STATEMENT OF ALEXANDER MINTZ, SHAKER SAVINGS Mr. MINTZ. My name is Alexander Mintz. The CHAIRMAN. Of interest, this morning Mr. Mintz told me his son graduated from Washington and Lee in my hometown and his daughter from Hollins College, where my wife graduated, which is only 40 miles from my home. So I listen with interest to his views. Mr. MINTZ. Thank you so much. We really love the State of Virginia. I mean that sincerely. My name is Alexander Mintz. I am president of Shaker Savings Association. I testified out of turn yesterday. I was scheduled for this morning, and I did not have my suitcase of materials with me. I will just take this one moment. I have in my hand and I will leave with your clerk a chart of the 100 largest savings and loan associations in the United States as of June 30, 1959. It is significant that although the Federal savings and loan system started in 1934, although the savings and loan industry started in 1831 and was exclusively a State system until 1934, that already of this 100 largest companies in the United States, 67 are Federal savings and loan associations. The holding company operation is a holding operation. It would tend to buffer and support and shore up in competition with a Federal system the State type of savings and loan association. Thank you very much. The CHAIRMAN. We will insert in the record this tabulation that Mr. Mintz has just furnished, the 100 largest savings and loan associations. That is very interesting. (The document referred to follows:) The 100 largest savings and loan associations in United States, in order of size of savings share account totals as of June 30, 1959, compared with Dec. 31, 1958 The 100 largest savings and loan associations in United States, in order of size of savings share account totals as of June 30, 1959, compared with Dec. 31, 1958-Continued The 100 largest savings and loan associations in United States, in order of size of savings share account totals as of June 30, 1959, compared with Dec. 31, 1958-Continued The 100 largest savings and loan associations in United States, in order of size of savings share account totals as of June 30, 1959, compared with Dec. 31, 1958-Continued Now the gentleman from Hollywood, Mr. Lytton. We would recognize him again if he wants to speak. STATEMENT OF BART LYTTON, PRESIDENT, LYTTON SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION, HOLLYWOOD, CALIF.-Resumed Mr. LYTTON. Mr. Chairman, may I thank you for recognizing me for the purpose of submitting one amendment, a short amendment, to the present bill. Prior to the reading of that amendment I should like to state, so that it is clearly understood, that the group of men who have testified here in opposition to the bill remain in concert that the bill is a bad bill from many points of view and that in offering the amendment which is offered in very good faith, we do so because we feel that it is crucial and critical if this bill should pass in its present form. We do not grant that it should nor that it will, but we feel that the amendment we have to offer is most pertinent and that if it were to be examined even by the Home Loan Bank Board they would see very great sense in it. In yesterday's testimony and in prior testimony great stress was placed upon the matter of local management. We, too, in the savings and loan industry and in the holding companies of the savings and loans feel strongly about local management. We maintained yesterday correctly that we have local management. In light of the local management aspect, however, we should like to be afforded the same privilege in the holding company, in the event of passage of the act, that is already part of the warp and woof of the Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation supervisory structure. That is to say that the limitation placed upon existing savings and loan associations, while they may vary, is never less, to the best of our knowledge and belief, than 50 miles. That is to say, it is considered to be local in any instance where its radius is not more than 50 miles. Thank you very much. Here is the amendment. The CHAIRMAN. We will be glad to consider it. Mr. LYTTON. It is a short amendment, and I will at this juncture read it and make a short statement explaining it, and thank you for your time. Proposed amendment to H.R. 7244. Add subsection (g): "(g) Nothing contained in this section shall apply to any acquisition by a company of control of an insured institution located within a 50-mile radius of the principal office of the company." This amendment is very simple, very clear and very plain. It is not ambiguous; there is no question as to its intent. It is intended to buttress the savings and loan industry generally. There be no question of self-interest involved here. I should like to point out that ours is to date the smallest of the holding companies going before the market. In our area there are a number of them and that I would be glad to meet them competitively in a situation of acquisition within 50 miles of our office. I think that the time that that would arise could be a period either of distress or a time when any given institution might be in difficulty. The chairman and the members of the committee know that it is the general procedure when an insured institution is in difficulty, either a commercial bank, a savings bank, or a savings and loan association, that the insuring corporation sees to it that it merges with another wholesome, whole, and healthy organization. By the language of the act as passed by the House and presently being considered by the Senate, holding companies would not be available with their vast resources. We would not be able to step in to rescue an institution that might be in difficulty. We would be prevented by law, apparently, by the present language in the bill, from stepping in to rescue a situation where people in our community might get badly hurt. The CHAIRMAN. May I ask you if you think that the amendment is limited to that, or does the amendment provide, since it deals with section 408-and that is the whole bill-that new holding companies could be created to take over all the stock companies that would be in a radius of 50 miles of where it would be operating? Mr. LYTTON. The amendment contemplates that any holding company could acquire any institution within 50 miles of its-may I again point out, sir-principal office. There is no ambiguity of language here. We are not talking about crossing State lines. We are not even talking about extension within the State. We are talking of local management and of local management being in a position to protect, in case of difficulty, another insti |