First 

Bank"), a proposed new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger 

with Bank of Whaleyville, Inc., Whaleyville, Virginia ("Second Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $4,292,000, under the 

charter and title of First Bank. The resulting bank will operate from the one 

existing office of Second Bank.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means by 

which Virginia Commonwealth Bankshares, Inc., Richmond, Virginia, a registered bank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of 

the bank resulting from the proposed merger. Application for said acquisition 

is pending before the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. First 

Bank will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but 

subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business at the 

existing location of Second Bank, and with the same management. The proposal will not, per se, change the competitive structure of commercial banking 

in the trade area served by Second Bank or affect the banking services which 

Second Bank has provided in the past. All factors considered pertinent specifically to the two subject applications are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

National Bank of Alaska

Anchorage, Alaska

231,995 28 29

to merge with

Bank of Petersburg 

Petersburg

6,466 1

Summary report by Attorney General, April 21, 1971 

Generally, banking competition is evaluated within fairly limited geographic 

areas because of the desire and need of most ordinary customers to have easy 

access to their bank. However, when a bank has the only office within an area, 

its customers must of necessity go beyond that area to find any alternative to 

the local monopolist. When two banks which enjoy such local monopoly 

checked only by competitive alternatives in adjacent areas, propose to merge 

and thus eliminate the only remaining check on monopoly power, it is relevant

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 123

to consider a larger area in appraising the competitive effects of a merger. 

Furthermore, the comparatively low deposit level of the existing banking 

offices in the area and lack of rapid population growth mean that entry of 

other banks into this area in the future is extremely unlikely.

In this case, National Bank of Alaska's Wrangell office is the only alternative 

banking facility within 100 miles of Bank of Petersburg. These offices, located 

on separate islands, are 30 miles apart. Hence, this merger would create an 

absolute regional monopoly of commercial banking offices in the WrangellPetersburg area, under the control of the largest bank in the state. It would also 

reinforce and entrench National Bank of Alaska's dominant position in the 

entire southeastern area of Alaska. Therefore, we conclude that this merger 

would have an adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 30, 1971

National Bank of Alaska, Anchorage, Alaska ("N B A "), with total resources 

of $231,995,000 and total deposits of $206,853,000, has applied, pursuant to 

Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for 

the Corporation's prior consent to merge with Bank of Petersburg, Petersburg, 

Alaska, a noninsured bank with total resources of $6,466,000 and total deposits of $5,925,000. The banks would merge under the title and charter of 

NBA and the existing office of Bank of Petersburg would be operated as a 

branch, subject to approval by the Comptroller of the Currency. The resulting 

bank would have a total of 29 offices, not including one approved but unopened branch.

Competition. NBA operates 28 offices throughout the far-flung State of 

Alaska (1970 population: 302,173), from the Aleutian Islands in the west to 

Metlakatla in the southeast and including the major population centers of 

Anchorage, Fairbanks, Juneau, and Ketchikan. NBA is the largest of 11 commercial banks in the State of Alaska, with 33.1 percent of their total deposits.

Bank of Petersburg operates only one office, located at Petersburg (1970 

population: 2,042) on M itkof Island, although it also serves residents of the 

immediately adjacent island of Kupreanof. These islands are located in the 

southeastern section of the State and are supported primarily by seasonal 

operations in logging and fishing. The islands are isolated and the only access is 

by boat or plane. Their economic outlook is not bright, and no substantial 

change is expected in the foreseeable future.

The nearest NBA office to Bank of Petersburg is located in Wrangell, some 

28 air miles away on another island. Commercial air and water carrier service 

between them is infrequent and at times unreliable, and neither office draws 

more than nominal business from the service area of the other. Moreover, since 

the middle of 1969, Bank of Petersburg has been controlled by NBA's chairman and principal stockholder and NBA officers have been managing Bank of 

Petersburg in effect as an NBA branch. In view of the separate service areas of 

the two banks and their common management, the proposed merger of NBA 

and Bank of Petersburg would not eliminate any significant existing competition between them.

Increased competition between NBA and Bank of Petersburg in the future 

through de novo branching, as permitted by Alaska's statewide branching laws, 

appears unlikely. Without regard to the current relationship between NBA and 

Bank of Petersburg, the latter, due to its small size and isolated location, would

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
124 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

not be likely to branch at all into areas served by NBA. While NBA has the 

resources and experience to expand de novo throughout the State of Alaska, 

the business potential of Bank of Petersburg's service area clearly provides no 

incentive for NBA to establish a de novo office there, in view of the small 

service area population, limited income levels, seasonal economy, and limited 

economic prospects for the future. The proposed merger, accordingly, would 

eliminate no significant potential for increased competition between the two 

banks from de novo branching.

The one factor of competitive concern presented by the application is the 

precedent which approval of this proposed merger might establish for the 

commercial bank structure of the State of Alaska, a structure which is already 

highly concentrated. As previously noted, NBA is the largest of 11 commercial 

banks in the State, with 33.1 percent of total statewide commercial bank 

deposits. Only one other bank in the State exceeds $60 million in deposit size, 

and it holds an additional 28.8 percent of such deposits. Their combined 

percentage share of Alaska's commercial bank deposits would be increased to

62.8 percent by consummation of the proposed merger, and NBA's share alone 

would be increased to 34.0 percent.

Alaska, however, is not a typical State. With the largest land mass of the 

fifty States, it is nevertheless the smallest in population, with widely scattered 

communities of very limited population outside the greater Anchorage areamany of which, like Petersburg, are on relatively isolated islands along the 

southern and southeastern coasts. These communities, if they have commercial 

bank facilities at all, are unlikely to have more than one or two offices, and the 

affiliation of such offices with a large branch bank may be the only way to 

provide adequate banking service (in terms of management and range of services offered) for all parts of the community. Bank of Petersburg, for example, 

is the store's only independent bank which is located on an isolated island. For 

this reason, approval of its proposed merger with NBA cannot be a significant 

adverse precedent for other similar mergers. Moreover, when NBA's chairman 

obtained personal stock control of Bank of Petersburg in 1969, its low-quality 

asset structure, likely loan losses, eroded capital position, and inadequate management and internal controls made it unlikely that the bank could continue to 

provide any banking service at all to the people in its service area without 

significant outside assistance from one of Alaska's major branch banks. It 

appears further that only the second largest bank in the State was in a position 

at that time to offer similar assistance to Bank of Petersburg without being 

significantly weakened itself by Bank of Petersburg's deteriorating condition.

Under these circumstances, the Board of Directors considers the increase in 

statewide deposit concentration which would result from approval of NBA's 

merger with Bank of Petersburg less significant as a competitive factor than a 

similar increase in some other State where population density might be greater 

and access to banking alternatives more convenient. Moreover, in view of Bank 

of Petersburg's condition at the time, the acquisition of control by NBA's 

chariman in 1969 cannot be characterized as "anticompetitive" when it occurred. Whatever residual significance the increase in NBA's share of statewide 

commercial bank deposits has in the consideration of this merger is clearly 

outweighed by the banking factors presented and a consideration of public 

convenience and needs.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. The resulting bank

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 125

would have adequate financial and managerial resources and favorable future 

prospects. While Bank of Petersburg's condition today is much improved over 

its 1968 condition, because of the technical and managerial assistance provided 

by NBA over the past 3 years, its future prospects would have to be considered 

bleak as an independent bank operating only one office in a service area of 

limited population and economic activity.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Residents of 

M itkof and Kupreanof islands would benefit if the proposed merger is approved, by having conveniently available the full range of loan, deposit, and 

trust services offered by a large, full-service branch bank with the capacity to 

provide competent local management on a continuing basis. With the highest 

lending limits in Alaska and a deposit base significantly broader than Mitkof 

and Kupreanof islands, NBA would also have the ability to meet local credit 

needs without outside participation and without regard to seasonal economic 

fluctuations in the immediate area. As an incident to the proposed merger, 

deposit accounts at the Petersburg office would carry FDIC insurance for the 

first time.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the proposed merger is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

op e ra te d

San Diego Bank

San Diego, California 

(in organization; change title to 

San Diego Trust & Savings Bank)

625 16

to merge with

San Diego Trust & Savings Bcink

San Diego

216,759 16

Summary report by Attorney General, November 26, 1969 

The proposed merger is part of a transaction which will result in a presently 

existing bank becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of a one-bank holding company. Thus, this merger is merely part of a corporate reorganization and as 

such will have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 30, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, applications have been filed for Federal Deposit Insurance for San Diego Bank, San Diego, California ("New Bank"), a proposed 

new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger with San Diego Trust

& Savings Bank, San Diego, California ("Old Bank"), total resources 

$216,759,000, under New Bank's charter and Old Bank's title. The resulting

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
126 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

bank is to operate from the present main office and 20 existing or authorized 

branch locations of Old Bank.

The new bank and merger are designed solely for the purpose of forming a 

one-bank holding company which is to hold stock ownership, except for directors' qualifying shares, of the resulting bank. New Bank will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior to consummation of the transaction and will 

begin business at the present locations of Old Bank with the latter's assets, 

liabilities, capital, and management. The proposal will not, per se, change the 

banking services which Old Bank has provided to San Diego County in the past. 

All factors considered pertinent specifically to the two subject applications are 

favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

R esources / i n

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Barclay Bank and Trust Company 

of Boston

Boston, Massachusetts 

(change title to

United States Trust Company)

18,393 4 7

to merge with

United States Trust Company

Boston

51,063 3

Summary report by Attorney General, September 28, 1971 

The closest offices of the merging banks are slightly more than a mile apart. 

All three offices of U.S. Trust and four offices of Barclay Bank are located 

within a 6.5 mile diameter area in Boston. There are numerous intervening 

competitive banking offices between the offices of U.S. Trust and Barclay 

Bank. The proposed merger would eliminate some direct competition between 

the merging banks.

As of June 30, 1970, the 19 commercial banks with 120 branches in Suffolk 

County held $5.2 billion in total county deposits. U.S. Trust and Barclay Bank 

held 0.8 per cent and 0.2 per cent, respectively, of such deposits. The merged 

bank would hold 1.0 per cent of total commercial bank deposits in the county.

The proposed merger would not have a significantly adverse effect upon 

competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 30, 1971 

Barclay Bank and Trust Company of Boston, Boston, Massachusetts ("Barclay"), an insured State nonmember bank with total assets of $18,393,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with United

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 127

States Trust Company, Boston, Massachusetts ("US"), with total assets of 

$51,063,000. The banks would merge under Barclay's charter but with the US 

name. As incidents to the merger, the main office of US would become the 

main office of the resulting bank, and the present main office of Barclay and 

two branch offices of US would become branches, increasing to seven the 

number of offices of the resulting bank.

Competition. Barclay and US are both headquartered in the city of Boston 

(population 735,190), and although located in different neighborhood areas, 

all of their respective offices are also in that city. Barclay is a relatively new 

bank, having been chartered in 1960, while US has been in existence since 

1887. The bulk of their deposit and loan accounts are derived from persons 

residing in Boston, Brookline, and Newton.

In assessing the competitive impact of the proposed merger, it appears that 

the narrowest geographic area which might be considered relevant would be the 

city of Boston, while the broadest would be the Metropolitan Boston SMSA. 

For ease of analysis, and since the competitive findings would be the same 

whichever area is selected, the Corporation will utilize, in this statement, the 

commercial bank structure of the smaller geographic area, i.e., the city of 

Boston.

The city of Boston has 15 insured commercial banks, but the pace of 

competition is largely set by its four largest banks: The First National Bank of 

Boston, State Street Bank and Trust Company, The National Shawmut Bank of 

Boston, and New England Merchants National Bank. Together, these four 

banks control 94.7 percent of the total IPC deposits held by all 15 insured 

Boston banks, and this pattern recurs in specific neighborhoods of the city, 

including those served by Barclay and US. Of the 15 insured commercial banks 

in Boston, US is the sixth largest, and Barclay the ninth largest; their percentage shares of total IPC deposits in the city are 0.9 and 0.3, respectively. 

The resulting bank would rank fifth in deposit size, less than one-tenth the size 

of the fourth largest bank in Boston, and hold only 1.2 percent of the total IPC 

deposit market.

Barclay and US both compete in the Boston banking market today, and 

each draws some deposit and loan business from neighborhood areas served by 

the other and from other parts of Boston. Thus, Barclay draws $1.8 million in 

deposits from US neighborhoods, and US draws $4.0 million in deposits from 

Barclay neighborhoods. While these amounts represent more than a nominal 

percentage of each bank's total deposits, neither is a significant percentage of 

the total deposit business originating in the city. Should the merger be approved, Boston residents would continue to have four relatively large banks 

available as alternative sources for banking service and a large number of 

smaller banks for the fundamental banking services.

Barclay has been expanding aggressively since a change of control in 1967. 

US has been relatively nonaggressive as a competitor, has never opened a de

novo branch, and has experienced an actual decline in deposits over the past 

few years. Under present management, US is not likely to branch de novo into 

neighborhood areas now served by Barclay, while the only neighborhood area 

of US which is likely to attract Barclay is the downtown financial center. Its de

novo entry there would not materially change its competitive structure. Since 

all banks headquartered in Suffolk County (which includes the city of Boston) 

can branch de novo throughout the city of Boston, numerous banks would

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
128 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

remain, if the proposed merger is approved, to provide new commercial bank 

offices for Boston residents whenever development patterns within the city 

require such facilities.

Under these circumstances, the proposed merger would not eliminate significant existing or potential competition between the two banks or in the city of 

Boston, nor would the proposed merger increase significantly the concentration of commercial bank resources in any relevant market.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Barclay has satisfactory managerial resources and a sound asset structure, but its capital ratios 

have been reduced since 1967 primarily by its rapid deposit growth, and its 

earnings have been retarded by the start-up expenses of new branches. US has 

had good earnings, weak loan administration, and an exceptionally strong 

capital position (resulting in part from the deposit decline of recent years). US 

has been family owned and operated since its establishment in 1887, but it has 

been relatively nonaggressive as a competitor and lacks management depth. It 

appears that the future prospects of the resulting bank would be substantially 

more favorable than those of either bank as an independent unit.

Convenience and Needs of the Community to be Served. Barclay customers 

would benefit from full computer and trust services, substantially higher lending limits, and a better earnings performance which could form the basis for 

innovations and improvements in banking service. Customers of US would 

benefit from a change in management philosophy, and both groups should 

benefit from the introduction of services not presently available at either'bank, 

such as home improvement loans and revolving consumer credit. While all of 

these benefits can be found at conveniently located offices of competing 

banks, their provision at offices of the resulting bank should increase the 

practical alternatives for such services and serve to stimulate competition with 

the four large commercial banks that presently dominate the Boston banking 

market.

Based on the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded 

that approval of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

Capital City Trust Company

Jefferson City, Missouri 

(in organization; change title to 

The Central Trust Bank)

210 2

to merge with

The Central Trust Bank

Jefferson City

145,749 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 129

Summary report by Attorney General, August 27, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Capital City Trust Co. 

(org.) would become a subsidiary of Central Bancompany, Inc., a bank holding 

company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing 

bank with a non-operating institution; as such, and without regard to the 

acquisition of the surviving bank by Central Bancompany, Inc., it would have 

no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 30, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for Capital City Trust Company, Jefferson City, Missouri ("Capital"), a proposed new bank in organization, and for prior consent to its merger with 

The Central Trust Bank, Jefferson City, Missouri ("Central"), an insured nonmember bank, total resources $145,749,000 as of April 20, 1971, under 

Capital's charter and Central's title. The resulting bank will operate Central's 

existing main office and detached facility, and incident to the merger the initial 

capital of the proposed new bank in organization will be retired.

The new, bank formation and merger are designed solely as a means by 

which Central Bancompany, Inc., Jefferson City, Missouri, a newly approved 

bank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting stock of the 

bank resulting from the proposed merger pursuant to authority recently granted by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. Capital will not 

be in operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent to 

consummation it will operate the same banking business at the existing locations of Central, and with the same management. The proposal will not, per se, 

change the competitive structure of commercial banking in the trade area of 

Central or affect the banking services which Central has provided in the past. 

All factors considered pertinent specifically to the three subject applications 

are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Resou rces 

/ jn

B a n k in g O ffic e s

\ hi

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

The Canal State Bank

Canal Winchester, Ohio 

(in organization; change title 

to The Canal Winchester Bank)

500 2

to merge with

The Canal Winchester Bank

Canal Winchester

12,688 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
130 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Summary report by Attorney General, September 27, 1971

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Canal State Bank 

(Org.) would become a subsidiary of Central Bancorporation, Inc., a bank 

holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an 

existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such and without regard to 

the acquisition of the surviving bank by Central Bancorporation, Inc., it would 

have no effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 30, 1971

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, applications have been filed for Federal Deposit Insurance 

for The Canal State Bank, Canal Winchester, Ohio ("State Bank"), a proposed 

new bank in organization, and for consent to its merger with The Canal Winchester Bank, Canal Winchester, Ohio ("Canal Bank"), total resources 

$12,688,000, under State Bank's charter and Canal Bank's title, and for consent to establish the sole branch of Canal Bank as a branch of the resulting 

bank.

The new bank formation and merger are designed solely as means by which 

The Central Bancorporation, Inc., Cincinnati, Ohio ("Central"), a registered 

multibank holding company, can acquire 100 percent of the voting stock (less 

directors' qualifying shares) of the bank resulting from the proposed merger 

pursuant to authority granted by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. State Bank will not be in operation as a commercial bank prior 

to the merger, but subsequent to consummation thereof it will operate the 

same banking business at the existing locations of Canal Bank, with the same 

management.

The proposal will not, per se, change the competitive structure of commercial banking in the trade area of Canal Bank or affect the banking services 

which the latter has provided in the past. All factors are favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Commercial Security Bank

Ogden, Utah

139,460 7 9

to acquire the assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

Granite National Bank

Salt Lake City

11,400 2

Summary report by Attorney General, August 27, 1971 

Commercial's Beehive branch is only 4.9 miles from Granite's head office

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 131

and only two miles from its recently opened city branch office. Furthermore, 

Commerciars new office will be about two miles from Granite's head office. 

The banks already have common customers and derive business from one 

another's area. This competition will increase when Commercial's new office is 

opened. Thus, the proposed merger will eliminate existing competition. However, the proposed merger will not significantly increase concentration in Salt 

Lake County. As of June 30, 1970, Commercial, the seventh largest bank in 

the county, held approximately 2.3 per cent of the county's total deposits and 

Granite, the county's tenth largest bank, held approximately 0.9 per cent.

Basis for Corporation approval, November 30, 1971

Commercial Security Bank, Ogden, Utah ("Commercial"), an insured State 

nonmember bank with total resources of $139,460,000 and total deposits of 

$113,256,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to 

purchase the assets of and assume liability to pay deposits made in Granite 

National Bank, Salt Lake City, Utah ("Granite"), which has total resources of 

$11,400,000 and total deposits of $9,612,000. The two offices of Granite 

would be operated as branches of Commercial, increasing the number of its 

authorized offices to 10. In another application, Commercial has requested 

written consent to issue capital notes and retire said notes at maturity, 7 years 

after date of issue.

Competition. Commercial has eight authorized offices: four are in Ogden, 

its headquarters community, two are in Tooele County (some 40 miles southwest of Salt Lake City), and two are in Salt Lake City— one acquired by merger 

at year-end 1968 and the other, an authorized but unopened de novo office. 

Granite was organized in 1963, with its main office in the suburban "Sugarhouse" area of Salt Lake City. Since November 1970, Granite has also maintained a downtown Salt Lake City branch which was opened de novo.

The proposed merger would have its most immediate competitive impact in 

Salt Lake City, an urban area which declined 7.2 percent in population during 

the 1960s and now has a population of 175,885. By contrast, the population 

of the Salt Lake City SMSA, which consists of Salt Lake and Davis counties, 

increased 24.5 percent during the same period, to a present combined population of 557,635. The. Salt Lake City metropolitan area is the financial, commercial, industrial, and distribution center for a large area which includes, in 

addition to Utah, southern Idaho, western Wyoming, and eastern Nevada.

Granite's main office is about 5 miles from the Salt Lake City branch of 

Commercial and approximately 2 miles from the location selected for Commercial's approved but not yet opened branch. Each of these offices serves a 

different neighborhood area, however, and numerous competing banks intervene. Granite's new downtown Salt Lake City branch is only five blocks from 

Commercial's existing Salt Lake City branch, but most competing commercial 

banks are also represented in this area. Granite's branch is actually located in 

an economically depressed part of downtown Salt Lake City, and it has attracted much less in deposits than was anticipated. The effect of this branch on 

downtown Salt Lake City banking competition has been minimal. While each 

bank draws some banking business from neighborhood areas served by the 

other, the volume of such business is not substantial relative to the total 

business originating in Salt Lake City.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
132 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

In the "Sugarhouse" area of Salt Lake City, from which Granite derives 

practically all of its business, the three largest banks in the State held 83.5 

percent of local I PC deposits as of June 30, 1970. Of the four commercial 

banks operating in this area on that date, Granite ranked third, with 16.4 

percent of local I PC deposits. Consummation of the proposed merger is likely 

to increase competition in the "Sugarhouse" area, as the resulting bank should 

be able to compete more effectively than Granite with the three large banks 

presently in the same market. Granite, moreover, has not been a particularly 

aggressive competitor in that market.

Under Utah law, Granite and Commercial can both branch de novo throughout Salt Lake County, but Granite cannot branch de novo into Commerciars 

home county. When Commercial opens its second branch in Salt Lake City, the 

level of competition between the two banks should increase somewhat, but the 

degree of overlap is not likely to be substantial. Moreover, de novo branching 

by Commercial into the "Sugarhouse" area of Salt Lake City does not seem 

likely in view of the number of commercial bank offices already located there 

relative to the local population.

As of June 30, 1970, Commercial was the 8th largest of 13 banks operating 

in Salt Lake County, in terms of local Salt Lake County deposits, with only 2.1 

percent of such deposits. Granite was the 11th largest of such banks similarly 

measured, on the same date, with only 0.8 percent of total Salt Lake County 

commercial bank deposits. By contrast, the three largest commercial banks in 

Salt Lake County, ranging in deposit size from $274 million to $527 million, 

controlled 67 percent of such deposits among them. Under these circumstances, while the proposed merger would eliminate some existing competition 

between Granite and Commercial in Salt Lake City and some potential for 

increased competition between them in the future, the extent of such competition is not considered to be of sufficient magnitude to require denial of the 

proposed transaction.

Commercial banking in the State of Utah is concentrated in its three largest 

banks, which, as of June 30, 1971, held 58.3 percent of total deposits held by 

all commercial banks in the State. Commercial is the fourth largest commercial 

bank in the State, with 6.1 percent of total statewide commercial bank deposits, while Granite is the 25th largest, with 0.5 percent of such deposits. 

Consummation of the proposed transaction would not substantially change the 

commercial bank structure of the State of Utah.

The Board of Directors, accordingly, is of the opinion that the proposed 

transaction would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Commercial has satisfactory financial and managerial resources, as would the resulting bank. 

Granite's asset problems and managerial weaknesses would be eliminated by 

the proposed transaction. Future prospects for the resulting bank are favorable.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. This proposed 

transaction would not have any great effect on present customers of Commercial, but Granite customers in the "Sugarhouse" area of Salt Lake City 

should benefit from the wider range of commercial bank services that would be 

offered by the resulting bank, including trust, credit card, and computer services. In addition, the present lending lim it of Granite ($99,500) would be

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 133

increased to $1.1 million. While similar services are now offered by Sugarhouse 

branches of the three largest banks in the State, consummation of the proposed 

transaction would provide an alternative source for such services and should 

stimulate competition with those banks throughout Salt Lake County.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

European-American Bank & Trust 

Company

New York (Manhattan), New York

220,149 3 5

to acquire certain assets and assume

a portion o f the liabilities of

Societe Generale pour Favoriser le

Developpement du Commerce et

de Tlndustrie en France

Paris, France

21,174 2

Summary report by Attorney General, October 26, 1971 

The head office of EABTC and one of SG's branches are both located on 

Wall Street; the other SG branch is located one-half mile east of one of 

EABTC's two Manhattan branches. The greatest distance separating the offices 

of these banks is six miles. Due to this geographic proximity and the derivation 

of accounts by both banks from a common service area, some direct competition exists. Consummation of this acquisition, therefore, will result in the 

elimination of this competition.

According to the FDIC, Summary o f Deposits, June 30, 1970, EABTC is 

the 27th largest commercial bank in New York County. EABTC controls 0.64 

per cent of the IPC demand deposits and 0.44 per cent of the total deposits 

held by commercial banks in New York County. SG is the 34th largest commercial bank in New York County. SG holds 0.51 per cent of the IPC demand 

deposits and 0.32 per cent of the total deposits held by commercial banks in 

the county. The combination of these banks in their entireties would place 

their share of the market at approximately one per cent. The specific transaction, involving the partial acquisition of deposits and loans, represents a smaller 

share of the market. Hence, this acquisition will not substantially increase the 

market position of EABTC. Furthermore, in view of the relatively insubstantial 

positions of the banks involved in New York County, the proposed transaction 

will not substantially increase concentration in banking.

Basis for Corporation approval, December 3, 1971 

European-American Bank & Trust Company, New York (Manhattan), New 

York ("European-American"), an insured State nonmember bank with total 

resources of $220,149,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other 

provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior 

Digitized for FRASER 

consent to acquire certain assets of, and assume liability to pay certain deposits

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
134 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

made in, two branch offices located at 66 Wall Street and 15 West 50th Street, 

New York (Manhattan), New York, of Societe Generate pour Favoriser le 

Developpement du Commerce et de I'Industrie en France, Paris, France 

("Societe Generate"), an operating noninsured foreign bank, under EuropeanAmerican's charter and title, and to establish those offices as branches of the 

resulting bank. This transaction is part of a plan to facilitate the broadening of 

Societe Generale's New York-based international financial capabilities through 

a significant stock investment in European-American, rather than through an 

expansion of Societe Generale's present branches. Five other major foreign 

banks share in Europeari-American's ownership.

Competition. European-American operates a total of three offices, all located in New York (Manhattan), New York. Societe Generale operates two 

offices, both of which are also in Manhattan. The closest locations of the two 

banks are their Wall Street offices, which are only a few doors apart in Manhattan's heavily banked financial district. There is some competition between 

them, but it can not be considered significant in view of the very small share of 

the total New York City market which the two institutions have, for IPC 

deposits or for international loan transactions. Both banks are primarily engaged in corporate and international banking and compete with the very largest 

New York City banks for this business. The proposed transaction represents a 

change only in the manner in which Societe Generale does business in this 

country, and as such would have no discernible effect on the competitive 

structure of banking in New York City or in any other area.

In view of the circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that 

the proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially 

lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in 

restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

with regard both to European-American and Societe Generale has been resolved favorably.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Both parties to this 

acquisition serve a specialized banking need in the field of international trade 

and finance, and serve only to a minor extent the normal domestic banking 

needs of individuals and corporations. The proposed acquisition should enable 

both parties to participate more effectively in meeting these specialized banking needs.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

R esources

(in

th o u sa n d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

The Citizens Banking Company

Salineville, Ohio

3,833 2 4

to acquire the assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

The Bergholz State Bank Company

Bergholz

4,440 2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 135

Summary report by Attorney General, October 12, 1971

The closest offices of the merging banks are approximately ten miles apart, 

with no banks in the intervening area. Each bank draws a small,amount of 

banking business from the service a(rea of the other. All four offices of the 

merging banks encompass a broad, but very lightly populated, area between the 

more heavily populated areas of Columbiana and Jefferson Counties. While the 

merging banks could be considered as alternatives for banking customers in this 

area, other larger banks in each county would appear to be at least as attractive 

for customers of the merging banks seeking services from beyond their home 

communities.

In view of the size of the merging banks and the characteristics of their 

service areas, we do not believe that the proposed merger would have a significantly adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, December 3, 1971

The Citizens Banking Company, SalineviIle, Ohio ("Citizens"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total resources of $3,833,000 and total deposits 

of $3,233,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to 

purchase the assets of and assume liability to pay deposits made in The Bergholz State Bank Company, Bergholz, Ohio ("State Bank"), which has total 

resources of $4,440,000 and total deposits of $3,939,000. The two offices of 

State Bank would be operated as branches of Citizens, increasing the number 

of its offices to four.

Competition. Citizens has two offices: its main office in Salineville, Ohio, 

and a branch in Columbiana County. Salineville is located in both Columbiana 

and Jefferson counties, which gives Citizens the right under Ohio law to branch 

de novo or merge in both counties. The main office of State Bank is in Jefferson C ounty, as is its one branch in Richm ond, approxim ately 11 miles southeast of Bergholz.

The 1970 population of Salineville was 1,686, as compared to 1,898 in 

1960, a decline of 11.2 percent. Only one small manufacturing concern is 

located in the village. The one branch of Citizens is within the trade area of 

East Liverpool and Wellsville, and the latter has also been declining in population. Most of the residents in the area served by Citizens commute to industrial 

centers within a 35-mile radius for employment.

Bergholz is in the northwest corner of Jefferson County, approximately 10 

miles southwest of Salineville. The population of Bergholz was 955 at the 1960 

census and declined to 914 at the 1970 census. It, too, has only one small 

plant. The one branch of State Bank at Richmond is approximately 8 miles 

northwest of Steubenville (population 30,771). The population of Richmond 

increased from 728 to 777 between 1960 and 1970. All of the commercial 

banks headquartered in Steubenville operate branches in Wintersville, a community of 4,921 population located between Richmond and Steubenville.

Ten miles separate the nearest offices of Citizens and State Bank, but the 

area is sparsely populated woodland served by mediocre roadways. There are 

no other commercial banking offices in the intervening area, but the activity 

which draws residents of Salineville is toward the north (Lisbon) and the east 

(Wellsville), while the activity which draws residents of Bergholz is to the south 

(Amsterdam and Steubenville). There are a few common customers and some 

relatively small accounts which the participating banks draw from areas presDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
136 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

ently served by the other. The proposed merger would eliminate this existing 

competition, but it is not considered significant in amount.

Under Ohio law, Citizens can branch de novo into Jefferson County, but 

State Bank cannot branch de novo into Columbiana County. De novo activity 

by either bank into areas now served by the other appears unlikely, however, in 

view of the limited population and limited deposit potential of such areas.

In the two counties of Columbiana and Jefferson there are 19 commercial 

banks operating a total of 47 offices. Of the IPC deposits held by these 19 

banks, the two largest shares are held by banks headquartered in Steubenville, 

with 20.6 percent and 14.8 percent. State Bank, with 1.1 percent of the IPC 

deposits, has the 17th largest share, and Citizens, with 0.8 percent of such 

deposits, has the 19th largest share. The resulting bank would have only 1.9 

percent of the combined IPC deposits in both counties.

Thus, no significant potential competition would be eliminated by the proposed transaction, and no undue concentration of banking resources in the 

two-county area would occur.

The Board of Directors is of the opinion that the proposed transaction 

would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen competition, 

tend to create a monopoly, or in any manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating banks has satisfactory financial and managerial resources, as would the 

resulting bank. Consummation of this proposed transaction should permit certain economies of scale, and future prospects for the resulting bank appear 

favorable.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Citizens has a 

lending lim it of $31,200, State Bank $23,000, and that of the resulting bank 

would be $53,200. Citizens pays 41/2 percent interest on savings accounts, while 

State Bank pays 4 percent. Consummation of the proposed transaction would 

almost double the lending lim it applicable to customers of Citizens, but it is 

the customers of State Bank who would benefit the most from the proposed 

merger. They would receive a higher interest rate on savings accounts, free 

checking accounts, a substantial increase in lending limits, and the conveniences of computerized operations. The communities of Bergholz and Richmond should also benefit from more aggressive management policies.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

li n B a n k in g O ffic e s

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

American Bank & Trust

Orangeburg, South Carolina

63,922 15 18

to merge with

The Commercial Bank 

Chester

11,306 2

and

McColl State Bank

McColl

1,955 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 137

Summary report by Attorney General, November 10, 1971 

The closest branch of American Bank to either of the banks it seeks to 

acquire is at Lugoff in Kershaw County. This office is about 45 miles from 

Commercial Bank and 73 miles from McColl Bank, with numerous intervening 

banks. Thus, it does not appear that any significant amount of existing competition will be eliminated by the proposed merger.

Statewide branching is permitted in South Carolina. Thus, American Bank 

could branch de novo into either or both of the areas presently served by the 

two banks it seeks to merge. However, the economic prospects of those two 

areas make such entry somewhat unlikely. In addition, the size of the banks to 

be acquired and their position in their respective markets support the conclusion that the proposed mergers are not likely to have adverse competitive 

effects.

Basis for Corporation approval, December 3, 1971 

American Bank & Trust, Orangeburg, South Carolina ("American"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $63,922,000, has filed 

separate applications, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge 

with The Commercial Bank, Chester, South Carolina ("Commercial"), having 

total resources of $11,306,000, and with McColl State Bank, McColl, South 

Carolina ("McColl Bank"), having total resources of $1,955,000. Both banks 

would merge under the charter and title of American and, as an incident to 

each merger, the offices of both banks would become branches of the resulting 

bank. If both mergers are approved, the number of authorized American 

offices would be increased to 19.

Competition. American has 16 authorized offices in seven of the 46 

counties of the State, all located in the central and south-central sections of 

South Carolina. This area has a diversified economic base, has been experiencing significant growth, and includes the State capital, Columbia (population 

113,542. American has no office in either Chester or Marlboro County. 

American is the ninth largest commercial bank in South Carolina, with 2.2 

percent of statewide commercial bank deposits. The four largest banks in the 

State hold, respectively 22.5 percent, 13.3 percent, 9.6 percent, and 8.7 percent of such deposits.

Both of Commercial's offices are located in the city of Chester (population 

7,045), the seat of Chester County (population 29,811). The economy of the 

area is shifting from agricultural to industrial, with textile-related plants predominating, while the remaining agricultural activity is shifting from cotton to 

livestock and dairy farming. Commercial is the largest bank in Chester County, 

holding 43.0 percent of that county's IPC bank deposits, followed by a local 

bank with 33.1 percent and an office of the State's seventh-largest bank, located in a small, remote community of the county.

McColl Bank, organized in 1932 as a cash depository, converted to an 

insured commercial bank in 1960. Its only office is in the town of McColl 

(population 2,524), near the northeastern border of Marlboro County (populaDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
138 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

tion 27,151) within the State of North Carolina. Agriculture is also declining in 

relative importance in this area, but it is still considered the principal factor in 

Marlboro County's economy. McColl Bank is the smallest of four banks operating in Marlboro County, with only 8.0 percent of countywide deposits. Two 

of the three largest banks in the State, operating in the county seat, together 

hold 82.0 percent thereof, and the seventh-largest bank, with a location in 

another small community, also holds 10.0 percent.

The nearest American office to one of Commercial's offices is approximately 50 miles away, while the nearest American office of McColl Bank is 

approximately 70 miles away. The two merging banks are also widely separated 

from each other. All three banks serve different trade areas, and none appears 

to have deposit or loan business originating in areas served by either of the 

other two. The proposed mergers, accordingly, would not eliminate any present competition among the three banks involved. In both Chester and Marlboro 

counties, moreover, competition with larger, statewide banks should be 

be enhanced.

South Carolina law permits statewide branch banking, but the potential for 

increased competition between the three banks through de novo branching in 

the absence of merger appears too insignificant to justify a denial of either 

proposed merger. Marlboro and Chester counties both lost population over the 

last decade and other South Carolina counties would appear to be more attractive for de novo branching. McColl Bank has limited resources and node novo

branching experience. Both American and Commercial have resources for additional de novo branching, but there are numerous South Carolina banks larger 

than either that are more likely de novo entrants into Marlboro County or the 

areas each bank now serves.

Moreover, in view of the relatively small share of the statewide banking 

market held by American, the proposed mergers would have no adverse effect 

on the competitive structure of commercial banking in the State of South 

Carolina as a whole.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed mergers would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen 

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. All three banks have 

adequate financial and managerial resources and satisfactory future prospects, 

as would the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

acquisition of Commercial would bring to residents of the city of Chester and 

its environs a full-service bank offering specialized loan services, trust services, 

computer facilities, arid an increased lending limit, none of which are conveniently available to them (the nearest office of a large statewide bank being 

some 20 miles away). The proposed acquisition of McColl Bank would bring to 

residents of the town of McColl and its environs similar services, although such 

services can presently be found at bank offices within 10 miles of McColl. The 

proposed mergers should, in any event, stimulate competition with the large

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 139

statewide banks found in both counties, with resulting benefits to the general 

public in both counties.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the applications is warranted.

Resources 

( in

B a n kin g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Fayette Trust Company

Baltimore, Maryland 

(in organization; change title to 

The Equitable Trust Company)

900 65

to merge with

The Equitable Trust Company

Baltimore

721,157 65

Summary report by Attorney General, October 1, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Fayette Trust 

Company (Org.) would become a subsidiary of Columbia Holding, Inc., a bank 

holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an 

existing bank with a non-operating institution; as such and’without regard to 

the surviving bank by Columbia Holding, Inc., it would have no effect on 

competition.

Basis for Corporation approval, December 17, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for Fayette Trust Company, Baltimore, Maryland ("New Bank"), a proposed 

new bank in organization, and for prior consent to its merger with The Equitable Trust Company, Baltimore, Maryland, ("Other Bank"), a State nonmember bank, total resources $721,157,000 as of June 30, 1971, under New 

Bank's charter and Other Bank's title. The resulting bank will operate Other 

Bank's existing 65 offices and initial capital of New Bank will be retired.

The new bank formation and merger are being utilized by Columbia Holding, Inc. ("Holding Company"), solely as a means to acquire control of Other 

Bank. Holding Company's application to become a registered bank holding 

company and to acquire control of Other Bank is now pending before the 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. New Bank will not be in 

operation as a commercial bank prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same banking business of Other Bank at its 

existing locations, and with the same management. The proposal will not, per 

se, change the banking services which Other Bank has provided to its trade 

area. All factors required to be considered pertinent to each application are 

favorably resolved.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
140 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

The Equitable Trust Company

Baltimore, Maryland

721,157 65 68

to acquire the assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

The Clinton Bank

Clinton

27,138 3

Summary report by Attorney General, September 27, 1971 

The head office of Equitable in Baltimore is about 45 miles from Clinton 

Bank. The closest branches of Equitable and Clinton Bank are about 13 miles 

apart; the application indicates that the merging banks draw no appreciable 

deposits and loans from each other's service area. Although Equitable operates 

a total of four offices in Prince Georges County, it does not appear that the 

proposed merger would eliminate substantial existing competition. Sixteen 

banks operate a total of about 87 banking offices in Prince Georges County, an 

area which overstates the market area primarily affected by the proposed 

merger. Equitable and Clinton Bank rank sixth and seventh among these banks, 

holding about 2.8 per cent each of total county deposits.

Maryland law permits statewide branching; accordingly, Equitable and 

Clinton Bank could be permitted to open de novo branches in those areas 

presently served by each other. In view of the size of Clinton Bank, its elimination as a potential new competitor in Equitable's service areas does not appear 

to be competitively significant.

Equitable is among the largest banks not operating offices in Clinton Bank's 

service area. Clinton Bank is among the smaller of the nine banks in its service 

area, operating three of the 29 commercial banking offices in the vicinity.

Basis for Corporation approval, December 22, 1971 

The Equitable Trust Company, Baltimore, Maryland ("Equitable"), an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $721,157,000 and total 

deposits of $632,964,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other 

provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior 

consent to acquire the assets and assume the liability to pay deposits of The 

Clinton Bank, Clinton, Maryland ("C linton"), an insured State nonmember 

bank with total resources of $27,138,000 and total deposits of $25,483,000. 

Application is also made under Section 18(d) of the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Act to establish Clinton's three offices as branches of the resulting bank. After 

the transaction, the resulting bank would have 80 authorized offices.

Competition. Equitable is the third largest bank in Maryland, holding 11.3 

percent of all commercial bank deposits in the State. Its branches are concentrated in the Baltimore area and in the densely populated corridor between 

Baltimore and the District of Columbia. Equitable has five branches in the 

northern section of Prince Georges County, which adjoins the District of 

Columbia to the south and east, but none in the southern section of the 

county.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 141

Clinton's banking business today is drawn primarily from southern Prince 

Georges County. Its main office is located about 7 miles southeast of the 

District of Columbia line on the fringe of the District's expanding suburban 

sector, while Clinton's two branches are located in the more densely populated 

communities of Camp Springs and Temple Hill, closer in to the District line. 

The population of this southern portion of Prince Georges County is estimated 

at 107,700 persons, with nine banks and 29 commercial bank offices as of June 

30, 1970, to serve that population. Clinton is the seventh largest of these nine 

banks, which include among them, three of the State's largest banks. Clinton 

holds an estimated 14.6 percent of the total deposits of these 29 offices, 

ranking fourth in this respect. If Prince Georges County as a whole, or a larger 

segment of the Washington SMSA, was considered relevant in assessing the 

competitive impact of the proposed acquisition, Clinton's percentage share of 

the total deposit market would, of course, be appreciably smaller.4

Equitable's nearest office is 13 miles north of Clinton's Camp Springs 

Branch. While both locations are in the Washington SMSA, numerous offices of 

competing banks separate them, and there appears to be almost no direct 

competition between the two banks which would be eliminated by the proposed transaction.

Maryland law permits statewide de novo branching as well as merging, but 

the proposed transaction is not likely to eliminate any significant potential for 

increased competition in the future between Clinton and Equitable. Clinton's 

past branching history and relatively limited resources make it an unlikely 

candidate for significant de novo branching in the highly developed and competitive banking markets presently served by Equitable. Equitable has aggressively demonstrated its de novo branching capabilities in recent years, but the 

limited population served by each commercial bank office in southern Prince 

Georges County today is likely to lead its de novo efforts into other areas until 

the population growth is this section of the county catches up with the rate of 

growth being experienced elsewhere in the Washington SMSA. When that 

happens, there are numerous large banks in Maryland capable of expanding de

novo in the same area.

Competition between Equitable and Clinton could arise in the future, however, through Clinton's possible acquisition by another bank that presently 

competes with Equitable or could be expected to compete with Equitable in 

the future. In this connection, the Corporation has carefully noted the growing 

concentration of commercial bank resources held by Maryland's largest banks, 

including Equitable. The Corporation does not believe, however, under the 

facts presented, that the proposed acquisition would establish a significant 

precedent adversely affecting the future structure of commercial banking in the 

State of Maryland or that it would adversely affect the ability of other banks in 

that State to compete in the future with the largest statewide banks. Clinton is 

the seventh largest of nine commercial banks in its local area, holding only the 

fourth largest share of local deposits. Equitable does not compete in that local 

market and holds only some 2.8 percent of total Prince Georges County commercial bank deposits and an even smaller share of the total commercial bank 

deposits in the Washington SMSA. The proposed acquisition would not elimi4Cl inton's share of total commercial bank deposits in Prince Georges County as of June 30, 

1970, was approximately 2.8 percent.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
142 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

nate significant existing or potential competition between the two banks or 

add materially to Equitable's strength in Prince Georges County, the Washington SMSA, or the State of Maryland as a whole.

Under these circumstances, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed purchase and assumption would not, in any section of the country, 

substantially lessen competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other 

manner be in restraint of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of these factors 

is favorable for Equitable, as they would be for the resulting bank. Clinton has 

a low net worth position and a below-average net earnings performance, both 

of which would be improved by the proposed acquisition.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

transaction would have little effect on present customers served by Equitable, 

but the resulting bank would provide a number of services not now offered by 

Clinton, such as personal and corporate trust services, computer applications 

for customers, a wider variety of time deposit instruments, and more specialized 

loan services. Equitable's much larger lending lim it would replace Clinton's 

$90,000 limit, which should prove more convenient to Clinton's commercial 

and industrial customers. To the extent these services are available at other 

institutions within the area served, the proposed transaction would provide an 

additional alternative for the banking public.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is warranted.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n kin g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o p e ra te d

American Bank and Trust Co. of Pa.

Reading, Pennsylvania

689,877 36 37

to merge with

American Bank 

Mahanoy City

9,154 1

Summary report by Attorney General, August 13, 1971 

American Bank operates a total of six offices in Schuylkill County, all 

having been acquired in a series of five mergers from 1964 to 1970. American 

Bank operates two offices in Frackville, about seven miles west of Mahanoy 

City, and one office in Tamaqua, about 11 miles east of Mahanoy City. Few 

banking offices intervene. Statistics presented in the application show that 

American Bank obtains some business from Mahanoy Bank's service area, particularly in the eastern part of the service area, toward Tamaqua. Thus, the 

proposed merger would eliminate existing competition between the two banks. 

Moreover, the proposed merger would eliminate Mahanoy Bank as an attractive 

entry vehicle for capable banks not yet operating in the general area, thus 

lessening potential competition in an area with brightening economic prospects.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 143

On June 30, 1970, American Bank held about 17.3 per cent of the total 

deposits held by the 18 commercial banks operating in Schuylkill County, the 

second largest share in the county. The three largest banks in the county 

together held about 60.4 per cent of total county deposits. On the same date, 

Mahanoy Bank held about 2.3 per cent of total county deposits. Thus the 

proposed merger would increase American Bank's market share to 19.6 per 

cent, and increase the concentration of deposits in the three largest banks to

62.7 per cent.

In view of the already successful entry of American Bank into Schuylkill 

County, and the elimination of existing and potential competition which 

would attend the proposed merger, we conclude that its overall competitive 

effect would be adverse.

Basis for Corporation approval, December 22, 1971

American Bank and Trust Co. of Pa., Reading, Pennsylvania ("American"), 

an insured State nonmember bank with total resources of $689,877,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with American 

Bank, Mahanoy City, Pennsylvania ("Mahanoy City Bank"), with total resources of $9,154,000.5 The banks would merge under the charter and title of 

American and, as an incident to the merger, the one office of Mahanoy City 

Bank would become a branch of the resulting bank, increasing the number of 

its authorized offices to 38.

Competition. American, 11th in size among some 456 commercial banks in 

Pennsylvania, operates 36 offices located in the seven counties where it may 

legally branch or merge under Pennsylvania law, i.e., Berks, Chester, Lancaster, 

Lebanon, Lehigh, Montgomery, and Schuylkill. One additional office, to be 

located in Lehigh County, has been authorized. With 2.0 percent of total 

commercial bank deposits in Pennsylvania, American ranks behind 10 larger 

banks which hold commercial bank deposit shares ranging from 11.2 percent to 

2.1 percent. American is an aggressive, full-service bank with a large trust 

department. Its six offices in Schuylkill County, all of them acquired by 

merger, hold about 16.9 percent of the county's total commercial bank deposits.

Mahanoy City Bank is a unit bank located in Mahanoy City (population 

7,257), a borough in the north-central portion of Schuylkill County. It holds 

2.4 percent of the county's total commercial bank deposits. The area from 

which most of its business is drawn, however, consists largely of Mahanoy City 

and its sparsely populated mountainous environs. Formerly devoted to the 

mining of anthracite coal, this section of Schuylkill County has never recovered 

from the decline and mechanization of that industry, and remains economically depressed. The area presently contains seven small industrial plants 

in diversified fields, but many local residents commute long distances for employment to the county seat at Pottsville (population 19,715), some 14 miles 

to the south, or to larger communities even further away. The one other 

commercial bank office in the community, a branch of the $137 million deposit Pennsylvania National Bank and Trust Company of Pottsville, holds twice

Deposit data are as of June 30, 1971, adjusted for the subsequent merger of American 

with Slatington National Bank and Trust Company. Deposit percentages are as of June 

30, 1970.

5

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
144 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

the amount of local deposits held by Mahanoy City Bank.

The nearest American offices to Mahanoy City are the two it has in Frackville, 8 miles to the southwest. Three small unit banks are located in the 

intervening borough of Shenandoah, 4 miles west of Mahanoy City, and the 

rugged terrain south of Mahanoy City limits active competition from American's Frackville offices. Despite the fact that American also has offices in 

McAdoo, Tamaqua, and Coaldale, some 10-15 miles east of Mahanoy City, 

American as a whole draws only $576,000 in deposits from communities also 

served by Mahanoy City Bank— a very small percentage of the total deposits 

originating in the area. The two banks apparently have no common customers 

and no loans originating in areas served by the other. While American offices in 

Frackville and to the east represent an alternative source of banking services 

today for Mahanoy residents dissatisfied with their local banks, four such 

alternatives would remain for the residents of this sparsely populated area of 

Pennsylvania even if the proposed merger is approved. The transaction, accordingly, would not eliminate significant existing competition between the two 

banks.

The proposed merger, on the other hand, would increase somewhat the 

concentration of commercial banking resources in Schuylkill County and in the 

seven-county area available to American for branching or merging under 

Pennsylvania law. American's share of total Schuylkill County deposits would 

increase to approximately 20 percent— a point at which future acquisitions in 

the county would be difficult to approve. Pennsylvania National Bank and 

Trust Company, however, would continue to have a much larger share of local 

deposits both in Mahanoy City and in Schuylkill County as a whole. In addition, numerous banking alternatives would remain available in Schuylkill 

County. Within American's seven-county branching area, there are at least 404 

offices of 103 commercial banks with total IPC deposits, as of June 30, 1970, 

aggregating over $4 billion. American holds 7.8 percent of the total number of 

commercial bank offices and 9.6 percent of the total deposits held at such 

offices in the seven-county area. As such, it is the largest bank headquartered in 

the district by a narrow margin. Four large Philadelphia banks, however, have 

recently relocated their offices to Montgomery County in order to be able to 

branch into three of the seven counties in American's branching area, and 

others are planning similar action. The large Harrisburg-based banks can enter 

three other counties of these seven, so that American's share of the total 

deposits in the seven-county area may well diminish, rather than increase, in 

the future.

Under these circumstances, the acquisition of a $9 million unit bank in 

Schuylkill County does not appear likely to result in such a concentration of 

assets in the county or in the seven-county branching district as to foreclose 

effective commercial bank competition in the future.

In accordance with Corporation policy, American has already been required, 

as a condition to approval of its merger with Slatington National Bank and 

Trust Company earlier this year, to divest itself, within a reasonable period of 

time, of stock it holds in other Pennsylvania banks which can branch or merge 

under Pennsylvania law into one or more of the seven counties in which 

American may branch or merge.

For the reasons stated, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

proposed merger would not, in any section of the country, substantially lessen

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS APPROVED BY THE CORPORATION 145

competition, tend to create a monopoly, or in any other manner be in restraint 

of trade.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. American has satisfactory financial and managerial resources, as would the resulting bank. 

Mahanoy City Bank faces the imminent retirement of its two senior officers, 

thereby posing a management succession problem which would be resolved by 

the proposed merger. While its financial and managerial resources are adequate 

for the business it does today, its future prospects, under the circumstances, 

would be brighter as a branch of the resulting bank than as an independent 

bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. Mahanoy City 

Bank has been an unaggressive competitor which has failed to offer time and 

savings deposits at the maximum rates allowed by regulations, or loans in excess 

of $35,000 (even though its lending lim it is $66,000). Its relevant loan-todeposits and loan-to-assets ratios, moreover, are much lower than American's. 

American would extend to customers of Mahanoy City Bank its full range of 

banking services, including bank credit card, lending, trust, and computer services, not now offered by Mahanoy City Bank. While it appears that the demand for such services can now be met at the Mahanoy City Branch of Pennsylvania Bank and Trust Company, the presence of a second source for such 

services should stimulate local competition and benefit all residents of the 

Mahanoy City area.

Based on the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded 

that approval of the application is warranted.

Resources / j rt

B a n k in g O ffic e s

lin

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

1 n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Jonesboro Bank & Trust Company

Jonesboro, Tennessee 

(in organization; change title to 

The Banking & Trust Company)

100 5

to merge with

The Banking & Trust Company

Jonesboro

27,861 5

Summary report by Attorney General, December 21, 1971 

The proposed merger is part of a plan through which Jonesboro Bank & 

Trust Company (Org.) would become a subsidiary of First National Holding 

Corporation of Memphis, a bank holding company. The instant merger, however, would merely combine an existing bank with a non-operating institution; 

as such, and without regard to the acquisition of the surviving bank by First 

National Holding Corporation of Memphis, it would have no effect on 

competition.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
146 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Basis for Corporation approval, December 22, 1971 

Pursuant to Sections 5 and 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, application has been filed for Federal deposit insurance 

for Jonesboro Bank & Trust Company, Jonesboro, Tennessee ("New Bank"), a 

proposed new bank in organization, and for prior consent to its merger with 

The Banking & Trust Company, Jonesboro, Tennessee ("Old Bank"), a State 

nonmember bank with total resources of $27,861,000 as of April 20, 1971, 

under New Bank's charter and Old Bank's title. The resulting bank will operate 

other bank's existing five offices.

The New Bank formation and merger are being utilized by First National 

Holding Corporation, Memphis, Tennessee ("Holding Company"), solely as a 

means to acquire control of Old Bank. Holding Company's application to 

become a registered bank holding company and to acquire control of Old Bank 

was approved by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on 

November 9, 1971. New Bank will not be in operation as a commercial bank 

prior to the merger, but subsequent to consummation it will operate the same 

banking business of Old Bank at its existing locations, and with the same 

management. The proposal will not, per se, change the banking services which 

other bank has provided to its trade area. All factors required to be considered 

pertinent to each application are favorably resoK/ed.

On the basis of the foregoing information, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval of the applications is warranted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION 147

BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n kin g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Westminster Trust Company

Westminster, Maryland 

(change title to Northern Maryland 

Bank and Trust Company)

18,390 4

to merge with

The Union National Bank of 

Westminster

Westminster

14,596 4

Summary report by Attorney General, March 3, 1971

All offices of the parties to the proposed merger are located in Carroll 

County. The two offices of Westminster Trust in Westminster are in direct and 

immediate competition with the two Westminster offices of Union National 

and its office under construction nearby. Westminster Trust's other two offices 

in Union Mills and Winfield, and Union National's office in Finksburg, are from 

six to 10 miles from Westminster, and no other competing bank lies directly 

between any of these offices and the town of Westminster itself. The application lists Carroll County as the primary service area of both banks. It is apparent that their proposed merger would eliminate substantial direct competition.

Eleven banks operate a total of 23 banking offices in Carroll County. Nine 

banks are headquartered in the county. As of June 30, 1968, Westminster 

Trust held the second largest share, about 12 per cent, of total commercial 

bank deposits in Carroll County banking offices, while Union National held the 

third largest share, about 10 per cent. The largest bank headquartered in the 

county, Carroll County Bank and Trust Company, held about 37 per cent of 

such deposits. If the proposed merger were approved, the resulting bank would 

hold about 22 per cent of the deposits in Carroll County banking offices, and 

after the completion of Union National's new branch near Westminster, would 

operate eight of the 24 banking offices which will then exist.

The two leading banks in the county would together hold almost 60 per 

cent of Carroll County commercial bank deposits and would operate 12 of the 

24 banking offices which will then exist.

Even these substantial concentration figures understate the effects of the 

proposed merger, for four of the offices Westminster Trust and Union National 

(five, counting the office of Union National under construction) are in or very 

near Westminster. Only one other bank, the county's largest, operates offices in 

the Westminster area. If the proposed merger were approved, only two banks 

would operate offices in this area.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
148 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

In view of the elimination of direct competition and increase in concentration which would result from the proposed merger, we conclude that it would 

have a significantly adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation denial, May 14, 1971

Westminster Trust Company, Westminster, Maryland ("Trust Company"), a 

State nonmember insured bank with total resources of $18,390,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to merge with The Union 

National Bank of Westminster, Westminster, Maryland ("Union Bank"), with 

total resources of $14,596,000, under the charter of Trust Company and with 

the title of "Northern Maryland Bank and Trust Company." The four offices 

of Union Bank would become branches of the resulting bank, increasing the 

number of its offices to eight.

Competition. The proposed merger would consolidate the second and third 

ranking banks presently headquartered in Westminster, Maryland (1970 population: 7,143). Trust Company operates two offices there, one in Union Mills,

7 miles northwest of Westminster and one in Winfield, 12 miles southwest of 

Westminster. Union Bank operates two offices in downtown Westminster, one 

in a shopping center ori the outskirts of Westminster and one in Finksburg, 8 

miles southeast of Westminster. The two banks are substantially smaller than 

the largest bank presently operating in Westminster, Carroll County Bank and 

Trust Company, a $45 million deposit institution.

The offices of Trust Company and Union Bank are all located in Carroll 

County (1970 population: 68,329), which is in the north-central sector of 

Maryland adjacent to the Pennsylvania State line. The rural orientation of 

Carroll County is being replaced by emphasis on light manufacturing, retail and 

wholesale trade and services. Farm operations, following a general trend, are 

being consolidated with consequent increase in the size of the average farm and 

its capital requirements. Although Carroll County is on the outer fringe of the 

Baltimore SMSA and some commutation to other parts of the SMSA occurs, 

the proposed merger would have its greatest public impact in Carroll County 

and in the adjacent communities of Reisterstown and Glyndon, both of which 

are in Baltimore County but easily accessible to Westminster by divided highway. Both banks draw their deposit and loan business almost exclusively from 

this area. Both banks, headquartered in Westminster, the county seat and geographic center of Carroll County, have offices in communities easily accessible 

to Westminster, and there appears to be only limited economic interaction 

between the people in this market area and the rest of the Baltimore SMSA or 

the York (Pennsylvania) SMSA to the north.

The close identity of service areas for Trust Company and Union Bank 

emphasizes that their proposed merger would eliminate direct competition 

between them, and the figures indicate this competition is relatively substantial 

and significant. Union Bank has a somewhat larger total of public deposits than 

Trust Company, but except for this difference their deposit structures are 

similar. More than one-half of Union Bank's deposits, moreover, are derived 

from customers who also deposit at Trust Company. Half of each bank's loan 

portfolio is in real estate loans, and both banks do approximately the same 

volume of installment lending in the area.

The proposed merger would not only eliminate this existing competition 

Digitized for FRASER 

but also the possibility, through de novo branching, of increased competition

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION 149

between the two banks in the future. Both have been successful in opening de

novo branches in Carroll County in the past, and population trends in the 

county and in Reisterstown and Glyndon make further de novo branching 

likely in the future.

Twelve commercial banks have offices in the designated market area, with 

Trust Company holding 12.2 percent of total IPC deposits, and Union Bank

9.0 percent. Their proposed merger would create a bank holding 21.2 percent 

of the market, exceeded only by Carroll County Bank and Trust Company, 

with 33.7 percent of the area's total IPC deposits. None of the other nine 

banks would have more than 9.8 percent of the area's total IPC deposits. 

Approval of the proposed merger would thus add significantly to commercial 

bank concentration in the relevant geographic market and encourage other 

direct competitors to merge.

Furthermore, although 12 commercial banks have offices in the relevant 

geographic market, approximately 50 percent of area IPC deposits are held at 

the Westminster offices of Carroll County Bank and Trust Company, Westminster Trust Company and Union Bank. By contrast, only one-tenth of the 

area's population lives there. This emphasizes Westminster's role as the economic as well as geographic center of the market and indicates further that 

many area residents turn to Westminster for banking services which are not 

provided by the smaller institutions elsewhere in the market. For this reason, a 

disproportionately large segment of the public living in the market area would 

be affected by the proposed reduction from three to two in the number of 

banking alternatives in Westminster.

Based on the foregoing and on applicable judicial precedents, the Board of 

Directors is of the opinion that the effect of the proposed merger would be 

substantially to lessen existing and potential competition in commercial banking in Carroll County, Reisterstown, and Glyndon.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. If the proposed 

merger were approved, the only immediate change in services to the public 

would be an increase in lending limits from $90,000 in the case of Trust 

Company and $70,000 in the case of Union Bank to $172,000. With one 

exception, neither bank has originated any loan within the past year which has 

been shared with any other bank and it appears that only a very small number 

of business customers would benefit from the higher lending limit. The application further states that it is not anticipated that any new services would initially be offered by the resulting bank.

The Board of Directors, accordingly, cannot find that the anticompetitive 

effects of the proposed transaction would be clearly outweighed in the public 

interest by the probable effect of the transaction in meeting the convenience 

and needs of the banking public in the relevant geographic market.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Each of the participating banks has adequate financial resources, with Union Bank's recent earnings performance somewhat more impressive than Trust Company's. Union 

Bank anticipates a management succession problem in the next few years, but 

there are alternatives available to the proposed merger for the resolution of 

what is presently only a potential problem. The future prospects of both 

banks, in a growing market, are favorable.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the application is not warranted and that it must, accordingly, be denied.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
150 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n k in g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Anderson Banking Company

Anderson, Indiana

65,494 8

to merge with

The State Bank of Lapel

Lapel

3,820 1

Summary report by Attorney General, December 15, 1971

Lapel Bank is located 11 miles from Anderson where six of Anderson 

Bank's offices are located. Anderson Bank draws a number of customers from 

Lapel and the application indicates that Lapel is within Anderson Bank's service area. Thus, the proposed merger would eliminate direct competition between the merging banks.

As of June 30, 1970, nine banks operated a total of 26 banking offices in 

Madison County. Anderson Bank ranked first in the total deposit market with 

a 40.5 per cent share; Lapel Bank, with about 2.2 per cent of such deposits, 

ranked eighth.

As a result of this merger, Anderson Bank's share of the commercial banking 

deposits in Madison County will be increased to about 42.7 per cent. This 

represents a significant increase in an already concentrated banking market. 

The proposed merger would, therefore, have an adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation denial July 19, 1971

Anderson Banking Company, Anderson, Indiana ("Applicant"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total deposits of $60,076,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit Insurance 

Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with The State Bank of 

Lapel, Lapel, Indiana ("Lapel Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank 

which has total deposits of $3,405,000. The banks would merge under the 

charter and title of Applicant and, as an incident to the merger, the one office 

of Lapel Bank would become a branch of the resulting bank, increasing the 

number of its offices to nine.

Competition. The eight offices of Applicant are all in Madison County, 

which, with small portions of contiguous counties, constitutes its primary trade 

area. Anderson, the county seat of Madison County, is a highly industrialized 

city located in the east-central section of the State of Indiana, between 

Indianapolis, 35 miles to the southwest, and Muncie, 18 miles to the northeast. 

In the 10 years prior to 1970, the population of Madison County increased 

from 125,819 to 137,451.

Lapel Bank's sole office is in the town of Lapel (population 1,725), about

11 miles southwest of Anderson near the Madison County-Hamilton County 

border. Lapel serves as a trading center for nearby farmers. A sizable number of 

area residents commute to Anderson to work in the industrial plants located 

there.

Applicant is the largest, and Lapel Bank the smallest, commercial bank in 

Madison County, with 39.7 percent and 2.1 respectively, of total IPC deposits

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION 151

held by Madison County commercial banks. Applicant and the two next largest 

banks in the county together hold some 75 percent of total IPC deposits. Some 

Madison County banks, however, such as those in Alexandria and Summitville, 

are not readily accessible to Lapel area residents, while commercial banks in 

Noblesville (9 miles to the west of Lapel in Hamilton County) and Fortville (8 

miles to the south of Lapel in Hancock County) are. After making these 

adjustments to local area deposits, Applicant alone would hold about 30 percent of the resulting market, and together with The American National Bank of 

Noblesville and Citizens Banking Company, Anderson, the second and third 

ranking banks, respectively, in the same market, would hold 67 percent of such 

deposits. The proposed merger would thus add to the strength of the dominant 

local bank, increase the concentration of banking resources in an already highly 

concentrated market, reduce by one the number of alternative sources of 

commercial bank services conveniently available to Lapel area residents, and 

eliminate direct competition between Applicant and Lapel Bank for the 

banking business of those area residents who commute to Anderson to work.

Under relevant Indiana law, which permits de novo branching for Madison 

County banks only within Madison County and subject to home office protection, Applicant could not enter Lapel by de novo branching at the present 

time. Applicant could enter unincorporated areas near Lapel, but this may be 

relatively unattractive in view of their sparse population. Were Lapel Bank to 

merge with one of the other seven Madison County banks, however, home 

office protection would be removed from Lapel, and Applicant has indicated it 

would, in that event, be likely to seek a de novo branch within the incorporated areas of Lapel. Consummation of the proposed merger would eliminate 

that potential for increased competition between the two banks in the future.

In view of Applicant's present 30 percent share of the relevant deposit 

market, its dominant position in Madison County as a whole, the highly concentrated nature of commercial banking in the relevant market and in Madison 

County as a whole, the elimination of both present and potential competition 

if this merger is approved, and the availability to Lapel Bank of other alternatives if this merger is denied, the Board of Directors is of the opinion that the 

effect of the proposed transaction may be to lessen competition substantially 

within the relevant market and within Madison County as a whole.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would replace a small, limited-service bank with an office of a larger 

bank offering a higher lending lim it and certain lending and deposit services not 

now available at Lapel Bank. Such services are available, with only slight inconvenience, however, from banks in Noblesville, Pendleton, and Anderson, 

including Applicant. Thus, the proposed merger would have only slight impact 

on the convenience and needs of the community to be served.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

adequate financial and managerial resources, although Lapel Bank has permitted a management succession problem to arise. The stock of Lapel Bank is 

closely held, however, and it is one of the most profitable Madison County 

banks. The record indicates that Lapel Bank is likely to have other solutions to 

its management succession problem even if the proposed merger with Applicant is denied,

Since the anticompetitive effects of the proposed merger are not clearly

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
152 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

outweighed by the convenience and needs of the community to be served, the 

Board of Directors has concluded that the proposed merger of Applicant and 

Lapel Bank should be denied.

Resources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

B a n kin g O ffic e s

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

The Citizens and Southern Emory 

Bank

Atlanta, Georgia

41,894 3

to acquire the assets and assume

the deposit liabilities of

The Citizens and Southern Bank 

of Tucker 

Tucker

28,552 2

Summary report by Attorney General, March 12, 1971 

The proposed mergers would eliminate present and future competition between (i) C&S and its subsidiaries, and (ii) the banks which it seeks to merge 

into its subsidiaries. Consummation of these mergers would allow C&S, which 

already is the dominant bank in Atlanta, to transfer its dominance to North 

Fulton County, and to increase its share of DeKalb County deposits from 25% 

to over 41%. (Even within the five-county Atlanta SMSA, an area which clearly 

overstates the market, these mergers would increase C&S' leading share from 

26% to 28%.)

Moreover, this merger must be evaluated in the context of the other pending 

merger proposals of First National and Trust Company. If all the proposed 

mergers were consummated, these banks which now dominate Atlanta would, 

together or separately, obtain positions of dominance in both North Fulton 

County and DeKalb County. These three Atlanta banks account for 53% of 

DeKalb County deposits now and would control almost 82% if all the proposed 

"affiliate" mergers were consummated. The same three banks' control of North 

Fulton County would increase from 0% to over 50%. These proposed mergers, 

involving three banks accounting for 54% of North Fulton County's deposits 

and nine banks accounting for over 28% of DeKalb County's deposits, would 

forever eliminate the possibility that significant numbers of Fulton or DeKalb 

"affiliates" of the major Atlanta banks could become independent sources of 

new competition. If they were all approved, few significant sources of deconcentration would remain in either Fulton or DeKalb Counties.

For the foregoing reasons, we believe that the C&S mergers would have a 

significantly adverse effect on competition in North Fulton County, DeKalb 

County and the Atlanta area generally.

Basis for Corporation denial, October 4, 1971 

The Citizens and Southern Emory Bank, Atlanta, Georgia ("Emory Bank"),

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION 153

an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $34,796,000, has 

applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to acquire the asset of and 

to assume the liability to pay deposits made in Citizens and Southern Bank of 

Tucker, Tucker, Georgia ("Tucker Bank"), an insured State nonmember bank 

with total deposits of $24,738,000. Application is made also under Section 

18(d) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to operate the main and single 

branch office of Tucker Bank as branches of the resulting bank.

Competition. The Citizens and Southern National Bank ("C&S National"), 

Savannah, Georgia, is the owner of all the outstanding stock of Citizens and 

Southern Holding Company ("C&S Holding"), Savannah, Georgia, which in 

turn owns 95.14 percent of the stock of Emory Bank and 5.0 percent of the 

stock of Tucker Bank.

The C&S system, including its 5% affiliates, presently controls 41.8 percent 

of all deposits held at DeKalb County commercial bank offices and 25.4 percent of all commercial bank offices in the county, making it by far the largest 

banking system in DeKalb County.

Tucker Bank was organized in 1919 and did not become affiliated with the 

C&S system until early 1965. A t that time Tucker Bank maintained only one 

office, holding approximately $4 million in deposits.

When C&S Holding acquired its 5% interest in Tucker Bank, approximately 

75 percent of Tucker Bank's remaining stock was acquired simultaneously by 

holders close to the C&S system. Ever since, Tucker Bank has been operated 

with substantially the same close working relationship between it and other 

C&S banks that exists between the C&S system and the 5% banks which it 

organized de novo. This relationship, and the lack of existing competition 

between C&S banks, are detailed in the Basis for Corporation Approval issued 

this date in connection with the proposed acquisition by The Citizens and 

Southern Bank of East Point and two other 5% C&S banks in Fulton County.

Even as to Tucker Bank, the Corporation sees no reason to anticipate a 

voluntary disaffiliation from the C&S system if this proposed merger is denied.

The close, and apparently friendly, working relationship that presently 

exists with the C&S system argues against the likelihood of such disaffiliation 

despite the fact that 17 percent of the outstanding stock of Tucker Bank 

remains in the hands of the family that controlled the bank as an independent 

institution when C&S acquired its interest in 1965. As in the case of the other 

proposed mergers of 5% banks into majority-owned C&S subsidiaries, more 

than 87 percent of the outstanding shares of Tucker Bank were voted in favor 

of this proposed merger and only 26 shares (less than 0.1 percent) of the 

outstanding shares were voted against the proposal. Disaffiliation, if it occurs, 

would appear to depend on compulsory process to sever the C&S relationship 

with this bank, rather than the denial of the application now before the 

Corporation.

While the Corporation finds that existing competition would not be eliminated by the proposed merger, and that future competition through voluntary 

disaffiliation is unlikely, it subscribes to the following view expressed by the 

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in its May 20, 1971, opinion on the reconsideration of its earlier decision relating to the proposed merger of Trust Company of Georgia and Peachtree Bank and Trust Company, 

Chamblee, Georgia:

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
154 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

. . . A merger of two banks which are not significant competitors cannot be 

regarded as eliminating significant existing competition, and similarly, if 

future competition is unlikely— even though possible— the merger cannot be 

regarded as reasonably likely to lessen future competition.

This does not mean that every proposed merger before the Board of two 

related banks receives favorable consideration. First of all, consideration

must he given to the question o f whether the relationship was anticompetitive in its origins; if so, little weight should be attributed to such relationship, since to do so might encourage evasion o f the law.*** [Emphasis 

supplied.]

The Corporation took a similar position in its December 1, 1970, opinion 

approving the proposed merger of The Lone Tree Savings Bank into The 

Farmers and Merchants Savings Bank, also of Lone Tree, Iowa, and in its 

December 4, 1970, opinion approving the proposed merger of Embarrass State 

Bank, Embarrass, Wisconsin, into Citizens State Bank, Shawano, Wisconsin.

The following circumstances surrounding the affiliation of Tucker Bank 

with the C&S system in 1965 appear relevant. Tucker Bank was a small, 

limited-service unit bank serving primarily the credit needs of outside business 

interests of the Cofer family, its controlling owners. A new national bank was 

being organized in Tucker, which promised more intense competition. Seeking 

more experienced banking management and a good price for their stock, the 

controlling owners of Tucker Bank approached C&S National, with whose 

management they were personally friendly, and the sale of 80 percent of their 

stock to C&S interests was consummated shortly thereafter.

While the C&S affiliation resulted in broadening the banking services offered 

to Tucker Bank customers, it also resulted in a significant increase in the share 

of DeKalb County banking resources controlled by the C&S system. A t yearend 1964, the C&S system already controlled approximately 24 percent of 

total DeKalb County commercial bank deposits and a slightly larger share of all 

the commercial bank offices in the county. Tucker Bank's deposits represented 

at that time about 5 percent of total DeKalb County commercial bank deposits. Its affiliation with the C&S system not only increased substantially that 

system's lead over other banking organizations in the county, but foreclosed 

the possibility that Tucker Bank, either as an independent bank under different 

control or as part of another large banking organization with a less substantial 

share of DeKalb County banking resources, would become a significant competitor to the C&S system.

Tucker Bank at the time was not in an unsound condition, it had had no 

experience actually competing against the new bank being organized in its 

community, and the record discloses no serious effort on the part of its owners 

to find some other, less anticompetitive solution to the new situation it faced. 

Moreover, with the growth projected for the Tucker area, the C&S system 

might have found it desirable and practicable, if not in 1964-1965, then at 

some later date, to establish a de novo bank in the area served by Tucker Bank, 

just as it did in other growing sections of DeKalb County prior to the recent 

change in Georgia's branching laws.

Based on the increased concentration of DeKalb County banking resources 

in the C&S system and the elimination of probable future competition with 

Bank of Tucker had the affiliation with C&S not taken place, the Corporation 

finds that the present affiliation was anticompetitive in its origins and should

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION 155

not now be ratified by the Corporation's approval under the Bank Merger Act.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. These factors are 

satisfactory with respect to each of the banks involved and are so projected for 

the resulting bank.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. In view of the 

close working relationship that presently exists between the C&S system and 

these two banks, neither consummation nor denial of the proposed merger 

would change in any significant way the ability of Tucker Bank to serve the 

convenience and needs of DeKalb County residents.

With the various other factors to be considered weighing neither for approval nor denial, the Corporation concludes that the application now before it 

should be denied in view of the anticompetitive nature of the original affiliation of Bank of Tucker with the C&S system in 1965.

R esources

(in

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs )

B a n kin g O ffic e s

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Continental Bank

Norristown, Pennsylvania

717,597 50

to merge with

Bank of Pennsylvania

Reading

252,416 22

Summary report by Attorney General, July 20, 1971

Continental principally serves the Philadelphia area composed of Montgomery, Bucks, Delaware, and Philadelphia Counties. It also has offices in 

nearby Chester County. The head offices of the two banks are about 32 miles 

apart, but the closest branch offices are located only six miles apart. There is 

some competitive overlap: Continental draws $2 million in deposits from residents of Bank of Pennsylvania's service area, while Bank of Pennsylvania draws 

$3 million in deposits from residents of Continental's service area. There is also 

some overlapping loan and trust business. Therefore, the proposed merger 

would eliminate some direct competition.

Pennsylvania law permits de novo branching by a commercial bank in the 

county in which its home office is located, and all counties contiguous thereto. 

Thus, Continental and Bank of Pennsylvania may be permitted to open de

novo branches in each other's service area.

The major effect of the proposed merger would be to eliminate Continental 

as a potential de novo entrant into Berks and Lehigh Counties. Both of these 

counties are growing and becoming increasingly important economically. Both 

appear to be attractive areas for expansion by Philadelphia-oriented banks. In 

fact, three of the five largest banks traditionally headquartered in Philadelphia 

have recently moved their head offices to suburban Montgomery County, 

where Continental has its head office, in order to become eligible to expand 

into Chester, Berks and Lehigh Counties.

Bank of Pennsylvania operates the largest number of offices in Berks County, and holds the second largest share of the county's total commercial bank

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
156 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

deposits, about 25 per cent. It holds about 2 per cent of commercial bank 

deposits in Lehigh County and about 15 per cent of total commercial bank 

deposits in the two county area. Both Berks and Lehigh Counties have highly 

concentrated banking structures. In Berks County, the three largest banks control about 83 per cent of total county commercial bank deposits. The three 

largest banks in Lehigh County hold about 85 per cent of such deposits.

Bank of Pennsylvania is one of the three banks which occupy leading positions in Berks County. The other two, American Bank and Trust Company of 

Pennsylvania, and National Central Bank, are substantially larger in terms of 

overall size. Under existing law, neither of these two banks could merge with a 

Philadelphia area bank absent radical divestiture of their widely dispersed 

branch systems.

A t present, Continental is the third largest bank able to branch de novo into 

Berks and Lehigh Counties, behind the $2.5 billion First Pennsylvania Banking 

and Trust Company, and the $1.3 billion Fidelity Bank. In addition, the $2.1 

billion Girard Bank has recently received approval to relocate its head office in 

Montgomery County, and the $2.0 billion Philadelphia National Bank has expressed some intent to follow, absent any changes in state restrictions on 

branching. The fifth billion dollar Philadelphia Bank, Provident National Bank, 

could also move its home office to Montgomery County and thereby become a 

potential entrant into the areas served by Bank of Pennsylvania.

Thus, Continental is the sixth largest of the commercial banks which, under 

present Pennsylvania law, may be considered significant potential entrants into 

Berks and Lehigh Counties. Although it is substantially smaller, in terms of 

overall resources, than the largest of these banks, it easily possesses the capability to expand into new areas in ways other than by acquisition of a leading 

bank. Expansion in this manner would preserve leading banks in such new 

areas, most capable of offering effective competition to new competitors.

Therefore, in view of the elimination of some existing competition between 

the merging banks, and the potential for increased competition, primarily in 

those areas served by Bank of Pennsylvania, we conclude that the proposed 

merger would have an adverse effect on competition.

Basis for Corporation denial, December 22, 1971

Continental Bank, Norristown, Pennsylvania ("Continental"), a State nonmember insured bank with total resources of $717,597,000 and total deposits 

of $620,966,000, has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions 

of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior consent to 

merge with Bank of Pennsylvania, Reading, Pennsylvania, with total resources 

of $252,416,000 and total deposits of $220,289,000. The banks would merge 

under the charter and title of Continental and, as an incident to the merger, the 

22 offices of Bank of Pennsylvania would become branches of the resulting 

bank, increasing the number of its offices to 72.

Competition. Continental presently operates 50 offices in the Philadelphia 

SMSA, 20 of which are located in Philadelphia (population 1,948,609, down 

2.7 percent since 1960), 16 of which are located in Montgomery County 

(population 623,799, up 20.7 percent since 1960), 6 of which are located in 

Buck's County (population 415,056, up 34.5 percent since 1960), 3 of which 

are located in Delaware County (population 600,035, up 8.5 percent since 

1960), and 5 of which are located in Chester County (population 278,311, up 

32.2 percent since 1960). Within this five-county area, Continental holds

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTIONS DENIED BY THE CORPORATION. 157

approximately 5.9 percent of all commercial bank deposits and 9.0 percent of 

all commercial bank offices, ranking sixth with regard to the total deposits held 

at commercial bank offices in these five counties and fifth with regard to the 

number of commercial bank offices within such counties. Continental's main 

office is in Montgomery County, but it has no office in the two remaining 

counties open to it under Pennsylvania law (i.e., Berks and Lehigh).

Bank of Pennsylvania operates 22 offices, 19 of which are located in Berks 

County (population 296,382, up 7.6 percent since 1960) and 3 of which are 

located in Lehigh County (population 255,304, up 12.2 percent since 1960). 

Fourteen banks have a total of 56 offices in Berks County, but only three 

banks are of substantial size: American Bank & Trust Company, headquartered 

in Reading, a $679 million institution, National Central Bank, headquartered in 

Lancaster, a $627 million institution that recently merged with Reading Trust 

Company, and Bank of Pennsylvania. Although third largest in total resources, 

Bank of Pennsylvania ranks second in terms of Berks County deposits, with 

26.1 percent of total IPC deposits held at offices within the county. In Lehigh 

County, where Bank of Pennsylvania has opened two de novo offices since 

1968, it holds only 2.2 percent of total IPC deposits held at offices within the 

county and competes with eleven other banks, six of which exceed $100 

million in total assets. In the combined two-county area, Bank of Pennsylvania 

holds 15.9 percent of total IPC deposits, ranking third in this regard in the 

Berks-Lehigh banking market. Under Pennsylvania law, Bank of Pennsylvania 

has the right to branch de novo or merge in several other counties where it has 

no offices today— ie., Montgomery, Chester, Lancaster, Lebanon, and Schuylkill. If the proposed merger is approved, the resulting bank would lose the legal 

authority to enter Lancaster, Lebanon, and Schuylkill counties.

The closest offices of the two banks— Continental's Pottstown Branch in 

Montgomery County and Bank of Pennsylvania's Boyertown Branch in Berks 

County— are 8 miles apart, but the immediate areas served by each bank are 

quite distinct. While there are a number of common depositors, approximately 

15 are major national firms or utilities doing business throughout this section 

of Pennsylvania. Neither bank draws more than a small amount of deposit, 

loan, or trust business from areas presently served by the other, and their 

proposed merger would not eliminate any significant existing competition 

between them.

The proposed merger, on the other hand, would eliminate the possibility of 

increased competition between the two banks in the future and adversely 

affect future competition in a number of counties in this general section of 

Pennsylvania.

Since 1965, most of the major Philadelphia banks, including Continental, 

have moved their main offices to* Montgomery County so as to extend the 

geographic reach of their branch systems to Lehigh, Berks, and Chester 

counties as permitted by Pennsylvania law. Continental itself now has five 

offices in fast-growing Chester County, where income levels are substantially 

above statewide averages and the population per commercial bank office is 

6,325. Lehigh County similarly is a growing county, with above average income 

levels and a population per commercial bank office of approximately 5,800. 

Berks County has only average income levels and a somewhat lower population 

per commercial bank office than Lehigh (i.e., 5,489 persons), but it, too, has 

been growing substantially in population and additional de novo branching

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
158 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

appears likely. While Continental is not the largest Philadelphia bank able to 

enter Berks and Lehigh counties de novo, it is clearly one of the most likely 

entrants in view of its aggressive efforts in the past to expand by both de novo

branching and by merger into counties where it was not already represented.

Commercial banking resources are already highly concentrated in both 

Berks and Lehigh counties. American Bank & Trust Company, National Central 

Bank, and Bank of Pennsylvania together hold 82.4 percent of all Berks County 

commercial bank deposits, while the three principal banks in Lehigh County 

hold 84.5 percent of its total commercial bank deposits. If the deconcentration 

of banking resources and greater public choice among alternative sources of 

banking service are to be encouraged, de novo entry by significant banks not 

presently represented in either county, or their entry by merger with much 

smaller local banks than Bank of Pennsylvania, is clearly preferable to a transaction in which one of the most likely entrants seeks to acquire a bank with a 

market share as large as that which Bank of Pennsylvania currently holds in 

Berks County.

The proposed transaction would adversely affect future competition in 

other counties as well. Bank of Pennsylvania, a $252 million institution, now 

has legal capacity to expand de novo or by merger into five counties in addition to Berks and Lehigh.

Continental has a significant share of the local deposit market in two of 

these counties (Montgomery and Chester), and both are among the fastest 

growing counties in Pennsylvania, with income levels well above the statewide 

average. In the absence of merger, greater competition between Bank of Pennsylvania and Continental in these two counties would be increasingly likely as 

Bank of Pennsylvania seeks additional ways to expand outside its headquarters 

county. Bank of Pennsylvania, it should be noted, has opened six de novo

branches since 1968, and has had successful experience in branch operations. 

The proposed merger would eliminate this additional potential for increased 

competition between the two banks.

Bank of Pennsylvania, moreover, would lose the legal capacity to expand de

novo or by merger into Lancaster, Lebanon, and Schuylkill counties if the 

proposed merger is approved. Based on population trends, income levels, and 

the present number of commercial bank offices, Lancaster County (population 

319,693, up 14.8 percent since 1960) must be considered the most attractive, 

and Lebanon County the next most attractive, of the three counties for expansionary moves today by outside banks. Bank of Pennsylvania, as the largest 

such outside bank with capacity to enter and with successful branching experience, is the most likely potential entrant into both counties, but such entry 

would no longer be possible if the proposed merger is approved.

The Board of Directors has concluded, accordingly, that approval of the 

proposed merger would eliminate a significant potential for greater competition between Bank of Pennsylvania and Continental Bank in Berks, Lehigh, 

Chester, and Montgomery counties and would adversely affect future commercial bank competition in Lancaster and Lebanon counties. Since Bank of 

Pennsylvania and Continental are both effective competitors in the banking 

markets they serve today, the Board of Directors has further concluded that 

the competitive factors presented by the application weigh against approval 

despite the fact that significant existing competition between the two banks 

would not be eliminated.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 159

Convenience and Needs of the Community to be Served. Approval of the 

proposed merger would have no appreciable effect on present or potential 

customers of Continental, but it would increase the unsecured lending lim it 

available to Bank of Pennsylvania customers from $1.7 million and make available to them a number of specialized services presently offered by Continental, 

but not by Bank of Pennsylvania. The demand in Berks County for such 

services and for loans above $1.7 million is limited, however, and no claim is 

made that any essential banking needs are going unmet today. What demand 

there is for these specialized services can apparently be satisfied today by the 

two larger banks with offices in Reading or by the Philadelphia banks with 

offices in nearby Montgomery County. Continental, moreover, can introduce 

another local source for such services by branching de novo into Reading 

without the anticompetitive consequences of the proposed merger.

With $252 million in assets, Bank of Pennsylvania should be quite capable 

of meeting the normal banking requirements of the vast majority of its customers. These retail customers would experience little apparent benefit from 

the proposed merger and could, in fact, be adversely affected if Continental 

extended to them its significantly higher service charges on nonbusiness checking accounts.

Considerations of convenience and need, therefore, would appear to weigh 

neither significantly for, nor significantly against, approval of the proposed 

merger.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. Both banks have 

satisfactory financial and managerial resources for the business they do as 

independent institutions, and both have satisfactory prospects for the future. 

The same would be true of the resulting bank if the merger were to be approved. While three of Bank of Pennsylvania's top four officers plan to retire 

during calendar 1972, it is the Corporation's view that qualified replacements 

are readily available to the bank, either by promotion from within or by 

outside recruitment.

Inasmuch as the anticompetitive effects of the proposed merger are not, in 

the opinion of the Board of Directors, outweighed by any other factors, the 

Corporation has concluded that the proposed merger of Continental and Bank 

of Pennsylvania should be denied.

BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED 

BY THE CORPORATION

Resou rces 

(i n

B a n k in g O ffic e s

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

I n

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

ope ra te d

First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company

Smithfield, North Carolina

679,981 145

to merge with

The Lucama-Kenly Bank

Lucama

6,372 3

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
160 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Summary report by Attorney General, April 7, 1970

First-Citizens and Lucama each operate offices in Johnston, Wilson and 

Nash Counties. Their head offices at Smithfield and Lucama are 23 miles apart 

but First-Citizens7 home office at Smithfield is 13 miles distant from Lucama's 

branch at Kenly. First-Citizens' three branches at Wilson, in Wilson County, are 

located some ten miles from Lucama, and its office at Spring Hope, in Nash 

County, is 20 miles distant from Lucama's branch at Bailey. Thus, it would 

appear that the proposed merger would eliminate direct competition between 

the participants.

Nine banks operate some 37 offices in the tri-county Johnston, Wilson, and 

Nash area. First-Citizens' share of the total deposits in this area, 28 per cent, 

will increase only slightly, some 2.2 per cent, as a result of the merger. Its share 

of the total deposits in Wilson County, where Lucama is based, will also increase from 17 per cent to 19.2 per cent.

It should be noted, however, that the proposed merger is part of a continuing trend of acquisitions and mergers by North Carolina's largest commercial banks which has the effect of retarding the development of a more 

competitive banking structure in North Carolina (a state in which the five 

largest banks already control more than two-thirds of total deposits).

Basis for Corporation denial, January 4, 1971

First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company, Smithfield, North Carolina ("C itizens"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $571,829,000, 

has applied, pursuant to Section 18(c) and other provisions of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, for the Corporation's prior approval to merge with The 

Lucama-Kenly Bank, Lucama, North Carolina ("Lucama-Kenly"), an insured 

State nonmember bank with total deposits of $5,616,000. The banks would 

merge under the charter and title of Citizens and, as an incident to the merger, 

the three offices of Lucama-Kenly would become branches of Citizens, increasing the number of its offices to 148. Approval is also requested for the 

retirement provisions of preferred stock.

Competition. Citizens is the fourth largest bank in North Carolina, controlling 9.1 percent of total commercial bank deposits in the State (the first, 

second, and third largest banks holding 20.7 percent, 17.0 percent, and 13.6 

percent of such deposits, respectively). Citizens has branches widely distributed 

throughout the State, but most of its 145 offices are located in eastern North 

Carolina. Its main office and 9 branches are located in Johnston County (1970 

estimated population: 60,477), it has a branch at Spring Hope in adjacent Nash 

County (1970 estimated population: 57,233) and is also represented in adjacent Wilson County (1970 estimated population: 57,328), where it has two 

branches at Wilson.

Lucama-Kenly has one office in each of these three counties: its main office 

at Lucama in Wilson County, a branch office at Bailey in Nash County, and a 

branch office at Kenly in Johnston County. Each is a sparsely populated community served only by Lucama-Kenly, and there are no intervening banks 

between the three locations. The area served by Lucama-Kenly, however, is 

also partially served by Citizens' offices at Spring Hope, Wilson, Selma, and 

Smithfield, by offices at Wilson of First Union National Bank of North 

Carolina (the State's third largest bank), by offices at Wilson, Micro, and Selma 

of Branch Banking & Trust Company (the State's sixth largest bank, and by an

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 161

office at Smithfield of First National Bank of Smithfield. Citizens has the 

largest share of local deposits (an estimated 37 percent), Branch Banking & 

Trust Company the next largest share (an estimated 35 percent), and LucamaKenly the smallest share (an estimated 5 percent). Wilson is 8 miles from 

Lucama-Kenly's nearest office, Micro and Selma are 5 miles from LucamaKenly's nearest office, while Spring Hope is 16 miles north and Smithfield 16 

miles south of Lucama-Kenly's nearest office.

With offices of Citizens surrounding the area served by Lucama-Kenly and 

also serving parts of the same area, the proposed merger would have the effect 

of eliminating existing competition between the two banks, reducing the number of alternatives in the vicinity of Lucama-Kenly's service area from five to 

four, and adding to the very high share of the local banking market already 

held by Citizens.

North Carolina law permits statewide de novo branching, but the likelihood 

of competition arising between Citizens and Lucama-Kenly through increased 

de novo branching activity is remote. Lucama-Kenly has very limited resources 

for such de novo branching activities against the larger banks in the surrounding area, while Citizens is not likely to be attracted to Lucama, Kenly, or 

Bailey because of their limited population and lack of growth potential. On the 

other hand, Lucama-Kenly has alternative merger possibilities available to it 

and a different merger might bring the resulting bank into significant competition with Citizens in Wilson, Johnston, and Nash counties as well as elsewhere 

in North Carolina.

In this regard, as was noted in approving the recent proposed merger 43f 

Citizens and The Haynes Bank, Cliffside, North Carolina, the Corporation is 

keenly aware of recent developments in the commercial banking structure of 

North Carolina. Since year-end 1964, more than 43 banks in the State have 

merged out of existence, and a sizable number of these have merged with the 

five largest banks in the State. Those banks already hold 67.2 percent of all 

commercial bank deposits and 63 percent of all commercial bank offices in 

North Carolina. While most of Citizens' expansion during the past 6 years has 

been accomplished by de novo branching, it has acquired 3 small banks since 

year-end 1964. Generally speaking, adding to the resources of a bank the size 

of Citizens by merger encourages the further concentration of banking assets in 

the State, rather than the deconcentration of such assets which might occur 

through de novo branching or some alternative merger. For as the number of 

viable, independent banks remaining in the State decreases, opportunities for 

deconcentration, through the affiliation of such banks with other banks 

capable of challenging the larger banks in the State, become increasingly less 

numerous. Under these circumstances, the merger of significant local banks 

with any of the larger banks in the State should be approached with the most 

careful regulatory scrutiny, increasing in vigor with the size of the acquiring 

bank.

Here, Citizens seeks to merge with a bank having three offices in a general 

trade area where it already holds more than 37 percent of area deposits. As a 

consequence, the merger would bring no new source of competition to the area 

but instead would serve to entrench Citizens in an even more dominant position in the market than it has today. The precedent of approval, moreover, 

would encourage the largest banks in the State to seek similar mergers in areas 

they already serve and in which they, too, have a significant portion of the

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
162 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

market. A denial of the merger, on the other hand, would encourage LucamaKenly to seek out another merger partner, smaller than Citizens and not presently represented within convenient driving distance of its three offices. Such 

a merger might well produce the benefits in banking service claimed for this 

proposal, while also enlarging the public's choice of convenient banking alternatives.

Based on these facts, and in view of the large number of less anticompetitive 

mergers available to Lucama-Kenly, the Board of Directors is of the opinion 

that the effect of the proposed transaction may be substantially to lessen 

competition in Johnston, Wilson, and Nash counties and in North Carolina 

generally.

Convenience and Needs o f the Community to be Served. The proposed 

merger would replace a small, independent bank offering limited services with 

branches of the fifth largest bank in North Carolina, offering a full range of 

banking and trust services. This increase in convenience would affect only 

limited numbers of customers, and is further reduced in importance by the 

proximity today of six branches of Citizens to Lucama-Kenly's three offices. 

Since these branches already offer the wider range of services, the more liberal 

credit policies, and the more aggressive management that the proposed merger 

would bring to Lucama-Kenly's three offices, the Corporation considers the 

additional increment to community needs and convenience to be slight. They 

can, moreover, be achieved as readily by numerous other, less anticompetitive 

mergers.

Financial and Managerial Resources; Future Prospects. These factors are 

adequate with respect to both merging banks and should be favorable for the 

resulting bank. They add, however, no decisive weight toward approval or 

denial of a proposed nnerger the effect of which may be substantially to lessen 

competition in a relevant market. A special examination of Lucama-Kenly 

concluded on December 11, 1970, moreover, disclosed no financial or management condition which might adversely affect the future prospects of that institution.

Based on the foregoing, the Board of Directors has concluded that approval 

of the proposed merger of Citizens and Lucama-Kenly is not warranted and 

should, accordingly, be denied.

Statement upon reconsideration, July 12, 1971

First-Citizens Bank & Trust Company, Smithfield, North Carolina ("C itizens"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $663,191,900, 

was denied on January 4, 1971, the Corporation's prior approval to merge with 

The Lucama-Kenly Bank, Lucama, North Carolina ("Lucama-Kenly"), an insured State nonmember bank with total deposits of $7,170,000. Citizens then 

petitioned the Corporation to reconsider its original denial offering to divest 

any one of Lucama-Kenly's branches if necessary to obtain the Corporation's 

approval. The Corporation's Board of Directors, having reconsidered the application in light of Citizens' petition and subsequent analysis, affirms its original 

denial, with the following additional statement.

In its Petition for Reconsideration, Citizens takes the position that if the 

merger were approved, competition would not be lessened in any primary area 

served by Lucama-Kenly's three offices nor in Johnston, Nash, or Wilson 

counties as a whole.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 163

To support this conclusion, it suggests that consideration of the competitive 

impact of the proposed merger should be limited to very narrow geographic 

areas surrounding each Lucama-Kenly office and then finds that Citizens has 

practically no deposit accounts and insignificant loan business from any of 

those areas. It also stresses the fact that each county has more commercial 

banks and more commercial bank offices for its residents than the average for 

North Carolina or the United States.

The Corporation agrees with Citizens that not all of Johnston, Wilson, and 

Nash counties can properly be considered in assessing the competitive impact 

of a merger between Citizens and Lucama-Kenly since many bank offices in all 

three counties are quite remote from Lucama-Kenly's three offices and cannot 

reasonably be considered in competition with them.6 The Corporation does 

not agree, however, that the competitive impact of the proposed merger should 

be assessed only within the narrowly circumscribed areas suggested by Citizens.

The residents and businessmen of Johnston, Wilson, and Nash counties who 

will be affected by the proposed merger are those for whom any one of the 

three offices of Lucama-Kenly are convenient alternatives to other offices for 

the banking services they need or desire. Given the semirural nature of the 

countryside around each Lucama-Kenly office, the general reliance of the public on automobile travel for transportation, and the existence of well-paved 

roads, including a major U.S. route that links Lucama and Kenly with Smithfield on the south and Wilson on the north, the Corporation considers it not 

unreasonable to consider all commercial bank offices within approximately 15 

miles of any Lucama-Kenly office as offering competition to that bank.

Within 15 miles of these offices, there are 42 commercial bank offices today 

holding about $135 million in IPC deposits. Nine different banks have offices 

in this area, but three hold more than 86 percent of area deposits: Citizens 

(with 11 offices and 33 percent of area deposits), Branch Banking & Trust 

Company (with 14 offices and 29 percent of total area deposits) and First 

Union National Bank of North Carolina (with six offices and 24 percent of 

total area deposits). Lucama-Kenly is the only remaining independent bank of 

consequence between Smithfield, Selma, and Micro to the south and Wilson to 

the north. In the former locations, Citizens and Branch Banking & Trust Company both conduct significant branch operations; in Wilson, all three of the 

dominant area banks have significant branch operations. And for some area 

residents near Lucama-Kenly's office in Bailey, Wilson on the east might be the 

more obvious choice for alternative sources of commercial bank service than 

Middlesex, Zebulon, or Wendell to the west. The proposed merger would add 

Lucama-Kenly's 4 percent to Citizens' present share of local area deposits and 

reduce by one the limited number of commercial bank alternatives available to 

any particular customer or potential customer of Lucama-Kenly.

The Board reiterates its general concern that the proposed merger, because 

it involves an acquisition in an area where Citizens is already well represented, 

would provide an undesirable precedent in the long-run for the commercial 

bank structure of the State of North Carolina, where an evident merger trend 

has significantly increased the share of statewide commercial bank deposits

6The Corporation frequently uses countywide deposit totals to approximate a market 

because of the convenient availability of such data in its biennial Summary of Deposits, 

most recently published as of June 30, 1970.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
164 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

held by the five largest banks in the State since 1964. Even conceding that a 

more accurate percentage figure would be 33 percent rather than 37 percent, 

the Board finds no reason to revise its earlier conclusion that:

Here, Citizens seeks to merge with a bank having three offices in a general 

trade area where it already holds more than 37 percent of area deposits. As 

a consequence, the merger would bring no new source of competition to the 

area but instead would serve to entrench Citizens in an even more dominant 

position in the market than it has today. The precedent of approval, moreover, would encourage the largest banks in the State to seek similar mergers 

in areas they already serve and in which they, too, have a significant portion 

of the market. A denial of the merger, on the other hand, would encourage 

Lucama-Kenly to seek out another merger partner, smaller than Citizens and 

not presently represented within convenient driving distance of its three 

offices. Such a merger might well produce the benefits in banking service 

claimed for this proposal, while also enlarging the public's choice of convenient banking alternatives.

Based on these facts, and in view of the large number of less anticompetitive 

mergers available to Lucama-Kenly, the Board of Directors is of the opinion 

that the effect of the proposed transaction may be substantially to lessen 

competition in Johnston, Wilson, and Nash counties and in North Carolina 

generally.7

Based on the foregoing, and on its review of the banking factors and the 

convenience and needs of the community to be served, the Board concludes 

again that approval of the proposed merger of Citizens and Lucama-Kenly is 

not warranted and should, accordingly, be denied.

Resources 

/ j

B a n kin g O ffic e s

v i n

th o u san d s 

o f d o lla rs)

In

o p e ra tio n

T o be 

o pe ra te d

Washington Mutual Savings Bank

Seattle, Washington

807,335 22

to consolidate with

Grays Harbor Savings and Loan

Association

Aberdeen

5,148 1

Statement upon reconsideration, July 30, 1971 

Washington Mutual Savings Bank, Seattle, Washington ("Washington 

Mutual"), an insured mutual savings bank with total deposits of $744,000,000,

7Because the Corporation's original decision discounted the likelihood of competition 

arising between Citizens and Lucama-Kenly through increased de novo branching, the 

Board considers the lower-than-average population per commercial bank office which 

exists in Johnston, Wilson, and Nash counties to be irrelevant to its reconsideration of 

the application. Moreover, since regulatory policy is or should be directed toward the 

deconcentration of highly concentrated local banking markets, the fact that Citizens' 

share of total deposits in the three-county area has shown a modest decline since 1966 

provides no affirmative basis for reversing the Corporation's earlier decision.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
was denied on December 18, 1970, the Corporation's prior approval to consolidate with Grays Harbor Savings and Loan Association, Aberdeen, Washington 

("S & L"), an FSLIC-insured institution with total withdrawable balances of 

$4,700,000. Washington Mutual and S&L then petitioned the Corporation to 

reconsider its original denial. The Corporation's Board of Directors, having 

done so, affirms its original denial with the following additional statement.

The applicants requested reconsideration on essentially three grounds: (1) 

that the Corporation improperly utilized a line of commerce limited to mutual 

savings banks and savings and loan associations in assessing the competitive 

impact of their proposed merger; (2) that the Corporation made certain errors 

of fact with regard to the potential competition issues presented by the application; and (3) that in any event the likely benefits to the convenience and 

needs of the community to be served and the resolution of S&L's management 

succession problem are such as to warrant approval of the application.

Line o f Commerce. Whether or not commercial bank time deposits under 

$100,000 should be included with th rift institution deposit totals in assessing 

the competitive impact of a merger between th rift institutions under the Bank 

Merger Act is a much-debated question among lawyers, economists, bankers, 

and public officials. The Corporation recognizes, of course, that commercial 

banks and th rift institutions are all deposit-type institutions and that in a sense 

they can all be said to compete in seeking to attract the savings of individual 

members of the public. The Corporation also recognizes that no definitive 

answer to this question has yet been given by the United States Supreme Court 

in its decisions under the Bank Merger Act as amended in 1966, all the decided 

cases having involved mergers of commercial banks.

One thing at least is clear. The United States Supreme Court, with apparent 

finality, has determined that commercial banking constitutes a separate "line 

of commerce" for purposes of analyzing the competitive aspects of commercial 

bank mergers,8 despite the arguments presented to it that deposit and loan 

competition from financial institutions other than commercial banks should 

also be considered. Its exclusion of th rift institution deposits was particularly 

striking in the Phillipsburg case, where the bulk of each bank's total deposits 

represented time deposits under $ 100,000 and where the bulk of each bank's 

total loans were real estate loans and mortgages— an asset and liability mix not 

too dissimilar from that of mutual savings banks and savings and loan associations. The Supreme Court expressly found error in the District Court's view 

that since the activities of the merging banks made them much more like 

savings institutions than like so many of the larger commercial banks, attention 

had to be given in the competitive analysis to different groupings of products 

and services within the more general line of commerce denoted by the term 

"commercial banking."

In its original denial of this application, the Corporation determined to 

exclude commercial bank time deposits from its analysis of the competitive 

effect of the proposed merger, looking instead solely to the deposits of mutual 

savings banks and the withdrawable shares of savings and loan associations. The 

Corporation cited its earlier decision involving the proposed merger of United

BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 165

8 United States v. Philadelphia National Bank, 374 U.S. 321 (1963); United States v. 

Phillipsburg National Bank, 399 U.S. 350 (1970). See also United States v. First National

Bancorporation, Civil No. C-2413 (D. Colo., filed July 12, 1971).

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
166 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Mutual Savings Bank and State Mutual Savings Bank, both headquartered in 

Tacoma, Washington, wherein it had said:

In the State of Washington, where mutual savings and loan associations have 

the option to become mutual savings banks (State Mutual converted at the 

end of 1969), where both types of institutions may pay interest on deposits 

below $ 100,000 at the same rates and each at rates higher than commercial 

banks, where at least some differential in interest rates has persisted between th rift institutions and commercial banks at almost all times throughout the post-World War II period, where both types of institutions are 

identified by the public as th rift institutions engaged primarily in mortgage 

lending, where both by statute have very similar powers, privileges, restrictions, and liabilities, it would appear that the decisive line of commerce for 

assessing the competitive implications of a proposed merger of mutual savings banks should be "th rift institution banking" as offered by savings banks 

and savings and loan associations. As indicated, in the State of Washington, 

savings banks and savings and loan associations are uniquely able to compete 

for deposits under $ 100,000 and are generally considered interchangeable 

alternatives for thrift-type deposits and for deposit institutions emphasizing 

home mortgage lending.

The Corporation adheres to this view of the appropriate "line of commerce" 

for purposes of the proposed merger of Washington Mutual and S&L.

There is no doubt that in the State of Washington as elsewhere, commercial 

banks, especially those in major metropolitan areas, aggressively advertise their 

offering of so-called consumer time deposits, which carry a rate of interest 

higher than the rate of interest paid on regular savings accounts. A member of 

the public interested in the highest return available to him at a deposit-type 

institution, however, ils likely to turn to a mutual savings bank or savings and 

loan association, which, since the end of World War II, have generally paid 

higher rates of interest than commercial banks on the same type of account. 

Under Federal regulations currently in force, these types of th rift institutions 

may offer a regular savings account, increasingly available on a "day-of-deposit-to-day-of-withdrawal" basis, at a maximum rate of interest of 5 percent 

per annum (compared with a 41/2 percent maximum rate at commercial banks) 

and a rate of interest on time deposits % percent higher than the maximum rate 

payable by commercial banks on accounts of less than $ 100,000 but of the 

same maturity.

Mutual savings banks and savings and loan associations, moreover, compete 

for the public's savings under operating rules that are different, in many basic 

respects, from those under which commercial banks operate. Besides their legal 

ability to offer higher maximum interest rates than commercial banks on comparable deposits, they are not required to maintain minimum reserves against 

their savings deposits, they have no holders of common stock to whom regular 

dividend payments must be provided, and they are permitted to set aside 

substantially higher tax-free reserves for loan losses than commercial banks. 

These differences in operating rules assist mutual th rift institutions to pay the 

higher rates of interest authorized by Federal regulation, to resist disintermediation, and to continue their role as the nation's principal source of residential mortgage money. The fact that legislature and public agencies treat 

mutual th rift institutions quite differently from commercial banks supports the 

view that they should be considered a separate line of commerce from comDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 167

mercial banks for purposes of the Bank Merger Act.

Members of the public may, of course, wish to limit their banking business 

to one institution and may, for this reason, deliberately forego the additional 

increment of interest available at mutual savings banks or savings and loan 

associations, depositing even their excess savings at the commercial bank they 

also utilize for checking accounts or loans which the more restricted th rift 

institutions cannot offer. The rapid growth of time deposits at mutual th rift 

institutions, including those in the State of Washington,9 and the stability of 

their regular savings deposits, make it clear, however, that the incremental 

interest advantage offered by such institutions is a meaningful difference to a 

substantial portion of the public and that such people will overcome any 

inconveniences involved to deposit their savings in a th rift institution rather 

than a commercial bank. Savings accounts at commercial banks and savings 

accounts at th rift institutions are not, therefore, interchangeable products for a 

significant portion of the public.

In summary, the Corporation believes that the unique ability of mutual 

th rift institutions to offer a higher rate of interest than commercial banks on 

consumer savings, the differences in the rules under which such institutions 

operate, and the differentiation between them which is made by a substantial 

portion of the public all warrant the treatment of mutual th rift institutions as a 

separate "line of commerce" for purposes of the Bank Merger Act.10The Corporation further notes that an agency determination to include commercial 

bank time deposits under $ 100,000 with the deposits of mutual th rift institutions in the same market would make the merger rules for th rift institutions 

demonstrably more lenient than the merger rules applicable to commercial 

banks.11 The Corporation knows no reason of public policy why this result 

should be encouraged.

Potential Competition. In its original denial of the application, the Corporation indicated that neither Washington Mutual nor S&L derives more than a 

nominal amount of business from areas presently served by the other, and that 

their proposed merger, accordingly, would not eliminate any meaningful existing competition between them. The Corporation further found, however, that 

the proposed merger would eliminate the possibility of future competition 

between the two institutions (i) through de novo branching into the Aberdeen9 Fixed-maturitytime accounts and other special accounts jumped from 1.3 percent of 

total deposits at mutual savings banks in Washington in January 1970 to 13.7 percent of 

their total deposits in January 1971. See May 1971 Annual Report of the Executive 

Vice President, National Association of Mutual Savings Banks, table 3, page 9.

10The Corporation recognizes that the powers of mutual thrift institutions have been 

expanding in a number of respects that bring them increasingly into competition for 

both loans and deposits with commercial banks, and that additional changes in interest 

rate ceilings and operating conditions may obliterate the distinctions upon which its 

determination of the appropriate "line of commerce” in these cases rests. If future 

changes in operating conditions make the division of commercial banks and mutual 

thrift institutions into separate lines of commerce factually untenable, it will be timely 

then to reconsider the proper line of commerce for both types of institutions.

11This point can be illustrated by a geographic market containing five commercial banks 

and five thrift institutions of equal deposit size. Each commercial bank would be 

considered as having 20 percent of the market in its "line of commerce" under Supreme 

Court decisions, while each thrift institution would be considered as having a much 

lower percentage (possibly as low as 10 percent) of the market in its line of commerce if 

commercial bank time deposits under $100,000 could be included.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
168 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Hoquiam area on the part of Washington Mutual, and (ii) through an alternative merger on the part of S&L with another mutual th rift institution which 

would not have Washington Mutual's 22.9 percent share of all th rift institution 

deposits in the State of Washington and which would preserve the possibility of 

more effective competition against Washington Mutual in the future from 

among the State's other th rift institutions.

A review of Washington State supervisory policy in authorizing de novo

branches for mutual savings banks, together with such pertinent facts as the 

stabilized economy of the Aberdeen-Hoquiam area, its slow growth rate and 

lower than average income levels, and the present population (approximately 

7,300 persons) per th rift institution office already serving that area, has caused 

the Corporation to revise its opinion that Washington Mutual "could in the 

normal cogrse enter the Aberdeen-Hoquiam area" by de novo branching if the 

proposed merger is denied. There appears to be little likelihood of such entry 

in the immediate future if S&L merges with a mutual savings bank other than 

Washington Mutual, although the longer range possibilities of de novo entry 

cannot be totally discounted.

The Corporation's earlier conclusion on this point was not, however, the 

principal reason for its denial of the application. That reason was stated in the 

original Basis for Corporation Denial as follows:

More importantly, the proposed merger would establish a significant precedent for the approval of additional mergers in highly concentrated markets in the State of Washington and elsewhere, among commercial banks as 

well as mutual th rift institutions, with the cumulative effect of further 

concentrating the banking resources of a given market in the largest institutions which operate there. As such concentration continues, the public's 

choice of alternate sources of banking services is likely to diminish.

As the Corporation's original denial pointed out, Washington Mutual has 

more than 22 percent of all th rift institution deposits in the State, a percentage 

share three times larger than the second-ranking th rift institution.12 Where institutions in the same line of commerce may branch or merge on a statewide 

basis, the Corporation believes that the entire State should be considered one 

of the relevant geographic areas in assessing the likely competitive impact of a 

proposed merger. It further believes that if institutions with 22 percent of a 

statewide market are permitted to make further acquisitions without compelling reasons based on public convenience and needs, two related results are 

likely: (1) more such mergers would be encouraged both among th rift institutions and among commercial banks, thus concentrating even further the banking resources of a given State into fewer and fewer hands, and (2) effective 

competition with such dominant institutions would become increasingly d ifficult as possible merger partners and their offices are acquired by the dominant 

institution itself, rather than by a smaller institution which could hope in time, 

by successive mergers, aggressive de novo branching or both, to offer significant 

competition to the former throughout wide areas of the same State. Indeed, 

even if Washington Mutual is denied any further mergers, only three or four

1^lts percentage share of statewide deposit totals, if commercial bank time deposits under 

$100,000 are also included, would be slightly over 13 percent— a percentage share 

significantly lower than 22 percent, but one that would still raise a serious question as 

to the disposition of this application.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BANK ABSORPTION DENIALS AFFIRMED BY THE CORPORATION 169

other th rift institutions of a size approximately equal to that of Washington 

Mutual could be created from all the thfrift institution deposits in the State of 

Washington.

The adverse precedent which the proposed merger might establish, because 

of the share of the potential statewide market already held by Washington 

Mutual, can best be illustrated by noting that only 72 commercial banks in the 

country, out of a total approaching 14,000, have 10 percent or more of the 

total commercial bank deposits in their respective States and only 29 have 

percentage shares exceeding 20 percent of the total commercial bank deposits 

in their respective States. Even fewer mutual th rift institutions would have a 

similar share of statewide th rift institution deposit totals.

The Corporation is not persuaded by any of the material submitted on 

reconsideration that S&L is limited to a very few merger alternatives and that 

Washington Mutual is the most logical of these. There are 79 other mutual 

th rift institutions in the State of Washington, including some 70 savings and 

loan associations, from which S&L may legally seek a merger partner. Their 

capacity to absorb S&L's mortgage portfolio may vary, because of statutory or 

regulatory restrictions, but the effect of these restrictions has changed even 

within the past year. The Corporation is confident that S&L's directors can 

find a satisfactory alternative to the merger proposed if it is again denied.

Finally, the Corporation would reiterate the view expressed in its original 

denial:

The Corporation believes that the Bank Merger Act as amended requires 

consideration of the long-term competitive implications of a proposed merger as well as its short-term effects. In situations where one of the institutions involved in a proposed merger already has such a large share of its 

potential market as Washington Mutual, the Corporation further believes 

that additions by merger to its existing strength should be avoided unless (i) 

significant improvements in banking service can be achieved only by consummation of the proposed merger or (ii) the condition of the institution to 

be merged is such that an immediate resolution of its problems appears to 

be necessary to prevent a failure.

Public Convenience and Needs; S&L's Management Succession Problem. The 

Corporation has reviewed again and affirms its earlier findings on the benefits 

to the public which may be expected to occur if this application is approved 

and also its findings with respect to S&L's management succession problem. It 

continues to differ with the applicants as to the weight which should be assigned these findings in reaching an overall conclusion on the application.

Based on the foregoing, the Corporation's Board of Directors again concludes that approval of the proposed merger of Washington Mutual and S&L is 

not warranted and should, accordingly, be denied.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
LEGISLATION AND REGULATIONS 

PART THREE

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
173

FEDERAL LEGISLATION - 1971

Regulation of interest rates. The Act of March 31, 1971 (Public 

Law 92-8; 85 Stat. 13) and the Act of May 18, 1971 (Public Law 

92-15; 85 Stat. 38) extended until May 31, 1971, and May 31, 

1973, respectively, the statutory authority vested in the Board of 

Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the Board of Directors of 

the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and the Federal Home 

Loan Bank Board for regulating in a flexible manner the rates of 

interest or dividends payable by insured banks on time and savings 

deposits and by members of the Federal Home Loan Bank System 

(other than those the deposits of which are insured by the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Corporation) on deposits, shares, or withdrawable accounts. They also extended for the same periods of time the 

authority of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and of the 

Federal Home Loan Bank Board for subjecting certain noninsured 

banks and institutions to interest and dividend-rate controls comparable to those applicable to insured banks and institutions.

State taxation of national banks. On December 24, 1969, the 

President approved legislation (the Act of December 24, 1969 

(Public Law 91-156; 83 Stat. 434)) designed to clarify the liability 

of national banks for certain taxes. The purpose of the Act was to 

equalize the tax treatment of State and national banks gradually so 

that under the terms of a permanent amendment to section 5219 of 

the Revised Statutes of the United States, as amended (12 U.S.C. 

548), to become effective on January 1, 1972—

. . . For the purposes of any tax law enacted under authority of 

the United States or any State, a national bank shall be treated as 

a bank organized and existing under the laws of the State or 

other jurisdiction within which its principal office is located.

A temporary amendment to section 5219 of the Revised Statutes, effective during the period from December 24, 1969, through 

December 31, 1971, authorized States and their political subdivisions to apply generally the same tax rules to locally headquartered 

national banks as they did to State banks. Moreover, with some 

restrictions, States and their political subdivisions were authorized 

to impose certain specified taxes on national banks not having their 

principal offices within the taxing jurisdiction. For example, nondomiciliary States and their political subdivisions were authorized 

to impose (1) sales taxes and use taxes complementary thereto 

upon purchases, sales, and use within the taxing jurisdiction; (2) 

taxes on real property or on the occupancy of real property located 

within the taxing jurisdiction; (3) taxes (including documentary 

stamp taxes) on the execution, delivery, or recordation of documents within the taxing jurisdiction; (4) taxes on tangible personal 

property (not including cash or currency) located within the taxing

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
174 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

jurisdiction; and (5) license, registration, transfer, excise, or other 

fees or taxes imposed on the ownership, use, or transfer of tangible 

personal property located within the taxing jurisdiction. The temporary amendment, however, prohibited States from imposing any 

sales or use taxes on tangible personal property which was the 

subject matter of a written contract of purchase entered into before 

September 1, 1969.

Because of the important implications of the permanent amendment to section 5219 of the Revised Statutes in long-standing 

Federal policy regarding the taxation of national banks, the Act of 

December 24, 1969, directed the Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System to—

.. . make a study to determine the probable impact on the 

banking systems and other economic effects of the changes in 

existing law to be made by [the permanent amendment] governing income taxes, intangible property taxes, so-called doing 

business taxes, and any other similar taxes which are or may be 

imposed on banks .. .

and to report the results of its study to the Congress not later than 

December 31, 1970. The report was required to include the Board's 

recommendations as to what additional Federal legislation, if any, 

might be needed to reconcile the promotion of the economic efficiency of the banking systems of the Nation with the achievement 

of effectiveness and local autonomy in meeting the fiscal needs of 

the States and their political subdivisions.

On May 4, 1971, the Board of Governors submitted its report, 

entitled "State and Local Taxation of Banks," to the Congress. 

The report stated the Board's conclusion that—

.. . additional Federal legislation is needed before the "permanent amendment” of section 5219 of the Revised Statutes (12 

U.S.C. 548) becomes effective on January 1, 1972. If that provision is allowed to go into effect without revision, the changed 

tax status of banks might open the way for State and local tax 

measures that could impair the ability of the banking system and 

possibly the entire structure of financial intermediaries to 

contribute to the efficient allocation of the Nation's credit 

resources. ..

The two major areas which appear to warrant further legislation 

relate to the new authority in [the permanent amendment] for 

State and local governments to tax intangible personal property 

of national banks and for States other than the State of the 

principal office to levy income or other "doing business" taxes 

on national banks .... An additional problem area relates to the 

possibility of discriminatory State and local taxes .... Two subDigitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
FEDERAL LEGISLATION-1971 175

sidiary issues [are] the tax treatment of interest income on U. S. 

Government securities and of cash and currency ....

The Board's recommendations for additional Federal legislation 

regarding each of .these areas and issues were detailed in the report. 

In a concluding comment, the Board of Governors noted that—

. . . The Congress undoubtedly will wish to make a detailed review of the proposed modifications of policy, with the result that 

definitive action may not be feasible before [the permanent 

amendment] becomes effective on January 1, 1972. Unless 

action on the proposals can be completed this year, the Board 

would recommend that the effective date of the "permanent 

amendment" be postponed beyond next January 1, since some 

of the potential adverse effects of the new statutory provisions in 

their present form might prove difficult to remedy.

Following the Board's recommendation, the Congress, by section 

4(a) of the Act of December 22, 1971 (Public Law 92-213; 85 Stat. 

775), deferred the effective date of the permanent amendment to 

section 5219 of the Revised Statutes to January 1, 1973, thereby 

automatically continuing the temporary amendment to that section 

in effect through December 31, 1972. Section 4(b) of the Act of 

December 22, 1971, directs the Board of Governors of the Federal 

Reserve System to study the probable impact on State and local 

government revenues of the extension of the effective date of the 

temporary amendment regarding intangible personal property taxes 

on national banks. The section also directs the Board of Governors 

to report the results of its study to the Congress not later than June 

22, 1972.

Dissemination of criminal record information to insured banks.

In the recent case of Menard v. Mitchell, 328 F. Supp. 718 (D.D.C. 

1971), the U. S. District Court for the District of Columbia limited 

the dissemination of criminal record information by the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation. The primary thrust of the court's opinion 

was to preclude dissemination of Federal Bureau of Investigation 

arrest records for employment and licensing purposes to State and 

local governments and to private employers, such as insured banks.

In response to the Menard decision, section 902 of the Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1972 (Public Law 92-184; 85 Stat. 

627), approved on December 15, 1971, authorizes the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation to use funds appropriated for the fiscal year 

ending June 30, 1972—

. . . for the exchange of identification records with officials of 

federally chartered or insured banking institutions to promote or 

maintain the security of those institutions, and, if authorized by 

State statute and approved by the Attorney General, to officials 

of State and local governments for purposes of employment and

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
176 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

licensing, any such exchange to be made only for the official use 

of any such official and subject to [cancellation if dissemination 

is made outside the receiving departments or related agencies].

Economic Stabilization Act Amendments of 1971. Section 2 of 

the Economic Stabilization Act Amendments of 1971 (Public Law 

92-210; 85 Stat. 743), approved on December 22, 1971, amended 

the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1904 note) in 

its entirety. The amendments authorize the President to issue such 

orders and regulations as he deems appropriate, accompanied by a 

statement of reasons for such orders and regulations, (1) to stabilize 

prices, rents, wages, and salaries at levels not less than those prevailing on May 25, 1970, except that prices may be stabilized at levels 

below those prevailing on that date if such action is necessary to 

eliminate windfall profits or is otherwise necessary to carry out the 

purposes of the amended Act; and (2) to stabilize interest rates and 

corporate dividends and similar transfers at levels consistent with 

orderly economic growth. Unless further extended, the authority 

expires at midnight on April 30, 1973.

The Economic Stabilization Act of 1970 conferred no authority 

upon the President with respect to interest rates. The 1971 amendments, however, direct the President, whenever he implements the 

other authority conferred upon him by the amendments with respect to significant segments of the economy, to—

. . . require the issuance of regulations or orders providing for the 

stabilization of interest rates and finance charges, unless he issues 

a determination, accompanied by a statement of reasons, that 

such regulations or orders are not necessary to maintain such 

rates and charges at levels consonant with orderly economic 

growth.

RULES AND REGULATIONS AND STATEMENTS 

OF GENERAL POLICY

Housekeeping amendments. Effective January 27, 1971, the 

Board of Directors adopted amendments to Parts 303, 304, 326, 

334, and 336 of the rules and regulations of the Federal Deposit 

Insurance Corporation (1) to reflect the redesignation of the Division of Examination as the Division of Bank Supervision and the 

redesignation of the Chief of the Division of Examination as the 

Director of the Division of Bank Supervision, and (2) to effect 

various minor structural and technical changes in those parts.

Further technical amendments to- Parts 301, 303, 326, 327, and 

329 of the Corporation's rules and regulations were adopted effective February 18, 1971. The purpose of the amendments was to 

reflect (1) the repeal of the Administrative Procedure Act and the 

reenactment of its provisions as a part of title 5 of the United States

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
RULES AND REGULATIONS OF THE CORPORATION 177

Code and (2) the amendment of sections 3 and 7 of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act, as amended (12 U.S.C. 1813, 1817), to 

make banks in American Samoa eligible for Federal deposit insurance and to include branches located in American Samoa within the 

definition of the term "branch" for the purposes of the Federal 

Deposit Insurance Act.

Certain tender offers and acquisitions of securities. Effective 

March 3, 1971, the Board of Directors adopted amendments to Part 

335 of the Corporation's rules and regulations, entitled "Securities 

of Insured State Nonmember Banks." The amendments to Part 335 

implemented amendments to sections 13(d), 13(e), 14(d), and 

14(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 

U.S.C. 78m(d), 78m(e), 78n(d), and 78n(e)), effected by the Act of 

December 22, 1970 (Public Law 91-567; 84 Stat. 1497), which 

were designed to provide additional protection for investors.

Under the terms of the amendments, any person, entity, or group 

of persons making a tender offer for, or a request or invitation for 

tenders of, the equity securities of a bank which are registered with 

the Corporation under section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 

1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78I), must now file a statement when 

the offer relates to more than 5 percent of the bank's outstanding 

shares, rather than 10 percent of the shares as was previously required. Similarly, any person, entity, or group of persons acquiring 

shares of a registered security, whose aggregate holdings will exceed 

5 percent of the outstanding shares, is now required to file a statement with the Corporation within 10 days of such acquisition.

The amendments provide an exemption for any person, entity, or 

group holding more than 5 percent of the registered stock of a bank 

if (1) the acquisition is made pursuant to preemptive subscription 

rights in an offering made to all holders of the class, (2) the purchaser acquires only his pro rata share, and (3) the acquisition is 

duly reported pursuant to section 16(a) of the Securities Exchange 

Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78p(a)), and section 335.6 of 

the Corporation's rules and regulations. The amendments also 

require offerors proceeding under the Securities Act of 1933, as 

amended (15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.), to file a copy of the prospectus 

required by that Act as an exhibit to the statement filed under the 

regulations.

Civil Rights Act nondiscrimination requirements in real estate 

lending activities. Section 805 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (42 

U.S.C. 3605) makes it unlawful for any bank, building and loan 

association, insurance company, or other corporation or enterprise 

whose business consists in whole or in part of making real estate 

loans to deny a loan or other financial assistance to a person 

applying therefor for the purpose of purchasing, constructing, repairing, or maintaining a dwelling, or to discriminate against him in

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
178 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

fixing the amount, interest rate, duration, or other terms and conditions of such loan or other financial assistance, because of race, 

color, religion, or national origin.

On December 17, 1971, in recognition of the fact that increased 

public awareness of nondiscrimination requirements and the availability of complaint procedures are necessary for effective implementation of the Civil Rights Act's requirements imposed on 

financial institutions, the Board of Directors adopted certain 

minimum procedures, applicable after March 1, 1972, to be fo llowed by all financial institutions subject to the Corporation's 

supervisory authority.

The statement of policy issued on December 17 directs every 

insured State nonmember bank which directly or through third 

parties engages in any form of advertising of real estate lending 

services to indicate prominently, in a manner appropriate to the 

advertising media and format utilized, that the bank makes real 

estate loans without regard to race, color, religion, or national 

origin. It also requires written advertisements relating to real estate 

lending services to include a facsimile of a prescribed logotype in 

order to increase public recognition of the nondiscrimination requirements and guarantees of section 805 of the Civil Rights Act of 

1968.

Finally, the statement of policy directs every insured State nonmember bank engaged in the business of making real estate loans to 

display conspicuously in the public lobby of each of its offices a 

notice that incorporates a facsimile of the prescribed logotype and 

attests to the bank's policy of compliance with the nondiscrimination requirements of section 805 of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. 

The notice must include the address of the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development as the agency to be notified concerning 

any complaint alleging a violation of the nondiscrimination provisions of section 805.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
STATISTICS OF BANKS 

AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE 

PART FOUR

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES

Table 101. Changes in number and classification of banks and branches in the United States (States and 

other areas) during 1971

Table 102. Changes in number of commercial banks and branches in the United States (States and other 

areas) during 1971, by State 

Table 103. Number of banking offices in the United States (States and other areas), December 31, 1971 

Grouped according to insurance status and class o f bank, and by State or area and type o f

office

Table 104. Number and deposits of all commercial and mutual savings banks (States and other areas), 

December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by class and deposit size

Table 105. Number and deposits of all commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

December 31, 1971

Banks grouped by deposit size and State

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Banks: Commercial banks include the following categories of banking 

institutions:

National banks;

Incorporated State banks, trust companies, and bank and trust companies, regularly engaged in the business of receiving deposits, whether demand or time, except mutual savings banks;

Stock savings banks, including guaranty savings banks in New Hampshire;

Industrial and Morris Plan banks which operate under general banking 

codes, or are specifically authorized by law to accept deposits and in practice 

do so, or the obligations of which are regarded as deposits for deposit insurance;

Special types of banks of deposit; regulated certificated banks, and a 

savings and loan company operating under Superior Court charter in 

Georgia; government-operated banks in North Dakota and Puerto Rico; a 

cooperative bank, usually classified as a credit union, operating under a 

special charter in New Hampshire; a savings institution, known as a "trust 

company," operating under special charter in Texas; the Savings Banks Trust 

Company in New York; and branches of foreign banks engaged in a general 

deposit business in New York, Oregon, Washington, Puerto Rico, and Virgin 

Islands;

Private banks under State supervision, and such other private banks as are 

reported by reliable unofficial sources to be engaged in deposit banking.

Nondeposit trust companies include institutions operating under trust 

company charters which are not regularly engaged in deposit banking but are 

engaged in fiduciary business other than that incidental to real estate title or 

investment activities.

Mutual savings banks include all banks operating under State banking 

codes applying to mutual savings banks.

Institutions excluded. Institutions in the following categories are excluded, though such institutions may perform many of the same functions as 

commercial and savings banks:

Banks which have suspended operations or have ceased to accept new 

deposits and are proceeding to liquidate their assets and pay off existing 

deposits;

Building and loan associations, savings and loan associations, credit 

unions, personal loan companies, and similar institutions, chartered under 

laws applying to such institutions or under general incorporation laws, regardless of whether such institutions are authorized to accept deposits from 

the public or from their members and regardless of whether such institutions 

are called "banks" (a few institutions accepting deposits under powers 

granted in special charters are included);

Morris Plan companies, industrial banks, loan and investment companies, 

and similar institutions except those mentioned in the description of institutions included;

Branches of foreign banks and private banks which confine their business 

to foreign exchange dealings and do not receive "deposits" as that term is 

commonly understood;

Institutions chartered under banking or trust company laws, but operating as investment or title insurance companies and not engaged in deposit 

banking or fiduciary activities;

Federal Reserve Banks and other banks, such as the Federal Home Loan 

Banks and the Savings and Loan Bank of the State of New York, which 

operate as rediscount banks and do not accept deposits except from financial 

institutions.

Branches: Branches include all offices of a bank other than its head 

office, at which deposits are received, checks paid, or money lent. Banking 

facilities separate from a banking house, banking facilities at government 

establishments, offices, agencies, paying or receiving stations, drive-in facilities, and other facilities operated for limited purposes are defined as 

branches under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, Section 3(o), regardless 

of the fact that in certain States, including several which prohibit the operation of branches, such limited facilities are not considered branches within 

the meaning of State law.

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 181

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 101. C H A N G E S IN N U M B E R A N D C L A S S IF IC A T IO N OF B A N K S A N D B R A N C H E S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S

(S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ) D U R IN G 1971

All banks Commercial banks and nondeposit trust companies Mutual savings banks

Insured Noninsured

Type of change

Total Insured

Noninsured Total

Members F.R. 

System

Not

members

F.R.

System

Banks

of

deposit

Nondeposit

trust

companies

Total Insured

Noninsured

National State

ALL BANKING OFFICES

Number of offices, December 3 1.1 9 7 1 1........................................................................... 38,860 38,229 631 37,174 36,918 17,922 4,949 14,047 203 53 1,686 1,311 375

Number of offices, December 3 1 ,19701........................................................................... 37,166 36,544 622 35,585 35,321 17,191 4,798 13,332 209 55 1,581 1,223 358

Net change during y e a r .................................................................................................. +1,694 +1,685 +9 +1,589 +1,597 +731 +151 +715 - 6 - 2 +105 +88 +17

Offices opened........................................................................................................... 1,903 1,874 29 1,790 1,782 827 231 724 7 1 113 92 21

B a n ks.................................................................................................................... 205 198 7 203 196 37 9 150 6 1 2 2 0

Branches................................................................................................................ 1,698 1,676 22 1,587 1,586 790 222 574 1 0 111 90 21

Offices closed.............................................................................................................. 209 202 7 201 197 99 31 67 3 1 8 5 3

B a n ks.................................................................................................................... 110 105 5 104 101 47 9 45 2 1 6 4 2

Branches................................................................................................................ 99 97 2 97 96 52 22 22 1 0 2 1 1

Change in classification ........................................................................................... 0 +13 -1 3 0 +12 +3 -4 9 +58 -1 0 - 2 0 +1 -1

Among b a n ks....................................................................................................... 0 +6 - 6 0 +6 -1 1 -1 9 +36 - 4 - 2 0 0 0

Among branches.................................................................................................. 0 +7 - 7 0 +6 +14 -3 0 +22 - 6 0 0 + 1 -1

BANKS

Number of banks, December 3 1 ,1 9 7 1 ............................................................................. 14,294 13,939 355 13,804 13,612 4,600 1,128 7,884 147 45 490 327 163

Number of banks, December 31,1970 ............................................................................. 14,199 13,840 359 13,705 13,511 4,621 1,147 7,743 147 47 494 329 165

Net change during y e a r.................................................................................................. +95 +99 - 4 +99 +101 -2 1 -1 9 +141 0 - 2 - 4 - 2 - 2

Banks beginning ope ra tio n...................................................................................... 205 198 7 203 196 37 9 150 6 1 2 2 0

New banks............................................................................................................. 203 198 5 201 196 37 9 150 5 2 2 0

Banks added to c o u n t......................................................................................... 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

Banks ceasing operation........................................................................................... 110 105 5 104 101 47 9 45 2 1 6 4 2

Absorptions, consolidations, and mergers...................................................... 103 100 3 97 96 46 9 41 1 6 4 2

Closed because of financial d iffic u lty ............................................................. 5 5 0 5 5 1 0 4 0 0 0 0

Other liquidations................................................................................................ 2 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

Noninsured banks becoming insured .................................................................... 0 +6 - 6 0 +6 0 0 +6 - 4 - 2 0 0 0

182 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Other changes in classification.............................................................................. 0 0 0 0 0 -1 1 -1 9 +30 0 0 0 0 0

National succeeding State bank........................................................................ 0 0 0 0 0 + 10 - 3 - 7 0 0 0 0 0

State succeeding national b a n k ....................................................................... 0 0 0 0 0 -2 1 0 +21 0 0 0 0 0

Admission of insured bank to F.R. System................................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 +4 - 4 0 0 0 o 0

Withdrawal from F.R. System with continued insurance........................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 0 +20 0 0 0 0 0

Changes not involving number in any class

Change in title ...................................................................................................... 249 244 5 245 241 83 19 139 3 1 4 3 1

Change in location............................................................................................... 20 20 0 20 20 7 1 12 0 0 0 0 0

Change in title and location............................................................................... 16 16 0 15 15 8 0 7 0 0 1 1 0

Change in name of location............................................................................... 6 6 0 6 6 1 0 5 0 0 0 0 0

Change in location w ithin c ity .......................................................................... 314 311 3 305 304 101 9 194 1 0 9 7 2

Changes in corporate p o w e rs.................................................................................

Granted trust powers (State nonmember banks o n ly )................................ 91 91 0 91 91 0 0 91 0 0 0 0 0

BRANCHES

Number of branches, December 3 1,19711 ..................................................................... 24,566 24,290 276 23,370 23,306 13,322 3,821 6,163 56 8 1,196 984 212

Number of branches, December 3 1,19701 ..................................................................... 22,967 22,704 263 21,880 21,810 12,570 3,651 5,589 62 8 1,087 894 193

Net change during y e a r................................................................................................. f 1,599 +1,586 +13 +1,490 +1,496 +752 +170 +574 - 6 0 +109 +90 +19

Branches opened for business................................................................................. 1,698 1,676 22 1,587 1,586 790 222 574 1 0 111 90 21

Facilities designated by Treasury..................................................................... 6 6 0 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Absorbed bank converted to b ranch.............................................................. 87 86 1 83 83 49 13 21 0 0 4 3 1

Branch replacing head office relocated......................................................... 28 28 0 26 26 11 1 14 0 0 2 2 0

New branches...................................................................................................... 1,559 1,540 19 1,456 1,455 718 204 533 1 0 103 85 18

Branches and/or facilities added to count2 ................................................... 18 16 2 16 16 6 4 6 0 0 2 0 2

Branches discontinued............................................................................................ 99 97 2 97 96 52 22 22 1 0 2 1 1

Facilities designated by Treasury..................................................................... 3 3 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Branches............................................................................................................... 83 81 2 81 80 40 21 19 1 0 2 1 1

Branches and/or facilities deleted from c o u n t.............................................. 13 13 0 13 13 9 1 3 0 0 0 0 0

Other changes in classification............................................................................... 0 +7 - 7 0 +6 +14 -3 0 +22 - 6 0 0 H -1

Branches changing class as a result of conversion......... ............................... 0 +6 - 6 0 +6 - 7 +10 +3 - 6 0 0 0 0

Branches transferred through absorption, consolidation, or merger......... 0 + 1 -1 0 0 +21 -1 7 - 4 0 0 0 + 1 -1

Branches of insured banks withdrawing from F R S ..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 -2 3 +23 0 0 0 0 0

Changes not involving number in any class..

Changes in operating powers of branches..................................................., 3 3 0 3 3 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Branches transferred through absorption, consolidation, or merger___ , 102 98 4 83 83 58 14 11 0 0 19 1b 4

Changes in title, location, or name of location ........................................... 778 774 4 741 741 379 128 234 0 0 37 33 4

1 Includes facilities established at request of the Treasury or commanding officer of government installations, and also a few seasonal branches that were not in operation as of December 31.

2Branches opened prior to 1971 but not included in count as of December 31, 1970.

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 183

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 102. CHANGES IN NUMBER OF COMERCIAL BANKS AND BRANCHES IN THE UNITED STATES 

(STATES AND OTHER AREAS) DURING 1971, BY STATE

State

In operation Net change 

during 1971

Beginning operation in 1971 Ceasing operation in 1971

Dec. 31, 1971 Dec. 31, 1970 Banks Branches Banks Branches

Banks BranchesBanks Branches Banks Branches New Other New Other Absorptions Other Branches Other

Total United States......... 13,804 23,370 13,705 21,880 +99 +1,490 201 2 1,472 115 97 7 81 16

50 States and D.C............. 13,783 23,120 13,686 21,644 +97 +1,476 200 1 1,458 114 97 7 80 16

Other Areas....................... 21 250 19 236 +2 +14 1 1 14 1 c 0 1 0

States

A labam a............................ 273 303 272 272 + 1 +31 3 0 30 2 2 0 1 0

Alaska ................................. 11 65 11 62 NA +3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

A rizona.............................. 13 347 12 323 + 1 +24 1 0 24 0 0 0 0 0

Arkansas ............................ 253 179 250 165 +3 +14 3 0 15 0 0 0 1 0

C a lifo rn ia .......................... 152 3,176 152 3,033 NC + 143 7 0 144 8 7 0 7 2

Colorado............................ 278 29 270 19 +8 +10 9 0 10 1 0 1 0 1

Connecticut....................... 63 469 61 436 +2 +33 5 0 34 5 3 0 6 0

Delaware............................ 18 99 18 87 NA +12 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0

District of Columbia . . . . 14 108 14 103 NA +5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0

Florida................................. 540 43 500 33 +40 +10 40 0 10 0 0 0 0 0

Georgia.............................. 434 412 441 296 - 7 + 116 3 0 110 11 9 1 3 2

Hawaii................................ 10 142 10 140 NA +2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0

Idaho................................... 24 165 24 156 NA +9 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 0

Illin ois................................ 1,134 123 1,108 98 +26 +25 28 0 25 1 1 1 1 0

Ind ia n a .............................. 408 671 407 632 + 1 +39 1 0 42 0 0 0 2 1

Io w a ................................... 666 329 666 318 NA +11 0 0 13 0 0 0 1 1

Kansas................................. 603 73 601 69 +2 +4 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0

Kentucky............................ 343 361 343 328 NA +33 0 0 32 2 0 0 1 0

Louisiana............................ 235 414 231 393 +4 +21 4 0 21 1 0 0 1 0

M a in e ................................ 44 237 43 226 + 1 +11 1 0 12 0 0 0 1 0

Maryland............................ 112 567 115 521 - 3 +46 0 0 46 3 3 0 1 2

Massachusetts................... 158 781 162 744 - 4 +37 1 0 38 5 5 0 6 0

Michigan............................ 331 1,254 331 1,203 NC +51 3 0 56 2 3 0 7 0

Minnesota.......................... 731 17 729 11 +2 +6 2 0 6 0 0 0 0 0

Mississippi.......................... 183 369 182 348 + 1 +21 2 0 21 1 1 0 1 0

Missouri.............................. 672 100 671 93 +1 +7 2 0 10 0 0 1 3 0

M ontana............................ 144 10 140 5 +4 +5 4 0 5 0 0 0 0 0

Nebraska............................ 443 45 441 42 +2 +3 3 0 3 1 0 1 1 0

Nevada................................ 8 89 8 86 NA +3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

New Hampshire................ 74 69 74 63 NA +6 0 0 6 0 0 0 0 0

184 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
New Jersey.......................... 211 1,097 217 1,012 - 6 +85 6 0 74 13 12 0 2 U

New M e x ic o ..................... 68 140 66 130 +2 +10 2 0 9 1 0 0 0 0

New Y o r k .......................... 311 2,556 311 2,441 NC + 115 7 0 121 7 7 0 10 3

North C a ro lin a ................ 95 1,224 98 1,119 - 3 + 105 3 0 101 7 6 0 3 0

North D a ko ta ................... 169 72 169 71 NA + 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0

O h io ................................... 514 1,370 516 1,304 - 2 +66 2 0 63 5 4 0 2 0

Oklahom a.......................... 437 71 434 60 +3 +11 2 1 10 1 0 0 0 0

O regon.............................. 46 359 49 337 - 3 +22 0 0 18 4 3 0 0 0

Pennsylvania..................... 454 1,826 471 1,727 -1 7 +99 0 0 86 16 16 1 3 0

Rhode Island..................... 13 179 13 171 NA +8 0 0 9 0 0 0 1 0

South C a ro lin a ................ 99 459 102 418 - 3 +41 1 0 42 5 4 0 6 0

South D a ko ta ................... 159 100 161 98 - 2 +2 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 0

Tennessee.......................... 310 528 308 488 +2 +40 2 0 41 0 0 0 1 0

Texas................................... 1,215 86 1,191 76 +24 + 10 25 0 11 1 0 1 1 1

U ta h ................................... 50 148 48 139 +2 +9 3 0 8 1 1 0 0 0

V e rm o n t............................ 42 89 43 85 -1 +4 0 0 4 1 1 0 0 1

V irgin ia .............................. 245 887 233 825 +12 +62 13 0 63 2 1 0 3 0

W ashington....................... 92 589 91 558 + 1 +31 3 0 31 3 2 0 2 1

West Virginia..................... 199 6 200 5 -1 + 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0

W isconsin.......................... 611 286 608 273 +3 +13 6 0 12 2 3 0 0 1

W yoming............................ 71 2 70 2 + 1 NA 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Other Areas

Pacific Islands................... 0 23 0 20 NA +3 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

Panama Canal Zone......... 0 2 0 2 NA NA 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Puerto R ico....................... 13 197 13 190 NA +7 0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0

Virgin Islands..................... 8 28 6 24 +2 +4 1 1 4 1 0 0 1 0

N A -N o activity 

N C -N o change

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 185

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 103. NUMBER OF BANKING OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS), DECEMBER 31, 1971

GROUPED ACCORDING TO INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK, AND BY STATE OR AREA AND TYPE OF OFFICE

State and type of bank 

or office

All banks Commercial banks and nondeposit trust companies Mutual savings banks Percentage insured1

Total Insured

Noninsured Total

Insured Noninsured

Total Insured

Noninsured

All

banks

of

deposit

Commercial

banks

of

deposit

Mutual

savings

banks

Total

Members F.R. 

System

Not

members

F.R.

System

Banks 

of deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

comNa­ panies

tional State

United States-all offices.......................... 38,860 38,229 631 37,174 36,918 17,922 4,949 14,047 203 53 1,686 1,311 375 98.5 99.5 77.8

Banks...................................................... 14,294 13,939 355 13,804 13,612 4,600 1,128 7,884 147 45 490 327 163 97.8 98.9 66.7

Unit banks ..................................... 9,764 9,519 245 9,586 9,416 2,868 668 5,880 129 41 178 103 75 97.9 98.6 57.9

Banks operating branches............ 4,530 4,420 110 4,218 4,196 1,732 460 2,004 18 4 312 224 88 97.7 99.6 71.8

Branches ............................................... 24,566 24,290 276 23,370 23,306 13,322 3,821 6,163 56 8 1,196 984 212 98.9 99.8 82.3

50 States & D.C.-all o ffices................... 38,588 37,992 596 36,903 36,682 17,871 4,947 13,864 168 53 1,685 1,310 375 98.6 99.5 77.7

Banks...................................................... 14,272 13,928 344 13,783 13,602 4,599 1,128 7,875 136 45 489 326 163 97.9 99.0 66.7

Unit banks ..................................... 9,754 9,517 237 9,577 9,415 2,868 668 5,879 121 41 177 102 75 98.0 98.7 57.6

Banks operating branches............ 4,518 4,411 107 4JO 6 4,187 1,731 460 1,996 15 4 312 224 88 97.7 99.6 71.8

Branches ............................................... 24,316 24,064 252 23,120 23,080 13,272 3,819 5,989 32 8 1,196 984 212 99.0 99.9 82.3

Other Areas-all offices............................ 272 237 35 271 236 51 2 183 35 0 1 1 0 87.1 87.1 100.0

Banks...................................................... 22 11 11 21 10 1 0 9 11 0 1 1 0 50.0 47.6 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 10 2 8 9 7 0 0 1 8 0 7 1 0 20.0 77.7 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 12 9 3 12 9 1 0 8 3 0 0 0 0 75.0 75.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 250 226 24 250 226 50 2 174 24 0 0 0 0 90.4 90.4 0.0

State

Alabama-all offices ................................. 576 576 0 576 576 301 33 242 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks...................................................... 273 273 0 273 273 88 20 165 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks ...................................... 177 177 0 177 177 39 15 123 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 96 96 0 96 96 49 5 42 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 303 303 0 303 J303__ 213 13 11 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Alaska-all offices...................................... 78 77 1 76 75 63 0 12 1 0 2 2 0 98.7 98.7 100.0

Banks ...................................................... 13 12 1 11 10 5 0 5 1 0 2 2 0 92.3 90.9 100.0

Unit banks . .. -............................... 6 5 1 4 3 0 0 3 1 0 2 2 0 83.3 75.0 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 7 7 0 7 7 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 65 65 0 65 65 58 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Arizona-all offices................................... 360 360 0 360 360 231 21 108 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks...................................................... 13 13 0 13 13 3 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks ...................................... 3 3 0 3 3 7 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 10 10 0 10 10 2 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 347 347 0 347 347 228 20 99 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

186 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Arkansas-all offices................................. 432 430 2 432 430 157

B anks...................................................... 253 251 2 253 251 69

Unit banks ..................................... 163 161 2 163 161 32

Banks operating branches............ 90 90 0 90 90 37

Branches ............................................... 179 179 0 179 L 88

California-all offices. . . .......................... 3,328 3,315 13 3,328 3,315 2,563

Banks ...................................................... 152 144 8 152 144 57

Unit banks...................................... 34 28 6 34 28 7

Banks operating branches............ 118 116 2 118 116 50

Branches ............................................... 3,176 3,171 5 3,176 3,171 2,506

Colorado-all offices................................. 307 264 43 307 264 141

B anks...................................................... 278 235 43 278 235 122

Unit banks ...................................... 253 210 43 253 210 105

Banks operating branches............ 25 25 0 25 25 17

Branches ............................................... 29 29 0 29 19

Connecticut-all offices............................ 761 760 1 532 531 276

B anks...................................................... 131 130 1 63 62 26

Unit banks ...................................... 38 37 1 17 16 4

Banks operating branches............ 93 93 0 46 46 22

Branches ............................................... 630 630 0 469 ^ 4 6 9 250

Delaware-all offices................................. 132 132 0 117 117 9

B anks...................................................... 20 20 0 18 18 5

Unit banks ...................................... 9 9 0 9 9 3

Banks operating branches............ 11 11 0 9 9 2

Branches ............................................... 112 112 0 99 „ 99 4

D.C.-all offices.......................................... 122 122 0 122 122 83

Banks ...................................................... 14 14 0 14 14 11

Unit banks ...................................... 1 1 0 7 1 1

Banks operating branches............ 13 13 0 13 13 10

Branches ............................................... 108 108 0 108 108 72

Florida-all offices..................................... 583 578 5 583 578 242

Banks ...................................................... 540 535 5 540 535 230

Unit banks ...................................... 501 496 5 501 496 219

Banks operating branches............ 39 39 0 39 39 11

Branches ............................................... 43 43 0 43 ^ 43 12

Georgia-all offices ................................... 846 840 6 846 840 287

Banks ...................................................... 434 428 6 434 428 60

Unit banks ...................................... 297 291 6 297 291 23

Banks operating branches............ 137 137 0 137 137 37

Branches ............................................... 412 412 0 412 JtlL 227

Hawaii-all offices...................................... 152 147 5 152 147 10

B anks...................................................... 10 7 3 10 7 1

Unit banks ..................................... 2 0 2 2 0 0

Banks operating branches............ 8 7 1 8 7 1

Branches ............................................... 142 140 2 142 _140^ 9

32 241 1 1 0

12 170 1 1 0

5 124 1 7 0

7 46 0 0 0

20 71 0 0 0

313 439 0 13 0

9 78 0 8 0

0 21 0 6 0

9 57 0 2 0

304 361 0 5 0

19 104 43 0 0

18 95 43 0 0

17 88 43 0 0

1 7 0 0 0

1 9 0 0 0

116 139 1 0 229

3 33 1 0 68

0 12 1 0 21

3 21 0 0 47

113 106 0 0 161

45 63 0 0 15

2 11 0 0 2

0 6 0 0 0

2 5 0 0 2

43 52 0 0 13

30 9 0 0 0

1 2 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

1 2 0 0 0

29 7 0 0 0

11 325 2 3 0

10 295 2 3 0

9 268 2 3 0

1 27 0 0 0

1 30 0 0 0

65 488 6 0 0

10 358 6 0 0

2 266 6 0 0

8 92 0 0 0

55 130 0 0 0

0 137 0 5 0

0 6 0 3 0

0 0 0 2 0

0 6 0 1 0

0 131 0 2 0

0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 86.0 86.0 0.0

0 0 84.5 84.5 0.0

0 0 83.0 83.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

229 0 99.9 99.8 100.0

68 0 99.2 98.4 100.0

21 0 97.4 94.1 100.0

47 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

161 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

15 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

2 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

2 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

13 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 99.7 99.7 0.0

0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 99.3 99.3 0.0

0 0 98.6 98.6 0.0

0 0 98.0 98.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 187

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 103. NUMBER OF BANKING OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971-CONTINUED

GROUPED ACCORDING TO INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK, AND BY STATE OR AREA AND TYPE OF OFFICE

State and type of bank 

or office

A ll banks Commercial banks and nondeposit trust companies Mutual savings banks Percentage insu red1

Total Insured

Noninsured Total

Insured Noninsured

Total Insured

Noninsured

All

banks

of

deposit

Commercial

banks

of

deposit

Mutual

savings

Total banks

Members F.R.

System

Not

members

F.R.

System

Banks 

of deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

companiesNational State

Idaho-all o ffice s........................................ 189 189 0 189 189 121 36 32 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks..................................................... 24 24 0 24 24 7 6 11 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 10 10 0 10 10 2 3 5 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 14 14 0 14 14 5 3 6 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches .............................................. 165 165 0 165 165 114 30 21 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Illin ois-all o ffic e s ..................................... 1,257 1,254 3 1,257 1,254 486 88 680 1 2 0 0 0 99.9 99.9 0.0

Banks.............................................. .. 1,134 1,131 3 1,134 1,131 415 78 638 1 2 0 0 0 99.9 99.9 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 1f016 1f013 3 1,016 1,013 348 68 597 1 2 0 0 0 99.9 99.9 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 118 118 0 118 118 67 10 41 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 123 123 0 123 1£ L 71 10 42 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Indiana-all offices ................................... 1,084 1,081 3 1,079 1,076 482 121 473 2 1 5 5 0 99.8 99.8 100.0

Banks..................................................... 412 409 3 408 405 122 61 222 2 1 4 4 0 99.5 99.5 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 212 209 3 209 206 48 38 120 2 1 3 3 0 99.1 99.0 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 200 200 0 199 199 74 23 102 0 0 1 1 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Branches ............................................ 672 672 0 671 J 7 1 360 60 251 0 0 1 1 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Iow a-all offices ....................................... 995 987 8 995 987 161 79 747 7 1 0 0 0 99.3 99.3 0.0

Banks..................................................... 666 658 8 666 658 99 49 510 7 1 0 0 0 98.9 98.9 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 446 438 8 446 438 56 33 349 7 7 0 0 0 98.4 98.4 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 220 220 0 220 220 43 16 161 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 329 329 0 329 329 62 30 237 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Kansas-all o ffic e s ..................................... 676 675 1 676 675 206 35 434 1 0 0 0 0 99.9 99.9 0.0

B anks..................................................... 603 602 1 603 602 171 28 403 1 0 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 532 531 1 532 531 138 21 372 1 0 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 71 71 0 71 71 33 7 31 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 73 73 0 73 J l . 35 1 31 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

K entucky-all offices .............................. 704 700 4 704 700 231 75 394 4 0 0 0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

Banks ..................................................... 343 339 4 343 339 80 14 245 4 0 0 0 0 98.8 98.8 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 200 196 4 200 196 35 6 155 4 0 0 0 0 98.0 98.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 143 143 0 143 143 45 8 90 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches .............................................. 361 361 0 361 361 151 61 149 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

188 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Louisiana-all offices................................. 649 648 1 649 648 234 48

Banks...................................................... 235 234 1 235 234 49 10

Unit banks ..................................... 99 98 1 99 98 11 /

Banks operating branches............ 136 136 0 136 136 38 9

Branches ............................................... 414 414 0 414 414 185 38

Maine-all offices........................................ 342 337 5 281 277^ 128 70

Banks ...................................................... 76 71 5 44 40 19 6

Unit banks ..................................... 25 20 5 11 7 3 7

Banks operating branches............ 51 51 0 33 33 16 5

Branches ............................................... 266 266 0 237 ,237 109 64

Maryland-all offices................................. 728 728 0 679 679 312 82

B anks...................................................... 117 117 0 112 112 39 7

Unit banks ..................................... 41 41 0 41 41 11 1

Banks operating branches............ 76 76 0 71 71 28 6

Branches ............................................... 611 611 0 567 J?67 273 75

Massachusetts-all offices ....................... 1,358 978 380 939 933 525 177

Banks...................................................... 328 162 166 158 154 84 14

Unit banks ...................................... 111 34 77 36 33 20 0

Banks operating branches............ 217 128 89 122 121 64 14

Branches3 ............................................... 1,030 816 214 781 •VI ,

441 163

Michigan-all offices ................................. 1,585 1,581 4 1,585 1,581 688 545

Banks...................................................... 331 329 2 331 329 104 101

UnitJjanks ..................................... 122 121 1 122 121 30 36

Banks operating branches............ 209 208 1 209 208 74 65

Branches ............................................... 1,254 1,252 2 1,254 1,252 584 444

Minnesota-all offices................................. 749 746 3 748 745 205 26

Banks ...................................................... 732 729 3 731 728 198 25

Unit banks ..................................... 719 716 3 718 715 195 24

Banks operating branches............ 13 13 0 13 13 3 1

Branches ............................................... 17 17 0 17 ,JjL 7 1

Mississippi-all offices.............................. 552 552 0 552 552 185 20

B anks...................................................... 183 183 0 183 183 38 7

Unit banks ..................................... 68 68 0 68 68 5 2

Banks operating branches............ 115 115 0 115 115 33 5

Branches ............................................... 369 369 0 369 J 6 9 .. 147 13

Missouri-all offices................................... 772 766 6 772 766 124 87

Banks...................................................... 672 666 6 672 666 98 71

Unit banks ..................................... 574 568 6 574 568 73 55

Banks operating branches............ 98 98 0 98 98 25 16

Branches ............................................... 100 100 0 100 100 26 16

Montana-all offices................................... 154 153 1 154 153 56 44

Banks ...................................................... 144 143 1 144 143 52 40

Unit banks ..................................... 134 133 1 134 133 48 36

Banks operating branches............ 10 10 0 10 10 4 4

Branches ............................................... 10 10 0 10 JJBL 4 4

366 1 0 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

175 1 0 0 0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

86 1 0 0 0 0 99.0 99.0 0.0

89 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

191 Q 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

79 4 0 61 60 1 98.5 98.6 98.4

15 4 0 32 31 1 93.4 90.9 96.9

3 4 0 14 13 7 80.0 63.6 92.9

12 0 0 18 18 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

64 0 0 29 29 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

285 0 0 49 49 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

66 0 0 5 5 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

29 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

37 0 0 5 5 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

219 0 0 44 44 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

231 6 0 419 45 374 72.0 99.4 10.7

56 4 0 170 8 162 49.4 97.5 4.7

13 3 0 75 1 74 30.6 91.7 1.3

43 1 0 95 7 88 59.0 99.2 7.4

175 2 0 249 37 212 79.2 99.7 14.9

348 3 1 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

124 1 1 0 0 0 99.7 99.7 0.0

55 0 7 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

69 1 0 0 0 0 99.5 99.5 0.0

224 2 0 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

514 3 0 1 1 0 99.6 99.6 100.0

505 3 0 1 1 0 99.6 99.6 100.0

496 3 0 7 7 0 99.6 99.6 100.0

9 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

9 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

347 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

138 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

61 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

77 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

209 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

555 3 3 0 0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

497 3 3 0 0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

440 3 3 0 0 0 99.5 99.5 0.0

57 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

58 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

53 0 1 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

51 0 1 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

49 0 7 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

2 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

2 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 189

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 103. NUMBER OF BANKING OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971-CONTINUED

GROUPED ACCORDING TO INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK, AND BY STATE OR AREA AND TYPE OF OFFICE

State and type of bank 

or office

A ll banks Commercial banks and nondeposit trust companies Mutual savings banks Percentage insured1

Total Insured

Noninsured Total

Insured Noninsured

Total Insured

Noninsured

All

banks

of

deposit

Commercial

banks

of

deposit

Mutual

savings

Total banks

Members F.R. 

System

Not

members

F.R.

System

Banks 

of deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

comNa­ panies

tional State

Nebraska-all o ffic e s ................................. 488 483 5 488 483 151 11 321 1 4 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

Banks ..................................................... 443 438 5 443 438 125 10 303 1 4 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 400 395 5 400 395 100 9 286 1 4 0 0 0 99.7 99.7 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 43 43 0 43 43 25 1 17 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches .............................................. 45 45 0 45 45 26 1 18 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Nevada-all offices..................................... 97 97 0 97 " I T " 68 15 14 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks..................................................... 8 8 0 8 8 4 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 2 2 0 2 2 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 6 6 0 6 6 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 89 89 0 89 , 89 64 14 11 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

New Hampshire-all o ffic e s ..................... 189 187 2 143 141 103 3 35 2 0 46 46 0 98.9 98.6 100.0

Banks ..................................................... 104 102 2 74 72 48 1 23 2 0 30 30 0 98.1 97.3 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 63 61 2 42 40 24 0 16 2 0 21 21 0 96.8 95.2 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 41 41 0 32 32 24 1 7 0 0 9 9 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Branches .............................................. 85 85 0 69 69 55 2 12 0 0 16 16 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

New Jersey-all offices ............................ 1,382 1,380 2 1,308 1,306 866 235 205 0 2 74 74 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Banks ..................................................... 231 229 2 211 209 120 33 56 0 2 20 20 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 51 49 2 43 41 17 5 19 0 2 8 8 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 180 180 0 168 168 103 28 37 0 0 12 12 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Branches .............................................. 1,151 1,151 0 1,097 1,097 746 202 149 0 0 54 54 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

New M exico-all o ffice s............................ 208 208 0 208 208 112 16 80 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

B anks..................................................... 68 68 0 68 68 33 7 28 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 16 16 0 16 16 7 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 52 52 0 52 52 26 5 21 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches .............................................. 140 140 0 140 J 4 0 _ 79 9 52 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

New Y o rk -a ll o ffic e s .............................. 3,370 3,335 35 2,867 2,832 1,507 1,135 190 29 6 503 503 0 99.1 99.0 100.0

Banks ..................................................... 431 405 26 311 285 166 73 46 21 5 120 120 0 95.1 93.1 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 141 123 18 120 102 62 20 20 14 4 21 21 0 89.8 87.9 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 290 282 8 191 183 104 53 26 7 1 99 99 0 97.6 96.3 100.0

Branches3 .............................................. 2,939 2,930 9 2,556 2,547 1,341 1,062 144 8 1 383 383 0 99.7 99.7 100.0

190 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
North Carolina-all offices..........

Banks........................................

Unit banks .......................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

North Dakota-all offices............

Banks........................................

Unit banks.......................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

Ohio-all offices............................

Banks........................................

Unit banks.......................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

Oklahoma-all o ffic e s .................

Banks ........................................

Unit banks .......................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

Oregon-all offices........................

Banks........................................

Unit banks.......................

Banks operating branches

Branches3 .................................

Pennsylvania-all offices

Banks ........................................

Unit banks .......................

Banks operating branches

Branches3 .................................

Rhode Island-all offices............

Banks........................................

Unit banks........................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

South Carolina-all offices.........

Banks........................................

Unit banks........................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

South Dakota-all offices............

Banks ........................................

Unit banks .......................

Banks operating branches

Branches .................................

1,319 1,311 8

95 94 1

30 30 0

65 64 1

1,224 1,217 7

241 236 5

169 166 3

117 115 2

52 51 1

72 70 2

1,885 1,883 2

515 513 2

224 222 2

291 291 0

1,370 1,370 0

508 506 2

437 435 2

369 367 2

68 68 0

71 71 0

408 406 2

47 45 2

15 13 2

32 32 0

361 361 0

2,394 2,385 9

462 455 7

204 198 6

258 257 1

1,932 1,930 2

274 264 10

20 18 2

0 0 0

20 18 2

254 246 8

558 558 0

99 99 0

34 34 0

65 65 0

459 459 0

259 259 0

159 159 0

120 120 0

39 39 0

100 100 0

1,319 1,311 633 1

95 94 23 1

30 30 3 7

65 64 20 0

1,224 1,217 610 0

241 236 54 6

169 166 42 4

117 115 31 3

52 51 11 1

72 _ 7 0 12 2

1,884 1,882 994 493

514 512 218 118

223 221 66 59

291 291 152 59

1,370 J ,370 776 375

508 506 245 19

437 435 197 16

369 367 152 13

68 68 45 3

71 J \ 48 3

405 403 268 0

46 44 8 0

15 13 7 0

31 31 7 0

359 359 260 0

2,280 2,271 1,378 282

454 447 286 23

203 197 128 8

251 250 158 15

1,826 1,824 1,092 259

192 182 102 0

13 11 5 0

0 0 0 0

13 11 5 0

179 171 97 0

558 558 272 15

99 99 19 6

34 34 4 2

65 65 15 4

459 459 253 9

259 259 94 29

159 159 32 25

120 120 22 22

39 39 10 3

100 62 4

677 8 0 0 0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

70 1 0 0 0 0 98.9 98.9 0.0

26 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

44 1 0 0 0 0 98.5 98.5 0.0

607 1 0 0 0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

176 5 0 0 0 0 97.9 97.9 0.0

120 3 0 0 0 0 98.2 98.2 0.0

81 2 0 0 0 0 98.3 98.3 0.0

39 1 0 0 0 0 98.1 98.1 0.0

56 2 0 0 0 0 97.2 97.2 0.0

395 2 0 1 1 0 99.9 99.9 100.0

176 2 0 1 1 0 99.6 99.6 100.0

96 2 0 7 7 0 99.1 99.1 100.0

80 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

219 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

242 0 2 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

222 0 2 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

202 0 2 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

20 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

20 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

135 2 0 3 3 0 99.5 99.5 100.0

36 2 0 1 1 0 95.7 95.7 100.0

12 2 0 0 0 0 86.7 86.7 0.0

24 0 0 7 7 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

99 0 0 2 2 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

611 7 2 114 114 0 99.7 99.7 100.0

138 5 2 8 8 0 98.9 98.9 100.0

61 4 2 7 7 0 98.0 98.0 100.0

77 1 0 7 7 0 99.6 99.6 100.0

473 2 0 106 106 0 99.9 99.9 100.0

80 10 0 82 82 0 96.4 94.8 100.0

6 2 0 7 7 0 90.0 84.6 100.0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

6 2 0 7 7 0 90.0 84.6 100.0

74 8 0 75 75 0 96.9 95.5 100.0

271 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

74 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

28 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

46 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

197 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

136 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

102 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

76 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

26 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

34 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 103. NUMBER OF BANKING OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971-C0NTINUED

GROUPED ACCORDING TO INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK, AND BY STATE OR AREA AND TYPE OF OFFICE

A ll banks Commercial banks and nondeposit trust companies Mutual savings banks Percentage insured1

State and type of bank 

or office

Insured Noninsured

All

banks

of

deCommercial

banks

of

deposit

Total Insured

Noninsured Total

Total

Members F.H. 

System

Not

members

F.R.

System

Banks 

of deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

companies

Total Insured

NoninsuredMutual

savings

banks

National State

posit

Tennessee-all offices................................. 838 834 4 838 834 371 51 412 3 1 0 0 0 99.6 99.6 0.0

Banks..................................................... 310 307 3 310 307 77 14 216 2 1 0 0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

Unit banks..................................... 159 157 2 159 157 17 8 132 1 1 0 0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 151 150 1 151 150 60 6 84 1 0 0 0 0 99.3 99.3 0.0

Branches ............................................... 528 527 1 528 527 294 37 196 1 0 0 0 0 99.8 99.8 0.0

Texas-all o ffice s........................................ 1,301 1,293 8 1,301 1 ? 2 9 r 550 58 685 8 0 0 0 0 99.4 99.4 0.0

B anks..................................................... 1,215 1,207 8 1,215 1,207 530 49 628 8 0 0 0 0 99.3 99.3 0.0

Unit banks..................................... 1,134 1,126 8 1,134 1,126 512 41 573 8 0 0 0 0 99.3 99.3 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 81 81 0 81 81 18 8 55 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 86 86 0 86 86 20 9 57 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

U tah-all offices.......................................... 198 198 0 198 198 88 35 75 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks..................................................... 50 50 0 50 50 9 6 35 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks..................................... 29 29 0 29 29 5 3 21 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 21 21 0 21 21 4 3 14 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches .............................................. 148 148 0 148 .148.. 79 29 40 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

V erm ont-all offices ................................. 141 140 1 131 130 76 0 54 0 1 10 10 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Banks..................................................... 48 47 1 42 41 26 0 15 0 1 6 6 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 21 20 7 17 16 11 0 5 0 7 4 4 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 27 27 0 25 25 15 0 10 0 0 2 2 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Branches ............................................... 93 93 0 89 89 50 0 39 0 0 4 4 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

V irgin ia-all o ffic e s ................................... 1,132 1,132 0 1,132 1,132 619 173 340 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks ..................................................... 245 245 0 245 245 101 45 99 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Unit banks ..................................... 87 87 0 87 87 26 21 40 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Banks operating branches............ 158 158 0 158 158 75 24 59 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Branches ............................................... 887 887 0 887 _887___ 518 128 241 0 0 0 0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

Washington-all offices ............................ 749 747 2 681 679 488 44 147 1 1 68 68 0 99.9 99.9 100.0

Banks..................................................... 101 99 2 92 90 24 7 59 1 1 9 9 0 99.0 98.9 100.0

Unit banks ..................................... 44 42 2 42 40 6 3 31 7 7 2 2 0 97.7 97.6 100.0

Banks operating branches............ 57 57 0 50 50 18 4 28 0 0 7 7 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Branches3 .............................................. 648 648 0 589 589 464 37 88 0 0 59 59 0 100.0 100.0 100.0

192 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
West V irginia-all o ffic e s .......................... 205 205 0 205 205 87

Banks ...................................................... 199 199 0 199 199 86

Unit banks ..................................... 193 193 0 193 193 85

Banks operating branches............ 6 6 0 6 6 1

Branches ............................................... 6 6 0 6 6 1

Wisconsin-all o ffice s................................. 900 896 4 897 ~893 ~ 195

B anks...................................................... 614 610 4 611 607 126

Unit banks ..................................... 439 435 4 436 432 90

Banks operating branches............ 175 175 0 175 175 36

Branches ............................................... 286 286 0 286 286 69

W yom ing-all o ffic e s ................................. 73 73 0 73 73 43

Banks...................................................... 71 71 0 71 71 42

Unit banks ..................................... 69 69 0 69 69 41

Banks operating branches............ 2 2 0 2 2 1

Branches ............................................... 2 2 0 2 ~JL 1

Other Areas

Trust T e rr.-a ll offices4 ............................ 23 11 12 23 11 6

B anks...................................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0

Unit banks ..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0

Banks operating branches............ 0 0 0 0 0 0

Branches5 ............................................... 23 11 12 23 11 6

Canal Zone-all offices.............................. 2 0 2 2 0 0

B anks...................................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0

Unit banks ..................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0

Banks operating branches............ 0 0 0 0 0 0

Branches6 ............................................... 2 0 2 2 0 0

Puerto R ico -a ll o ffic e s ............................ 211 196 15 210 195 19

B anks...................................................... 14 9 5 13 8 0

Unit banks ..................................... 4 2 2 3 1 0

Banks operating branches............ 10 7 3 10 7 0

Branches7 ............................................... 197 187 10 197 187 19

Virgin Islands— all o ffice s.......................... 36 30 6 36 30 26

B anks..................................................... 8 2 6 8 2 1

Unit banks ..................................... 6 0 6 6 0 0

Banks operating branches............ 2 2 0 2 2 1

Branches8 ............................................... 28 28 0 28 28 25

34 84 0 0 0

33 80 0 0 0

32 76 0 0 0

1 4 0 0 0

1 4 0 0 0

61 637 1 3 3

40 441 1 3 3

30 312 7 3 3

10 129 0 0 0

21 196 0 0 0

13 17 0 0 0

13 16 0 0 0

13 15 0 0 0

0 7 0 0 0

0 1 0 0 0

0 5 12 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 5 12 0 0

0 0 2 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0

0 0 2 0 0

0 176 15 0 1

0 8 5 0 1

0 7 2 0 7

0 7 3 0 0

0 168 10 0 0

2 2 6 0 0

0 1 6 0 0

0 0 6 0 0

0 1 0 0 0

2 1 0 0 0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

3 0 99.9 99.9 100.0

3 0 99.8 99.8 100.0

3 0 99.8 99.8 100.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 47.8 47.8 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 47.8 47.8 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

1 0 92.9 92.9 100.0

1 0 64.3 61.5 100.0

7 0 50.0 33.3 100.0

0 0 70.0 70.0 0.0

0 0 94.9 94.9 0.0

0 0 83.3 83.3 0.0

0 0 25.0 25.0 0.0

0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

0 0 100.0 100.0 0.0

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 193

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 103. NUMBER OF BANKING OFFICES IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS), 

DECEMBER 31, 1971-C0NTINUED 

GROUPED ACCORDING TO INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK, AND BY STATE OR AREA AND TYPE OF OFFICE

1 Nondeposit trust companies are excluded in computing these percentages.

in clu d e s 14 noninsured branches of insured banks: 12 branches in the Pacific Islands and 2 in the Canal Zone. 

Massachusetts: 1 branch operated by a noninsured bank in New York.

New York: 15 branches operated by 3 insured banks in Puerto Rico (not members of F.R. System).

Oregon: 1 branch operated by a national bank in California.

Pennsylvania: 2 branches-1 operated by a noninsured bank in New Y ork and 1 operated by a national bank 

in New Jersey.

Washington: 2 branches operated by a national bank in California.

4 U.S. possessions: (American Samoa, Guam, Midway Islands, and Wake Island): Trust Territories (Kwajalein, 

Majuro. Palau Islands, Ponape Island, Saipan, and Truk).

5Pacific Islands: 23 branches.

American Samoa (Pago Pago): 1 insured branch-operated by an insured bank in Hawaii (not member of 

F.R. System).

Guam: 10 insured branches-operated by 2 insured banks in Hawaii (not members of F.R. System): a national

bank in California, and a national bank in New York.

Carolina Islands: 4 noninsured branches-1 branch operated by a national bank in California, and 3 branches 

operated by 2 insured banks in Hawaii (not members of F. R. System).

Saipan Islands: 3 noninsured branches-2 branches operated by a national bank in California, and 1 branch 

operated by an insured bank in Hawaii (not member of F. R. System).

Marshall Islands: 3 noninsured branches-1 branch operated by a national bank in California, and 2 branches 

operated by an insured bank in Hawaii (not member of F. R. System).

Midway Islands on Sand Island: 1 noninsured branch operated by an insured bank in Hawaii (not member 

of F. R. System).

Wake Island: 1 noninsured branch operated by an insured bank in Hawaii (not member of F. R. System).

6Canal Zone: 2 noninsured branches operated by 2 national banks in New York.

7Puerto Rico: 19 insured branches operated by 2 national banks in New York.

8Virgin Islands: 19 insured branches operated by 2 national banks in New York, 1 national bank in

California, and 1 state member bank in Pennsylvania.

194 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 104. N U M B E R A N D DEPOSITS OF A L L C O M M E R C IA L A N D M U T U A L S A V IN G S B A N K S , 

(S TA TE S A N D O TH E R A R E A S ), D E C E M B E R 31, 1971 

BANKS GROUPED BY CLASS AND DEPOSIT SIZE

Deposit size 

(in dollars)

All

banks

Insured commercial banks Noninsured 

banks 

and trust 

companies

Mutual savings banks

Total

Members F.R. System Nonmembers 

F.R. System

Insured

Noninsured

National State

Number of banks

Less than 1 m illio n .................................................... 246 146 15 4 127 100 0 0

1 to 2 m illio n ............................................................. 747 732 75 28 629 15 0 0

2 to 5 m illio n ............................................................. 3,034 3,004 549 176 2,279 24 4 2

5 to 10 m illio n ........................................................... 3,374 3,333 992 243 2,098 12 15 14

10 to 25 m illio n ........................................................ 3,848 3,756 1,556 325 1,875 13 46 33

25 to 50 m illio n ........................................................ 1,535 1,406 690 153 563 6 74 49

50 to 100 m illio n ...................................................... 717 608 338 75 195 9 59 41

100 to 500 m illio n .................................................... 606 479 289 87 103 13 91 23

500 million to 1 b illio n ............................................. 108 85 52 18 15 0 22 1

1 billion or more ...................................................... 79 63 44 19 0 0 16 0

T o ta l............................................................... 14,294 13,612 4,600 1,128 7,884 192 327 163

(In thousands of dollars)

Amount of deposits

Less than 1 m illio n .................................................... 139,669 106,278 9,908 2,271 94,099 33,391 0 0

1 to 2 m illio n ............................................................. 1,173,025 1,146,403 116,307 44,165 985,931 26,622 0 0

2 to 5 m illio n ............................................................. 10,465,030 10,368,027 1,989,980 642,530 7,735,517 74,068 17,372 5,563

5 to 10 m illio n ........................................................... 24,501,725 24,173,892 7,366,564 1,784,867 15,022,461 96,234 112,445 119,154

10 to 25 m illio n ......................................................... 59,755,689 58,076,282 24,631,093 5,062,790 28,382,399 210,752 873,626 595,029

25 to 50 m illio n ........................................................ 53,672,681 48,990,656 24,403,194 5,335,465 19,251,997 200,182 2,657,594 1,824,249

50 to 100 m illio n ...................................................... 49,901,167 42,058,102 23,482,555 5,055,981 13,519,566 665,238 4,314,198 2,863,629

100 to 500 m illio n .................................................... 126,949,935 97,960,146 62,399,846 18,351,062 17,209,238 2,419,805 22,242,315 4,327,669

500 million to 1 billion ............................................. 75,235,324 58,537,172 36,477,494 12,402,911 9,656,767 0 15,956,103 742,049

1 billion or more ...................................................... 223,094,282 197,767,104 134,672,428 63,094,676 0 0 25,327,178 0

T o ta l............................................................... 624,888,527 539,184,062 315,549,369 111,776,718 111,857,975 3,726,292 71,500,831 10,477,342

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 195

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 105. N U M B E R A N D D E P O S ITS O F A L L C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S 1 IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ),

D E C E M B E R 31, 1971 

BANKS GROUPED BY DEPOSIT SIZE AND STATE 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Banks with deposits o fState

All

banks

Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Total United States

B anks........................................ 13,804 246 747 3,028 3,345 3,769 1,412 617 492 85 63

Total deposits.......................... 541,219,080 137,618 1,167,414 10,439,664 24,243,386 58,231,407 49,164,892 42,383,940 99,146,483 58,537,172 197,767,104

State

Alabama

Banks ........................................ 273 2 11 47 98 84 14 8 8 1 0

Deposits................................... 5,777,332 1,719 17,239 181,005 733,214 1,292,478 487,499 541,127 1,789,424 733,627 0

Alaska

Banks ........................................ 11 0 0 0 2 3 2 2 2 0 0

Deposits................................... 654,284 0 0 0 12,144 47,270 72,320 115,337 407,213 0 0

Arizona

B anks........................................ 13 0 2 0 2 0 1 2 3 1 2

Deposits................................... 4,322,061 0 3,725 0 13,872 0 28,734 138,147 599,477 532,241 3,005,865

Arkansas

Banks ........................................ 253 8 11 60 70 74 18 7 5 0 0

Deposits................................... 3,636,632 5,336 16,468 216,462 498,542 1,146,576 592,304 430,403 730,541 0 0

California

Banks ........................................ 152 9 1 6 17 54 20 21 14 3 7

D eposits................................... 56,161,156 267 1,744 22,520 137,532 967,447 688,924 1,587,266 3,291,325 2,339,387 47,124,744

Colorado

Banks ........................................ 278 37 15 63 69 53 28 7 4 2 0

Deposits................................... 5,068,642 19,716 21,537 228,312 498,795 785,867 1,008,657 481,419 872,108 1,152,231 0

Connecticut

Banks ........................................ 63 1 2 7 10 20 9 3 8 1 2

Deposits................................... 5,566,939 396 3,054 22,865 72,525 317,889 322,981 213,628 2,005,188 529,971 2,078,442

Delaware

Banks ........................................ 18 0 1 4 5 3 1 0 4 0 0

D eposits................................... 1,424,086 0 1,939 14,978 39,529 52,247 36,059 0 1,279,334 0 0

196 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Washington D.C.

Banks ........................................ 14 0 0 0 0

Deposits................................... 2,951,573 0 0 0 0

Florida

Banks ........................................ 540 5 13 45 111

Deposits................................... 16,249,166 2,289 18,515 158,517 836,526

Georgia

Banks ........................................ 434 11 36 107 123

Deposits................................... 8,272,753 6,340 56,128 378,285 876,376

Hawaii

Banks ........................................ 10 1 0 0 1

Deposits................................... 1,909,897 189 0 0 7,636

Idaho

Banks ........................................ 24 0 0 7 4

Deposits................................... 1,540,748 0 0 29,123 29,020

Illinois

Banks ........................................ 1,134 11 52 259 265

Deposits................................... 39,258,425 6,062 86,471 895,853 1,886,875

Indiana

Banks........................................ 408 3 8 56 103

Deposits................................... 11,980,768 660 13,199 199,297 757,736

Iowa

Banks........................................ 666 5 30 241 189

Deposits................................... 7,360,661 2,643 50,634 821,263 1,321,961

Kansas

B anks........................................ 603 20 72 219 144

Deposits................................... 5,614,381 15,771 105,644 701,203 1,019,371

Kentucky

Banks ........................................ 343 4 21 74 113

Deposits................................... 6,125,414 2,641 32,068 246,239 845,366

Louisiana

Banks ........................................ 235 3 9 25 56

Deposits................................... 7,686,337 2,646 14,393 88,307 416,543

Maine

Banks ........................................ 44 3 2 2 8

Deposits................................... 1,382,986 1,513 2,830 6,626 63,882

Maryland

Banks ........................................ 112 0 1 18 23

Deposits................................... 5,940,883 0 1,564 69,338 165,599

Massachusetts

Banks ........................................ 158 0 2 7 27

Deposits................................... 11,807,188 0 3,056 23,842 204,312

2 4 2 4 2 0

30,711 130,835 141,733 1,028,179 1,620,115 0

179 114 50 22 1 0

2,986,819 4,106,619 3,431,255 3,847,488 861,138 0

118 21 9 6 2 1

1,789,117 772,678 568,166 1,105,803 1,409,982 1,309,878

1 0 2 3 2 0

11,975 0 182,637 386,268 1,321,192 0

7 2 0 3 1 0

102,622 72,321 0 742,331 565,331 0

279 155 73 34 2 4

4,404,965 5,460,774 5,009,175 5,884,179 1,340,336 14,283,735

135 61 21 18 1 2

2,079,981 2,099,197 1,473,355 2,699,077 500,264 2,158,002

152 30 14 5 0 0

2,165,434 1,028,393 906,026 1,064,307 0 0

115 23 4 6 0 0

1,802,807 765,138 274,694 929,753 0 0

92 25 7 5 2 0

1,393,025 908,861 464,614 1,099,019 1,133,581 0

85 29 12 14 2 0

1,245,389 885,753 911,715 2,902,086 1,219,505 0

16 6 2 5 0 0

233,599 206,944 142,306 725,286 0 0

41 16 4 4 4 1

614,675 576,866 220,289 717,542 2,489,721 1,085,289

54 28 23 13 3 1

813,768 1,006,998 1,607,936 2,447,350 2,781,938 2,917,988

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 197

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 1 05. N U M B E R A N D D E P O S ITS O F A L L C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S 1 IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ),

DE C E M B E R 31, 197 1 -C O N T IN U E D 

BANKS GROUPED BY DEPOSIT SIZE AND STATE 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Banks with deposits o fState

A ll

banks

Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Michigan

Banks ........................................ 331 1 2 29 75 110 53 32 20 4 5

Deposits................................... 23,165,535 790 3,778 115,520 540,073 1,705,755 1,863,354 2,212,351 3,857,309 2,369,165 10,497,440

Minnesota

Banks ........................................ 731 2 51 272 187 154 47 9 6 2 1

Deposits................................... 10,543,659 1,284 82,494 896,882 1,299,520 2,254,182 1,630,524 547,470 826,554 1,871,263 1,133,486

Mississippi

Banks ........................................ 183 1 5 29 53 65 22 4 4 0 0

Deposits................................... 3,622,380 908 7,953 106,840 411,530 969,237 724,812 284,555 1,116,545 0 0

Missouri

Banks ........................................ 672 15 59 175 165 171 48 23 13 2 1

Deposits................................... 12,692,281 10,848 92,393 615,028 1,219,854 2,643,307 1,644,523 1,517,629 2,480,001 1,455,888 1,012,810

Montana

Banks ........................................ 144 0 1 9 37 45 34 12 5 1 0

Deposits................................... 1,868,781 0 12,864 123,801 322,008 504,307 453,485 346,687 105,629 0 0

Nebraska

Banks........................................ 443 28 91 138 98 63 19 1 5 0 0

Deposits................................... 4,131,390 17,648 139,252 450,637 678,037 912,209 634,272 59,817 1,239,518 0 0

Nevada

Banks ........................................ 8 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 4 1 0

Deposits................................... 1,371,207 0 0 0 0 33,844 0 67,147 593,839 676,377 0

New Hampshire

Banks ........................................ 74 2 0 19 20 22 7 3 1 0 0

Deposits................................... 1,175,544 1,532 0 69,410 147,880 342,473 246,804 235,768 131,677 0 0

New Jersey

0 Banks........................................ 211 2 0 9 25 57 54 24 34 6

Deposits................................... 17,063,256 0 0 32,770 202,191 983,883 1,957,837 1,755,513 7,853,953 4,277,109 0

New Mexico

Banks ........................................ 68 1 1 2 22 25 12 2 3 0 0

Deposits................................... 1,839,517 767 1,980 7,473 180,339 395,027 411,496 105,284 737,151 0 0

198 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
New York

Banks ........................................ 311 8 5 27 47

Deposits................................... 95,788,934 3,447 8,289 96,035 330,126

North Carolina

Banks ........................................ 95 1 2 14 22

Deposits................................... 8,371,967 95 3,096 51,581 158,972

North Dakota

Banks ........................................ 169 2 9 61 56

Deposits................................... 1,764,966 1,777 15,317 215,828 393,172

Ohio

B anks........................................ 514 3 9 82 119

Deposits................................... 23,589,399 1,743 13,920 295,586 854,689

Oklahoma

Banks ........................................ 437 11 40 142 101

Deposits................................... 6,315,203 8,102 64,357 465,484 727,101

Oregon

B anks........................................ 46 0 0 7 10

Deposits................................... 4,539,610 0 0 24,836 72,840

Pennsylvania

Banks ........................................ 454 5 3 48 95

Deposits................................... 31,445,359 262 5,409 174,834 727,374

Rhode Island

Banks ........................................ 13 0 0 1 2

Deposits................................... 1,829,105 0 0 4,287 13,299

South Carolina

Banks ........................................ 99 0 7 18 38

Deposits................................... 2,789,596 0 12,302 61,814 262,217

South Dakota

Banks ........................................ 159 1 14 74 38

Deposits................................... 1,763,952 756 22,753 252,566 278,667

Tennessee

Banks ........................................ 310 4 16 69 74

Deposits................................... 8,697,768 1,536 25,062 234,811 523,369

Texas

Banks ........................................ 1,215 17 82 277 283

Deposits................................... 30,040,728 11,047 121,727 959,061 2,073,159

Utah

Banks ........................................ 50 1 2 7 12

Deposits................................... 2,099,108 417 3,135 27,229 81,415

Vermont

Banks ........................................ 42 1 2 4 9

Deposits................................... 991,726 0 3,338 16,621 61,163

74 44 39 47 7 13

1,169,076 1,652,106 2,750,806 10,511,052 5,250,593 74,017,404

27 10 6 8 2 3

449,577 357,934 406,769 1,400,117 1,348,436 4,195,390

26 10 4 1 0 0

410,912 351,110 222,885 153,965 0 0

155 78 32 26 7 3

2,487,080 2,695,034 2,250,673 5,570,008 4,732,198 4,688,468

102 28 6 7 0 0

1,538,550 905,551 415,375 2,190,683 0 0

17 5 4 1 0 2

251,064 170,666 267,397 171,057 0 3,581,750

153 74 33 29 7 7

2,469,252 2,558,734 2,135,455 5,372,390 4,608,986 13,392,663

3 1 4 0 2 0

38,713 31,581 248,552 0 1,492,673 0

22 5 2 6 1 0

359,744 156,928 133,901 1,197,747 604,943 0

17 10 1 4 0 0

261,871 307,016 50,871 589,452 0 0

95 34 7 7 4 0

1,472,352 1,141,530 485,581 1,815,483 2,998,044 0

361 106 46 35 4 4

5,535,008 3,660,203 3,121,998 6,263,485 2,407,805 5,887,235

18 3 2 4 1 0

257,349 87,742 139,413 922,064 580,344 0

17 5 2 2 0 0

255,665 184,430 168,561 301,948 0 0

NUMBER OF BANKS AND BRANCHES 199

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 105. N U M B E R A N D D E P O S ITS O F A L L C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S 1 IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S T A T E S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ),

DE C E M B E R 31, 1 9 7 1 -C 0 N T IN U E D 

BANKS GROUPED BY DEPOSIT SIZE AND STATE 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Banks with deposits o fState

All

banks

Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Virginia

Banks........................................ 245 6 5 30 50 90 33 16 12 2 1

D eposits................................... 9,210,785 3,414 6,884 108,421 372,274 1,376,054 1,081,006 1,111,993 2,742,396 1,395,004 1,013,339

Washington

Banks ........................................ 92 2 11 19 20 21 8 4 4 1 2

Deposits................................... 6,206,186 1,192 18,592 64,795 147,510 312,104 282,720 296,229 1,158,362 642,939 3,281,743

West Virginia

Banks ........................................ 199 0 4 34 63 66 21 8 3 0 0

Deposits................................... 3,298,014 0 6,662 128,721 457,832 1,010,980 757,347 517,971 418,501 0 0

Wisconsin

Banks ........................................ 611 4 24 142 159 205 46 21 9 0 1

Deposits................................... 10,611,979 946 37,261 485,642 1,145,028 3,108,987 1,610,706 1,444,346 1,677,630 0 1,101,433

Wyoming

Banks ........................................ 71 1 5 13 17 27 6 2 0 0 0

Deposits................................... 933,066 919 8,388 42,958 124,391 393,584 195,488 167,338 0 0 0

Other Areas 

Trust Territories

Banks ........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Deposits................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Canal Zone

Banks ........................................ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Deposits................................... 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Puerto Rico

Banks ........................................ 13 0 0 1 0 1 4 1 4 2 0

Deposits................................... 2,257,283 0 0 2,863 0 17,087 151,098 74,377 717,013 1,294,845 0

Virgin Island

Banks ........................................ 8 3 0 1 0 2 0 0 2 0 0

Deposits................................... 508,484 0 0 3,295 0 27,513 0 0 477,676 0 0

1 Excludes data for branches in U.S. possessions and trust territories of banks headquartered in the United States and for 15 insured branches, in New York, of 3 insured nonmember banks in Puerto Rico.

200 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF BANKS

Table 106. Assets and liabilities of all commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas) June 

30,1971

Banks grouped by insurance status and class o f bank

Table 107. Assets and liabilities of all commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

December 31, 1971 

Banks grouped by insurance status and class o f bank

Table 108. Assets and liabilities of all mutual savings banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

June 30, 1971, and December 31, 1971 

Banks grouped by insurance status

Table 109. Assets and liabilities of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

December call dates, 1961, 1967-1971 

Table 110. Assets and liabilities of insured mutual savings banks in the United States (States and other 

areas), December call dates, 1967-1971 

Table 111. Percentages of assets and liabilities of insured commercial banks operating throughout 1971 in 

the United States (States and other areas), December 31, 1971 

Banks grouped by amount o f deposits

Table 112. Percentages of assets and liabilities of insured mutual savings banks operating throughout 1971 

in the United States (States and other areas), December 31, 1971 

Banks grouped by amount o f deposits

Table 113. Distribution of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

December 31, 1971

Banks grouped according to amount o f deposits and by ratios o f selected items to assets or

deposits

Commercial banks

Before 1969, statements of assets and liabilities were submitted by insured commercial banks on either a cash or an accrual basis, depending upon

the bank's method of bookkeeping. In 1969, insured commercial banks

having resources of $50 million or more, and beginning in 1970, $25 million

or more, were required to report their assets and liabilities on the basis of

accrual accounting. Where the results are not significantly different, particular accounts may be reported on a cash basis. Banks not subject to full

accrual accounting are required to report the installment loan function on an

accrual basis, or else to submit a statement of unearned income on installment loans carried in surplus accounts. All banks are required to report

income taxes on an accrual basis.

ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF BANKS 201

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
All majority-owned premises subsidiaries are fully consolidated in 1969

and subsequent reports. Consolidation is required of other majority-owned

domestic subsidiaries (but not domestic commercial bank subsidiaries) meeting either of the following criteria: any subsidiary in which the bank's investment represents 5 percent or more of its equity capital accounts, or any

subsidiary whose gross operating revenues amount to 5 percent of the bank's

gross revenues.

In the case of insured banks with branches outside the 50 States, net

amount due from such branches are included in "Other assets," and net

amount due to such branches are included in "Other liabilities." Branches of

insured banks outside the 50 States are treated as separate entities but are

not included in the count of banks. Data for such branches are not included

in the figures for the States in which the parent banks are located.

Prior to 1969, securities held by commercial banks were reported net of

valuation reserves; total loans were reported both gross (before deductions

for reserves) and net, the latter included in "Total assets." Beginning in

1969, loans and securities are shown on a gross basis in "Total assets" of

commercial banks. All reserves on loans and securities, including the reserves

for bad debts set up pursuant to Internal Revenue Service rulings, are included in "Reserves on loans and securities" on the liability side of the

balance sheet.

Individual loan items are reported gross. Installment loans, however, are

ordinarily reported net if the installment payments are applied directly to

the reduction of the loan. Such loans are reported gross if, under contract,

the payments do not immediately reduce the unpaid balances of the loan but

are assigned or pledged to assure repayment at maturity.

The category "Trading account securities" was added to the condition

report of commercial banks in 1969 to obtain this segregation for banks that

regularly deal in securities with other banks or with the public. Banks

occasionally holding securities purchased for possible resale report these

under "Investment securities."

Assets and liabilities held in or administered by a savings, bond, insurance,

real estate, foreign, or any other department of a bank, except a trust department, are consolidated with the respective assets and liabilities of the commercial department. "Deposits of individuals, partnerships, and corporations" includes trust funds deposited by a trust department in a commercial

or savings department. Other assets held in trust are not included in statements of assets and liabilities.

Demand balances with, and demand deposits due to, banks in the United

States, except private banks and American branches of foreign banks, exclude

reciprocal interbank deposits. (Reciprocal interbank deposits arise when two

banks maintain deposit accounts with each other.)

Asset and liability data for noninsured banks are tabulated from reports

pertaining to the individual banks. In a few cases, these reports are not as

detailed as those submitted by insured banks.

Additional data on assets and liabilities of all banks as of June 30, 1971,

and December 31, 1971, are shown in the Corporation's semiannual publication Assets and Liabilities—Commercial and Mutual Savings Banks.

Mutual savings banks

Effective December 31, 1971, the reports of condition and income for

mutual savings banks were revised. Among the changes was the requirement

that mutual savings banks report on a consolidated basis with respect to

branches and subsidiaries in the same manner as commercial banks (see

above).

One objective of the revisions in 1971 was to provide a simplified reporting form. To this end, the schedules for deposits and securities were condensed and simplified.

Several changes were madfc in the reporting of specific items. Loans are

reported in somewhat more detail than formerly. In real estate loans, construction loans are shown separately, and loans secured by residential properties are detailed as to those secured by 1- to 4-family properties and by

multifamily (5 or more) properties.

Another important change shifted various reserve accounts which had

been carried as deductions against assets (about $200 million in 1971) into

the surplus accounts. Figures for the years 1967-1970 in table 110 have been

revised in order to provide comparability with the 1971 data.

Sources of data

Insured banks: see p. 225; noninsured banks: State banking authorities;

and reports from individual banks.

202 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 106. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF ALL COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

JUNE 30, 1971

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Insured banks Noninsured banks

Asset, liability, or capital account item Total

Total

Members of 

Federal Reserve System

Not 

members 

of F.R. 

System

Total

Banks

of

deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

Total National1 State companies4

Total assets.................................................................................................... 605,150,667 599,825,220 484,748,511 354,793,984 129,954,527 115,076,709 5,325,447 4,912,822 412,625

Cash, reserves, balances w ith banks, and collection ite m s-to ta l___

Currency and coin.................................................................................

Reserve with Federal Reserve banks (member banks)...................

Demand balances with banks in U.S. (except American

branches of foreign banks).............................................................

Other balances with banks in United S ta tes...................................

Balances with banks in foreign co u n trie s ........................................

Cash items in process of co llection...................................................

96,583,901

7,695,103

24,067,449

20,053,503

1,691,970

548,194

42,527,682

95,534,534

7,664,768

24,067,449

19,243,109

1,630,795

472,936

42,455,477

84,834,135

5,882,668

24,067,449

11,740,482

1,241,856

374,234

41,527,446

57,335,586

4,436,404

17,883,015

9,130,787

1,107,539

256,301

24,521,540

27,498,549

1,446,264

6,184,434

2,609,695

134,317

117,933

17,005,906

10,700,399

1,782,100

0

7,502,627

388,939

98,702

928,031

1,049,367

30,335

0

810,394

61,175

75,258

72,205

993,589

29,900

0

766,435

49,815

75,258

72,181

55,778

435

0

43,959

11,360

0

24

S ecu rities-to tal...........................................................................................

U.S. Treasury securities........................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and c o rp 'ns.........

Obligations of States and subdivisions............................................

Other securities.................................• ..................................................

158,325,019

60,586,143

15,643,064

78,270,484

3,825,328

157,099,337

60,217,230

15,448,228

77,790,298

3,643,581

118,744,678

44,050,423

9,971,248

61,991,631

2,731,376

89,532,009

33,771,504

7,435,468

46,253,549

2,071,488

29,212,669

10,278,919

2,535,780

15,738,082

659,888

38,354,659

16,166,807

5,476,980

15,798,667

912,205

1,225,682

368,913

194,836

480,186

181,747

1,002,047

336,541

183,167

371,957

110,382

223,635

32,372

11,669

108,229

71,365

Investment securities-total ...............................................................

U.S. Treasury securities.................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corp'ns...

Obligations of States and subdivisions.......................................

Other securities...............................................................................

154,193,533 

58,650,815

14£95,493

76,764,642

3,782,583

152,970,105

58^84,156

14,800,657

76^84,456

3,600,836

114,661,409

42,124,985

9,339,401

60,505,834

2,691,189

86,473,692

32211,803

6,993,918

45235J935

2,032,036

28,187,717

9^13,182

2,345,483

15269,899

659,153

38,308,696

16,159,171

5,461256

15,778,622

909,647

1,223,428

366,659

194,836

480,186

181,747

999,793

334287

183,167

371,957

110,382

223,635

32,372

11,669

108229

71,365

Trading account securities-total........................................................

U.S. Treasury securities.................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corp'ns...

Obligations of States and subdivisions........................................

Other securities...............................................................................

4,131,486 

1 $35,328

647,571

1,505,842

42,745

4,129,232 

1 £33,074

647,571

1,505,842

42,745

4,083,269

1,925,438

631,847

1,485,797

40,187

3,058,317

1,559,701

441,550

1,017,614

39,452

1,024,952

365,737

190297

468,183

735

45,963

7,636

15,724

20,045

2,558

2,254

2254

0

0

0

2,254

2254

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to 

re s e ll-to ta l......................................................................................

With domestic commercial banks.....................................................

With brokers and dealers in securities...............................................

With others.........................................................................................

15,707,644

14,881,649

569,239

256,756

15,425,698

14,599,703

569,239

256,756

12,040,844

11,244,792

556,692

239,360

9,573,998

8,903,940

479,653

190,405

2,466,846

2,340,852

77,039

48,955

3,384,854

3,354,911

12,547

17,396

281.946

281.946 

0 

0

276.145

276.145 

0 

0

5.801

5.801 

0 

0

ASSETS AND LIABI LITIES OF BANKS 203

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 106. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF ALL COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

JUNE 30, 1971— CONTINUED 

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Insured banks Noninsured banks

Asset, liability, or capital account item Total

Total

Members of 

Federal Reserve System

Not 

members 

of F.R. 

System

Total

Banks

of

deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

Total National1 State companies4

Other loans and d is c o u n ts -to ta l............................................................. 31u,656,115 308,473,424 248,399,299 183,733,888 65,259,331 59,474,125 2 182 691 2,128,381 R4 31 n

Real estate lo a n s-to ta l........................................................................ 76,639,497 76,447,755 57,259,064 43,828,204 13,430,860 19,188,691 ^191*742 178,954 n ,m

Secured by farmland...................................................................... 3J999,266 3,970212 1,880,732 1,483,422 397,310 2,089,480 29,054 28,538 516

Secured by residential properties:

Secured by 1- to 4-family residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration................ 7,477,862 7,447,597 6,425,704 5,352,049 1,073,655 1,021,893 30265 29257 1,008

Guaranteed by Veterans Administration....................... 2,635,592 2,621,355 2242,651 1,820,613 422,038 378,704 14237 12,931 1,306

Not insured or guaranteed by FHA or VA ................... 34,340,917 34,251,781 25,181,096 19,823,661 5,357,435 9,070,685 89,136 82,537 6,599

Secured by multifamily (or more) residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration................ 668,307 668,138 615,674 361,691 253,983 52,464 169 169 0

Not insured by FHA.......................................................... 3,040,332 3,039,754 2,448,870 1,561,386 887,484 590,884 578 578 0

Secured by other properties.......................................................... 24,477^21 24,448,918 18,464,337 13,425,382 5,038,955 5,984,581 28,303 24,944 3,359

Loans to domestic commercial and foreign banks.......................... 2,858,010 2,718,140 2,496,292 1,708,441 787,851 221,848 139,870 139,870 0

Loans to other financial institutions................................................. 17,026,366 16,893,148 15,789,832 10,716,357 5,073,475 1,103,316 133,218 132,666 552

Loans to brokers and dealers in securities........................................ 5,635,037 5,556,513 5,332,921 2,144,389 3,188,532 223,592 78,524 71,256 7,268

Other loans for purchasing or carrying securities.......................... 3,494,792 3,481,633 3,024,330 2,205,301 819,029 457,303 13,159 8,323 4,836

Loans to farmers (excluding loans on real estate).......................... 12,250,357 12,232,208 7,108,603 5,978,848 1,129,755 5,123,605 18,149 17,907 242

Commercial and industrial loans (incl. open market paper)......... 115,340,405 114,115,868 98,899,734 71,428,732 27,471,002 15,216,134 1,224,537 1,206,096 18,441

Other loans to in d ividu als-to tal........................................................ 69,691,394 69,433,002 52,168,381 40,733,310 11,435,071 17,264,621 258,392 254,703 3,689

Passenger automobile instalment loans..................................... 23,581,777 23,467,768 16,656,859 13,505,132 3,151,727 6,810,909 114,009 112,631 1,378

Credit cards and related plans:

Retail (charge account) credit card plans............................ 3J915,604 3,915,576 3,536,148 2,814,308 721,840 379,428 28 28 0

Check credit and revolving credit plans............................... 1,367,823 1,367,823 1,191,037 767,373 423,664 176,786 0 0 0

Other retail consumer instalment loans:

Mobile homes, not including travel trailers ....................... 3,886247 3,883261 2,849,185 2,353,447 495,738 1,034,076 2J986 2,986 0

Other retail consumer goods................ ............................ 4,383,682 4,370,333 3,084J925 2,512,000 572225 1285,408 13,349 13,100 249

Residential repair and modernization instalment loans......... 3,754^29 3,748,516 2,892255 2,197,303 694,952 856261 5,713 5,545 168

Other instalment loans for personal expenditures................... 10,945,692 10,869,712 7,852,121 6,079215 1,772,906 3,017,591 75,980 75260 720

Single-payment loans for personal expenditures..................... 17,856,340 17,810,013 14,105,851 10,504,532 3,601,319 3,704,162 46,327 45,153 1,174

All other loans (including overdrafts)............................................... 7,720,257 7,595,157 6,920,142 4,996,386 1,923,756 675,015 125,100 118,606 6,494

Total loans and securities............................................................... 484,688,778 480,998,459 379,784,821 282,845,975 96,938,846 101,213,638 3,690,313 3,406,573 283,746

Bank premises, furniture and fixtures, and other assets

representing bank premises.......................................................... 9,698,209 9,646,706 7,736,159 6,031,002 1,705,157 1,910,547 51,503 33,922 17,581

Real estate owned other than bank prem ises................................. 413,902 403,811 285,467 211,060 74,407 118,344 10,091 4,653 5,438

Investments in subsidiaries not consolidated................................... 808,311 787,477 772,025 612,820 159,205 15,452 20,834 3,809 17,025

Customers' liability on acceptances outstanding............................ 4,089,242 3,969,957 3,796,869 2,219,343 1,577,526 173,088 119,285 119,285 0

Other assets........................................................................................... 8,868,324 8,484,276 7,539,035 5,538,198 2,000,837 945,241 384,048 350,991 33,057

204 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total liabilities, reserves, and capital accounts .......................................... 605,150,667 599,825,220 484,748,511 354,793,984 129,954,527 115,076,709 5,325,447 4,912,822 412,625

Business and personal deposits-total

Individuals, partnerships, and corporations-dem and..................

Individuals, partnerships, and co rp ora tion s-tim e.........................

Savings deposits...............................................................................

Deposits accumulated for payment of personal loans............

Other deposits of individuals, partnerships, and corp'ns.........

Certified and officers' checks, letters of credit, travelers'

checks, etc.........................................................................................

414,935,952

177,637,703 

225,280,871 

108,572,442

753,269

115 <955,160

12,017,378

412,923,601

176,761,655

224,373,495

108J48J28

744,645

115,379,922

11,788,451

324,351,559

141,784,429

171,894,101

83,792,524

535,890

87,565,687

10,673,029

241,966,158

104,817,518

131,280,284

64,850,780

406,627

66,022,877

5,868,356

82,385,401

36,966,911 

40,613,817 

18 <941,744

129263

21,542,810

4,804,673

88,572,042

34,977,226

52,479,394

24,456,404

208,755

27,814^35

1,115,422

2,012,351

876,048

907,376

323,514

8,624

575J38

228,927

1,853,076

742,710

881,439

304,933

8,612

567,894

228,927

159,275

133,338

25,937

18,581

12

7,344

0

Government d e p o sits-to ta l......................................................................

United States Government-demand.................................................

United States G ove rn m e nt-tim e.....................................................

States and subdivisions-dem and.....................................................

States and subdivisions-tim e............................................................

52,934,337

8,512,345

520,239

17,504,422

26,397,331

52,687,553

8,478,326

519,862

17,393,258

26,296,107

41,115,611

6,988,231

463,699

13,020,236

20,643,445

32,163,085

5,122,979

374,003

10,388,751

16,277,352

8,952,526

1,865,252

89,696

2,631,485

4,366,093

11,571,942

1,490,095

56,163

4,373,022

5,652,662

246,784

34,019

377

111,164

101,224

245,279

32,517

375

111,164

101,223

1,505

1,502

2

0

1

Domestic interbank d e p o s its -to ta l........................................................

Commercial banks in the United S tates-dem and.........................

Commercial banks in the United S tates-tim e................................

Mutual savings banks in the United States-dem and.....................

Mutual savings banks in the United S tates-tim e............................

30,842,819

27,590,732

1,692,090

1,130,129

429,868

30,627,139

27,509,738

1,683,075

1,026,748

407,578

29,497,706

26,639,931

1,483,253

969,989

404,533

16,800,443

14,912,115

1,138,550

475,510

274,268

12,697,263

11,727,816

344,703

494,479

130,265

1,129,433

869,807

199,822

56,759

3,045

215,680

80,994

9,015

103,381

22,590

215,014

80,502

9,015

103,207

22,290

666

492

0

174

0

Foreign government and bank d e p o s its -to ta l.....................................

Foreign governments, central banks, etc.-dem and.......................

Foreign governments, central banks, e tc .- tim e ............................

Banks in foreign countries-dem and.................................................

Banks in foreign co un tries-tim e ........................................................

8,746,184

864,136

5,036,647

2,615,635

229,766

8,297,519

773,409

4,869,949

2,435,951

218,210

8,059,551

742,838

4,779,330

2,360,014

177,369

4,610,813

414,487

2,890,167

1,192,856

113,303

3,448,738

328,351

1,889,163

1,167,158

64,066

237,968

30,571

90,619

75,937

40,841

448,665

90,727

166,698

179,684

11,556

445,656

90,326

164,275

179,499

11,556

3,009

401

2,423

185

0

Total d ep osits ..........................................................................

Demand...............................................................................

Time......................................................................................

507,459,292

247,872,480

259,586,812

504,535,812

246,167,536

258,368276

403,024,427

203,178,697

199,845,730

295,540,499

143,192,572

152,347,927

107,483,928

59,986,125

47,497,803

101,511,385

42,988,839

58,522,546

2,923,480

1,704,944

1218,536

2,759,025

1,568,852

1,190,173

164,455

136,092

28,363

Miscellaneous lia b ilitie s -to ta l.................................................................

Federal funds purchased (borrowed) and securities sold under

agreements to repurchase............................................................

Other liabilities for borrowed m o n e y..............................................

Mortgage indebtedness........................................................................

Acceptances o utstanding....................................................................

Other liabilities......................................................................................

45,872,355

20,479,685

2,183,241

654,683

4,194,833

18,359,913

44,050,536

20,390,661

1,968,427

652,352

4,051,525

16,987,571

40,630,340

19,947,020

1,782,763

494,690

3,876,771

14,529,096

29,443,766

14,472,865

1,185,891

371,775

2,265,481

11,147,754

11,186,574

5,474,155

596,872

122,915

1,611,290

3,381,342

3,420,196

443,641

185,664

157,662

174,754

2,458,475

1,821,819

89,024

214,814

2,331

143,308

1,372,342

1,764,720

89,024

201,868

2,331

143,308

1,328,189

57,099

0

12,946

0

0

44,153

Total liabilities.......................................................................... 553,331,647 548,586,348 443,654,767 324,984,265 118,670,502 104,931,581 4,745,299 4,523,745 221,554

M inority interest in consolidated subsidiaries....................................... 4,134 3,529 1,097 1,078 19 2,432 605 0 605

Reserves on loans and se curitie s-tota l...................................................

Reserve fo r bad debt losses on loans.................................................

Other reserves on loans........................................................................

Reserves on securities..........................................................................

6,276,955

5,966,052

122,341

188,562

6,264,325

5,959,272

119,833

185,220

5,262,748

5,061,552

68,980

132,216

3,801,974

3,665,978

46,926

89,070

1,460,774

1,395,574

22,054

43,146

1,001,577

897,720

50,853

53,004

12,630

6,780

2,508

3,342

11,564

6,136

2,508

2,920

1,066

644

0

422

ASSETS AND LIABI LITI ES OF BANKS 205

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 106. A SS E TS A N D L IA B IL IT IE S OF A L L C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S T A T E S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ),

JU N E 30, 1971— C O N T IN U E D 

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Insured banks Noninsured banks

Asset, liability, or capital account item Total

Total

Members of 

Federal Reserve System

Not 

members 

of F.R. 

System

Total

Banks

of

deposit2

Nondeposit

trust

Total National1 State companies4

Capital a ccounts-total............................................................................... 45,537,931 44,871,018 35,825,838 28,008,687 9 823 232 9141 119 566 913 377 513 189.400

Capital notes and debentures............................................................. 2,687,221 2,595,983 2,289,050 1,314,230 '974*820 ~ 306*933 ~ 9 U 3 8 91 '238 0

Equity c a p ita l-to ta l....................... ..................................................... 42,850,710 42,375,035 33,540,849 24,692,437 8,848,412 8,834,186 475,675 286,275 189,400

Preferred stock............................................................................... 117^11 112,671 97,537 64,322 33,215 15,134 4,540 4,540 0

Common stock............................................................................... 11,729,904 11,602,757 9,095,334 6,680,548 2,414,786 2,507,423 127,147 76,706 50,441

Surplus............................................................................................. 19,192,770 19,064,415 15,402,761 11,325,084 4,077,677 3,661,654 128,355 96,636 31,719

Undivided profits............................................................................. 10,762219 10,601,737 8,144,539 5,954,583 2,189,956 2,457,198 160,482 72,907 87,575

Reserve for contingencies and other capital reserves.............. 1,048,606 993,455 800,678 667,900 132,778 192,777 55,151 35,486 19,665

PERCENTAGES

Of total assets:

Cash and balances with other banks........................................................ 16.0% 15.9% 17.5% 16.2% 21.2% 9.3% 19.7% 20.2% 13.5%

U.S. Treasury securities and securities of other U.S. Government

10.5 10.7 agencies and corporations.................................................................... 12.2 12.2 10.6 11.1 9.4 18.8 10.5

Other securities........................................................................................... 14.0 14.0 13.9 14.2 13.0 14.5 12.5 9.9 43.5

Loans and discounts (including Federal funds sold and securities

54.6 48.9 14.6 purchased under agreements to resell)............................................... 53.9 54.0 53.9 54.5 52.1 46.3

Other assets.................................................................................................. 3.9 3.9 4.2 4.1 4.2 2.7 11.0 10.4 17.7

Total capital accounts5............................................................................... 7.5 7.5 7.4 7.3 7.6 7.9 17.63 13.23 45.9

Of total assets other than cash and U.S. Treasury securities:

23.13 17.33 58.4 Total capital accounts5............................................................................... 10.1 10.1 10.0 9.8 10.6 10.4

Number of banks ............................................................................................. 13,747 13,555 5,737 4,599 1,138 7,818 192 147 45

1 Excludes the national bank located in the Virgin Islands.

in clu d e s asset and liability figures fo r 16 branches of foreign banks (tabulated as banks) licensed to do a deposit business in the State of New York. Capital is not allocated to these branches by the parent banks.

3Data for branches of foreign banks referred to in the previous note have been excluded in computing this ratio for noninsured banks of deposit and in total columns.

4Amounts shown as deposits are special accounts and uninvested trust funds, with the latter classified as demand deposits of individuals, partnerships, and corporations.

50nly asset and liability data are included fo r branches located in “ other areas" of banks headquartered in one of the 50 States; because no capital is allocated to these branches, they are excluded from the computation of 

ratios of capital accounts to assets.

Note: Further information on the reports of assets and liabilities of banks may be found on page 201.

206 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 107. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF ALL COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971 

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Insured banks Noninsured banks

Asset, liability, or capital account item Total

T otal

Members of 

Federal Reserve System

Not 

members 

of F.R. 

System

Banks

r»f

Nondeposit

trust

Total National State companies3

T otal OT

deposit1

Total assets......................................................................................................................... 646,283,186 639,903,322 513,621,617 378,104,223 135,517,394 126,281,705 6,379,864 6,057,755 322,109

Cash, reserves, balances w ith banks, and collection ite m s-to ta l.......................

Currency and c o in ...............................................................................................

Reserve with Federal Reserve banks (member banks)..................................

Demand balances with banks in U.S. (except American branches of

foreign banks)..................................................................................................

Other balances with banks in United S ta te s...................................................

Balances with banks in foreign c o u n trie s ........................................................

Cash items in process of co lle ctio n...................................................................

100,346,466

7,607,130

27,482,817

23,276,153

2,551,465

707,406

38,721,495

98,690,700

7,591,590

27,482,817

21,962,456

2,427,914

567,033

38,658,890

86,245,425

5,792,863

27,482,817

13,042,231

1,866,299

443,662

37,617,553

59,247,104

4,411,262

19,782,666

10,294,576

1,402,229

293,442

23,062,929

26,998,321

1,381,601

7,700,151

2,747,655

464,070

150,220

14,554,624

12,445,275

1,798,727

0

8,920,225

561,615

123,371

1,041,337

1,655,766

15,540

0

1,313,697

123,551

140,373

62,605

1,605,449

15,139

0

1,277,754

109,593

140,373

62,590

50,317

401

0

35,943

13,958

0

15

S ecurities-total...........................................................................................................

U.S. Treasury securities......................................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and c o rp 'ns.........................

Obligations of States and subdivisions............................................................

Other securities ....................................................................................................

170,351,374

65,367,909

17,979,603

82,644,224

4,359,638

169,167,078

65,029,368

17,787,490

82,199,178

4,151,042

127,402,895

47,642,979

11,411,944

65,265,613

3,082,359

96,030,383

36,395,702

8,634,436

48,649,145

2,351,100

31,372,512

11,247,277

2,777,508

16,616,468

731,259

41,764,183

17,386,389

6,375,546

16,933,565

1,068,683

1,184,296

338,541

192,113

445,046

208,596

1,023,227

311,877

186,994

365,250

159,106

161,069

26,664

5,119

79,796

49,490

Investment securities— total ...............................................................................

U.S. Treasury securities.................................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corp'ns....................

Obligations of States and subdivisions.......................................................

Other securities...............................................................................................

165,040,682 

63,032,080

17,263£49

80,580,067

4,164,586

163,859,514 

62,696,667

17,071,836

80,135,021

3,955^90

122,164,898

45,333,581

10,719,626

63,222,462

2,889,229

92,388,347

34,679,061

8,261,744

47,288,557

2,158,985

29,776,551 

10,654,520

2,457,882

15,933,905

730J? 44

41,694,616

17,363,086

6,352,210

16,912,559

1,066,761

1,181,168

335,413

192,113

445,046

208,596

1,020,099

308,749

186,994

365,250

159,106

161,069

26,664

5,119

79,796

49,490

Trading account securities-total .....................................................................

U.S. Treasury securities.................................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corp'ns.....................

Obligations of States and subdivisions........................................................

Other securities...............................................................................................

5,310,692

2,335,829

715,654

2,064,157

195,052

5,307,564

2,332,701

715,654

2,064,157

195,052

5,237,997

2,309,398

692,318

2,043,151

193,130

3,642,036

1,716,641

372,692

1,360,588

192,115

1,595,961

592,757

319,626

682,563

1,015

69,567

23,303

23,336

21,006

1,922

3.128

3.128

0

0

0

3.128

3.128

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Federal funds sold and securities purchases under agreements to

re s e ll-to ta l.............................................................................................................

With domestic commercial banks.....................................................................

With brokers and dealers in securities...............................................................

With others................................................. . . . . .

19,974,528

17,402,745

1,959,519

612,264

19,643,272

17,071,489

1,959,519

612,264

15,379,764

12,832,845

1,951,644

595,275

12,705,094

10,444,311

1,754,258

506,525

2,674,670

2,388,534

197,386

88,750

4,263,508

4,238,644

7,875

16,989

331.256

331.256 

0 

0

324.256

324.256 

0 

0

7.000

7.000 

0 

0

ASSETS AND LIABI LITIES OF BANKS 207

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 107. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF ALL COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971-CONTINUED

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Insured banks Noninsured banks

Asset, liability, or capital account item Total

Total

Members of 

Federal Reserve System

Not 

members 

of F.R. 

System

Total

Banks

of

deposit1

Nondeposit

trust

Total National State companies3

Other loans and d is c o u n ts -to ta l............................................................................. 330,562,160 328,225,896 263,871,006 195,105,022 68,765,984 64,364,890 2,336,264 2,305,088 31 168 

Real estate lo a n s-to ta l......................................................................................... 82,515,170 82,314,290 61,419,899 46,907,128 14,512,771 20,894,391 200,880 188,773 12,107

Secured by farmland...................................................................................... 4204,560 4,173,726 1,976,511 1,562,656 413,855 2,197,215 30,834 30,276 558

Secured by residential properties:

Secured by 1- to 4-family residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration................................. 7,505,587 7,476,243 6,453,140 5,365,872 1,087,268 1,023,103 29,344 29,095 249

Guaranteed by Veterans Administration........................................ 2,980,163 2,966,378 2,568,927 2,104,546 464,381 397,451 13,785 13,671 114

Not insured or guaranted by FHA or VA..................................... 37,534,739 37,438,104 27,405,164 21,452,385 5,952,779 10,032,940 96,635 91,149 5,486

Secured by multifamily (5 or more) residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration................................. 804,795 803,880 714,290 397,705 316,585 89,590 915 915 0

Not insured by FHA........................................................................... 3,179,049 3,177$70 2,538,660 1,625,596 913,064 639,310 1,079 1,079 0

Secured by other properties........................................................................ 26,306277 26,277,989 19,763,207 14,398,368 5,364,839 6,514,782 28,288 22,588 5,700

Loans to domestic commercial and foreign banks.......................................... 4,605,319 4,405,298 4,123,229 2,745,453 1,377,776 282,069 200,021 200,021 0

Loans to other financial institutio ns................................................................. 17,053,412 16,908,213 15,759,484 10,894,011 4,865,473 1,148,729 145,199 145,199 0

Loans to brokers and dealers in securities........................................................ 7,293,938 7,202,440 6,895,170 3,284,086 3,611,084 307,270 91,498 90,758 740

Other loans for purchasing or carrying securities............................................ 3,660,516 3,646,064 3,166,834 2,326,229 840,605 479,230 14,452 9,943 4,509

Loans to farmers (excluding loans on real estate).......................................... 12,523,429 12,506,206 7,327,507 6,182,303 1,145,204 5,178,699 17,223 16,912 311

Commercial and industrial loans (incl. open market paper).......................... 119,628,756 118,401,203 101,890,987 73,930,109 27,960,878 16,510,216 1,227,553 1,223,973 3,580

Other loans to ind ividuals-total........................................................................ 75,104,246 74,796,848 55,992,881 43,640,140 12,352,741 18,803,967 307,398 304,179 3,219

Passenger automobile instalment loans...................................................... 25,007,880 24,850,695 17,501,277 14,208269 3293,008 7,349,418 157,185 155,774 1,411

Credit cards and related plans:

Retail (charge account) credit card plans............................................ 4,530,903 4,523,889 4,090,422 3,255,403 835,019 433,467 7,014 7,014 0

Check credit and revolving credit plans............................................... 1,463,857 1,463,857 1,276,233 811,400 464,833 187,624 0 0 0

Other retail consumer instalment loans:

Mobile homes, not including travel trailers.......................................... 4,677,629 4,674,364 3,433,471 2,849,731 583,740 1240,893 3,265 3265 0

Other retail consumer goods................................................................... 4,668,852 4,655,510 3,180,451 2,586,401 594,050 1,475,059 13,342 13,090 252

Residential repair and modernization instalment loans.......................... 3,871,337 3,865,597 2,982,570 2,264,669 717,901 883,027 5,740 5,585 155

Other instalment loans for personal expenditures................................... 11,485,426 11,409,477 8239,526 6,393,800 1,845,726 3,169,951 75,949 75,604 345

Single-payment loans for personal expenditures..................................... 19,398,362 19,353,459 15,288,931 11270,467 4,018,464 4,064,528 44,903 43,847 1,056

A ll other loans (including overdrafts)............................................................... 8,177,374 8,045,334 7,295,015 5,195,563 2,099,452 750,319 132,040 125,338 6,702

Total loans and securities........................................................................ 520,888,062 517,036,246 406,653,665 303,840,499 102,813,166 110,382,581 3,851,816 3,652,579 199,237

208 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Bank premises, furniture and fixtures, and other assets representing

bank premises.................................................................................................

Real estate owned other than bank premises.......................................................

Investments in subsidiaries not consolidated.......................................................

Customers' liability on acceptances outstanding...................................................

Other assets..................................................................................................................

10,338,340

400,929

932,515

4,013,411

9,363,463

10,285,384

390,833

911,550

3,914,186

8,674,423

8,220,803

267,688

902,989

3,711,080

7,619,967

6,440,847

180,850

713,118

2,197,657

5,484,148

1,779,956

86,838

189,871

1,513,423

2,135,819

2,064,581

123,145

8,561

203,106

1,054,456

52,956

10,096

20,965

99,225

689,040

35,896

4,581

3,809

99,225

656,216

17,060

5,515

17,156

0

32,824

Total liabilities, reserves, and capital accounts............................................................ 646,283,186 639,903,322 513,621,617 378,104,223 135,517,394 126,281,705 6,379,864 6,057,755 322,109

Business and personal deposits-total ...................................................................

Individuals, partnerships, and corporations-dem and..................................

Individuals, partnerships, and co rp orations-tim e................................ ..

Savings deposits...............................................................................................

Deposits accumulated for payment of personal loans...........................

Other deposits of individuals, partnerships, and corp'ns.........................

Certified and officers' checks, letters of credit, travelers' checks, etc . . . .

442,064,649

192,630,191

239,246,138

112,538,338

689,158

126,018,642

10,188,320

439,568,884

191,775,515 

237,930,791 

112,165£51

677,179

125,087,661

9,862,578

342,518,136

152,406,177

181,510,053

86,054^56

482,242

94,973,555

8,601,906

257,259,182

112,990,616

138,908,461

66,624,967

387,338

71,896,156

5,360,105

85,258,954

39,415,561

42,601,592

19,429289

94,904

23,077,399

3,241,801

97,050,748

39,369,338

56,420,738

26,111,695

194,937

30,114,106

1,260,672

2,495,765

854,676

1,315,347

372,387

11,979

930,981

325,742

2,413,689

774,221

1,313,902

372,117

11,979

929,806

325,566

82,076

80,455

1,445

270

O

1,175

176

Government d e p o sits-to ta l......................................................................................

United States G overnm ent-dem and..............................................................

United States G ove rn m e nt-tim e .....................................................................

States and subdivisions-dem and.....................................................................

States and subdivisions-tim e............................................................................

59,247,376

10,293,282

531,903

17,848,768

30,573,423

58,987,158

10,263,251

530,769

17,714,586

30,478,552

45,850,512

8,432,134

445,189

12,988,742

23,984,447

35,528,675

6,019,716

374,588

10,109,957

19,024,414

10,321,837

2,412,418

70,601

2,878,785

4,960,033

13,136,646

1,831,117

85,580

4,725,844

6,494,105

260,218

30,031

1,134

134,182

94,871

258,639

28,455

1,132

134,182

94,870

1,579

1,576

2

0

1

Domestic interbank d e p o s its -to ta l........................................................................

Commercial banks in the United States-dem and.........................................

Commercial banks in the United S tates-tim e................................................

Mutual savings banks in the United States-dem and.....................................

Mutual savings banks in the United States-tim e............................................

32,350,126

28,071,096

2,660,522

1,316,782

301,726

31,906,847

28,014,732

2,441,489

1,163,740

286,886

30,502,687

26,969,017

2,149,209

1,100,112

284,349

17,956,603

15,616,113

1,620,716

550,736

169,038

12,546,084

11,352,904

528,493

549,376

115,311

1,404,160

1,045,715

292,280

63,628

2,537

443,279

56,364

219,033

153,042

14,840

442,709

56,264

219,033

152,572

14,840

570

100

0

470

0

Foreign government and bank deposits-total

Foreign governments, central banks, etc.-dem and.......................................

Foreign governments, central banks, e tc.-tim e ..............................................

Banks in foreign countries-dem and.................................................................

Banks in foreign countries-tim e........................................................................

9,248,203

878,969

5,312,346

2,856,636

200,252

8,721,173

803,364

5,053,554

2,681,096

183,159

8,454,752

782,960

4,980,524

2,556,521

134,747

4,804,909

374,450

3,015,812

1,357,128

57,519

3,649,843

408,510

1:964,712

1,199,393

77,228

266,421

20,404

73,030

124,575

48,412

527,030

75,605

258,792

175,540

17,093

524,802

75,310

256,859

175,540

17,093

2,228

295

1,933

0

0

Total deposits.............................................................................................

Demand...............................................................................................

Time......................................................................................................

542,910,354

264,084,044

278,826,310

539,184,062

262,278,862

276,905200

427,326,087

213,837,569

213,488,518

315,549,369

152,378,821

163,170,548

111,776,718

61,458,748

50,317,970

111,857,975

48,441,293

63,416,682

3,726,292

1,805,182

1,921,110

3,639,839

1,722,110

1,917,729

86,453

83,072

3,381

Miscellaneous lia b ilitie s -to ta l.................................................................................

Federal funds purchased (borrowed) and securities sold under

agreements to repurchase...............................................................................

Other liabilities for borrowed m o n ey..............................................................

Mortgage indebtedness........................................................................................

Acceptances outstanding......................................................................................

Other liabilities......................................................................................................

49,451,778

24,289,292

1,698,681

670,650

4,156,223

18,636,932

47,367,281

24,179,742

1,463,429

668,331

4,039,643

17,016,136

43,618,375

23,733,702

1,312,366

502,842

3,833,728

14,235,737

31,564,112

17,302,411

866,103

378,541

2,243,173

10,773,884

12,054,263

6,431,291

446,263

124,301

1,590,555

3,461,853

3,748,906

446,040

151,063

165,489

205,915

2,780,399

2,084,497

109,550

235,252

2,319

116,580

1,620,796

2,025,853

109,550

222,184

2,319

116,580

1,575,220

58,644

0

13,068

0

0

45,576

Total liabilities ........................................................................................ 592,362,132 586,551,343 470,944,462 347,113,481 123,830,981 115,606,881 5,810,789 5,665,692 145,097

M inority interest in consolidated subsidiaries....................................................... 4,156 3,551 1,071 1,052 19 2,480 605 0 605

ASSETS AND LI ABI LITI ES OF BANKS 209

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 107. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF ALL COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971-CONTINUED

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS AND CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Insured banks Noninsured banks

Asset, liability, or capital account item Total

Total

Members of 

Federal Reserve System

Not 

members 

of F.R. 

System

Total

Banks

of

deposit1

Nondeposit

trust

Total National State companies3

Reserves on ioans and se curities-total.................................................................... 6,457,840 6,443,382 5,389,321 3 917 232 i 472 082 1 Q54 Q01 14 458 14 379 79

Reserve for bad debt losses on loans................................................................. 6,159,464 6,151,274 5,198,853 3*790*835 1*408*018 ’ 9 52^421 ‘ i i i o 8*113 77

Other reserves on loans......................................................................................... 117,720 113,427 65,439 45,673 19,766 47,988 4,293 4,293 0

Reserves on securities........................................................................................... 180,656 178,681 125,029 80,731 44,298 53,652 1,975 1,973 2

Capital accounts-total................................................................................................ 47,459,058 46,905,046 37,286,763 27,072,451 10,214,312 9,618,283 554,012 377,684 176,328

Capital notes and debentures............................................................................. 3,054,496 2,956,180 2,585,047 1,449,007 1,136,040 371,133 98,316 98,296 20

Equity c a p ita l-to ta l.............................................................................................. 44,404,562 43,948,866 34,701,716 25,623,444 9,078,272 9,247,150 455,696 279,388 176,308

Preferred stock................................................................................................ 96,506 91,930 76,497 43,282 33,215 15,433 4,576 4,576 0

Common stock................................................................................................ 11,927,261 11,811,129 9,211,183 6,785,463 2,425,720 2,599,946 116,132 75,363 40,769

Surplus .............................................................................................................. 20,020,325 19,895,816 15,992,699 11,818,285 4,174,414 3,903,117 124,509 94,194 30,315

Undivided profits............................................................................................. 11,287,099 11,135,068 8,599,567 6,300,098 2299,469 2,535,501 152,031 66,321 85,710

Reserve for contingencies and other capital reserves.............................. 1,073,371 1,014^23 821,770 676,316 145,454 193,153 58,448 38,934 19,514

PERCENTAGES

Of total assets:

Cash and balances with other banks........................................................................ 15.5% 15.4% 16.8% 15.7% 19.9% 9.9% 26.0% 26.5% 15.6%

U.S. Treasury securities and securities of other U.S. Government

agencies and corporations.................................................................................... 12.4 12.5 10.9 11.4 9.7 18.8 8.3 8.2 9.9

Other securities........................................................................................................... 13.9 14.0 13.9 14.0 13.5 14.3 10.3 8.7 40.1

Loans and discounts (including federal funds sold and securities

purchased under agreements to resell)............................................................... 54.2 54.4 54.4 55.0 52.7 54.3 41.8 43.4 11.8

Other assets.................................................................................................................. 3.9 3.8 4.0 4.0 4.2 2.7 13.7 13.2 22.5

Total capital accounts4 ............................................................................................ 7.4 7.3 7.3 7.2 7.5 7.6 15.72 11.42 54.7

Of total assets other than cash and U.S. Treasury securities:

Total capital accounts4 ............................................................................................. 9.9 9.8 9.8 9.5 10.4 10.0 19.92 14.42 71.9

Number of banks................................................................................................................ 13,804 13,612 5,728 4,600 1,128 7,884 192 147 45

11ncludes asset and liability figures fo r 18 branches of foreign banks (tabulated as banks) licensed to do a deposit business in the State of New York. Capital is not allocated to these branches by the parent banks.

2-3-4See table 106, notes 3 -5 .

Note: Further information on the reports of assets and liabilities of banks may be found on page 201.

210 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 108. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF ALL MUTUAL SAVINGS BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

JUNE 30, 1971, AND DECEMBER 31, 1971 

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Asset, liability, or surplus account item

June 30,1971 December 31, 1971

Total Insured Noninsured Total Insured Noninsured

Total assets........................................................................................................................................................................... 85,771,7361 74,353,5391 11,418,1971 89,573,352 77,891,927 11,681,425

Cash, balances w ith banks, and collection item s-tota l .................................................................................... 1,229,993 1,079,152 150,841 1,396,453 1,273,735 122,718

Currency and c o in ................................................................................................................................................. 206,551 169,494 37,057 231,119 195,679 35,440

Demand balances w ith banks in the United States......................................................................................... 537,520 459,252 78,268 615,066 551,149 63,917

Other balances with banks in the United States ......................................................................................... 403,911 378,885 25,026 452,803 445,384 7,419

Cash items in process of collection..................................................................................................................... 82,011 71,521 10,490 97,465 81,523 15,942

S e c u ritie s -to ta l.......................................................................................................................................................... 20,350,88s1 17,067,8351 3,283,0531 21,684,078 18,491,379 3,192,699

United States Government and agency s e curitie s-tota l............................................................................. 5,439,918 4,296,402 1,143,516 6,267,2435 5,156,3215 1,110,922E

1,087,341 867,992 219,349

Securities maturing in 1 to 5 years2 ............................................................................................................ 2,396,515 1,823,997 572,518

Securities maturing in 5 to 10 years2 ......................................................................................................... 999,397 832,859 166,538

Securities maturing after 10 years2 ....................................................................................................... 1,783,350 1,631,473 152,517

State, county, and municipal obligations......................................................................................................... 324,768 315,033 9,735 391,947 373,810 18,137

Corporate b o n d s ................................................................................................................................................... 11,754,252s 10,100,843s 1,653,409s 10,390,293 9,293,507 1,096,786

Other bonds, notes, and debentures3 ................................................................................................................ 1,647,445 1,194,941 452,504

Corporate stock-total ........................................................................................................................................ 2,831,950 2,355,557 476,393 2,987,150 2,472,800 514,350

Bank ................................................................................................................................................................. 514,555 269,643 244,912 504,419 288,373 216,046

Other ................................................................................................................................................................. 2,317,395 2,085,914 231,481 2,482,731 2,184,427 298,304

Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell4 ......................................................... 609,536 493,536 116,000

Other loans and disco u nts-to tal.............................................................................................................................. 62,558,9091 54,708,7051 7,850,2041 64,186,091 56,066,722 8,119,369

Real estate loans - t o t a l........................................................................................................................................ 59,643,347 52,176,507 7,466,840 61,977,841 54,222,077 7,755,764

Construction loans2 ..................................................................................................................................... 965,591 736,386 229 205

Secured by farmland........................................................................................................................................ 106,996s 100,846s 6,150s 49,781 41,656 8,125

Secured by residential properties:

Secured by 1- to 4-family residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration ................................................................................ 14,755,094 13,622,205 1,132,889 14,673,597 13,532,344 1,141,253

Guaranteed by Veterans Administration....................................................................................... 12,010,591 10,871,505 1,139,086 12,074,421 10,923,517 1,150,904

Not insured or guaranteed by FHA or VA.................................................................................... 15,851,188 12,367,993 3,483,195 16,494,745 13,031,229 3,463,516

Secured by multi family (5 or more) residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration.................................................................................. 1,526,415 1,456,261 70,154 1,467,886 1,396,791 71,095

Not insured by FHA .......................................................................................................................... 7,218,772 6,831,486 387,286 7,651,498 7,136,586 514,912

Secured by other properties..................................................................................................................... 8,174,291 6,926,211 1,248,080 8,600,322 7,423,568 1,176,754

Loans to domestic commercial and foreign b an ks......................................................................................... 558,0334 516,8324 41,2014 50,574 49,628 946

Loans to other financial in s titu tio n s ................................................................................................................ 65,362 65,139 223 37,145 36,492 653

Loans to brokers and dealers in securities......................................................................................................... 53,682 53,649 33 5,984 5,951 33

Other loans fo r purchasing or carrying securities........................................................................................... 9,762 8,842 920 4,184 3,485 699

Loans to farmers (excluding loans on real estate)........................................................................................... 1,129 1,129 1,110 1 110

Commercial and industrial lo a n s ....................................................................................................................... 729,999 713,341 16,658 481,110 463,001 18,109

ASSETS AND LIABI LITI ES OF BANKS 211

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 108. ASS E TS A N D L IA B IL IT IE S O F A L L M U T U A L S A V IN G S B A N K S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S T A T E S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ),

JU N E 30, 1971, A N D D E C E M B E R 31, 1 9 7 1 -C O N T IN U E D 

BANKS GROUPED BY INSURANCE STATUS 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Asset, liability, or surplus account item

June 30,1971 December 31, 1971

Total Insured Noninsured Total Insured Noninsured

Loans to individuals for personal expenditures............................................................................................... 1,416,976

80,619

1,134,355

38,911

282,621

41,708

1,558,973

69,170

1,260,144

24,834

298,829

All other loans (including o verdrafts).............................................................................................................. 44,336

Total loans and securities........................................................................................................................ 82,909,7971

627,371

78,101

71,776,5401

558,113

72,768

11,133,2571

69,258

5,333

86,479,705

663,135

98,893

42,407

892,759

75,051,637

590,326

90,987

41,518

843,724

11,428,068

72,809

7,906

889

Bank premises, furniture and fixtures, and other assets representing bank premises......................... .

Real estate owned other than bank premises .................................................................................................

Investments in subsidiaries not consolidated2 .................................................................................................

Other assets.............................................................................................................................................................. 926,474 866,966 59,508 49,035

Total liabilities and surplus accounts............................................................................................................................. 85,771,736 74,353,539 11,418,197 89,573,352 77,891,927 11,681,425

Deposits— to ta l....................................................................................................................................................... 78,321,726

72,182,062

157

68,145,292

62,141,225

157

10,176,434

10,040,837

81,978,173

65,937,786

3,387

15,312,106

81,253,279

724,894

1,266,146

71,500,831

57,644,100

80

10,477,342

8,293,686

3,307

2,138,235

10,435,228

42,114

290,150

Savings d e p o sits.............................................................................................................................................

Deposits accumulated fo r payment of personal lo a n s...................................................................................

Fixed m aturity and other time d eposits.......................................................................................................... 5,373,307

77,555,526

766200

1,316,622

5,302,958

67,444,340

700,952

971,841

70,349

10,111,186

65^48

344,781

13,173,871

70,818,051

682,780

975,996

Savings and time deposits-total...................................................................................................................

Demand deposits-total..................................................................................................................................

Miscellaneous lia b ilitie s-to ta l....................................................................................................................................

Securities sold under agreements to repurchase..........................................................................................

Other b orrow in g s.................................................................................................................................................. 101,531

1,215,091

101,331

870,510

200 100,895

1,165,251

100,045

875,951

850

Other lia b ilitie s...................................................................................................................................................... 344,581 289,300

Total lia b ilitie s........................................................................................................................................... 79,638,348 69,117,133 10,521,215 83,244,319

953

72,476,827

1

10,767,492

M inority interest in consolidated subsidiaries2 ...................................................................................................... 952

Surplus accounts— total ...................................................................................................................................... 6,133,388

6,074

6,127,3141

5,236,406

6,074

5,230,3321

896,982

(2)

896,9821

6,328,080

13,296

6,314,784

5,415,099

10,456

5,404,643

912,981

2,840

910,141

Capital notes and debentures........................................................................................................................

Other surplus accounts.........................................................................................................................................

PERCENTAGES

Of total assets:1

Cash and balances w ith other b a n k s ...................................................................................................................... 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.6% 1.7% 1.1%

U.S. Government and agency securities................................................................................................................. 6.4 5.8 10.0 7.0 6.6 9.5

Other securities........................................................................................................................................................... 17.4 17 2 18 7 17 2 17.1 17.8

Loans and discounts (including federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell). 

Other assets..................................................................................................................................................................

72.9

1.9

73.6

2.0

68.8

1.2

72.3

1.9

72.6

2.0

70.5

1.1

Total surplus accounts ............................................................................................................................................. 7.2 7.0 7.9 7.1 7.0 7.8

Of total assets other than cash and U.S. Government and agency securities:

Total surplus accounts............................................................................................................................................... 7.8 7.6 8.9 7.7 7.6 8.7

Number of b an ks............................................................................................................................................................. 491 327 164 490 327 163

1Figures on securities and loans on June 30, 1971, have been revised to a gross basis to provide comparability with data as of December 31, 1971. See page 202 for information on changes in reports for December 31, 1971.

2Not reported separately prior to December 31, 1971.

3Corporate bonds included with other bonds, notes, and debentures prior to December 31,1971.

4Federal funds sold included w ith loans to banks prior to December 31,1971.

5Farmers Home Adm inistration insured notes, previously reported as loans secured by farmland, included in U.S. Government and agency securities fo r December 31, 1971.

212 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 109. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER CALL DATES, 1961, 1967-1971 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Asset, liability, or capital account item Dec. 30, 1961 Dec. 30, 1967 Dec. 31,1968 Dec. 3 1 ,19691 Dec. 31,1970 Dec. 31,1971

Total assets...............................................................................................................................................

Cash, reserves, balances with banks, and collection ite m s-to ta l......................................................

Currency and c o in ..........................................................................................................

Reserve with Federal Reserve banks (member banks)................................................................

Demand balances with banks in the U. S. (except American branches of foreign banks)___

Other balances with banks in the U.S.........................................................

Balances w ith banks in foreign c o u n trie s ............................................................

Cash items in process of co lle ctio n.........................................................................................

Investment securitie s-tota l...................................................

U.S. Treasury securities............................................................................

Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations.........................................

Obligations of States and subdivisions .......................................................................

Other securities............................................................................................

Trading account securities3 .................................................................................................

279,980,5912 455,445,1842 505,453,7322 530,714,711 576,350,801 639,903,322

56,181,467

3,692,593

16,917,834

13,816,911

80,713

249,421

21,423,995

77,532,592

5,953,155

20,275,051

16,520,060

544,658

280,249

33,959,419

83,269,951

7,216,003

21,230,246

18,089,886

334,917

264,433

36,134,466

89,335,129

7,346,973

21,452,826

19,389,950

230,150

320,921

40,594,309

93,048,095

7,084,430

23,325,123

21,088,737

1,401,661

395,356

39,752,788

98,690,700

7,591,590

27,482,817

21,962,456

2,427,914

567,033

38,658,890

89,661,642

66,090,869

2,112,292

20,103,538

1,354,943

123,263,625

62,229,348

8,901,164

49,820,973

2,312,140

135,242,315

64,171,324

10,081,641

58,391,738

2,597,612

122,203,185

53,262,588

9,239,140

57,572,607

2,128,850

3,181,756

141,554,863

58,880,431

12,481,059

67,414,393

2,778,980

5,664,059

163,859,514

62,696,667

17,071,836

80,135,021

3,955,990

5,307,564

Federal funds sold4 .......................................................... 3,924,357

237,518,0862 

58,678,014 

3,419,336

7,603,100

2,613,060

27,157,632

6,526,458

264,671,3952

65,332,745

3,735,180

7,809,567

2,626,560

30,712,679

9,712,405

286,751,602

70,325,953

3,992,931

7,262,023

2,596261

31210,921

562,501

2,647,857

22,053,459

2,425,147

14,938,963

5,646,962

3,994,818

10,323,657

108,393,788

63,355,683

22,706,108

2,639,497

1,082,791

6269,924

15,952,321

298,189,504

73,053,364

4,319,352

7,302,286

2,563,475

32,321,718

588,760

2,718,829

23238,944

2,581,078

15,794,299

6,208,570

3,517,601

11,153,583

112,214,990

66,005,700

22,366,443

3,807,987

1,343,990

7,306,995

19,643,272

328,225,896

82,314,290

4,173,726

7,476243

2,966,378

37,438,104

803,880

3,177,970

26277,989

4,405,298

16,908,213

7,202,440

3,646,064

12,506,206

118,401,203

74,796,848

24,850,695

4,523,889

1,463,857

4,674,364

4,655,510

3,865,597

Other loans and d is c o u n ts -to ta l..............................................................................................

Real estate lo a n s -to ta l...............................................................................

Secured by farmland................................................................................................................

Secured by residential properties:

Secured by 1- to 4-family residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration................................................................

Guaranteed by Veterans Administration ..................................................

Not insured or guaranteed by FHA or VA..................................................................

Secured by multi family (5 or more) properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration3 .......................................................

127,413,8562

30,330,432

1,731,465

5$96,563

2,613,165

12,570,273

Not insured by FHA3 ..............................................................................

Secured by other properties..........................................................

Loans to domestic commercial and foreign banks...................................

Loans to other financial institutions............................................................................

Loans to brokers and dealers in securities..........................................

Other loans for purchasing or carrying securities...................................

Loans to farmers (excluding loans on real estate)...........................................................

Commercial and industrial loans (including open market paper)...............................................

Other loans to in d ividu als-to tal.................................................................

Passenger automobile installment loans.....................................................

Credit cards and related plans:

Retail (charge account) credit card plans............................................

Check credit and revolving credit plans.......................................

Other retail consumer installment loans:3................................................................................

Mobile homes, not including travel trailers.........................................................................

7,448,966

1,032,864

7,310,112

4,030,000

2,107,360

6,224,041

45,156,607

27,819,669

9,062,043

(5)

(5)

2,807,751

17,884,886

1,847,683

12,447,077

6,017,418

3,724,055

9,260,220

88,257,588

51,628,083

18,890,458

828,313

521,909

4,781,232

20,448,759

2,145,604

13,676,953

6,409,302

4,068,900

9,712,410

98,161,381

58,414,799

21200,443

1,312,020

798,115

5,520^74

Other retail consumer goods................................................................................................

Residential repair and modernization installment loans......................................................... 2,693,068 3,351,554 3,494,813 3,654,863 3,716,802

ASSETS AND LIABI LITIES OF BANKS 213

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 109. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER CALL DATES, 1961, 1967-1971-CONTINUED 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Asset, liability, or capital account item Dec. 30, 1961 Dec. 30, 1967 Dec. 31,1968 Dec. 3 1 ,19691 Dec. 31,1970 Dec. 31, 1971

Other installment loans for personal expenditures...................................................................

Single-payment loans for personal expenditures.....................................................................

All other loans (including overdrafts)...............................................................................................

4,480,462

8,776,345

3,402,771

8,361,180

14,893,437

5,657,948

9,390,559

16,698,575

6,749,301

9,936,340

17,066,160

7,346,631

10,534,538

16228,945

7,660,319

11,409,477

19,353,459

8,045,334

Total loans and securities........................................................................................................ 217,075,498 364,706,068 406,440,168 421,848,948 461,360,747 517,036,246

Bank premises, furniture and fixtures, and other assets representing bank premises..............

Real estate owned other than bank prem ises.................................................................................

3,450,217

93,778

6,007,170

282,704

6,656,856

323,257

8,070,059

360,820

651,095

3,308,881

7,139,779

9,143,432

406,832

740,897

3,753,246

7,897,552

10,285,384

390,833

911,550

3,914,186

8,674,423

Customers' liability on acceptances outstanding............................................................................

Other assets...........................................................................................................................................

1,651,595

1,528,036

2,314,772

4,601,878

2,472,778

6,290,722

Total liabilities, reserves, and capital accounts .......................................................................................... 279,980,591 155,445,184 505,453,732 530,714,711 576,350,801 639,903,322

Business and personal d ep osits-to tal......................................................................................................

Individuals, partnerships, and corporations-dem and...................................................................

Individuals, partnerships, and corporations-tim e..........................................................................

Savings deposits...............................................................................................................................

Deposits accumulated for payment of personal loans............................................................

Other deposits of individuals, partnerships, and corporations..............................................

Certified and officers' checks, letters of credit, travelers' checks, etc........................................

203,088,106

123,489,686 

74,561,084 

63,887,537

771,554

9 J0 1,993

5,037,336

329,860,033

158,491,340

162,727,918

94,451,458

1^83,923

66$92,537

8,640,775

361,993,247

172,006,973

180,506,278

96,166256

1215,522

83,124,500

9,479,996

365,934,821

178,185,683

176,240,900

93,796,302

1,129,305

81,315293

11,508,238

395,246,811

181,897,284

204,962,756

98,815,863

802,924

105,343,969

8,386,771

439,568,884

191,775,515

237,930,791

112,165,951

677,179

125,087,661

9,862,578

Government d e p o sits-to ta l......................................................................................................................

United States Government-demand.................................................................................................

United States G ove rn m e nt-tim e ......................................................................................................

States and subdivisions-dem and......................................................................................................

States and subdivisions-tim e.............................................................................................................

23,881,005

5,943,251

280,030

12,215,686

5,442,038

36,990,123

5,238,918

285,533

15,577,942

15,887,730

41,385,278

5,012,445

376,629

16,881,042

19,115,162

36,092,200

5,050,538

222,560

17,559,438

13,259,664

49,455,597

7,914,962

465,476

17,784,768

23,290,391

58,987,158

10,263,251

530,769

17,714,586

30,478,552

Domestic interbank d e p o s its -to ta l........................................................................................................

Commercial banks in the United States-dem and..........................................................................

Commercial banks in the United S tates-tim e.................................................................................

Mutual savings banks in the United States-dem and.....................................................................

Mutual savings banks in the United States-tim e............................................................................

16,680,600

15,751,918

213,214

700,355

15,113

20,660,087

18,788,406

727,014

935,212

209,455

23,221,458

21,424,784

714,271

933,799

148,604

24,858,037

23,394,428

415,216

1,017,123

31,270

28,968,652

26,290,939

1,424,049

975,413

278,251

31,906,847

28,014,732

2,441,489

1,163,740

286,886

Foreign government and bank d e p o s its -to ta l.....................................................................................

Foreign governments, central banks, etc.-dem and.......................................................................

Foreign governments, central banks, etc.— tim e...............................................................................

Banks in foreign countries-dem and.................................................................................................

Banks in foreign countries-tim e ......................................................................................................

4,255,164

656,922

2,178,055

1,297,787

122,400

8,285,680

874,451

5,166,228

1,909,911

335,090

8,051,716

866,885

4,752,732

2,118,758

313,341

10,104,607

940,239

6,378,964

2,475,098

310,306

8,842,795

919,683

4,627,306

3,000,626

295,180

8,721,173

803,364

5,053,554

2,681,096

183,159

Total deposits..................................................................................................................................

Demand......................................................................................................................................

Time.............................................................................................................................................

247,904,875

165,092,941

82,811,934

395,795,923

210,456,955

185,338,968

434,651,699

228,724,682

205,927,017

436,989,665

240,130,785

196,858,880

482,513,855

247,170,446

235,343,409

539,184,062

262278,862

276,905200

Miscellaneous lia b ilitie s -to ta l.................................................................................................................

Federal funds purchased (borrowed)7...............................................................................................

7,346,272 20,910,731

4,980,322

568,797

28,958,217

7,468,200

1,214,440

47,966,725

14,684,700

3,367,342

601,562

3,387,309

25,925,812

44,968,169

16,609,041

2,572,528

668,545

3,848,666

21,269,389

47,367,281

24,179,742

Other liabilities for borrowed m o n ey...............................................................................................

Mortgage indebtedness3 . ............................................................................................................

462,309 1,463,429

668,331

4,039,643

17,016,136

Acceptances outstanding......................................................................................................................

Other liabilities.......................................................................................................................................

1,689,406

5,194,557

2,382,072

12,979,540

2,508,707

17,766,870

214 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total liabilities.............................................................................................................................. 255,251,147 416,706,654 463,609,916 484,956,390 527,482,024 586,551,343

Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries....................................................................................... 3,295 3,219 3,551

Reserves on loans and securities-total.................................................................................................. 2,606,474 4,732,606 5,215,817 6,178,797 6,299,150 6,443,382

Reserve for bad debt losses on loans................................................................................................ 2,606,474 4,732,606 5,215,817 5,885,873 5,998,689 6,151,274

Other reserves on loans3 ..................................................................................................................... 108,824 115,601 113,427

Reserves on securities3 ....................................................................................................................... 184,100 184*860 178^681

Capital accounts-total ............................................................................................................................ 22,122,970 34,055,924 36,627,999 39,576,229 42,566,408 46,905,046

Capital notes and debentures........................................................................................................... 22,107 1,984,390 2,110,137 1,998,316 2,091,879 2,956,180

Equity c a p ita l-to ta l.......................................................................................................................... 22,100,863 32,020,534 34,517,862 . 37,577,913 40,474,529 43,948,866

Preferred stock.............................................................................................................................. 14,745 87,076 90,686 103,416 107,304 91,930

Common stock............................................................................................................................ 6,584,701 9^53,642 9,772,605 10,529,322 11,137,824 11,811,129

Surplus ........................................................................................................................................ 10,798,364 14,983,375 16,173,907 17,460,832 18,072,590 19,895,816

Undivided profits.......................................................................................................................... 4,156,764 6,610,743 7,419,669 8,426,787 10,145,848 11,135,068

Reserve for contingencies and other capital reserves............................................................. 546,289 1,086,698 1,060,995 1,057,556 1,010,963 1,014,923

PERCENTAGES

Of total assets:

Cash and balances with other banks.............................................................................................. 20.1% 17.0% 16.5% 16.8% 16.1% 15.4%

U.S. Treasury securities and securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations 24.3 15.6 14.7 11.8 12.4 12.5

Other securities .............................................................................................................................. 7.7 11.5 12.1 11.8 13.2 14.0

Loans and discounts (including Federal funds sold and securities purchased under

agreements to resell)..................................................................................................................... 45.5 53.0 53.6 55.9 54.5 54.4

Other assets .......................................................................................................................................... 2.4 2.9 3.1 3.7 3.8 3.8

Total capital accounts......................................................................................................................... 7.9 7.5 7.2 7.5 7.4 7.3

Of total assets other than cash and U.S. Treasury securities:

Total capital accounts ....................................................................................................................... 14.0 10.8 10.2 10.2 10.0 9.8

Number of b a n k s .......................................................................................................................................... 13,115 13,517 13,488 13,473 13,511 13,612

1 For description of changes in 1969 in the Report of Condition, see p. 201 and notes to tables.

2Assets in 1968 and prior years include "Other loans and discounts" at gross (before deduction of valuation reserves) value, as reported in 1969-1971. “ Other loans and discounts" in 1966-1968 exclude Federal funds sold, 

now reported separately.

3Not available prior to figure shown, see note 1.

4Prior to December 31, 1966, "Federal funds sold (loaned)" not reported separately; most were included with loans to banks; beginning in 1967, includes securities purchased under agreements to resell, which previously were 

reported with "Loans to domestic commercial and foreign banks" and "Other loans for purchasing or carrying securities."

5Before 1967, loans extended under credit cards and related plans were distributed among other installment loan items.

®Net of mortgages and other liens; previously included w ith "Other liabilities." Includes real estate owned other than bank premises.

yPrior to December 31, 1966, Federal funds purchased were included in "Other liabilities for borrowed money"; beginning in 1967, includes securities sold under agreements to repurchase, which previously were reported with 

"O ther liabilities for borrowed money."

ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF BANKS 215

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 110. ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF INSURED MUTUAL SAVINGS BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER CALL DATES, 1967-1971 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Asset, liability, or surplus account item Dec. 30, 1967 Dec. 31, 1968 Dec. 31,1969 Dec. 31,1970 Dec. 31,1971

Total assets..................................................... .......................................................................................

Cash, balances w ith banks, and collection item s-total ..........................................................

Currency and c o in ....................................................................................................................

Demand balances with banks in the United S tates............................................................

Other balances with banks in the United S ta tes................................................................

Cash items in process of collection........................................................................................

S ecurities-total...............................................................................................................................

United States Government and agency se cu ritie s-to ta l...................................................

58,076,4031 62,321,3771 64,837,8921 68,739,5241 77,891,927

881,596

153,639

461,378

202,325

64,254

10,529,4341

4,174,223

883,058

164,965 

497,725 

157,610 

62,758 

11,878,9581 

4,102,711

780,079

179,378

499,506

42,964

58,231

11,926,8251

3,608,068

1,115,656

173,646

538,858

316,584

86,568

13,550,8491

3,860,276

1,273,735

195,679

551,149

445,384

81,523

18,491,379

5,156,3215 

867,992

1,823,997

832,859

1,631,473

373,810

9,293,507

1,194,941

2,472,800

288,373

2,184,427

State, county, and municipal obligations............................................................................

Corporate bonds........................................................................................................................

Other bonds, notes, and debentures......................................................................................

Corporate s to c k -to ta l.............................................................................................................

Bank......................................................................................................................................

Other......................................................................................................................................

Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell4 ...........................

Other loans and d is c o u n ts -to ta l.................................................................................................

Real estate lo a n s -to ta l.............................................................................................................

Construction loans2.............................................................................................................

211,449 

J 4,727,0633

1,416,699

232,232

1,184,467

190,944 

} 5,937,6943

1,647,609

246,455

1,401,154

190,949 

} 6,273,9693

1,853,839

251,903

1,601,936

192,606 

J 7,413,742s

2,084,225

251,321

1,832,904

45,619,2341

44,595,807

48,409,2791

47,177,405

50,949,4961

49,329,087

'106,943s

14,742,577e

11,030,4566

17,193,3096

52,753,8081

50,695,693

493,536

56,066,722

54,222,077

736,386

41,656

13,532,344

10,923,517

13,031229

1,396,791

7,136,586

7,423,568

49,628 

36,492 

5,951 

3,485 

1,1 It) 

463,001 

1,260,144 

24,834

Secured by farmland..........................................................................................................

Secured by residential properties:

Secured by 1- to 4-family residential properties:

Insured by Federal Housing Administration.....................................................

Guaranteed by Veterans Administration............................................................

Not insured or guaranteed by FHA or VA.........................................................

Secured by multifamily (5 or more) residential properties:6

Insured by Federal Housing Administration.....................................................

Not insured by FHA ..........................................................................................

110,6955

14,057,5366

10,756,7866

14,824,5676

111,935s

14,500,5126

10,940,229 6

16,029,7706

112,723s

13,563,069

10,884,718

12,089288

1,358,590

6,015291

6,672,014

280,9994 

53,867 

16,342 

1,838 

1,068 

586,589 

1,081,513 

35,899

Secured by other properties........................................................................................

Loans to domestic commercial and foreign banks..............................................................

Loans to other financial institutions......................................................................................

Loans to brokers and dealers in securities............................................................................

Other loans for purchasing or carrying securities..............................................................

Loans to farmers (excluding loans on real estate)..............................................................

Commercial and industrial loans.............................................................................................

Loans to individuals for personal expenditures...................................................................

All other loans (including overdrafts)...................................................................................

Total loans and securities......................................................................................

4,846223

11,6544 

9,827 

81,162 

4,578 

1,681 

158,428 

734,973 

21,124

5,594,959

23,7734

25,109

37,369

5,143

1,409

237.600

869.601 

31,870

6255,802

319,2794 

25,111 

30,710 

7,433 

1,201 

206,348 

987,198 

43,129

56,148,6681 60,288,2371 62,876,3211 66,304,6571 75,051,637

216 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Bank premises, furniture and fixtures, and other assets representing bank premises..

Real estate owned other than bank prem ises.....................................................................

Investments in subsidiaries not consolidated2 ....................... ............................................

428,779

30,617

470,421

36,449

497,059

47,607

528,680

62,805

590,326

90,987

41,518

Other assets............................................................................................................................... 586,743 643,212 636,826 727,726 843,724

Total liabilities and surplus accounts..................................................................................... 58,076,403 62,321,377 64,837,892 68,739,524 77,891,927

D eposits-total ...................................................................................................................... 52,912,962 56,861,324 58,867,848 62,683,783 71,500,831

Savings deposits.................................................................................................

Deposits accumulated fo r payment of personal loans.......................................................

52,390,941

74

56,110,409 57,729,948

1,096

602,968

57,989,110

64

4,100,994

57,644,100

80

Fixed m aturity and other time deposits.............................................................................. 86,912 260,935 13,173,871

Savings and time deposits-total....................................................................................... 52,477,927 56,371,344 58,334,012 62,090,168 70,818,051

Demand deposits-total..................................................................................................... 435.035 489,980 533,836 593,615 682,780

Miscellaneous lia b ilitie s -to ta l.....................................................................................

Securities sold under agreements to repurchase ................................................................

716,615 781,183 1,068,152 1,000,127 975,9961

Other borrow ings............................................................................................................... 68,155 70,814 381,690 252,171 100,045

Other liabilities.......................................................................................................................... 648,460 710,369 686,462 747,956 875,951

Total lia b ilitie s ........................................................................................................ 53,629,577 57,642,507 59,936,000 63,683,910 72,476,827

M inority interest in consolidated subsidiaries2 .............................. l

Surplus a c c o u n ts -to ta l.......................................................................................................... 4,446,826 4,678,870 4,901,892 5,055,614 5,415,099

Capital notes and debentures.............................................................................. 3,064 3,657 4,617 6,068 10,456

Other surplus accounts........................................................................................................ 4,443,7621 4,675,2131 4,897,2751 5,049,5461 5,404,643

PERCENTAGES

Of total assets:1

Cash and balances with other banks................................................................................. 1.5% 1.4% 1.2% 1.6% 1.7%

U.S. Government and agency securities................................................................. 7.2 6.6 5.6 5.6 6.6

Other securities........................................................................................................................ 10.9 12.5 12.8 14.1 17.1

Loans and discounts (including federal funds sold and securities purchased

under agreements to resell).......................................................................................... 78.6 77.7 78.6 76.8 72.6

Other assets.................................................................................... 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0

Total surplus accounts.................................................................................................... 7.7 7.5 7.6 7.4 7.0

Of total assets other than cash and U.S. Government and agency securities:

Total surplus account ............................................................... 8.4 8.2 8.1 7.9 7.6

Number of banks ............................................................................. 333 334 331 329 327

1, 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 g g e n o te s^to ta b le 108.

6 Prior to December 31, 1970, real estate loans secured by multifamily residential properties were combined with those secured by 1- to 4-family residential properties.

ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF BANKS 217

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 111. PERCENTAGES OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS OPERATING THROUGHOUT 1971 IN 

THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS), DECEMBER 31, 1971

BANKS GROUPED BY AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS

Banks with deposits o fAsset, liability, or capital account item

A ll

banks

Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Total assets .......................................................................... 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Cash and due from banks............................................... 15.5 18.0 13.9 11.6 11.2 10.9 11.3 11.5 14.7 15.7 19.3

U.S. Treasury and agency securities1.......................... 12.5 29.6 31.5 27.9 23.4 19.7 16.8 15.5 12.6 10.4 7.6

Obligations of States and political subdivisions . . . 12.6 2.1 3.7 7.6 11.5 14.0 14.9 15.0 14.6 13.5 10.5

Other securities............................................................... .6 1.2 .8 .6 .7 .7 .7 .9 .7 .6 .5

Federal funds sold (loaned)2 ..................................... 3.1 7.7 4.7 4,3 4.1 3.9 3.5 3.2 3.0 3.3 2.5

Other loans and d isco u nts-to tal................................. 51.3 40.3 44.1 46.5 47.4 48.5 49.9 50.9 50.9 52.2 53.0

Real estate lo a n s -to ta l.......................................... 12.9 5.5 9.3 12.5 14.4 15.8 16.4 17.2 14.6 13.6 9.3

Loans to banks and other financial institu tio n s. 3.3 .8 .3 .4 .4 .7 .9 1.2 2.1 3.9 5.9

Loans to purchase or carry securities................... 1.7 (5) .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .7 1.4 1.0 3.1

Loans to farm e rs...................................................... 2.0 15.6 17.3 14.4 9.8 5.2 2.3 1.0 .9 .6 .6

Commercial and industrial lo a n s .......................... 18.5 5.3 5.7 6.7 8.3 10.4 12.8 14.4 16.6 19.0 25.1

Installment loans for personal expenditures.. . . 8.7 7.4 8.2 8.8 10.4 12.0 12.7 12.1 10.5 9.1 5.1

Single payment loans for personal expenditures. 3.0 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.6 2.2

All other loans (including overdrafts)................... 1.2 3.2 .6 .5 .6 .6 .6 .6 1.2 1.4 1.7

Other assets...................................................................... 4.5 1.2 1.3 1.5 1.9 2.2 2.8 3.0 3.5 4.3 6.7

Total liabilities, reserves, and capital accounts.............. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

D e p o s its -to ta l............................................................... 84.3 82.7 87.2 89.0 89.4 89.4 88.7 88.0 86.0 83.5 79.9

Demand............................................................... 41.0 56.3 48.2 40.5 39.1 37.9 37.9 37.8 41.1 43.1 42.8

Time...................................................................... 43.2 26.3 38.9 48.4 50.3 51.5 50.7 50.3 44.8 40.4 37.2

Individuals, partnerships, and corporationsdemand................................................................. 30.2 48.9 41.7 33.9 32.0 31.0 31.1 30.6 30.6 31.7 28.6

Individuals, partnerships, and corporations-time 37.2 23.0 35.2 44.6 46.2 47.2 46.1 44.6 38.9 34.5 29.8

U.S. Government...................................................... 1.7 .2 .8 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.3 1.6 2.1 1.8

States and subdivisions .......................................... 7.5 9.5 8.7 8.4 8.7 8.2 8.1 8.6 8.9 8.6 6.0

Domestic interbank................................................. 5.2 .6 .3 .3 .3 .4 1.0 1.8 4.9 5.4 9.0

Foreign government and b a n k .............................. .9 .0 (5) (5) (5) (5) (5) .1 .1 .2 2.3

Other deposits.......................................................... 1.5 .4 .5 .6 .7 .9 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.4

Federal funds purchased (borrowed)3 ....................... 3.8 .0 (5) .1 .1 .2 .4 .8 2.7 4.8 6.9

Other liabilities for borrowed m o n e y ....................... .2 .0 .1 .1 .1 (5) .1 .1 .3 .5 .2

Other liabilities4 ............................................................. 3.3 .7 .9 1.1 1.5 2.1 2.8 3.0 2.9 3.0 4.5

Reserves on loans and securities................................. 1.0 .3 .5 .6 .6 .7 .8 .9 .9 .9 1.2

Capital notes and debentures..................................... .5 (5) (5) (5) .1 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .7

Other capital a cco u n ts................................................. 6.9 16.3 11.2 8.9 8.1 7.3 6.9 6.8 6.8 6.7 6.6

Number of b anks................................................................. 13,415 111 678 2,925 3,309 3,753 1,404 608 479 85 63

’’ Securities held in trading accounts are included in "O ther assets." 5 Less than 0.05 percent, 

inclu de s securities purchased under agreements to resell, 

in clu d e s securities sold under agreements to repurchase, 

inclu de s minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries.

Note: For income and expense data by size of bank, see tables 117 and 118. Assets and liabilities (in $000) of all commercial banks by size of bank are contained in Assets and Liabilities-Commercial and Mutual Savings

Banks (with 1971 report of income), December 31, 1971.

218 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 112. PERCENTAGES OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF INSURED MUTUAL SAVINGS BANKS OPERATING THROUGHOUT 1971 IN 

THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS), DECEMBER 31, 1971 

BANKS GROUPED BY AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS

Assets, liabilities, or surplus item All

banks1

Banks with deposits o fLess 

than 

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion

Total assets.

Cash and due from banks...................................................................

United States Government and agency securities..........................

Corporate bonds..................................................................................

State, county, and municipal obligations........................................

Other securities....................................................................................

Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements 

to resell..................................................................................

Other loans and discounts........................................

Real estate lo a n s -to ta l.............................................

Construction loans ............................................

Secured by farmland..........................................

Secured by residential properties:

Insured by FHA..............................................

Guaranteed by VA.........................................

Not insured or guaranteed by FHA or VA

Secured by other properties..............................

Commercial and industrial loans.............................

Loans to individuals for personal expenditures. . . 

A ll other loans including overdrafts.........................

Other assets....................................................................

Total liabilities and surplus accounts..

D e p o s its -to ta l........................................................................

Savings deposits.................................................................

Deposits accumulated for payment of personal loans

Fixed maturity and other time deposits........................

Demand deposits...............................................................

Miscellaneous liabilities..........................................................

Surplus accounts............................

Capital notes and debentures. 

Other surplus accounts............

Number of banks.................................

100.0%

1.6

6.6

11.9 

.5

4.7

.6

72.0 

69.6

.9

.1

19.2

14.0

25.9

9.5

.6

1.6 

.2

2.0

100.0

91.8 

74.0 (2)

16.9 

.9

1.3

7.0(2)

6.9

100.0%

6.3 

8.0

8.0

.3

4.6

(2)

71.8

66.0

7.8

.3

14.7

4.3

36.2

2.7

.4

4.6

.9

1.0

100.0

90.4

82.1 (2)

7.8

.6

1.2

8.4

2.1

6.3

100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

3.7

13.0 

7.6

.5

6.0

1.5

66.2

61.1

.3

5.0

5.5

40.6

8.9

.3

4.3

.4

1.5

100.0

90.7

76.2 (2)

14.1

.4

8.6(2)

8.6

2.1

9.8

9.6 

.5

7.4

.7

68.5

64.7 

1.2

.5

6.3

5.3

43.7

7.7

.2

3.3 

.4

1.3

1.7 

7.5

7.7

1.3

73.5

69.4

1.3

.3

8.5

7.2

45.2

6.8

.5

3.4 

.3

1.8

8.0

9.4

1.0

71.7

69.0

1.1

.1

12.9

9.8

38.5

6.6

.2

2.4

.1

1.6

100.0 100.0 100.0

91.1

76.7

.0

13.9

.5

8.1

.1

8.0

91.4 

74.0 (2)

16.5 

1.0

.9

7.7 (2)

7.7

91.2

74.7 (2)

15.6

.8

1.2

7.7 (2)

7.6

1.7

7.7

11.5 

.4

5.0

.6

71.1

68.4

1.1

(2)

17.7

12.8

28.6

8.1

.4

2.1

.2

2.0

100.0

91.9

74.9 

(2)

15.9 

1.1

1.1

6.9

(2)

6.9

100.0%

1.9

5.4

12.5 

.6

5.4

.5

7J.6

69.6

1.4

.1

18.8

12.0

26.2

11.1

.1

1.2

.2

2.0

100.0

91.9

74.9 

.0

16.5

.6

1.1

6.9 (2)

6.9

1.4

6.0

13.0

.4

3.6

73.0

71.0 

.4

.0

23.4

18.2

18.4

10.6

.7

1.1

.1

2.1

100.0

91.8

72.4 

.0

18.5 

.9

1.5

6.7 

.0

6.7

^Dollar amounts of assets and liabilities of all mutual savings banks are shown in Assets and Liabilities-Commercial and Mutual Savings Banks (with 1971 report of income ), December 31 1971; 

Less than U.ub percent. ' ' 1

see table 111 notes.

ASSETS AND LI ABI LITI ES OF BANKS 219

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 113. DISTRIBUTION OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971

BANKS GROUPED ACCORDING TO AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS AND BY RATIOS OF SELECTED ITEMS TO ASSETS OR DEPOSITS

Ratios 

(In percent)

All

banks

Number of banks with deposits o fLess 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Ratios of obligations of States and subdivisions to 

total assets o fZ e ro .................................................................................. 901 92 226 360 161 54 7 0 1 0 0

More than 0.0 but less than 1.0................................... 556 18 124 273 76 49 9 4 3 0 0

1.0 to 2 .4 9 ...................................................................... 641 9 102 342 117 56 9 1 5 0 0

2.5 to 4 .9 9 ...................................................................... 1,069 10 103 451 289 148 41 15 10 1 1

5.0 to 7 .4 9 ...................................................................... 1,349 4 62 409 400 309 85 31 32 10 7

7.5 to 9 .9 9 ...................................................................... 1,652 9 42 351 490 459 164 57 58 9 13

10.0 to 1 2 .4 9 ................................................................. 1,764 0 25 278 493 564 206 95 71 14 18

12.5 to 1 4 .9 9 ................................................................. 1.677 1 15 184 413 597 244 113 87 14 9

15.0 to 1 7 .4 9 ................................................................. 1,408 2 13 126 330 539 201 100 69 21 7

17.5 to 1 9 .9 9 ................................................................. 1,001 0 9 100 209 374 162 81 55 5 6

20.0 to 24.99 ................................................................. 1,096 0 6 77 239 410 208 79 66 9 2

25.0 or m ore.................................................................... 498 1 5 53 116 197 70 32 22 2 0

Ratios of U.S. Treasury securities to total assets 

of

Less than 5 ...................................................................... 1,258 23 53 206 281 377 155 56 72 13 22

5 to 9 .9 9 ........................................................................... 2,829 14 79 373 575 853 418 220 214 50 33

10 to 14.99...................................................................... 3,027 22 110 499 708 914 416 207 127 16 8

15 to 19.99...................................................................... 2,262 16 103 510 605 697 222 63 43 3 0

20 to 24.99 ...................................................................... 1,560 14 88 398 479 419 113 35 11 3 0

25 to 29.99 ...................................................................... 1,043 12 75 359 293 232 49 16 7 0 0

30 to 34.99 ...................................................................... 645 13 56 260 162 132 16 6 0 0 0

35 to 39.99 ...................................................................... 416 8 43 172 101 76 10 3 3 0 0

40 to 44.99 ...................................................................... 242 6 52 91 66 24 2 1 0 0 0

45 to 49.99 ...................................................................... 148 10 34 54 29 15 4 1 1 0 0

50 or m o re ...................................................................... 182 8 39 82 34 17 1 0 1 0 0

220 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Ratios of loans to total assets o f -

Less than 2 0 ..........................................................

20 to 24.99 .............................................................

25 to 29.99 .............................................................

30 to 34.99 .............................................................

35 to 39.99 .............................................................

40 to 4 4 .9 9 .............................................................

45 to 49.99 .............................................................

50 to 54.99 ............................................... ...........

55 to 59.99 .............................................................

60 to 64.99 ..............................................................

65 to 69.99 .............................................................

70 to 74.99 ..............................................................

75 or m o re .............................................................

Ratios of cash and due from banks to total assets 

o fLess than 5 .............................................................

5.0 to 7 .4 9 .............................................................

7.5 to 9 .9 9 .............................................................

10.0 to 1 2 .4 9 ........................................................

12.5 to 1 4 .9 9 ........................................................

15.0 to 1 7 .4 9 ..........................................................

17.5 to 1 9 .9 9 ........................................................

20.0 to 24.99 ..........................................................

25.0 to 29.99 ..........................................................

30.0 or m ore..........................................................

Ratios of total demand deposits to total deposits

of

Less than 25

25 to 29.99

30 to 34.99

35 to 39.99

40 to 44.99

45 to 49.99

50 to 54.99

55 to 59.99

60 to 64.99

65 to 69.99

70 to 79.99

80 to 89.99

90 or more ,

123 18 18 39

155 9 24 60

322 6 40 111

545 5 54 156

938 10 73 258

1,448 7 79 347

1,980 15 85 406

2,402 23 105 443

2,351 9 87 421

1,782 17 69 331

1,035 12 56 256

369 7 23 115

162 8 19 61

546 3 17 147

2,328 15 112 529

3,321 9 129 724

2,811 20 122 573

1,877 18 89 381

1,054 16 66 240

656 18 57 140

639 16 77 160

231 14 38 65

149 17 25 45

486 3 10 100

1,015 1 23 203

1,634 2 34 331

2,159 7 60 468

2,280 11 94 495

2,005 14 108 429

1,468 8 100 327

1,013 12 75 231

598 15 43 142

340 9 46 90

308 21 44 89

105 15 24 27

201 28 71 72

26 14 4 1 3 0 0

41 20 1 0 0 0 0

94 52 12 5 2 0 0

153 128 30 12 7 0 0

240 246 71 23 16 0 0

378 415 132 46 41 2 1

497 559 226 101 72 12 7

540 742 296 111 105 21 16

545 663 288 154 128 33 23

422 529 217 102 74 10 11

254 280 98 43 25 7 4

108 76 25 10 5 0 0

35 32 6 0 1 0 0

145 165 42 20 7 0 0

650 661 231 86 37 7 0

863 1,017 340 147 81 9 2

624 862 346 140 98 16 10

480 506 208 96 82 7 10

241 244 104 67 54 11 11

134 142 66 29 39 16 15

122 107 58 17 55 19 8

47 33 7 5 19 0 3

27 19 4 1 7 0 4

147 161 35 18 11 0 1

250 319 137 55 23 3 1

413 511 184 103 51 4 1

558 660 249 82 61 8 6

559 668 243 114 77 11 8

500 553 219 89 68 15 10

343 374 164 65 66 13 8

242 263 89 39 47 7 8

143 132 45 24 32 13 9

73 57 19 8 24 8 6

67 41 17 6 15 3 5

19 11 4 3 2 0 0

19 6 1 2 2 0 0

ASSETS AND LI ABI LITI ES OF BANKS 221

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 113. DISTRIBUTION OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS),

DECEMBER 31, 1971-CONTINUED

BANKS GROUPED ACCORDING TO AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS AND BY RATIOS OF SELECTED ITEMS TO ASSETS OR DEPOSITS

Ratios 

(In percent)

All

banks

Number of banks with deposits o fLess 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or

more

Ratios of total capital accounts to total assets other

than cash and due from banks, and U.S. Treasury 

securities, and U.S. Government agency securities o fLess than 7.5 ................................................................. 602 0 1 23 77 210 164 71 40 6 10

7.5 to 9 .9 9 ...................................................................... 3,688 1 13 320 734 1,394 622 293 239 46 26

10.0 to 1 2 .4 9 ................................................................. 3,895 7 71 654 1,118 1,274 419 170 137 25 20

12.5 to 1 4 .9 9 ................................................................. 2,117 5 98 618 649 507 138 52 37 7 6

15.0 to 1 7 .4 9 ................................................................. 1,132 8 90 423 328 218 40 10 13 1 1

17.5 to 1 9 .9 9 ................................................................. 686 13 83 286 204 74 15 5 6 0 0

20.0 to 22.49 ................................................................. 430 11 75 208 91 35 3 4 3 0 0

22.5 to 24.99 ................................................................. 260 13 45 129 47 21 1 2 2 0 0

25.0 to 29.99 ................................................................. 325 14 89 154 47 15 4 1 1 0 0

30.0 to 34.99 ................................................................. 166 9 51 74 28 4 0 0 0 0 0

35.0 to 39.99 ................................................................. 70 4 21 39 5 1 0 0 0 0 0

40.0 or more ................................................................. 241 61 95 76 5 3 0 0 1 0 0

Ratios of total capital accounts to total assets o f29 19 3 Less than 5 ...................................................................... 352 0 2 34 60 124 80 1

5 to 5.9 9 ........................................................................... 1,341 0 9 136 282 501 229 90 71 8 15

6 to 6 .9 9 ........................................................................... 2,936 4 30 404 695 1,001 406 195 158 27 16

7 to 7 .9 9 ........................................................................... 3,090 3 76 577 794 976 356 156 108 31 13

8 to 8 .9 9 .......................................................................... 2,162 7 94 511 628 574 186 74 70 9 9

9 to 9 .9 9 ........................................................................... 1,406 6 92 452 395 311 73 40 27 3 7

10 to 10.99...................................................................... 820 8 86 301 211 143 42 10 14 3 2

11 to 11.99...................................................................... 465 19 73 184 101 54 22 6 5 1

0

0

12 to 12.99...................................................................... 301 12 59 124 62 35 5 2 2 0

13 to 14.99...................................................................... 294 17 64 116 63 24 4 3 3 0 0

15 to 16.99...................................................................... 154 15 44 60 25 7 2 1 0 0 0

17 or m o re ...................................................................... 291 55 103 105 17 6 1 2 2 0 0

Number of banks................................................................. 13,612 146 732 3,004 3,333 3,756 1,406 608 479 85 63

222 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
INCOME OF INSURED BANKS

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

114. Income of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 1963-1971

115. Ratios of income of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

1963-1971

116. Income of insured commercial banks in the United States (States and other areas), 1971

Banks grouped by class o f bank

117. Income of insured commercial banks operating throughout 1971 in the United States (States 

and other areas)

Banks grouped by amount o f deposits

118. Ratios of income of insured commercial banks operating throughout 1971 in the United States 

(States and other areas)

Banks grouped according to amount of deposits

119. Income of insured mutual savings banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

1967-1971

120. Ratios of income of insured mutual savings banks in the United States (States and other areas), 

1967-1971

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The income data received and published by the Corporation relate to 

commercial and mutual savings banks insured by the Corporation.

Commercial banks

Prior to 1969, reports of income and dividends were submitted to the 

Federal supervisory agencies on either a cash or an accrual basis. In 1969, 

banks with assets of $50 million or more, and beginning in 1970, $25 million 

or more, were required to report consolidated income accounts on an accrual 

basis. Smaller banks continue to have the option of submitting their reports 

on a cash or an accrual basis, except that unearned discount on installment 

loans, and income taxes, must be reported on an accrual basis. For more 

detail on the method of cash or accrual reporting by banks, and on the 

inclusion of subsidiaries in consolidated statements of condition and income, 

refer to page 201 of this report.

Income data are included for all insured banks operating at the end of the 

respective years, unless indicated otherwise. In addition, appropriate adjustments have been made for banks in operation during part of the year but not 

at the end of the year.

In 1969 the Report of Income was revised to include a more detailed 

breakdown of investment income and separation of income from Federal 

funds transactions from other loan income. The overall contents of "Operating income” were not changed significantly from prior years, the principal 

changes being the consolidation of subsidiaries and conversion to accrual 

accounting.

Under “ Operating expenses,” expense of Federal funds transactions, 

which is now itemized separately, was included prior to 1969 under “ Imerest on borrowed money.” "Interest on capital notes and debentures,” now 

included in operating expenses, before 1969 was not treated as a charge 

against operating earnings or net income. The item "Provision for loan 

losses" covers actual loan losses (charge-offs less recoveries), or an average 

percentage of loan losses experienced during the previous five years, applied 

to average loans outstanding during the year, beginning in 1969. Newly 

organized banks and others are also permitted to determine their loan loss

ratio by averaging forward from 1969 or their first year of operation. Prior 

to 1969, loan losses for most banks (those on a reserve basis) were not 

charged against operating income or net income. Instead, transfers to loan 

loss reserves were included as a charge against net income (but not against 

operating income). Actual losses charged to loan loss reserves were treated as 

a memorandum item.

Beginning in 1969, "Applicable income taxes” for income before securities gains or losses is an estimate of the tax liability that a bank would incur 

if its taxes were based solely on operating income and expenses; that is, if 

there were no security gains or losses, no extraordinary items, etc.

Income from securities gains and losses, reported both gross and after 

taxes, prior to 1969 was reported as separate gain or loss items. It is now 

included, along with a subtraction for minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries, before arriving at net income (after taxes).

The memorandum item "Total provision for income taxes” does not 

necessarily equal the sum of "Applicable income taxes" and the tax effects of 

security gains or losses and of extraordinary charges or credits. The principal 

difference is accounted for by the fact that the transfer to reserve for bad 

debts generally exceeds provision for loan loss and consequently tends to 

reduce tax liability.

In comparing the 1969-1971 reports with prior data, certain generalizations are applicable. Because of the inclusion of additional items in "Operating expenses," "Income before taxes or security gains or losses" is understated, compared with the current operating income of prior reports. On the 

other hand, "Net income" for years prior to 1969 tends to be somewhat 

understated because it includes transfers to bad debt reserves which would 

generally exceed the provision for loan losses. Table 115 provides several 

operating ratios which afford comparisons between years prior to 1969 and 

more recent earnings experience.

Mutual savings banks

For a discussion of the report of income and dividends for mutual savings 

banks used in 1970 and previous years, see the 1951 Annual Report, pp. 

50-52.

224 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Beginning December 31, 1971, income and expenses for mutual savings 

banks are reported on a consolidated basis in the same manner as required of 

commercial banks, including all domestic branches, domestic bank premises 

subsidiaries, and other significant nonbanking domestic subsidiaries (see pg 

202).

Under operating income, certain income from securities formerly in the 

"other" category are shown separately beginning in 1971. Income from U.S. 

Treasury securities is combined with income from U.S. Government agency 

and corporation securities. Somewhat fewer items are detailed under operating expense. Beginning in 1971, actual net loan losses (charge-offs less 

recoveries) are included as an expense item in the operating section of the 

report. In 1970 and prior years (table 119), the amounts shown for this 

expense item are "recoveries credited to valuation adjustment provisions on 

real estate mortgage loans" less "the realized losses charged to valuation 

adjustment provisions on these loans", which were reported in those years in 

the "memoranda" section.

The nonoperating sections of the report were condensed in 1971, with 

realized gains and losses on securities, mortgage loans, and real estate reported "net" rather than in separate sections and captions as before. Detailed data formerly reported on reconcilement of valuation adjustment provisions was almost entirely eliminated, except for a simple reconciliation of 

surplus.

Sources of data

National banks and State banks in the District of Columbia not members 

of the Federal Reserve System: Office of the Comptroller of the Currency.

State banks members of the Federal Reserve System: Board of Governors 

of the Federal Reserve System.

Other insured banks: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 114. INCOME OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS), 1963-1971

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Income item 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 19691 1970 1971

Operating income-total ........................................................................................

Interest and fees on loans2 ...............................................................................

Income on Federal funds sold and securities purchased under

agreements to resell2 ...................................................................................

13,509,713

8,672,315

15,024,487

9,785,238

16,817,187

11,204,863

19,508,414

13,286,400

21,781,611

14,646,637

25,478,404

17,121,079

30,806,805

20,726,664

811,580

2,845,257

551,068

2,215,971

134,548

1,021,900

1,120,196

693,578

686,043

34,716,420

22,967,366

1,006,367

3,078,725

688,421

2,620,257

151,832

1,132,292

1,178,192

842,480

1,050,488

36,364,008

23,069,354

871,167

3,395,663

916,559

3,127,136

238,033

1,257,807

1,231,470

989,432

1,267,387

Interest on U.S. Treasury securities...............................................................

Interest and dividends on securities of other U.S. Government

agencies and corporations3 ........................................................................

2,176,454 2,240,389 2,224,71 1 2,317,794 2,601,900 3,004,655

Interest on obligations of States and political subdivisions3 .......................

Interest and dividends on other securities3 ....................................................

Trust department incom e.................................................................................

Service charges on deposit accounts...............................................................

Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions,

and fees ..........................................................................................................

Other operating in co m e...................................................................................

Operating expense-total4 .....................................................................................

Salaries and wages of officers and employees...............................................

Pensions and other employee b e n e fits ..........................................................

Interest on deposits..........................................................................................

Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under

agreements to repurchase5..........................................................................

921,060

573,252

728,857

248,362

189,413

1,085,334

629,694

781,405

280,289

222,138

1,285,287

689,628

842,775

304,276

265,647

1,531,517

756,130

915,049

354,036

347,488

1,904,886

820,269

987,187

411,021

409,711

2,376,223

906,206

1,055,964

478,028

536,249

9,714,980

3,284,375

457,033

3,464,308

10,897,460

3,519,062

490,732

4,088,061

12,486,120

3,762,024

525,692

5,070,781

14,561,852

4,095,742

598,768

6,259,472

16,553,642

4,537,896

667,345

7,379,863

19,354,237

5,101,803

755,744

8,681,705

24,076,791

5,878,812

903,469

9,789,893

1,205,787

433,120

100,742

1,073,339

1,331,926

258,587

773,072

521,064

3;397,493

27,588,602

6,656,884

1,060,167

10,483,795

1,400,838

464,568

104,730

1,254,520

1,555,734

301,214

909,090

703,150

4,550,860

29,650,981

7,202,972

1,192,011

12,217,994

1,095,648

139,388

142,381

1,410,190

1,730,402

320,212

1,018,128

867,260

4,365,009

Interest on other borrowed money5 ...............................................................

Interest on capital notes and debentures4 ......................................................

106,517 127,277 189,519 301,768 266,476 528,986

Occupancy expense of bank premises, n e t ....................................................

Gross occupancy expense..........................................................................

Less rental income .....................................................................................

Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing, etc...........

Provision for loan losses4 .................................................................................

608,462

760,908

152,446

311,518

670,243

831,158

160,915

362,301

731,573

898,440

166,867

411,889

802,060

980,444

178,384

458,695

873,541

1,059,785

186,244

533,846

970,034

1,173,423

203,389

631,564

Other operating expenses.................................................................................

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses6 .............................

1,482,767 1,639,784 1,794,642 2,045,347 2,294,675 2,684,401

6,730,014 7,127,818 6,713,027

Net current operating earnings (old basis).......................................................... 3,794,733 4,127,027 4,331,067 4,946,562 5,227,969 6,124,167

Applicable income taxes6........................................................................................ 2,164,419

4,565,595

-237,707

-512,242

-274,535

4,327,888

6,914

3,994

-2,920

235

4,334,567

2,173,775

4,954,043

-103,695

-224,028

-120,333

4,850,348

-12,810

-35,865

-23,055

245

4,837,293

1,689,146

5,023,881

213,245

359,279

146,034

5,237,126

-639

-12,552

-11,913

282

5,236,205

Income before securities gains or losses6 .............................................................

Securities gains or losses, net6 ...............................................................................

G ro ss..................................................................................................................

Taxes ..................................................................................................................

117,558 -13,674 -426 -392,447 -4,312 -438,520

Net income before extraordinary items6 .............................................................

Extraordinary charges or credits, net6 .................................................................

G ross..................................................................................................................

Taxes ..................................................................................................................

Less minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries6 ...........................................

Net incom e..............................................................................................................

Recoveries charge-offs transfers from reserves, n e t ......................................... -532,745 -681,521 -786,746 -839,869 -904,645 -992,665

226 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Net income before taxes (old basis)......................................................................

Total provision for income ta xe s..........................................................................

Federal income ta x e s ........................................................................................

State and local income taxes ..........................................................................

Net income after taxes (old basis)......................................................................

3,379,546

1,226,783

1,130,629

96,154

3,431,832

1,148,203

1,050,624

97,579

3,543,895

1,029,162

927,423

101,739

3,714,246

1,029,906

911,585

118,321

4,319,012

1,177,154

1,020,988

156,166

4,692,982

1,267,044

1,086,889

180,155

1,505,336

1,287,514

217,822

1,863,787

1,619,790

243,997

1,651,807

1,367,492

284,315

2,152,763 2,283,629 2,514,733 2,684,340 3,141,858 3,425,938

Dividends on capital-total7 ...................................................................................

Cash dividends declared on common stock....................................................

Cash dividends declared on preferred stock7..................................................

993,374

990,039

3,335

1,088,310

1,062,561

25,749

1,202,349

1,146,186

56,163

1,307,387

1,240,048

67,339

1,426,202

1,342,538

83,664

1,589,114

1,488,670

100,444

1,769,314

1,762,279

7,035

2,040,027

2,033,288

6,739

2,230,556

2,225,125

5,431

Memoranda

Recoveries credited to reserves (not included above):

On loans..........................................................................................................

On securities...........................................................

Losses charged to reserves (not included above):

On loans........................................................................

On securities........................................................................ ................

96,897

6,216

323,475

17,314

157,791

4,515

394,181

43,683

124,062

4,158

429,490

25,761

143,859

3,300

545,647

60,282

168,680

5,638

601,194

29,072

219,115

1,913

629,707

32,262

209,124

1,986

697,874

12,448

255,350

1,260

1,236,988

2,881

317,320

2,253

1,404,520

3,714

Average assets and liabilities8 

Assets-total ............................................................................................................

Cash and due from banks...............................................................................

United States Treasury securities...................................................................

Obligations of States and political subdivisions9 ...........................................

301,861,288

50,997,566

64,058,431

328,756,207

54,449,343

61,439,390

360,944,351

59,013,596

59,419,551

391,255,121

62,867,398

56,088,649

425,619,337

70,248,679

57,357,584

473,138,013

78,504,024

61,545,807

516,325,483

86,663,384 

56,724,0831° 

58,011,2001° 

11,839,1301° 

283,479,251 

19,608,43510

543,880,408

89,089,607 

54,198,40710 

62,012,77110 

12,821,68710 

301,667,242 

24,090,6941°

603,422,720

95,673,527 

59,923,5621 

74,606,1531 

18,216,0641 

327,633,687 

27,369,7271

Other securities9 ..........................................................................................

Loans and discounts........................................................................................

All other assets.................................................................

Liabilities and c a p ita l-to ta l...................................................................................

Total deposits.............................................................

Demand deposits...................................................................................

Time and savings deposits........................................................................

Borrowings and other liabilities ......................................................................

Total capital accounts ....................................................

31,421,875

147,948,743

7,434,673

36,360,062

168,082,284

8,425,128

41,540,772

191,391,533

9,578,899

47,054,812

214,381,628

10,862,634

55,213,293

230,636,149

12,163,632

65,318,374

253,678,319

14,091,481

301,861,288

264,069,489

159,561,973

104,507,516

13.507.899

24.283.900

328,756,207

287,988,560

168,382,122

119,606,438

14,376,273

26,391,374

360,944,351

315,643,533

178,089,360

137,554,173

16,479,957

28,820,861

391,255,121

340,336,714

185,336,407

155,000,307

20,067,721

30,850,686

425,619,337

368,906,501

194,982,924

173,923,577

23,836,162

32,876,674

473,138,013

407,508,260

213,628,389

193,879,871

30,297,605

35,332,148

516,325,483

431,468,339

230,490,525

200,977,814

46,642,486

38,214,658

543,880,408

449,522,141

237,588,875

211^ 33266

53,212,878

41,145,389

603,422,720

507,101,968

251,447,347

255,654,621

51,507,005

44,813,747

Number of employees (end of p e riod)................................................................. 648,967 702,658 732,163 777,361 815,037 866,725 904,008 959,867 980,660

Number of banks (end of period).................................................................... 13,291 13,493 13,547 13,541 13,517 13,488 13,473 13,511 13,612

1 Figures before 1969 may differ slightly from those published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Comptroller of the Currency because of differences in rounding techniques. Revisions in Report of Income in 1969 are 

discussed on pp. 224-22F; also see notes to tables.

2"lncome on Federal funds sold” was included in "Interest and discount on loans" in 1968 and prior years (see 1968 report, p. 198).

^Income from "Securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations" and from "Obligations of States and political subdivisions" were included in income from "Other securities" in 1968 and prior years.

^'Inte rest on capital notes and debentures" and "Provision for loan losses" not included in "Operating expense-total" in 1968 and prior years.

"Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase" were included in "Interest on borrowed money" in 1968 and prior years.

6Data are not available prior to 1969. See page 224 of this report.

7ln 1968 and prior years, "Dividends declared on preferred stock" was reported in combination with "Interest on capital notes and debentures."

For 1964-1971, averages of amounts reported at beginning, middle, and end of year. For 1962, averages of amounts for four consecutive official call dates beginning with the end of the previous year and ending with the fall call of the current year. 

For 1963, averages of amounts reported at 1962 year-end, 1963 spring, midyear, and year-end calls. 1962-1968 averages of securities and loans have been revised to a gross basis.

In 1968 and prior years, "Obligations of States and political subdivisions" were included in "Other securities."

^Securities held in trading accounts are included in "A ll other assets."

INCOME OF INSURED BANKS 227

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 115. R A T IO S OF IN C O M E O F IN S U R E D C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S IN TH E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ), 1 9 6 3 -1 9 7 1

Income item 1963 1964 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971

Amounts per $100 of operating income

Operating in co m e -to ta l......... .............................................................................................................. $ 100.00 $100.00 $ 100.00 $100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00

Income on loans1 ............................................................................................................................. 64.19 65.13 66.63 68.11 67.24 67.20 69.91 69.05 65.84

Interest on U.S. Treasury securities2............................................................................................. 16.11 14.91 13.23 11.88 11.95 11.79 9.23 8.87 9.34

7.19 7.55 8.60

Interest and dividends on other securities2 ................................................................................. 6.82 7.22 7.64 7.85 8.74 9.33 2.23 2.42 3.17

Trust department incom e............................................................................................................... 4.24 4.19 4.10 3.88 3.77 3.56 3.32 3.26 3.46

Service charges on deposit accounts............................................................................................. 5.39 5.20 5.01 4.69 4.53 4.14 3.64 3.39 3.39

Other charges, commissions, fees, etc............................................................................................ 1.84 1.87 1.81 1.81 1.89 1.88 2.25 2.43 2.72

Other operating inco m e .................................................................................................................. 1.41 1.48 1.58 1.78 1.88 2.10 2.23 3.03 3.48

Operating expense-total3 .................................................................................................................... 71.91 72.53 74.25 74.64 76.00 75.96 78.15 79.47 81.54

Salaries and wages............................................................................................................................. 24.31 23.42 22.37 20.99 20.83 20.02 19.08 19.18 19.81

Pensions and other b e n e fits ........................................................................................................... 3.38 3.27 3.13 3.07 3.07 2.97 2.93 3.05 3.28

Interest on time and savings deposits.......................................................................................... 25.64 27.21 30.15 32.09 33.88 34.07 31.78 30.20 33.60

Interest on borrowed money3 ...................................................................................................... .79 .85 1.13 1.55 1.22 2.08 5.65 5.67 3.79

Occupancy expense of bank premises, n e t................................................................................. 4.50 4.46 4.35 4.11 4.01 3.81 3.48 3.61 3.88

Furniture and equipment, etc......................................................................................................... 2.31 2.41 2.45 2.35 2.45 2.48 2.51 2.62 2.80

Provision for loan losses3 ............................................................................................................... 1.69 2.03 2.38

Other operating expenses............................................................................................................... 10.98 10.91 10.67 10.48 10.54 10.53 11.03 13.11 12.00

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses............................................................ 21.85 20.53 18.46

Net current operating earnings (old basis) . . . ............ 28.09 27.47 25.75 25.36 24.00 24.04

Amounts per $100 of total assets

Operating inco m e -to ta l......................................................................................................................... 4.48 4.57 4.66 4.99 5.12 5.38 5.97 6.38 6.03

Net current operating earnings (old basis) . . . . . ....................... 1.26 1.26 1.20 1.26 1.23 1.29

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses............................................................ 1.30 1.31 1.11

Net income4.............................................................................................................................................. .71 .69 .70 .69 .74 .72 .84 .89 .87

Amounts per $100 of total capital accounts

Net income4............................................................................................................................................. 8.86 8.65 8.73 8.70 9.56 9.70 11.34 11.76 11.68

Cash dividends declared on common s to c k ...................................................................................... 4.08 4.03 3.98 4.02 4.08 4.21 4.61 4.94 4.97

Net additions to capital from income................................................................................................. 4.77 4.53 4.56 4.46 5.22 5.20 6.71 6.80 6,71

Special ratios

Income on loans per $100 of loans1.................................................................................................... 5.86 5.82 5.85 6.20 6.35 6.75 7.60 7.95 7.31

Income on U.S. Treasury securities per $100 of U.S. Treasury securities................................... 3.40 3.65 3.74 4.13 4.54 4.88 5.02 5.68 5.67

Income on obligations of States and political subdivisions per $100 of obligations of

States and political subdivisions2 . . .............. ........................................................ 3.82 4.23 4.19

Income on other securities per $100 of other securities2 ............................................................... 2.93 2.98 3.09 3.25 3.45 3.64 5.79 6.55 6.34

Service charges per $100 of demand deposits ................................................................................. .46 .46 .47 .49 .51 .49 .49 .50 .49

Interest paid per $100 of time and savings deposits........................................................................ 3.31 3.42 3.69 4.04 4.24 4.48 4.87 4.95 4.78

Number of banks (end of period)........................................................................................................ 13,291 13,493 13,547 13,541 13,517 13,488 13,473 13,511 13,612

inclu de s Federal funds sold.

2"lnterest on State and local government obligations” included in "Interest and dividends on other securities" in 1968 and prior years. Income from securities held in trading accounts is included in “ Other operating income." 

3“ lnterest on capital notes and debentures,” which is included in "Interest on borrowed money” in 1969-1971, and "Provision for loan losses” were not included in "Operating expense-total” in 1968 and prior years. 

4Because of changes in the form of reporting by banks, figures in 1969-1971 are not fully comparable with those in 1968 and prior years; see table 114 and page 224.

228 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 116. IN C O M E O F IN S U R E D C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ), 1971

BANKS GROUPED BY CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Income item Total

Members F.R. System Nonmembers 

F.R. System

Operating 

throughout 

the year

Operating 

less than 

National State full year

Operating in c o m e -to ta l............................................................................................................................................ 36,364,008 21,295,292 7,384,655 7,684,061 36,342,253 21,755

Interest and fees on lo a n s................................................................................................................................... 23,069,354 13,660,013 4,663,187 4,746,154 23,059,023 10,331

Income on Federalfunds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell.................................. 871,167 533,714 143,335 194,118 868,692 2,475

Interest on U.S. Treasury securities................................................................................................................... 3,395,663 1,848,927 585,697 961,039 3,392,499 3,164

Interest and dividends on securities of other U.S. Government agencies and corporations.................. 916,559 442,811 135,472 338,276 915,057 1,502

Interest on obligations of States and political subdivisions......................................................................... 3,127,136 1,838,925 630,069 658,142 3,127,110 26

Interest and dividends on other securities....................................................................................................... 238,033 137,630 44,662 55,741 236,797 1,236

Trust department in co m e ................................................................................................................................... 1,257,807 699,552 482,502 75,753 1,257,805 2

Service charges on deposit accounts.................................................................................................................. 1,231,470 709,337 186,731 335,402 1,230,540 930

Other service charges, collection and exchange charges, commissions, and fees...................................... 989,432 624,471 171,223 193,738 988,653 779

Other operating income....................................................................................................................................... 1,267,387 799,912 341,777 125,698 1,266,077 1,310

Operating e x p e n s e -to ta l.......................................................................................................................................... 29,650,981 17,418,151 5,936,483 6,296,347 29,621,300 29,681

Salaries and wages of officers and em ployees................................................................................................ 7,202,972 4,137,117 1,531,020 1,534,835 7,193,852 9,120

Pensions and other employee benefits.............................................................................................................. 1,192,011 697,996 276,021 217,994 1,191,233 778

Interest on deposits.............................................................................................................................................. 12,217,994 7,223,663 2,204,950 2,789,381 12,212,037 5,957

Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase.................... 1,095,648 739,041 334,474 22,133 1,095,641 7

Interest on other borrowed m o n ey................................................................................................................... 139,388 80,744 46,691 11,953 139,334 54

Interest on capital notes and debentures......................................................................................................... 142,381 67,788 55,204 19,389 142,308 73

Occupancy expense of bank premises, net....................................................................................................... 1,410,190 810,390 320,661 279,139 1,407,618 2,572

Gross occupancy expense ............................................................................................................................ 1,730,402 1,021,586 387,420 321,396 1,727,714 2,688

Less rental incom e.......................................................................................................................................... 320,212 211,196 66,759 42,257 320,096 116

Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental costs, servicing, etc............................................................ 1,018,128 606,187 191,530 220,411 1,016,833 1,295

Provision for loan losses..................................................................................................................................... 867,260 514,007 167,942 185,311 866,685 575

Other operating expenses................................................................................................................................... 4,365,009 2,541,218 807,990 1,015,801 4,355,759 9,250

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses.................................................................................. 6,713,027 3,877,141 1,448,172 1,387,714 6,720,953 -7,926

Applicable income taxes .......................................................................................................................................... 1,689,146 942,730 406,393 340,023 1,689,244 -9 8

Income before securities gains or losses................................................................................................................ 5,023,881 2,934,411 1,041,779 1,047,691 5,031,709 -7,828

Net securities gains or losses ................................................................................................................................... 213,245 106,727 37 466 69,052 212,974 271

Gross ...................................................................................................................................................................... 359,279 189,168 65,586 104,525 358,995 284

Taxes ...................................................................................................................................................................... 146,034 82,441 28,120 35,473 146,021 13

Net income before extraordinary ite m s ................................................................................................................ 5,237,126 3,041,138 1,079,245 1,116,743 5,244,683 -7,557

Extraordinary charges or credits, n e t ..................................................................................................................... -6 3 9 -1,836 -6 5 7 1,854 -5 1 6 -1 2 3

Gross ...................................................................................................................................................................... -12,552 -10,563 -2,261 272 -12,421 -131

T a x e s .................................................................................................. ......................... -11,913 -8,727 -1 ,60 4 -1 ,58 2 -11,905 -8

INCOME OF INSURED BANKS 229

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 116. IN C O M E O F IN S U R E D C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ), 1 9 7 1 -C O N T IN U E D

BANKS GROUPED BY CLASS OF BANK 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Income item Total

Members F.R. System Nonmembers 

F.R. System

Operating 

throughout 

the year

Operating 

less than 

National State full year

Less m inority interest in consolidated subsidiaries............................................................................................... 282

5,236,205

117

3,039,185

165

1,118,432

282

Net incom e.................................................................................................................................................................... 5,243,885

Total provision for income ta x e s .............................................................................................................................

Federal income taxes ...........................................................................................................................................

State and local income taxes...............................................................................................................................

Dividends on c a p ita l-to ta l........................................................................................................................................

Cash dividends declared on common s to c k ......................................................................................................

Cash dividends declared on preferred stock......................................................................................................

1,078,588 -7,680

1,651,807

1,367,492

284,315

901,526

745,607

155,919

391,512

302,553

88,959

358,769

319,332

39,437

1,651,962

1,367,660

284,302

-1 5 5

-1 6 8

13

2,230,556

2,225,125

5,431

1,388,666

1,384,653

4,013

519,689

519,093

596

322,201

321,379

822

2,230,553

2,225,122

5,431

3

3

Memoranda

Recoveries credited to reserves (not included above):

On lo a n s..................................................................................................................................................................

On securities...........................................................................................................................................................

Losses charged to reserves (not included above):

On lo a n s..................................................................................................................................................................

On securities...........................................................................................................................................................

317,320

2,253

1,404,520

3,714

209,692

1,294

873,354

1,408

45,085

224

293,444

445

62,543

735

237,722

1,861

317,320

2,253

1,404,499

3,714

21

Number of employees, December 31 ...................................................................................................................... 980,660 565,529 185,146 229,985 978,548 2,112

Number of banks, December 3 1 ............................................................................................................................... 13,612 4,600 1,128 7,884 13,415 197

230 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 1 17 . IN C O M E O F IN S U R E D C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S O P E R A T IN G T H R O U G H O U T 1971 IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S

(S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S )

BANKS GROUPED BY AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Banks with deposits o fIncome item All

banks1

Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Operating in co m e -to ta L ............................................................. 36,342,253 6,188 74,036 683,829 1,595,394 3,869,825 3,265,918 2,825,041 6.471,462 4,071,574 13,478,986

Interest and fees on lo a n s .................................................... 23,059,023 3,334 41,135 397,954 948,813 2,345,801 2,021,776 1,761,729 4,106,710 2,639,949 8,791,822

Income on Federal funds sold and securities

purchased under agreements to resell.......................... 868,692 309 2,052 19,433 47,363 119,141 95,448 75,667 154,456 95,144 259,679

Interest on U.S. Treasury securities................................... 3,392,499 1,534 17,500 134,362 257,676 531,572 377,100 303,253 584,093 308,406 877,003

Interest and dividends on securities of other U.S. 

Government agencies and corporations........................ 915,057 378 5,438 46,782 88,468 174,099 133,519 100,015 171,129 66,560 128,669

Interest on obligations of States and political

subdivisions...................................................................... 3,127,110 91 1,761 34,278 123,056 353,463 324,174 276,990 618,861 354,010 1,040,426

Interest and dividends on other securities........................ 236,797 52 668 4,345 9,364 22,788 20,532 2 2,652 4 6,982 23,917 8 5,497

Trust department incom e..................................................... 1,257,805 3 286 323 3,083 16,626 36,119 54,618 237,270 174,085 735,392

Service charges on deposit accounts................................... 1,230,540 212 2,619 24,936 69,311 187,000 148,790 117,272 226,529 127,437 326,434

Other service charges, collection and exchange

charges, commissions, and fees..................................... 988,653 191 1,620 14,543 32,597 76,669 69,232 75,556 193,123 138,769 386,353

Other operating incom e........................................................ 1,266,077 84 957 6,873 15,663 42,666 39,228 37,289 132,309 143,297 847,711

Operating expense-total............................................................. 29,621,300 4,948 59,352 552,805 1,286,073 3,137,730 2,679,882 2,343,631 5,310,311 3,320,523 10,926,045

Salaries and wages of officers and employees................... 7,193,852 2,121 20,762 156,422 322,175 730,189 614,478 549,280 1,307,974 825,592 2,664,859

Pensions and other employee benefits............................... 1,191,233 191 1,680 15,953 40,131 101,169 92,433 84,043 215,572 145,805 494,256

Interest on deposits............................................................... 12,212,037 1,157 20,710 240,708 587,780 1,472,086 1,240,897 1,061,443 2,211,525 1,237,671 4,138,060

Expense of Federal funds purchased and securities 

sold under agreements to repurchase.......................... 1,095,641 0 10 240 1,056 3,782 8,469 15,114 125,197 154,130 787,643

Interest on other borrowed money...................................... 139,334 4 52 480 1,118 2,566 3,666 3,717 14,866 23,062 89,803

Interest on capital notes and debentures.......................... 142,308 2 9 160 685 4,379 6,111 7,597 21,361 19,435 82,569

Occupancy expense of bank premises, n e t........................ 1,407,618 283 2,045 19,275 48,176 129,615 118,340 110,823 261,380 163,252 554,429

Gross occupancy expense............................................... 1,727,714 291 2,184 20,646 51,667 141,728 135,600 135,938 332,255 228,409 678,996

Less rental incom e........................................................... 320,096 8 139 1,371 3,491 12,113 17,260 25,115 70,875 65,157 124,567

Furniture and equipment, depreciation, rental

costs, servicing, etc............................................................ 1,016,833 155 1,803 16,317 41,878 104,069 94,578 88,752 227,519 127,395 314,367

Provision fo r loan losses........................................................ 866,685 92 2,056 16,803 38,716 91,978 75,538 63,692 134,543 107,066 336,201

Other operating expenses...................................................... 4,355,759 943 10,225 86,447 204,358 497,897 425,372 359,170 790,374 517,115 1,463,858

Income before income taxes and securities gains

or losses.................................................................................... 6,720,953 1,240 14,684 131,024 309,321 732,095 586,036 481,410 1,161,151 751,051 2,552,941

Applicable income taxe s............................................................. 1,689,244 317 3,991 36,044 81,161 181,866 133,537 105,712 263,408 186,461 696,747

INCOME OF INSURED BANKS

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 117. IN C O M E O F IN S U R E D C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S O P E R A T IN G T H R O U G H O U T 1971 IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S

(S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S )— C O N T IN U E D 

BANKS GROUPED BY AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Banks with deposits o fIncome item All

banks1

Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or

more

Income before securities gains or losses..................... 5,031,709 923 10,693 94,980 228,160 550,229 452,499 375,698 897,743 564,590 1,856,194

Net securities gains or losses........................................

G ro ss...........................................................................

T a xe s...........................................................................

212,974

358,995

146,021

32

69

37

382

473

91

4,279

5,535

1,256

12,855

17,351

4,496

35,424

52,983

17,559

32,205

52,169

19,964

28,555

49,543

20,988

52,511

94,672

42,161

20,129

36,950

16,821

26,602

49,250

22,648

Net income before extraordinary item s..................... 5,244,683 955 11,075 99,259 241,015 585,653 484,704 404,253 950,254 584,719 1,882,796

Extraordinary charges or credits, net...........................

G ro ss...........................................................................

T a xe s...........................................................................

-5 1 6

-12,421

-1 1 ,9 0 5

1

1

0

15

13

-2

100

118

18

710

693

-1 7

108

-1 ,75 8

- 1,866

802

658

-1 4 4

1,338

1,364

26

201

-1 ,50 4

-1 ,70 5

3,682

5,222

1,540

-7 ,47 3

-17,228

-9 ,75 5

Less m inority interest in consolidated subsidiaries. . 282 0 0 35 14 11 7 4 71 140 0

Net in c o m e ...................................................................... 5,243,885 956 11,090 99,324 241,711 585,750 485,499 405,587 950,384 588,261 1,875,323

Total provision for income ta xe s................................. 1,651,962

1,367,660

284,302

402 4,635

4,321

314

39,522

36,383

3,139

85,591

78,607

6,984

189,450

172,432

17,018

144,381

131,276

13,105

117,079

104,454

12,625

276,402

241,375

35,027

181,351 613,149

Federal income ta x e s ...............................................

State and local income ta x e s .................................

368

34

154,164

27,187

444,280

168,869

Dividends on capital-total ..........................................

Cash dividends declared on common stock.........

Cash dividends declared on preferred stock.........

2,230,553

2,225,122

5,431

254

254

0

3.318

3.318 

0

27,256

27,245

11

59,201

59,171

30

149,198

148,875

323

146,503

146,235

268

132,212

131,945

267

395,636

394,365

1,271

276,900

276,008

892

1,040,075

1,037,706

2,369

Memoranda

Recoveries credited to reserves (not included above): 

On loans...................................................................... 317,320

2.253

35 749 6,842

28

18,777

35

44,953

257

29,431

562

28,076 58,948 34,679 94,830

On securities........................................................... 0 0 583 778 10 0

Losses charged to reserves (not included above):

On loans...................................................................... 1,404,499

3,714

120 2,176

6

19,182

197

52,021

180

131,980

711

105,746

888

96,704

420

217,160

1,255

166,006

57

613,404

On securities............................................................... 0 0

Number of employees, December 3 1 .......................... 978,548 416 3,438 23,397 48,415 111,036 93,116 82,141 185,272 112,387 318,930

Number of banks, December 31................................... 13,415 111 678 2,925 3,309 3,753 1,404 608 479 85 63

1This group of banks is the same as the group shown in table 116 under the heading "Operating throughout the year."

232 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 118. RATIOS OF INCOME OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS OPERATING THROUGHOUT 1971 IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES

AND OTHER AREAS)1

BANKS GROUPED ACCORDING TO AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS

Income item

Banks with deposits o fLess 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Amounts per $100 of operating income

Operating in c o m e -to ta l............................................................................... $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $100.00 $ 100.00 $100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00 $ 100.00

Income on loans2...................................................................................... 58.87 58.33 61.03 62.44 63.70 64.83 65.04 65.85 67.18 67.15

Interest on U.S. Treasury securities3 ................................................... 24.79 23.64 19.65 16.15 13.74 11.55 10.73 9.03 7.57 6.51

Interest on State and local government obligations3......................... 1.47 2.38 5.01 7.71 9.13 9.93 9.81 9.56 8.69 7.72

Interest and dividends on other securities3.......................................... 6.95 8.25 7.48 6.13 5.09 4.72 4.34 3.37 2.22 1.59

Trust department income........................................................................ .05 .38 .05 .20 .43 1.10 1.93 3.67 4.28 5.45

Service charges on deposit accounts...................................................... 3.42 3.54 3.65 4.35 4.83 4.55 4.15 3.50 3.13 2.42

Other charges, commissions, fees, etc.................................................... 3.09 2.19 2.13 2.04 1.98 2.12 2.68 2.98 3.41 2.87

Other operating income3 ........................................................................ 1.36 1.29 1.00 .98 1.10 1.20 1.32 2.04 3.52 6.29

Operating expense-total............................................................................... 79.96 80.17 80.84 80.61 81.08 82.06 82.96 82.06 81.55 81.06

Salaries and wages.................................................................................... 34.27 28.04 22.87 20.19 18.87 18.82 19.44 20.21 20.27 19.77

Pensions and other benefits.................................................................... 3.09 2.27 2.33 2.52 2.61 2.83 2.98 3.33 3.58 3.67

Interest on time and savings deposits................................................... 18.70 27.97 35.20 36.84 38.04 38.00 37.57 34.17 30.40 30.70

Interest on borrowed m o n ey................................................................. .10 .10 .13 .18 .28 .56 .94 2.50 4.83 7.12

Occupancy expense of bank premises, n e t.......................................... 4.57 2.76 2.82 3.02 3.35 3.62 3.92 4.04 4.01 4.11

Furniture and equipment, etc................................................................. 2.50 2.44 2.39 2.62 2.69 2.90 3.14 3.52 3.13 2.33

Provision for loan losses............................................................. ......... 1.49 2.78 2.46 2.43 2.38 2.31 2.26 2.08 2.63 2.50

Other operating expenses........................................................................ 15.24 13.81 12.64 12.81 12.86 13.02 12.71 12.21 12.70 10.86

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses..................... 20.04 19.83 19.16 19.39 18.92 17.94 17.04 17.94 18.45 18.94

Amounts per $ 100 of total assets5

Operating in c o m e -to ta l............................................................................... 5.96 6.05 6.01 5.94 5.97 5.92 5.96 5.74 5.81 5.45

Income before income taxes and securities gains or losses..................... 1.19 1.20 1.15 1.15 1.13 1.06 1.02 1.03 1.07 1.03

Wet incom e.................................................................................................... .92 .91 .87 .90 .90 .88 .86 .84 .84 .76

Memoranda

Recoveries credited to reserves (not included above):

On lo a n s .............................................................................

On securities...........................................................................................

Losses charged to reserves (not included above): ...................................

On lo a n s ..................................................................................................

On securities.............................................................................................

.03

0

.12

0

.06

0

.18

(4)

.06

(4)

.17

(4)

.07

(4)

.19

(4)

.07

(4)

.20

(4)

.05

(4)

.19

(4)

.06

(4)

.20

(4)

.05

(4)

.19

(4)

.05

(4)

.24

(4)

.04

0

.25

0

INCOME OF INSURED BANKS 233

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 118. RATIOS OF INCOME OF INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS OPERATING THROUGHOUT 1971 IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES

AND OTHER AREAS)1

BANKS GROUPED ACCORDING TO AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS

Banks with deposits o fIncome item Less 

than 

$1 million

$1 million 

to

$2 million

$2 million 

to

$5 million

$5 million 

to

$10 million

$10 million 

to

$25 million

$25 million 

to

$50 million

$50 million 

to

$100 million

$100 million 

to

$500 million

$500 million 

to

$1 billion

$1 billion 

or 

more

Amounts per $100 of total capital accounts5 

Net inco m e ....................................................................................................... 5.65 8.01 9.61 11.10 12.07 12.29 11.93 11.70 11.55 10.44

Cash dividends declared on common s to c k ............................................... 1.50 2.40 2.63 2.72 3.07 3.70 3.88 4.86 5.42 5.78

Net additions to capital from in co m e ........................................................ 4.15 5.62 6.97 8.38 8.99 8.58 8.04 6.83 6.12 4.65

Memoranda

Recoveries credited to reserves (not included above):

On loans...................................................................................................... .21 .54 .66 .86 .93 .75 .83 .73 .68 .53

On securities............................................................................................. 0 0 (4) (4) .01 .01 .02 .01 (4) 0

Losses charged to reserves (not included above):

On loans .................................................................................................... .71 1.57 1.86 2.39 2.72 2.68 2.84 2.67 3.26 3.42

On securities.............................................................................................. 0 (4) .02 .01 .01 .02 .01 .02 (4) 0

Special ratios5

Income on loans per $100 of loans2 ........................................................... 7.31 7.23 7.22 7.20 7.24 7.18 7.17 7.01 7.02 6.60

Income on U.S. Treasury securities per $100 of U.S. Treasury securities3 6.55 5.95 5.69 5.56 5.53 5.52 5.52 5.40 5.19 5.31

Income on obligations of States and political subdivisions per $100 

of obligations of States and political subdivisions3 .......................... 4.24 3.84 3.98 3.99 3.89 3.96 3.88 3.77 3.74 4.02

Income on other securities per $100 of other securities3........................ 5.02 6.01 5.78 5.38 5.41 5.40 5.48 5.21 5.17 6.22

Service charges per $100 of demand deposits.......................................... .36 .44 .54 .66 .76 .71 .66 .49 .42 .31

Interest paid per $100 of time and savings deposits................................. 4.23 4.35 4.36 4.35 4.41 4.43 4.46 4.38 4.37 4.50

Number of banks, December 31.................................................................... 111 678 2,925 3,309 3,753 1,404 608 479 85 63

1 This group of banks is the same as the group shown in table 116 under heading "Operating throughout the year."

in clu d e s Federal funds.

3lncome from securities held in trading accounts is included in "O ther operating income."

4 Less than 0.005.

5Ratios are based on assets and liabilities reported at end of year.

234 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 119. IN C O M E O F IN S U R E D M U T U A L S A V IN G S B A N K S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S T A T E S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ), 1 9 6 7 -1 9 7 1

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Income item 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971

Operating incom e-total.......................................................................................................................................................... 2,884,789 3,238,735 3,581,559 3,874,870 4,529,014

Interest and fees on real estate mortgage loans, net..................................................................................................... 2,326,459 2,538,502 2,768,370 2,963,859 3,275,859

Interest and fees on real estate mortgage loans, gross........................................................................................... 2,389,864 2,603,928 2,835,708 3,031,157 3,344,057

Less: Mortgage servicing fees..................................................................................................................................... 63,405 65,426 67,338 67,298 68,198

Interest and fees on other loans........................................................................................................................................ 67,925 83,807 121,172 154,230 163,675

Interest on U.S. government and agency securities2..................................................................................................... \ ..................... 268 370

Interest on corporate bonds.............................................................................................................................................. > 432,091 552,841 633,835 693,986 546*033

Interest on State,county, and municipal obligations2 ................................................................................................ I ..................... 12,789

Interest on other bonds, notes, and debentures2 ....................................................................................................... : : : : : : : : : : 75*489

Dividends on corporate stock2. ............................................................................................ / 105*592

Income from service operations..................................................................................................................... 33,275 40,964 35,942 35,107 27^669

Other operating income ............................................................................................... 25,039 22,621 22,240 27,688 53,538

Operating expenses-total...................................................................................................................... 357,7561 390,6691 443,0491 520,8621 581,693

Salaries.................................................................................................................... 161,122 175,307 193,613 217,536 243,446

Pensions and other employee benefits........................................................................ 34,243 37,149 41,860 47,072 55,944

Interest on borrowed money............................................................................................ 2,922 4,021 9,864 20,327 7,862

Occupancy expense of bank premises (including taxes, depreciation, maintenance, rentals), n e t..................... 42,412 47,184 52,491 60,655 71,113

Furniture and equipment (including recurring depreciation) .................................................................................. 13,799 16,414 19,726 22,603 28,365

Actual net loan losses (charge-offs less recoveries)....................................................................................................... 3,809 889 898 1,363 3,328

Other operating expenses................................................................................................................................... 99,449 109,705 124,597 151,306 171,635

Net operating income before interest and dividends on deposits.................................................................................. 2,527,0331 2,848,0661 3,138,5101 3,354,0081 3,947,321

Interest and dividends on deposits-total......................................................................................................................... 2,395,762 2,612,638 2,808,141 2,987,200 3,418,845

Savings deposits2 ........................................................................................................... 3,058,645

Other time deposits2 ........................................................................................................................ 360*200

Net operating income after interest and dividends on deposits....................................................................................... 131,271 235,428 330,369 366,808 528,476

Net realized gains (or losses) on—to ta l............................................................................................................................ -21,7031 7,2031 -5 9 ,4 5 7 1 —121.3721 -58,286

Securities................................................................................................................................................................. -15,778 11,237 -37,719 — 91,760 -44,290

Real estate mortgage loans.............................................................................................................................................. -4,186 -3,137 -23,381 — 26,334 -12,133

Real estate............................................................................................................................................................... 6 493 434 -5 6 8 -1,690

Other transactions ............................................................................................................................................................ -1,745 -1,390 1,209 -2,710 -1 7 3

Less minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries?.........................................................................................................

Net income before taxes....................... 109,5681 242,6311 270,9121 245,4361 470,190

Franchise and income ta x es -to tal...................................................... 37,708 47,710 61,874 78,421 126,601

Federal income ta x ...................................................... 3,971 8,429 14,303 25,310 63,833

State and local franchise and income taxes..................................................................................................... 33,737 39,281 47,571 53,111 62,768

Net income...................................................................... 71.8601 194,9211 209,0381 167,0151 343,589

INCOME OF INSURED BANKS 235

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 119. IN C O M E OF IN S U R E D M U T U A L S A V IN G S B A N K S IN TH E U N IT E D S TA T E S (S T A T E S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ), 1 9 6 7 -1 9 7 1

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Income item 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971

Memoranda

Change in surplus accounts, n e t......................................................................

Discount on securities, tota l2 ...........................................................................

Average assets and liabilities3

Assets-total4 .......................................................................................................

Cash and due from b a n k s ...........................................................................

United States Government and agency securities4.................................

Other securities4 ...........................................................................................

Real estate mortgage loans4 ......................................................................

Other loans and discounts4 ......................................................................

Other real esta te ...........................................................................................

All other assets..............................................................................................

Liabilities and surplus accounts-total4 ........................................................

Total deposits................................................................................................

Savings and time deposits......................................................................

Demand deposits....................................................................................

Other lia b ilitie s..............................................................................................

Total surplus accounts4 .............................................................................

Number of employees (end of period).............................................................

Number of banks (end of perio d )....................................................................

78,549! 220,0631 188,4841 486,234

16,513

55.382.218

953,843

4,219,878

5,331,015

42,920,455

1,004,362

27,987

924,678

55.382.218

50,247,915

49,805,468

442,447

.730,825

4,403,478

59.871.912

825,767

4,297,630

6,964,029

45,566,125

1,176,814

36,156

1,005,391

59.871.912

54,534,572

54,053,723

793,930

4,543,410

63.518.853 

715,778

3,865,250

8,254,868

48,091,156

1,463,714

38,345

1,089,742

63.518.853

57,834,645

57,304,999

529,646

888,123

4,796,085

24,075 25,063 26,105

65.986.370

778,430

3,893,429

8,471,553

49,745,250

1,904,974

57,981

1,134,753

65.986.370

59,862,839

59,296,823

566,016

1,162,859

4,960,672

27,505

73.661.663

1,156,181

4,437,666

11,932,355

52,364,759

2,309,498

75,520

1,385,684

73.661.663

67,443,302

66,784,186

659,116

982,655

5,235,706

30,134

333 334 331 329 327

1 Figures have been revised to provide comparability w ith 1971 data-see page 225 for information on changes in reports in 1971.

2Data are not available prior to 1971, see page 225.

3 For 1970 and prior years, averages o f amounts for four consecutive official call dates beginning with the end of the previous year and ending with the fall call of the current year; for 1971 averages of amounts reported at 

beginning, middle, and end of year.

4Averages fo r 1967— 1970 have been revised to a gross basis; see notes to table 108.

236 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 120. RATIOS OF INCOME OF INSURED MUTUAL SAVINGS BANKS IN THE UNITED STATES (STATES AND OTHER AREAS), 1967-1971

Amounts per $100 of operating income

Operating incom e-total........................................................

Interest and fees on real estate mortgage loans-net .

Interest and fees on other loans.....................................

Interest on U.S. Government and agency securities2 .

Interest on corporate bonds2..........................................

Interest on State, county, and municipal obligations. 

Interest on other bonds, notes, and debentures2 . .. .

Dividends on corporate stock2 .....................................

Income from service operations.....................................

Other operating income....................................................

Operating expense-total...................................................................................................................................

Salaries.............................................................................................................................................................

Pensions and other employee benefits .....................................................................................................

Interest on borrowed m o n e y.....................................................................................................................

Occupancy expense of bank premises (including taxes, depreciation, maintenance, rentals)— net .

Furniture and equipment (including recurring depreciation)................................................................

Actual net loan losses (chargeoffs less recoveries)..................................................................................

Other operating expenses............................................................................................................................

Net operating income before interest and dividends on deposits.

Interest and dividends on deposits-total........................................

Savings deposits .............................................................................

Other time deposits........................................................................

Net operating income after interest and dividends on deposits .

Net realized gains (or losses) on-total .

Securities ............................................

Real estate mortgage lo a n s ..............

Real estate............................................

Other transactions..............................

Less minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries

Net income before taxes...............................................

Franchise and income taxes-to tal.....................

Federal income t a x ..........................................

State and local franchise and income taxes.

$100.00

80.65

2.35

14.98

1.15

.87

12.401

5.58

1.19

.10

1.47

.48

.13

3.45

$100.00

78.38

2.59

1.26

.70

12.061

5.41

1.15

.12

1.46

.50

.03

3.39

1969

$100.00

77.30

3.38

17.70

1.00

.62

12.371

5.41

1.17

.27

1.47 

.55 

.02

3.48

$100.00

76.49

3.98

17.91

.91

.71

13.441

5.61

1.22

.52

1.57

.58

.04

3.90

$100.00

72.33

3.61

5.93

12.06

.28

1.67

2.33

.61

1.18

12.84

5.37

1.24

.17

1.57

.63

.07

3.79

87.60 1 87.941 87.631 86.561 87.16

83.05

(2)

4.551

- .751

-.5 5

-.1 4

(5)

-.0 6

3.801

1.31

.14

1.17

2.491

80.67

(2)

7.271

.221

.35

-.1 0

.01

-.0 4

1.47

.26

1.21

6.0 2 1

78.41

(2)

9.221

—1.661

—1.05

—.65

.01 

.03

7.561

1.72

.40

1.32

5.841

77.09

(2)

9.471

—3.141

— 2.37 

—.68

-.02 

-.0 7

6.331

2.02

.65

1.37

4.311

75.49

67.54

7.95

11.67

-1.29

-.9 8

-.2 7

-.04

(5)

2.79

1.41

1.38

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 120. R A T IO S O F IN C O M E OF IN S U R E D M U T U A L S A V IN G S B A N K S IN TH E U N IT E D S T A T E S (S TA TE S A N D O T H E R A R E A S ), 1 9 6 7 -1 9 7 1

Income item 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971

Amounts per $100 o f total assets3

Operating income— to ta l.................................................................................................................................................................... 5.21 5.41 5.64 5.87 6.15

Operating expense— total . . . . .................................................................................................................................... .65 .65 .70 .79 .79

Net operating income before interest and dividends on d e p o sits............................................................................................ 4.56 4.76 4.94 5.08 5.36

Interest and dividends on deposits-total ................................................................................................................................. 4.32 4.37 4.42 4.52 4.64

Net operating income after interest and dividends on deposits................................................................................................ .24 .39 .52 .56 .72

Net realized gains (or losses)— to ta l................................................................................................................................................. -.0 4 .02 -.0 9 -.1 9 -.0 8

Net income before taxes.................................................................................................................................................................... .20 .41 .43 .37 .64

Franchise and income taxes— t o t a l................................................................................................................................................. .07 .08 .10 .12 .17

Net income ......................................................................................................................................................................................... .13 .33 .33 .25 .47

Special ratios3

Interest on U.S. Government and agency securities per $100 of U.S. Government and agency securities4 ..................... j 4.52 4.91 5.23 5.61 6.05

Interest and dividends on other securities per $100 of other securities4 ................................................................................ 6.20

Interest and fees on real estate mortgage loans per $100 of real estate loans4....................................................................... 542 5’ 57 5! 7 6 5.96 6.26

Interest and fees on other loans per $100 of other loans4.......................................................................................................... 6.76 7.12 8.28 8.10 7.09

Interest and dividends on deposits per $100 of savings and time deposits ........................................................................... 4.81 4.83 4.90 5.04 5.12

Net income per $100 of total surplus accounts4 ..................................................................................................................... 1.63 4.29 4.36 3.37 6.56

Number of b anks................................................................................................................................................................................ 333 334 331 329 327

1, 2, 3, 4 gee notes to table 119. 

5 Less than 0.005.

238 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 121. 

Table 122.

Table 123. 

Table 124.

BANKS CLOSED BECAUSE OF FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES;

DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS

Number and deposits of banks closed because of financial difficulties, 1934-1971

Insured banks requiring disbursements by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation during

1971

Depositors, deposits, and disbursements in insured banks requiring disbursements by the 

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, 1934-1971 

Banks grouped by class o f bank, year o f deposit payoff or deposit assumption, amount o f

deposits, and State

Recoveries and losses by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation on principal disbursements 

for protection of depositors, 1934-1971

BANKS CLOSED AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS 239

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Deposit insurance disbursements

Disbursements by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to protect 

depositors are made when the insured deposits of banks in financial d ifficulties are paid off, or when the deposits of a failing bank are assumed by 

another insured bank with the financial aid of the Corporation. In deposit 

payoff cases, the disbursement is the amount paid by the Corporation on 

insured deposits. In deposit assumption cases, the principal disbursement is 

the amount loaned to failing banks, or the price paid for assets purchased 

from them; additional disbursements are made in those cases as advances for 

protection of assets in process of liquidation and for liquidation expenses.

Noninsured bank failures

No noninsured bank failed in 1971.

For detailed data regarding noninsured banks which suspended in the 

years 1934-1962, see the Annual Report for 1963, pp. 27-41. For 

1963-1970, see table 121 of this report, and previous reports for respective 

years.

Sources of data

Insured banks: books of bank at date of closing; and books of FDIC, 

December 31, 1971.

240 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 121. NUMBER AND DEPOSITS OF BANKS CLOSED BECAUSE OF FIN A N C IA L DIFFICULTIES, 1934-1971

Noninsured1

Without 

disbursements 

by FDIC2

With 

disbursements 

by FDIC3

Deposits (in thousands of dollars)

Noninsured1

Without 

disbursements 

by FDIC2

With 

disbursements 

by FDIC3

Total.

1934.

1935.

1936. 

1937 . 

1938.

1939 .

1940 .

1941 .

1942 .

1943.

1944. 

1945 .

1946.

1947.

1948.

1949 .

1950 .

1951 .

1952 . 

1953.

1954 .

1955 .

1956 .

1957 .

1958 .

1959 . 

1960.

1961 .

1962 . 

1963.

1964 .

1965 .

1966 .

1967 . 

1968. 

1969 .

-1 9 7 0 . 

1971 .

61

32

72

83

80

72

48

16

23

5 2 1 2

6

3 

9 

5 

5

4

5

4

5 

3 

3 

9 

3 2 

9 

3 2

3

7

7

12

5

2

3

9

26

69

76

73

60

43

14

20

5

2

1

1

5

3 

5

4 2

3

4 2

5 2 2

4

3 1

5 1 2 

7

5 

7

4 

3 

9 

7

6

9

25

69

74

73

60

43

14

20

5

2

37,332

13,987

28,100

34,141

60.444 

160,211 

142,787

18,805

19,541

12,525

1,915

5,695

494

7,207

10,674

9,217

5,555

6,464

3,313

45,101

2,948

11,953

11,689

12,502

10,413

2,593

7,965

10,611

4,231

23.444 

23,867 

45,256

106,171

10,878

22,524

40,120

52,7634

131,682

62,396 1,092,722

35,364 1,968

583 13,404

592 27,508

528 33,613

1,038 59,406

2,439 157,772

358 142,429

79 18,726

355 19,186

12,525

1,915

5,695

147 347

167 7,040

10,674

2,552 6,665

42 5,513

3,056 3,408

143 3,170

390 44,711

1,950 998

11,953

360 11,329

1,255 11,247

2,173 8,240

2,593

1,035 6,930

1,675 8,936

1,220 3,011

23,444

429 23,438

1,395 43,861

2,648 103,523

10,878

22,524

40,120

4234 52,340

131,682

41,147

1,190

10,084

3,011

1,051,575

1,968

13,319

27,508

33,285

59,406

157,772

142,429

18,726

19,186

12,525

1,915

5.695

347

7,040

10,674

5,475

5,513

3,408

3,170

18,262

998

11,953

11,329

1,163

8,240

2,593

6,930

8,936

’ ’23,444' 

23,438 

43,861 

103,523 

10,878 

22,524 

40,120 

52,340 

131,682

For information regarding each of these banks, see table 22 in the Annual Report of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation for 1963, page 221 of the report for 1964, page 179 of the report for 1965, and page 183 of the 1966 report. One noninsured bank placed in receivership in 1934, with no deposits at time of closing, is omitted (see table 22, note 9). Deposits are unavailable for 7 banks.

2For information regarding these cases, see table 23 of the Annual Report for 1963.

3 For information regarding each bank, see the Annual Report for 1958, pp. 4 8 -8 3 and pp.98-127, and tables regarding deposit insurance disbursements in subsequent annual reports. Deposits are adjusted as of December 31, 1971, and exclude deposits for three cases requiring disbursements by the Corporation: 1 bank in voluntary liquidation in 1937 (payoff case no. 90); 1 noninsured bank in 1938 with insured deposits at date of suspension, its insurance status having been terminated prior 

to suspension (payoff case no. 162); and 1 foreign-owned bank closed in 1941 by order of the Federal Government (payoff case no. 234).

4 Revised.

BANKS CLOSED AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS 241

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 122. IN S U R E D B A N K S R E Q U IR IN G D IS B U R S E M E N T S B Y T H E F E D E R A L D E P O S IT IN S U R A N C E C O R P O R A T IO N D U R IN G 1971

Case

number Name and location

Class of 

bank

Number of 

depositors or 

accounts1

Date of closing or 

deposit assumption

First payment to 

depositors or 

disbursement by 

FDIC

FDIC

disbursement2

Receiver or liquidating agent 

or assuming bank

Deposit

payoff

293 Sharpstown State Bank 

Houston, Texas

NM 27,300 January 25, 1971 February 2, 1971 $47,280,250 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

295 Farmers State Bank of Carlock 

Carlock, Illinois

NM 1,101 February 17,1971 February 22, 1971 1,912,042 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

296 Bank of Salem 

Salem, Nebraska

NM 416 April 5, 1971 A pril 7, 1971 540,520 State Banking A uthority

297 The First National Bank 

of Cripple Creek 

Cripple Creek, Colorado

N 951 November 30,1971 December 2, 1971 1,121,008 Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

298 First Community State Bank 

of Savannah 

Savannah, Missouri

NM 1,961 December 30,1971 January 4, 1972 2,884,967 State Banking A uthority

Deposit

assumption

202 Birmingham-Bloomfield

Bank

Birmingham, Michigan

NM 40,100 February 16,1971 February 16, 1971 109,245,319 Fidelity Bank of Michigan 

Birmingham, Michigan

242 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Assets1 Liabilities aed capital accounts1

Case

number Cash and 

due from 

banks

U.S. Government 

obligations

Other

securities

Loans,

discounts,

and

overdrafts

Banking 

house 

furniture & 

fixtures

Other

real

estate

Other

assets

Total Deposits Other

liabilities

Capital

stock

Other

capital

accounts

Deposit

payoff

293 4,997,226 6,545,895 2,405,953 41,024,650 6,417,705 16,001,295 1,510,647 78,903,371 66,762,842 118,953 6,000,000 6,021,576

295 127,160 64,242 0 1,684,246 50,216 0 269,999 2,195,863 2,077,193 10 50,000 68,660

296 107,218 0 60,000 491,508 6,071 0 14,444 679,241 605,970 0 30,000 43,271

297 122,672 2,000 113,301 888,094 20,625 0 154,359 1,301,051 1,200,824 0 50,000 50,227

298 465,288 549,972 115,670 2,500,289 66,319 0 3,738 3,701,276 3,488,477 0 205,000 7,799

Deposit

assumption

202 2,074,171 7,299,942 29,083,566 68,235,962 1,718,447 1,310,604 16,505 109,739,197 57,547,481 46,329,584 3,230,240 2,631,892

1Figures as determined by FDIC agents after adjustment of books of the bank immediately following its closing, 

in clu d e s disbursements made to December 31, 1971, plus additional disbursements estimated to be required in these cases.

BANKS CLOSED AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS 243

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 123. DEPOSITORS, DEPOSITS, AND DISBURSEMENTS IN INSURED BANKS REQUIRING DISBURSEMENTS BY THE 

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, 1934-1971 

BANKS GROUPED BY CLASS OF BANK, YEAR OF DEPOSIT PAYOFF OR DEPOSIT ASSUMPTION, AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS, AND STATE

Classification

Number of banks Number of depositors1

Deposits1 

(in thousands of dollars)

Disbursements by FDIC1 

(in thousands of dollars)

Total Payoff

cases

Assumption

cases

Total Payoff

cases

Assumption

cases

Total Payoff

cases

Assumption

cases

Principal disbursements

Advances and 

expenses2

Total Payoff

cases3

Assumption

cases4

Payoff

cases5

Assumption

cases6

A ll b a n k s ............................................ 495 293 202 1,775,826 560,417 1,215,409 1,063,195 360,422 702,773 623,211s 248,889s 374,322 4,282s 55,975

Class of banks

National ........................................ 91 34 57 358,290 98,485 259,805 224,548 103,396 121,152 115,929 57,703 58,226 1,364 7,945

State member F.R.S..................... 27 10 17 376,257 88,892 287,365 197,673 34,388 163,286 108,177 26,496 81,681 288 19,427

Nonmember F.R.S....................... 377 249 128 1,041,279 373,040 668,239 640,973 222,638 418,335 399,105s 164,690s 234,415 2,630s 28,603

Year7

1934 9 9 15 767 15,767 1,968 1,968 941 941 43

1935 ............................................... 25 24 " Y 44,655 32,331 12,324 13,319 9,091 4,229 8,891 6,026 2,865 108 272

1936 ............................................... 69 42 21 89,018 43,225 45,793 27,508 11,241 16,267 14,781 8,056 6,725 67 934

1937 ............................................... 75 50 25 130,387 74,148 56,239 33,349 14,960 18,389 19,161 12,045 7,116 103 905

1938 ............................................... 74 50 24 203,961 44,288 159,673 59,684 10,296 49,388 30,479 9,092 21,387 93 4,902

1939 ............................................... 60 32 28 392,718 90,169 302,549 157,772 32,738 125,034 67,770 26,196 41,574 162 17,603

1940 ............................................... 43 19 24 256,361 20,667 235,694 142,429 5,657 136,773 74,134 4,895 69,239 89 17,237

1 9 4 1 ............................................... 15 8 7 73,005 38,594 34,411 29,718 14,730 14,987 23,880 12,278 11,602 50 1,479

1942 ............................................... 20 6 14 60,688 5,717 54,971 19,186 1,816 17 369 10,825 1,612 9,213 38 1,076

1943 ............................................... 5 4 1 27,371 16,917 10,454 12,525 6,637 5,888 7,172 5,500 1,672 53 72

1944 ............................................... 2 1 1 5,487 899 4,588 1,915 456 1,459 1,503 404 1,099 9 37

1945 1 1 12 483 12,483 5,695 5,695 1,768 1,768 96

1946 1 1 1,383 1,383 347 347 265 265 11

1947 5 5 10,637 10,637 7,040 7,040 1,724 1,724 376

1948 3 3 18,540 18,540 10,674 10,674 2,990 2,990 200

1949 4 4 5,671 5,671 5,475 5,475 2,552 2,552 166

1950 4 4 6,366 6,366 5,513 5,513 3,986 3,986 524

1951 2 2 5,276 5,276 3,408 3,408 1,885 1,885 127

1952 3 3 6,752 6,752 3,170 3,170 1,369 1,369 195

1953 2 2 24,469 24,469 18,262 18,262 5,017 5,017 428

1954 2 2 1,811 1,81 J 998 998 913 913 145

1955 .......................................... 5 " 4 1 17,790 8,080 9,710 11,953 6,503 5,450 6,784 4,438 2,346 106 665

1956 ............................................... 2 1 1 15,197 5,465 9,732 11,329 4,702 6,628 3,458 2,795 663 87 51

1957 1 1 2,338 2,338 1,163 1,163 1,031 1,031 20

1958 ............................................ 4 3 T 9,587 4,380 5,207 8,240 4,156 4,084 3,026 2,796 230 38 31

1959 3 3 3,073 3,073 2,593 2,593 1,835 1,835 51

1960 ............................................... 1 1 11,171 11,171 6,930 6,930 4,765 4,765 82

244 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1 9 6 1 ............................................... 5 5

1963 ............................................... 2 2

1964 ............................................... 7 7

1965 ............................................... 5 3

1966 ............................................... 7 1

1967 ............................................... 4 4

1968 ............................................... 3

1969 ............................................... 9

" 4

1970 ............................................... 7 4

1 9 7 1 ............................................... 6 5

Banks w ith deposits of

Less than $100,000..................... 107 83

$100,000 to $250,000................ 109 86

$250,000 to $500,000................ 62 37

$500,000 to $1,000,000 ............ 71 35

$ 1,000,000 to $2,000,000 . . . . 57 21

$2,000,000 to $5,000,000 . . . . 48 20

$5,000,000 to $10,000,000 . . . 24 5

$10,000,000 to $25,000,000 .. 9 4

$25,000,000 to $50,000,000 .. 5 1

$50,000,000 to $100,000,000 . 3 1

State

A lab am a ........................................ 4 2

Arkansas........................................ 7 6

C a lifo rn ia ...................................... 4 3

C olorado........................................ 5 3

Connecticut................................... 2 2

F lo rid a .......................................... 5 2

Georgia.......................................... 10 8

Idaho ............................................ 2 2

Illinois .......................................... 22 10

Ind ian a .......................................... 20 15

Io w a ............................................... 8 5

Kansas............................................ 10 6

Kentucky........................................ 25 19

Louisiana ..................................... 3 3

M a in e ............................................ 1

M aryland........................................ 5 2

Massachusetts.............................. 2

M ichigan........................................ 13 ” 5'

M innesota..................................... 5 5

Mississippi..................................... 3 3

Missouri ........................................ 51 37

M o ntana........................................ 5 3

Nebraska........................................ 7 7

New Hampshire............................ 1

New Jersey................................... 40 ’ 13

8,301 8,301

36,430 36,430

19,934 19,934

"2 15,817 14,363 1,454

6 95,424 1,012 94,412

4,729 4,729

" 3' 12,850 12,850

5 27,370 6,540 20,830

3 31,167 20,137 11,030

1 71,842 31,742 40,100

24 38,347 29,695 8,652

23 83,370 65,512 17,858

25 92,179 57,287 34,892

36 160,000 73,908 86,092

36 209,749 70,265 139,484

28 277,438 84,019 193,419

19 256,796 40,754 216,042

5 222,591 99,093 123,498

4 284,809 12,481 272,328

2 150,547 27,403 123,144

2 9,170 2,059 7,111

1 5,446 4,541 905

1 21,059 17,890 3,169

2 9,673 2,245 7,428

5,379 5,379

3 14,082 1,725 12,357

2 9,410 8,797 613

2,451 2,451

' n 82,295 44,376 37,919

5 30,006 12,549 17,457

3 17,725 5,736 11,989

4 6,715 3,824 2,891

6 39,925 18,964 20,961

6,087 6,087

" V 9,710 9,710

3 22,567 6,643 15,924

2 9,046 9,046

8 165,811 10,173 155,638

2,650 2,650

1,651 1,651

14 49,016 31,439 17,577

2 1,500 849 651

6,482 6,482

1,780 1,780

27 532,467 113,701 418,766

8,936 8,936 6,200

23,444 23,444 19,232

23,438 23,438 13,746

43,861 42,889 972 11,391

103,523 774 102,749 15,075

10,878 10,878 8,125

22,524 22,524 5,284

40,133 9,011 31,122 37,045

52,419 31,087 21,332 46,500

131,874 74,327 57,547 157,710s

6,418 4,947 1,471 5,000

17,759 13,920 3,839 12,906

22,315 12,921 9,394 15,615

53,869 26,265 27,604 35,522

76,202 27,628 48,574 44,136

156,704 64,666 92,038 87,2888

161,285 37,655 123,630 80,154

151,639 65,341 86,297 83,299

199,594 40,176 159,418 95,153

217,410 66,903 150,507 164,136

6,170 3,985 2,185 3,557

2,538 1,942 596 1,720

47,298 46,220 1,078 25,607

12,327 3,537 8,790 5,583

1,526 1,526 1,242

17,665 2,668 14,997 6,163

1,959 1,870 89 1,620

1,894 1,894 1,493

54,640 28,956 25,684 31,897

13,594 3,933 9,662 6,197

13,376 8,358 5,018 7,515

5,052 4,358 694 4,093

15,522 5,213 10,309 11,933

1,652 1,652 668

5,450 5,450 2,346

4,566 828 3,738 3,109

3,019 3,019 1,564

177,381 11,334 166,046 134,067

818 818 640

334 334 257

21,713 10,728 10,985 13,275s

1,095 215 880 639

8,729 8,729 5,549

296 296 117

210,542 49,040 161,502 95,712

6,200 154

19,232 318

13,746 587

10,918 473 601 123

735 14,340 25 1,186

8,125 231

5,284 845

7,631 29,414 245 2,999

26,744 19,756 499 701

50,855s 106,855 423s 2,587

4,309 691 88 154

11,554 1,352 209 173

10,549 5,066 164 611

20,427 15,095 408 2,334

21,937 22,199 542 3,693

44,004s 43,284 830s 6,512

26,137 54,017 573 7,493

53,031 30,268 595 6,506

9,660 85,493 532 25,580

47,281 116,855 339 2,917

2,562 995 90 91

1,576 144 43 48

12,906 12,701 627 995

2,059 3,524 72 932

1,242 8

2,145 4,018 63 601

1,551 69 33 33

1,493 29

23,915 7,982 437 791

3,096 3,101 39 384

6,444 1,071 116 113

3,601 492 55 72

4,505 7,428 103 361

668 10

2,346 665

735 2,374 9 371

1,564 1,030

9,652 124,415 171 3,832

640 17

257 5

6,009s 7,266 102s 679

186 453 6 21

5,549 55

117 8

40,055 55,657 403 20,154

BANKS CLOSED AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS 245

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 1 23. D E P O S IT O R S , D E P O S ITS , A N D D IS B U R S E M E N T S IN IN S U R E D B A N K S R E Q U IR IN G D IS B U R S E M E N T S BY T H E 

F E D E R A L D E P O S IT IN S U R A N C E C O R P O R A T IO N , 1 9 3 4 -1 9 7 1 -C O N T IN U E D 

BANKS GROUPED BY CLASS OF BANK, YEAR OF DEPOSIT PAYOFF OR DEPOSIT ASSUMPTION, AMOUNT OF DEPOSITS, AND STATE

Classification

Number of banks Number of depositors1

Deposits1 

(in thousands of dollars)

Disbursements by FDIC1 

(in thousands of dollars)

Total Payoff

cases

Assumption

cases

Total Payoff

cases

Assumption

cases

Total Payoff

cases

Assumption

cases

Principal disbursements

Advances and 

expenses2

Total Payoff

cases3

Assumption

cases4

Payoff

cases5

Assumption

cases6

New Y o r k ...................................... 26 3 23 269,621 28,440 241,181 145,439 13,286 132,153 67,997 10,836 57,161 32 10,847

North C a ro lin a ............................ 7 2 5 10,408 3,677 6,731 3,266 1,421 1,845 2,387 1,156 1,231 23 179

North D a k o ta ............................... 29 18 11 14,103 6,760 7,343 3,830 1,552 2,278 2,656 1,397 1,259 24 203

O h io ............................................... 4 2 2 13,751 7,585 6,166 7,223 2,345 4,877 2,098 1,610 488 7 44

O klahom a...................................... 12 8 4 27,650 20,149 7,501 18,920 11,053 7,867 10,275 7,936 2,339 178 395

O re go n .......................................... 2 1 1 3,439 1,230 2,209 2,670 1,368 1,302 1,948 986 962 11 81

Pennsylvania................................. 30 8 22 168,834 43,828 125,006 84,595 14,340 70,255 60,149 10,133 50,016 75 9,732

South C a ro lin a ............................ 2 1 1 1,848 403 1,445 849 136 714 274 136 138 10

South Dakota .............................. 23 22 1 12,515 11,412 1,103 2,987 2,862 126 2,411 2,388 23 26 9

Tennessee...................................... 12 8 4 12,358 9,993 2,365 1,942 1,620 322 1,278 1,164 114 28 25

Texas ............................................ 39 30 9 86,535 68,319 18,216 119,734 93,301 26,432 80,436 66,623 13,813 1,000 1,553

U ta h ............................................... 1 1 3 254 3,254 5,992 5,992 3,248 3,248 223

V e rm o n t........................................ 3 2 1 11,057 8,687 2,370 3,725 3,375 350 3,445 3,259 186 21 22

V irgin ia.......................................... 9 4 5 35,715 12,638 23,077 17,778 7,652 10,127 8,263 3,867 4,396 297 505

Washington 1 1 4,179 4,179 1,538 1,538 935 935 512

West Virginia 3 3 8 346 8 346 2 006 2,006 1,458 1,458 11

Wisconsin ..................................... 31 20 " n ‘ 26*898 18>39 8,159 9,512 5,966 3,545 7,188 5,096 2,092 54 434

W yoming........................................ 1 1 3,212 3,212 2,033 2,033 202 202 19

1 Adjusted to December 31,1971. In assumption cases, number of depositors refers to number of deposit accounts.

2Excludes $513 thousand of nonrecoverable insurance expenses in cases which were resolved w ithout payment of claims or a disbursement to facilitate assumption of deposits by another insured bank and other expenses of 

field liquidation employees not chargeable to liquidation activities,

in clu d e s estimated additional disbursements in active cases.

4Excludes excess collections turned over to banks as additional purchase price at termination of liquidation.

5These disbursements are not recoverable by the Corporation; they consist almost wholly of field payoff expenses.

in clu d e s advances to protect assets and liquidation expenses of $54,235 thousand, all of which have been fully recovered by the Corporation, and $1,737 thousand of nonrecoverable expenses.

7No case in 1962 required disbursements. Disbursement totals fo r each year relate to cases occurring during that year, including disbursements made in subsequent years, 

disbursem ents to depositors in bank closing on December 30, 1971, did not begin until 1972.

Note: Due to rounding differences, components may not add to totals.

246 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T able 124. R E C O V E R IE S A N D LOSSES B Y TH E F E D E R A L DE P O S IT IN S U R A N C E C O R P O R A T IO N ON P R IN C IP A L 

D IS BU R S EM EN TS FOR P R O T E C T IO N OF D E P O SITO RS, 1 9 3 4 -1 9 7 1 

(Amounts in thousands of dollars)

Litfuidation 

status and year 

of deposit payoff 

or deposit 

assumption

T otal...................

Status

Active.................

Terminated.........

Year4

1934 

1935 

1936 

1937 

1938 

1939 

1940 

194 1 

1942 

1943 

194 4 

1945 

1946 

1947 

1948 

1949 

1950 

195 1 

1952 

1953 

1954 

1955 

1956 

1957 

1958 

1959 

1960 

196 1 

1963 

196 4 

1965 

1966 

1967 

1968 

1969 

1970 

197 1 

All c Deposit payoff cases Deposit assumption cases

Number

of

banks

Principal

disbursements3

Recoveries 

to Dec. 

31, 1971

202 374,321 261,836

24 217,517 115,909

178 156,804 145,927

1 2,865 1,931

27 6,725 5,730

25 7,116 6,090

24 21,387 20,147

28 41,574 40,219

24 69,239 66,025

7 11,602 11,225

14 9,213 8,816

1 1,672 1,672

1 1,099 1,099

1 1,768 1,768

1 265 265

5 1,724 1,646

3 2,990 2,349

4 2,552 2,183

4 3,986 2,601

2 1,885 1,885

3 1,369 577

2 5.017 5.017

2 913 654

1 2,346 2,346

1 663 663

. ...

230 230

2 473 317

6 14,340 5,221

" 3 5,284 4,716

5 29,414 25,956

3 19,756 15,719

1 106,855 24,769

Number

of

banks

Principal

disbursements

Recoveries 

to Dec. 

31,1971

Estimated

additional

recoveries

Number

of

banks

Principal Recoveries 

to Dec. 

31.1971

Estimated

additional

recoveries

Estimated

additional

recoveries

54

441

25

69

75

74

60

43

15

20

5

2

1

1

5

3

4

4 

2

3 

2

2

5 

2

1

623,209®

357,2965

265,913

941

8,891

14,781

19,161

30,479

67,770

74,134

23,880

10,825

7,172

1,503

1.768

265

1,724

2,990

2,552

3,986

1,885

1,369

5,017

913

6,784

3,458

1,031

3,026

1,835

4,765

6,200

19,232

13,743

11,392

15,075

8,125

5,284

37,045

46,500

157,710s

172,022

238,670

734

6,205

12,325

15,610

28,055

60,618

70,338

23.290

10,136

7,048

1,462

1,768

265

1,646

2,349

2,183

2,601

1,885

577

5,017

654

6,554

3,244

1,031

2,998

1,738

4,765

4,698

17,140

11,655

6,091

5,832

6,426

4,716

30,417

23,804

24,817

1

1,692

454

88

1,733

233

34

6,034

16,594

115,642

42,537

27,244

207

2,682

2,455

3,549

2,425

7,153

3,796

591

688

123

40

641

369

1,385

’ ’ 792

258

230

28

97

1,501

400

1,636

5,214

7,511

1,465

535

595

6,100

17,250

30

263

9

24

42

50

50

32

19

8

6

4

248,8885

139,7795

109,109

941

6,026

8,056

12,045

9,092

26,196

4,895

12,278

1,612

5,500

404

4,438

2.795 

1,031

2.796

1,835

4,765

6,200

19,232

13,743

10,919

735

8,125

26,744

50,855s

56,113

92,743

734

4,274

6,595

9,520

7,908

20,399

4,313

12,065

1,320

5,376

363

4,208

2,581

1,031

2,768

1,738

4,765

4,698

17,140

11,655

5,774

611

6,426

" M d i

8,085

1

1,692

454

8-7

104

233

13,659

33,557

31,020

16,367

207

1,751

1,460

2,524

1,184

5,798

582

213

292

123

40

28

97

1,501

400

1,636

5,060

20

1,465

5,000

17,250

34

3,389

2,935

82,085

11,517

10,877

931

995

1,025

1,241

1,355

3,214

378

396

64

641

369

1,385

792

154

7,491

' ‘ 535 

70

1,100

includes estimated losses in active cases. Not adjusted for interest or allowable return, which was collected in some cases in which the disbursement was fully recovered, 

includes estimated additional disbursements in active cases.

3Excludes excess collections turned over to banks as additional purchase price at termination of liquidation.

4No case in 1962 required disbursements.

disbursements to depositors in bank closing on December 31, 1971, did not begin until 1972.

Note: Due to rounding differences, components may not add to totals.

BANKS CLOSED AND DEPOSIT INSURANCE DISBURSEMENTS 247

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
251

INDEX

Absorptions:

Of insured banks requiring disbursements by FDIC. See 

Banks in financial difficulties.

Of operating banks, 1971 .......................................................3-5, 242, 243

Of operating banks approved by FDIC, 1971 .......................... 3-5, 29-146

Of operating banks denied by FDIC, 1971 ................................... 147-169

Regulation o f ....................................................................................... 12, 13

Admission of banks to insurance. See also Applications from banks:

Applications for, 1971 ...............................................................................10

Number of banks admitted, by class of bank, 1971 ....................182, 183

Aid to operating insured b a n k .......................................................................... 5-6

Applications from banks ...............................................................................10-13

Areas outside continental United States, banks and branches located in:

Number, December 31, 1971 ................................................185, 186, 194

Assessments for deposit insurance............................................................... 20-23

Assets and liabilities of F D IC ........................................................................19, 20

Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks. See also Deposits:

Commercial banks:

Changes during 1971................................................................. xi, xn

Grouped by insurance status,

June 30, 1971, and December 31, 1971 .......................... 203-210

Sources of d a ta ...............................................................................202

Insured commercial banks:

Amounts, December call dates, 1961, 1967-1971 ............. 213-215

Amounts, June 30, 1971, and December 31, 1971

by class of b a n k ................................................................. 203-210

Major categories, average, 1963-1971 ..........................................227

Percentage distribution, by size of bank, 1971 .................. 220-222

Percentages of items, by size of bank, 1971 ...............................218

Mutual savings banks:

Changes during 1971........................................................................xn

Grouped by insurance status, June 30, 1971, and December

31, 1971...............................................................................211, 212

Sources of d a ta ...............................................................................202

Insured mutual savings banks:

Amount, December call dates, 1967-1971 .......................... 216, 217

Major categories, average, 1967-1971 .................................235, 236

Percentages of items, by size of bank, 1971 ...............................219

Assets purchased by FDIC from banks in financial difficulties......................4-6

Assumption of deposits of insured banks with financial aid of FDIC.

See also Banks in financial difficulties......................................... 3-5, 242, 243

Attorney General of the United States, summary 

reports on absorptions ............................................................................ 34-160

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
252 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Audit of F D IC .......................................................................................................25

Bad-debt reserves. See Valuation reserves.

Bank Merger Act of 1960..................................................................................... 12

Bank ownership, changes i n .................................................................................15

Bank performance, 1971 ...............................................................................xi, xn

Bank Protection Act of 1968 ...............................................................................15

Bank supervision. See Supervision of banks; Examination of 

insured banks.

Banking offices, number of. See Number of banks and branches.

Banks in financial difficulties:

Insured banks requiring disbursements by FDIC:

Aid to operating bank, 1 9 7 1 .........................................................5,6

Assets and liabilities of ..................................................................243

Deposit size o f .............................................................................4, 245

Deposits protected, 1934-1971 ....................................... 5, 244-246

Disbursements by FDIC, 1934-1971 ...............................6, 244-247

Failures in 1971 ............................................................................ 3-5

Loans made and assets purchased by F D IC ..................................... 6

Location by State, 1934-1971 ..............................................245, 246

Losses incurred by depositors...........................................................5

Losses incurred by F D IC ........................................................... 6, 247

Number of, 1934-1971 .................................................... ,............241

Number of deposit accounts, 1934-1971 ............................ 244-246

Recoveries by FDIC on assets acquired, 1934-1971 ............. 6, 247

Noninsured banks:

Number and deposits of commercial banks closed,

1934-1971 .......................................................................... 240,241

Banks, number of. See Number of banks and branches.

Board of Directors of FDIC. See Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. See Federal Reserve 

authorities.

Branches:

Establishment approved by FDIC, 1 971............................................10-12

Examination of, 1970 and 1971................................................................. 9

Number of. See Number of banks and branches.

Brokered funds:

Involved in bank failures in 1971 ............................................................... 3

Call reports. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks;

Reports from banks.

Capital of banks. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Banks in 

financial difficulties; Income of insured commercial banks;

Examination of insured banks.

Cease-and-desist and termination-of-deposit insurance proceedings...........8, 9

Charge-offs by banks. See Income of insured commercial banks;

Income of insured mutual savings banks; Valuation reserves.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
INDEX 253

Civil Rights Act nondiscrimination requirements

in real estate lending activities.........................................................16, 177, 178

Civil Rights Act of 1968 ..................................................................................... 16

Class of bank, banking data presented by:

Absorptions ...............................................................................14, 182, 183

Income of insured commercial banks, 1971 ................................. 229,230

Insured banks requiring disbursements by FDIC, 1934-1971 ............. 244

Number of banks and banking offices, 1971 ............... 182, 183, 186-194

Number of banks and deposits ................................................................195

Classification of banks...............................................................................180, 181

Closed banks. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Commercial banks. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Deposits;

Income of insured commercial banks; Number of banks and branches.

Comptroller of the C urrency.................................................. iv, v, 6, 10, 12, 18

Consolidations. See Absorptions.

Consumer Credit Protection Act ........................................................................16

Credit, bank. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks.

Criminal record information, dissemination

to insured banks..................................................................................... 175, 176

Demand deposits. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Deposits.

Deposit insurance coverage ..................................................................xn, xm, 25

Deposits insured by FDIC:

Estimated insured deposits, December 31, 1934-1971 .......................... 25

Increase in maximum per depositor .......................................................xm

Survey of, on June 30, 1970 ......................................................................xn

Deposits of: See also Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks:

Banks closed because of financial difficulties, 1934-1971 ....................241

Commercial banks:

By insurance status and type of bank, and type of account,

June 30, 1971 .................................................................... 203-206

By insurance status and type of bank, and type of account,

December 31, 1971 ........................................................... 207-210

By State and deposit size of bank......................................... 196-200

Insured commercial banks:

Average demand and time deposits, 1963-1971 .......................... 227

By class of bank, December 31, 1971 ..........................................195

By deposit size of bank, December 31, 1971...............................195

December call dates, 1961, 1967-1971 ....................................... 214

Mutual savings banks, by insurance status, June 30, 1971, and

December 31, 1971 ....................................................................212

Insured mutual savings banks:

Average demand and time deposits, 1967-1971 .......................... 236

December call dates, 1967-1971 .................................................. 217

Deposits, number of insured commercial banks with given ratios of

demand to total deposits.................................................... ............................221

Directors of FDIC. See Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
254 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Disbursements. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Dividends:

To depositors in insured mutual savings banks. See Income of insured 

mutual savings banks.

To stockholders of insured commercial banks. See Income of insured 

commercial banks.

Earnings of banks. See Income of insured commercial banks; Income of 

insured mutual savings banks.

Economic Stabilization Act Amendments of 1971.................................................................................................. 176

Employees:

FDIC .....................................................................................................18-19

Insured commercial banks,

number and compensation, 1963-1971 ..................................... 226, 227

Insured mutual savings banks, number and

compensation, 1967-1971 ........................................................... 235, 236

Examination of insured banks.

By FDIC, 1 97 1 ..........................................................................................6-9

Regions and regional directors ..................................................................vi

Expenses of banks. See Income of insured commercial banks;

Income of insured mutual savings banks.

Expenses of FDIC ..........................................................................................20-23

Failures. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation:

Actions on applications ......................................................................10-14

Assessments on insured banks............................................................. 20-23

Audit ........................................................................................................... 25

Banks examined by, and submitting reports t o ..................................... 6-7

Borrowing power ....................................................................................... 20

Capital stock................................................................................................ 23

Coverage of deposit insurance.................................................... x ii, xm, 25

Deposit insurance disbursements ...................................3-6, 242, 244-247

Deposit insurance fund (surplus) .......................................................19-25

Directors (members of the Board) ............................................v, 5, 18, 20

Divisions................................................................................................ iv, 18

Employees ............................................................................................18, 19

Examination of banks...............................................................................6-8

Financial statements, 1971..................................................................19-23

Housekeeping amendments............................................................. 176-177

Income and expenses, 1933-1971 ............................................................. 23

Insured banks requiring disbursements by. See Banks in 

financial difficulties.

Loans to, and purchase of assets from, insured banks......................6, 247

Losses incurred, 1934-1971 ............................................................... 6, 247

Methods of protecting depositors.......................................................3, 5, 6

Officials .........................................................................................................v

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
INDEX 255

Organization................................................................................................ iv

Payments to insured depositors ..................................... 3-6, 242, 244-247

Publications ..........................................................................................17, 18

Recoveries ............................................................................................6, 247

Regions......................................................................................................... vi

Regulation of bank securities............................................................. 13-15

Regulation of interest rates.................................................. ................... 173

Reports from banks .............................................................................17f 18

Research................................................................................................ 17, 18

Reserve for losses on assets acquired.................................................. 19-21

Rules and regulations......................................................................176-178

Sources and application of funds ............................................................. 22

Supervisory activities ............................................................................ 6-18

Survey of accounts and deposits.......................................................xu, xm

Training programs.................................................................................16, 17

Federal Home Loan Bank Board ......................................................................173

Federal legislation, 1971 .......................................................................... 173-176

Federal Reserve authorities ....................................... 6, 10, 12, 16-18, 173-175

Federal Reserve member banks. See Class of bank, banking data presented by.

General Accounting O ffice .................................................................................25

Income of F D IC .............................................................................................. 20-23

Income of insured commercial banks:

Amounts of principal components:

Annually, 1963-1971 ........................................................... 226, 227

By class of bank, 1971 .........................................................229, 230

By size of bank, 1971 ........................................................... 231,232

Classification of income data .........................................................223-225

Ratios of income items:

Annually, 1963-1971 .......................... . .......................................228

By size of bank, 1971 ........................................................... 233,234

Sources of d a ta ..........................................................................................225

Income of insured mutual savings banks:

Amounts of principal components, 1967-1971 .............................235, 236

Ratios of income and expense items, 1967-1971 ........................ 237, 238

Sources of d a ta ..........................................................................................225

Insolvent banks. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Insurance status, banks classified by:

Assets and liabilities of, June 30, 1971, and December 31, 1971 203-212

Changes in number of, 1971 ........................................................... 182, 183

Class of bank and size...............................................................................195

Income of insured commercial banks............................................229, 230

Percentage of banks insured, by State, December 31, 1971 .... 186-194

Insured banks. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Banks in 

financial difficulties; Deposits; Income of insured commercial banks; 

Income of insured mutual savings banks; Number of banks and branches. 

Insured commercial banks not members of the Federal Reserve System. 

Digitized 

See Class of bank, banking data presented by.

for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
256 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Insured deposits. See Banks in financial difficulties; Deposit insurance 

coverage.

Insured State banks members of the Federal Reserve System. See Class 

of bank, banking data presented by.

Interest rates paid by banks:

On deposits, regulation o f ........................................................................ 173

Survey of, by FDIC ............................................................................17, 18

Investments. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Assets and 

liabilities of FDIC; Banks in financial difficulties.

Legislation relating to deposit insurance and banking:

Federal, enacted in 1971 ............................................................... 173-176

Loans. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Banks in financial 

difficulties.

Losses:

Of banks. See Income of insured commercial banks; Income of 

insured mutual savings banks.

Of F D IC ................................................................................................ 6,247

On loans, reserves for. See Valuation reserves.

Provision for, in insured banks, 1963-1971 ................. 226-228, 235, 237

Mergers. See Absorptions.

Methods of protecting depositors.......................................................................... 3

Methods of tabulating banking data. See Banking data, classification of.

Mortgage lending by insured commercial banks, survey o f ...............................17

Mutual savings banks. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks;

Deposits; Income of insured banks; Number of banks and branches.

National banks. See Class of bank, banking data presented by.

National banks, State taxation o f ............................................................. 173-175

New banks, 1 9 7 1 ................................................................................................ 182

Noninsured banks. See also Absorptions; Admission of banks to insurance; Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Banks in financial 

difficulties; Classification of banks; Class of bank, banking data presented 

by; Deposits; Number of banks and branches; Reports from banks.

Number of banks and branches:

Banks:

By insurance status and type of bank, June 30, 1971, and

December 31, 1971 .................................................. 206,210,212

By insurance status, type of bank, number of branches, and

State, December 31, 1971 ................................................ 186-194

By State and deposit size of b a n k ....................................... 196-200

Changes during 197 1 ................. .......................................xi, 182-185

Branches:

By insurance status and type of bank, December 31, 1971 . . . .183 

By insurance status, type of bank, and State, December 31,

1971 ..................................................................................... 186-194

Changes during 1971.........................................................xi, 183-185

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
INDEX 257

Insured commercial banks:

December call dates, 1963-1971 .................................................. 227

December 31, 1971, by class of bank and deposit size of bank .195

December 31, 1971, by State ..............................................186-194

Distributed by capital ratios and distribution of assets and

deposits, December 31, 1971 ............................................ 220-222

Insured mutual savings banks:

December call dates, 1967-1971 .................................................. 217

December 31, 1971, by deposit size of b an k...............................195

Mutual savings banks, by State, December 31, 1971 .................... 186-194

Noninsured banks by State, December 31, 1971 ........................ 186-194

Unit banks, by insurance status and State, December 31, 1971 . 186-194 

Obligations of banks. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks.

Officers of insured banks. See Employees.

Officials of F D IC .................................................................................................... v

Operating banks. See Number of banks and branches.

Payments to depositors in closed insured banks. See Banks in financial 

difficulties.

Personnel. See Employees.

Possessions, banks and branches located in. See Areas outside 

continental United States, banks and branches located in.

Protection of depositors. See Banks in financial difficulties; Deposit 

insurance coverage.

Real estate lending, Civil Rights Act 

nondiscrimination requirements.................................................... 16, 177, 178

Receivership, insured banks placed in. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Recoveries:

By banks on assets charged off. See Income of insured commercial 

banks; Income of insured mutual savings banks.

By FDIC on disbursements. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Regions, F D IC .......................................................................................................vi

Reports from banks....................................................................................... 17, 18

Reserves:

Of FDIC, for losses on assets acquired ..............................................19-21

Of insured banks for losses on assets. See Valuation reserves. 

With Federal Reserve Banks. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of 

banks.

Rules and regulations of the FDIC. See Federal Deposit Insurance

Corporation.

Salaries and wages:

FDIC ........................................................................................................... 21

Insured banks. See Income of insured commercial banks; Income of 

insured mutual savings banks.

Savings and loan associations......................................................................14, 173

Savings and time deposits. See also Deposits ..................................... xi, x i i , 173

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
258 FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Securities. See Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks; Assets and

liabilities of FDIC; Banks in financial difficulties.

Securities, bank, regulation o f ............................................................. 13-15, 177

Securities, tender offers and

acquisitions o f .................................................................................................. 177

Size of bank, data for banks classified by amount of deposits:

Assets and liabilities, percentages of, insured banks, 1971 .........218, 219

Banks requiring disbursements by FDIC, 1934-1971 .......................... 245

Income of insured commercial banks, 1971 ................................. 231,232

Income ratios of insured commercial banks, 1971 ......................233, 234

Number and deposits of all banks...........................................................195

Number of employees of insured commercial banks, 1971 ................. 232

Number of insured commercial banks, 1971..........................................195

Number of insured commercial banks, grouped by ratios of selected

items to assets and deposits, December 31, 1971 ...................... 220-222

State, banking data classified by:

Changes in commercial banks and branches, 1971 ...................... 184-185

Disbursements, deposits, and depositors in insured banks requiring

disbursements by FDIC, 1934-1971 ......................................... 245, 246

Number and deposits of commercial

banks, by deposit size of b an k.................................................... 196-200

Number of banks and branches, by class of bank and type of office,

December 31, 1971 ...................................................................... 186-194

Percentage of banks insured, December 31, 1971 ........................ 186-194

State banks. See Class of bank, banking data presented by.

Stockholders of banks, net profits available for. See Income of insured

commercial banks.

Supervision of banks:

By F D IC .................................................................................................. 6-18

Federal legislation.............................................................................173-176

Suspensions. See Banks in financial difficulties.

Taxation of national banks, by States .................................................... 173-175

Taxes paid by insured banks. See Income of insured commercial banks;

Income of insured mutual savings banks.

Terminations of insurance for unsafe and unsound practices........................8, 9

Time and savings deposits. See also D eposits.......................... xi, xn, 17-18, 173

Trust assets of insured commercial banks, re p o rt..............................................17

Truth-in-Lending A c t............................................................................................16

Unit banks, by insurance status and State, December 31, 1971 ........... 186-194

Valuation reserves. See also Assets, liabilities, and capital of banks:

Amounts held, June 30, 1971, and December 31, 1971 . . .202, 205, 210

Amounts held, December call dates, 1961, 1967-1971 ........................215

Violations of law or regulations, banks charged w it h ..................................... 8, 9

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis