View original document

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

- FE D fk ytfR E SERVE BANKJ&JRICHMOND

J (<m f^ ffatosiv
D IS T R IC T

November 1956

BANK

LOANS TO F A R M E R S *

Fifth District Totals, July I, 1943-1956
Millions of Dollars

EZ
3

Other Loans to Farmers

- 250ED Farm-Mortgage Loans
TOTAL LOANS
-

200

-

100

* Excluding CCC guaranteed loans and loans of uninsured barks.
Source: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.

h e Federal Reserve System, with the active
cooperation of the American Bankers A sso­
ciation and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpo­
ration, made a nationwide Agricultural Loan Sur­
vey as of June 30, 1956. The above chart reveals
the sharp loan expansion since the previous farm
loan survey was made in 1947. The article on
page 3 shows how Fifth District banks meet the
challenge of farm credit.

T




Also In This Issue -

-

-

Shifts In Commodity Demand Create
Changes In Fifth District Agriculture „ Page

6

Ups and Downs In
Fifth District Personal Income _____ _Page

7

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

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

F

if t h

D

T

is t r ic t

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT AWARDS

r e n d s

CONSTRUCTION

CONTRACT AWARDS

1000
COMMERCIAL

800

(Seosonolly Adjusted)
(1947-1949*100)

1952

1953

1954

1 95 5

1948

1956

1949

1950

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

1956

District contract awards for factory buildings during September
dropped 29% (adjusted basis) from August, were 56% under Sep­
tember last year. The nine months’ total was down 24% . North
Carolina gained over a year ago but declined from August; South
Carolina showed an increase over both periods. Other states had
declines in both periods.

District contract awards for commercial construction during Sep­
tember fell off 10% (adjusted basis) from August and were 60%
under September last year; the nine months’ total was off 38% .
September commercial awards rose in West Virginia and North
Carolina, both from the previous month and a year ago, but de­
clined in all other states in both periods.

NEW PASSENGER CAR REGISTRATIONS

RETAIL FURNITURE STORES NET SALES
150

150

/ VA
A

125

100 >/
A

v

/v
k

,

A
\I

V

A

IV

%

i f
/ v

\y*
i l

125

100

V

75

75
(Sea sonaliy Adjusted)
(19 47-1949*1

1948

DEBITS

1951

1952

1953

1954

1955

"
1956

(seasonally
the lowest
the lowest
a year ago.

SERIES E AND H SAVINGS BONDS

Changes in bank debits (adjusted) ranged from a gain of 2 % in
North Carolina to a decline of 12% in the District of Columbia.
The District total was down 10% in September from August. All
states showed gains over a year ago, ranging from 3% in Virginia
to 10% in West Virginia, but the District of Columbia held even
with last year.




1 95 0

Sales of retail furniture stores in the Fifth District
adjusted) slipped 10% from August to September to
level in 1956 but were 1 % ahead of September 1955,
month last year. Nine months’ sales were 5 % ahead of

Registrations of new passenger cars in August rose 3 % over July,
with gains in Maryland, Virginia, and South Carolina more than
offsetting losses elsewhere. Registrations were, however, 21% under
a year ago.

BANK

1949

Higher interest rates on other types of securities and a general
slowing-down in the level of savings have affected sales of savings
bonds in this District. September sales were off 19% from August
and 12% under a year ago; the nine months’ total was even with
last year.

i 2 f

/{on/M t//fanout

The Ag Loan Survey (Reveals)

November 1956

.

.

.

Banks Meet the Challenge of Farm Credit
states or parts of states. It was decided that the mini­
mum acceptable sample wr one which would produce
as
reliable estimates by Federal Reserve Districts. Even
this necessitated a sampling of 141 Fifth District banks
subdivided by volume of agricultural loans and location
so as to represent properly all banks in the District.1
It was on this basis that the American Bankers A sso­
ciation, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and
the Federal Reserve System launched the survey of
farm loans of banks as of June 30, 1956. As a further
step to improve the quality of farm credit statistics,
corresponding studies of farm loans held by other in­
stitutional lenders are in process. In time, results of
the study of the farm loan portfolio of life insurance
companies and the lending activities of the Farm Credit
Administration and Farmers Home Administration wrill
also be available.

I^T^i f t h D i s t r i c t bankers are serving a complete cross
J- section of the region’s farmers, according to the
1956 Agricultural Loan Survey now nearing comple­
tion. In the course of a day’s business, they make loans
to farmers of all ages, to those with small net worth as
well as those of sizable financial means. They lend to
producers of nearly every conceivable farm product, and
the advances run all the way from a few' days to a num­
ber of years.

Background on the Loan Survey

Far-reaching changes have taken place both in bank­
ing and agriculture since the last nationwide survey of
farm loans of commercial banks in 1947. A t that time
farmers’ indebtedness to principal institutional lenders
in both the District and the nation was near the postW orld W ar II low. Since then it has about doubled.
Another striking change has been the 35% increase in
the value of farmers’ equities since 1947.
Changes also have occurred within the banks. A l­
though total assets of banks have risen between onethird and two-fifths, their total loan volume has sub­
stantially more than doubled. Thus, loans which
amounted to just over one-fifth of total bank assets in
1947 now represent about two-fifths of the total.
In view of the rapidity and magnitude of changes,
both from farming and banking points of view, a new
bench mark seemed to be needed for viewing farm credit
developments. A further consideration favoring the
newT survey wr the lack of comprehensive quantitative
as
information on some important aspects of farm lending.
These blind spots included the extending of loans to
young and/or small-scale farmers and the financing of
intermediate-term investments. Additionally it was
thought desirable to look at all of a farmer’s borrowing
from a bank as contrasted with the traditional analysis
of separate notes.
The numerous individuals and agencies associated
with this survey would be among the first to admit the
practical limitations of any survey or current reporting
series. In a sense, such a survey resembles taking a
still photograph of farm loans of banks as of June 30,
1956 instead of making a movie which would be the
approximate equivalent of one or more current report­
ing series on farm loans of banks.
Within the framework of a single-shot type of survey,
two basic decisions had to be made. One involved what
information to obtain, although as previously noted, this
had been partially solved by the basic data deficiencies
which led to the survey in the first place. The harder
decision involved establishment of a sample adequate
to provide accurate data for the nation but inadequate
for smaller areas, or deciding on a reliable sample for



Farmer Customers— Actual and Potential

On June 30, 1956, Fifth District banks had an esti­
mated 266,000 loans outstanding to 199,000 farmer
borrowers.2 This is approximately 30% of the total
number of farm families who are actual and/or potential
customers for bank loans. The outstanding amount of
these loans totaled $306 million. This figure is higher
than the June 30, 1956 Call Report indicates since loans
totaling an estimated $16 million are actually farm loans
but are classified otherwise for Call Report purposes.
Origin and Size of Farm Loans

The slang saying, “ there is more than one wr
ay to
skin a cat,” has some applicability in farm credit. A l­
though most loans (7 3 % ) are made direct, the remain­
ing 27% are extended indirectly by banks acquiring
farmers’ notes originally made out to machinery or farm
supply dealers or insurance companies.
Comparison of the extent to which banks of various
sizes acquire farm loan paper from dealers reveals that
the larger the bank the greater the reliance placed upon
this source of farm loans. Banks with less than $3
million of deposits obtained 18% of their farm loans
and 6% of their outstanding loan volume from dealers.
For banks with deposits of from $3 to $10 million, the
corresponding shares are 25% for number and 10%
for amount. For banks with $10 million or more in
deposits, 38% of their loans and 20% of their outstand­
ing volume of farm loans represented dealer paper.
The average size of farm loans also tended to increase
'The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond proudly notes that each of
the 141 banks invited to participate both agreed to do so and supplied
the requested information even though diligent effort was required of
officers and staff members. Such a 100% response is one more indica­
tion of the importance banks, individually and collectively, attach to
meeting farm credit needs.
-The survey did not include loans directly guaranteed by the Com­
modity Credit Corporation.

{ 3 Y

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

with the size of bank. This was true both of loans
made direct to farmers and of farm loans acquired from
dealers. Notes originally made for amounts under
$1,000 account for the vast majority of non-real-estate
farm loans (7 7 % ) and notes from $1,000 to $5,000 for
about half of all farm real estate notes. In terms of
dollar amount, however, the larger loans dominate the
situation. The outstanding amounts in each of the two
loan size groups of $1,000 to $1,999 and $2,000 to
$4,999, for example, accounted for 21% of the total
loan value for non-real-estate loans, whereas each of
the three size groups of $2,000 to $4,999, $5,000 to
$9,999, and $10,000 to $24,999, accounted for from
24% to 28% of all farm real estate loans.
Purpose of Loans

In recent years considerable attention has been given
to farmers’ need for intermediate-term credit. Until
this survey was made, however, no effective measure of
the number or amount of such loans was available.
This survey reveals that loans for purposes normally
associated with intermediate-term credit have the larg­
est dollar volume outstanding of any category of farm
loans held by Fifth District banks. Such intermediatetype loans account for 33% of total outstandings. This
compares with 30% for current operating expenses,
22% to buy farm real estate, 8% to consolidate and
pay other debts, and 7% for other purposes.
Intermediate-term loans, as the term is used here, in­
clude loans for four groups of purposes. Those for the
purchase of farm machinery lead in importance, account­
ing for 18% of all loans and 14% of the outstanding
amount. Loans for the purchase of automobiles and
other consumer durables account for 7% of the number
and 4 % of the outstanding amount of all loans, while
those to improve land and buildings comprise but 5%
of the number but 11% of all outstandings. W hile loans
for intermediate-term purposes represent a larger dollar
volume than any other category, loans for current
operating expenses— which have a much smaller aver­
P U R PO SE OF FARM L O AN S
Fifth District Banks, June 30, 1956

Item

Number
of
Loans
Thousands

Current Operating Expenses:
Feeder livestock ----------------------Other current operating
Total --------------------------------Intermediate-Term Investments:
Other livestock -----------------------Machinery __ — --------- - ------Automobiles and other
consumer durables --------------Improve land and buildings ----Total --------------------------------Buy Farm Real Estate --------------Other Purposes:
Consolidate and pay other
debts _________________________
Other __________________________
Total, All Purposes ---------- ----------




Amount
Average
Outstanding
Size
Mil. Dol.

Dollars

3

10
82
92

635
693

6
48

13
42

2,210
861

20
14
88
19

11
34
100
69

569
2,382
1,133
3,612

11
16

25
20

2,329
1,329

266

306

1,151

M aturity, Repayment Method, and Renewal Status

The length of time specified as the life of a given
note is an incomplete guide to the time that may elapse
before it is paid in full. Despite the role of renewals
in Fifth District commercial banking, there is, never­
theless, enough importance to “ maturity” to justify a
careful analysis. The survey reveals that 58% of all
bank loans to farmers and 48% of the outstanding dol­
lar volume had a maturity of six months or less.
Farm real estate loans are generally written with a
longer maturity than other farm loans. For example,
in the case of number of loans, only 29% are for six
months or less, whereas 64% of the non-real-estate loans
fall in this maturity period. Furthermore, 35% of the
real estate loans are written for one year or longer,
whereas only 9% of the non-real-estate loans are for a
year or better. In dollar volume, 28% of the real estate
loans and 62% of the non-real-estate loans are for six
months or less, and 44% and 10% , respectively, are for
a year or longer.
Single-payment loans outnumber instalment loans by
about four to one, and in amount, by three to one. O f
the instalment loans, somewhat less than half provide
for interest to be charged on the unpaid balance. A l­
though these are less numerous than those with interest
charged on the original amount, they average much
larger in size than either the latter group or the single­
payment loans.
Banks extend farmers far more credit for periods of
a year or longer than is revealed by studying the matur­
ity of the notes. Although 70% of all notes, account­
ing for 61% of the amount outstanding, had not been
renewed up to June 30, 1956, an undetermined number
had been made with an understanding that some or all
of the principal would be renewed. In addition, 23%
of the notes, representing 32% of the dollar volume, had
already been renewed according to prior agreement.
Unforeseen developments occasionally prevent farm­
ers, like others, from paying their notes when due. As
a result, there are renewals despite expectations that
the original loans would be repaid when due. These
loans accounted for about 7% of both the number and
amount of farm loans as of June 30, 1956.

2,950

129
132

age size— are by far the more numerous, accounting for
half of all loans.

Security

About 15% of all loans, representing 41% of the
total outstanding dollar volume, are farm-mortgage
loans. There are far fewer farm-mortgage loans than
other loans secured by chattel mortgages (3 0 % ) or
those which have a co-maker or are endorsed (3 3 % ).
The only other “ security” classification of significance
is the group of unsecured notes which account for 20%
of the total number and 17% of the outstanding amount.
Considerable variation exists in the average size of
loans in these different security classifications. The

November 1956

farm-mortgage classification and the Government-guar­
anteed or insured group, which are principally farmmortgage loans insured by the Farmers Home Adminis­
tration, have the largest average size.
O f the other
major security classifications, the unsecured group ranks
next in average size, followed by the chattel-mortgage
loans and then by the endorsed and co-maker group.
SE L EC T ED C H A R A C T E R IST IC S OF FAR M L O A N S
Fifth District Banks, June 30, 1956

Item

Number
of
Loans
Thousands

How Acquired:
Loan made direct to customer
Loan acquired from dealer
Renewal Status:
Note has not been renew ed__
Note renewed by agreement __
Note renewed for other reasons
Repayment Method:
Single payment ________________
Instalment:
Interest on unpaid balance
Interest on original amount
Security:
Unsecured ____ „ ____ _ ___
Endorsed or co-maker _________
Chattel mortgage, etc. ______
Real-estate mortgage __________
Government guaranteed or in­
sured ________________________
Other __________________________
Maturity:
Demand ________________________
6 mos. and less ________ _ __
6 mos. to 1 year ______________
1 to 5 years
.
_ __ _
Over 5 years _______________ . _
Total, All Notes _____ .... ________

Average
Amount
Outstanding
Size
Mil. Dol.

Dollars

194
72

268
38

1,380
529

187
62
17

187
99
20

1,001
1,610
1,149

216

224

1,039

23
27

68
14

2,961
521

52
87
80
41

54
42
69
124

1,030
480
867
3,021

1
5

4
13

4,914
2,578

7
147
77
28
7

22
124
86
38
36

3,261
841
1,116
1,370
5,168

266

306

1,151

O f the farm borrowers whose net worth category is
known, 24% fall under $3,000 and 36% have a net
worth of from $3,000 to $10,000. Thus, six out of ten
farmers have a net worth of less than $10,000. Those
in the $10,000 to $25,000 range account for 27% of the
total; those with a net wrorth of from $25,000 to $100,
000 represent 1 1 % ; and the remaining 2% have net
worths of $100,000 or more.
W hen the proportion of farmers in the various net
worth categories is compared for small, medium, and
large banks, it is found that banks of each size group
number among their farm customers practically the
same percentage of farmers in each net worth category
as the above data for all banks reveals. In other words,
the small farmer is as welcome a customer in a big bank
as he is in a small- or medium-size bank. Similarly,
the wealthier farmers comprise as big a share of a small
bank’s farm customers as they do of middle-size or
larger banks. The survey, however, shows that the aver­
age amount of outstanding debt of farmers writh higher
net worth increases as the size of the bank increases.

Tenure, A ge, and N et W o rth of B orrow er
Of the 189,000 farm borrowers from Fifth District
banks whose tenure is known, owner-operators repre­
sent by far the largest share— 71% . Tenants account
for 23% and landlords 6 % . Corporation farms ac­
count for only 0.1% . The proportion of tenants to
owner-operators who borrow from banks (2 5 % ) is
practically the same as the relationship of tenants to
owner-operators reported in the last census (2 9 % ).
Although tenants are as likely as owner-operators to be
customers for bank loans, the average bank debt of
tenants on June 30, 1956 wr only $485 compared with
as
an average of $1,849 for owner-operators.

SE L E C T E D C H A R A C T E R IS T IC S OF FARM B O R R O W E R S
Fifth District Banks, June 30, 1955
Number
of
Borrowers Loans

Amount
Outstanding

Thousands

Item

Mil. Dol.

Dollars

Age of Borrower:
Under 25 ____________
25-34 _________________
35-44 _________________
45 and over _________
Corporation _________
Unknown ___________
Tenure:
Owner-operator ______
Tenant .... __________
Landlord ____________ _
Corporation _____ ____
Unknown ___________
Net Worth of Borrower
Under $3,000 _______
$3,000-89,999 ________
$10,000-$24,999 ______
$25,000-$99,999 ______
$100,000 and over ___
Unknown ____________

In contrast with such fields of activity as baseball or
football where the accent is on youth, people of all ages
are engaged in farming and are represented among
those to whom banks make farm loans. The age of
many farm borrowers whose notes are acquired from
dealers is not known by the banker, but of those w'hose
age is known, 50% were reported to be 45 years of age
or older, 33% were from 35 to 44, 15% were from 25
to 34, and 2% were under 25 years of age.
It is possible to orient these data in terms of census
data on the age distribution of all farmers in the District.
Those 45 years and over comprise 57% ; those 35 to 44



represent 24% ; those 25 to 34 account for 16% ; and
those under 25 years make up 3% of the total. Thus,
Fifth District banks are seen to be extending credit to
farmers of all ages. Although some of the divergence
which these data reveal may be attributable to possible
shifts in actual age composition since the census enu­
meration, it seems certain that a higher proportion of
farmers in the age groups 25-34 and 35-44 borrow from
banks than farmers of other ages. It may be that many
of the younger farmers have not attempted to establish
bank connections and that some wr
ho tried were un­
successful. It may also be true that farmers over 45
have developed a stronger financial basis and hence
fewer require credit. Average size of bank debt was
found to increase with age of the borrower.

Total, All Borrowers ....
* Only 129.

{ 5 y

** Only 193.

Average Size
of
Debt Loan

3
27
61
94
*
14

4
34
81
131
**
16

3
32
93
166
1
11

877
756
1,180
958
1,521 1,143
1,774 1,266
9,736 6,508
762
682

133
44
11
*
11

186
53
15
**
12

246
222
27
1
10

1,849 1,325
485
408
2,415 1,768
9,736 6,508
933
848

45
66
48
20
4
16

52
84
71
34
8
17

16
64
91
81
44
10

368
316
961
754
1,858 1,289
3,985 2,396
12,126 5,457
603
656

199

266

306

1,534

1,151

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

Shifts In Commodity Demand Create

Changes In Fifth District Agriculture
day finds that 55 cents of each farm dollar comes from
demands exerted by a changing economy have
livestock as contrasted with 40 cents in the late 1920’s.
brought about definite changes in the character of
agriculture. The dethroning of King Cotton and to­
Tobacco Leads the Parade
bacco’s sharp rise to prominence are the prime exhibits
A closer look at the District’s agriculture may pro­
in the Fifth District’s farm history. Recent years have
vide a clearer picture. If the light is turned on tobacco
brought perhaps less obvious but decided shifts toward
it is seen to be pacing all commodities by contribut­
what may be called a two-armed type of agriculture—
ing 36 cents to the average farm dollar. Poultry in re­
illustrated by expansion and a better balance between
cent years has become big business and, with its 15crop and livestock enterprises.
cent contribution to each dollar the farmer makes, is
These shifts in production emphasis have naturally al­
running second as an income-producing enterprise.
tered the quantity as well as quality of farm commodities
Dairy products and meat
put on the market. And
animals (cattle, calves, hogs,
times are still changing!
sheep and lambs) are now
H ow to meet the relatively
WHERE THE FARMER’S DOLLAR COMES FROM
neck and neck for third
rapid variations in demand
FIFTH DISTRICT
place. W ith dairy products
keeps and will keep most
c u r r e n t l y furnishing 12
District farmers— and those
Meat A nim als**
cents to the average dollar
who lend to them— on the
of District farm income and
alert.
the meat animals group 11
Newly available data may
cents, dairying now has a
answer the problem of eco­
slight edge on third place.
nomic change since they in­
Accounting for 8 cents of
vite analysis of the present
each dollar and coming in a
pattern of commodity par­
poor fifth is cotton— once
ticipation in the agriculture
King of all District money­
of this area. The pattern
making f a r m enterprises.
emerges from a study of
Crops
Livestock
Providing 6 cents of each
1955’s cash farm income by
cash dollar and running
* Including potatoes, sweet potatoes, and tree nuts.
commodity sources.
* # Including wool and other livestock, the sum of which accounts for less than one
sixth as an income producer
cent of each dollar.
Source-. U. S. Department of Agriculture.
Crops Versus Livestock
are the fruits and vege­
tables. Then, of course,
1955 provided excellent
there are the also-rans,
crop yields throughout the
the “ other crops” — peanuts, forest products, corn,
District, though there were notable exceptions.
It is,
wheat, hay, soybeans, small grains, etc.— which, when
therefore, not surprising that crops on the average con­
lumped together, account for 12 cents of each dollar of
tinued to put more cash— 62 cents of each dollar of farm
District farm income.
income— in farmers’ pockets than did livestock. Actual­
By states, the characteristics of the agriculture as re­
ly, livestock and their products (hereafter referred to as
vealed by the relative income positions of the more im­
livestock) are now far bigger money-makers for District
portant commodities look like this: Tobacco is the
farmers than in the late twenties when they contributed
prime income producer in North Carolina with poultry
28 cents to each dollar of farm income as against 38
in second place. In South Carolina tobacco has nudged
cents today.
cotton out of first place. Dairying now occupies the
The pattern varies considerably from state to state—
spotlight in Maryland, but is followed closely by poultry;
for example, the Carolinas are predominantly crop states
the reverse is true in W est Virginia. In Virginia poul­
and these contribute more than 75 cents of each dollar
try has a slight edge over tobacco.
of cash farm income. But W est Virginia and Maryland,
This brief review of the relative income contributions
insofar as their agriculture is concerned, are primarily
of various commodities produced by District farmers
livestock states. Farmers in the Mountaineer State,
has attempted to provide a clearer indication of the
for instance, now receive 78% of their income from
nature of the District’s agriculture, to stress the obvious
livestock, while in Maryland 70 cents of the farmer’s
factor of change and to imply the need for constant
dollar is livestock income. Virginia, on the other hand,
study and evaluation of this fluid, highly competitive,
and vulnerable sector of the District’s economy.
has done an about-face in its farming pattern and to­
ew




4 6 1
“

November 1956

$<W i£C U L

Ups and Downs In

Fifth District Personal Income
in Fifth District states and the
District of Columbia increased again in 1955— and
the rise of nearly 7% was somewhat faster than the
6.5% national figure.
In dollar amount, Virginia showed the largest person­
al income of any Fifth District state— $5,494 million.
Maryland was a close second with $5,463 million, fol­
lowed in order by North Carolina’s $5,371 million,
South Carolina’s $2,557 million, W est Virginia’s $2,555
million, and the District of Columbia’s $1,992 million.
In the Fifth District income progress has hardly been
regular in the postwar period— between 1946 and 1949,
and again in 1954 and 1955, the increase was roughly
5.8% per annum (compound annual rate). In the period
from 1950 through 1953 the effects of the Korean W ar
and its resultant price rise caused a substantial bulge
above this rate of growth. Interestingly, all states of
the District have shown somewhat the same pattern.
erso n al

P

In c o m e

C om position of Personal Incom e
Most important contribution to 1955 District income
came from Government disbursements which accounted
for 25% of the District’s total. Nationally, the figure
was under 17%. All District states showed a larger
percentage derived from Government payments than the
nation as a whole, except W est Virginia which was
slightly under the national average. The District of
Columbia, Virginia, and Maryland (with their substan­
tial concentrations of Government facilities) naturally
derived a super-average share of personal income from
this source.

Manufacturing-industry wage and salary disburse­
ments contributed just under a fifth of total personal
income in 1955 compared with nearly a fourth for the
nation in that year. Lack of substantial manufacturing
facilities in the District of Columbia is in part responsi­
ble for this difference, although W est Virginia, Virginia,
and Maryland each showed wages and salaries from
manufacturing as smaller than national proportions.
Third in importance in personal income contribution
in the Fifth District are the wages and salaries of trade
and service industries. These accounted for nearly
17% of the total in 1955 compared with a national
18.5%. The District of Columbia alone showed a larger
proportion than nationally with Maryland at the national
average.
Altogether, Government income disbursements and
manufacturing, trade and service wages and salaries
accounted for 61.5% of the District’s total personal in­
come in 1955, which was slightly above the 59.1% figure
for the nation.
Farm income contributed a relatively small proportion
of the District’s personal income— 5.7% as against
4.7% nationally. In the District this source is most
important in North Carolina (1 2 .6 % ) and South Caro­
lina (9 .2 % ). Virginia’s contribution is at the national
level, with W est Virginia and Maryland considerably
under.
In the contract construction industries, wages and
salaries, which usually account for 40-50% of total con­
struction outlay, have not contributed commensurately
with the industry’s economic importance. Here, direct

CHANGES IN PERSONAL INCOME AND SELECTED COMPONENTS
FIFTH

DI S TRI CT

A N D THE UNI TED

STATES

Manufacturing
Payroll

Trade and
Services
Payroll

Per cent change
1955 from 1954

+

10 -




Farm Income

1 7 1
*

Contract
Construction
Payroll

Mining
Payroll

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

Table 1
PE R S O N A L IN C O M E
C O M P O S IT IO N , 1955
(Percent of Total)
Md.
Farm Income _______________________________
Government Disbursements
_ ______ _
_
___________________________
Manufacturing Wages and Salaries _______ __________________________
Trade and Service Wages and Salaries ___ __________________________
Contract Construction Wages and Salaries __________________________
Mining Wages and Salaries _______________ ___________________________
All Other ____________________________________

Va.

W .V a.

N.C.

s.c.

Dist.

29.7

4.7
31.3
15.5
17.0
3.9
1.0
26.6

2.8
15.3
21.5
13.8
2.9
13.9
29.8

12.6
18.1
25.0
16.2
3.0
0.2
24.9

9.2
21.9
26.7
14.9
3.3
0.2
23.8

5.7
25.0
19.6
16.9
3.6
1.9
27.3

4.7
16.8
23.8
18.5
3.9
1.2
31.1

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

D.C.

1.6
24.3
20.4
18.5
4.9
0.2
30.1
100.0

Total ______________________________________ __________________________

contributions were but 3.6% of the total in 1955 and
3.9% for the nation. Variations as between District
states were not materially different, ranging from 2.4%
in the District of Columbia to 4.9% in Maryland.
Mining wages and salaries contribute importantly to
personal income in the Fifth District only in W est
Virginia. There it contributed 13.9% of the state’ s
total in 1955 and nearly 2% of total Fifth District per­
sonal income compared with the national total of 1.2%.
The above contributions to personal income ac­
counted for 72.7% of the total in 1955 compared with a
national figure of 68.9% . District and national dif­
ferences are largely accounted for by the higher percent­
age of Government income disbursements in the Dis­
trict and lower contributions in manufacturing, trade
and service wages and salaries. Details are shown in
Table 1.

45.1
2.4
20.4
2.4

as large a proportion of the total dollar increase
(2 9 .0 % ) in the District as in the nation (3 2 .7 % ).
Income from sources other than those enumerated
accounted for a larger percentage of the total increase
during the year in the Fifth District (3 3 .6 % ) than in
the nation (3 0 .2 % ). Percentage-wise, the District in­
crease in all other sources of income from 1954 to 1955
was 8.7% .
The accompanying table shows the dollar increase
in the sources of personal income between 1954 and
1955 in both the District and the nation, together with
the percentage of the total increase.
Table 2
C H A N G E IN P E R S O N A L IN C O M E C O M P O N E N T S 1954 TO
1955 A N D P ER CE N T OF T O T A L C H A N G E
Fifth District
Million
Dollars

W h a t Caused the Increase?
Farm Income
„
Government Income Disburse­
ments ___________ __ _____
Mining Payroll .
_________
Manufacturing Payroll _____
Trade and Services Payroll
Contract Construction Payroll
All Other ____ _ ________ ___
_

Manufacturing industries’ wages and salaries showed
the largest dollar as well as the largest percentage in­
crease in both Fifth District and the nation between
1954 and 1955. The District increase of $441 million
was 10.6% higher in 1955 than in 1954; the national
increase was $6,095 million or 9.0% .
Second in importance, both dollar-wise and percentage-wise, were wages and salaries in trade and service
industries. These payrolls rose $288 million in the Dis­
trict (up 7 .9 % ) and $4,160 million in the nation (up

Total

____

____ _ ____

% of
Total

United States
Million
Dollars

48

3.2

—

+ 153
46
+
+ 441
+ 288
33
+
+ 511
+ 1,520

10.1
3.0
29.0
18.9
2.2
33.6

+
+
+
+
+
+

+

100.0

% of
Total

719

— 3.9

2,426
271
6,095
4,160
783
5,628

13.0
1.5
32.7
22.3
4.2
30.2

+18,644

100.0

L ong-Term Change

The postwar period has been one of violent price
changes. Between 1945 and 1955 the price level (meas­
ured by the implicit deflators of the gross national pro­
duct) has risen nearly 50% . The bulk of this increase
was between 1945 and 1951 where the gain was 4 3% —
from 1951 to 1955 it was only 4.5% . If District income
were expressed in terms of constant purchasing power,
it would show a decline from 1945 to 1946 and a sharper
decline from 1946 to 1947. Since 1947, however, it has
shown a fairly consistent rise each year with the except­
ion of 1954.

8.0%).
Next in importance in the District increase were
Government income disbursements which totaled $153
million. They were up 2.7% , whereas nationally they
increased 5.0% .
Farm income gave the Fifth District its fourth larg­
est increase. Nationally, farm income did not contrib­
ute to total personal income but was a $719 million
offset to other gains for a loss of 5.0% in the period.
Contract construction wages and salaries added $33
million to personal income in the period under review,
an increase of 4.1% . Nationally, they added $783 mil­
lion for a plus 7.0% .
Despite the larger percentage increase in manufactur­
ing payrolls in the Fifth District between 1954 and 1955,
the dollar increase in these payrolls did not constitute



U.S.

Between 1946 and 1955 many internal divergent
movements are observed. These longer run changes are
important to understand the structural changes that take
place in the income base. Figures are unavailable for
detailed analysis of the 1946-1955 period; but payroll
figures are available in all important sectors of the Dis­
trict’s wage and salary income. These accounted for
i 8 1
-

November 1956

70.8% of total personal income in 1954 and 60.6% in
1946.
In this period construction contract wages and
salaries rose at a compound annual rate of 12.6% per
annum, followed by communication and public utilities,
12.0% per annum; finance, insurance, and real estate,
10.3% per annum; government, 9.4% ; trade, 8.3% ;
manufacturing, 7 .7 % ; service industries, 7 .8 % ; trans­
portation, 4.5% ; while mining wages and salaries show­
ed an actual decrease in the period and agricultural in­
come rose 1.4%.
It is clear that the great expansion in the construction
industry, whose payroll directly has shown the largest
annual rate of increase in the postwar period, has had
its effect in expanding both communication and utilities
in about the same proportion and has also increased
activity in financial, insurance, and real estate concerns.
It is probable that the substantial expansion in real
estate activity has been mainly responsible for the entire
group increase. If comparable data were available for
1955, the chances are that these longer run changes
would not be greatly different from what they were in
1946 to 1954.
It should be noted that payrolls in manufacturing
and trade industries have risen at a more rapid rate than
total income payments; the only payroll item falling
below the increase in the total was in transportation
industries. A ll other sources of income, particularly
proprietors and property income, have moved at a
slower pace than total income payments, and this is
particularly true in recent years. The government pay­
roll, dominated largely by the Federal government, has
slowed down its rate of growth in relation to that of
total personal income.

dollars it was nearly 20% smaller than the $1,847
national average.
In the states of the Fifth District income per capita
ranged between $1,108 in South Carolina and $2,324 in
the District of Columbia. Maryland showed the second
largest figure, $1,991, followed by Virginia, $1,535;
W est Virginia, $1,288; and North Carolina, $1,236.
W est Virginia showed the largest increase ( 6 % )
between 1954 and 1955 when both manufacturing and
bituminous coal payrolls rose substantially. The Dis­
trict of Columbia and North Carolina tied for second
largest increase (5 .4 % ), followed by South Carolina
(5 .0 % ), Virginia (3 .5 % ), and Maryland (2 .2 % ).
Historically, District per capita income gained sub­
stantially on the national level since 1929 and 1939; but
it has lost position slightly since 1946. In 1929 District
per capita income was 33% smaller than the national
average; in 1939, it was 21.6% smaller; in 1946, 19.1%
smaller; and in 1955, 19.8% smaller.
The gains have come largely in the Carolinas and
Virginia. Maryland and the District of Columbia have
lost position, but the gains in other states of the District
have more than offset these losses as the accompanying
table shows.
Table 3
PER C A P IT A P E R S O N A L IN C O M E
P ER CEN T A B O V E OR B E L O W N A T IO N A L A V E R A G E

1929 ___ .....
1939 __ __
1946 ___ .....
1955

Md.
%
+ 10.5
+ 1 8 .9
+ 5.1
+ 7.8

D.C.
+
+
+
+

%
81.1
100.9
35.2
25.8

Va.
%
— 38.1
—24.1
—20.7
— 16.9

W .V a. N.C.
%
%
— 34.3 — 52.5
— 30.4 —43.2
—26.3 — 31.3
— 30.3 — 33.1

S.C.
%
— 61.6
—50.9
— 38.9
—40.0

Dist.
%
— 33.0
—21.6
— 19.1
— 19.8

H ow the States Have Fared
State Changes

Personal income for the whole Fifth District achieved
an increasing share of the national total from 1929 to
1942— percentages of the national total rose from 6.12%
in 1929 to 8.39% in 1942. It remained above 8%
through 1946, dropped down to the 7.70’s in 1947 and
1948, showed continuous improvement (up to 8.02%
by 1951), slipped to 7.70% in 1954 and improved slight­
ly to 7.72% in 1955.
Accounting mainly for the long-term increase in the
District’s proportion are Virginia, North Carolina, and
South Carolina. W est Virginia has varied little, while
the District of Columbia has been in a downward trend
since 1932. Virginia’s proportion of the national total
rose substantially in the war period, receded in the early
postwar period, and has since recovered about half of
that loss. Maryland, likewise, showed a considerable
increase during the war period, receded immediately in
the postwar period, but has since regained most of its
loss. North Carolina’s chief increase came in the Great
Depression and war period. Since then its percentage
has fluctuated little. South Carolina’s percentage has
moved up little since 1942 except for a bulge in the
Korean W ar Period.

Long-run changes in personal income (1946 to 1955)
have varied among the District states rather substantial­
ly. The compound annual rate of increase has ranged
from 7.2% in Maryland to 3.1% in the District of
Columbia. South Carolina follows Maryland with the
second highest annual rate of increase in personal in­
come in the period under review, 6.2% ,followed in turn
by North Carolina, 5 .9 % ; Virginia, 5 .7 % ; and W est
Virginia, 4.7% .
W hat was responsible for these varying rates of in­
crease in personal income? In the period 1946-1954
most payroll items rose substantially faster than total
personal income. The only exception in this District
was in the District of Columbia. Largest increases in
the period came in construction, finance, real estate,
insurance, and communication. Much larger-than-average payroll increases in these areas were common to all
of the states but not to the District of Columbia.
Personal Income Per Capita

Personal income per capita in the Fifth District in
1955 averaged $1,481, a 4.4% increase over 1954. In



{

9

y

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

Business Conditions and Prospects
the District improved moderately during September but
remained belowT a year ago. Improvement during the
month was mainly in the nondurable goods industries;
most sectors of the durable goods industries managed
to hold their own. The lumber industry slackened
somewhat during the month. The furniture industry
showed mixed trends, partly up and partly down.
Primary metal industries held their own while fabri­
cated metals moved upward.
Transportation equipment industries rose consider­
ably during the month with shipbuilding and aircraft
largely responsible for the uplift. New business on the
books of both industries has improved substantially, and
a better level of operations appears to be under way.
The food industries rose during the month beyond their
normal seasonal peak. Apparently, slackening cigarette
consumption was reflected in a drop in manufacturing
operations during the month although output continued
considerably ahead of last year.

balance September was not a favorable month for
the Fifth District economy. The trade level weaken­
ed, construction was down, bituminous coal output held
even, and cigarette demand lessened. On the other
hand, the pace in the District’s manufacturing industries
quickened somewhat, sparked mainly by the nondurable
goods industries. Farm income was up seasonally dur­
ing August, continuing to run moderately ahead of a
year ago. Demand for bank credit diminished slightly
during September, and over-all spending in the District
(as reflected in adjusted bank debits) declined sharply
from August but held above a year ago.

O

n

Trade
Department store sales slipped moderately during the
month (after seasonal correction), but this was from
an all-time peak in this D istrict; sales are still ahead of
a year ago, and the year’s accumulated sales show a
small gain. In the furniture stores sales eased a little
more than in department stores, but they too were still
slightly ahead, and the cumulative total was comfortably
ahead of last year.
Efforts to clean up automobile inventories seem to
have borne fruit as the August complete registrations
showed a small rise over July, and dealer inventories
worked down to a lower level than in the past several
years. This provides pleasant accommodation for the
new models now on offer to a curious public.
It may be that inventories of department stores are
becoming a bit heavy, since the increase over a year ago
is about three times that of sales; but the stores are
hardly likely to worry over this ratio at this time of the
year. Furniture stores appear to have done a remark­
able job of maintaining balanced inventories and sales.

Operations in District textile mills receded moder­
ately (after seasonal correction) due in part to shut­
downs on the synthetic side early in the month. Cot­
ton consumption also declined moderately from the
August level, but this seems to have been more an
operating problem than a demand situation. Mills have
improved their backlogs rather substantially with fourth
quarter output pretty well sold out and some extension
into the first quarter. However, there appears to be no
great urgency to continue adding further to backlogs,
and for the time being new business is dull.
Banking
Surprisingly, bank loans (all member banks) in Sep­
tember dropped back a bit ($12 million) from a month
earlier while investments during the month rose slight­
ly ($21 m illion). The slackening in loan demand has
apparently been in the smaller banks, for loans of the
large weekly reporting banks made a new' high in Sep­
tember. There has been some change in the char­
acter of lending in the weekly reporting banks with cur­
rent emphasis on commercial, industrial, and agricul­
tural loans. A marked slackening in the rate of in­
crease in consumer loans has taken place, and real
estate loans have shown little change during 1956. Total
deposits of all member banks rose $113 million in Sep­
tember, but the increase came in interbank deposits (up
$40 million) and other demand deposits (up $82 mil­
lion). The partial offset was a slight reduction ($8
million) in time deposits. Borrowings from the Fed­
eral Reserve bank declined (by $13 m illion), but bor­
rowings from others rose by a similar amount.

C onstruction
The decline in construction contract awards during
September was appreciable and occurred in all lines
except apartments and hotels, which more than doubled
from the previous month on a seasonally adjusted basis.
All types of construction awards in September were
under a year ago with the exception of apartments and
hotels and nonresidential construction other than com­
mercial, manufacturing, and educational. On an ac­
cumulated basis, all types were under a year ago ex­
cepting apartments and hotels and public works and
utilities. Employment in the industry is still ahead of
a year ago, and there has thus far been no apparent
drop in the amount of construction put in place. The
continuing decline in contract awards, however, brings
the time nearer when some cutback in construction em­
ployment will be witnessed.

Savings

M anufacturing

One of the pressing problems of the day is an in­
sufficient amount of saving to finance the high-and-ris-

Over-all activity in the manufacturing industries of



i

io

y

November 1956

ing level of investment. Interestingly, despite some
slackening at the trade level during September, new
savings in this District did not contribute much. Sav­
ings deposits in mutual savings banks in Maryland con­
stituted the only available institutional figure to show a
rise during the month. These deposits were up 0.7%
($3 million) during the month and were 4.7% ahead
of a year ago. Net new savings in savings and loan
associations dropped 18% during the month to a level
20% under a year ago, and the nine months’ accumu­
lated savings were 16% under a year ago. Although
time deposits of the member banks eased slightly ($8
million or 0 .4 % ), they were still $66 million (3 .7 % )
higher than a year ago. Purchase of Series E and H
savings bonds during September dropped about a fifth
and stood 12% under a year a g o ; the nine months’ to­
tal, however, was even with last year.

Agriculture
Cash income from farm marketings in the District

F if t h

D is t r ic t




The 4% increase in cash farm income in the first
eight months reflected gains in all states except South
Carolina. The range was from 1% in W est Virginia
to 8 % in North Carolina. South Carolina’s total eased
about 3 % .
Average farm prices declined from July to August in
Maryland, Virginia, W est Virginia, and South Caro­
lina but rose in North Carolina. Maryland, Virginia,
and W est Virginia showed higher prices than a year
a g o ; in the Carolinas prices were under last year. In
the first eight months prices were about a standoff
against a year ago.

B ankin g

D E B IT S TO D E M A N D D E P O SIT A C C O U N T S*
(000 omitted)
Sept.
Sept.
9 Months
9 Months
1956
1955
1956
1955
Dist. of Columbia
W a sh in g to n ___
$1,332,193 $1,396,840 $13,301,806 $12,102,935
Maryland
14,104,905
Baltimore _____ __ 1,558,839
15,513,902
1,525,951
Cumberland ___
26,452
250,674
231,580
26,944
F red erick _____
25,131
232,824
213,398
24,109
Hagerstown ___ __
48,723
434,238
394,061
46,683
Salisbury** ___ __
34,918
34,898
305,800
326,748
Total 4 Cities
1,659,145
14,943,944
1,623,687
16,431,638
North Carolina
Asheville ______ ___
72,688
660,566
607,413
76,247
434,104
473,044
Charlotte _____ ___
3,967,132
3,702,890
Durham _______ ___
107,407
98,994
814,043
761,261
Greensboro ____ ___
160,355
1,461,010
1,343,053
160,821
High Point** _____
52,843
451,311
52,257
494,819
58,131
Kinston _______
56,872
247,758
245,305
Raleigh _______ ___
265,512
267,055
2,147,393
1,968,733
Wilmington ___ ___
56,965
55,259
489,079
474,837
W ils o n ________ ___
68,161
69,507
245,807
241,360
Winston-Salem ___
247,167
202,490
1,785,529
1,557,730
Total 9 Citiesi _ 1,470,490
11,815,864
1,460,289
10,905,035
South Carolina
Charleston ____
90,723
95,280
828,786
763,582
1,628,274
Columbia _____
187,595
183,798
1,750,997
1,148,756
Greenville _____
146,930
132,905
1,288,007
593,606
Spartanburg ....
73,812
80,003
638,988
Total 4 Cities
499,060
491,986
4,134,218
4,506,778
Virginia
Charlottesville
41,289
330,125
36,436
350,691
54,843
54,497
395,801
Danville ______
362,530
61,580
493,794
Lynchburg ___
57,866
550,595
55,313
60,077
556,772
506,611
Newport News
287,194
_
281,051
2,786,126
2,606,825
Norfolk _______ _
24,328
33,186
252,233
279,513
Petersburg** __
34,411
336,341
Portsmouth ___
34,143
322,070
747,623
6,403,010
732,825
5,989,891
R ichm ond_____ __
149,014
1,385,952
Roanoke ______ __
141,719
1,187,110
1,423,537
12,765,288
Total 8 Cities .... 1,406,344
11,798,956
West Virginia
58,060
47,349
514,318
403,857
Bluefield
--------163,320
1,618,504
166,019
1,514,133
Charleston . . ____
38,693
37,098
362,705
323,182
Clarksburg _______
79,312r
81,927
763,060
713,329r
Huntington ---------37,191
36,155
332,068
294,504
Parkersburg _____
363,234r
381,890
3,590,655
3,249,005r
Total 5 Cities __
District Totals _____ $6,749,122 $6,759,573r $62,412,029 $57,134,093r
* Interbank and U. S. Government accounts excluded.
** Not included in District Totals.
r Revised.

during August ran 1% ahead of a year ago. This slight
increase hardly reflects the Districtwide situation, for
actual gains ranged between 1% in W est Virginia and
12% in Virginia. These were approximately offset by
a loss of 15% in South Carolina, which can probably
be attributed mainly to a decline in the quantity of fluecured tobacco marketed.

S t a t is t ic s

W E E K L Y R E P O R T IN G M E M B E R BA N K S
(000 omitted)

Items

Oct. 17,
1956

Change in Amount from
Sept. 12,
Oct. 12,
1956
1955

Total Loans
„ _______ ____
$1,850,225**
Bus. & A g r i c ._________
866,609
Real Estate Loans ._ _ _ _______
336,823
All Other L o a n s_____ _______ _
673,356

—
+
—

-

4,736
8,774
889
12,454

+ 127,486
+ 93,164
3,601
+
+ 35,076

24,191
32,805
5,022

_ 73,438
9,754
+
—
5,581
— 36,864
— 63,290
+ 22,543

Total Security Holdings ...
_ 1,651,636
U . S. Treasury Bills _________
81,805
U . S. Treasury Certificates ..
49,686
U. S. Treasury Notes __ ____
294,722
U. S. Treasury Bonds _______
960,170
Other Bonds, Stocks & Secur.
265,253

7,153
+
— 11,085
340
+

Cash Items in Process of Col. ..
397,917
Due from Banks
___________ _ 180,838
Currency and Coin _ _ ___
79,661
Reserve with F. R. Banks _ .
532,200
Other A s s e t s ___________________
80,550
Total Assets
... ____ ..... _ $4 ,773,027

161
+
— 10,737
— 4,405
3,026
+
6,372
+
+ 13,872

_

Total Demand Deposits _______ $3 ,594,301

+ 38,895
— 17,678
+ 14,739
+ 23,278
+ 10,357
8,199
+

1,913
+
4,338
+
— 14,855
6,265
+
—
437
6,602
+

_

+
+
-

11,718
17,674
5,956

_

3,175
7,744
19,505
37,705

Deposits
Deposits
Deposits
Deposits
Certified

of Individuals _____ 2,667,419
of U. S. Government
110,063
of State & Local Gov.
201,500
of Banks ____ .. _
_
553,597*
& Officers’ Checks _
61,722

Total Time Deposits
_____
Deposits of Individuals __
Other Time Deposits . _
_

+
+
—

758,750
694,104
64,646

+
-

Liabilities for Borrowed Money
23,800
All Other Liabilities ___________
55,723
Capital Accounts ___________ ...
340,453
Total Liabilities _____________ $4, ,773,027

4,641
2,969
7,610

+
+
+

_ 21,800
1,295
123
13,872

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

* 11 V
{

12,555
— 12,337
— 3,366
—
683
+ 12,598
+ 37,705

+
+
+

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*

STATES
Maryland ________
Dist. of Columbia
Virginia __________
West Virginia ___
North Carolina _
South Carolina ___

B U IL D IN G P E R M IT F IG U R ES

(Based on Dollar Value)
Percentage change with correspond­
ing period a year ago
9 Mos. 1
Sept. 1956
— 4
+ 1
— 14
+ 1
+ 3
+ 3
— 10
+ 8
+ 7
+ 1
— 16
— 1
— 7

IN D IV ID U AL CITIES
Baltimore, Md____________
Washington, D. C. ______
Richmond, V a................ ......
Charleston, W . V a ............
Greenville, S. C.............. —

+

3

— 4
— 14
+ 13
+ 7
—23

District

+
+
+
+

1
1
4
5
2

—

Data from furniture departments of department stores as well as
furniture stores.

Stocks on
Sept. 30, 1956
compared with
Sept. 30, Aug. 31.
1956
1955
— 5
+ G

Sales in
Sept. 1956
compared with
Aug.
Sept.
1956
1955
— 6
— 10
+

+23

+ 15

+

6

— 3

+ 35

— 4

— 5
— 11

+
+

7
2

0
— 16

— 7
—21
— 17
— 12
— 4

5

+ 6
+ 17
NA
+ 18
+ 19

+ 5
+ 2
NA
— 6
— 7

+

5

— 4

— 7

+16

0

— 1
+ 4
—
—
—
+
—

6
6
9
2
3

Sept.
1956

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

Sept.
1955

1,392,523
108,666
210,825
1,088,085
80,775

$ 5,675,365
58,945
358,700
258,060
169,562

414,153
568,093
79,770
411,910
185,813
1,961,235
359,200
717,276
1,185,548
1,253,594
132,220
409,361

358,787
925,415
111,910
263,520
160,130
1,107,920
167,000
337,592
1,849,179
1,672,671
230,575
807,540

668,517
161,845
426,726

Maryland
Baltimore ____ $
Cumberland _
Frederick ____
Hagerstown ....
Salisbury ____
Virginia
Danville _____
Hampton ____
Hopewell ____
Lynchburg ___
Newport News
Norfolk ______
Petersburg ___
Portsmouth ....
Richmond ____
Roanoke _____
Staunton ____
Warwick _____
West Virginia
Charleston ___
Clarksburg ___
Huntington ....

W H O L E SA L E TRADE

LINES
Auto supplies -------------------Electrical, electronic and
appliance 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 total _____________

data

9 Months
1956

842,329
195,324
411,365

$ 53,789,717
1,221,916
4,067,045
2,014,740
1,427,097

9 Months
1955
$ 73,660,792
1,168,136
2,516,475
1,886,380
1,550,734

6,153,449
5,960,884
1,680,567
7,688,485
1,633,861
20,664,418
2,706,150
4,493,545
20,527,620
17,126,956
2,163,110
5,803,958

4,987,656
12,318,806
2,811,215
7,482,698
1,831,882
10,400,608
2,974,800
3,681,075
17,273,505
10,225,759
2,285,445
9,177,335

7,009,927
1,583,843
3,898,261

5,605,737
1,566,987
5,028,637

North Carolina
Asheville ____
659,743
537,792
5,564,048
Charlotte ____ 1,386,941
1,639,416
22,208,820
Durham ______
388,999
552,463
6,547,939
Gastonia _____
640,825
782,000
4,854,775
Greensboro ....
560,680
661,397
11,947,643
High Point ___
217,453
493,097
5,452,983
Raleigh ______
1,266,503
1,535,987
12,194,060
Rocky Mount ..
176,552178,152r
2,634,574
Salisbury _____
605,425
177,574
2,132,775
Wilson _______
158,150
523,300
3,450,203
Winston-Salem 1,124,403
1,167,125
12,725,963
South Carolina
Charleston ___
145,783
575,000
2,638,799
Columbia ____
733,494
744,606
7,908,418
Greenville ____
296,750
362,800
4,790,800
Spartanburg ..
284,828
506,067
4,047,317
Dist. of Columbia
Washington .... 9,842,463
4,860,404
47,791,380
District Totals .-$30,305,127$31,259,019r $328,506,046

2,843,351
21,913,042
8,822,931
5,973,750
8,879,570
6,180,333
16,521,883
2,730,804r
1,136,149
3,574,246
10,398,027
2,640,240
7,161,815
5,964,000
2,277,253
58,421,433
$343,873,489r

r revised.

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 STO R E O P E R A T IO N S
(Figures show percentage changes)
Other
Wash. Cities
Rich. Balt.
Sales Sept. ’56 vs Sept. ’55
Sales, 9 Mos. ending Sept.
30, ’56 vs 9 Mos. ending
Sept. 30, ’55 ------------------

+

5

— 2

+

5

Stocks, Sept. 30, ’56 vs ’55 „
Outstanding Orders,
Sept. 30, ’56 vs ’55 ----------

Seasonally Adjusted: 1947-1949 = 100
Dist.
Totals

+

2

+

7

+

3

+

6

+

7

+

6

— 5

+ 2
+ 10

+ 10

+ 16

+ 10

+

+ 20

+

+

+

1

1

3

7

Open account receivables Sept
1, collected in Sept. ’56 —

31.0

49.3

40.9

37.4

40.:

Instalment receivables Sept.
1, collected in Sept. ’56 —

10.6

13.8

12.7

15.9

13.:

Md .
Sales, Sept. ’56 vs Sept.
’55 ___________________




D.C.

— 1

+

2

Va.
+

5

W .V a.
+17

N.C.

S.C.

+

+

2

3

Sept.
1956
New passenger car registra­
tion* ________ ________________
Bank debits ___________________
Bituminous coal production* ..
Construction contracts _______
Business failures— number -----Cotton spindle hours --------------Department store sales ----------Electric power production ____
Manufacturing employment* —
Furniture store sales --------------Life insurance sales ----------------* Not seasonally adjusted,
r Revised.
Back figures available on request

i 12 V

176
110
208
311
114
140
109
226

Aug.
1956

Sept.
1955

% Chg.—
Latest Mo.
Prev.
Yr.
Mo.
Ago

164
188
llOr
240
298
118
145
203
113
121
230

200r
169r
99r
241
171
117
135r
187
113r
108
202

+ 3
— 6
0
— 13
+ 4
— 3
— 3
+ 3
+ 5
— 10
— 2

—21
+ 4
+ 11
— 14
+ 82
— 3
+ 4
+ 3
+ 1
+ 12

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