« 이전계속 »
thing about them in the past 10 days; there is a great deal more for us to learn, and the men whom you are consulting
Mr. MAPES. I am not trying to be controversial, but for one I should like to have before the committee the testimony of men like yourself who are willing to say that specific provisions in this bill are all right
Mr. SMITH (interposing). If you will ask me about anyone. We did not consider all.
Mr. MAPES (continuing). Or not.
Mr. Smith. I will answer any definite question about definite proposition of the bill.
Mr. MAPES. Well, I am asking you about that one.
Mr. Smith. That was not submitted to the Treasury for consideration.
Mr. Mapes. And you passed no judgment upon it?
Mr. MAPES. The provision on page 30, Mr. Smith, relating to specialists acting as brokers, and as dealers.
Mr. Smith. That section of the bill was submitted to us as being a part of the procedure to eliminate the floor trader and
Mr. Mapes. As I understood you, you do not express an opinion as to whether the floor trader should be eliminated or not.
Mr. Smith. We are not expressing an opinion upon that phase of the bill.
Mr. MAPES. Mr. Smith-
During the hearings here that lasted about 3 weeks, there constantly came up, and it was very properly brought up, that the committee would like to know from the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board, what they thought about the provisions of the bill having to do with banks, banking credits, Government financing, and so forth, and I told the President that, and he communicated with Mr. Smith and with Governor Black and asked them to study the bill with reference to those sections and when Mr. Smith says that he was not asked to do things, other things, it was not that anybody who had anything to do with the drafting of the bill was not perfectly willing to submit anything to the Treasury or the Federal Reserve Board; but on the specific questions that had been raised by the committee, the President asked the Treasury and the Federal Reserve Board to study this bill.
Mr. Smith. And, of course, we did.
The CHAIRMAN. I understand what Mr. Smith is stating to the committee, which is entirely a frank statement and entirely a true statement, that is, after they studied this bill for 8 days, with reference to those particular things, that it is satisfactory to the Treasury, so far as they are concerned, and that he did not go into a great many of the technicalities of the bill, because he was not asked to.
Mr. SMITH. That is correct, and I cannot express an opinion about anything that we did not study.
The CHAIRMAN. Exactly. And, there has not been any other condition, Mr. Smith.
Mr. Smith. No, sir; absolutely not.
Mr. Smith. No; absolutely not.
The CHAIRMAN (continuing). That the sections of this bill that you have no practical knowledge that you disapprove them any more than you approve them.
Mr. SMITH. That is correct.
The CHAIRMAN. Well, what I said was not in criticism of your statement at all. I just wanted to bring that out.
Mr. Mapes. I am in a good deal of the same position as Mr. Smith. I quite approve of the general purposes sought to be accomplished by this legislation, but in enacting it into law we have got to study individual and specific provisions and I was endeavoring to find out, to get Mr. Smith's judgment on some of the specific provisions.
Mr. Smith. You happen to be asking about the ones we did not study.
Mr. MAPES. You said that you studied section 10.
Mr. Mapes. In view of your general statements I have got to ask specific questions in order to get specific knowledge.
Mr. Smith. I will be glad to answer.
Mr. MAPES. Mr. Smith, there is a provision in lines 23 and 24, giving the Federal Reserve Board apparently power to regulate loans to members of the stock exchanges.
Mr. Smith. Well, that is an independent transaction, previously announced in connection with another question.
Mr. MAPES. That is quite independent of banks, is it not, and I wonder just why that was put in.
Mr. Smith. I could not tell you why it was put in. It was in there when the bill was presented to us.
Mr. MAPES. Do you think-
Mr. Smith. No, sir. I think that it was in there when the bill was presented. We did not make any suggestions concerning 11, I think.
Mr. Mapes. That seems to permit the Federal Reserve Board to go outside its banking connections.
Mr. Smith. What was the last question?
Mr. Mapes. I say, a hasty reading of that seems to indicate that it authorizes the Federal Reserve Board to go outside of its banking connections in regulating loans.
Mr. Smith. Well, the section as drafted was satisfactory to us. I mean that provision of the section. We did not consider the regulatory part of it at all.
Mr. MAPES. You see the following language reads:
Provided, That the provisions of this paragraph in regard to lending shall not apply to a member bank of the Federal Reserve System.
That particular provision seems to authorize the Federal Reserve Board to make the regulations for brokers' loans.
Mr. Smith. Loans at the post.
Mr. Smith. We went through that section and it did not arouse, or bring forth any suggestions on our part.
Mr. MAPES. What is the purpose of that particular provision?
The CHAIRMAN. I might say the purpose of that, in bringing the Federal Reserve in there, is because it does have to do with lending,
Mr. Smith. It is the lending of the issuer.
The CHAIRMAN. And there was expressed here, especially by the opponents to the bill, and by those favorable to it, that upon anything that had to do with banks or bank credits and Government financing in anywise, before the Commission should make a final order, that they should at least have the approval of the Treasury and/or the Federal Reserve Board.
Mr. KENNEY. Mr. Chairman,
Mr. MAPES. That seems to me to say that an issuer, before borrowing money from a broker, even on the floor of the exchange, must comply with the regulations of the Federal Reserve Board.
Mr. Smith. As I recall now, that provision of the bill was to prevent dumping outside money in the call market.
Mr. Mapes. Yes.
Mr. Smith. And met with our approval. This is a long bill, and sometimes we do not recall all of its provisions.
Mr. MAPES. Yes, I appreciate that, Mr. Smith. Did you examine the provisions with regard to proxies?
Mr. Smith. We have no suggestions to offer concerning that. That is a part of the regulatory powers of the bill about which we were not supposed to offer an opinion.
Mr Mapes. That is all I want to ask.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Mr. Smith, does the Treasury Department approve this bill or not?
Mr. Smith. That, I thought, I should say that has been covered by previous questions.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Well, is your answer that it does or does not, in whole or in part?
Mr. Smith. The Treasury approves the part of the bill that was submitted for our consideration. We were not asked to
Mr. WOLVERTON. Did the Treasury see this bill before it had been completed in final draft as it now appears before this committee as H.R. 8720?
Mr. Smith. Did I?
Mr. Smith. As I have explained before, I am not in a position to answer that question at all.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Why not?
Mr. Smith. I represent the Treasury here, and in that capacity I am answering questions as to things that have been submitted to us.
Mr. WOLVERTON. You mean you were sent here with instructions not to give an opinion on this bill?
Mr. SMITH. No, sir.
Mr. Smith. No, sir; but I prefer not to, because I am representing the Treasury. Mr. WOLVERTON. Well, this bill has a very wide scope.
Mr. Smith. That does not mean one thing or another. It simply means that I am voicing the opinion of the Treasury as approved by the Secretary of the Treasury, and that is what we are saying.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Then, there is no misunderstanding upon my part that the Treasury does not wish to be considered here today as approving this bill?
Mr. Smith. Now, wait a minute, or as disapproving it.
Mr. Smith. Well, we were invited by your chairman to answer certain questions as to things that were submitted to us.
Mr. WOLVERTON. You do not mean that you were asked to come here to answer only certain questions?
Mr. Smith. About certain sections, parts of the bill, matters that have been submitted to us.
Mr. WOLVERTON. So that, notwithstanding the fact that you have read this bill through and have asked that you be given a further opportunity to present your views, you do not wish today to do so?
Mr. SMITH. We have been asked to come here to answer your questions, about certain parts of the bill that were submitted for our consideration, and about those I shall be glad to attempt to answer your questions, for the Treasury. I am sorry that I cannot answer anything else.
Mr. WOLVERTON. You have stated that the major objectives of this National Securities Exchange Act are:
(1) To establish Federal supervision over securities exchanges.
And you have stated that with these general objectives, the Treasury is in full accord?
Mr. Smith. Yes, sir.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Are you in accord with the means that have been provided in this bill to carry out those general objectives?
Mr. Smith. The parts that have been submitted to us are satisfactory.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Well, notwithstanding the fact that you are in full accord with the objectives of the bill, do you mean to say that you are not interested in that
Mr. Smith. Your committee has not submitted those things for our consideration.
Mr. WOLVERTON. I beg your pardon?
Mr. Smith. Your committee did not submit those things for our consideration.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Well
Mr. Smith. How can we pass on them until they ask us about them? It cannot be done.
Mr. Wolverton. That is what I am attempting to do now.
Mr. Smith. Well, I cannot. Are you submitting those, asking them now?
Mr. WOLVERTON. I am asking you, very frankly, Mr. Smith. It is my thought that this bill is so wide in its scope and in its effect that I think this committee is entitled to have the unqualified opinion, yes or no, of the Treasury, of the Comptroller of the
Currency, of the Federal Reserve Board, and of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, and I confess that it is very disappointing to me that a department of the Government as important as the Treasury is should come here, by its representative, this morning and state that "we cannot say yes or no
Mr. Smith. Because you did no ask us.
Mr. WOLVERTON. I am intensely interested, I do not have the responsibility that the Treasury has, and yet I feel a responsibility.
Mr. Smith. You asked us certain questions. We are willing to answer as to those things about which you have inquired. Now, if we are not answering them, it is not our fault. The chairman of your committee has explained that we were asked to do certain things.
Mr. WOLVERTON. I do not understand that there is any limitation, so far as this committee is concerned, as to what you may testify to. If there is any such limitation, I am not aware of it. You came here as the representative of probably the most important department of our Government at this time, prepared to give, as I thought, your opinion with respect to this important legislation, and it would have been very helpful to us to have had it.
Mr. Smith. I am very anxious not to have a misunderstanding on that point with you, Mr. Wolverton. I am just as anxious as you are.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Would you briefly, then
Mr. Smith (interposing). The President asked us to consider, as the chairman of your committee has stated, a few moments ago, certain portions of the bill.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Would you prefer
Mr. Smith (continuing). And for that reason, this interrogation must be confined to the subject of our study.
Mr. WOLVERTON. Would you prefer that the questioning should be wide in scope, or confined to the particular questions you have referred to?
Mr. Smith. That is for the Secretary of the Treasury to answer. I have no preference. I am just in this war to do what I can to help out.
Mr. WOLVERTON. I am, too, although I am of the minority party, and I am particularly anxious, in this important legislation to do the thing that will attain the objectives which you have referred to in your statement, and to do it in an effectual way and to do it in a way that will not unduly upset business, and I know of no department of the Government, in my opinion, that should be more qualified, more ready, more willing, to give advice to this committee than the Department of the Treasury.