The following post is from a booklet published by Monetary Science Publishing. It is it the record of testimony given in a suit brought at common law in Minnesota in 1968 -- not all that long ago.
Explaining what the banks don't want you to know may shatter most of the public's religiously entrenched assumptions about money and banking. What the general public "thinks" it knows about money and banking is largely based upon a collection of canards gleaned from TV, radio, newspapers and their own personal experiences with money and banking.
There is no academic curriculum that offers an intellectively [sic] comprehensive course in the modern "Credit Money" mechanism and banking. There is no academic or news media that explains the awesome power possessed in having access to clearing your own checks. If you and I could clear our own checks, through our own operated check-clearing house, we could then create "checkbook" money to buy/pay for our investments, just like the banks do. Checkbook or Credit Money is not a cash currency "representing" money. Credit Money, better
known as Bank Credit, is a cash currency "substitute" that circulates in the marketplace by means of checks as cash.
In the following pages you will find where high bank officials admitted that banks do create checkbook "deposit credits" to the credit of their clients' checking accounts, as their loans and investment payment funds. You will also learn how an attorney has successfully voided a bank foreclosure, because the bank admitted creating the checkbook "credits" as the funds it loaned to its client.
Even though attorney Jerome Daly was forced into a disbarment procedure for challenging the bankers' recondite practices, he successfully demonstrated that any knowledgeable attorney in the bank "credit money" mechanism in a just court can successfully challenge the bankers' unrelenting foreclosure of homes, businesses, farms and mills.
-- Peter Cook, M.Sc., June 3, 1993
A LANDMARK DECISION
Reprinted in part from The Daily Eagle, Issue of Feb. 7, 1969
The fate of companies and individuals -- and governments is entirely at the mercy of banks. Their power is stupendous, both in creating and granting of loans, but in their arbitrary recall, with or without notice. This Court decision in the United States may well be the beginning of the end of some of their powers.
A Minnesota Trial Court's decision holding the Federal Reserve Act unconstitutional and void; Holding the National Banking Act unconstitutional and void; Declaring a mortgage acquired by the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota in the regular course of its business, along with the foreclosure and the Sheriff's Sale to be void. This decision, which is legally sound, has the effect of declaring all private mortgages on real and personal property, and all U.S. and State bonds held by the Federal Reserve, National and State Banks to be null and void. This amounts to an emancipation of this Nation from personal, national and state debt purportedly owed to this banking system. Every American owes it to himself, his country, and to the people of the world, for that matter, to study this decision very carefully and to understand it. For upon it hangs the question of freedom or slavery.
On May 8, 1964 the writer Mr. Jerome Daly executed a Note and Mortgage to the First National Bank of Montgomery, Minnesota, which is a member of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Both Banks are private owned and are a part of the Federal Reserve Banking System.
In the Spring of 1967 Mr. Daly was in arrears $476.00 in the payments on this Note and Mortgage. The Note was secured by a Mortgage on real property in Spring Lake Township in Scott County, Minnesota. The Bank foreclosed by advertisement and bought the property at a Sheriff's Sale held on June 26, 1967. Mr. Daly made no further payments after June 26, 1967 and did not redeem within the 12 month period of time allotted by law after the Sheriff's Sale.
The Bank brought an action to recover the possession to the property in the Justice of the Peace Court at Savage, Minnesota. The first 2 Justices were disqualified by Affidavit of Prejudice. The first by Mr. Daly and the second by the bank. A third one refused to handle the case. It was then sent, pursuant to law, to Martin V. Mahoney, Justice of Peace, Credit River Township, Scott County, Minnesota, who presided at a Jury trial on December 7, 1968. The Jury found the Note and Mortgage to be void for failure of a lawful consideration and refused to give any validity to the Sheriff's Sale. Verdict was for Mr. Daly with costs in the amount of $75.00.
The president of the Bank admitted that the Bank created the money and credit upon its books by which it acquired or gave as consideration for the Note; that this was standard banking practice, that the credit first came into existence when they created it; that he knew of no United States Statutes which gave them the right to do this. This is the universal practice of these banks.
Mr. Morgan appeared at the trial on December 7, 1968 and appeared as a witness to be candid, open, direct, experienced and truthful. He testified to 20 years of experience with the Bank of America in Los Angeles, the Marquette National Bank of Minneapolis and the Plaintiff in this case. He seemed to be familiar with the operations of the Federal Reserve System.
He freely admitted that his Bank created all of the Money or credit upon its books with which it acquired the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964. The credit first came into existence when the Bank created it upon its books. Further he freely admitted that no United States law gave the bank the authority to do this. There was obviously no lawful consideration for the Note. The Bank parted with absolutely nothing except a little ink.
NOTE: It has never been doubted that a Note given in a Consideration which is prohibited by law is void. It has been determined, independent of Acts of Congress, that sailing under the license of an enemy is illegal. The emission of Bills of Credit upon the books of these private corporations, for the purposes of private gain is not warranted by the Constitution of the United States and is unlawful.
No complaint was made by the bank that the bank did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan, the path of duty was made direct and clear for the jury. Their verdict could not reasonably have been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, comfortable to the laws in this Court on December 7, 1968.
The Justice who heard the case handed down the opinion attached and included herein. Its reasoning is sound. It will withstand the test of time. This is the first time the question has been passed upon in the United States. I predict that this decision will go into the history books as one of the great documents of American history. It is a huge cornerstone wrenched from the temple of Imperialism and planted as one of the solid foundation stones of Liberty.
The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute on the facts for the jury to resolve.
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions, incorporated under the laws of the United States, are in the law to be treated as one and the same bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note.
THE CREDIT RIVER CASE...
STATE OF MINNESOTA
COUNTY OF SCOTT
First National Bank of Montgomery,
The above entitled action came on before the Court and a Jury of 12 on December 7, 1968 at 10:00 A.M. Plaintiff appeared by its President Lawrence V. Morgan and was represented by its Counsel Theodore R. Mellby. Defendant appeared on his own behalf.
A Jury of Talesmen were called, empanelled and sworn to try the issues in this Case. Lawrence V. Morgan was the only witness called for Plaintiff and Defendant testified as the only witness in his own behalf.
Plaintiff brought this as a Common Law action for the recovery of the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minn. Plaintiff claimed titled to the Real Property in question by foreclosure of a Note and Mortgage Deed dated May 8, 1964 which Plaintiff claimed was in default at the time foreclosure proceedings were started.
Defendant appeared and answered that the Plaintiff created the money and credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry as the consideration for the Note and Mortgage of May 8, 1964 and alleged failure of consideration for the Mortgage Deed and alleged that the Sheriff's sale passed no title to Plaintiff.
The issues tried to the Jury were whether there was a lawful consideration and whether Defendant had waived his rights to complain about the consideration having paid on the Note for almost 3 years.
Mr. Morgan admitted that all of the money or credit which was used as a consideration was created upon their books, that this was standard banking practice exercised by their bank in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, another private Bank, further that he knew of no United States Statute or Law that gave the Plaintiff the authority to do this. Plaintiff further claimed that Defendant by using the ledger book created credit and by paying on the Note and Mortgage waived any right to complain about the Consideration and that Defendant was estopped from doing so.
At 12:15 on December 7, 1968 the Jury returned a unanimous verdict for the Defendant.
Now therefore, by virtue of the authority vested in me pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, the Northwest Ordinance of 1978, the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution and laws of the State of Minnesota not inconsistent therewith:
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED & DECREED:
1. That Plaintiff is not entitled to recover the possession of Lot 19, Fairview Beach, Scott County, Minnesota according to the Plat thereof on file in the Register of Deeds office.
2. That because of failure of a lawful consideration the Note and Mortgage dated May 8, 1964 are null and void.
3. That the Sheriff's sale of the above described premises held on June 26, 1967 is null and void, of no effect.
4. That Plaintiff has no right, title or interest in said premises or lien thereon, as is above described.
5. That any provision in the Minnesota Constitution and any Minnesota Statute limiting the Jurisdiction of this Court is repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and to the Bill of Rights of the Minnesota Constitution and is null and void and that this Court has Jurisdiction to render complete Justice in this Cause.
6. That Defendant is awarded costs in the sum of $75.00 and execution is hereby issued therefore.
7. A 10 day stay is granted.
8. The following memorandum and any supplemental memorandum made and filed by this Court in support of this Judgment is hereby made a part hereof by reference.
BY THE COURT
Dated December 9, 1968
MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
The issues in this case were simple. There was no material dispute on the facts for the Jury to resolve.
Plaintiff admitted that it, in combination with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, which are for all practical purposes, because of their interlocking activity and practices, and both being Banking Institutions Incorporated under the Laws of the United States, are in the Law to be treated as one and the same Bank, did create the entire $14,000.00 in money or credit upon its own books by bookkeeping entry. That this was the Consideration used to support the Note dated May 8, 1964 and the Mortgage of the same date. The money and credit first came into existence when they created it. Mr. Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this. A lawful consideration must exist and be tendered to support the Note. See Anheuser-Busch Brewing Co. v. Emma Mason, 44 Minn. 318, 46 N.W. 558. The Jury found there was no lawful consideration and I agree. Only God can create something of value out of nothing.
Even if Defendant could be charged with waiver or estoppel as a matter of Law this is no defense to the Plaintiff. The Law leaves wrongdoers where it finds them. See sections 50, 51 and 52 of Am. Jur 2d. "Actions" on page 584 -- "no action will lie to recover on a claim based upon, or in any manner depending upon, a fraudulent, illegal, or immoral transaction or contract to which Plaintiff was a party."
Plaintiff's act of creating credit is not authorized by the Constitution and Laws of the United States, is unconstitutional and void, and is not a lawful consideration in the eyes of the Law to support any thing or upon which any lawful rights can be built.
Nothing in the Constitution of the United States limits the Jurisdiction of this Court, which is one of original Jurisdiction with right of trial by Jury guaranteed. This is a Common Law Action. Minnesota cannot limit or impair the power of this Court to render Complete Justice between the parties. Any provisions in the Constitution and laws of Minnesota which attempt to do so are repugnant to the Constitution of the United States and are void. No question as to the Jurisdiction of this Court was raised by either party at the trial. Both parties were given complete liberty to submit any and all facts and law to the Jury, at least in so far as they saw fit.
No complaint was made by Plaintiff that plaintiff did not receive a fair trial. From the admissions made by Mr. Morgan the path of duty was made direct and clear for the Jury. Their Verdict could not reasonably have been otherwise. Justice was rendered completely and without denial, promptly and without delay, freely and without purchase, comfortable to the laws in this Court on December 7, 1968.
BY THE COURT
December 9, 1968
/s/ MARTIN V. MAHONEY
JUSTICE OF THE PEACE
CREDIT RIVER TOWNSHIP
SCOTT COUNTY, MINNESOTA
RONALD GRAHAM, Vice President and General Counsel of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis taken Wednesday February 11, 1970 in the disbarment proceedings brought by the Minnesota State Board of Law Examiners against Jerome Daly to have Mr. Daly disbarred from the practice of law. This Testimony was taken under oath:
Wednesday, February 11, 1970
Approximately 2:30 p.m.
(Whereupon, the following proceedings were duly had:)
MR. DAVIS: Mr. Graham.
ROLAND D. GRAHAM
------ -- ------
being first duly sworn, testified
as follows on behalf of the Petitioner on:
BY MR. DAVIS:
Q. Will you state your full name please.
A. I am Roland D. Graham, G-r-a-h-a-m.
Q. Your address, Mr. Graham?
A. My address is 73 South Fifth Street, Minneapolis: Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
Q. What is your profession?
A. I am an attorney.
Q. By whom are you employed?
A. I am Vice-President and General Counsel of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis.
Q. Are you licensed to practice law in the state of Minnesota?
A. Yes sir.
Q. For how long a time have you been counsel for the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis?
A. I have been general counsel for the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis since 1966; however, I was on the staff of the legal department of the bank since 1959.
Q. In the course of your duties with the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, have you had occasion to be involved in litigation with one Jerome Daly?
Q. Have you received any inquiries from other agencies of government or other persons within the banking group concerning these actions commenced by Mr. Daly?
A. Well, we received several inquiries with respect to the actions commenced against our bank and especially by other Federal Reserve Banks and the Board of Governors; we kept them constantly informed of the progress in these cases as it occurred. And there was an occasional inquiry made with reference to theses cases from our office, yes.
Q. Do you have any compilation or list of inquiries that were made either to you or to the board, the Federal Reserve Board?
A. I have a compilation of inquiries that were made and letters sent out by the Board of Governors and the Treasury Department with reference to a case arising in Credit River, Minnesota, involving the constitutionality of the Federal Reserve System.
Q. Do you have that letter with you?
(WHEREUPON, Petitioner's Exhibits 66 and 67 were duly marked for purposes of identification.)
Q. I show you Petitioners Exhibit Number 66, will you identify that for the Court?
A. This is a letter dated September 2, 1969, addressed to me from Mr. Robert Sanders, Assistant General Counsel of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. And Mr. Sanders sent me this list at my request, in which it contains a list of a number of responses made by the Board of Governors and the Treasury Department, in connection with inquiries received by them, certain congressional offices, relating to a case arising out of Credit River, Minnesota, and arising as a result of a publication, primarily of a publication distributed, reporting that case, entitled Myers' Finance Review.
Q. And I show you Petitioner's Exhibit 67 and ask you to identify that.
A. This is a subsequent Xerox copy of some articles that were referred to in that letter, which also were the basis of inquiries that we received.
Mr. Jerome Daly's cross-examination consisted of two arguments. The first part of his argument was to elicit confirmation from Mr. Ronald D. Graham, a qualified spokesman for the Federal Reserve banks, that the Federal Reserve banks and the commercial banks do create Deposit (checkbook) Money on their books as their lending and investing money media.
The second part of Mr. Daly's argument was the convertibility of the pocket paper currency into gold and/or silver is a separate argument, and irrelevant to the mechanics of Deposit (checkbook) Money creation.
Therefore, to make it easier for the reader to understand the mechanics of where and how bank Deposit (checkbook) Money (generally referred to as "credit" is created -- all questions and answers referring to currency convertibility were edited (left) out.
BY MR. DALY:
Q. You say you have been with the Federal Reserve Bank for how long?
A. For ten years, approximately ten years.
Q. And you are a Vice President of the bank?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And you say that you have been in the practice of law in the state of Minnesota?
A. Yes sir.
Q. And also in the United States District Court?
A. Yes sir, for the state of Minnesota.
(WHEREUPON, Respondent's Exhibit J was duly marked for purposes of identification.)
Q. Showing you Respondent's Exhibit J, I will ask you if you can identify that.
A. Respondent's Exhibit J is a publication put out by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System explaining its purposes and functions.
Q. And what issue is that?
A. According to this, this is an issue that was published in 1963.
Q. Are you familiar with that, Respondent's Exhibit J?
A. I am familiar with its publication; I could not cite it, all the language; but I am familiar with its publication.
Q. Have you looked it over?
Q. Generally, do you agree that the statements in there are true?
A. As to the functions and so forth, yes, sir.
Q. That is the official publication of the Board of Governors, is it not true?
MR. DALY: I offer in evidence Exhibit J.
MR. DAVIS: No objection.
THE COURT: It will be received.
Q. Now, your Federal Reserve Banks, there are twelve of them in the United States, aren't there?
A. That is correct.
Q. And more or less the head bank is in New York, is it not?
A. There is a Federal Reserve Bank of New York, that represents a second Federal Reserve District; it is a separate incorporated bank, separate from the other eleven banks, yes.
Q. Now, by the way, these Federal Reserve Banks have employees, do they not?
A. Yes, they do.
Q. And there are none of these employees on Civil Service?
A. No, sir.
Q. That is a true statement, is it not?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You are not on Civil Service, yourself?
A. No, sir.
Q. And the Federal Reserve banks pay taxes to the state for the real estate they are situated upon?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And the Federal Reserve banks are owned by the member banks, are they not?
A. I don't know what you mean by owned, Mr. Daly.
Q. I withdraw the question. The Federal Reserve corporation is a corporation organized and existing by virtue of the laws of the United States, is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And the member banks are required to subscribe to so much stock?
A. That is correct.
Q. But this is non-voting stock, isn't that correct?
A. They have a right to elect six of the directors of the Federal Reserve bank.
Q. I didn't mean that; it is a stock that doesn't actually carry any rise to ownership with it, isn't that correct?
A. The Federal Reserve stock, owned by member banks of the Federal Reserve System, represent the capitalization they put into the system required by law and it gives them certain limited rights as to the election of directors on the Board of the reserve banks. However, in the event of dissolution of any Federal Reserve bank, they are only entitled to their reserves, the amount of capitalization they have put into the reserve bank. And after the reserve banks have paid all of the liabilities and expenses, all the residuals go into the United States Government.
Q. And the member banks, like the First National here in Minneapolis; Northwestern National; they have a right to use the services of the Federal Reserve bank?
A. Yes, we do provide services for them, yes.
Q. And the First National Bank of Montgomery is one of your member banks?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Now, calling your attention to page seventy-five in that book, will you read the last two paragraphs out loud.
A. The last two paragraphs?
Q. I think that is what I want.
A. The commercial banks as a whole can create money only if additional reserves are made available to them. The Federal Reserve System is the only instrumentality endowed by law with discretionary power to create (or extinguish) the money that serves as bank reserves or as public's pocket cash. Thus, the ultimate capability of expending or reducing the economy's supply of money rests with the Federal Reserve.
New Federal Reserve money, when it is not wanted by the public for hand-to-hand circulation, becomes the reserves of member banks. After it leaves the hands of the first bank acquiring it, as explained above, the new reserve money continues to expand into deposit money as it passes from bank to bank until deposits stand in some established multiple of the additional reserve funds that Federal Reserve action has supplied.
Q. Now, the mechanics, can you explain the mechanics by which the Federal Reserve bank runs its open market committee.
A. Runs its open market committee?
A. The open market committee is not a committee of the Federal Reserve Banks, Mr. Daly. It consists of seven members of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and five of the seven -- five of the twelve presidents of the Federal Reserve banks.
Q. And the seven members of the Board of Governors?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Will you explain to the Court what their function is?
A. The function of the Federal Open Market Committee is to meet and
make policy with reference to the purchase or sale of government
securities by Federal Reserve Banks.
Q. Now, can you elaborate on that.
A. The purchase and sale of government securities by Federal Reserve Banks, under the direction of the Open Market Committee, is a device, one of the monetary tools used by the Federal Reserve System to expand on one of the Federal Reserve --
Q. Expand or reduce the reserves?
Q. Now does the Federal Reserve Bank expand its reserves?
A. The reserves of the commercial banks?
Q. Or its own reserves?
A. The action taken with reference to the Open Market Committee and expansion of the commercial bank reserves that are required to be held in the Federal Reserve banks in their own vault, by expanding reserves of the commercial banks. This then takes out of circulation or the ability of commercial banks to expand loans or investments.
Q. So that seven members of the Board of Governors and the twelve presidents of the Federal Reserve banks have the control over the volume of credit that is made available to the public?
A. The Open Market Committee, which consists of five of the twelve presidents of the Federal Reserve banks and the seven members of the Board of Governors, directs policy with reference to the sales or purchase of the government securities on the open market, which expands or contracts the ability of commercial banks to make loans and investments.
Q. And this has a direct bearing upon the amount of money that is available to the public?
A. It would have a direct bearing on the amount of money and supply of credit available.
Q. Now, the Federal Reserve Bank actually creates credit on its books, does it not?
A. The only way in which it creates credit is by its discount policy, in which it may credit, by making a temporary loan and credit the reserve account of that individual bank.
Q. It can credit the account of the individual bank by making a loan to the bank?
A. Yes, sir, this is a loan that is repaid.
Q. And when the Federal Reserve bank makes the loan or that credit first comes into existence, is when they manufacture it on the books?
A. It is a credit to their reserve?
Q. And it first comes into existence at that time?
A. These are temporary loans.
Q. And it doesn't make any difference if it is temporary or long term, the first time it comes into existence is when it is credited on the books of the bank?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And as a practical matter, this credit never leaves the books of some bank; it is transferred by check entry from one bank to another?
A. The effect of that particular transaction may or may not be transmitted through the banking system, I don't know.
Q. What percentage of the volume of business was done by check in this country?
A. I don't know the figure, Mr. Daly, I don't know the breakdown upon demand deposits and currency at the present time.
Q. Now, when a member bank makes a loan, what is the percentage of so-called reserves that they are supposed to have on hand?
A. That is determined by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System and it varies at what the Board decides.
Q. What is it at present?
A. It is kind of a multiple breakdown at present; my recollection is reserves are seventeen per cent reserve requirement; a sixteen per cent for the country banks, which are required to have a lower reserve.
Q. In other words, when say like the First National Bank of Montgomery wants to make a loan of one hundred dollars; if it has a reserve of seventeen dollars on deposit with our bank, it can make a loan of a hundred dollars?
A. If the reserve bank decides to lend it, yes, this is discretionary.
Q. If the First National Bank decides to lend it?
A. Now, now, an application for a loan or discount from the Federal Reserve Bank may be made; in discretion with the Federal Reserve Bank, if it feels it is an appropriate borrowing.
Q. Does the First National Bank of Montgomery, do they have to get the permission of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis before they can make a loan?
A. They make application for a loan and they can be turned down if the Federal Reserve Bank in Minneapolis did not deem it a good loan.
Q. To an individual?
A. They only make loans and discounts to banks.
Q. I am talking about the individual citizen that walks into a bank and wants to borrow ten thousand dollars from the bank out in the country.
A. All right.
Q. Does that bank out in the country also create money on its books?
A. That bank may make a loan to that individual if it has the funds available to make that loan.
Q. Does that bank, the commercial banks can also create credit on their books?
A. To the extent that the reserve or equity at the position permits them to make a loan in accordance with their policy. They can do this by issuing a cashier's check, which is a liability in the bank or do so by crediting the deposit account of that individual.
Q. To what extent can they do that?
A. I guess I don't follow your question.
Q. Is there a limit upon them? Is there a limit to the extent that they can do that?
A. The ultimate limit to which they would be restricted would be determined by the amount of reserves they are required to hold back, dependent upon what the reserve requirements, as established by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, are.
Q. So, there is a percentage of limit?
Q. They also create credit on their books?
A. To the extent they can make loans or investments.
Q. And this credit first comes into being when they create it?
A. When the credit is made tot he account of the customers, they have thus created a loan to the customer in the form of a deposit balance. Now, this may be drawn upon to pay off perhaps creditors of the individual, that is making the loan.
Q. But in any event, this is the first time that this credit comes into existence, they create it on their books?
Q. So, in effect, the books of the member banks amount to a bill of credit, do they not?
A. What is your definition of a bill of credit, Mr. Daly?
Q. There has been some argument about that, isn't that right?
Q. But at any rate, the credit is manufactured on the books though?
A. There is a credit on the account of the customers, either that he is given in disbursed funds by means of a cashier's check or some
Q. Now, have you had a chance to read over my publication, the Daly Eagle?
A. I don't remember if I have read it through or not, Mr. Daly.
Q. Have you attempted to read it?
A. I believe I did read it at one time; but I don't recall all the language in it.
Q. There is a picture of a note in here, on page twelve, a one dollar Federal Reserve note?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Is this a sample of what is in circulation?
A. As currency.
A. It appears as though it is a Federal Reserve note, yes, sir.
Q. Well, that is a reasonably accurate portrayal, is that right?
Q. Your bank acquires United States obligations by creating credit on its books, do they not?
A. I guess you might say by creating credit as permitted under the policy of the Federal Reserve, yes.
Q. But the physical notes themselves, they are made up by the Bureau of Printing and Engraving?
A. That is correct.
Q. And that is under the control of what, the Treasury Department?
A. I believe it is the Treasury Department.
Q. The notes themselves, you get these notes in denominations from one dollar up to ten thousand dollars, is that right?
A. I don't believe there is a ten thousand dollar bill in circulation; but we get them in the various denominations now permitted by law.
Q. And your bank gets them for the cost of printing?
A. We get them, yes; these are the actual physical notes, yes, for the cost of printing; but they are issued as a liability to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis or whatever Federal Reserve Bank is involved.
Q. Well, now, I believe you indicated that you had some correspondence from the head office of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. With your self, for purposes of following it to the Bar Association, is that right?
A. This arose, because I had heard that there was some testimony being given before the Ethics Committee with reference to the Credit River proceeding. I talked to Mr. Orren with the Ethics Committee and indicated I had a number of telephone calls with respect to the Credit River proceeding and I acknowledged they had received a number of inquiries down at the Board, at the Treasury Department, arising out of the Myers' Finance Publication.
Q. This is Myers' Finance Review?
Q. From Calgary, Alberta, Canada?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. Did you ever see his review before this?
A. Before today? I had seen copies of a publication, I believe, that was dated May 27, 1969.
Q. May 27, 1969?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And this is the first publication in which he published it, is that right?
A. Published what, I am sorry.
Q. This story with reference to the Credit River verdict?
A. I don't know, Mr. Daly, I just saw the May 27th issue.
(WHEREUPON, Respondent's Exhibit K was marked for purposes of
Q. Do you recognize that as a copy that you saw?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. And how soon after May 27th of 1969 did you see that?
A. The only one I recollect was a publication that came out, I believe, in June. I don't subscribe to the publication.
Q. Well, it is fair to say that you gentlemen that are counsel for the Federal Reserve banks and the general counsel for the Board of Governors, you are keeping very close tab on this dispute?
A. Well, as a matter of information, yes, yes.
Q. And you have since 1963?
A. I have transmitted all the information down to the Board of Governors, with reference to the suits, yes.
Q. And by the way, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System are independent of the control by Congress, are they not?
A. No sir, that is not true.
Q. Well, can you elaborate on why it is not true?
A. The Federal Reserve System was established by Congress under the Federal Reserve Act, by legislation enacted by Congress.
Q. But at the present time, Congress exercises no control over them?
A. Are you talking about control over the decisions, policy decisions made by the Federal Reserve?
A. There is specific law I am aware of that any Congressman can effectuate a policy decision upon the Federal Reserve.
Q. That is what I am driving at.
Q. And the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System controls volume of credit that is put into circulation?
A. The policy decisions of the Board of Governors, Mr. Daly, influence the supply of money and credit in the country, yes; I think that is a fair statement.
Q. And that, under the present laws, is independent of any act of Congress?
A. The policy decisions, I am aware of, are not subject to any Congressional mandate, that is correct.
Q. And the determination of the interest rate is not subject to any Congressional mandate?
A. No sir, I think the determination of the interest rate is a result of the marketplace, are you talking about?
Q. Actions of the Open Market Committee?
A. Actions of the Open Market Committee could have an influence on the level of interest rates.
Q. Isn't that set by basically, it is set or controlled, that is the prime rate is set and controlled by the Board of Governors?
A. The prime rate, no.
Q. Pardon me?
Q. What do they do with reference to the interest rate?
A. The only interest rate, I think you are referring to, is a discount rate, established by the Federal Reserve banks. The discount rate is established initially by the Board of Directors of Federal Reserve banks, subject to review and determination by the Board of Governors. The discount rate is the rate charged against member banks of the Federal Reserve System, who make loans or discounts at Federal Reserve banks.
Q. Isn't it pure and simple, the rate of interest that the Federal Reserve bank charges the member banks for the credit that they create on their books?
A. Would you repeat that one?
Q. To use simple language: Isn't the rate of interest that the Federal Reserve bank charges the member banks for credit they create on their books?
A. This is for loans or advances given to member banks, yes.
Q. And these loans and advancements are created on the books of the Federal Reserve bank?
A. The making of a loan or discount is effected of a credit to the reserve account of a member bank.
Q. When they create the credit on their books, it comes into existence?
Q. This discount rate is set by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System?
A. The discount rate is initially set by the Boards of Directors of reserve banks, independently; they are subject to review and determination of the Board of Governors in the Federal Reserve System.
Q. So if all of the member banks get together and agree to set the discount rate, that is the federal reserve banks get together and set the discount rate, the Board of Governors doesn't have anything to say about it?
A. They have to approve a discount rate.
Q. And the people in charge of the Federal Reserve banks are not, none of them are government employees as such?
A. Of the Federal Reserve banks?
A. None of them are under Civil Service, no.
Q. And none of them are government employees as such then?
A. No, sir, they are not under Civil Service.
MR. DALY: I think that is all the questions I have.
THE END OF MR. JEROME DALY'S CROSS-EXAMINATION.
The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston in a 1977 publication titled: "The Federal Reserve, Putting It Simply", writes:
"The most important thing to understand about money is that money is artificial -- that is to say, that money is entirely a man-made creation. It isn't an element of nature (such as gold or silver). It is simply a creation of civilized man: it always has been and it always will be."
It is also important to understand that all *artificial* money, better known as "Bank Credit", is created by the commercial banks, first in the form of *checking account* "deposit credits" -- either as bank expenditures, bank loans, or bank investment monies -- and most Bank Credit money remains and circulates in that *deposit credits* form by means of checks -- until some is (temporarily) converted into physical cash currency notes.
The Treasury's Engraving and Printing Bureau tailor-prints the Federal Reserve notes cash currency for the 12 Federal Reserve banks at the cost of printing, about 2 cents per note. The Federal Reserve banks then distribute the cash currency amongst the commercial banks by charging it to their (Fed provided) reserve accounts.
The banks then distribute the cash currency amongst the general commerce and public, by exchanging their obtained cash currency for the public's checking or savings account *deposit credits*. In other words, the general public gets its cash currency from banks, or from someone who got it from some bank by having it charged, either to his checking or savings account.
PRESIDENT OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND...
Quoting Sir Josiah Stamp at the time he was president of the Bank of England and president of the English Railway System. His directorates filled several pages of WHO'S WHO. In the late 1920s, in an informal talk to about 150 history, economics and social science professors, at the University of Texas Josiah Stamp explained the following:
"Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin... The bankers own the world. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create money and control credit, with a flick of the pen they will create enough money to buy it back again... Take this power away from bankers and all great fortunes like mine (he was the second richest man in Great Britain) will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for this world would then be a happier and better world to live in. My sons should not object. They are well educated, and should be willing to take their places in the business world and forge their own fortunes... But, if you want to continue to be slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own enslavement, then let the bankers continue to create money and control credit... However, as long as governments will legalize such things, a man is foolish not to be a banker."
From: LEGALIZED CRIME OF BANKING
By: S. W. Adams, Money Analyst
All Content © HiddenMysteries - TGS (1998-2012)
HiddenMysteries.com Internet Store ~ HiddenMysteries Information Central
Texas National Press ~ TGS Publishers Dealers Site
All Rights Reserved
Please send bug reports to the Information .
The articles being presented and published are not necessarily the views and research of TGS. TGS and/or the editors and publishers may or may not agree with the assumptions, the articles, or the conclusions of the authors. Each article is presented to give everyone every possible source to TRUTH available. Discerning TRUTH is the responsibility of each reader.