View original document

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

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION No. 268

W A S H I N G T O N , D . C.

ISS U E D S E P T E M B E R 1938

A GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF
AGRICULTURAL CREDIT
By
NORMAN J. WALL
Senior Agricultural Economist
and

E. J. ENGQUIST, J r .
Associate Agricultural Economist
Bureau o f Agricultural Economics

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C.




Price 10 cents

This publication is one of a series of 10 publications as
follows:
A Graphic Summary of Physical Features and Land
Utilization in the United States____________________ O. E. Baker
A Graphic Summary of Farm Tenure__________________ H. A. Turner
A Graphic Summary of Farm Taxation---------------------Donald Jackson
A Graphic Summary of the Value of Farm Property___ B. R. Stauber
and M. M. Regan
A Graphic Summary of Farm Machinery, Facilities,
Roads, and Expenditures_________________________ _0. E. Baker
A Graphic Summary of Farm Labor and Population___ J. C. Folsom
and O. E. Baker
A Graphic Summary of the Number, Size, and Type
of Farms, and Value of Products___________________ O. E. Baker
A Graphic Summary of Farm Crops___ O. E. Baker and A. B. Genung
A Graphic Summary of Farm Animals and Animal
Products___________________________________________ O. E, Baker
A Graphic Summary of Agricultural Credit____ Norman J. Wall and
E. J. Engquist, Jr.

This series, which has been prepared under the general direction of
O. E. Baker, senior agricultural economist, will bring up to date the
Graphic Summary of American Agriculture published in 1931 as
Miscellaneous Publication 105.
The first Graphic Summary of American Agriculture appeared in
the 1915 Yearbook of Agriculture (also issued as Yearbook Separate
681), and was largely based on the 1910 census. The second was
contained in the 1921 Yearbook (also issued as Yearbook Separate
878), and was based largely on the 1920 census. The third was
published as Miscellaneous Publication No. 105, in May 1931, and
was based both on the 1925 Agricultural Census, and the annual
T
estimates of the Bureau of Agricultural Economics. It was divided
into 11 sections, but these sections were bound together and issued only
as a single publication. It was more inclusive than previous issues,
particularly of maps and graphs relating to the economic and social
aspects of agriculture.
The publications in this series devote still more attention to eco­
nomic and social conditions. They are based on both the 1930 and
1935 census reports, as well as the annual estimates of the Bureau of
Agricultural Economics. They deal not only with changes between
1930 and 1935 but also with the changes during the decade of urban
prosperity and agricultural depression that preceded the more general
depression. Most of the distribution maps for crops and many of
those for livestock present the 1929 census returns, because the
drought of unprecedented severity and extent in 1934 would make
such maps for 1934 misleading. Several increase and decrease maps,
howrever, show the changes that occurred between 1929 and 1934,
or 1930 and 1935.
The graphic presentation was designed and drafted under the
direction of R. G. Hainsworth, in charge of the Graphic Section of the
Bureau of Agricultural Economics.
Most of the clerical work in compiling the statistical data used in
the following charts was done under the supervision of Mrs. Lucy R,
Hudson and Mrs. Cecelia G. Schreiber.




ii

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION No. 268
Washington, D. C.

September 1938

A GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT1
By

J. W a l l , senior agricultural economist, a n d E . J. E n g q t j is t , Jr.,
associate agricultural economist, Bureau of Agricultural Economics

N okm an

Wide variations in the total amount of agricultural indebtedness
and in the sources from which the credit was obtained have been
significant characteristics of the debt structure of American agricul­
ture during the last two decades. The expansion in agricultural in­
debtedness during the World War and immediate post-war period
and the sharp reduction of debt following 1929 were closely associated
with significant changes in the level of farm income. The prevalence
of distressed economic conditions during most of this period led to
extensive Federal and State legislation to alleviate unfavorable credit
conditions.
AMOUNT OF AGRICULTURAL INDEBTEDNESS

Farm-mortgage indebtedness increased from $3,320,470,000 in 1910
to $7,857,700,000 at the beginning of 1920 and continued to increase
up to 1928, at which time the total stood at about $9,469,000,000.
During this period there were substantial increases in the loans of
the Federal land banks and joint-stock land banks, established under
the Farm Loan Act of 1916, and in the loans held by life insurance
companies. /T h e increase in the farm-mortgage holdings of these
agencies represented, in part, a shift of indebtedness, including short­
term loans, from commercial banks and individuals. From January
1, 1930, to January 1, 1935, the mortgage indebtedness of farmers
decreased sharply from $9,214,278,000 to $7,645,091,000.2 The reduc­
tion of 17 percent during this period resulted largely from foreclosures
and other acquirements of mortgaged properties by mortgagees.
By January 1, 1937, the estimated farm mortgage indebtedness had
been reduced further to $7,254,821,000.
The total of personal and collateral loans to farmers by open com­
mercial banks also showed wide variations during this period. From
1914 to 1920 the estimated amount of such loans increased from
$1,607,970,000 to $3,869,891,000. From the peak level of 1920 there
was an almost continuous reduction until the beginning of 1937, at
which time the estimated amount of such loans was $593,614,000, or
1 The charts in this publication that deal with the estimates of farm-mortgage indebtedness and its dis­
tribution by tenure and lending agency for 1935, and the revised estimates for 1930, are based upon data
compiled under the immediate direction of Donald C. Horton, agricultural economist.
2 For further details relating to these estimates see joint release (multilithed) of the Bureau of the Census
and the Bureau of Agricultural Economics entitled “ Cooperative Survey— Farm Mortgage Indebtedness
in the United States (Detailed Summary) ”




1

2

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

less than one-sixth of the 1920 peak. This reduction in loans was
accompanied by a decrease in the number of banks operating in agri­
cultural areas equal to about one-half of the number of banks in
operation in such areas on June 30, 1920. From June 1936 to June
1937 there was an increase of 10 percent in the outstanding amount
of these loans, the first significant increase to occur in any recent year.
The decline after 1920 in personal and collateral loans held by com­
mercial banks was offset to some extent by an increase in short-term
loans of a similar character obtained from federally sponsored agencies.
At the end of 1937 the amount of such loans was $194,224,535. In
addition, there was a considerable volume of outstanding loans repre­
senting emergency crop-production advances and loans for agricul­
tural rehabilitation made^ by the Resettlement Administration and
the Farm Security Administration.
FEDERAL EFFORTS FOR IMPROVEMENT OF CREDIT FACILITIES

Following 1920 when farm-commodity prices declined precipitously,
commercial banks which had been the major source of short- and
intermediate-term credit were faced by severe difficulties. To avert
widespread suspension of banking facilities, the War Finance Corpora­
tion was authorized to make advances to banking institutions. But
despite this financial assistance, bank suspensions were very numerous
throughout the 1920’s. In 1923 legislation was enacted that author­
ized the establishment of 12 intermediate credit banks with the ob­
jective of providing more adequate discounting facilities for agencies
providing short- and intermediate-term credit for farmers. The
failure of local rediscounting agencies to be organized in sufficient
number to make these facilities generally available made this new
avenue of credit a relatively limited one.
Federal assistance during this period also was provided in the form
of seed loans made directly to farmers by the Federal Government.
From 1921 through 1937, Congress by special appropriation or au­
thorization made funds available in 13 different years for direct ad­
vances for producing crops or for purchasing feed for livestock. These
advances were first known as seed loans and later as emergency cropproduction loans. The earlier appropriations were available only to
limited districts within a very few States and the amounts involved
were relatively small.
Following 1929 when farm income and farm-commodity prices
declined even more drastically than they had following 1920, the credit
problems of agriculture were further intensified. The number of bank
suspensions increased, and the lending facilities of operating banks
were sharply curtailed by the decline in deposits and the need of main­
taining a liquid position under the abnormal conditions existing at
that time.
In 1932 the Reconstruction Finance Corporation was authorized to
establish 12 regional agricultural credit corporations to make loans
directly to farmers and stockmen where the proceeds of such loans were
to be used for an agricultural purpose. In the earlier months of opera­
tion, the demand for loans was largely from the livestock areas, and,
in particular, from the range sections. In the first part of 1933 the
volume of crop-production loans assumed considerable proportions.
The combined total of all outstanding loans reached a peak of $158,




A GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

3

394,375 in August 1933. After the establishment of the production
credit associations, the orderly liquidation of the regional agricultural
credit corporations was begun.
The Federal Government took additional steps, beginning in 1933,
to alleviate the credit distress prevailing in agricultural areas by devel­
oping a comprehensive program of refinancing outstanding indebted­
ness and setting up a system for providing a permanent source of
credit for meeting current production-financing requirements.
Under the refinancing program the Federal land banks were author­
ized to make loans on the basis of “ normal-value” appraisals as con­
trasted with the abnormally depressed sales-value basis prevailing
previously. In addition, provisions were made for Land Bank Com­
missioner loans which could be made, either on first- or second-mortgage security, in an amount up to 75 percent of the normal value of the
underlying security. From May 1933 to the end of 1937, Federal
land bank loans in the amount of $1,291,438,933 and Land Bank
Commissioner loans in the amount of $937,621,745 were made under
this program.
To provide a continuous source of credit for current production
requirements, 12 production credit corporations were set up to capital­
ize and supervise the operations of local discounting agencies known as
production credit associations. About 550 production credit associa­
tions are now in operation to supply credit for sound agricultural pur­
poses in all agricultural areas.
Under the provisions of the Farm Credit Act of 1933, 12 district
banks for cooperatives and a central bank for cooperatives were
established. The lending operations of these institutions cover some­
what the same field (excluding stabilization operations) as was for­
merly served by the revolving fund of the Agricultural Marketing Act
enacted in 1929. The banks for cooperatives make commodity,
operating capital, and facility loans to farmers’ cooperatives.
Other Federal efforts in the field of agricultural credit include
(1) the loan facilities of the Commodity Credit Corporation for making
loans on staple commodities in connection with adjustment or market­
ing programs of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration; (2) the
Farm Security Administration (formerly the Resettlement Adminis­
tration) engaged in making relief and rehabilitation advances, with the
additional authority granted in 1937 for making loans to tenants for
the purchase of farms; (3) the Rural Electrification Administration,
established for the purpose of making loans for—
financing the construction and operation of generating plants, electric trans­
mission and distribution lines or systems for the furnishing of electric energy to
persons in rural areas who are not receiving central station service.
ACQUIRED FARM REAL ESTATE AND INTEREST RATES

In spite of the extensive refinancing program of the Farm Credit
Administration, the volume of farm land acquired by lending agencies
reached substantial proportions. At the beginning of 1929 the
Federal land banks, joint-stock land banks, life insurance companies,
and three State credit agencies had an investment of almost $150,000,000 in acquired farm real esate. By 1937 this had increased to
$983,284,000, involving over 28,000,000 acres. On January^1, 1937,
the majority of this was held by life insurance companies, their invest-




4

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 68, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

inent amounting to an estimated $713,166,000. The above data
exclude an estimated investment of $45,598,000 by open commercial
banks in farm real estate on January 1, 1937.
The joint-stock land banks were placed in voluntary liquidation
under the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933. The liquidation
of these agencies, as well as that of three State credit agencies in
Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota, has resulted in a shift
of their loan holdings to other active lending agencies or in the ac­
quirement of a large number of properties from delinquent borrowers.
The shift and reduction in loans by these agencies accompanied that
which was taking place in insurance-company and commercial-bank
holdings of mortgage loans.
Average interest rates charged on agricultural loans have decreased
in most sections of the country during the last two decades and particu­
larly during the last few years. Although regional variations are
still apparent, the uniform rates charged by federally sponsored
agencies have probably reduced the average interest rate in the highrate areas more than in the low-rate areas. The Federal land bank
loan rate varied between 5 percent and 6 percent until 1935. Since
that date the contract rate on new loans made through national farm
loans has been 4 percent. The rate charged on production credit
association loans is 5 percent. In many areas, also, there has been a
slightly downward trend in the rate of interest charged by commercial
banks on agricultural loans.
SOURCE OF DATA

The data presented in the following charts have been obtained
principally from the various reports issued by the Bureau of the
Census, the Farm Credit Administration, and the following publica­
tions issued by the Bureau of Agricultural Economics:
Technical Bulletin 288, Farm-Mortgage Credit.
Technical Bulletin 521, Agricultural Loans of Commercial Banks.
Circular 414, Farmer Bankruptcies, 1898-1935.
Technical Bulletin 539, Federal Seed Loan Financing and its Relation to Agri­
cultural Rehabilitation and Land Use.
Technical Bulletin 575, Demand Deposits of Country Banks.
Mimeographed report, Supplementary Report on Agricultural Credit Develop­
ments Relating to Commercial Banks.
Joint release, Bureau of Agricultural Economics and Bureau of the Census, FarmMortgage Indebtedness (detailed summary).
Circular 417, The Farm Real Esta te Situation, 1935-36.
Mimeographed reports, Farm Real Estate Taxes by States.
Mimeographed report, Outstanding Farm-Mortgage Loans of Leading Lending
Agencies.
Mimeographed report, Regional Variations in the Source and Tenure Distribution
of Farm-Mortgage Credit, Outstanding January 1, 1935.
Agricultural Finance Review (multilith), Vol. 1, No. 1.




A GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

M O RTGA GE DEBT, VALUE, A N D TA XE S ON FARM REA L
ESTATE. PER A C R E O F A L L L A N D IN F A R M S
250

Taxes p er acre
( 1915 =1 0 0 )

200

Value o f fa rm real
esta te p e r a cre
( 1913 - 1 0 0 )

150

100

50

1915

1920

1925

1935

* PR ELIM IN A R Y

1.— Farm-mortgage indebtedness more than doubled from 1910 to
1920. Despite a sharp drop in land values, indebtedness continued to
increase until about 1928. Taxes on farm real estate also increased at a
rapid rate adding to the heavy load of fixed charges borne by farmers in
the 1920’s. Since 1930 there has been a substantial reduction in indebted­
ness largely because of the liquidation of debt through foreclosure and
assignment, and a material decrease in the amount of taxes paid per acre.

F ig u r e

B A E 32967

2.— Changes in the volume of farm-mortgage debt lag behind changes
in farm income. While the rapid rise in farm income prior to 1920 was
accompanied by a substantial expansion in agricultural indebtedness, the
fall in farm income in 1921 and 1932 was not matched by a comparable
decrease in debt. As a consequence, the relation of debt to income fluctu­
ates considerably, becoming extremely unfavorable at times. Since early
1933, increases in gross farm income have again placed the two factors
in better relation to each other.

F ig u r e




6

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

INDEX NUMBERS OF FARM BANKRUPTCIES. AND OF WHOLESALE
PRICES OF FARM PRODUCTS, UNITED STATES, 18 99 -193 6
BANKRUPTCIES

PRICES
1
1910-1 4=100

(PERCENT)

700

/ ' i
*
i
I
/
i
|
i
•
I
#
•
I
«
I
_____ ■
»-------*
»
i
•
»1#
i
»

205

»

500
Fa rm bank ruptcies
300

100

(PERC EN T)

/

/

V

170

\y\

X

%

l
> . x
Whohesale pri ces o f
farm products

J
1899

L L L L ...L L L L -J L L L L . L
1905
1910
1915

%
%
<
1
*
t
4
*
#
t ......I
%
t
1
• 1
» I
./ v #

i j j l j j j j . l i L i..I J . J J J
11
1920
1925
1930
1935

135

100

65

30

BAE 29038

3.— Changes in farm-commodity prices and farm income have been
reflected in the frequency of farm bankruptcies. The peak of bankruptcies,
7,872 in number, occurred in 1925, 4 years after the cessation of the sharp
drop in farm-commodity prices in 1921. The number of farmer cases
concluded in the bankruptcy courts is only a small proportion of the farmdebt-distress cases and involves primarily tenant farmers. Since 1933 the
amended National Bankruptcy Act provides additional facilities for com­
position or extension of debts.

F ig u r e

BAE 32847

4.— Total farm-mortgage debt in the United States decreased 17
percent, or approximately $1,500,000,000, between 1930 and 1935. In the
North Central States mortgage debt declined over 20 percent, or $1,144,000,000. This accounted for 73 percent of the total reduction in mortgage
indebtedness for the United States during this period. The decrease in
Iowa of 31.5 percent represents a debt reduction of almost $373,000,000.
The increase in debt in the New England States represents to some extent
the increase in the number of farms enumerated by the Census Bureau.

F ig u r e




A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

5.— The decrease between 1930 and 1935 in the number of farms
mortgaged, as in the case of the amount of the mortgage debt (fig. 4),
occurred largely in the Midwest, Northwest, and Southwest. It was notably
large in Oklahoma. For the United States as a whole there were 2,350,000
farms mortgaged on January 1, 1935, compared with 2,523,000 5 years
earlier, a decrease of 6.9 percent. The percentage of all farms reporting
which were mortgaged, dropped from 40.1 to 34.5 between 1930 and 1935.

F ig u r e

6.— The increase in the number of mortgaged farms in the New
England States represents to a considerable extent an increase in the num­
ber of farms included in the 1935 census as compared with 1930. The rather
sharp increase in the number of mortgaged farms in Virginia, Kentucky,
Tennessee, and Nevada occurred in spite of a drop in total farm-mortgage
debt in those States.

F ig u r e

67558°— 38------- 2



7

8




MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

BAE 32809

7.— It is estimated that on January 1, 1935, 2,350,000 farms were
mortgaged, or 34.5 percent of the 6,812,350 farms in the United States.
It will be noted that in Wisconsin and North Dakota more than half
of the farms were mortgaged in 1935, as compared with less than 20
percent in West Virginia and New Mexico.

F ig u r e

BAE 32813

F i g u r e 8 . — Since

the value of farm land decreased by 31.4 percent from 1930
to 1935 and farm-mortgage indebtedness decreased 17 percent, the relative
weight of the outstanding debt, as measured by the ratio of mortgage debt
to total value of land and buildings, was greater in 1935 than in 1930.
The high ratio of debt to value of property in the Great Plains States
reflects, in part, the results of several years of severe drought.

9

A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

PERCENTAGE OF FARM-MORTGAGE DEBT SECURED BY FARMS OPERATED
BY OWNERS AND BY TENANTS AND MANAGERS. JAN. 1.1935
PERCENT OF MORTGAGE DEBT PERCENT OF MORTGAGE DEBT
SECURED BY FARMS OPERATED SECURED BY FARMS OPERATED
BY OWNERS
BY TENANTS AND MANAGERS
PERCENT
LENDER

PERCENT

PERCENT

PERCENT

J

IND IVID U A LS .................. 70.!
FED ER AL LAND
BANKS AND LAND
BANK COMMISSIONER

68.3

ALL L E N D E R S ..............64.1
COMMERCIAL AND
0
SAVINGS B A N K S ........ b/,<i
JOINT-STOCK
LAND BANKS ..............b b '7
MORTGAGE
C O M P A N IE S ............54,6
LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANIES

.......5 4*
5

OTHERS ...........................61.1

9.— On January 1, 1935, about 64 percent of the total farm-mortgage
debt rested on farms of owner operators and about 36 percent on farms of
nonoperators. Individuals and the Federal credit agencies had a higherthan-average percentage of their loans on owner-operated farms whereas
the life insurance companies, commercial and savings banks, joint-stock
land banks, and mortgage companies had a smaller-than-average per­
centage on owner-operated farms. As compared with 1930, debt on owneroperated farms showed a decline of 13.7 percent, and on farms operated
by tenants and managers, a decline of 22.3 percent.

F ig u r e

P ER CENTA GE OF MORTGAGE H O L D IN G S O F P RIN CI PA L L E N D IN G GROUPS
ON OW N ER -OPE R A TE D FARMS, JA N U A R Y 1.1 92 8, AND JA N U A R Y 1 ,1 9 35
PERCENT

PERCENT
i

FEDERAL LAND BANKS
AND LAND BANK
COMMISSIONER
INDIVIDU ALS

--

20

o
----------

40

60

i

l

I

v / y y y y y y y zy y y zy y y y y y / y y s Æ ç zy y y y y y y y y y y y y zA
y
y

7 0 .8
i

I

58.7
64.1

v y y y yy yy yy & zyy yzy yy yy yy yy yy yy yy yy yy yy yA

COMMERCIAL AND
SAVINGS BANKS

67.1
57.2

////y

i
///7

//7

l

7

7

7

////////////////////////y

1
1

l

7

.
//y

//A

V/

■
1

1 9 28
1 9 36

1

JOINT-STOCK
LAND BANKS

56.2
56.7

y jz y z z & z y y y y y /y / y /y y y y y y y y y y y j z rz a i
y
p

MORTGAGE COMPANIES

45.1
5 4.6

v y 7 y /7 / y y y ///y y 7 / 7 7 7 7 y y y ^
y
7

LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANIES

44.7
54.5

v 7 z z ///7 //7 ;//;;/;js y s 2 y 2 /y 7 2 A

59.9

V

i

i

i

i

i

\

OTHER LENDERS

6 1.1

/7

/////////7

/;///7

.

//7

i

7 //////7

7 //7 /7 M

.........

/m

1 ........ - - -

J

--

10.— The proportion of all farm-mortgage debt resting on owneroperated farms rose from approximately 59 percent on January 1, 1928, to
approximately 64 percent on January 1, 1935. It is estimated that 41.5
percent of all owner-operated farms were mortgaged on January 1, 1935,
compared with 44.6 percent 5 years earlier. The frequency of debt on
tenant- and manager-operated farms was much less, being 25.1 percent on
January 1, 1935, and 34.2 percent 5 years earlier.

F ig u r e




“

68 .3

66.2

--

ALL L E N D E R S

100

80

-------r - - ...................r - .......... —

i

70.2

10

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

BAE 32846

11.— In general the decrease in the number of mortgaged full-owneroperated farms took place in the areas where the frequency of debt had been
high. (See fig. 7.) For the United States as a whole there occurred be­
tween 1930 and 1935 a 10.3-percent increase in the number of full-owneroperated farms, an increase of 3.1 percent in the number of full-owneroperated farms mortgaged, and a decrease of 15.1 percent in the amount
of mortgage debt on full-owner-operated farms.

F ig u r e

BAE 32845

12.—The decrease in total debt on mortgaged full-owner-operated
farms despite an increased number of such farms reflects largely the reduc­
tion in average debt per farm during this period. The increase in the
number of owner-operated farms from 1930 to 1935 consisted to considerable
extent of an increase in small farms. The fall in land values also resulted
in smaller debt per farm for farmers becoming indebted for the first time.
Also, the debt which was liquidated by foreclosure from 1930 to 1935, was
probably the most burdensome, namely, large loans placed during the
time of high land values.

F ig u r e




A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

11

BAE 32808

13.— Farms operated by their owners are more frequently encum­
bered by debt than those operated by tenants and managers. For every
1.000 farms operated by their owners, 415 were mortgaged in 1935 as
contrasted with 446 in 1930, or a decline of about 7 percent. For every
1.000 farms operated by tenants and managers, the number mortgaged in
1935 is estimated at 251 and in 1930 at 342, which indicates a decline of
nearly 27 percent. The large proportion of mortgaged owner-operated
farms in the Great Plains States is associated, in part, with the severe
droughts of recent years.

F ig u r e

BAE 32832

14.— The data in this chart relate the amount of debt on owneroperated farms to the value of land and buildings in the same farms. In
1920 this ratio of debt to value in the United States as a whole was 29.1
percent, in 1930 it was 39.6 percent and in 1935 it was 50.2 percent. The
high ratio of debt to value for 1935 reflects the decline in value which had
taken place in the preceding years, without significant debt reductions on
those farms which remained mortgaged. The high ratio of debt to value
for mortgaged farms indicates the burden which is being carried by farmers

who are in debt.

F ig u r e

12

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OE AGRICULTURE

BAE 32814

15.— Farms operated by their owners, although representing but 57.2
percent of all farms in 1935, were security for 64.0 percent of the total
farm-mortgage debt. Of the 2,350,313 mortgaged farms, 68.9 percent were
in this tenure group. The regional differences in percent of total debt
secured by owner-operated farms is influenced by the percent of total farms
operated by owners, which is notably high in the northeastern dairy States.

F ig u r e

BAE 32810

16.— Regional variations in average debt per acre for mortgaged
owner-operated farms are somewhat related to variations in the value of
land and buildings. This relation is not uniform, however, as indicated
by the ratios of debt to value in figure 14. Other factors which determine
the amount of debt per acre are borrowers’ needs, which vary with type
of farming, the frequency of land transfers, which usually involve large
purchase money mortgages, and the degree of competition amongst the
various lending agencies.

F ig u r e




13

A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

BAE 32811

17.— Only 25.1 percent of tenant- and manager-operated farms were
mortgaged on January 1,1935, compared with 41.5 percent of owner-operated
farms. (See fig. 13.) This difference may be explained in part by the large
volume of distress transfers, 1930-35, of mortgaged owner-operated farms
to nonoperating owners with complete liquidation of debt. It may also
be noted that the relative frequency of tenant- and manager-operated
farms mortgaged was fairly uniform over a large portion of the country
whereas the percentage of owner-operated farms mortgaged varied con­
siderably.

F ig u r e

STATE M O RTG A G E R E L IE F LEG ISLATIO N
JAN. 1 , 1 9 3 0 -APR. 2 0 , 1 9 3 6

^

I] Y H Moratorium on foreclosures

p —3 Courts given pow er to f i x selling
E = 3 prices on foreclosed properties
(^3 vj Redemption period extended

¥,'44 D eficiency judgm ent legislation

Numbers in States re fer to
one or more kinds of mortgage'*
relief legislation enacted
BAE 32087

18.— Widespread difficulty in meeting mortgage payments resulted
in the enactment, in many States, of laws to relieve debtor distress. The
types and frequency of these laws, 1930-36 (not subsequently declared
unconstitutional), are shown above. Some of the States in which no
legislation was enacted during this period already had general or specific
debtor-relief laws. More detail regarding this type of legislation is to be
found in United States Department of Commerce, Domestic Commerce
Series No. 96, Long-Term Debts in the United States.

F ig u r e




14

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 68, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

TREND OF FARM-MORTGAGE HOLDINGS OF PRINCIPAL
L E N D IN G AGENCIE S. 1 9 1 4 - J U N E 3 0 , 1 9 3 7

1914

*16

’ 18

*20

'2 2

’ 24

’26

*28

'3 0

*32

*34

‘36

• INCLUDES LOANS OF BANKS ¡N REC EIV ER SH IP
¿IN C LUD ES THE DEPARTMENT OF RURAL CREDIT OF MINNESOTA. THE BANK OF NORTH DAKOTA,
AND THE RURAL-GRED1T BOARD FOR THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA

BAE 32915

19.— In the period from 1920 through 1927 outstanding farm-mortgage loans of life insurance companies, Federal land banks, and joint-stock
land banks increased in a larger amount than did the total farm-mortgage
indebtedness. After 1929 outstanding loans of all the principal lending
agencies decreased until 1933. Since the latter date, Federal land bank
and Land Bank Commissioner loans have been rapidly expanded, reflecting
to a considerable extent the refinancing of loans held by other agencies.

F ig u r e

A M O U N T OF FARM L O A N S R E C O R D E D , U N I T E D STATES,
O CT . 1 9 3 3 - A U G . 1 9 3 7

1933

1 93 4

1 93 5

1936

1937
BAE 32893

20.— With the completion of the emergency refinancing program of
the Farm Credit Administration the volume of farm mortgages currently
recorded has been greatly reduced although there has been an increase in
the volume of recordings by private lenders. A larger percent of the total
outstanding farm-mortgage debt is now in the hands of agencies specializing
in long-term amortized loans. (See fig. 23.) Therefore, the volume of
future recordings of mortgages, which include renewals and refinancing
of short-term real estate loans, may not be expected to exceed greatly that
attained in 1936 and 1937.

F ig u r e




15

A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

PERCENTAGE OF P RO CEEDS OF FE D E R A L LAND BA NK
A N D L A N D B A N K C O M M I S S I O N E R L O A N S U S E D F OR
V A R I O U S P U R P O S E S , MAY 1, 1 9 3 3 - J A N . 1. 1 9 3 7
PER CENT

60

80

0

REFIN A N C E MORTGAGES

I

I

Commercial banks
*
'
Life insurance companies
j Joint stock land banks

I

40

20

20

R E FINAN CE
OTHER DEBTS

OTHER USES

GEO GR APH IC
D IVISIO N S

Purchase of land
/
General
I . agricultural
I !*■ Association
tr r stock and

WEST SOUTH
CENTRAL

P A C IFIC ------

EAST SOUTH
CENTRAL

W.

WEST NORTH
CENTRAL

MOUNTAIN - -

EAST NORTH
CENTRAL -

SOUTH
ATLANTIC“

NEW
En g l a n d ’

MIDDLE
ATLANTIC’

UNITED
STATES '

BAE 32852

21.— For the United States as a whole 70.8 percent of the proceeds
of Federal land bank and Land Bank Commissioner loans made during
the period May 1, 1933-January 1, 1937, are estimated to have been used
for refinancing first and junior mortgages. In the West South Central
States, 82.2 percent of such loan proceeds were used to refinance outstand­
ing farm-mortgage loans. This percentage is largely accounted for by
Texas, in which State the estimated percentage of loan proceeds used for
the purpose of refinancing existing mortgage indebtedness was 84.3 percent.
The small proportion of loan proceeds, in all geographic divisions, used for
the purchase of land should be noted.

F ig u r e




6 7 5 5 8 ° — 38 -------- 3

16

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

USE OF PROCEEDS OF FEDERAL LAND BANK
AND LAND BANK CO M M ISSIONER LOANS

80

40

20

19191*20 |’ 21 |’2 2

1*23 |'2 4 1*25 |'2 6

l’27 |*28 1*29 |’3 0 1*31 |’32 |*33 |’34 |’3 5 |*36 l’37
BAE 34006

F i g u r e 2 2 . — During

times of relative agricultural prosperity, increased fre­
quency of voluntary transfers creates a demand for funds to finance such
transfers. During times of relative distress, on the other hand, farmers
have used a higher proportion of funds, borrowed from the federally spon­
sored agencies, for refunding nonreal estate loans. The refinancing of real
estate mortgage loans has been the principal use to which farmers have put
the proceeds of their Federal land bank loans. More detailed analysis may
be found in the Use of Farm Mortgage Loan Proceeds, Farm Credit Quar­
terly, volume 1, No. 3 , September 1 9 3 6 .
P ERCENTA GE O F TOTA L FARM- MORTGAGE DEBT H E LD BY P R IN C IP A L
L E N D IN G GR OU PS. JAN U A R Y 1 , 1 9 2 8 , A ND JA N U A R Y 1.1 9 3 5
PERCENT

|

PER CEN T

0

FEDERAL LAND BANKS
AND LAND BANK
COM MISSIONER

1

2 2 .9
16.5

20

30

40

1

3 0 7

LIFE INSURANCE
COM PANIES

10

__
~

J 2 1

1
IN D IVID U A LS
COMMERCIAL AND
SAVINGS BANKS

_
~

MORTGAGE CO MPANIES
J O IN T -S T O C K ____ ___
LAND BANKS
~
OTHER LENDERS

- -

10.8 w m s z m * n
9.0
1 3

^

V ////////Æ

/Æ

\
P B

/ 7
7.0 V/7Z/ 777X
3.3

1928
1955

W T zzm

1
I
BAE 32947

F i g u r e 2 3 . — The

proportion of the total outstanding farm-mortgage debt
held by the Federal credit agencies on January 1, 1 9 3 5 , was much higher
than on January 1, 1 9 2 8 , reflecting both the increased volume of mortgage
loans held by these agencies and the reduced total outstanding farmmortgage debt. Through liquidation of loans by foreclosure and shifting
of loans to the federally sponsored agencies, most of the private lender
groups reduced their holdings of mortgages by a larger percentage than
the total reduction in farm-mortgage debt.




P E RC E NT AG E OF TOT AL FARM MORTGAGE DEBT H E L D BY
L E A D I N G L E N D I N G A G E N C I E S , JAN. 1 1935
,

GRAPHIC

I

SUMMARY

C = Life insurance com panies
D_

Open and clo sed banks
and mutual savings banks

E_

M ortgage and land
investm ent com panies

F = Individuals

24.— Wide variation in the relative importance of the different sources of farm-mortgage credit in the United States is evident
in the above chart. Except in the New England and Middle Atlantic States the Federal land banks and Land Bank Commissioner
are the most important lenders in every geographic division. They predominate most, however, in the Southern States. ^ Individuals
are, generally, the next most important source of loans, ranking either first or second in seven of the nine geographic divisions. Loans
of insurance companies are notably small in the New England and Middle Atlantic States.

F ig u r e




CREDIT

6 = A ll others

AGRICULTURAL

B = Joint-stock land banks

O
F

Federal land banks.
Land Bank Com m issioner

00
PERCENTAGE OF MORTGAGE HOLDINGS OF LEADING LENDING AGENCIES
SECURED BY OWNER-OPERATED FARMS, JAN. 1,1935

MISC.
PUBLICATION
268,

LEGEND

U.
S.

Federal land banka
Land Bank Commissioner
B = Joint-stock land banks

Open and closed banks
and mutual savings banks

^_

Mortgage and land
investment companies

O
F

D_

6 * A ll others

BAE 34009

debt, 6 4 percent, or $ 4 ,8 9 5 ,8 1 1 ,0 0 0 , rested on owner-operated farms on January 1 , 1 9 3 5 ,
operated by tenants and managers. The proportion of total loans secured by owner-operated
farms for any one type of lender shows considerable variation from region to region. Individuals, for instance, vary in this respect,
from 8 9 .5 percent in the New England States to 5 4 percent in the West South Central States. The most significant regional com­
parisons are obtained by relating the data in this figure to figure 1 5.




AGRICULTURE

F= Individuals

F i g u r e 2 5 . — Of the total farm-mortgage
$ 2 ,7 4 9 ,2 8 0 ,0 0 0 being secured by farms

DEPT.

C - Life insurance companies

A GRAPHIC
SUMMARY
O
F
AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT

BAE 32268

2 6 — This map, based upon data of insured commercial banks, shows the heavy concentration of farm-mortgage loans held by
banks in the Northeastern States, in some of the States in the Midwest, and in California. In earlier years banks in the New England
States and in such sections as southern Wisconsin and northern Illinois were large purchasers of mortgages secured by farm lands in
other areas. Since 1920, however, the volume of farm-mortgage loans held by banks in these areas of surplus investment funds has
been substantially reduced. In some States, particularly California, the county data are appreciably influenced by the holdings of
branch banking systems reporting their loans on the basis of the location of their main office.

F ig u r e




t^
—
so

20

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

A G R I C U L T U R A L L O A N S S E C U R E D BY F A R M R E A L
ESTATE AND INDEX OF LAND VALUES

Index of land values i---1.400

( 1912 - 1 4 -1 0 0 )

Agricultural loans,
secured by farm real estate,
held by com m ercial banks

180
160

1.200
140

1.000
120
800

100
600
80
400
60
200
40
1912

1915

1920

1925

1930

1935

BAE 29714

27.— The volume of farm real estate loans held by commercial banks
has tended to follow the trend of farm-land values. After a period of
declining farm income, such as occurred subsequent to 1920 and 1929,
there is a tendency for banks to expand their mortgage holdings to obtain
additional security for advances previously made on the basis of the higher
price level. Since the end of 1934, farm-mortgage loans held by commercial
banks have shown little change, although banks in some of the Midwest
States have shown a consistent increase in such holdings.

F ig u r e




BAE 32851

28.— Lands in the North Central States secured 74.8 percent of all
farm-mortgage loans of life insurance companies at the beginning of 1935.
Due to this concentration of loans, these companies held a high proportion
of the total farm-mortgage indebtedness in these States. In the West
North Central States, life insurance company loans represented 25.9 per­
cent of the total mortgage indebtedness, in the East North Central States
16.3 percent of the total, and 19.3 percent of the total indebtedness in the
West South Central States.

F ig u r e

A GRAPHIC SUM M ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

21

BAE 32850

29.— Agencies of the Farm Credit Administration substantially in­
creased their farm-mortgage-loan holdings in relation to the estimated
total farm mortgage debt from 12.9 percent in 1930 to 32.7 percent of the
total in 1935. During this period the proportion of the total debt held
by the Federal land banks and Land Bank Commissioner increased most
in the Middle Atlantic, North Central, and South Atlantic States. In the
East South Central States these agencies held 52.6 percent of the estima­
ted total mortgage debt on January 1, 1935.

F ig u r e

FA RM-M OR TG AG E LO AN S O U T S T A N D IN G BY T H E F E D E R A L
L A N D B A N K S A N D TH E LA N D BANK C O M M I S S I O N E R *

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

* A T THE END OF EACH MONTH

BAE 32891

30.— Between May 1, 1933, and December 31, 1935, the Federal
land banks and Land Bank Commissioner rapidly expanded their farmmortgage holdings from $1,105,128,000 to $2,866,651,000. The peak of
$2,902,834,000 was reached in October 1936. There has been a small
reduction since then. Land Bank Commissioner loans, which accounted
for nearly half of the expansion, were made under the terms of the Emer­
gency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933 from funds largely provided by the
Federal Farm Mortgage Corporation, which was established early in 1934.

F ig u r e




MISC.
PUBLICATION
268,
U.
S. DEPT.
O
F




AGRICULTURE

31.— At the end of 1936, 831,000 farmers had loans from the Federal land banks and the Land Bank Commissioner. This repre­
sented approximately 35 percent of the estimated 2,350,000 farms mortgaged on January 1, 1935. Federal land bank and Land Bank
Commissioner loans appear to be heavily concentrated in the Corn Belt, western Dairy Belt, Spring Wheat Belt, Hard Winter Wheat
Belt, portions of the Cotton Belt, and valleys of the Pacific coast, Utah, and Idaho. This concentration should be related to other
factors, such as frequency of debt and total debt.

F ig u r e

.8222,9

A GRAPHIC
SUMMARY
O
F
AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT

32.— From May 1, 1933, to December 31, 1936, the Federal land banks and the Land Bank Commissioner loaned nearly $2,126,000,000. The Federal land banks, already holding a high proportion of the farm-mortgage debt in the South, were not called upon, in
that region, to supply funds for refinancing to the same extent as they were elsewhere. In the Corn Belt the reduction by life insurance
companies of their investments in farm real estate loans was in part the cause for the extensive use, in that region, of the resources
of the Federal credit agencies. In the great valley of California the volume.of loans closed during this period also has been substantial.

F ig u r e




^
CO

24




MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

CAPITAL STOCK AND PAID-IN S U R P L U S OF TH E
FEDERAL LAND BANKS

# SEPTEM BER 80. 1937

BAE 32892

33.— The purchase of ^Federal land bank stock by national farm loan
associations almost accomplished, by 1932, complete member-borrower
ownership, as contemplated in the original Farm Loan Act. The addi­
tional subscription to and payment for capital stock of the Federal land
banks by the United States Government in 1932 was a part of the program
to increase the effectiveness of the system in meeting the urgent needs of
farmers for refinancing. The paid-in surplus was provided in amounts
equal to the deferments and extensions which the land banks granted to
borrowers as provided in the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933.

F ig u r e

34.— The basic unit of the Federal Farm Loan System is the national
farm loan association. The increased farm-mortgage holdings of the
federally sponsored agencies has increased the importance and responsibility
of these associations. Strengthening of these units has involved several
essential steps, one of which has been consolidation and combination. The
result is a marked reduction over the last few years in the number of
these associations. At the end of 1929 there were 4,662 associations.

F ig u r e

A GRAPHIC
SUMMARY
O
F
AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT

BAE 32842

35.— Interest rates on farm-mortgage loans, as reported in the census of 1930 for farms operated by full owners, show wide variations
as between regions and even within States. Such variations partly reflect differences in risks based upon soil and climatic as well as
economic and social conditions. Interest rates have generally been lowest in the central Corn Belt States and highest in the South
and Southwestern States. The refinancing program of the Farm Credit Administration has tended to lower average interest rates,
particularly in the high-rate areas.

F ig u r e




^

26

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

AV ER A G E I N T E R E S T RATES ON N E W F A R M -M O R T G A G E
L O A N S R E C O R D E D EACH YEAR. 1 9 1 7 -3 5
INSURANCE COMPANIES, AND
FEDERAL LAND BANK AND
LAND BANK COMMISSIONER

COMMERCIAL
BANKS

INDIVIDUALS

•j
w

'N

'V.i\>m
t
\
s
tttlt4 t
tt-tu ttt 1 flltttttH
itttm H
ttut tt
% 1
✓ rv
"
\TV
\
\
A i l_'y - 1
*
f >«/ %
ttnit1 ttH ttH tttt+Ü ttH
+ it it 1-ttH tttttt
\_

-

Fede,ral land bank
ana i~ana Dantt
Commissioner
•

J

A

S
+f £ t
rt
ttttttH ttttH ittttt hrttttlF!kti
ttH
ttH
b

,

t

ttittttttttttttttttt
-ftttttttttttttttttttH
*

A

Insurance
companies

y
....

V

A
- 'S P

V* \
--

i±

H ittttt ttH
ttH
itttttitttit±
tttItttH
tt

1917 20

'25

*30

1917 ’ 20

'25

'30

1917 *20

’25

’ 30

‘35

BAE 34267

36.— This figure shows for selected States the annual average rates
of interest on farm mortgages recorded each year. The level of interest
rates varies not only between regions but also by type of lender, partly
reflecting the variations in types of loans and security required by the
lender. Each State also shows some differences in trends of interest rates,
although in general the trend has been downward since the early 1920’s.
The decline in rates has been more pronounced since 1932. The averages
of interest rates on loans recorded by commercial banks has been, in most
States, higher, and by the Federal land banks, lower, than interest rates
charged by other lenders.

F ig u r e




27

A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

AVERAGE IN T E R E S T RATE PAID BY FARMERS ON
MORTGAGE D E B T S * MAY 1 9 3 3 - S E P T . 1 9 3 4

PERCENT

UNITED STATES AVERAGE
6.2 PERCENT
* D EBTS WH ICH W E R E R E FIN A N C E D
B Y THE FE D E R A L L A N D BANKS AND LAN D
B A N K CO M M ISSIO N E R

6.25-5.74
E S 5.75-6.2 4
6.25-6.74
6.75-7.24
7.25-7.74
7.75-8.24

BAE 32844

37.— From May 1933 to September 1934 the Federal land banks and
the Land Bank Commissioner refinanced over $900,000,000 of farm real
estate mortgages, on which farmers had been paying, prior to refinancing,
an average rate of interest of 6.2 percent. Several factors cause the
regional variations. In the North Central States many insurance com­
pany loans, already bearing a relatively low rate, were refinanced. In
other States maximum contract-rate laws were a factor resulting in the
average rate, before refinancing, having been about 6 percent.

F ig u r e

AVERAGE A N N U A L I N T E R E S T RATES ON AN D A M O U N T O F N E W LO ANS
BY TH E FE D E R A L LA N D B A N K S A N D LA N D BANK C O M M IS S IO N E R
IN TE R C S T
RATE
(PERCENT)

6

BAE 32906

F

38.— The contract rate of interest on new Federal land bank loans
varied between 5 and 6 percent from 1917 through 1934, during which
time the majority of the loans now outstanding were written. The volume
of new loans by the Federal land banks for 1937 was smaller than for most
of the preceding years when the rate of interest was 1 to 2 percent higher.
The present contract rate of 4 percent is the lowest in the history of the
Federal Land Bank System.

ig u r e




28




MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

range of 4 and 4% percent during most of the early years of the system.
Following 1930, the land banks experienced difficulties in obtaining funda
at low enough cost to allow them to make new loans in any large volume.
During 1933-35 the Federal land banks obtained funds through the Recon­
struction Finance Corporation and the Federal Farm Mortgage Corpora­
tion. The general rise in bond prices by 1935, placed the Federal land
banks again in a favorable position to finance their lending operations.
F E DE RA L LAND BANK BONDS O U T S T A N D IN G
A N D T H E AVER AGE I N T E R E S T RATE
DO LLARS
« MILLIO NS)

1 .5 0 0

1,000

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937*

* SEPT. 50, 192?

40.— In 1934 the Federal land banks began an extensive program
of refunding bonds issued in the earlier years of the system. This pro­
gram was successfully carried out together with the new financing required
by expanded loan activities. Through new issues bearing 3 and 4 percent
and retiring of old higher rate issues the average interest on bonds outstanding has been substantially reduced. Much of the “ new” financing
was done by selling or exchanging bonds for Federal Farm Mortgage Cor­
poration bonds.

F ig u r e

A GRAPHIC
SUMMARY
O
F
AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT

41.— The sharp drop in farm income following 1929 was accompanied by a rapid increase in the farm real estate holdings of leading
lending institutions. Wide variations are shown within individual States, resulting in part from variations in soil and weather condi­
tions. The heavy concentration of farms in Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota reflects to a large extent the high rate of
acquirements by the State credit agencies in these three States. This map, as well as figures 42 and 43, is based upon the farm real
estate holdings of 14 life insurance companies, whose farm-mortgage loans represent approximately 75 percent of the total held by all
life insurance companies; the 3 State credit agencies of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Minnesota; the Federal land banks; and the
joint-stock land banks.

F ig u r e




to

MISC.
PUBLICATION
2 68,
U.
S.
DEPT.
O
F




AGRICULTURE

42.— Data based upon a group of lending agencies larger than is shown on the above map indicate that the estimated total invest­
ment in farm real estate held by all life insurance companies, three State credit agencies, the Federal land banks, and the joint-stock
land banks increased from $149,559,000 at the beginning of 1929 to $983,284,000 at the beginning of 1937. In addition to the latter
amount, insured commercial banks held farm real estate carried on their books at $45,598,000 at the beginning of 1937. Comparison
with figure 41 will show that the investment in farms is even more concentrated in the Midwest than is the number of farms.

F ig u r e

A GRAPHIC
SUMMARY
O
F
AGRICULTURAL
CREDIT

BAE 32522

43.— On the basis of total acreage in acquired farms held by these lending agencies, such acreage in the Southeastern States is
relatively more important than when comparison is made on the basis of total number of acquired farms or of the investment in such
farms. Based upon data for a larger group of lending agencies than is shown in the above map, the estimated acreage of acquired
farms held by all life insurance companies, three State credit agencies, Federal land banks, and joint-stock land banks, on January 1,
1937, has been placed at 28,145,325 acres. Over half of this acreage was in the West North Central States.

F ig u r e




^




32

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OE AGRICULTURE

FARM REAL ESTATE HE LD , AN D MORTGAGE LOANS O U T S T A N D IN G .
BY LE A D IN G L E N D IN G AGE N CIE S , JAN. 1.1937

FEDERAL LAND BANKS
AND FEDERAL FARM
MORTGAGE CORPORATION

LIFE
INSURANCE
COMPANIES

!
JOINT-STOCK
LAND BANKS

!
COMMERCIAL
BANKS

THREE STATE
CREDIT
AGENCIES

BAE 32910

44.— Acquirement of real estate has resulted in problems for the
lender as well as for the dispossessed farmer. Life insurance companies’
investments in such real estate, estimated at $713,166,000 on January 1,
1937, accounts for the majority of the holdings of the principal lending
agencies. Estimated real estate investment of the three State credit agencies
exceeds the amount of their mortgage loans. Real estate acquirements of
the federally sponsored agencies is a small proportion of total loans partly
because of the recent acquirement of a majority of their loans.

F ig u r e

P E R S O N A L A N D C O LL A TE R A L LOAN S TO FARMERS, DEC. 3 1 ,1 9 3 4
PERCENT

0
NEW ENGLAND------------

10

20

30

40

50

i

i

t

i

60

70

80

90

100

i

BC

MIDDLE ATLANTIC-------EAST NORTH CENTRALWEST NORTH CENTRAL

HE

SOUTH ATLANTIC--------EAST SOUTH CENTRAL-

w zm .
W/M ÆWÆ/A1

WEST SOUTH CENTRAL
MOUNTAIN--------------------PACIFIC------------------------UNITED STATES------------

J

1

W Æ m m r'
i
i
i
i
m m ::.
_L
TYPE OF SECURITY

■

L' stack
>
ve

P
77?i livestock and/or
crops and equipment

r-rrn Warehouse receipts,
bills of lading, etc.

Other
collateral

Not secured
by collateral

BAE 34098

45.— Unsecured loans constituted 43 percent of all personal and col­
lateral loans to farmers held by commercial banks. But in the North­
eastern States this type of loan represented about 75 percent of the total.
The high percentage of loans secured by warehouse receipts, bills of lad­
ing, etc., in the Southern States was due in part to the Commodity Credit
Corporation cotton-loan program which prevailed in the fall of 1934. In
the range livestock areas a high percentage of the loans are based upon
livestock security.

F ig u r e

33

A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

N U M B E R OF BANK S U S P E N S IO N S . 1921-36
BANK
S U S P E N S IO N S

B anks in p la ces o f 10,0 00 _
population and over
• B anks in p la ces o f less
than 10,000 population

1 92 3

1921

192 5

1927

192 9

1931

1 933

1 93 5

1937

B A E 29716

46.— The sharp drop in farm income following 1920 and 1929 made
it difficult for farmers to repay loans. As the consequence of extending
too liberal credit to farmers and others on the basis of the previous high
level of prices, many banks in agricultural areas were forced to suspend
operations, further curtailing credit facilities. Concentration of bank
suspensions in places of less than 10,000 population is explained by the
large proportion of all banks in such centers, 79 percent of all commercial
banks being located in such places at the end of 1934.

F ig u r e

P E R S O N A L A N D C O L L A T E R A L L O A N S TO F A R M E R S A N D
I N D E X O F P R I C E S R E C E I V E D BY F A R M E R S

J ------

( MILLIONS )

3 .6 0 0
3 .2 0 0

Index of prices
received by
farmers
( 1910-14 = 100)

PERCENT

/

X

200

Personal and collateral
loans to farmers held by
commercial banks

180

2 .8 0 0

160

2 .4 0 0

140

2.000

120

1.600

100

1.200

80

K -/-

800

60

400

40

0 1915

1920

1930

E

E

30

B A E 29713

47.— Th& trend from 1914 to 1934 of personal and collateral loans
to farmers held by commercial banks tended to follow the movement of
farm-commodity prices, although there was a tendency for loans to lag
behind commodity prices. Variations in farm-commodity prices influence
the ability of farmers to repay advances obtained from banks. Price
variations also alter the value of the collateral that farmers can offer as
security for loans. The increase in 1937 marks the reversal of the down­
ward trend that has prevailed in recent years.

F ig u r e




34

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

C O M M E R C IA L BANKS AND N U M B E R HAVING
A G R I C U L T U R A L L O A N S , DE C . 3 1 , 1 9 3 4
HUN DREDS

BAE 32143

48.— The Mountain States had the highest percentage of banks
having agricultural loans, with 98.8 percent of the total thus included.
Commercial banks whose agricultural loans were secured exclusively
by farm real estate were relatively more numerous in the New England,
Middle Atlantic, South Atlantic, and Pacific States than in other sections
of the country. These groups of States, on the other hand, showed the
lowest proportion of banks having personal and collateral loans. The
number of commercial banks does not include offices of branch banks.

F ig u r e




A GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

35

D E M A N D D E P O S I T S O F M E M B E R B A N K S * BY R E G I O N S

8 RANGE S T A TE S

100 --

•LOCATED IN PLACES UNDER IS,000 POPULATION
IN MONTANA, COLORADO, ARIZONA, IDAHO, NEVADA,
NEW MEXICO. UTAH, AND WYOMING

...
I . , , I..I
1929

1931

* DATA NOT AVAILABLE

B A E 32145

F i g u r e 4 9 . — The




sharp drop in farm income which accompanied the depres­
sion that followed 1 9 2 9 is reflected in the deposits of country banks in the
various agricultural regions. The extent of the seasonal movement of
deposits as between regions shows marked contrasts. The diversified
type of farming in the Corn Belt States is reflected in smaller seasonal
fluctuations in deposits than in the cotton-growing or range States. In
these latter States deposits normally rise with increase in the farmers’
income near the close of the year.

36

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

50.— The level of demand deposits of country banks is influenced by
changes in farm income and in the level of prices received by farmers.
The low level of farm-commodity prices in 1923 and low cotton prices
in 1926 are reflected in a relatively lower level of deposits. The marked
drop in income and prices following 1929 and the subsequent recovery
are clearly reflected in bank deposits. In more recent years countrybank deposits also have reflected the inflow of Federal funds for relief,
drought expenditures, benefit payments, etc. As demand deposits of
country banks thus reflect the composite inflow and outflow of funds in
agricultural communities, this series serves as a rough measure of agricul­
tural purchasing power, as indicated by the trend of retail sales.

F ig u r e




P E R S O N A L A N D C O L L A T E R A L LO A N S TO F A R M E R S
B Y C O M M E R C I A L B A N K S , D E C - 31, 1 9 3 4

HELD

GRAPHIC
SUMMARY

LOANS

50-99
100-149
ISO-249
250-499
500-99$
1,000 and over

f

AGRICULTURAL

laffsj Under 25
0M3
25-49

O
F

(T H O U SAN D S OF DOLLARS
PER COUNTY)

I NO LO A N S

CREDIT

51.— In general the distribution of personal and collateral loans to farmers, held by insured commercial banks, is similar when
totaled by geographic divisions to the distribution of total agricultural income and the value of farms. Banks in the West North Cen­
tral States held 23.3 percent of United States total of such loans at the end of 1934. These States accounted for 25.0 percent of the
total annual average cash farm income in the period 1932-34 and for 28.6 percent of the total value of farms on' January 1, 1935. In
some States, particularly California, the county data are appreciably influenced by the holdings of branch banking systems reporting
their loans on the basis of the location of their main office.

F ig u r e




CO

38

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

P E R S O N A L A N D C O L L /t f E R A L L O A N S O F C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S A N D S H O R T TERM

L O A N S O F F E D E R A L L Y S P O N S O R E D A G E N C IE S . J U N E 3 0 . 1 9 3 7
DOLLARS (M ILL IONS)
)
1

mAl r i C

* * ’* * "

—” 1*o

PERCENT
20

40

1

1

60
1

80
1
1

1

1

1

1

1

»
*

1

i

1

1

1

1

*

*

1

M A b b A tn U b L f l h a ~ £ #
v
3
RHO DE IS L A N D --------0 .7

1

1

1

t

i

l

l

1

1

1

1

1

1

t

I

1

«

1

1

___

100

1

.

1

1

<fM ITU H A Ix UT A --« . 1 *7• *7
d v U I n U A IfA IA
%/ /
N TR D A C I ( A - - - - - - A O &
K A NI/AK1CAC_____ M___ A
bA b
JO*4

1

1

I

•

•
1

1

1

1

n Cl AU/ADP - - ••••* •- U.O
DfcLAWAric
y aDVI AAin_________ A 1

1

1

t

i

1
l

1

S S S //S
'

l
I

1

I

V IK o I N I A - ---------- —- I 4 .J
XA/CCT U ID fllM I
Û
M/tDTLl r A D A I LIMA tol 4 . 4
N U K Ir l L A K U IIlA — i A A
CAIITLl r A D A I L Ir iA -- Ô A
o U U ln U A K U IMA
Î7. 9
r C A O r iA
a a
Cl A D IH A __. .
r L U K lU A ""* *’ . . . . O .c
Jo
IVCniUV*!\T
^ 1 1,6
1t n n t b b b h -------- - I 3 .Z
A1 A B U A
_
_ AA A
A L ifiA A M A - -.- - - - - ZO.Z
fti lO O lO O lr r l - . ~ | O 1
.
M IC C IC C 1DDI — .—. . 1 y, j
A B IANSAS —
/lU fà ff
«CA
ARK
-------- 1 6 .3
1 ('‘M IIC IA M A— - __ _ A A
LUU IblAINA - —- —- - g.g
AI / 1 a u a u / i ___ ____O 1
t c a A c --------- .. . . . ..
11 va o. . . .

. ]f0 0n e
f t .5
UAMT&MA
—_____ g
MUIN 1 A N A — - - - - . ¿ -7 , /
in A n
e o
I UA u H U ------ 5 .y
UIVAIJ 1U /'
IC C
/•A lLO K An A — _____ 4 4 . O
CO A B t U O
* * -CÓ C
Kitrui M A r
c\ q
N t W u ct Y ilrw t _____ 1IU ,S
A K It U N A ---------- —
a
. A D I7A K IA ______ _ ___/.O
IIT A U _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J y O
|
U 1A M ---------- ---------“"1 4 .0
M til/ Ar\ A
IMt v AU A ---------- . . . o o
I*/ A b n lN b t a m — .—.1I o .l
c»
1
W A c u i w r 1UPI . .
A DCu u n --------- . —— 1 0 , 0
u n t CAKl_____
1c Q
/ Al UnH A- - CO
t 'A Ul rtA D M II A ____ _“QO O .t
h

™

1

1

t

i

1

l

-

1

l

1

1

1

1

1

1

t

i

l

1
1

l

1

1

<

•

1

1

1

1 -

1

1

1

t
•
•

i
•

l

1

l

1

1

I

■

1
1

I

I

•

1

1

1

1

t

1

1

t

1

1

I

l

1

*
•

:
*

•
«

i

1

1

i

•

1

1

1

t

l
1

l
1

1

W K ÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊÊI Ê
K

t
*

Personal and collateral loans
of commercial banks

i

l
1

l
1

1

rrrn Short-term loans'of federally
sponsored agencies

BAE 32969

52.— Short- and intermediate-term loans of federally sponsored agen­
cies, of a character similar to personal and collateral loans to farmers made
by commercial banks, on June 30, 1937, were equal to 24.0 percent of the
combined holdings of such agencies and the holdings of commercial banks.
In general the volume of loans from the federally sponsored agencies are
relatively most important in the range livestock States and in the cottongrowing areas. The proportion of the financing handled by these agencies
in specialized fruit and vegetable areas is also relatively large. The loans of
federally sponsored agencies included in the above chart are loans by the
regional agricultural credit corporations, loans by the production credit
associations, and discounts by the Federal intermediate credit banks for
private financing institutions.

F ig u r e




39

A GRAPHIC SUM M ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

BORROWINGS AT FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS BY COUNTRY B A N K S *
IN EIGHT FEDERAL RESERVE BANK DISTRICTS, LARGELY
AGRICULTURAL IN CHARACTER, 1919-36

REPORTING WEEKLY TO THE FEDERAL RESERYE BOARD

BAE 29715

53.— The dependence of country banks upon the Federal reserve
banks for seasonal accommodation has tended to decrease in importance.
After reaching the abnormal high peak of about $450,000,000 at the end
of 1920, borrowings of country banks from the Federal reserve banks have
tended to work gradually downward, and after 1934 borrowings had been
practically eliminated. The marked seasonal movement of this series
is largely accounted for by the seasonal accommodations extended to
country banks in the cotton-growing States.

F ig u r e




in character to those made by commercial banks, excluding emergency
drought, rehabilitation, and seed loans. With the establishment of the
regional agricultural credit corporations in 1932, the volume of loans from
federally sponsored credit agencies became a significant proportion of the
total personal and collateral loans to farmers. In the more recent years
this series reflects largely the loans of production credit associations.

40

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

S H O R T - T E R M C R E D I T O U T S T A N D I N G BY L E N D E R S U N D E R
FARM C R E D I T A D M I N I S T R A T I O N S U P E R V I S I O N
DOLLARS
( M ILLIONS)

1 93 3

193 4

1 93 5

193 6

1937
BAE 34007

55.— The seasonal characteristics of short-term credit are demon­
strated by the midyear peaks of outstanding loans of the federally spon­
sored agencies. A high proportion of the total outstanding loans of these
agencies is of an emergency character. The production credit associations,
organized in 1933 and 1934, have shown an increase in volume of business,
offsetting the decrease in regional agricultural credit corporation loans.
The volume of loans shown for the Federal intermediate credit banks are
loans to and discounts for private financing institutions.

F ig u r e

56.— Production credit associations were established by the Farm Credit
Act of 1933 to supply short-term credit on a business basis to farmers and
stockmen. They are organized and supervised by the production credit cor­
porations, who own approximately 86 percent of the capital stock of the
associations. The rest of the capital stock is owned by member borrowers.
The associations discount borrowers' paper with, or borrow directly from, the
Federal intermediate credit banks. The associations have over 250,000
farmer members.

F ig u r e







A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

41

IN T E R E S T RATES CHARGED ON AGRICUL TU RAL LO A N S * BY
M EM BE R BANK S OF THE FE D ER AL RE SERVE SYSTEM

57.— Interest rates on personal and collateral loans to farmers gener­
ally have been lowest in the Northeastern States and highest in the West
South Central States of Oklahoma and Texas. The rates shown in this map,
which apply to the largest volume of loans made at different interest rates, are
a fairly close approximation of the regional differences in the average interest
rate paid on all personal and collateral loans, as indicated by previous
surveys of interest rates charged by commercial banks, made by the De­
partment of Agriculture.

F ig u r e

PERCENT
7 5 - 6 .2 4
6 .2 5 -6 .7 4
UNITED STATES AVERAGE
7.2 PERCENT
* DEBTS WHICH WERE REFINANCED
BY THE FEDERAL LA N D BANKS AND
LAN D BAN K COMMISSIONER

6 .7 5 -7 .2 4
7 .2 5 -7 74
7.7 5 - 8 .2 4
8 .2 5 and over

58.— Loans other than real estate loans, refinanced by the Federal
land banks and the Land Bank Commissioner from May 1933 to September
1934 carried an average rate of interest of 7.2 percent, which was somewhat
higher than that paid on real estate loans. (See fig. 37.) The high-rate
areas are clearly shown in this chart. Whereas the influence of certain
agencies was effective in reducing rates on mortgage loans, the low-rate
area for nonreal estate loans is fairly well restricted to those States with
low maximum contract rate laws.

F ig u r e

to
MISC.
PUBLICATION
2 6 8,
U.
S. DEPT.
O
F




AGRICULTURE

BAE 28085

59. Use of Federal seed loans or emergency crop-production loans as a means of financing crop production has been most frequent
in the spring wheat States and in the southeastern cotton-growing States. Loans made since 1934 have also been heavily concentrated
in these two areas. In those counties which have received Federal aid of this character most frequently, there has also been a high
ratio of loans to total number of farms in such counties. (No loans were made during the years 1923, 1925, 1927, and 1928.)

F ig u r e




A GRAPHIC SUMMARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

43

PERCENTAGE OF EM ERG ENCY CROP AND FEED
L O A N S O U T S T A N D I N G , D E C . 31, 1 9 3 6

BAE 32896

60.— The repayments o f principal on seed loans or emergency
crop-production loans on a State basis has shown wide variations. In the
spring wheat States, where recurring droughts have reduced farm income
in several years since 1920, the percentage of balances remaining unpaid
has been high. In the southeastern cotton-growing States collections have
been favorable and unpaid balances represent only a small part of the loans
originally made. Drought conditions in much of the Great Plains region
tended to reduce the percentage collected on loans made in 1936.

F ig u r e

44

MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8 , U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

L O A N S T O C O O P E R A T I V E S O U T S T A N D I N G BY
FEDERALLY SPONSORED A G E N C IE S *

APR. JULY OCT. JAN. APR. JULY OCT. JAN. APR. JULY OCT. JAN. APR. JULY OCT. JAN. APR. JULY OCT. JAN.

1933

1934

1935

1936

1937

* A T THE END OF EACH MONTH

BAE 32890

61.— The banks for cooperatives were established under the Farm
Credit Act of 1933 t# engage in the financing of farmers’ cooperatives.
Of the $143,592,400 capital stock and guaranty fund of these banks, as of
September 30, 1937, $140,500,000 was held by the United States Govern­
ment. The banks for cooperatives now handle the majority of the types
of loans to cooperatives formerly made by the Federal intermediate credit
banks. Loans to cooperatives from the Agricultural Marketing Act
revolving fund, formerly supervised by the Federal Farm Board, are being
liquidated.

F ig u r e

L O A N S O U T S T A N D I N G F R O M B A N K S FOR
COOPERATIVES, DEC. 31.1936

O

Commodity loans
Operating loans
Facility loans

B A E 34097

62.— On December 31, 1936, the banks for cooperatives, including the
Central Bank for Cooperatives, had $69,647,241 in loans outstanding,
classified as follows: $22,652,753, commodity; $28,868,118, operating
capital; $18,126,370, facility. Only a small portion of the loans made by
these banks are rediscounted with the Federal intermediate credit banks.
Farmers’ cooperatives borrowing through these facilities numbered 1,382.
There are approximately 10,500 farmers’ cooperatives in the United States.

F ig u r e




A GRAPHIC SUMM ARY OF AGRICULTURAL CREDIT

45

was authorized by the President’s Executive order of October 16, 1933.
It has a capital stock of $100,000,000 and obtains additional funds for
making loans through the sale of debentures and through advances from
the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The 1937-38 loan program
of the Corporation also included advances as of December 31, 1937, on
peanuts in the amount of $4,473,000, tobacco $4,807,000, turpentine
$1,473,000, and nominal amounts on dates, figs, and prunes.

BAE 34103

64.— One of the important phases of activity of the Resettlement
Administration (established by Executive order in 1935) was the making
of rehabilitation loans to individual farmers. In 1937 these lending
activities were transferred to the Farm Security Administration of the
Department of Agriculture. The amount of vouchers certified for loans
to individuals for rural rehabilitation amounted to $7,907,000 in 1935,
$84,655,000 in 1936, and $61,951,000 in 1937, a total for the 3 years of
$154,513 000.

F ig u r e




46




MISC. PUBLICATION

2 6 8, U . S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE

65.— The Rural Electrification Administration was originally estab­
lished in 1935 by Executive order with an allotment of funds from the
appropriation for work relief. It was given a definite legislative status by
the Rural Electrification Act of 1936, making funds available as follows:
$50,000,000 as loans from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation during
the fiscal year ended June 30, 1937, and $40,000,000 as a Treasury appro­
priation for each of the 9 fiscal years thereafter.

F ig u r e

Over one-half of the outstanding loans of the Rural Electrifica­
tion Administration are in the North Central States. In Ohio, Indiana,
Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, and Nebraska the amount of such loans is
in excess of $5,000,000. Twenty-year loans are made at 2.88 percent
interest, chiefly to farmers’ cooperatives, but also to public power districts,
private utilities, and other agencies, for the entire cost of building electricdistribution lines in rural areas.

F i g u r e 6 6 .—

INDEX
Page
Acquired farms, held by leading lending agen­
cies:
Acreage, December 31, 1934_______________
31
Discussion-................................ ...........................
3-4
Investment, December 31, 1934, and Janu­
ary 1, 1937_______________________________ 30,32
Number, December 31, 1934..........................
29
Agricultural Marketing A ct, revolving fund,
loans to cooperatives, outstanding, 1933-37. _
44
Bank suspensions, number, 1921-36-.......... ..
33
Bankruptcies, farm, index of, 1899-1936______
6
Banks:
Commercial—
Interest rates on mortgages recorded..
26
15
Loans refinanced, 1933-37_____________
Mortgage loans____________ 9,14,16-20,32,34
Personal and collateral loans_______ 33,37-38
Total and number holding agricultural
loans, December 31, 1934____ _______
34
Country—
Borrowings from Federal Reserve
banks, amount, 1919-36____________
39
Demand deposits, trend, 1923-37___
36
1-2
Discussion_________________________________
Investment in acquired real estate, Janu­
32
ary 1, 1937_________________ ______________
Member of Federal Reserve System—
Demand deposits, trend, 1923-37____
35
Interest rate, agricultural loans, Oc­
tober 1, 1936,.______ ________ ________
41
Number of suspensions, 1921-36___________
33
Banks for cooperatives, loans outstanding,
1933-37; December 31, 1936......... ................... 3,44
Bond yields, trend, 1919-37....................................
28
Bonds:
Federal land bank—
Interest rate, 1928-37.................................
28
28
Outstanding, 1928-37..................... ...........
Yield on, trend, 1919-37.......................... _
28
Government and industrial, yield, trend,
1919-37........................................... .....................
28
Borrowers from Federal land banks and Land
Bank Commissioner, number, January 1,
22
1937......... ............................ ............... .......................
Borrowings, country banks from Federal Re­
serve banks, 1919-36..........................................
39
Capital stock, Federal land banks, 1917-37.
Commercial banks. See Banks; Loans.
Commodity Credit Corporation, loans out­
standing, December 31, 1937________________
Cooperatives, loans to, 1933-37________________
Crop and feed loans:
Discussion........ ................................... .................
Percentage outstanding, December 31,1936
See also Emergency crop loans; Loans.
Demand deposits. See Banks.
Drought loans outstanding, 1934-37........... ........
Emergency crop loan s., — ...................... ..

45
44
2
43

Government bonds, yield on, 1919-37__________

28

Income, farm, gross, 1910-36; trend, 1924-37____ 5,36
Industrial bonds, yield on, 1919-37_____________
28
Interest rate on:
Bonds outstanding, Federal land bank,
1928-37............................................. .................
28
Discussion.............................................................
3-4
Federal land bank and Land Bank Com ­
missioner loans.............................................. 26-27
Mortgage debt—
Average paid b y farmers refinanced
during 1933-34...................... ...................
27
Owner-operated farms, 1930....................
25
Mortgages recorded...........................................
26
Unsecured debts—
Average paid b y farmers refinanced
during 1933-34.......................... ..............
41
Charged by member banks, Federal
Reserve System, October 1,1936____
41
Investment in acquired farms, December 31,
1934 and January 1,1937--------------- ----------- —
30,32

40

2,40,42-43

Farm bankruptcies, index of, 1899-1936.............
Farm Credit Administration. See Banks for
cooperatives; Federal intermediate credit
banks; Federal land banks; Production cred­
it associations.
Farm income, gross, 1910-36; trend, 1924-37...
Farm loans recorded, amount, 1933-37............ ..
Farm mortgage debt. See Mortgage debt.
Farm products, price, index of, 1899-1936.........
Farm real estate:
Value per acre, index of, 1912-37...................
See also Acquired farms; Loans; Taxes.




24

Page
Farm Security Administration loans outstand­
ing, December 31, 1937.............. ........... ................
45
Farms:
Owner-operated—
Mortgage debt per acre, January 1,
1935............................................. ...............
12
Percentage mortgaged, January 1,1935.
11
Ratio of mortgage debt to value of
mortgaged farms, January 1,1935—
11
Tenant- and manager-operated, percentage
mortgaged, January 1,1935---------------------13
Total, percentage mortgaged, January 1,
1935_____ _________ _______________________
8
Farms acquired. Se e Acquired farms.
Farms mortgaged. See Mortgage debt.
Federal intermediate credit banks, loans— 2,38-40,44
Federal land banks:
Bond yields, 1919-37........... ............................. ..
28
Bonds outstanding, 1928-37________________
28
Borrowers, number, January 1,1937_______
22
Capital stock______________________________
24
Discussion------------------------------- ------------------- 1,3-4
Interest rates on bonds, 1928-37.....................
28
Interest rates on loans____ _____ ___________ 26-27
Investment in acquired real estate, January
1 ,1 9 3 7 ................................................. .............
32
Mortgage loans—
M ad e........... ................... ................. .
14,23,27
Outstanding............................9,14,16-18,21,32
Percentage of total mortgage debt
held, January 1,1935. _.......................
21
National farm loan associations, location,
24
November 1,1937............................................
Surplus, paid-in, 1932-37..................................
24
Use of loan proceeds------------------------------------ 15-16
See also Loans.

6

5,36
14
6
5

Joint-stock land banks:
Discussion........................, ........... ................... .. 1,3-4
Investment in acquired real estate, Janu­
ary 1,1937............................... ...........................
32
Mortgage loans.................................... 9,14,16-18,32
Mortgages refinanced, 1933-37........................
15
Land and buildings, ratio of mortgage debt to
total value, January 1,1935..................................
8
Land Bank Commissioner. See Federal land
banks.
Legislation, State, mortgage relief, 1930-36.........
13
Lending agencies, principal:
Acquired farms, December 31, 1934 and
January 1, 1937...................... ......................... 29-32

47

48

INDEX

Page
Lending agencies, principal— Continued.
Page
Discussion--------------------------------------------------1-4 M ortgages recorded, 1933-37___________________
14
Mortgage loans—
Outstanding, January 1, 1937___..........
32 N ationa l farm loan associations:
Percentage of total mortgage debt held,
Capital stock ow n ed in Federal land
1928-35_________ _____ _________ 16-17,20-21
banks, 1917-37___________________________
24
Percentage on owner-operated farms,
Location, N o v e m b e r 1, 1937_______________
24
1928, 1935___.................................. ........... 9,18
Trend, 1914-37............................. ...............
14 Owner-operated farms:
See also Banks; Federal land banks; Life
M ortgage d eb t secured b y , percentage of
insurance companies; Loans; Mortgage
total, January 1,1935____________________
12
M ortgaged, n u m ber—
debt.
Life insurance companies:
Percentage increase an d decrease, 1930Interest rates on mortgages recorded........
26
35------------------------------------------------------10
Investment in acquired real estate, Janu­
Percent o f total, Jan uary 1, 1935______
11
ary 1,1937-------------------------------- -------------32
See also F arm s; Interest rates; M ortgage
Mortgage loans-----------------------------------9,14,16-18
debt; M ortgaged farms.
Mortgages refinanced, 1933-37............. .........
15
Percentage of total debt held, January 1,
Personal and collateral loans t o farmers b y
1935------- -------------------------------------------------20
com m ercial b an k s_________________ 1-2,32-33,37-38
Loans:
See also B anks; Loans.
Banks for cooperatives, outstanding, D e­
Prices:
cember 31,1936; 1933-37_________________
44
R eceived b y farmers, trend, 1910-37; 1923Commercial banks—
37-------------------------------------------------------------- 33, 36
Number having, December 31,1934.. _
34
W holesale, farm produ cts, index of, 1899Personal and collateral-------------- 32-33,37-38
1936______________________________________
6
Real estate, amount per county, D e­
P rod u ction credit associations:
cember 31,1934............................ ...........
19
D iscussion _________________________________
3
Secured b y farm real estate___________
20
L oa n s----------------------------------------------------------38-40
Commodity Credit Corporation, amount
L o ca tio n ___________________________________
40
outstanding, December 31,1937_________
45 P urpose of loans, Federal land banks and L a n d
Discussion_______ _______ ______ _____ ______
1-4
B ank Com m issioner_________________________ 15-16
Emergency crop and feed, outstanding,
December 31,1936............................ .............
43 R a tio of m ortgage debt to value, January 1,
Federal land bank and Land Bank Com­
1935:
missioner. See Federal land banks.
A ll farms___________________________________
g
Leading lending agencies, January 1, 1937.
32
O wner-operated farm s_____________________
11
Personal and collateral to farmers by com­
R ea l estate loans. See M ortgage debt.
mercial banks_________ ______ _____ 32-33,37-38 R ecordings o f m ortgages, 1933-37______________
14
Recorded, October 1933-August 1937 .........
14 R egional agricultural credit corporations,
Rural Electrification Administration, out­
lo a n s------------------------------------------------------------ 2,38,40
standing, December 31, 1937------------------46 R e lie f legislation, m ortgage, State, 1930-36____
13
Rural rehabilitation of Farm Security
R esettlem en t A d m inistration. See F arm Se­
Administration, outstanding, December
c u r ity A dm inistration.
31, 1937___________________________________
45 R e ta il sales, tren d, 1929-37_____________________
35
Seed, frequency of recourse to, 1921-34----42 R u ral rehabilitation loans o f the Farm Security
Short-term amount, June 30, 1937; out­
A d m inistration, ou tstanding, D e ce m b e r 31,
standing, 1923-37.________________________38-39
1937__________________________________________
45
See also Lending agencies; Mortgage debt.
R u ra l E lectrification A d m inistration:
Loans outstanding, D ecem ber 31, 1937____
46
Manager- and tenant-operated farms. See
Projects, nu m ber, N ovem b er 15, 1937_____
46
Tenant- and manager-operated farms.
Mortgage debt:
Sales, retail, trend, 1929-37____________________
36
Discussion--------------------------------------------------1-4
42
Seed loans, 1921-34_____________________________
Interest rates.------------ -------------------------------- 25-27
Short-term loans:
Owner-operated farms-—
D iscussion _________________________________
1-3
Interest rate, 1930-------- -----------------------25
F ed era lly sponsored agencies_____________ 38-40
Per acre, January 1,1935--------------------12
Interest rates o n ___________________________
41
Percentage mortgaged, January 1,
R efin an ced _____________________________ 15-16,41
1935........... - ----------- --------------------------11
See also B a n k s; Loans; P rod u ction credit
Ratio to value of mortgaged farms,
associations.
11
January 1, 1935--------------------------------State credit agencies:
Per acre, average, index, 1910-37................
5
D iscu ssion _________________________________
3-4
Percentage change, 1930-35-----------------------6
In vestm en t in acqu ired real estate, Janu­
Percentage held b y principal lending
a ry 1, 1937________________________________
32
agencies___________________________ 16—
17,20-21
F arm m ortgage holdings__________________ 14, 32
Secured b y owner- and b y manager- and
13
State m ortgage relief legislation, 1930-36______
tenant-operated farms------------------------- 9,12,18
Surplus, paid-in, Federal lan d banks, 1932-37_
24
Ratio to total value of farm land and build­
ings, January 1, 1935------------------------------8
_
5
Refinanced b y the Federal land banks. _ 15-16,27 Taxes, on farm real estate, per acre, 1913-36_
Total, 1910-37--------- -----------------------------------5 T en an t- a n d manager-operated farms, nu m ber:
Percentage o f m ortgage d e b t secured b y ,
Mortgages secured by:
January 1, 1935__________________________
9
Owner-operated farms, percentage------------ 9,18
Percent m ortgaged, January 1, 1935_____ I
13
Tenant- and manager-operated farms,
January 1,1935. ------- . . -----------------------Mortgage loans. See Loans; Mortgage debt.
Mortgage relief legislation, State, 1930-36-----Mortgaged farms, number:
Total—
Percentage increase and decrease, 193035-------------- ----------------------------------------Percentage of all farms, January 1,
1935____________________ —
----------------- Owner-operated, percentage increase and
decrease, 1930-35--------------------------------------




9
13

7
8
1°

O

U se o f loan proceeds, Federal land b a n k and
L a n d B ank C om m issioner loans____________ 15-16
V alue o f land:
P er acre, index_____________________________ 5f 20
R a tio to m ortgage d e b t, Jan uary 1, 1935^
A ll farm s______________________________
g
O wner-operated farm s___________ n
Y ie ld s o n b on d s, trend, 1919-37____________ ___

28


Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, One Federal Reserve Bank Plaza, St. Louis, MO 63102