> Thanks to Fred Foldvary for defining "real bills"; that is
 > helpful. However, my question was and remains, what is the real bills
 > "doctrine", as used by Currie and Sandilands, and is it a form
 > of qualitative control over banking,


Obviously, Roger S. can answer ably for himself (and probably without 
contradiction by anyone living for Currie), but let me throw in my 
understanding of how the drafters of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 
viewed the operational function of the real bills doctrine (the 
theoretical underpinning of the FRA of 1913). In short, the answer to 
the above question is "Yes" if by "qualitative control" one means 
assessing the the type and quality of a commercial banks' loans as 
well as their quantity (without reference to Friedman). The drafters 
(here I include Henry Parker Willis) were very concerned that the 
assets (loans made by member commercial banks) the Federal Reserve 
District banks would lend against at discount (at their discretion) 
would be limited to those loans 'backing' real, productive, mainly 
industrial or wholesale/retail trading activity. However, in 
practice, this list was altered (e.g. in 1923 by the Agricultural 
Credit Act, 1923) to include a wider range of loans against which 
FRBs could discount to try to address economic conditions (the post 
WWI economic slump).

If this is viewed as qualitative control, or an attempt at same 
(which I think, in the spirit of the discussions during the drafting 
of the FRA of 1913, I'd argue it is) then, again, the answer is "Yes".
I'm somewhat perplexed by the reference to Friedman and leave that to others.

David Hammes