Free America's Bank: The Epic Struggle to Create the Federal Reserve by Roger Lowenstein Page B

correspondence toward the end of 1913 in the Warburg Papers.
    relations between the two framers: Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:115; and Glass to Paul Warburg, November 22, 1913, Glass Collection, Box 8.
    Warburg kept Glass closely informed: Glass,
An Adventure in Constructive Finance,
209. See also Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:115–17, reproducing two lettersattesting to their frequent contact. On December 15, 1913, Warburg wrote to Glass on a favorite technical subject, rediscounting. Three days later he anxiously followed up, “I have not heard from you concerning the rediscount clause.”
    the Virginian stunned Warburg: Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:125. See also Glass to Paul Warburg, December 24, 1913, Glass Collection, Box 8, in which Glass repeated the suggestion that Warburg consider a Federal Reserve Board post.
    On December 17, after eighty: Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
503; and “Democrats Heed Root’s Warning,”
The New York Times,
December 18, 1913.
    he went for a ride: “President Takes a Drive,”
The New York Times,
December 18, 1913; and Laughlin,
The Federal Reserve Act,
169. For the votes on December 19, see “Currency Bill Passes Senate,”
The New York Times,
December 20, 1913; one Progressive also voted in favor.
    Warburg rifled off a: Warburg to Robert Owen, December 19, 1913, Warburg Papers, Folder 12.
    “It is a terribly tiring business”: Warburg to Arthur Spitzer, December 19, 1913, ibid., Folder 11. See also Warburg’s letter of December 19 to Harry A. Wheeler, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in ibid., Folder 12; and Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:121.
    “no prospect at all”: Timberlake,
The Origins of Central Banking in the United States,
202.
    The conferees worked with surprising speed: The House-Senate conference dealt with dozens of individual items. The conference changes are detailed in Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
511–19; and Glass,
An Adventure in Constructive Finance,
212–19; in addition, high (and low) points are treated in Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:126–29. See also Glass’s speech to the House of Representatives, December 22, 1913, in Glass Collection, Box 22, as well as “Money Bill May Be Law To-day,”
The New York Times,
December 22, 1913, and “Money Bill Goes to Wilson To-day,” “Currency Bill Conference Report,” and “Changes Made in the Bill,” all from ibid., December 23. For a more detailed comparison, in his
The Federal Reserve System,
Willis reprinted the House bill (p. 1614), as well as the Senate bill (p. 1637), and those versions may be contrasted with the final Federal Reserve Act (p. 1667).
    “legal tender”: Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
456–57, 467–68; for $1 and $2 bills, see “Changes Made in the Bill”; for distinctive engravings, see “Currency Bill Conference Report.”
    The conferees tackled the truly sticky points: “Money Bill May Be Law To-day”; and “Money Bill Goes to Wilson To-day.” For Warburg’s bitter disappointment, see Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:121–23, 128–29.
    Only the makeup of the board remained: “Money Bill May Be Law To-day”; and “Money Bill Goes to Wilson To-day.” For analysis of this issue, see West,
Banking Reform and the Federal Reserve,
132–33.
    bolstering the authority: Warburg,
The Federal Reserve System,
1:128; Seymour,
The Intimate Papers of Colonel House,
139; Broesamle,
William Gibbs McAdoo,
115; and Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
518. For amplifying the power of the board, see Willis,
The Federal Reserve System,
518. Glass,
An Adventure in Constructive Finance,
215, is the source for 4:10 a.m. Terms of board members in the House bill were to have been eight years; in the Senate bill, six years.
    who had barely slept, in pajamas: Seymour,
The Intimate Papers of Colonel House,
139. For House’s evening at the White House, see House diary, December 22, 1913, in
The Papers of Woodrow