Full text of Review (Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas) : June 1, 1923

View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

..'UUUNI'Mtn'ttHUHIIMlUIU'lI.lIIIIUllUttl'Ht"""

lith

, .........

b........tNI ..." ....................................'.,.....lItttllbnfiT.

n-"'Wftl.lWHHIIU.ntbl .... m,nHnUlIM

HIUllIII.tUttHUl.UntUllfltflIllIlUlllllllUUIlUn.....
.

~ rllllmffll.....'''"''"lni,U .tllfl.IUIU .. llUlnlllllltMIU. ...'wt..., ...........''.............. iWWh.m.'U. .,.."'I....mMlIntl'hfIlHlnt.lfilUjlnlhlllltt"'IM".... ".~III"dlll""llnlll lllll ltmlItIIUIIIUJIIIIIUmU'U.lllllnUJUIUmUIIIII'Um'IIIIU,tllll'UIUIII'"i
.

II
n

IN THE

II;;
=

ELEVENTH FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT

III1
=

~~
II

INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

I(
=

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND

LYNN P. TALLEY,

~E.~~,~~~~E BAN~FCD:~~"'
'(Compill!<l M"j

•e

FoJ"", ..

~. A~,

15. I<~ll')

=_1

;: e

I i.uul"""""UllIlI'IlInn"lIlllllul. . uttfffIllWnnlutrttllll.N"'tltlUtlUfttIlIlIM"""ttI""tlN1_M...."'m.'u rtftUtmlmflhIU' .. flmmUUHlII .....ttll'n.: III........ mm.'mmntT"n"lftl"""NnmtrlllltmIllI'UruUI.ntlllltiIIlIUIl:tlllllllllllltlllllntttltllllllitlll: ~
H
F.UtltlIIIIUnUUUltltlllll1l1ll1.tlUIIIIIIPhI1I1I11IWJUIIIUIIIIIIIHIlIIt"IIIIHUlUUIftUtlnttlUtWIUIUlUllumUUlI1 IUltJIIIHtlUtltlMtlUUlmlllmlllWlulllltHIlMIUllllmUIIUIl1I' MUIIUlllllliUllut IlIlUUlllul!lIlIlJtrrlm UIIIIU"lfl4U:UIfI1 ffUftilllftUIIU_"llrr"lUltill"-

Volume 8, Ng.

Dallas, Texas, June I, 1923

DISTRICf SUMMARY

...."'w"'I"""'''''''"''''''''••''''_''''o/''''''''i''.''''"l'"I'''''d'II."dllli. ."111011,, ,"" "' ' '"11'' ' ' ' "11,,,,",,,11"",,,,,,,""
1111'

MUltimn ....UJl«""

......w

"IlmMilln.lll"UJt"nIlHII"'"'114I......ttIUIl"nl',IIIUUII~

NIUltunN.UlWUIIImUUl

THE SITUATION AT A GLANCE
Eleventh Federal Reserw District

March

Ap1"il

Bank debits to individual accounts (at 13 cities) ... __ .... _.__ _._
..
Department store sale _.... _._._ ........ _ ._..... _..•. _ ... _. __ . _.._._ ..
Reserve Bank loanll to member banks at end of month...-.__
Reserve Bank ratio at end of montL ......__ .. __ ... _______ _
BuIlding permit valuations at langer centers... _____ ._ ..._...
Commercial f:illu?eII (Number) ._...._ . _....... _. ___..... _ .. _ ._ .. .
Commercial failures (Liabilities) ....... __ ....___ ....._.._ ........ _.... _.
Oil production (barrels) ......... _... _. __ ..... __ ._....... ___ .._ ... __ ._
Lumber ol'ders at pine mills (per cent of normal production)

$603,41"6,000

-_··,·-{9,961;ii7····

47.6%

45.5%
$11,661,391
91

$
'$

6,733,~79

93
8874897
11;033;880
88%

'"I''',"'IIoII...I....lll11uri_,..........''''''"''''•••''.'''.. ""'11"......."......."••""•••• """......"1111... .....u....................
'

~""I"""I"""'".........

A slowing up of industrial activity and a spirit of
hesitancy and uncertainty in trade circles were
noticeable teatures ot the developments in the di~
trict's business situation during the month of April.
The SMtl"'p and unexpected slump in the cotton
•
market was perhaps the outstanding and most direct
cause responsible for the disturbance which
dimmed, at least temporarily, the exceptionally
bright outlook which had characterized the situation
through the first three months of the year, although
reports of a general slowing up of trade and industry
in other districts indirectly affected the local situation by adding to the uncertainty of the outlook.
April reports from the district's wholesale houses
reflected a slackening of business and a somewhat
slower rate in the flow of collections. Seasonal conditions to some extent account for these changes,
but in no small degree they can be traced to the unsettled condition of the cotton market and a feeling
. . of uncertainty as to the probable effect of steadily
. , rising merchandise prices upon consumption. Notwithstanding these unfavorable conditions, however,
there is a persistent undertone of confidence and
sober optimism in trade eircles generally, due to the

$660,590,000

··-···r2~117;134····

l~~U:~
87%

UI.....ttl.l ..nNt............... a

Inc. 01" Dec.

Dec.

P:c~.

8.7%

~g:~~

Inc. 2.1 points
Dee.
42.3% =
Inc.
2.2% i

~~~. 25t~~ !:_~=

Inc. 1 point

..........""...............IUlatNlltllllll....IlIt"HIIUIIUl't.......

exceptionally fine crop outlook in this section, and
the belief that the statistical position of raw cotton
is still sufficiently strong to insure a fairly prosperous year for the district's farmers, whose buying
power is now stronger than it has been for the past
three years.
A seasonal increase in the use of bank credit was
\\itnessed during the month of April, when outstanding loans of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas to
its member banks increased from $19,961,000 to
$26,117,000. This compares with outstanding loans
of $34,484,000 at the end of April, 1922. During the
first two weeks of May there has been no appreciable
increase in the volume of our loans to member banks,
and on May 18th we were still carrying a "secondary
reserve" of approximately $18,000,000 invested in
convertible securities (open-market bills and United
States Treasury Certificates.)
There was a marked diminution in the volume of
new building contracts awarded in April as contrasted with the record-breaking month of March,
but this slowing up is regarded as a wholesome development in view of the strain which has recently
been imposed upon the supply of labor and materials

This publication was digitized and made available by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Historical Library (FedHistory@dal.frb.org)

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

by the unprecedented volume of construction this
year.
The commercial failure statistics for April disclose
a startling increase in the aggregate of debts scheduled by insolvent concerns, but investigation developed that this was due to the fact that included in
t.he month's casualties was one firm in Oklahoma
whose liabilities were listed as aggregating $7,000,000.

Employment at the larger centers showed moderate gains in all crafts during the month of April,
although a surplus of metal workers and common
labor is still in evidence. No shortage of farm labor
has yet become apparent in this district, as the demand for farm help during the planting season is a
negligible factor in the labor situation, although it
becomes an important item when the harvest season
arrives.

i
~

CROP CONDITIONS
Wet weather and low temperatures in April resulted in a general setback to this district's principal
crops, cotton being the principal sufferer from these
unfavorable conditions. The frequent and heavy
rains which fell in April and early May were not
needed, as a generous winter precipitation had supplied an abundance of subsoil moisture in most sections of the district. Much replanting of cotton has
been necessary in the southern counties, and the crop
as a whole is from ten days to two weeks late. Chopping is well advanced in the Rio Grande Valley, and
planting has been completed in all sections except
in the northwestern part of the belt. The cold wet
weather of the past sixty days has been favorable
to the propagation of weevils and worms. The extent to which these pests will be held in check remains to be seen, as a vigorous use of poison (such
as reports indicate will be resorted to this year) and
a period of hot, dry weather during the next two
months would go far towards enabling the farmers
to overcome the advantage gained by insects from
early weather conditions.
Spring plowing is practically completed throughout the district, due to the early start made possible
by an open winter. Planting and sowing, however,
have been retarded in 'I'exas, Louisiana, and Southern Oklahoma, although in New Mexico and Arizona
these operations are reported to be well advanced.
The condition of winter wheat in Texas is 14
points above that of a year ago, and 5 points above
the ten-year average. There has been little abandonment except in the Texas Panhandle, and New
Mexico, and while reports from those important
areas show a heavy damage due to drouth, the remainder of the crop has been benefitted by spring
rains and is in much better condition than was the
case a year ago.

Cotton
Movements

Receipts of cotton at the port of
Galveston dropped from a total of
76,591 bales in March to only 38,243
in April. Exports decreased from 180,483 bales to
104,364. The April export movement was the smallest for that month recorded in many years, both at
the port of Galveston and all United States ports
combined. Thus far the total exports for the present
season from all American ports have been less, by
700,000 bales, than those of last season, although the
1922 crop was approximately 20 per cent larger than
the 1921 crop.

'l"lltlflIIllIIJIIIIIDIIIIIUIJIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUUIIIIIIIIIIIIUllJllllflllllllliIlUIiUli1lllIIlllIlIIlIllrulllllllllllllllllUhlllUlllUllnlllnU'fffUS

; COTTON

l\mVEME~I~v~~¥g:iGH

THE PORT OF
Aug. 1 to April 30

April
1023

April
1922

~ Gross Receipts.......

38,243
104,364

132,316 2,303,478 2,237 886 ~
19.1,'737 2,258,560 2,280,975 ~
109,648 249,598 §

Exports....................
§ Stocks, April 30th..
f.uulUlumUIIIIIIIII1II1I1UIIUflltlfllIIID

S~~n

IIUIWIIWIIIIIUIIUllllllnIllUUUUllhIlUIIIIIJIU,umJUIIIIUlllllll llltUUJIIIIUUJUUUllin

i"lIIf11,uurllmmUIlIfI1lI1111111l1IlmllIIllUllllllllllllllnlllllltllIIUlln .UUIl1mllllUIttIIlJIIUUllUlIIl/lIIII'"IIIIIH(IIIIUHtlll'lmll~

~ SEASON'S RECEIPTS, EXPORTS, AND STOCKS AT ~
~

ALL UNITED STATES PORTS

~
;;

This Se.... on

Last Se.... on

~ Receipts since Aug. I, 1922 .. _
: Exports: Great Britain ... _.....
~
France ""._'_"_'_'"
~
Continent ... - ..--..
~
Japan-China ...... _. _
~
Mexico _•. _ .,,_._,
#
Total foreign ports

5,464,540
1,21 8,2'78
547,027
1,755,7.'78
536,423
16,365
4,073,871

5,241,091
1 301 973
'601:513
2,002,738
800,012
2,100
4,708,336

ports,

474,037

938,577

I S~:~ :8tha~._~.:.. S.

i
!!
~

~
§

;;

~uummIlWIUttIiIlUlllllltlltlIlIlUJU"IfiUJltiUlUlltnIlIIIllIIUlIIIUlIIIUllllUlllltttlUIUlIJ"IlHUU"Umllllll ...mmltJllmIUtIllIU~
~IIIIIIIIUIIIIUIII'IIIII"IIIIIIIIIIIII"IIIUlUUlIIUIIIUtlltllIlUIIItIUUIIIIIIIUlIiUllmuIIIUIUil1nIlUfllIIUlIUllliIfIUUlnllUtUUllllft lll}

;
Ii
~

Allril 30,
1928

F or Grea t B rI aln ................................
't .

For other foreign ports....................
For coastwise ports ............................
In compresses......................................

1,200
6,800
7',3'73
3 500
90,'7'15

Total ...._ ..........._ ... __ ...... _. __ .. _

109,648

i For France............................................
E

: :=~

GALVESTON STOCK STATEMENT

A:J>ril 80, §
1922!
27,418 l
_
12 237 ~
~

25 ,585 __
~:.:
5 000
179,858
249,598

~
;;lIIlIllIIlllIllIIlIItllIIIII",nlln"lttlIlIllUlllllllllllllltllllllllllHnllltflIlIlIlIIllUIllIlIfIUIII1IIlIIllflllIllltIlUltlttlU II IIIIIUlllIIlIllltllO'=-

The corn, rice, sugar cane, and kaffir corn crops
have been materially retarded by wet weather, although with favorable temperatures in June and
July the outlook is for a normal production of these
staples.

1IA.
'tIP

Range
Conditions

More seasonable temperatures and
moderate to heavy rains during
April and May have left the district's ranges for the most part in excellent condi-

•

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS
tion. According to the United States Division of
Crop and Livestock Estimates, the condition of
Texas ranges and cattle is as good as, if not better
than, it has been in many years. The supply of stock
water is ample, and grass has shown rapid growth
and is furnishing plenty of sustenance for cattle.
. Feeding in most sections has been discontinued. The
condition of cattle on May 1st was reported to be 92
per cent of normal as compared to 84 per cent on
April 1st. While the calf crop is somewhat late,
calves are strong and healthy and are getting an
ample supply of milk. The sheep ranges are covered
with a good growth of grass and weeds, and sheep
were reported to be in normal condition. A fine
clip of desirable length and light shrinkage has been
obtained from the shearing during April.
Ranges in New Mexico and Arizona are reported
to be in fair condition, with improvement taking
~ place. However, more rain is needed to insure an
•
ample supply of grass.

tion of the month's totals was received during tpe
last days of April.
With receipts of butcher stock insufficient to supply the demand, trading was fairly active throughout April and the month closed with the market
steady at a 50 cent advance. However, the more
liberal receipts early in May caused the South Texas
runs to meet with indifferent demand, with the result that prices were forced to lower levels and the
gains of the previous month were lost. The sheep
and lamb market held steady under moderate re,c eipts during April, but with receipts increasing during May the market registered a decline of 50 to 75
cents. The demand for hogs was light throughout
the month, with prices moving downward. Despite
relatively small receipts in May, further downward
price revisions were made.
i::,!IlUlllttll llllUIIIIIIIIIIII II IUUlll lllllill llll Ullftlllll llllll lll lllllllUlIllIU,lIttilItIlUIIIIUnl"lJIlUlIIIIIIUl1IUIIItUlUIIIIJIIlJIIIU , IIIII U'.6

I§

a
s
3

FORT WORTH LIVESTOCK RECEIPTS.

Although the April receipts of all
classes of livestock at the Fort
Worth market displayed an increase
as compared to those for April of last year, movements were comparatively light as compared to the
average of previous years. With plenty of grass on
Texas ranges, movements of cattle to outside ranges
have been light, this being a factor in accounting for
the month's small cattle receipts. Another important feature of the situation was the fact that the
freezing weather in March greatly retarded the fattening of cattle, and thus delayed the spring movement to market centers. April marked the real
opening of the season on South Texas cattle and
West Texas sheep, but no big runs were received
until near the end of the month. In fact a large por-

e
~

Movements
and Prices

1======.1

March

Gain or

67,567
7,373

L 17,659
G 8,971

Gain or

~::::: ::: 6;~~ 3i: :~ ~ ~~:: {~~~ ~~~ I
!

Hogs ......... _.49,908
Sheep .... _ .. 16,344

46,473
13,905

G 3,435
G 2,439

~lI1 l ll1lU l lllllllltIIUllnmU l llltlllllJmllmU l lmn II IlIlUU IIIJIIIIIIIIU"1I1I1 1 1I11111 1 1m,lIIltHlIIl lUIII I IIUIiUIfItIll IlUrnn IUllllll ll mQ

~llIIlllnUJUIIIU III IIIIUJ1JWUltlfll JI IIIII I IIIIIJ IJ IlUlUJIlIIllIUJlIJIJUUII '1 1I1II11IUIUUllUllJUIIWIJJJIU U tlUlllJJ tlmJlJIlIIlIltlt ll 'HIII!

COMPARATIVE TOP

Beef steers ....................... ....

I Stocker cows .......... . ........ .....
Butcher cows ....................

ii Stocker steers ...................... .
~

: Calves .................... ...............
i Hogs ...................... ..............
..
.!
_
~ Lambs ........... ..........................
Sheep ........... ........ ......... ....

U;:TOC~~;~.~ICE~r;l~
$ 8.25
7 40
6:60
4.00
8.75
8.25
18 0
5.'0°0

$ 9.25
7 00
5:50
4.00
9.25
8,45
19'.° °1
00
6

$ 8.75 i
7 25 i
6:75
4.25 ~
9.25 =
10.15 =
196. 55°0 ~.:
_:

!it~l ulnI IUIl""IIII1If1tllllllllln I IllIUllllltlltllUll1l1rmlltlllluIIlIIlH"'uj1llIlIIluurnwllluuUfuliulImllimrulintnu l lllUllllIIllll·

WHOLESALE TRADE
Seasonal slackening in the wholesale channels of
distribution became apparent during April, when all
lines of trade reflected a smaller volume of sales
than during the previous month. This decline ranged
from 4.6 per cent in groceries to 24 per cent in farm
implements. It is to be noted that two lines of
trade--dry goods and furniture--showed a smaller
volume of sales than during the corresponding month
of last year. While seasonal dullness accounted for
the larger portion of the April decline, other factors
have made their appearance. Increased caution is
observable in some lines of trade with buyers showing a tendency to defer orders until future price
trends can be more accurately gauged. While fac-

tories are running at or near capacity, production
represents actual orders and there is but little indication that manufacturers are maintaining this high
rate of production beyond their order files.
Considerable anxiety is being felt regarding the
effect of rising prices upon consumptive demand.
Although labor is employed with wage rates on the
upgrade and agricultural prospects promising, the
public has already shown a disposition to resist higher prices. Especially is this true in the agricultural
districts, where the prices of goods which the community consumes are out of line with the prices of
those which it produces for sale.

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

Dry
Goods

The slowing down in the wholesale
dry goods trade, which made its appearance during March, became
more marked during the past month. The April
sales of eleven firms were not only 22.9 per cent
less than sales during the previous month, but were
2.6 per cent less than during April, 1922. However,
the dollar value of sales for the first four months
of the year was 21.9 per cent larger than during
the same period last year. While the abatement of
demand in the dry goods trade has been due in part
to unfavorable weather conditions, uncertainty regarding prices has had its effect.
Price advances in the wholesale markets were
checked to a very large extent during April. The
downward course in raw cotton caused further hesitation and more caution in primary markets, and
there has been some evidence of curtailment in production. The wage increases put into effect have
not as yet caused increased quotations on goods, and
in fact there have been indications of softening of
prices in sympathy with raw cotton. Silk prices,
while somewhat irregular, have worked to lower
levels. Finished wool goods, although displaying a
weakness during April, strengthened again during
the early part of May.
Dealers generally are optimistic over present conditions, feeling that the present lull is only temporary and that with more seasonable weather a
stronger demand will appear.
Farm
Implements

While the sales of farm implement
firms were 42.5 per cent larger than
during the corresponding month of
last yea'r, there was a decline of 24 per cent as compared with the previous month. Sales for the period
Janu~ry 1st to April 30th were 116.9 per cent larger
than those during the corresponding period of 1922.
While the farm implement trade has made exceptional improvement during the past year, sales still
are noticeably below normal. Considerable hesitation has developed recently, due to the steadily advancing market. At the present time there is a large
potential demand for implements, but the farmer,
in view of the fact that he is facing uncertainty
as to the outcome of the present crop, is slow to
purchase all needed equipment at a time when crop
and market conditions affecting his income are so unsettled. Then, too, while many of the farm machinery factories are running at capacity, Hie increasing
cost of production, which must be passed on to the
consumer, is limiting his purchasing power, and affecting his desire to buy. Although the outlook in
this line of trade is considered promising, the future
course of prices and the changing conditions in the
crop prospects will materially affect future buying.

Drugs

Reports from eight wholesale drug_
firms reflect a decrease in sales of . .
10.2 per cent as compared to March sales, but a gain
of 9.1 per cent over April, 1922. The month of April
is considered a short month in the drug trade in the
point of sales, but the seasonal decline this year
was not so marked as usual. This is shown by the
fact that sales during March were 2.9 per cent larger
than during March, 1922, but April sales were 9.1
per cent larger than the corresponding month of the
previous year. Dealers report that b)lying has been
active for current needs, but that future orders
are continuing on a very limited scale. Collections
for the month were reported to be well in line with
sales of the previous month.
Groceries

The April reports from thirteen
wholesale grocery firms showed IA
that the increased volume of sales this year as com- '.
pared to last year was well maintained during the
month. The higher totals are in part attributable to
a higher level of prices. The sales during April
were 17.8 per cent greater than those during April,
1922. Sales for the period January 1st to April
30th were 16 per cent larger than for the correspond- A
ing period last year. The distribution of groceries •
generally slows up at this season of the year as
produce begins to come into the market in substantial volume. However, the unseasonable spring
weather has hampered truck gardening to some extent, and there was a small decrease of 4.6 per cent
from the sales of last month.
Prices generally remained firIl1 with a few dealers
reporting a slight weakness on some items. Sugar, , .
after reaching the highest point since 1920, reacted 'P
downward; but since the first of May the market
has held steady with a slight tendency to stiffen.
The outlook is reported to be from fair to good
with some firms reporting improvement.
Furniture

The pronounced expansion in this
line of trade during the first three
months of this year subsided to some extent during
April, when the sales of the reporting wholesale furniture dealers reflected a decrease of 6.8 per cent
from April, 1922, and 17.8 per cent from last month.
Sales for the first four months of the year registered an increase of 15.2 per cent over the same
period a year ago. The decrease from April a year
ago, however, is not surprising as an exceptionally
large volume of business was done in that month.
The decline from last month is partly attributed
to the more restricted volume of residence building
at some centers.

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS
Hardware

The April sales of eleven wholesale
hardware firms were 27.2 per cent
larger than during April, 1922, but there was a decline of 7.6 per cent as compared to last month. The
smaller' volume of business during April is partly
due to seasonal causes, but other factors have been
operative. Dealers state that the increase in prices

has caused a slackening in demand. This is indicated by the fact that curtailment in new building
programs on account of the rising costs of construction is becoming apparent. Furthermore, the downward course of crude oil prices, which began early in
April, has brought a restriction in drilling operations, and a lessened demand for drilling machinery .

...
·utunutUn •• JlunIlIJIIUUlIIUUUUIllIUWUJJIUlUUlmuHlu .. uIIUIIIIIJUIl1UIIUUtlUIHUl0I1JJUllruIUJII •• UUWUlutmllltlIIllIUl.mUUUlIlllUUmnUlnJ.UlIIlUlIU1JJuunn.U lnWIHlUJIIUIUllUIIIWIIIUIIIUlUII IIllIIIIUluliUllilI1IUIIIUlIIIUUlililIUIliUJUIIUlllIIIIIIUIIUUII,::

=
=1
__

CONDITION OF WHOLESALE TRADE DURING APRIL, 1923.
Percentage of Increase or Decrease in

_
-=

I
ii

-Net Sales-

_ Groceries _..•__ ..............................._ .................._
....................... _ .._.......
~ Dry Goods ........ _............_................... _._. __ .. _........................................
~ Hardware ............................................................................................. ~.
5 Farm Implements ................................. _ ......................................... __ ....
~ Furniture _..... _.............................................................. _...._ ... _ ..._ .._
~ Drugs .........................................................................................................

-Net Sales-

-Stocko-

~;'~~'6 ~ ':l::~!'=' ~~~~;8 :1
- 2.6
+27.2
+42.5
- 6.8
+ 9.1

-22.9
- 7.6
-24.0
-17.8
-10.2

+ 16.0
+ 21.9
+ 34.3
+116.9
+ 15.2
+ 9.5

+19.4
+14.9
-182
.
+ 6.3

+ 9.1

+ 26
'7
.
+.2.

E
§

~
~

p,.nIIlHrlIIUUU'IIUUIIIIUIllUUllllllIlIllIlHlIIlIllllIIIIUUlII1IIUIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.nmUUIllUlllllunIllIUIUUlllllllllumuu uu .. I'JihUlIWUnUllllnlniUllt11UUUIII'IUUUIIUIUI.JIIUum,u,murnnIllIIflUiIlIIIllIUUiIIlUlluu.uunrrnIInIIUUllIllllmillrumll"IIIUltrullllllll~

e
A

.r-

RETAIL TRADE
Retail buying during April, favored by more seasonable weather and the offerings of various goods
at reduced prices, held closely to normal proportions, although the sales of twenty-two department
stores in this district showed a seasonal decrease of
10.5 per cent from sales during March, and were
only three-tenths of one per cent larger than sales
during April, 1922. As Easter came earlier this
year than in 1922, a more accurate comparison is
obtained when the sales for March and April are
combined. This combination discloses that sales for
these two months this year gained approximately
five per cent over sales of the corresponding months
of last year.
Stocks on hand at the close of April were 4.1
per cent larger than those carried at the close of
April last year, and 2.9 per cent larger than at the
close of March.
The ratio of stocks to sales for the first four
months of this year was 461.6 per cent, which compares to 484 per cent for the corresponding period of

1922. The better rate of turnover was due to the
fact that sales for the first four months of this year
averaged 5.1 per cent larger than for the similar
period of last year, while the average stocks carried
by these firms were only slightly larger.
The ratio of outstanding orders to last year's
purchases showed a fractional increase during the
month, being 7.8 per cent on April 30th, as compared
to 7.3 per cent on March 30th. This compares to
5.0 per cent at the close of April a year ago.
Collections during April were rather slow as compared with the previous month. While collections
are expected to fall off at this season, the slowing
up was more marked than usual. The ratio of April
collections to accounts receivable on April 1st was
36.9 per cent, as compared to 40.4 per cent during
March. It is to be noted, however, that, while collections slowed down, the volume of cash sales during April represented approximately 50 per cent of
total sales, as against 47.4 per cent during March.
April collections were approximately the same as
during the corresponding month a year ago.

~ ml r mU'IUUWl l mUl tIIlUtllIIllIIUIllUlllllllnllllllllllllnllllUllmnIIUIIUllillunllllUlTltUlilmnmU Ul1 lllllllUlllUrrtUU UlIlIUntmullUlUllt lnUUtllUHTIlI lIU I UllnrnnmrlllUlltlllll l fllllltlllUUUlllIIUlnllllUlmmllUtUlllltllUlIlUlIllll1IIfIIUlUIIUUlUJlIllllltllliullnlll~
....

1=,

TOU~:::I:7.23,

oompared with

AP,,~::~::~:~~~~AR::i~;~S:O:~7'3 ..~: 3.7 o~~ Df.~ '0:

April, 1923, compared with March, 1923........................
~
Jan. 1st to date compared with same period last year..
=_~ Credit SalesApril, 1923, compared with April, 1922............................
5
April, 1923, compared with March, 1923..........................
Jan 1st to date compared with same period last year..
Stocks§
April, 1923, compared with April, 1922..........................
1=
April, 1923, compared with March, 1923..........................
Ratio of stocks to sales..................................................................
§ Ratio of outstanding orders to last year's purchases............
Ratio of April Collections to Accounts Receivable, due
~
and outstanding on April 1, 1923........... _.........................

I
~
i

.::

_:1

+ 7.7

-11.9
+ 5.4

- 6.3
+.4

4.7

+ 5.1

+ 4.2
-22.0
+10.7

- 6.8
-15.3
+15.1

+10.2
- 5.1
+14.3

+ 6.7
- 6.9
+11.6

+ 4.5
-14.6
+12.1

~
;

+ 4.1
+ 1.7
453.1
8.5

+2.1
+ 1.4
516.3
6.3

- 2.0
+ 5.6
449.6
6.7

+10.0
+ 3.8
453.6
8.0

34-.4.

37.3

42.4

45.7

+ 4.1 §
+ 2.9 ~
461.6 ~
7.8 ~
36.9

i
~

....IIIIIIIUUUUUUUIIIIllIIIIllUJIIIUU/IUlulumuUmuUnnl1tr1mU llluUIUIIIIIUJI!IIIJUIllIIlIUIIIlUIIIIlUWUIllIIIllIIUIUllUlUWUUmUJIUuttnmUlilllllJlUlftnlllu.uUun4olUIi1II.lImUlUtU"UNtIII.lllunUUUUJlUUIUIUIIIUIUIIUUIllUllllUlmUUUUlfllllllllllIIIUlIIUIIU..

...

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS
FINANCIAL

The volume of business at the principal cities of
this district during April, 'as measured by checks
charged to depositors' accounts, evidenced a decline
as compared to the previous month, but an increase
over the corresponding month of last year. The
total amount of debits to individual accounts was
$603,416,000 during April, as compared to $660,590,000 during March, and $555,108,000 during

April, 1922. That this decline is due to seasonal
factors is shown by the fact that the decline in
April of this year as compared to March was 8.7
per cent, while the decline in April, 1922, as compared with the previous month was 9.9 per cent,
thereby indicating that the decline this year was
not as marked as a year ago;

~_lllIflUJttIlUUtfIllUII Ulllll llltll 'l lIllUlIlIIll1llt,"n I IlJIII I I I I1U III III U llfll lill lllIII llI tII llll lI lII lI lIIll lIIlII ll lIIlI lIlll llIU ll lIIlIIlIIllII l lIllII ll UlUlIlI l Ull ill lllll ll 1i II1 I1I11HlllnlltlIIIIIJlt Ul lIlIl l lUunllll,lIIlllItlUUlllllU l hUJJ1Ul litH UtUIIUUUIU II III IIlIumuUllUUUlllnlWUUtl1

~_i

CHARGES TO DEPOSITORS' ACCOUNTS
April, 1923

Albuquerque ...........................................................
Austin ................ .....................................................
Beaumont ........... .................................................
Dallas .....................................................................
El Paso ...................................................................
Fort Worth ............... .............................................
Galveston ...............................................................
Houston ............................................_____ ..._
San Antonio __ ......_.... _................................. _...
Shreveport ................... _ ........... _ ............ _.........
Texarkana .. _............... ____... _...........................
Tucson .. ..................................................'................
Waco .... _... _................_ .........._ ...... _...... ............
Totals, Eleventh District ...........................

March, 1923

8,779,000
16,555,000
16,525,000
145,326,000
32,124,000
95,650,000
87,288,000
107.969,000
27.875,000
34,640,000
8,727,000
7,505,000
14,453,000

$603,41 6,000

9,809,000
16,209,000
16,017,000
167,932,000
36,070,000
111,870,000
81,763 000
115,945,000
31,63 .000
38,645,000
10,587,000
7,843,000
16~62,000

Inc. or Dec.

-10.5
+ 2.1
+ 3.2
-13.5
-10.9
-14.5
+ G 1
.8
- 6.9 l
-11.9 1
- 10.4
- 17.6
- 4.3'
=l~:~j

$660,590,000

April, 1922

7,944,000
12,981,000
12,851,000
132,670,000
28.707.000
119,459,000
5!l,625.000
100,510,000
24,656,000
29,673,000
6,103,000
6.851,000
13,078,000

$555,108,000

lIne. or Dec.

+10.8
+27.5
+28.6
+ 9.5
+11.9
-19.9
+46.4
+ 7.4
+13.1
+16.7
+43.0
+ 9.5
+10.5 ~_~
+ 8.7

t UIIIUI Ul il mlU ll1 1runll lUU IIII1I111'III Uliu n ullll lllu IIUlIUlIU llli liunIHl luwtnllllUUU IUIIII IUI.Uil llnnlwlrllllllllllll lUlUtltlUIUlllmU Il UIUllUfU l ll 1111 11J 11II1I1 1I UlIIHWJI Ulll fUU 1UUlltUUWllIlIIlItI IIllIl Il Ill IIlIU,UIIUm UttlII ItUfllII UlllU llltUUUlml11111111111111 1"

Acceptance
Market

Reports from accepting banks reflect a sharp decline in the volume
of acceptances executed by banks in
this district and outstanding on the last day of the
month. However, the volume of outstanding acceptances is expected to show a decline at this season of
the year. The heaviest movement of commodities
against which acceptances are executed begins in
the fall and generally reaches a peak in the latter
part of the year. The movement subsequently slows
down with the result that the volume of acceptances
declines. On April 30th the volume of outstanding
acceptances executed by banks of this district
amounted to $1,141,325.42 as compared to $2,465,248.65 on March 31st. Outstanding acceptances
based on the domestic shipments and storage of
goods declined from $893,549.42 on March 31st to
$355,779.46 on April 30th, while those executed
against export and import transactions dropped from
$1,571,699.23 on March 31st to $785,545.96 on April
30th. The amount of this class of paper held by the
Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas declined from $20,662,972.96 on March 31st to $13,255,215.42 on April
30th.
Operations of
the Federal
Reserve Bank

There was a substantial increase in
our loans to member banks during
April, the total volume outstanding
on April 30th being $26,117,134.39
as compared to $19,961,116.90 on March 31st. The
rate of increase during April was 30.8 per cent as

compared to 18 per cent during March. It is to be
noted that this $6,156,017.49 increase in the volume
of borrowings was about evenly divided between the
banks located in reserve cities and banks located outside reserve cities. The expansion in loans at this
time is a normal seasonal movement, but it presents a marked contrast with conditions existing
a year ago. While at the end of April a year ago
loans were $8,382,547.64 greater than on the corresponding date this year, they were showing a
constant reduction, due to the fact that at that time
liquidation had not been completed, and seasonal
needs were more than offset by the steady volume
of liquidation which was taking place.
The tolal volume of bills held by this bank decreased from $,10,624,089.86 on March 31st to $39,372,349.81 on April 30th, distributed as follows:
anttUUIlIII!illlllllllll l llnlltllllll1ll llUlll111UIII IIllII IIIIUUlllllUl l11 1II4 1111111111 11 111 111 11I1I1 IITI III IIIJ III IIUl UnllllIlUIII III UlllllUtllII'!:

•

Member banks' collateral notes secured by
~
U. S. Government obligations .................. $ 2,818,300.00 ~
Rediscounts and all other loans to mem=
ber banks ...................................................... 23,298,834.39 ~

I O~~ce~r~.~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~.~.~.~~~~.~: ~~~~~.~ 13~55,215.42 I
..

...

Total bills held .............................................. $39.372,349.81 _

~.UIlIlIIllIlU"'IIIIIIIItIlIIIlUI1lIIJ111l11111l1U"nI1l111IU1ITUllrnll'lttrt'ur~"'lmli1l'"UlUlIIO"llrt'lItutUllWiIllJlUUltlIlHltllllllllll~

The actual circulation of Federal Reserve notes
on April 30th amounted to $27,866,820 as compared
to $29,031,160 on March 31st, showing a contraction
of $1,164,340 during the month. Member banks'
reserve deposits dropped from $51,984,086.46 on
March 31st to $47,133,055.53 on April 30th, reflecting a net loss of $4,851,030.93.

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

Condition of
Reserve City

Reports from reserve city banks as
of May 2nd reflect a decrease of
Banks
$8,630,000 in loans since March
28th. The net demand deposits of
these banks amounted to $225,609,000 on May 2nd,
as compared to $236,134,000 on March 28th, showing a loss of $10,525,000 during the five weeks'
period. Their investments in government securities
were increased $693,000 and their investments in

other stocks, bonds and securities were increased
$1,784,000. The bills payable and rediscounts with
the Federal Reserve Bank of these banks rose from
$2,716,000 on March 28th to $6,058,000 on May 2nd,
while their reserve deposits dropped from $25,623,000 to $24,936,000. The ratio of loans to deposits
was 92 per cent on May 2nd as compared to 91 per
cent on March 28th, and 93 per cent on May 3,
1922.

i" U I UU l tl IlUlltttft Il III IIIIlUllli lU lllllllltIIU UlUlU Ul IIII II I1IUIIII IIIIUI II Il IlIU II Uu n n Ulllllllll lt lHlIIlIIU ll ll lllt ll lllll ll llltllllfUl lll llli ll llllll l l l lllillllllll l Ulllll1UII IlIIII III I I III IIII I II II UIIIIIIIIIIUlUIUIlII!I I IIIIIIUIUlUllmU l lllmnU I IIUI I IUIIIIIIIIUllil l mll1lmll' t I II U lt I UII III' ~

_
~
;

I
e

~
~

g
~

May 2, 1923

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

6.
e 7.
! 8.
9.
" 10.
~ 11.

I
if

~_:

CONDITION STATISTICS OF MEMBER BANKS IN SELECTED CITIES
Number of reporting banks....................................................................
U. S. securities owned..............................................................................
All other stocks, bonds, and securities owned .................... .... ... ..
Loans secured by U. S. Government obligatio n~ ... . . .. ................ .. .. . .
Loans secured by stocks and bonds other than U. S. Governmellt
obligations ..............................................................................................
All other loans............................................................................................
Net demand deposits..................................................................................
Time deposits................................................................. ..........................
Reserve with Federal Reserye Bank.......................... ...........................
Bills payable and rediscounts with Federal Reserve Bank................
Ratio of loans (*) to net demand deposits...... .................................
*Loans include only items 4 and 6.

March 28, 1923.

May 3, 1922

52
$62,620,000
8,998,000
5,260,000

52
$61,927,000
9,515,000
5,137,000

52
$42,619,000
7,563,000
4,921,000

47,509,000
202,845,000
225,609,000
75,595,000
24,936,000
6 058 000
"
92%

52,374,000
211,598,000
236,134,000
75,666,000
25,§23,000
2 710000
"
91 %

43,781,000
186,614,000
205,332,000
64,272,000
22,484,000
3 566000
"
93%

I
;;
~
~
§
~

"
"

g
!
=

i.IUUUIIU IIIIIUl II IIllIUIIIU1u m UUIIIIIIUlllllltlU IIUUIIUJIJUUIUIIUlilfliUIIW1QUUIUIJUm nnIllIUIUllllllllllltlUllllllnltlllnlllltllalllllllll"IIIIIIUlIIIIIIUIIIIIIIUIIIIIUII1I,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIUIIIUUIIIIIlIIIllIlIUIIIIIUIUIt!lutJIIIIIIULUlluuuumllllllIJIIIIIIUj UltUlU l tt .. U~

Discount
Rates

Discount rates at commercial banks
in the cities shown below have
shown a tendency to stiffen, with
the exception of those in San Antonio, where slight-

ly easier rates are noticeable. The "high," "low,"
and "customary" rates charged by these banks are
presented below.

~hmUlUlllnWlm"UIUIIIIIIIUlllllfllfHlilllltllUIllIIII.ur"lIIrIIIUIIIIUUIII"1Il1i1 1 1UIIIIIUU I III''' 1I11111111 11111111Il1l11lf1l11 ''I'IIIIII I IIIIIII I Ulllll l llltll l l llll lllnlll l IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIII4111111111 1 11111 1 1111111lllnlll1!llrIII111mmllml4! l lmllll"lIIlllrr1Ullltunr,:

•

APRIL DISCO UNT RATES

I
~

~
E
i

S
::
~

~
E

;

:
i
i
!

=
~

;

!
I

I
i

I
s
E

I
i

E
:..tU.....UUllIUUWI Ill IUI IllUUlUItUUIlJllllUIlUllllm"UUU IUIIIIl1UIIflUJlIUIlQUf411lJmt IIImtllllllJlIIHlliU1 III UI II IIU l lllllll li liflI II II I1II III IIIIIml1ll1ll1lllHUnnUHnlll i flillfll llllUUlIUUlIIUUUllIlIlIIHlIIIUlltllllllllUUUllIIUl l lftlUlllllln lunU l llllUHIUIIIIIUIIIII IIIIIII II,,"

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

Savings
Deposits

Reports from 118 banks which operate savings departments reflect a
gain of nine-tenths of one per cent

over those on March 31st, and 17.8 per cent over
April 29, 1922.

...... UIlUlllftllllllnmfUnIlIllUJI"I ... llllIIlllflUIlIIlJUUlIIUIUIUlIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIIIIIItllllllllllflillUl llllUIIIIIIUltl1lllllllillUlllllllttllltnlltiliUl tlUIIIIIIUtuIllIIIlU'*,IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII UIlIlIl IIlIlIlIllIIIIllIlUlllllmnWIIIIIII IUlIIIIIIIIIIIIlUU!I1IIIU1lllllnU IIIIIIIIIIIIUU':

Number of
Iteporting
Banks

I...

"
I

Dallas ....................... ................................................................
EI Paso ......................................................................................
Fort Worth .................... ................................................ .........

7
5
4

I ~~~::ot~n

I
_

...:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::..::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::'.:'.:::::::::'.::'
San Antonio ............ ............................................ .. ....................
Shreveport ................................................................................
Waco ..........................................................................................
Wichita Falls ............................. ..............................................
All others ._ ..__~.................................. ..... .................................

Total ___................................... ___._.....__._._._............

Ap ril SO.
19l!3

April 29,
1922

g$ t:fg~~ $ t:gn~:~

~~~~~;~i~~. . . ···.·"",··.·. .·.··..·.·.·.·.·.·.·". . . . . .. . .. . . . . ... . . . ......... .. . ... .... . ... . . . . . ..
.. ·. . . . .
·
... . . . .

SAVINGS DEPOSITS

1
f

:
6
5
6
4,

[nco or
Dee.

t2~:g

March 81,
1923

~:~~g::~~

Inc. or
Dec.

+ 2:~

:_0-_=

12,610,2 2
7,1 9,221:J
6, 64,054

8,936,142
6,910,864
5,274,959

+40.0
+ •. 0
+11.2

12,311,669
7,142,833
5,836,812

+ 1.6 "
+ .6 §=
+.5

9,262,189
8,697,654
2,222,396
2,764.,611
15,394,215

8,710,625
6,759,205
1,609,738
2,.00,974
12,596,173

+ 6.3
+28.7
+38.1
+15.1
+ 22.2

9,240,213
8,649,206
2,186,099
2,629,960
15,155,446

+ .2 S
+ .6
+ 1.7 + 5.1 ~
+ 1.6 ~

J:~~~;g~: 1~:~~g:g~ t~~:~ 1~:~::~~:

118 $89,146,742 $75,665,431

+17.8 $88,382,048

UI
i
.9

'''WIUUlIlJlUlIlIl.WIIIIIMIIUIIIIIUiIIlJIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIUWIIIII UIIUUlI 1IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIII IIIIUIIU IIIIIII'III1IUIUllllllltlIIIIIIIIUl IIIIIUUII IIII " ,"11lttillUIIIIIIIUlUUIIUlIIUtltUIIUUlllllmmWlUUlIIUlIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIUlflillUlllllllUUlIIIII1IIIIIIIIUIIUJIIIIIIIUlIIIIIIIIII;

FAILURES
While the number of commercial firms failing in
this district during April showed only a slight increase, the liabilities involved in these failures was
the highest on record. The failures during April
numbered 93 with the liabilities aggregating $8,874,897. This compares to 91 failures in March with an
indebtedness of $2,474,504, and 167 failures in April,
1922, involving liabilities amounting to $3,865,301.
It is to be noted that several failures occurred which

had a very large aggregate indebtedness, but the direct cause of the exceptionally large total of liabilities was the failure of one concern which had liabilities amounting to seven million dollars.
In the United States as a whole, there was a reduction in the number of insolvencies but the indebtedness of defaulting firms reflected a slight
increase.

~IIKUIUIiUlUllUlfnllll.uuuu""nllUIJ.tUlUIIIIIIUIiUlIIIIIIIIIUl"IUIIIIIIIIUIiUlIIIIIIIII1 I1UUIII UUllllnllllllHnUlUUU U.UlUUWllllll tUIIIIU

IWIIUiUUUUWUMIIUfUUIUUUIHUUIIIUMIIJII . W."IfWIWIII'M'tIIU,W,-I IUIIII

COMMERCIAL FAILURES

J....t.UtiJWItIlIJUriHIIlml .. llmumulllmlU'I..~

!'.~=-

i..,UUullUllu.,nlltlUUIIWIIUlluIUlliliunuuIIIIIIIUIIIIlUIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU'IIIIUIllI, II 11111 IUIIIUll llllllllllllllllilU lihullnllllUlllllttUIIII UtllUUIIUlilltUIIIUIIUIIUtn1111111JUlUlfU1UUnUJUIIIU'UIlIlIlUUII..mUUWIlUiUJIIIII IIIIIIU'''''UIJIIUnUIIIIIUUIIIII'IIIlIUIIHIUUJ

PETROLEUM
Production of crude oil in the Eleventh Federal
Reserve District amounted to 11,033,880 barrels during April as compared to 11,212,490 barrels for the
previous month. While there was a slight decrease
in the total output, the daily average production
showed a gain of 6,103 barrels, due to the shorter
month of April. The daily average yield of Texas
fields amounted to 290,821 barrels as compared to
282,314 barrels during the previous month. On the
other hand, the production of the Louisiana fields
dropped from 2,460,750 barrels in March to 2,309,250
barrels in April, reflecting a loss of 2,404 barrels in
the daily average run.
After showing a decline during the past two
months, the Texas Gulf Coast fi eld scored a gain of
770 barrels in the daily average yield. As this gain
was made in the face of a large reduction in the

amount of new production added during the month,
it would seem to indicate that the old wells produced on a more steady basis during April than during the previous month. The Hull field increased
its daily average production from 16,893 barrels in
March to 17,185 barrels. A larger gain was shown
in the Goose Creek field, where the daily average
run amounted to 20,421 barrels in April as compared
to 19,300 barrels in March.
After registering a slight increase in production
during March, the Central-West Texas fields sustained a loss in production during April of 155,950
barrels, or a reduction of 1,246 barrels in the daily
average yield. The total production for April
amounted to 3,520,515 barrels, as compared to 3,676,465 barrels during March. The total output of the
Mexia-Currie section aggregated 1,823,100 barrels,

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS
or a decline of 116,570 barrels, representing a loss of
1,820 barrels in the daily average yield. This decline is due to the natural depletion of old wells,
with the lack of sufficient new production coming
in to offset the decline. Heavy losses also occurred
in the Stephens County field, the daily average flow
being 28,404 barrels in April as compared to 29,621 barrels during the previous month. The old
producers in this field showed a consider-able loss
in production, but the large amount of new production added partly offset the decline. The large declines in Mexia-Currie and Stephens County fields
were partially covered by the substantial production
gains in the Ranger-Eastland fields, the Moran
Shackleford County field, and the Desdemona-Gorman field. The smaller fields showed no material
changes in production averages.
The North Texas district continued its upward
course in production, with all the major fields sharing in the increase. The Holiday-Archer County
field, which has come to the front as an oil producing center during the past three months, increased
its daily average output from 7,061 barrels in March
to 10,070 barrels during April. The production in
Young County aggregated 245,215 barrels in April as
compared to 218,460 barrels during March. The
Electra field scored a gain in production of 61,650
barrels representing an increase of 2,821 barrels in
the daily average yield. The Burkburnett fields
registered a gain of 1,509 barrels in the daily average run, due to the new production coming in from
the Hirschi pool.
The daily average output of the Haynesville (La.)

field declined from 35,701 barrels in March to 34,340
barrels in April. The Bellevue field produced 198,075 barrels in April as compared to 206,150 barrels
in March.
Drilling
Results

There was a general slackening in
drilling operations in practically all
fields of the district during April.
The wells completed during the month numbered
379, out of which 282 were producers, as against
539 completions in March including 370 producers.
Despite the fact that there were 88 fewer producers
completed in April than in March, the new production added during April amounted to 47,388 barrels,
as compared to 50,888 barrels during the previous
month.
Texas fields as a whole reported 329 completions,
240 of which were producers yielding a total initial
production of 44,238 barrels. This compares to 479
completions in March, of which 326 were producers
with an initial output of 46,998 barrels.
Louisiana operations continued on practically the
same scale as during the previous month. There
were 50 wells completed, including 31 producers of
oil and 11 gas wells.
Crude Oil
Prices

The reaction in the crude oil market which appeared early in April
continued throughout that month
and the first half of May. This reaction has affected
all the fields shown below with the exception of the
Gulf Coast district. The declines in the various
fields have ranged from 10 cents to 30 cents per
barrel.

~IIUlflll"IIIIIIIUlmll'lfJilnnUmlHllllltlrnIllUlllllnUlllllltllmIIlIllIIJUtllU'fnlllUUIIIUIIII1I11I11UUnIIlUiUlmUIIUIUlIIIIII.IUnlllllllllliltml.Ui I IllUliUIU ImUlllllllllnl'mntilll~I'UllllflluuUrmUmUIIIUDIIUtl1l11llmmlU'.IIIIIUIIIII.DIIIUti ,,11m IIIIUIIIII ..I*II'I1':1

~
=

OIL PRODUCTION

i
E

=
i

;

~
c

I
;:

~Jrnlll"UUUtlmIUttmUttlllllflrnlllfmUlt'fI'lIIllllllIIllllIlIllnll"lllllIl1nl I"fIIIIUlUlUII,mIUtIllUUlUmtllmmlnIUUmUItfUnnU IiUn t l lmUllUiltlnlUIUnuUI,HJJlUUunU/lllllflJlI\UIHIIIJDfJUlHlfllIIII I IIIUIIIIIIII,mml"mIlUllllllfrrlliUI 1 IIIIIIIIIIIIImUIIIIIHIIIIIIIIII

!
S
;;.

!:iIUltlIIUfflIIIUlltlllllllItlIllIHUUliIUIIII'UUUllnUm'IH"llIh nrrllltll'ImlUUlUlllllllllfllllllumOumlllllllfnunmmutmntlllll tllllTUUrtlll lll IIl1unmllllrIUUlltUlIIUIIUIIIJlIIUUIIIU'"'UIIUIiUIUIIIIIUIt1I1UIIIIUlUUUIInnmlillllltlllfllnlllUlllllnUnlllllltlllllHIIIIIUIl!

i
~

~
~

;;
iii

!
~
~

i
;

CRUDE OIL PRICES
TexlUl

May 4,
1923

Corsicana light ..........................................$1.30
Corsicana heavy...... .... ........................ .70
Texas Coastal ............................................ 1.75
Mexia .......................................................... 1.90

~~~~ T~~~~T'i.i~.~.~ity.~~d..~bo~e).:::::: ~:~g

May 4,
1922

$1.30
.75
1.25
1.50

Louisiana

May 4,
1923

Caddo (39 gravity and above) .................. $2.10
Bull Bayou (38 gravity and above) ........ 1.70
Homer (39 gravity and above) .............. 2.10
Haynesville (39 gravity and above) ...... 2.10
De Soto crude ............................................ 2.00

May 4, ;
1922 ;;

$2.00 §
1.90 ~
2.00 ~
2.00 §
2.00 ~

*1922 prices for North Texas oil are not comparable with 1923 prices, due to the fac~ thaft t$h2iS oil wabs nOlt ~
purchased on a gravity basis until December, 1922. North Texas crude on May 4, 1922, was sellmg or .00 per arre. ~

1llIIl lI lIIlumm l fllnlllllmUlunllU1l11mlltllllllfllllllllllnllllllllllUlIUIIUllll111lUItiIIIUllmUIIIUUUtlllllllnrUnltIIl U lnUII1III11IU11111111tlllll1lllU'U UllllIIII1UlllllUunlnlllrlllUlllm.'''mU1II~liUtlIUU~III'Ullllllllllflll 1IIt1IIU1UII,mIIIUl'IIIIIU I IU\IIIIIIltHlllllllllllUtr

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

fllll"'"I""'''''''''III'''I0111I" ,",,",I'''''''''''''''III''"""'"""''''''''''"'''''''''''''"'III''''''''III:;;;~''~;';~~;:~''';;~~'~~';lll1lll",,,",,,,",,,'"",'10",,,,",,,11111"111"1111'111111""'"1111111111""1"""11"""1111111'"11"1'111"11"1

;

Nort~i~~xas ................................._......._

..__ ._._._._ .................. _...........
Central-West Texas .............................................. _......... __ .......... _. __ .....
~ Texas Coastal ..................... . _.. ............................. _.... _..... _ •...... ..... _ ... e Miscellaneous fields ..... _............ __ ._... _......................... _.......... _...... _....... __
§ Texas Wildcats ... _.................. ........ __ .._......__ ._._._•..• _ .................. _.....
~

I
i

Compl

t1::

1
80
36
21
II

produc::9
59
30
21
1

Failor"" 62
21
6

pr!,d;~,;12 I
12,021
9,610
1,996
300

$29
60

~:= ~ April totals, District...................................................... ...................................
_ March totals, District........................................................................................
"Includes 11 gas wells

240
42*

1
89 ---44-,2-3-8
8
3,150

379
539

Totals, Texas ......................... ............................................... ............... '"
North Louisiana ................ ................... .......... ......... .............. .. .. . ......

282
370

1967911
---4-7-,3-8
-8
60,888

?1 111I'IIIIIUI IIIIllUIIIU'~IIIIllII' llIIlllIlllII lllrllllulnlllll llllll Irnml 'IIIIIUII IIUlUllllUlllfllUI/,llIilll'lllltnllllllilflnllllllllll lflllllllrrullllInrJlnITllhlfllllllll illUllllllllltlllllllllflnlllllllllllilllUlJIIlllll11mIJlll llllilumlllllij "'IIUhlllllllll'''IIIIII IIUll lltlltll'"lImtltlllrt''II''~

(Oil statistics compiled by The Oil Weekly, Houston, Texas.)

LUMBER

The production rate of Eleventh District mills reThe lumber market reflected a weakness on comflected a sharp decline during the month, having mon lumber during the month and by the middle
dropped from normal production in March to 20 per of May the price on common had declined, on an avcent below normal in April. While production fell erage, two dollars per thousand. On the other hand,
off, shipments continued in a large volume. April the better grades are scarce and the market has
shipments were 18 per cent above production as com- strengthened on this class of lumber.
pared to 3 per cent during the previous month. Orders received at the mills were equivalent to 88 per
"""'."." ""'I'n'""'nn:;;~u~w;;~;,u:~~~_~;:;I;;~~~;'"I""ulu'n''''11",,,nwD11
cent of normal monthly production, which was practically the same as during the previous month. The
Number of reporting mills_....... _.
47
_~=_=_
unfilled orders on the books of 47 mills on April 30th . Production ........................................ 92,360,873 feet
- Shipments ........................................ 109,461,384 feet
amounted to 94,865,275 feet as compared to 92,023,g~~~ll~d ··~;d~~;·:·Ap;i"j··3"(ith::::::::::::1~U~~:~i~ ~:~
393 feet on the books of 48 mills at the close of
;; Normal production ........................ 116,704,303 feet
;;
March. Stocks on hand at the mills continued to ;; Stocks, April 30th..........................259,382,575 feet
"
~
dwindle, due to the heavy shipments and the slower ~ Normal stocks ................................ 328,958,316 feet
~
Shipments above production ........ 17,100,511 feet=18% ~
rate of production. Stocks as of April 30th were =_~ Actual production below normal.. 23,343,430 feet=20% ~
Orders below normal production.. 13,761,789 feet=12% =
21 per cent below normal as compared to 15 per cent
~ Stocks below normaL ................... 69,675,741 feet=21% ~ .A
on March 31st.
iIJl'" l ll lnl fUI'I "'~

-_=_§=_

-"m"'.IIIII.ftltH'I1.4IIII"'I1111IIUMIINIIWIItUiM""''''''llllllJ4'''i!Illulit"'IHon_UI'IOlllnUUlflJ't'U , nllllllIlU..

...

BUILDING
The valuation of building permits issued at the
principal cities of this district reflects a decline of
42.3 per cent from the March valuation, but an increase of 4.7 per cent over April, 1922. However,

the March valuation was the highest amount ever
recorded in this district. The April valuation was
$6,733,979, as compared to $11,661,391 in March and
$6,434,537 in April a year ago.

~'UIIIIIUI IIIIUUtIII IllUt tl' lnlttnUttrllnl llllllltllttu n 'IIIIIUtlIPIIlllltlUIIUlllllttullllllnnltm f lllllUtlIIIIIDIJIIlllnnnwmnullUlllUlll1t1UUIIIUllnlUllrlllllllimUlrHfllllllllllllll lnulllnlll1l11lUllUllllllUljllill1liun:lUlluommUlmml Jflll1111l11UlrtlUmmntl'lffHtm

Aus1in.. _ _._._.. ____ ..... ~._ .. __ ..
Beaumont._ ... ___ ..... _..... _... .......-...........
Dallas.._ .................. _... _.
·~
EI Paso.... _...... _ .... _.. _.......... _. __

~!~~~~.~.~.~::::~::~::::::::::::::~~~::::=:::=~
Total. ....................................._ ..

2,5501 $0,733,979

Galveston ...... _ ..• _..... __ ......................

No.

IAprU, 1928
Valuation

40 $ 83,847
142
378,166
455
l ,926,0iS"G
238,363
1011
311
934,444
327 1
110,8R6
1,314,916
2331
2431
262,0~~
571,723
3441
817,620
306,
48
96,010

Fori Worth... __ . __ .. _ ... _._ ...... _...

nr..

BUILDING PERMJTS

Hooston.. ......... _ .............. _...... _ .._.....
Port Arthu.r._ _ _ ._ .................. .....
an Antonio...

Marc.b. 1923
Valuation
No.
54 $ 53~95

I
1

120:
470:
102 1
2841
2771
584
184.
3781
320!
371

173,274
2,059,537
212,517
655,122
174,952
5,348,319
155,455
1,137,511
1,612,344
79,065

Jnc. or
Dec.
+ 57.3
+118.2
- 6.5
+ 12.2
+ 42.6
- 36.8
- 75.4
+ 68.7
- 49.7
- 49.3
+ 21.4

2,810 $11,661,391, -

~fUII1UINI1I"lIlIl1r"IIIUllljllllrnlllulnuIUIOl1mJII.nIIIiUllnllnlln"l(111111111111111 11"'III,InmllnIllIIUIlUlIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIUIIUUlllllltttIlIlUUIIUIIIIUUlllUun

42.3

Al)cll, 1922

tnc. or

261
41

557,486
183,258
1,689,967
79,838
1,150.605
721,907
126,314-

Dee.
+ 36.6
+277.8
+ 45.2
- 45.4
+ 67.6
- 39.6
- 22.2
+228.3
- 60.3
+ 13.2
- 24.0

2,730

6,434,537

No.

40
114
407
112
268
396
698
103

290

Valuation
$ 61,902
100,105
1,326,197
4.36.9~~

I.,

4.7

1IIIIIIUlU,!llml ml1mWlIlrllllllllWUmnmUII1UUIUlUlnJttlmUIIUUlllUlIUlJlllllUlmntnUnnlttlllltllUIl

=:~-= ~

f
~

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

SUMMARY OF NATIONAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS
(Compiled by !he Federal Reserv. Board .. of May

Production and trade continued in large volume
during April. There was some slackening of business
activity in the latter part of the month and during
the early weeks of May, partly on account of seasonal influences.
PRODUCfION

~s. JC~~'.)

were made in March, and the unseasonably cold
weather in many localities. Mail order sales during
April were 10 per cent less than in March, but 32
per cent larger than a year ago.
WHOLESALE PRICES

Prices of certain basic commodities declined during April and the early part of May. The general
index of wholesale prices of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, it is to be noted, showed no change between March and April. Prices of building materials, metals, cloth, and clothing were higher in
April than in March, these advances being offset by
declines in prices of fuel, and farm products, especially livestock and dairy products.

The Federal Reserve Board's index of production
in basic industries declined about one per cent in
April. Production of lumber, anthracite coal, and
mill consumption of cotton decreased, while there
were increases in the output of pig iron, and petroleum. There was a further increase in the value
of building contracts awarded in April, but the value
of building permits issued in 168 cities was 16 per
BANK CREDIT
cent less than the record figures of March. The deSince the middle of April the volume of bank
crease was due chiefly to a curtailment of new procredit in use has remained relatively constant. Bejects in New York, as the aggregate value of pertween April 11th and May 9th the loans of member
mits at other reporting cities showed an increase of
banks in leading cities showed an increase of nearly
20 per cent. Car loadings continued to be much
$100,000,000, a large part of which occurred in the
larger than in the corresponding weeks of previous
Chicago District. These increases in loans were acyears, owing chiefly to heavy shipments of manucompanied by a somewhat larger liquidation of infactured goods. In spite of present heavy traffic,
vestments, which was general throughout the counthe shortage of freight cars has largely disappeared.
try. Partly through the sale of these investments
- . Employment at industrial establishments oontinued
reporting member banks have met the demand for
to increase during April, although plants in eastern
additional loans without obtaining increased accomstates reported some reductions in their forces and
modation at the reserve banks. The volume of Fedthere was an increase in those states in the number
eral reserve bank credit has consequently continued
of concerns working part time. Increases in wage
to remain fairly steady at the level which has prerates were announced by many concerns, and avervailed since the middle of January, and the volume of
age weekly earnings of factory workers increased
Federal reserve notes in circulation has remained
about one per cent.
practically unchanged.
Somewhat easier money conditions are indicated
TRADE
by slightly lower rates on commercial paper and
Wholesale and retail trade were somewhat smaller lower yields on outstanding treasury certificates.
in April than in March, which is the customary The Treasury offering of approximately $400,000,trend at this season of the year. Both were well 000 4%, per cent notes maturing March, 1927, was
above the level of a year ago. Decreased sales by was heavily oversubscribed and the issue was subdepartment stores in April as compared with March sequently quoted at a slight premium in the open
were in part due to the fact that Easter purchases market.

MONTltLY REVIEW OF BtrsiNESS AND iNDtJS11t1AL coN"bttIONS
BANK CREDIT

BANK CJ:\EDIT

ALL F'EOE~AL FiE~!:RVE BAtiKS
MILLIONS Of DOUARS

MI LuOlO' OF

~~
.. . ""
;

2500

DOL LARS

ItOOO

.-..

DOlLAItS

OIWONS or DOllAIlS

3000

14
... . LOANS AND
\. DisCOUNTS

12
DENARD

... '(

&lUIOKS

3500

I'" .~-f·'~~

c"id

e80 MEM8£R SANK's IN It).OINC

\'-.1
"

fo.:

~ "-

ZOOD

',.....

I'\...t.

"I.

--"-

15 00

tANNING

..£sscrs.."l. . .~
". ..
.~"

1000

I500

"~ ~,.<Io.

I 000

IIIVCJTNCNTS..··· · -

.. ..-.~
"~~:.,

. . . - ....

- -

TiMe

500

1919

19 20

1921

1922

1923

300

P£R aNT
300

19'" "00 )

P.f;/I CENT
0

1100

25 0

200

--"'-

pJ
IV

192 3

(

- -

t"~. tOO )

160

,
I

.I'

IZ 0

100

1so

/\)

"\I

--'-

-.....r

I 00

V\?

100

P[II ctHT

zso

~\
-

150

1922

d;)M!lINATlOH or 'ZZ INDI\I10UAL stRIES
CoRRfc:TfO fOR 5L'SOML VARIATIO,",

U. S. BUREAU Of LABOR STATISTICS
MQftrIlU'.Ali£<fAG£

1921

1920

1919

INDEX 0" PRoOut'rlOM 1~ &ASlt "NDUSTRIES
I

P¥tI CES

(

IHtlEX "UMmS - r ~ot.g).\.E ~fCts
o
P[!lC;~J

OCPOSITS"

I-""

I 00

so
zo

20
l ...Us.-r

o
1919
Note:

1920

~lIR£-

1921

1922

1923

Due Adopted by United State. Bureau of r.bor Statlatb

1919

o
1920

1921

1922

19 23

Full text of Review (Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas) : June 1, 1923

FRASER