New Britain herald., 1926-12-09
BRANCH BANKING BILL
 \ HARD KNOT


 \ HARD KNOT
 Legislation increasing. the powers of national banks and clarifying the national banking act has been pend ing before Congress for nearly three | years. The President in his mes sage declared it within the limita- ton of sound banking for Congress 10 place the national banks upon a flair equality with their competi- tors" the state banks, and he voiced the opinion that means will be found to harmonze the differences on branch banking legislation be- tween the Senate and the House and that such legislation be promptly enacted.
 The legislation referred 10, of course, is the Pepper -McFaddcn banking bill, which was passed by both houses of Congress during the last session, but which remained in conference at the close of the ses- sion, due 10 the differences between the two houses over the Hull amend ment.
 This amendment needs clarifica- tion. The original bin gave nation al banks the right to establish branch banks within the limits of the cities in which they were located in states where state banks were authorized to have branches. In other words, In any state where branch banks were permitted at all the national banks would be placed on parity with all other banks as regards the privilege of estab- fishing branch banks.
 Along came the Hull amendment, one that has created more diverg- ing opinions than any banking legis- lation since the federal reserve sys- tenn was preached, if not more, as there was no great diversity of opinion regarding the value of the federal reserve system, but more difference of opinion as to what particular party should get the credit for originating the system and putting it into operatl.
 The object of the Hull amendment is to limit the right of national banks in establishing branches to those states In which at the time of the passage of the bill. the policy of the state Is in favor of branch banking. The effect of this amend ment would be to prohibit the es- tabishment of branches of national banks in any except the 22 states which now permit branch banking by their own institutions, notwith- standing any future change in policy by the remaining states in favor of branch banking by state banks.
 The Senate has refused to accept the Hull amendment to date and the House has twice returned the bill to conference rather than agree to the elimination of the amendment. A break In the deadlock will be re- quired before the bill can be acted upon at this session of Congress.
 Despite what the President may wish. it is very unlikely that any action will be taken at the present session of Congress. In the first place, the subject is of too contro- yersial a nature 10 settle rapidly; ed about it and there does not ap- pear any reasonable doubt that the session will be far too short for ex- tended debate upon the question, much less one resulting in final passage of a bill; lastly, in states where the bill and the amendment would have particular force there are local politics involved and repre- scntativcs and senators are watch ing their step carefully in order to avoid political onsequences-lame ducks in Congress excepted.
 The question of renewing the charters of federal reserve banks, which the President rightfully sug- gested be done, thereby removing uncertainty and "insuring q continu- alton of the policies and present use fulness of the federal reserve sys- tem," Is pretty much in the same category, except there is no differ ence of opinion about it.
 The original charters of the fed craI reserve banks were for a period of 20 years. The banks have been in operation for l2 years and their present charters expire in 1884. There would be no especial need for