View original document

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

CLEVELAND BHIEF PRESENTED TO
BESERVE BANK OBGA.NIZATION COMMITTEE
PEBEUABY 17, 1914

To the Reserve

Bank

Organization

Committee:

W e suggest the division of the United States into eleven Federal
Reserve Districts, approximately as outlined on the map which we
submit for your consideration.
Logical
n u m b e r of
Districts

W e believe that the purposes of the Federal Reserve A c t cannot
be well served with a smaller number of districts. A n y attempt
to limit the number further we think would necessitate either overwhelming banks in the great financial centers, or districts covering
too large areas throughout the rest of the country.

Characteristics
of Districts
a n d Reserve
Cities

W e have outlined each of the districts with regard to " t h e convenience and customary course of business," attempting also to have
each as self-contained as possible with respect to borrowing needs
and lending power, and to divide the resources of the country
equitably if not equally. T h e smallest banks of the eleven we
suggest will serve districts that are certain to grow in financial
strength. W e have suggested the location of the bank in each
district in a city which seems to us to be now or potentially the
trade center, readily accessible, and with adequate commercial and
financial strength; and we believe these qualifications are best
indicated, not merely by present size and position, but also, and
perhaps more reliably, by the rate and character of recent growth.

T h e eleven
Reserve Cities

T h e districts we suggest are each described on a schedule
which we have designated as " E x h i b i t A , " the headquarters being
as follows: District 1, Boston; District 2, N e w Y o r k ; District 3,
Philadelphia; District 4, Richmond; District 5, Cleveland; District
6, Atlanta; District 7, Chicago; District 8, St. Louis; District 9,
Dallas; District 10, Minneapolis; District 11, San Francisco.

Territory and
data for
District 5

In District N o . 5 we have included the entire state of Ohio, nine
counties in western N e w York, including Buffalo and Rochester,
twenty-five counties in western Pennsylvania, including Pittsburgh
and Johnstown, the four counties constituting the " Panhandle M
of West Virginia, including Wheeling, and nineteen counties of
southeastern Michigan, including Detroit, Lansing and B a y City.
W i t h i n this district are national banks having a total capital and
surplus of $230,360,000 which would be members of a Federal
District bank with a capital of $13,800,000. T h e deposits of these
banks aggregate $1,042,000,000.
T h e state banks in the District
have capital and surplus aggregating $251,300,000, and deposits of
$1,336,000,000. T h e population of the district, according to the
census of 1910, was 10,287,292.




Necessity of
a District
between New
York and
Chicago

We believe it is obvious that a district in the north between
New Y o r k a n d C h i c a g o is a b s o l u t e l y necessary to limit the
tremendous banking power acquired by those two centers of finance
under our old law, as well as to enable each of those centers to
serve its own community best. The District Reserve Banks in New
Y o r k and Chicago will necessarily be greater than any others, even
when such a midway district is established. We believe it essential,
however, to attach to other centers as much territory as can
reasonably be separated from the N e w Y o r k district, and some of
the territory which under the old conditions has centered its banking in Chicago.

A natural
District
between New
York and
Chicago

Fortunately, between these two great centers there lies a natural
district, which we believe is as cohesive in its industries, commerce,
exchanges and financial problems as can be found anywhere in the
world in a like area. This is the great iron and steel producing
territory centering in northern Ohio, a district which has such
manufacturing advantages in varied lines, added to great mineral
and agricultural resources, that it has developed a remarkable diversity
of industries and commerce, loosely allied, not discordant, yet
offering a distribution of financial requirements which approaches
the ideal.

Agricultural,
mineral and
industrial
factors i n
the District

This district has become so great in manufacturing that its
agricultural resources are often forgotten. Census figures show,
for example, that Ohio ranks fifth among the states in number of
farms, sixth in value of farm property, sixth in production of corn,
fifth in tons of hay produced, sixth in value of potatoes grown,
third in production of wool, sixth in pounds of butter produced,
sixth in gallons of milk, third in dozens of eggs; and the list might
be extended. But the meeting of bituminous coal and iron ore in
this district has made it pre-eminent in most forms of iron and
steel production, the great barometer of business; Ohio is fourth
in production of bituminous coal, and second in production of
pig-iron. This region or district has moreover such advantages for
the distribution as well as production of so many articles of manufacture, not only those using iron and steel as their chief materials,
that it has taken on chief importance as an industrial district. The
census shows in this district nine manufacturing cities of more than
100,000 population, as follows (in order of rank): Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit, Buffalo, Cincinnati, Rochester, Columbus, Toledo




and Dayton. These cities alone produce annually manufactures
valued at more than $1,500,000,000. The census lists of leading
classes of products in these cities show a remarkable diversity.
Among the classes showing the greatest value of products in each
city are the following:
Foundry and machine-shop products
Primary iron and steel
Automobiles and automobile parts
Packing-house products
Soap
Men's and women's clothing
Boots and shoes
Printing and publishing
Petroleum refining
Flour and grist mill products
Bakery products
Coffee and spice roasting and grinding
Tobacco manufactures
M a l t and spirituous liquors
Brass and bronze products
District w i l l
be
financially
self-contained

W e believe it is demonstrable that the seasonal demands for
loans in the commerce and industries of this district are as evenly
distributed throughout the year as would be possible in any district
that could be outlined anywhere. Even were the district limited
to iron and steel manufactures, the demand would be distributed
by the very fact that the processes are all carried on within its
borders, from unloading of iron ore to assembling the most highly
finished products. For example, the season of the year when Cleveland has the least demands for loans on its industries, particularly
its ore, pig-iron and primary steel, is the very season when Detroit
has its greatest demands for financing its automobile products.
We might multiply instances, but we believe the probability that the
district is likely to be always self-reliant is indicated sufficiently by
a table and accompanying chart which we have prepared and marked
"Table A " and 44Chart I," showing percentage of reserves in each of
the reserve cities in this district at the date of each comptroller's call
for a period of three years.

H a r m o n y of
diversified
interests of
the District

W i t h all the diversity of industry, commerce and agriculture
in this district, there is nevertheless a certain relation even between
the most diverse. In Cleveland, for example, our women's wear
manufacturers not only employ other producing members of the




families of our machinists, but some of our largest foundries are
owned by textile goods manufacturers; and other inter-relations
make for understanding of each other's problems, and mutual
helpfulness. W e believe that the bankers of all the district we have
outlined would have sympathetic understanding, if not absolute
knowledge, of the financial problems of all the manufacturers,
miners, farmers and merchants of the district. N o w this would
not be true if the district were to include much of the tobacco and
cotton territory south of the Ohio River, where the agricultural,
commercial and industrial conditions are utterly divergent from
those of Ohio. We think there would be a lack of mutuality which
would be likely to affect the southern territory unfavorably, because
of the preponderance of northern problems and requirements, and
the probable majority of northern stockholders and directors.
Three possible
Reserve
Cities

The location of the bank to serve this district will doubtless
lie between Cleveland and Cincinnati, because the other large cities
within the district are so near its eastern and western boundaries.
However, Pittsburgh has also claimed to be able to serve Ohio.
Your choice lies possibly between these three. Y o u will, of course,
select the city which can, in your judgment, best serve the district.
It is our purpose in this presentation to assist you in forming a
correct judgment; we shall try to avoid mere local pride, and present
only the facts and figures that have convinced us, as we think they
must convince you, that the business interests of this district would
be best served by locating the headquarters bank at Cleveland.

Qualifications

We are frank enough to say that no city in this district can substantiate the claim, as Chicago can for instance, that the great
bulk of the trade of the proposed district centers there. So if you
establish a district with Ohio as its great nucleus, you will doubtless
place the bank in the city that best meets the following requirements:

°f

Re

oity




(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Satisfactory communication throughout the district.
Proximity to center of traffic and exchanges of the district.
Financial, commercial, industrial and civic strength in itself.
Satisfactory relations with the entire district.

We shall confine our evidence to a comparative showing for the
three cities under each of these four heads. T h e few essential facts
and figures have been compiled with great care, accuracy being
sought at whatever cost; and we believe they are absolutely reliable.

E a c h city
accessible

(1) C o m m u n i c a t i o n : It is probable that the communication
throughout the district from any one of the three cities would be
satisfactory to serve the purpose of the bank. It is certainly true
that a letter mailed from Rochester, Johnstown, Cincinnati or
Saginaw, cities in the remotest parts of the district, at the close of
banking hours on one day would reach Cleveland in time to receive
attention at the beginning of banking hours on the next day; and
this would even be true of most, if not all, communities of eastern
Kentucky and eastern Tennessee, if the district should extend so
far south. It is worthy of note, furthermore, that a letter mailed at
the close of banking hours at any one of seven of the other District
Reserve Cities indicated on our map, would reach Cleveland in time
to receive attention during the following morning.

Cleveland is
shortest journey for most
people i n the
District

Moreover, we believe it can be shown that Cleveland can be
reached more quickly, by most of the people in the district, than
either of the other cities. The debatable territory, so to speak, is all
within the state of Ohio; it is obvious that Pittsburgh can be
reached by Pennsylvania towns more quickly than can Cleveland or
Cincinnati; it is obvious that Cincinnati could be reached by towns
in Kentucky more quickly than Cleveland, if Kentucky were
included in the district; it is obvious that Cleveland can be reached
by the Michigan and New Y o r k points more quickly than either of
the other cities. But Ohio lies between the three cities. Of the
thirty-seven cities of Ohio containing a population of 10,000 or
more in 1910 (taken as indicating density of population) seventeen,
with a total population of 1,130,000, can reach Cleveland most
quickly; fourteen cities, with a'population of 902,000, can reach
Cincinnati most quickly, and six, with a population of 105,000, can
reach Pittsburgh most quickly.
Fifteen of these cities, with a
population of 1,064,000, are a longer journey from Pittsburgh than
from either Cincinnati or Cleveland; seventeen, with a population
of 427,000, are furthest from Cincinnati; while only four, with a
population of 78,000, are furthest from Cleveland. T o make the
point clearer by a system of scoring, if 100 points are allowed for
the quickest communication, and fifty, for the second quickest, the
score is: Cleveland 2,350, Cincinnati 1,550, and Pittsburgh 1,350.

Relative
traffic
density




(2)

Location w i t h respect to center of traffic and ex-

changes:

There are eighty-eight counties in Ohio.

The popula-

tion of the forty-four counties north of a line drawn approximately
through the center of the state is 2,547,721; of the forty-four southern

counties, 2,219,400. Density of traffic, which means density of
exchanges, can be indicated fairly by railroad facilities for handling
the traffic. There are forty main-line tracks in service on the railroads traversing the northern part of Ohio, and twenty-three mainline tracks for the railroads traversing the southern part. In the
north half of the state, ten railroads have two or more main-line
tracks; in the south half, only three have as many as two mainline tracks. The total double-track mileage in Ohio, as shown by
the most recent map of the Ohio Public Service Commission, is
2,107 miles. Of this double-track mileage, more than 1,468 miles, or
nearly seventy per cent., lies in the northern forty-four counties;
not quite 639 miles, or a little over thirty per cent., is in the south
half of the state.
Traffic

CHevefond




W i t h respect to the railroad situation of Cleveland in this part
state
» it is only necessary to say that every eastern trunk
line of the United States enters Cleveland, and that the city is on
the principal travel highway between New Y o r k and Chicago. Moreover, and equally important, C l e v e l a n d is on the most direct
line from the iron ore of the northern states to the bituminous coal
deposits of this district. Practically all of the shipping carrying
the iron ore trade of the lakes (amounting to 50,000,000 tons last
year) is directed from Cleveland, and about eighty per cent, of the
great fleets of vessels engaged in the ore and coal trade are managed
at Cleveland. Y o u doubtless have in mind the fact that the tonnage
through the Detroit River to and from Lake Erie ports is greater
than the total port tonnage of New York, London and Liverpool
combined. Furthermore, the value of this tonnage, as estimated by
the United States Government Engineer at Detroit, was more than
$800,000,000 in 1910, a far greater sum than the total reported by the
census for the value of both the agricultural and manufactured t
products of the states of Kentucky and Tennessee combined. This
indicates the unreliability of the argument that Cleveland is a less
desirable center for this district because it has the lake to the north.
The lake is a far more valuable source of business and exchanges
than most equal areas of land. The Great Lakes furnish the cheapest
freight haul in the world, so that the iron ore, coal and limestone
for the production of pig-iron can be assembled on the south shore
of Lake Erie more cheaply than in any other of the great furnace
districts in the north. We note also that nearly all the cities you
have been considering as locations for district banks are situated,

not in the geographic centers of their districts, but at the points
where lines of communication center, which happen to be, in most
cases, at or near one edge of each district; and especially when any
district has any frontage on navigable water, the trade of the
district is likely to seek a port city.
R a n k of
Cleveland
a n d causes
of growth

V o l u m e of
Cleveland's
business
i n principal
commodities




(3)

Financial, commercial, industrial and civic strength:

Cleveland is the largest city between the Atlantic seaboard and
Chicago, and its population is exceeded by only three cities of the
seaboard—New York, Philadelphia and Boston—and two cities
of the interior, Chicago and St. Louis. T h e United States Census
of Manufactures for 1909 shows that the value of the manufactured
product of Cleveland is exceeded only by that of four cities, N e w
York, Chicago, Philadelphia and St. Louis. Cleveland's rapid
growth to this position is due largely to its strategic location and
transportation facilities, which have been the chief of its manufacturing advantages. These natural and economic advantages,
aided by individual enterprise and the application of intelligent
public spirit in co-operative effort, have produced the phenomenal
but steady and substantial advance of Cleveland among the cities
of the country.
In 1850 Cleveland was forty-third in population
rank; today it is the Sixth City.
A s indicating the volume of trade now centering in Cleveland,
we give below a table of a few of the leading commodities handled
by Cleveland business houses, with the approximate volume of
annual business conducted through Cleveland banks in each line, as
estimated from reports furnished by a large number of leading
business houses, or from most recent census reports. T h e financial
needs of all of these lines are distributed over a large part of the year.
Commodity
Annual volume
Iron ore
.
$64,000,000
Bituminous coal
56,000,000
Petroleum and its products, etc
33,500,000
Lumber
13,500,000
Stone
13,000,000
Grain and hay
19,000,000
Live stock and packing-house products
40,000,000
Primary iron and steel products
36,000,000
Foundry and machine shop products
48,000,000
Automobiles and automobile parts and accessories
(manufactured) *
43,000,000
Men's and women's wearing apparel (factory product). .
32,000,000
* Part of this total is probably included in the value of 41 foundry and
machine-shop products/'

G r o w t h is
safe index

W e believe that the selection of normal trade centers for the
districts you establish can be made almost unerringly by a study
of the rate and character of growth of the chief cities in each
district.
T h e present size, trade importance and financial condition of the cities considered are of course most important factors;
but you are planning for the future as well as the present, and
growth is, we believe, a clearer index of. probable strength than
present size, if the two factors do not coincide. W e believe, therefore, that we can best aid you in selecting the headquarters for this
district by showing the history of recent growth in Cleveland,
Pittsburgh and Cincinnati.

Soundness
of Cleveland
Banks

Before considering the figures of financial growth, you should
be advised that since the enactment of the national banking law
Cleveland is unique among these three cities in having reported not
one single failure of a national bank; no depositor in any national
bank in Cleveland has lost one penny.

Index items

In order to limit as severely as possible the figures which we
feel must be brought to your attention, we have confined our
evidence of relative growth to a very few index items. These are
not chosen for the reason that they favor Cleveland; we believe
that all the recorded data would indicate equally well the indisputable fact of Cleveland's advance; but we believe the following
items will be sufficient for reliable comparison. F o r each item we
give the precentages of increase for the most recent ten-year periods
for which authoritative data are available, as follows:
Cleveland

Population, 1900-1910
. . . .
Postoffice receipts, 1904-1913
. .
Value of manufactures, 1899-1909 .
Clearing House exchanges, 1904-1913
Deposits, all banks, 1904-1913 . .

46.9
116.4
95.1
57.8
66.1

Cincinnati

11.8
61.3
37.3
16.1
37.5

Pittsburgh

18.2
107.5
11.1
23.9
36.2

Tables B, C, D, E and F , and Charts II, III, IV, V and V I ,
which we offer in evidence, show clearly the annual growth of the
three cities as indicated by these items.
Civic
soundness




Civic conditions may seem to be a minor point in your consideration of a purely economic problem, but we believe they
have a very distinct bearing. Cleveland has a deserved reputation
for freedom from " g r a f t " in its municipal affairs; but that is
a negative virtue, and is perhaps only a minor evidence of the
alert progressive spirit which is constantly manifested by the great
body of our citizens and their leaders in many ways. F o r example,

Cleveland enjoys the lowest death rate among the large cities
of the country, due in part to climatic conditions, but also in
large part to intelligent municipal sanitation. Cleveland was the
first American city actually to begin putting into effect a great
plan for grouping its public buildings in a " c i v i c center."
Cleveland's experiments in charities and correction are attracting
world-wide attention and serving as models for other communities;
the famous Cooley Farm Colony, the Cleveland Federation for
Charity and Philanthropy, and the new "Cleveland Foundation M
are examples. In Cleveland has been evolved the unique street
railway franchise (which may be credited largely to the work of the
late Mayor T o m L . Johnson and the late United States Judge
Robert W . Tayler) the essential features of which are the control
of service by the city, the kind of service the people's representatives require at a rate of fare which will pay its cost plus 6%
upon an arbitrated valuation; and the consequent satisfaction of
the people because a problem is solved which in other cities is a
constant source of disturbance of both business and banking
conditions. The citizenship of Cleveland expresses itself not only
at the polls, but also through civic and commercial organizations,
in which effective voluntary service for the improvement of living
and working conditions in Cleveland is rendered most freely by
a very large number of able men.
These facts we cite as reasons for the growth of Cleveland in
the past, and as evidence of its healthy condition and probable
continued growth; so that in the future, still more than at present,
Cleveland is likely

to be the undisputed

trade center of

this

district.
R i v a l r y of
three cities




(4)

Relations with District:

It is natural that in a district
tj1jg
s m a l l e r communities and rural territory would all prefer
to be attached to the nearest large city, with which trade relations
are closest; and it is natural, too, that none of the three cities under
consideration should name either of the others even as a second
choice, because there has been a friendly but intense rivalry between these cities.
Since Cleveland continues to outgrow the
other two, we believe that it should not be subordinated to either.
Y e t Pittsburgh and Cincinnati cannot be expected to yield ungrudged precedence to their successful rival for pre-eminence in the
middle west.

Commercial
a n d financial
allegiance

B u t the business men of all this district enjoy friendly, profitable and even cordial relations with each other, and we are certain that there would be no real disturbance, much less violence,
done to existing trade conditions in Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Buffalo,
Detroit or Rochester, or any other locality within the district,
through the establishment of a bank at Cleveland. Six hundred
and twenty-four national and six hundred state banks within the
district now carry accounts with Cleveland national banks, besides
two hundred and seventy-nine national and one hundred and
twenty-one state banks beyond the district. About five hundred
banks in the district have designated Cleveland banks as reserve
agents. Cleveland has forty-five per cent, of the total of all " b a n k
deposits" in all Ohio banks. W e have heard directly from two
hundred and thirty-three banks in northern and central Ohio who
name Cleveland as their first choice for the location of the district
bank, as well as twenty banks in southern Ohio, four in south-eastern
Michigan, five in western Pennsylvania, two in N e w York, and even
seven in Indiana; and we are certain that many other banks in
surrounding states and in southern Ohio would find Cleveland
perfectly acceptable, if not their first choice. - T o show that our
city has the active good will of business men in its immediate
trade territory, we shall submit to you copies of resolutions from
commercial and trade organizations in thirty-three Ohio cities and
towns, resolutions formally adopted by Clearing House Associations
in some of the cities, and editorials that have appeared in several
Ohio newspapers outside of Cleveland.

Conclusion

W e submit these facts and considerations with the conviction
that they establish clearly the desirability of such a district as we
have outlined, with Ohio as its center, and with its Reserve Bank
at Cleveland.
Respectfully submitted,




J. J. Sullivan, Chairman, Clearing House Committee
Newton D. Baker, Mayor of Cleveland
Warren S. Hayden, President, The Cleveland Chamber of Commerce
Elbert H. Baker, President, Plain Dealer Publishing Co.
F. H. Goff, President, Cleveland Trust Company
Executive Committee
Representing Committees appointed by
The Cleveland Clearing House
Association
The Cleveland Chamber of Commerce
The Cleveland Builders
Exchange
The Cleveland Association
of Credit Men
The Cleveland Real Estate Board
The Cleveland Advertising
Club
The Industrial
Association
of Cleveland
Cleveland Rotary Club
Lakewood Chamber of Commerce

EXHIBIT
S C H E D U L E OF F E D E R A L

A

RESERVE

DISTRICTS

(Figures are chiefly from the report of the Comptroller of the
Currency

for

1913,

supplemented

by

latest

reports

of

State

Banking Departments of some States.)
A l l of Maine, N e w Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode
Island; three counties of eastern Connecticut (Windham, Tolland,
N e w London); the northeastern part of N e w Y o r k , going west as far as
the western boundaries of Wayne, Ontario and Steuben counties,
and southeast as far as the southern boundaries of Delaware, Green
and Columbia counties.
Capital of Reserve Bank at BOSTON
Capital and surplus National banks
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks
Deposits all other banks
District No.

2

Thirteen counties of N e w Y o r k ,

.
.

.

.

.
.

$ 12,100,000
202,150,000
811,500,000
215,000,000
2,500,000,000

.

including and

surrounding

Greater N e w Y o r k , going north as far as the northern boundaries
of Dutchess, Ulster and Sullivan counties; the five western counties
of Connecticut not included in District N o . 1; the eleven northern
counties of N e w Jersey, as far south as the southern boundaries of
Middlesex, Somerset and Hunterdon counties.
Capital of Reserve Bank at NEW YORK .
Capital and surplus National banks
. .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks
. .
Deposits all other banks
District No.

3




.
.

$ 19,400,000
323,600,000
1,700,000,000
400,000,000
3,100,000,000

.

Forty-two eastern counties of Pennsylvania, as far west as the
eastern boundaries of Potter, Cameron, Clearfield, Cambria and
Somerset counties; all of Delaware; and the ten southern counties of
N e w Jersey not included in District No. 2.
Capital of Reserve Bank at PHILADELPHIA .
Capital and surplus National Banks. . .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks
Deposits all other banks

.
.

$10,300,000
171,550,000
693,100,000
170,000,000
635,000,000

District No. 4

A l l of Virginia, Maryland, District of Columbia, North and South
Carolina, and all of West Virginia except the four counties of the
"Panhandle."
Capital of Reserve Bank at RICHMOND . . .
Capital and surplus National banks . . . .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks . . . .
Deposits all other banks

District No. 5

A l l of Ohio; the twenty-five western counties of Pennsylvania not
included in District No. 3; the nine counties of western N e w Y o r k
not included in District No. 1; the four counties of the " Panhandle"
of West Virginia (Brook, Hancock, Marshall and Ohio); nineteen
counties of southeastern Michigan, as far as the western boundaries
of Hillsdale, Jackson, Ingham, Shiawassee, Saginaw and B a y counties.
Capital of Reserve Bank at CLEVELAND .
Capital and surplus National banks , .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks . .
Deposits all other banks

District No.

6

$ 6,400,000
106,400,000
395,000,000
115,000,000
450,000,000

.
.
.

$ 13,800,000
230,360,000
1,042,000,000
251,300,000
1,336,000,000

A l l of Kentucky, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Alabama and
Mississippi.
Capital of Reserve Bank at ATLANTA . . .
Capital and surplus National banks
. . .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks . . . .
Deposits all other banks

District No. 7

A l l of Illinois, Iowa, Indiana and Wisconsin, and the sixty-five
counties of Michigan not included in District No. 5.
Capital of Reserve Bank at CHICAGO
Capital and surplus National banks
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks
Deposits all other banks . . / .

District No.

8




$ 6,050,000
100,800,000
312,000,000
125,000,000
360,000,000

. . .
. . .
.
.

.
.

.
.

$ 14,000,000
233,290,000
1,279,400,000
260,000,000
1,600,000,000

A l l of Missouri, Arkansas, Louisiana, K a n s a s , N e b r a s k a and
Colorado.
Capital of Reserve Bank at ST. LOUIS . . .
Capital and surplus National banks . . . .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks . . . .
Deposits all other banks

$ 8,080,000
134,700,000
695,700,000
173,000,000
710,000,000

District No. 9

A l l of Texas, Oklahoma and N e w Mexico.
Capital of Reserve Bank at DALLAS. . . .
Capital and surplus National banks . . . .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks . . . .
Deposits all other banks

District No.

io

A l l of Minnesota, North Dakota,
Wyoming, Idaho and Washington.

South Dakota,

Capital of Reserve bank at MINNEAPOLIS
Capital and surplus National banks . . .
Deposits National banks . . . . . .
Capital and surplus all other banks . . .
Deposits all other banks
District No. l l




$ 5,900,000
97,900,000
336,000,000
45,000,000
140,000,000

.

.
.
.
.

Montana,

$ 5,300,000
87,700,000
505,200,000
80,000,000
415,000,000

A l l of California, Oregon, Nevada, Utah and Arizona.
Capital of Reserve Bank at SAN FRANCISCO .
Capital and surplus National banks . . . .
Deposits National banks
Capital and surplus all other banks . . . .
Deposits all other banks

$ 6,500,000
108,200,000
460,700,000
110,000,000
725,000,000




TABLE A
Reserve percentages of the five reserve cities i n 4 'District 5", averages of
the five cities, and averages of all reserve cities i n the United States,
at dates of Comptroller's Calls, 1911-1913 inclusive.
Date

P i t t s b u r g h Average

All
Reserve
Cities

25.65
27.21
26.86
25.31
26.37

26.10
28.77
28.94
26.87
26.87

27.11
28.49
28.37
26.97
26.41

25.74
27.30
29.06
25.61
22.62

27.96
26.28
25.18
27.67
24.05

28.54
27.06
27.71
27.23
24.54

28.00
27.30
27.21
26.18
25.32

25.14
24.84
28.33
29.39
25.72

29.54
24.87
23.98
25.91
26.09

28.89
26.27
26.39
27.34
26.71

26.96
25.61
26.33
26.52
25.72

Cleveland C i n c i n n a t i C o l u m b u s

Detroit

26.60
29.65
32.82
29.66
26.57

32.37
30.97
28.17
25.19
27.82

22.93
27.10
26.19
25.49
25.86

22.97
28.94
30.67
28.69
27.73

20
18
14
4
26

31.51
26.44
29.35
29.86
26.54

29.92
29.85
30.41
27.45
25.65

27.58
25.45
24.54
25.56
23.83

Feb. 4
Apr. 4
June 4
Aug. 9
Oct. 21

30.86
26.14
27.35
28.43
29.73

30.59
30.05
26.86
28.45
26.73

28.33
25.44
25.45
24.54
25.26

1911

Jan.
7
Mar. 7
June 7
Sept. 1
Dec. 5
1912

Feb.
Apr.
June
Sept.
Nov.
1913




TABLE B
Population
Year

1910
1900
1890
1880
1870
1860
1850

Cleveland

Rank

Cincinnati

Rank

Pittsburgh

Rank

560,663
381,768
261,353
160,146
92,829
43,417
17,034

6
7
10
12
15
21
43

364,463
325,902
296,908
255,139
216,239
161,044
115,435

13
10
9
8
8
7
6

533,905
321,616
238,617
156,389
86,076
49,221
46,601

8
11
13
13
16
17
13

TABLE C
Postal Receipts for Offices Named Below for the Years
1904 to 1913, Inclusive
Year

Cleveland

Cincinnati

Pittsburgh

1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1^13

$1,420,498.00
1,565,305.65
1,753,588.58
1,943,895.96
1,952,902.11
2,057,907.53
2,300,006.86
2,521,555.67
2,696,530.34
3,073,638.38

$1,781,367.81
1,947,211.02
2,083,078.40
2,179,672.94
2,171,128.72
2,298,581.71
2,458,395.58
2,541,586.24
2,621,186.90
2,873,070.66

$1,511,653.48
1,622,343.16
1,835,960.01
2,046,951.72
2,017,427.64
2,134,086.78
2,411,111.78
2,634,097.55
2,922,842.55
3,136,125.09




TABLE B
Manufactures Statistics
From U. S. Census 1910
Cleveland

Capital invested 1899 . $101,243,000
1904 . 156,321,000
1909 . 227,397,000
Value of products 1899 .
1904 .
1909 .

139,356,000
171,924,000
271,961,000

Cincinnati

Pittsburgh

$103,467,000
130,272,000
150,254,000

$211,774,000
260,765,000
283,139,000

141,678,000
166,059,000
194,516,000

218,198,000
211,259,000
243,454,000

TABLE E
Annual Exchanges of the Clearing Houses of
Cleveland, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh
For a Period of Ten Years, Each Ending September 30th
(From Reports of the Comptroller of the Currency)
Cleveland

Year

1903
1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.

.
.

$ 804,850,901
700,078,208
754,739,346
812,973,376
914,658,049
766,518,416
825,246,000
992,803,000
1,001,569,000
1,101,007,000
1,271,232,000

Cincinnati

$1,153,865,500
1,196,854,400
1,192,662,600
1,291,921,250
1,399,770,100
1,202,794,250
1,326,713,000
1,277,997,000
1,276,279,000
1,347,123,000
1,329,668,000

Pittsburgh

$2,381,454,231
1,997,603,459
2,431,366,780
2,630,996,408
2,761,441,799
2,190,479,976
2,223,335,000
2,604,069,000
2,539,143,000
2,687,970,000
2,951,861,000




TABLE B
Deposits i n all Banks
Cleveland

1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913

National

.

$139,892,000
162,936,000
172,627,000
173,556,000
162,900,000
180,277,000
187,732,000
205,854,000
214,164,000
229,876,000

$194,889,000
219,890,000
232,910,000
231,808,000
228,420,000
247,663,000
257,360,000
278,828,000
292,824,000
314,770,000

$61,701,000
62,400,000
63,439,000
61,518,000
68,673,000
68,616,000
71,750,000
72,173,000
68,921,000
69,743,000

.

State

$54,997,000
56,954,000
60,283,000
58,252,000
65,520,000
67,386,000
69,628,000
72,974,000
78,660,000
84,894,000

$32,689,000
38,410,000
42,632,000
47,333,000
45,331,000
48,438,000
54,720,000
59,535,000
58,108,000
59,920,000

$94,390,000
100,810,000
106,071,000
108,851,000
114,004,000
117,054,000
126,470,000
131,708,000
127,029,000
129,663,000

$143,204,000
162,667,000
170,190,000
163,851,000
169,907,000
185,759,000
188,827,000
201,135,000
210,693,000
189,831,000

$157,627,000
157,599,000
169,464,000
172,930,000
165,579,000
177,685,000
179,955,000
191,756,000
202,810,000
219,851,000

$300,831,000
320,266,000
339,654,000
336,781,000
335,486,000
363,444,000
368,782,000
392,891,000
413,503,000
409,682,000

Total

Cincinnati

1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913

.
.
.
.

.

Pittsburgh

1904
1905
1906
1907
1908
1909
1910
1911
1912
1913

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.




CHART I
Reserve percentages of the five reserve cities i n " D i s t r i c t 5 " , averages of the five cities,
a n d averages of a l l reserve cities i n the U n i t e d States,
(at dates of C o m p t r o l l e r ' s Calls, 1911-1913 inclusive)

DATE OF

CALL




C H A R T II
Population
z:
YEAR £

r1

1S5Q

I860

1870

I860

1890

1900 1910

2

1
3
4
5
6 15
14

3
5

7

5063
66
114 4
60

316
878
26 2 3 9 2 5 3
1
519

8

530
395
29 98
6 0

9

2153 350
63
292

|o
i

311
266

11
12

104
616

13 461
60

16S
53 9

2 81
3 67

14

989
22

r

806
67

16
17

42.
9 21

19
20

21

447
31

2
2
23

2
4
43 1 Q 4
7 3

LEGEND
Ct,£,VKLAM» ) C I N C I N N A T I

••SGBIHB

PITTSBURGH

546
643




C H A R T III
P o s t a l Receipts for Offices N a m e d Below for the Years
1904 to 1913, Inclusive
J
/ '

3 o o o ooo

/

r
H o o

»'

/

/
/

/
/

/

y

/

OOO

4

J

/

/

/

y

l o o o ooo
.,1

' X

/
(r

r'
1 S GO OOO

/

.

1 ooo ooo

soo

ooo

YIAJ* 1904

1903

1904

1907

i9oa

(909

LEGEND
CLEVELAND

.ii.I

CINCINNATI

. •
»

I9IO

11
91

1912

isu




C H A R T IV
Manufactures Statistics
F r o m U. S. C e n s u s 1910
>OQ OOP OOP

1
1

y

zoooooooo

f

-

—
^—

-

too 000 ooo

t

1

I

i

I

i

i

YtARJ

LEGEND
C PT L I VSE
A I A N E TD
CLEVELAND
VALUE Of PRODUCTS

CINCINNATI

CAPITAL INVESTED
VALUE Of PSOOUCTS

PITTSBURGH

CAPITAL INVESTED

?

1

s

1

1




CHART V
A n n u a l Exchanges of the C l e a r i n g Houses of
Cleveland, C i n c i n n a t i a n d P i t t s b u r g h
F o r Period of T e n Years E a c h E n d i n g September 30th
F r o m R e p o r t s of the C o m p t r o l l e r of t h e C u r r e n c y )

/

\

/

f"

>
1

\
\

1 0 0 0 oco
5 0 0

\

/

!

r'

\\

I
/

/
V

/

/

\

v

/

V

OOWO
jD O O C
l

V

1
1

|
—

\

j

""1

x,

r

|

YEAR 1 0
93

ISO*

1905

i»o»

i«oe

1907

LtQEND
CE EA D
LVL N
CINCINNATI

PT - B R rl
I TS U Ot

1909

1910

11
91

I9IZ

1 1
9 3




C H A R T VI
Deposits i n a l l B a n k s — C l e v e l a n d , C i n c i n n a t i a n d P i t t s b u r g h

Cleveland

Cleveland

Cleveland

LEGEND
CLEVELAND

NATIONAL

CINCINNATI

STATE

PITTSBURGH

-




C H A R T VII
Deposits i n all Banks i n the five
largest cities of Ohio

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