View original document

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

FEDBRAU RESERVE BANKj

O

RICHMOND

M

£

U

t

April 1956

BUSINESS BORROWERS AT FIFTH DISTRICT MEMBER BANKS
LOANS OUTSTANDING OCTOBER 5,1955

j here begins on page 3 the first of a series of
■ reports describing the characteristics of busi­
*ness loans and borrowers at District member banks.
The reports are based on a survey of business
loans outstanding on October 5, 1955, the District
survey being part of a nation-wide survey conduc­
ted by the Federal Reserve System. This first
article presents the survey findings as to differ­
ences among the various size-groups of banks and
among the types of borrowers.




Also In This I s s u e

-----------

A Fair Share for Small Business ______ Page

6

What W ill Farmers Plant in ’ 5 6 ? ______ Page

8

Business Conditions and Prospects ____ Page 10
Fifth District Statistical Data __________ Page 11

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

F ifth

D ist r ic t

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARDS

1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

30
0
20
5
20
0
1
5
0
10
0
5
0
0

T r en d s
BITUMINOUS COAL PRODUCTION

1
5
0
1
2
0
9
0
6
0
3
0
0

1956

120

(Average Daily)

1949

1948

CIGARETTE PRODUCTION

120

A

A X KfAk
A
V i

yfV
|

8
0
6
0

A K
r

A

s/

(Sea sonoliy Adjusted)
(I9< 7-1949* 1
C
>0), ..........

0
1948

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1953

1954

1955

0
1956

10
4
10
2
10
0
8
0
6
0
0

higher

on a seasonally adjusted basis than in December and 8 % higher
than in January 1955. February figures in V irgin ia are up 6 %
from a year ago according to the Richmond Chamber of Commerce.

1949

1950

1951

195?

1953

1954

1955

1956

Departm ent store sales, seasonally adjusted, dropped 7 % from
January to February to a level 6 % ahead of a year ago. The first
two m onths’ sales were up 5 % from last year. Inventories rose 1 %
on an adjusted basis in February and were 1 1 % higher than a
year ago.

10
5
15
2
1 vA
0
0
7
5
0

RETAIL FURNITURE STORES NET SALES

10
5
15
2

1
1
r
V vk V A

A( V %
I V
/
V

yv y ¥

A
100

(Sea sonally Adjusted)
(19 47-1949*1

DO)

7
5
j

1

1948

1956

Cigarette output in the D istrict during January was 8 %




1952

DEPARTMENT STORE SALES

Contract awards for commercial construction on a seasonally ad­
justed basis declined 9 % from January to February leaving Feb­
ruary 2 7 % under a year ago and the first two months down 29% ,

100

1950

Average daily output of bituminous coal in the F ifth District,
sparked by inclement weather and a strong export demand, rose
2 % in February over January. February output was 2 3 % higher
than a year ago, and the first two months was up 2 3 % .

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARDS

10
4

9
0
6
0
3
0

(1947-1949* 100)

1948

Total construction contract awards in February were 4 % smaller
than in January after seasonal adjustment, 2 8 % under a year ago,
with the first two tnonths down 2 5 % . The chief cause was a sharp
drop in commercial and factory awards.

10
5

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

February sales of retail furniture stores dropped 7 % on an ad­
justed basis from January but were still 5 % higher than a year
ago, and the first tw o months were up 8 % . February inventories
rose 1 % and were 1 6 % higher than last year.

* 2 J
{
*

ffa / iz tL i

April 1956

Loan Survey Results . . .

Business Loans at Fifth District Member Banks
cating very clearly that the very large loans are pre­
dominantly with the very large banks. This is due in
some measure, of course, to the legal limitation on the
amount of credit a bank is permitted to extend to a
single borrower, this limitation being related to the
bank’s capital and surplus.

7 3 o u g h l y 40% of total loans on the books of Fifth
-L*- District member banks are loans for business pur­
poses. The sum of these loans outstanding at District
member banks is estimated to have been $1,187.4 mil­
lion on October 5, 1955. It is further estimated that
this sum was made up of 77,898 separate loans.
The vital importance of bank lending in the level, and
changes in the level, of economic activity is well rec­
ognized. Not only are banks by far the largest single
category of lender, but they also deal in new money—
new purchasing power. The granting of loans by banks
generally involves an increase in the total amount of
money available for current spending and, since bor­
rowers borrow to spend, a higher level of total spend­
ing than if such credit had not been demanded or made
available. Because of this significant role of bank credit
in the economy, the over-all totals of bank lending are
watched very closely as they become available.

TABLE 1
B U S IN E S S L O A N S OF M E M B E R B A N K S
Fifth Federal Reserve District
Estimated— October 5, 1955
Bank Size
Amount
Number
Outstanding
of Loans
(Total deposits
No.
in millions of
of
Thousands
% of
% of
Bks.
dollars)
of dollars
total
Number
total
Over 250
3
230,871
19.5
6,933
8.9
100-250
11
374,267
31.5
11,086
14.2
50-100
13
164,992
13.9
8,443
10.8
20-50
38
183,229
15.4
16,940
21.7
10-20
50
106,743
9.0
10,176
13.1
2-10
265
119,056
10.0
21,930
28.2
94
8,242
Less than 2
0.7
2,390
3.1
Total

Although total loan figures are important indicators
of economic developments, the components that make
up the totals may be even more significant by pointing
to particular segments of the economy. The availability
of bank credit to individual segments of the business
world, the terms upon which it is available, the pattern
of interest rates charged, the type of business firm to
which these apply, and numerous other loan character­
istics are essential to any adequate analysis of bank
lending and its effect upon the nation’s economy.

1,187,400

100.0

77,898

100.0

The 94 smallest banks, those with total deposits of
less than $2 million, held less than 1% of the dollar
amount of business loans at District member banks, but
held 3% of the number of loans. Perhaps a more
interesting comparison is with banks having total de­
posits under $10 million. Seventy-six percent of all
District member banks are in this category; and this
76% held only 11% of the dollar amount of business
loans and 31% of the total number of such loans.
A further breakdown by the business of the borrower
of loans held by each size group of member banks is
given in Table 2.
Retail merchants provided the single largest outlet
for business lending on the survey date by the banks
in every size group, but were a considerably more im­
portant category of borrower for the small banks than
for the large ones. The relatively larger borrowings
for the financing of retail trade in the Fall of 1955 may
well have been a seasonal phenomenon which did not
affect the other classes of business borrowers to the
same degree at that time.
District member banks’ loans to manufacturing and
mining firms are largely concentrated in the larger
banks. The 14 banks with deposits in excess of $100
million held 56% of the total of these loans on O cto­
ber 5, 1955. The 359 member banks with deposits
under $10 million held less than 10% of the total. The
distribution among banks of this type of borrowing is
related in some measure to the geographic location of
firms in the industry as well as to the average size of
firm doing this sort of business. The smaller banks
are generally not located near a concentration of manu­
facturing or mining firms nor are they able to fully
meet the needs of large manufacturers.

In order to obtain detailed and current information
with regard to the characteristics of bank lending to
business, this bank, with the cooperation of 101 Fifth
District member banks, made a survey of commercial
and industrial loans outstanding as of October 5, 1955.
This was part of a nation-wide survey conducted by the
Federal Reserve System. Some of the basic findings
of the District survey are presented in this article.
Future articles will deal with the more detailed char­
acteristics of business lending by District member banks
as revealed by the survey. The presentation is neces­
sarily a statistical one and the information will be made
available primarily in the form of statistical tables.
However, the more significant aspects of each table
will be commented on briefly in the articles.
Some Differences Among Banks
The distribution of business loans among banks of
various sizes is shown in Table 1.
There are 14 member banks in the District with total
deposits of $100 million or more. These 14 banks held
just over half the total dollar amount of business loans
at all District member banks on October 5, 1955. In
contrast to the dollar amount held, the 14 banks held
less than one-fourth the total number of loans— indi­



474

* 3
{

y

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

TABLE 2
T H E PA T TE R N OF B U S IN E S S L E N D IN G BY S IZ E OF B A N K
Fifth District Member Banks
Estimated— October 5, 1955
Bank Size (Total deposits in millions of dollars)
Business of Borrower

Less than 2

2 - 10

10 - 20

20 - 50

50 - 100

100 - 250

Over 250

(Amount outstanding— thousands of dollars)
119,056
106,743
183,229
164,992
374,267
32,494
20,839
31,366
34,705
82,646
2,192
8,051
6,606
23,322
6,303
2,253
8,268
4,838
8,718
24,422
2,162
3,790
5,818
5,956
8,533
3,220
941
1,956
3,731
9,409
11,012
14,874
8,718
9,997
16,960

230,871
73,888
13,200
34,031
11,838
266
14,553

All Businesses ___________________________________________________
Manufacturing and mining ---------------------------------------------------------Food, liquor, and tobacco ----------- -------------------------- --------------Textiles, apparel, and leather ------------------------------------------------Metal and metal products ---------------- --------- ------------------------Petroleum, coal, chemicals, and rubber __________________ _
_
All other manufacturing and mining ----------------------- ------------

8,242
2,279
818
13
200
327
921

Trade ________________________ _________ ____ _____________ — - Wholesale _______ ___________ ______ - _ ................ ...................
Retail
_________ __________ ___________ _
______ ____

2,408
274
2,134

54,213
9,753
44,460

36,947
15,385
21,562

52,922
16,340
36,582

44,381
17,220
27,161

87,364
30,130
57,234

47,197
11,859
35,338

Other --------------------------------------------------- -------- - ------------------ -------Commodity dealers .. ------ -------- ------- ------- .... -------- .
Sales finance companies ... ----------- _
------ _ .....................
Transportation, communication, and other public utilities__
Construction — -------------------------------- -------------------------- -------Real estate __ - - --------------- ------- - - -----------------—
Service firms ----------------------------- ------ - ----— -------- _
All other nonfinancial ... — .. . --------------- - _

3,555
236
0
266
398
484
1,258
913

44,004
2,953
3,661
2,730
7,916
6,228
14,020
6,496

37,302
707
3,611
5,664
6,828
8,073
7,655
4,764

98,941
7,551
19,003
5,630
15,649
21,716
20,048
9,344

85,906
1,640
13,040
7,771
11,621
25,629
15,522
10,683

204,257
23,377
38,307
31,011
28,065
56,057
15,553
11,887

109,786
8,947
27,502
18,591
18,657
21,184
7,093
7,812

Bank Size (Total deposits in millions of dollars)
Business of Borrower

Less than 2

2 - 1.0

10 - 20

20 - 50

50 - 100

100 - 250

Over 250

(Percentage of total in each bank size group)
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
22.1
17.1
21.0
30.4
17.5
3.8
6.2
3.6
1.8
7.5
6.5
5.3
4.5
1.9
4.5
2.3
3.2
3.6
3.6
1.8
2.3
2.5
1.1
2.7
0.9
4.6
6.0
9.3
13.9
4.7

100.0
32.0
5.7
14.8
5.1
0.1
6.3

All Businesses -----------------------------------------------------------------------------Manufacturing and mining ---------------------------------------------------------Food, liquor, and tobacco ---------------------------------------------------------Textiles, apparel, and leather ------------------------------------------------Metal and metal products -------------------------------------------------------Petroleum, coal, chemicals, and rubber ______________________
All other manufacturing and mining -------------------------------------

100.0
27.7
9.9
0.2
2.4
4.0
11.2

Wholesale ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Retail __________________________________ - .............. ............ — -----

3.3
25.9

45.5
8.2
37.3

34.6
14.4
20.2

28.9
8.9
20.0

26.9
10.4
16.5

23.3
8.0
15.3

20.4
5.1
15.3

Other -------------------------- ----- -------------------------------------------------------------Commodity dealers ------- . -------------------------------------------------------Sales finance companies --------------------- — -------------------------------Transportation, communication, and other public utilities —
Construction ---------------------------------- - ---------- - ----------------------- --------Real estate ---------------------- ------------- - -------------- - Service firms ----------------------------- ------— ............ - ---------------All other nonfinancial _
—_ .
-

43.1
2.9
0.0
3.2
4.8
5.9
15.2
11.1

37.0
2.5
3.1
2.3
6.6
5.2
11.8
5.5

35.0
0.6
3.4
5.3
6.4
7.6
7.2
4.5

54.0
4.1
10.4
3.1
8.5
11.9
10.9
5.1

52.1
1.0
7.9
4.7
7.1
15.5
9.4
6.5

54.6
6.2
10.2
8.3
7.5
15.0
4.2
3.2

47.6
3.9
11.9
8.0
8.1
9.2
3.1
3.4

2% of their total business loans in the textile, apparel,
and leather group, and the dollar amount outstanding
for this class of borrower at these banks accounted for
less than 4 % of total bank indebtedness of these manu­
facturers.

Within the manufacturing and mining group of bor­
rowers, textile, apparel, and leather processors had 70%
of their bank loans on the survey date with banks hav­
ing deposits over $100 million. The largest banks,
those with deposits of over $250 million, had 15% of
all their business loans in this borrower class. The
small banks, deposits under $10 million, had less than

Sales finance companies, too, according to the survey
results, tend to place their loans with the larger banks.
District member banks with deposits over $20 million
(65 banks) put approximately 10% of their funds for
business purposes into loans to sales finance companies.
The banks with total deposits under $2 million had no
loans of this sort at all on the survey date.

TABLE 3
A V E R A G E IN T E R E S T RATES BY L O A N M A T U R IT Y AN D
FORM OF B U SIN E SS O R G A N IZ A T IO N
Fifth District Member Banks
Estimated— October 5, 1955

Table 3 indicates very clearly that lower interest
rates are charged, on the average, by the larger banks,
and that incorporated business borrowers are granted
lower rates than unincorporated businesses. The aver­
age interest rate on loans maturing within one year is
in nearly all cases lower than the rate on loans with
longer maturity for the same form of business organiza­
tion. However, the long-term rate for incorporated
business borrowers is frequently lower than the short­
term rate for the unincorporated businesses.

Average Interest Rate
Bank Size
(Total deposits
in millions of
dollars )

Short-term
(one year or less)

Incorpo­
rated

Unincorpo­
rated

4.43

3.98

4.30

4.31

4.15
4.91

4.22
4.16

4.76
4.74

4.48

4.25
5.24

5.11
5.65

6.86

5.39

5.52

5.08

Incorporated

Unincorpo­
rated

Over 250

3.85

100-250
50-100
20-50

3.99

10-20
2-10
Less than 2

Long-term
(over one year)




5.31
4.93

4.87
5.85
5.23
7.28
6.09

i 4 y

April 1956

of all business loans. Over one-third of the number
of business loans were made to these retail merchants.
A s shown in Table 4, real estate loans were second
largest in dollar amount. These loans made up 12%
of the dollar total, but the number of individual loans
involved amounted to only 7% of the total number of
business loans. Sales finance companies and wholesale
merchants were the next two largest business borrowers.
Sales finance companies, on the average, have larger
loans per firm than any of the other types of business
borrowers. Total loans of these companies accounted

TABLE 4
B U SIN E SS L O A N S BY T Y P E OF B U SIN E SS
Fifth District Member Banks
Estimated— October 5, 1955
Amount
Outstanding
Thousands % of
of dollars
total

Business of Borrower

All Businesses __________________ 1,187,400
Manufacturing and mining _
278,217
Food, liquor, and tobacco ___
60,492
Textiles, apparel, and leather
82,543
Metal and metal products . 38,297
Petroleum, coal, chemicals,
and rubber _________ ______
19,850
All other manufacturing and
mining ___ ___ ______ _ ...
77,035
325,433
Trade ___________________________
Wholesale _ __________________
100,962
Retail ________________ _______
224,471
Other ___________________________
583,750
45,411
Commodity dealers ___________
105,124
Sales finance companies ___
Transportation, communication
and other public utilities __
71,663
89,134
Construction _________ ___ ..
139,371
Real estate _ . _____________
81,149
Service firms „ ..............
51,898
All other nonfinancial .

Number
of Loans
Number

100.0
23.5
5.1
7.0
3.2

% of

total

77,898
11,233
1,991
1,384
1,918

100.0
14.4
2.6
1.8
2.4

1.7

1,662

2.1

6.5
27.4
8.5
18.9
49.1
3.8
8.9

4,278
34,159
5,448
28,711
32,506
511
727

5.5
43.9
7.0
36.9
41.7
0.7
0.9

6.0
7.5
11.7
6.8
4.4

2,588
5,298
5,324
11,687
6,371

3.3
6.8
6.8
15.0
8.2

TABLE 6
B U S IN E SS L O A N S BY M A T U R IT Y
Fifth District Member Banks
Estimated— October 5, 1955
Amount Outstanding
(Thousands of
dollars)
Business of Bor­
rower

Some Differences Among Business Borrowers

Manufacturing and
mining ____ _ _ ..
_ _
Food, liquor, and
tobacco __ ___
Textiles, apparel,
and leather ___
Metal and metal
products — __ ~
Petroleum, coal,
chemicals, and
rubber ________
All other manu­
facturing and
mining
. _ _ ..

TABLE 5
B U SIN E SS L O A N S B Y FO R M OF B U SIN E SS
O R G A N IZ A T IO N
Fifth District Member Banks
Estimated— October 5, 1955
Amount Outstanding
(Thousands of
dollars)
Business of Borrower
All Businesses ---------Manufacturing and
mining . --------Food, liquor, and
tobacco . ..............
Textiles, apparel,
and leather _ ___
Metal and metal
products — . ____
Petroleum, coal,
chemicals, and
rubber __________
All other manu­
facturing and
mining
- _ ____
Trade . . ___
_____
Wholesale
__ ____
Retail _____________
O th er___________ ____ _
Commodity dealers
Sales finance com­
panies ----- -------Transportation,
communication,
and other pub­
lic utilities _____
Construction ______
Real estate _______
Service firms
_ _
All other nonfi­
nancial ■ ...........

Incorpo­
rated

Unincorporated
359,587

69.7

50,867

81.7

18.3

50,281

10,211

83.1

16.9

78,366

4,177

94.9

5.1

31,819

6,477

83.1

16.9

10,725

9,125

54.0

20,877

72.9

27.1

196,408
72,299
124,109
404,055
30,897

129,025
28,663
100,362
179,695
14,514

60.4
71.6
55.3
69.2
68.0

39.6
28.4
44.7
30.8
32.0

102,474

2,649

97.5

2.5

60,627
54,165
93,311
37,267

11,037
34,969
46,060
43,881

84.6
60.8
67.0
45.9

15.4
39.2
33.0
54.1

25,314

26,585

48.8

270,890

77.2

22.8

224,321

53,895

80.6

19.4

52,965

7,527

87.6

12.4

68,316

14,227

82.8

17.2

30,321

7,975

79.2

20.8

16,749

3,101

84.4

15.6

51.2

55,970

21,065

72.7

27.3

256,912
86,962
169,950

68,522
14,000
54,522

78.9
86.1
75.7

21.1
13.9
24.3

435,277
44,262

148,473
1,148

74.6
97.5

25.4
2.5

103,311

1,813

98.3

1.7

31,798
76,477

39,865
12,657

44.4
85.8

55.6
14.2

94,718
49,661

44,653
31,488

68.0
61.2

32.0
38.8

35,051

16,849

67.5

32.5

46.0

56,159

916,510

Real estate _____ ..
Service firms ___ ..
All other nonfi­
nancial ..............

30.3

227,350

Long-term
(over one
year)

Other _____________ ..
Commodity dealers
Sales finance com
panies . „
... ..
Transportation,
communication,
and other pub­
lic utilities ___ ..
Construction _ __ „
_

Unincorpo­
rated

827,813

Short-term
(one year
or less)

Trade _____________ ..
Wholesale __ __ ..
Retail ___________ ..

Per cent of
Industry Total
Incorpo­
rated

Long-term
(over one
year)

Short-term
(one year
or less)

All Businesses ____ .

Loans for the financing of retail trade accounted for
the largest dollar amount outstanding for any single
classification of business borrower at District member
banks on the survey date— 19% of the estimated total

Per cent of
Industry Total




for nearly 9% of all business loans of the member banks,
but the number of loans involved was less than 1% of
the total. The average size of each loan to sales finance
companies was just under $145,000.
Reference to Table 5 shows that over two-thirds of
business loans by District member banks were to in­
corporated firms. Over four-fifths of the manufactur­
ing and mining loans were to incorporated firms, with
95%; of producers of metal and metal products being of
this form of business organization. Retail merchants,
the heaviest borrowers, were incorporated in only 55%
(Continued on page 7)

i

5

y

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

A Fair Share for Small Business
small business firms in Huntington, W est
-L Virginia, have pooled their facilities, under G ov­
ernment sponsorship, for bidding and negotiating for
defense contracts.”
< < r T y w e lv e

This recent newspaper report went on to point out
that the pooling arrangement had been effected with
the assistance of the Small Business Administration
and was a device designed to give a fair share of de­
fense contracts to small firms that would otherwise be
excluded because of their limited production facilities.

“ It is the declared policy of the Congress that
the Government should aid, counsel, assist, and
protect insofar as is possible the interests of smallbusiness concerns in order to preserve free com­
petitive enterprise, to insure that a fair proportion
of the total purchases and contracts for supplies
and services for the Government be placed with
small-business enterprises, and to maintain and
strengthen the overall economy of the nation.”
(Sec. 202, Small Business A ct)

Few economic subjects have received as much atten­
tion over such a long period of time as have the prob­
lems of small business. Since the founding days of
this nation, the virtues of small business and its vital
advantages to the economy have been universally pro­
claimed and accepted. Countless articles and speeches
have pointed out checks and obstacles to the mainte­
nance or improvement of its position in the business
structure of the nation. Equally countless have been
the prescriptions for its continued existence and growth.
Like the weather, however, it has been easier to talk
about small business than to do something about it.

Government Contracts
During the last five full fiscal years, small business
has obtained 19.1% of the net value of all Defense De­
partment prime contracts awarded in this country. The
annual proportion has varied considerably, from 16.2%
to 25.1% , depending on the volume of procurement and
the product-mix. A s explained by the Office of De­
fense Mobilization, “ The volume of procurement of
housekeeping items, most readily obtained from small
business, tends to be more constant than that of complex
weapons which are generally supplied by larger con­
cerns. Thus the small business percentage share tends
to be high in times of diminishing procurement and
lower in times of heavy procurement.”

Dual-Type Economy
In recent years it has been contended that the post­
war merger movement has continued the progressive
concentration of economic power. It has been argued
that the postwar economy was developing in such a way
that the position of small business was becoming more
and more vulnerable at the same time that its im­
portance to the American economic way of life was
becoming more and more pronounced.
After the Korean W ar it appeared likely that a high
level of defense expenditures had become a permanent
part of the Federal budget. It was obvious that de­
fense procurement, amounting to billions of dollars and
absorbing a relatively large share of the total output
of goods and services in the nation, had a marked im­
pact on the economy. One very important aspect of
this impact is its effect on small business. Obviously,
the cause of small business can be very significantly
advanced or hindered through the medium of defense
procurement.

This is indicative of the difficulty in determining in
any given year whether or not small business has re­
ceived a “ fair proportion” of the Government’s business.
Nevertheless, while what constitutes a fair share is a
moot point, there is general agreement that small busi­
ness is not getting as big a share as is desirable.
In carrying out its responsibility in this direction,
S B A ’s most potent tool is the joint determination pro­
gram. Under this program, representatives of this
agency together with military procurement officers
review proposed purchases (for $10,000 or m ore) and
determine what ones should be set aside for exclusive
award to small business. Such earmarked purchases are
then called to the attention of small firms capable of sup­
plying the items so that they may bid for the contract if
they so choose. These proposed purchases are also
listed in “ Synopsis of U. S. Government Proposed
Procurement, Sales and Contract Awards,” published
daily by the Department of Commerce.

There was nothing new about this, of course, but it
was pointed out again in the dissatisfaction of Congress
with the extent and nature of Federal assistance to
small business in an economy in which military procure­
ment is a major spending program. It was felt that a
new approach had to be made to the problem of giving
small business an opportunity to attain its maximum
development under such conditions.

The two accompanying tables provide a breakdown
by states and by industries of contract awards to small
business in the Fifth District in 1954 and 1955. These
awards resulted from joint determinations made by

One important result was the establishment in 1953
of the Small Business Administration. This is the first
peacetime independent Government agency created for



the sole purpose of assisting the small business enter­
prises of the nation. In charging the new agency with
its responsibility, Congress set forth clearly its policy
with respect to small business:

{ 6 y

April 1956

view purchases of the latter to the end of increasing
the share of such business going to small firms. The
General Services Administration is the principal buyer
of common-use items for the Federal Government.

SB A and the Department of Defense. The distribution
of awards reflects the different industrial structures of
the states, with the largest volume of orders being placed
in those states with industries able to supply items of
relatively great importance to the defense program.
This includes such industries as ordnance, electrical
equipment, and transportation equipment.

S B A —D EFENSE DEPARTM EN T CONTRACT AW AR D S
Fifth District— By Industry
% of
% of
Total
1954
Total
1955

A very important extension of the joint determina­
tion program was made in recent months when SB A
and the General Services Administration agreed to re-

Ordnance __________________ - $ 953,618
345,699
Electrical equipment _________
953,451
Textile products -------- _ ----- _
Transportation equipment ___ 1,933,318
475,949
Lumber and wood products __
432,786
Chemicals _____________________
1,098
Printing and Publishing -------559,601
Paper and products ............ —
775,382
Metal products ________________
50,000
Research and engineering ____
180,112
Food products ________________
689,515
Furniture and fixtures ______
72,167
Instruments ___________________
Construction ___________________
Stone, clay and glass ________

SBA— D E F E N S E D E P A R T M E N T C O N T R A C T A W A R D S
Fifth District— By State
% of
% of
1954
Total
1955
Total
Maryland _________________ _____ $2,599,884
District of Columbia ___ _____ 1,739,021
Virginia ___ ____________ _____ 2,038,592
West Virginia __________ _____
1,196
North Carolina _________ _____ 1,444,267
South Carolina __________ _____
50,924
Total, Fifth District ___ _____ $7,873,884
% of United States
-------5.9%

33.0 $ 6,115,992
22.1
1,781,862
25.9
2,100,346
.02
4,541,588
18.3
2,082,972
.7
57,055
100.0

$16,679,815
5.9%

36.7
10.7
12.6
27.2
12.5
.3

50,000
Other services ________________
401,188
Miscellaneous manufacturing _
Total ________________________ $7,873,884

100.0

Source: SBA Contract Awards Reports.
N. B. The above amounts are net of cancellations of awards made
during each period. These are not true totals since awards made
in six weeks of 1954 and in four weeks of 1955 were not available.

12.1 $ 4,783,469
4.4
2,469,911
1,850,662
12.1
1,562,474
24.6
6.0
1,029,998
5.5
465,611
.01
410,907
381,951
7.1
9.9
360,162
.6
346,633
236,683
2.3
95,084
8.8
.9
72,517
35,681
29,176
12,762
.6
27,870
2,508,264
5.1
100.0 $16,679,815

28.7
14.8
11.1
9.3
6.2
2.8
2.5
2.3
2.1
2.1
1.4
.6
.4
.2
.2
.1
.2
15.0
100.0

Source: SBA Contract Awards Reports.
N. B. The above amounts are net of cancellations of awards made
during each period. These are not true totals since awards made
in six weeks of 1954 and in four weeks of 1955 were not available.

Loan Survey Results . . .

Business Loans at Fifth District Member Banks
(Continued from page 5)

of the cases.
A V E R A G E IN T E R E S T R ATES B Y T Y P E OF B U SIN E SS
A N D M A T U R IT Y

banks in the District had maturities of one year or less
on October 5, 1955. Loans to commodity dealers and

Average Interest Rate
Short-term
(one year or less)

sales finance companies were almost entirely of this

Long-term
(over one year)

4.66

Food, liquor, and tobacco

4.49

5.38

Textiles, apparel, and leather

4.23

5.41

Metal and metal products ___

4.78

short-term category.

6.28

6.91

Manufacturing and mining ____

Petroleum, coal, chemicals and
rubber ____________________ All other manufacturing and
mining _ _ ______________ ____

Over four-fifths of all the loans

to manufacturing and mining firms and wholesale mer­
chants were also with maturities of one year or less.
The only group of borrowers having more than half
their loans with maturities in excess of one year were

4.86

7.46

4.91

6.13

Trade -----------------------------------------Wholesale _____________________
Retail _________________________

4.79
4.78
4.79

5.32
5.17
5.47

Other ___________________________
Commodity dealers ----------------Sales finance companies _____
Transportation, communication
and other public utilities —
Construction __________________
Real estate __________________
Service firms _________________
All other nonfinancial _______

4.62
4.15
4.25

5.51
4.98
6.50

4.95
5.06
4.65
4.84
4.38

6.20
6.47
4.49
5.26
4.90




of wholesale merchants

Just over 77% of all the business loans of member

Fifth District Member Banks
Estimated— O ctober 5, 1955

Business of Borrower

Nearly 72%

were incorporated.

TABLE 7

the transportation, communication, and other public
utilities group.
Short-term (one year or less) interest rates charged
all classes of business borrowers were lower than rates
on longer-term loans with one exception: the short­
term rate on business loans secured by real estate was
4.65% while the long-term rate was 4.49% , the lowest
of all the long-term rates.

Commodity dealers secured

the lowest average interest rate on their short-term
borrowing.
i 1 h

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

What Will Farmers Plant In ’56?
is the question.” It might well be the
$64,000 question. Actually, it wr the informa­
as
tion sought by the Department of Agriculture in their
recently released annual preplanting survey of prospec­
tive crop acreages. According to this report, Fifth
District farmers’ March 1 intentions point to a mod­
erate 2% acreage reduction from last year as against a
1% cut in the nation.

as last year. A s now revised, 1956 allotments for
these tobaccos are: Virginia fire-cured, 9,745 acres;
Virginia burley, 10,947 acres; W est Virginia burley,
2,844 acres; and North Carolina burley, 10,085 acres.

Growers in Maryland and Virginia will plant about
the same over-all acreage as in 1955, but with various
shifts in the acreage of particular crops. Combined
planted acreage will be down slightly in W est Virginia
and the Carolinas, w’ith South Carolina showing a cut
of some 6 % — largest of the District states.
Normally this report is of great importance to farm­

Flue-cured types are expected to total some 773,000
acres, 11% belowr the 869,000 acres harvested last year.
This is in response to a 12% cut in flue-cured allot­
ments.

<

<fT y h a t

For Maryland tobacco, the March 2 announcement
revised the 1956 allotment upward to 53,600 acres,
about the same as the acreage allotted for 1953— the
last year quotas were in effect for this type tobacco.

Cotton Plantings Down, Peanuts Up

ers, to buyers and traders of farm products, and to
bankers because it gives them some idea of what to
expect in the way of total production and cash farm
income. This year, however, many farmers doubtless
could not give very clear-cut answers concerning their
planting plans; so, changes from early prospects may
be greater than usual.
In addition to the weather— always an important
partner on every farm— farmers on March 1 of this
year didn’t know how new farm legislation being con­
sidered by Congress would affect them : Whether there
would be a soil bank plan and whether payments for
taking land out of production under such a plan would
persuade them to participate. They were in the dark
about the rates at which the Government would sup­
port 1956 crops of cotton, peanuts, corn, and wT
heat.
They didn’t know definitely that acreage allotments for
some tobacco types were to be increased; nor is it cer­
tain that Yirginia-Carolina peanut producers fully took
into account the allotment increase for Virginia-type
peanuts announced on February 21.

Prospective cotton acreage is not included in the
planting intentions report; however, cotton will be
grown under allotments again this year. On the basis
of 1956 allotments with an allowance for underplant­
ing equal to that in 1955, District cotton plantings this
year will total around 1,144,000 acres. For South
Carolina, the District’s largest cotton-growing state, it
will be the smallest acreage since 1871; for North
Carolina, the lowest since 1869.
The District’s 1956 acreage of peanuts grown alone
for all purposes will total around 337,000 acres, 16,000
acres or 5% above last year, if growers carry out their
planting plans as of March 1. In Virginia and North
Carolina— the important peanut-producing states— in­
creases of 6% and 4% respectively are indicated.
Because Virginia-type peanuts were found to be in
short supply, allotments for these types were increased
on February 21. This increase brought 1956 District
allotments to some 327,000 acres, 6 % above 1955’s
picked-and-threshed harvested acreage. Even so, if
planted acreages approximate those indicated in the in­
tentions report, substantial overplanting will result.

Tobacco Acreage W ill Be Lower

Feed-Crop Intentions Vary

District farmers’ reports as of March 1 indicated that
they intended to plant 853,000 acres of all types of
tobacco, a reduction of 11% from last year. Should
this tobacco acreage be harvested, it would be the
smallest since 1943.
On March 2, however, the President signed legisla­
tion providing restoration of the cuts in allotments
previously proclaimed for burley and fire-cured tobac­
cos. This same legislation also provided for a 15%
increase over the earlier announced allotments for
Maryland tobacco. There is no way of knowing, of
course, to what extent farmers took into account the
possibility of higher acreage allotments when they re­
ported their planting intentions. Since the revised
acreage allotments for most fire-cured and burley farms
are practically the same as in 1955, the acreage finally
planted to these types could be approximately the same

Compared with 1955, the survey shows that farmers
in this five-state area have planted 2% more W inter
wheat and barley and 10% less oats. They expect to
increase acreages of hay only slightly but presently plan
to cut corn acreage 5 % . The intended decrease in corn
plantings could well be tied in with the unprofitableness
of the hog enterprise during the past year and the con­
tinued downtrend in workstock numbers.
Sorghums and soybeans with planned increases of
11% and 12%, respectively, stand out this year as the
leaders in acreage expansion. The 22,000-acre jump
in District sorghum acreage results from indicated in­
creases in all producing states, with the sharpest ex­
pansion (2 5 % ) expected in South Carolina. For soy­
beans, sizable acreage increases are planned in all Dis­
trict states except W est Virginia.
Growers’- intention-to-plant reports throughout the




April 1956

Plans May Change

District indicate that both Irish and sweet potato plant­
ings will be reduced this year-—Irish potatoes by some
4% and sweet potatoes by 9% . There will be smaller
acreages of both types in all states except W est V ir­
ginia where acres planted to Irish potatoes will remain
the same as last year and where sweet potatoes are not
grown commercially. The relatively low prices re­
ceived for the 1955 crop are apparently responsible for
the intended reduction in sweet potato acreage.

Since much uncertainty— particularly with regard to
farm legislation being considered by Congress— pre­
vailed when producers reported their planting inten­
tions, District farmers this year may make greater than
usual changes in their March 1 plans. This could be
especially true if a new farm program is written into
law in time to be effective this season.

P R O S P E C T IV E P L A N T I N G S O F S P E C IF IE D C R O P S IN 1956

_____ Fifth District_____
Indicated
1956
1000 Acres

Crop
T obacco*
Flue-cured ______________
Va. F ire-curedf . . . __________
Burleyf ____________________
M arylandf ____________ ...
Va. Sun-cured _____________
Total T ob a cco _____________
Cotton:!: ______________________
Corn, All ____________________
Oats** ________________________
Barley** _____________________
Hay, All* ____________________
Peanuts*** ___________________
Soybeans*** __________________
Sorghums ___ _______________
Irish Potatoes** ______________
Sweet Potatoes _______________
W heat** _____________________
Total (12 Crops) ________

________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
______
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________
________

1956
as % of
1955
Per Cent

773.0
9.1
21.6
45.0
4.3
853.0
1,144
4,540
1,981
326
4,256
337
1,166
228
96.2
87.2
1,079
16,093.4

89
100
94
92
100
89
94
95
90
102
101
105
112
111
96
91
102
98

W est Virginia
Indicated
1956
1000 Acres

Crop

Flue-cured _________________
B u rleyf ____________________
Total T o b a c c o _____________
CottonJ _______________________
Corn, A l l ___
...___ ______
Oats** ________________________
Barley** _____________________
Hay, All* . .. __________________
Peanuts*** ___________________
Soybeans*** __________________
Sorghums ____________________
Irish Potatoes** ______________
Sweet Potatoes _______________
W heat** _____________________
Total (12 Crops) ________

________
________

1956
as % of
1955
Per Cent

2.5
2.5

95
95

________
________
________
________

184
76
16
811

98
87
107
99

________

6

86

________

13

100

________
________

41
1,149.5

85
97

f
J

_______ Maryland_______

_________ Virginia______

Indicated
1956

1956
as % of
1955

Indicated
1956

1956
as % of
1955

1000 Acres

Per Cent

1000 Acres

Per Cent

87.0
9.1
10.1
45.0

92

4.3
110.5
16
826
240
124
1,408
123
264
19
32.0
20
279
3,461.5

100
90
89
94
94
100
102
106
114
112
97
95
100
100

92

45.0

88
100
95

446
82
92
483

95
104
102
101

169

120

5.2
5.2
185
1,512.4

88
95
96
100

North Carolina

South Carolina

Indicated
1956

1956
as % of
1955

Indicated
1956

1956
as % of
1955

1000 Acres

Per Cent

1000 Acres

Per Cent

582.0
9.0
591.0
445
2,070
709
64
1,144
200
514
144
37
41
392
6,351.0

89
92
89
94
96
94
98
103
104
110
105
97
91
107
98

104.0

89

104.0
683
1,014
874
30
410
14
213
65
9
21
182
3,619.0

89
94
95
85
111
100
108
112
125
90
88
105
94

Allotments for these types were increased after March 1.
1956 cotton data are allotted acreages less an allowance for underplanting equal to that in 1955. Com­
parison is made with July 1, 1955 acreage in cultivation.
*
Acreage harvested.
**
Includes acreage planted in preceding Fall.
* * * Grown alone for all purposes.
Sources: U S D A , A M S : C ro p P rod u ction , December 1955 and March 1956; T he C otto n S itu a tion , November
1955.




O f

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

Business Conditions and Prospects
showed a counter-seasonal rise of 16% from January
to February. These awards were 38% higher than in
February 1955, and the two months were up 2 5% . All
other types of awards were either unchanged from Janu­
ary or showed reductions on .seasonally adjusted figures
ranging to as much as 65% in the case of awards for
factory buildings.

the high level plateau of business over the past
several months be described as backing and filling,
it could be said that February was backing. On a sea­
sonally adjusted basis, the January-February change
shows the trade level down, manufacturing production
perceptibly easier, construction down, and mineral out­
put up. Total assets of member banks declined during
the month and borrowings rose. Bank debits, after
seasonal correction, were lower in February than in
January. Savings in banks and savings and loan in­
stitutions improved moderately during the month while
savings bank sales widened gains over a year ago.
Unemployment declined further during the month to
March 10. Nonagricultural employment level showed
no change between January and February, with a drop
of 0.3% in manufacturing employment being offset by
a rise of 0.2% in nonmanufacturing employment.

/

f

February construction contract awards were below
a year ago in every category except public works and
utilities. Declines ranged from 26% in one- and twofamily houses to 62% for apartments and hotels.
Bituminous Coal
Average daily output of bituminous coal during Feb­
ruary in the District was 2% higher than in January
and 23% higher than a year a g o ; the first two months of
the year were up 23% . Employment in the mines of
Virginia was 22.6% higher in February than a year ago.
W est Virginia showed an increase of 7 .6 % ; and while
of relatively little significance in the employment pic­
ture, employment in the mines of North Carolina was
2.6% higher than a year ago and in South Carolina up
18.3%. The January-February rise in mining employ­
ment was larger than customary at this season of the
year in all states except South Carolina.

Trade
The trade level in the District weakened during Feb­
ruary with available trade indicators showing decreases
from January. Department store sales, seasonally ad­
justed, declined 7% in February from January. They
remained 6% ahead of February 1955, and the first two
months’ total was 5% higher than a year ago.
Sales of retail furniture stores, seasonally adjusted,
dropped 7% from January to February; but February
held 5% higher than a year ago, and the first two
months’ sales were up 8 % . Sales of household ap­
pliance stores dropped 4% from January to February
to a level 2 % lower than February a year ago. The
first two months, however, show an increase of 3%
over last year.
New passenger automobile registrations for three Dis­
trict states and the District of Columbia show an in­
crease of 3% from January to February. February
registrations were 1% ahead of a year ago, and the two
months’ figures were up 8 % . New commercial car
registrations in these states for February were 8%
higher than January, 24% higher than a year ago, with
two months up 27% .

Manufacturing
February man-hours in the manufacturing industries
in all states of the District except Maryland dropped
0.1% from January, but remained 4.4% ahead of Feb­
ruary 1955. Man-hours in the durable goods indus­
tries were up 1.2% during the month and 7.5% during
the year. Nondurable goods industries showed a de­
crease of 0.6% in man-hours during the month, but an
increase of 2.8% during the year.
The individual durable goods industries all showed
increases from January to February ranging from 0.4%
in the case of machinery (excluding electrical) to 2.5%
in stone, clay, and glass industries. Decreases in the
nondurable goods industries were largely seasonal in
the food and tobacco industries; but the yarn and
thread mills showed a counter-seasonal decline in North
Carolina, and the paper industries of North and South
Carolina both operated at lower rates during February
than January. W hile the chemical industries of V ir­
ginia and W est Virginia showed increases, those of
North Carolina and South Carolina showed decreases.

Construction
Total construction contract awards in the District
during February were 4 % smaller than January after
seasonal correction, and 28% smaller than a year ago.
In the first two months of the year, total contract
awards were down 25% . Residential contract awards,
which normally show a rather sharp drop from January
to February, rose a little better than 4 % this year to
raise the seasonally adjusted index for February 18%
higher than January. February awards were 29%
smaller than a year ago, and the first two months of the
year were down 40% .

Consumption of cotton in Fifth District mills dropped
1% after seasonal correction from January to February,
but held 8% higher than a year ago. January cigarette
production in the District was 8 % higher than in
December on an adjusted basis and 8% higher than a
year ago. February output in Virginia, according to
the Richmond Chamber of Commerce, was 2.8% under
January, but 6.4% over February 1955.

Awards for public works and utilities construction



i

10

y

f/ o

n M

April 1956

fy

Banking
Total assets of member banks of the Fifth District
dropped $41 million during February, but were $119
million ahead of a year ago. Loans and investments
were down $33 million during the month, but up $178
million over a year ago. Loans rose $6 million during
February and were $344 million higher than a year
ago. Holdings of U. S. Government obligations de­
clined $35 million during February and were down
$183 million from a year ago. Other security hold­
ings dropped $4 million, but were $17 million higher
than last year.
Total deposits dropped $95 million during February,
but borrowings rose $41 million, capital accounts rose
$6 million, and other liabilities were up $6 million.
Time deposits rose $11 million during February com ­
pared with a rise of $12 million in January and stood
at a level $40 million higher than a year ago.
Commercial, industrial, and agricultural loans of the

F if t h
D E B IT S TO D E M A N D
(000
Feb.
1956
Dist. of Columbia
Washington ______ $1,412,465
Maryland
Baltimore _________ 1,555,461
Cumberland ______
23,209
F red erick _________
22,307
H agerstow n______
43,603
Salisbury** ______
32,884
Total 4 C ities___ 1,644,580
North Carolina
Asheville _________
69,161
420,223
Charlotte__________
Durham __________
82,074
Greensboro _______
147,384
High Point** ____
54,425
Kinston ___________
21,120
Raleigh ___________
201,311
Wilmington ______
48,257
Wilson ____________
20,037
Winston-Salem ___
183,312
Total 9 C ities___ 1,192,879
South Carolina
Charleston ________
86,203
C o lu m b ia _________
186,097
Greenville_________
139,642
Spartanburg _____
66,493
Total 4 C ities___
478,435
Virginia
Charlottesville ____
34,461
Danville ___________
42,131
Lynchburg ________
56,073
Newport News ___
59,333
Norfolk ___________
286,919
Portsmouth ______
36,883
Richmond _________
640,687
Roanoke __________
138,590
Total 8 C ities___ 1,295,077
West Virginia
Bluefield __________
51,552
Charleston ________
168,139
Clarksburg________
36,255
Huntington ______
76,653
Parkersburg______
31,205
Total 5 Cities ___
363,804
District T o t a ls _____ $6,387,240

D ist r ic t

Agriculture
Cash income from farm marketings in Fifth District
states ran 4 % under a year ago in January to mark the
third consecutive month of decrease from corresponding
months a year earlier. The January decrease in the
total was caused by an 11% drop in crop income. In­
come from livestock and products held at last years
level during the month for the first year to year de­
crease since July 1955.
Cash income in W est Virginia and South Carolina
was higher in January than a year ago by 2% and 5%
respectively, but these gains were more than offset by
a 12% loss in Virginia and a 7% drop in Maryland.

B a n k in g

$1,199,564

3,287,011
50,389
46,459
88,930
67,806
3,472,789

2,927,148
44,209
41,773
77,614
59,608
3,090,744

60,937
375,996
73,119
141,486
46,656
20,691
193,809
47,148
19,941
160,046
1,093,173

142,400
901,245
170,831
310,628
108,971
45,459
461,624
101,719
43,461
375,633
2,553,000

131,659
782,282
154,402
286,758
94,316
46,165
390,453
98,103
42,267
321,432
2,253,521

74,503
155,999
111,622
60,267
402,391

181,139
391,818
284,248
141,842
999,047

32,807
36,617
48,540
50,567
252,415
33,211
597,533
116,878
1,168,568

73,995
90,426
121,432
120,569
596,433
74,374
1,370,716
292,467
2,740,412

39,889
149,464
29,034
63,378
25,891
307,656
$5,674,840

(000 omitted)

Items

$ 2,983,494 $ 2,522,945

1,423,627
21,540
20,468
37,853
28,786
1,503,488

156,523
323,699
244,586
130,722
855,530
68,240
78,541
100,822
100,626
529,658
68,650
1,245,715
239,094
2,431,346

114,845
83,577
367,642
351,620
82,928
69,900
153,599
143,530
73,080
58,102
792,094
706,729
$13,540,836 $11,860,815

S ta tistic s

W E E K L Y R E P O R T IN G M E M B E R B A N K S

D E P O S IT A C C O U N T S*
omitted)
Feb.
2 Months
2 Months
1955
1956
1955

1956
Mar. 14,

Changes in Amount from
1956
1955
Mar. 16,
Feb. 15,

Total Loans . .

_ _____________ $1,776,814**
Bus. & Agric........................
803,822
Real Estate Loans ....... ........
330,575
All Other Loans . ................
667,768

+
+
+
+

32,020
21,561
697
9,969

1,443
8,005
+
7,321
+
— 17,872
—
306
1,409
+
8,240
+
— 7,050

i

+201,690
83,883

+
+
+

22,389
98,717

Total Security Holdings _ . __ 1,684,077
U. S. Treasury Bills ........
85,594
29,742
U. S. Treasury Certificates__
U. S. Treasury Notes ______
298,563
U. S. Treasury Bonds ____
992,947
Other Bonds, Stocks & Secur.
277,231
Cash Items in Process of Col. ..
359,019
Due from Banks __________ .
175,619*
Currency and Coin ......................
79,998
Reserve with F. R. B a n k s ____
522,018
Other Assets _ .. .........................
71,707
Total Assets .............
$4,669,252

+
+
+
+

Total Demand Deposits
$3,511,152
Deposits of Individuals _____ 2,683,671
Deposits of U. S. Government
70,854
Deposits of State & Local Gov
220,302
Deposits of Banks __________
475,096
Certified & Officers’ Checks__
61,229*

+ 46,068
+ 47,313
— 14,287
+ 16,724
— 6,167
2,485
+

+
+

Total Time D eposits___________
Deposits of Individuals _____
Other Time Deposits ...........

751,298
678,407
72,891

+
+
+

11,613
8,482
3,131

+
+
-

869
5,862
4,993

Liabilities for Borrowed Money
26,500
All Other Liabilities . _
53,635
Capital Accounts ______________
326,667
Total Liabilities __
$4,669,252

—

7,000
3,941
2,153
56,775

+
+
+
+

7,500
11,191
22,608
67,508

—

+
+
+

3,579
20,294
1,135
56,775

* Net figures, reciprocal balances being eliminated.
** Less losses for bad debts.

* Interbank and U. S. Government accounts excluded.
** Not included in District Totals.




weekly reporting banks, after declining seasonally dur­
ing January and February, rose to a new high level in
the third week of March. A similar performance was
given in the “ other” loans, which are largely consumer
loans, while real estate loans have shown little change
since January.

11 V

— 147,032
—
901
—
19,947
—
75,918
— 45,588
—
4,678
+ 18,239
+
+
—

+
+

4,177
4,880
19,600
5,154
67,508

25,340
65,569
—
33,566
— 9,004
5,721
+
3,380
-

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

F if t h

D is t r ic t

s t a t is t ic a l

F U R N IT U R E SA L E S*
(Based on Dollar Value)
Percentage change with correspond­
ing period a year ago
STATES
February 1956 2 Mos. 1956
Maryland __________________________
+ 12
+ 6
Dist. of Columbia __ . ____________
0
— 1
V ir g in ia ___________________________
0
+ 2
West Virginia
+14
+ 19
North Carolina . .
+ 16
+ 13
South Carolina ___
.... ... __
— 1
+ 5
D istrict............

........ .........

+

6

+

5

IN D IV ID U AL CITIES
Baltimore, Md. ___ _ ____ _____
_
Washington, D. C . ______________ _
Richmond, Va. ___ ... __________
Charleston, W . Va.
..................
Greenville, S. C. ..........................

+ 12
+ 6
0
— 1
— 5
— 6
+ 9
+ 11
0
+ 13
* Data from furniture departments of department stores as well as
furniture stores.

W H O LE SA LE TRADE
Sales in
Feb. 1956
compared with
Jan.
Feb.
1955
1956
— 1
+ 2

LINES
Auto supplies _______________
Electrical, electronic and ap­
pliance goods
...................
Hardware, plumbing and
heating goods _____ . . .
Machinery equipment sup­
plies .
. __
. ....
Drugs, chemicals, allied
products ___ . „ .
. „
.......
.....
Dry goods
Grocery, confectionery,
meats _ ....................
Paper and its products
Tobacco products ... _ ___
Miscellaneous______________
District T o ta l____ ________

Stocks on
Feb. 29, 1956
compared with
Feb. 28,
Jan. 31,
1955
1956
— 3
+ 3

— 5

+15

NA

NA

+ 11

— 6

NA

NA

+ 34

+15

+ 14

+

+ 9
— 3

— 6
+ 8

+ 2
—21

— 2
— 7

+ 7
+ 18
+ 18
+ 17
+14

+
—
+
+
+

— 4
NA
NA
+12
+ 5

+ 7
NA
NA
0
— 1

9
5
8
1
4

3

N A Not Available.
Source: Bureau of the Census, Department of Commerce.

D ata

B U IL D IN G P E R M IT F IG U R E S
Feb.
1956
Maryland
Baltimore ______ $ 7,378,840
Cumberland ____
60,800
F red erick______
41,600
H agerstow n____
124,975
Salisbury _____ _
290,174
Virginia
Danville_________
545,988
Hampton __ ___
604,499
H o p e w e ll______
145,885
Lynchburg _____
371,640
Newport News ..
238,412
N o r fo lk _________
1,404,870
Petersburg _____
174,000
Portsmouth ------416,080
Richmond ______ 1,969,199
Roanoke ________
1,153,871
Staunton________
337,925
W a rw ic k ________
692,828
West Virginia
Charleston_____
353,567
Clarksburg_____
61,032
Huntington ____
177,075
North Carolina
Asheville ________
461,556
Charlotte ______
1,965,425
D urham _________
588,007
Gastonia ________
306,450
Greensboro _____
1,758,990
High Point ____
466,645
R a le ig h _________
1,129,586
Rocky M ou n t___
178,791
S a lis b u ry ______
247,360
W ils o n __________
740,900
Winston-Salem _
2,035,534
South Carolina
C h arleston_____
223,294
C o lu m b ia _______
1,377,772
Greenville______
252,500
179,345
Spartanburg ___
Dist. of Columbia
Washington ____
3,388,090
District Totals ___ $31,843,505

Feb.
1955

2 Months
1956

2 Months
1955

$ 9,879,812
217,950
171,955
63,070
84,955

$11,100,330
82,500
89,350
127,375
374,989

$16,543,057
264,050
264,155
320,670
199,865

1,600,408
570,135
152,305
348,021
106,412
992,482
163,600
217,260
684,871
657,531
243,500
893,577

914,293
1,038,388
335,164
866,595
329,856
2,196,713
419,000
717,200
3,443,163
2,556,604
451,550
1,145,567

2,000,617
1,874,898
416,558
899,064
283,280
1,806,298
334,900
591,875
2,223,215
1,821,058
515,370
1,553,975

465,002
133,555
291,390

500,352
105,738
372,687

751,917
223,422
522,140

282,823
1,145,938
665,735
1,303,550
812,675
1,063,935
3,301,158
283,092
84,132
288,000
1,188,517

581,271
4,155,397
698,591
1,344,775
2,533,825
1,021,814
1,852,911
629,387
358,400
914,950
2,740,863

385,880
2,682,193
4,097,046
1,602,300
1,213,815
1,409,435
4,084,298
619,519
151,378
494,450
1,934,133

170,791
391,151
417,350
379,330

383,317
2,575,954
1,146,906
487,930

390,012
952,609
907,550
457,450

5,362,055
$35,078,023

6,916,057
$55,509,762

8,501,163
$63,293,615

F IF T H D IS T R IC T IN D E X E S
D E P A R T M E N T ST O R E O P E R A T IO N S
(Figures show percentage changes)
Other
Rich. Balt.
Wash. Cities
0

Seasonally Adjusted: 1947-1949=100
Dist.
Total

Feb.
1956

+10

Sales, Feb. ’56 vs Feb. ’55 _
Sales, 2 Mos. ending Feb. 29,
’ 56 vs 2 Mos. ending Feb.
9.9,, *K
K

+12

+

9

— 2

+ 10

+

Stocks, Feb. 29, ’56 vs ’55 —
Outstanding Orders,
Feb. 29, ’56 vs ’55 -----

+

5

+

+ 13

+ 17

+11

+

6

— 9

+

+

+

5

+14

9

+11

8

2

+

New passenger car registra­
tion* _______________________
Bank debits _________________
Bituminous coal production*

7

2

Open
account
receivables
Feb. 1, collected in Feb.
’56 .... ...................
- -

30.2

50.1

42.3

36.4

40.1

Instalment receivables Feb.
1, collected in Feb. ’56

10.4

13.0

12.1

14.8

12.'

Md.
Sales, Feb. ’56 vs Feb. ’55




+

1

D.C.
+14

Va.

+12

W .V a.
+17

N.C.
+ 6

Cigarette production_______
Cotton spindle hours _______
Department store sales _____
Electric power production __
Manufacturing employment*
Furniture store sales _______
Life insurance sales _________

182
106
189
197
122
129
113
214

* Not seasonally adjusted,
r Revised.
Back figures available on request.

S.C.
+10

i

12 1
*

Jan.
1956
151
191
104
196r
137
108
123
138
192
111
122r
202

Feb.
1955
145
168
86
262
177
104
115
122
182
107r
108
175

% Chg.—
Latest Mo.
Prev.
Yr.
Mo.
Ago
—28
— 5
+ 2
— 4
+44
+ 8
— 1
— 7
— 3
— 1
— 7
+ 6

+19
+ 8
+23
—28
+ 11
+ 8
+ 6
+ 6
+ 7
+ 5
+ 5

+22

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