View original document

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

Atlanta, Georgia
August • 1958

Feed Manufacturing
A Growth Industry in the Sixth District

1o
Is

in

t h is is s u e :

FLOW OF BANK
LOANS TO DISTRICT
BUSINESS

DISTRICT BUSINESS
HIGHLIGHTS
SIXTH DISTRICT
STATISTICS

SIXTH DISTRICT
INDEXES

S e e k a growth industry in the Southeast and you will find one in feed
manufacturing. Ninety-four new feed mills were built in Sixth District
states from 1947 to 1954, and many others were enlarged. In Georgia
alone feed companies built at least six major mills in 1954.
Why are feed firms building so many new plants in the South? Be­
cause of the seemingly unlimited rise in broiler production and the
vast amount of feed needed for it. Only ten years ago broiler sales in
District states totaled a modest 47 million birds; last year 481 million
were sold, about ten times more. With each bird taking about 2.5
pounds of feed, the 1957 flock ate 1.2 billion pounds, or 600,000 tons.
Feed firms had several other incentives for service and growth.
Animal agriculture is clearly on the rise here: Farmers now produce
more beef, pork, milk, and eggs than they did only a decade ago and
they therefore need more mixed feeds. Then too, feed men sought to
offset rising transportation costs by building mills near markets for
mixed feed rather than near areas where ingredients are produced.
Growth in the feed industry helps both our farm and nonfarm
economies. The industry’s increased capacity supports broiler output
and helps sustain broiler income on farms. Also, feed mills use local
labor and make heavy payments for services from railroads, trucking
firms, barge lines, ports, grain elevators, and the like. Finally, by serv­
ing growers who produce broilers, eggs, beef, and pork, they help
food processors such as meat and poultry packers.

Location and Size of Mills
Most District feed manufacturers make one or more prepared feeds
for livestock or poultry; they mix corn products, oats, wheat products

^fcferaf

%setve
IBankgf
jS

fa

n

ta




Proportion of 247 Feed Mills
Making Prepared Animal Feeds
Sixth District States, 1954

Proportion of Grains Used by the
Mixed Feed Industry in the East South
Central Region of the U. S., 1947

like bran and middlings, and other raw materials
obtained largely from tne Midwest. Millers store their teed
ingredients in bins or warehouses, grind or otherwise pro­
cess some of them, and tnen mix tnem by precise formula.
Usually feed makers try to maintain production line oper­
ations, but many firms rely on batch or job-lot mixing.
Feed mills in the District are concentrated in Tennes­
see, northern Alabama, and Georgia. These locations are
convement because of the nearby poultry areas that
provide the major market for mixed feeds. Two-thirds
of the mixed feed tonnage produced in the nation is poul­
try feed, and the proportion is probably larger in District
states. Although most of the tonnage in our region is
broiler feed, laying and breeding mash for hens is being
used here more and more. Dairy feed and high protein
hog supplement, used especially in Tennessee and Georgia,
are other important products made in District mills.
Feed makers were also influenced by total costs in
selecting a location for their plants. They sought low-cost
water transport via the Tennessee River for bulk grains
—principally com, oats, and wheat—which they have to
import from the nation’s grain belts. Since 54 percent of
the poultry mash is made of corn, that waterway is highly
useful to these feed men. Com was barged from St. Louis
to Guntersville, Alabama, in April 1953 for $2.45
per ton; the cost by rail was $10.68. Trucking from
Alabama to Georgia raises millers’ costs, but not exces­
sively. Georgia mills get about three-fourths of their com
and one-third of their oats by the barge-truck route.
After World War II, national firms found that they
too had to do something about high costs. District feed
dealers, who were among their best customers, began
mixing their own feeds rather than having mixed feeds
shipped from so far away. To meet that competition
national firms built mills closer to the market; they
offset efficiency of large volume central mills in surplus
grain areas with lower transport and distribution costs
at mills in the South. Being near their customers they
could market fresher feed and operate with smaller inven­
tories, which require less bin and warehouse space. By
handling inventories of ingredients locally rather than at
distant mills they gained flexibility in mixing operations
because smaller stocks enabled them to substitute an in­
gredient in the event of price changes and the like.
Spurred by both its cost structure and the demand for
its products, the feed industry invested 3.4 million dollars
in new District plants and expansions in 1947 and 2.7
million in 1954, and probably comparable amounts in
intervening years. In 1954, firms in Georgia made the
largest investment, 917,000 dollars, which was 150 per­
cent more than they made in 1947. Recent construction
includes two 250,000-dollar mills at Flowery Branch and
Forest Park, Georgia, and two one-million-dollar mills at
Chamblee, Georgia, and Chattanooga, Tennessee.
Investments to modernize or erect plants have to be
large nowadays. It takes 17,000 dollars’ worth of ma­
chinery and equipment, for example, to replace a mill
man earning 2,600 dollars a year, according to the United
States Department of Agriculture. Even small mills putting
??c”
\ ? er eight' hour day cost between 55,000 and
175,000 dollars. Medium or 150-ton mills cost from



175,000 to a million dollars, and large or 500-ton m
ills
cost a million dollars or more.
Investments since World War II have pushed the feed
industry in the District to fair size. Its size is measured in
one way by the 56 million dollars in value added through
manufacture in 1954. This measure places it below the
District s meat packing industry that produced 72 million
dollars in value added, but above two other important
industries—tobacco manufacture and electrical machin­
ery. By employment, another measure of size, the feed
industry fell below tobacco and electrical machinery. The
feed industry employed 6,971 people in 1954 and met a
payroll totaling 22 million dollars. Workers in the tobac­
co manufacturing and electrical machinery industries
totaled 9,000 and 7,000, respectively.

More Efficiency Needed
Although the feed industry in the District has invested
capital in new facilities and has otherwise grown, it is not
as efficient as it is elsewnere. Taken broadly, soutnern
mills use 30 to 50 percent more man hours per ton than
mills in other regions, according to analyses by the USDA.
Since this poor productivity is offset by generally lower
wage rates, manufacturing costs of District firms are low
enough that they can compete with mills elsewhere. Never­
theless, wage rates are under upward pressure, and if they
rise District millers will have to protect their competitive
position by using labor more efficiently. The room for
improvement is large. Based on an analysis of a national
sample, small mills use 5.69 man hours per ton produced,
whereas a model small mill uses only 1.80 man hours.
Large mills too could do better. They now use 1.90 man
hours per ton but could achieve a level of .80 hours.
Analysts say that because all mills use two or three times
the labor they should, they need to invest more funds to
modernize and better equip their plants.
Some investment will be most profitable if made in im
*
proving facilities and techniques in warehouses, since
labor is used least efficiently there. Warehousing comes
to about a third of a mill’s total labor cost or twice as
much as mixing or mill maintenance costs. Yet warehouse
labor is nonproductive almost a third of the working tim
e,
according to studies by the USDA. Men wait to unload
cars or trucks; they wait to load; they wait for others down
the line to complete their jobs. By speeding change-overs
in daily operations and loading and unloading and by
steadying the flow of work, District firms can cut their costs.
Adjusting plant facilities and schedules to cut labor
costs,.however, is not easy. Often a firm manager m
ust
first answer difficult questions: Should I specialize my P10"
duction, that is, produce only a few feeds? Should I ^
straight production line mixing to turn out a large but
steady flow of one feed or batch m ixing that allows ®
e
to use labor and materials more flexibly or a combination
of line and batch mixing? Can I profitably use bulk de­
livery to my plant, bulk storage in the plant, a n d butt
delivery to my patrons if poultry feed is my major item
Can I economically adjust or relocate my equipment t°
keep my labor fully employed? To find the right answer
to these questions is often to reduce operating costs. Th,s
•

2

•

is true because labor accounts for 60 percent of those
costs in a feed mill.
Firms also seek to lower costs by raising tonnage han­
dled. They try to spread their costs for machinery, labor,
electricity, trucks, and so on over many tons of feed.
Costs can be lowered significantly as volume is gained:
Fixed costs at a sample of mills producing less than 5,000
tons a year, for example, were five dollars a ton in 1952,
say USDA specialists. They were two dollars a ton at mills
mixing 45,000 tons or more. Operating costs at the time
were 16 dollars a ton at mills with small volume, but nine
dollars a ton at mills with large volume. Small mills, of
course, can have management skilled enough to achieve
low manufacturing costs and thus compete with large mills.
Nevertheless, even small mills do better as they gain vol­
ume because volume accounts for almost two-thirds of
the variation in labor costs per ton among plants.
Finally, District mills seek to lower costs through their
policies on the principal item in their total cost—raw ma­
terials. With raw materials accounting for four-fifths of
total cost, how cheaply they are bought, stored, and
moved helps determine net profits. Mill managers, there­
fore, strive to make their inventory policy profitable, that
is, to keep the rate of turnover high. Small mills generally
turn their inventories 10 times a year; large mills 25 times.

Further Progress Possible
Feed manufacturers seeking lower costs, higher volume,
and higher inventory turnover know they must resolve
some subsidiary problems that affect their over-all suc­
cess. A major one is whether to rely more or less on the
feed dealer system for marketing their feeds. Trucking
feed direct from a plant to farms within a trade area may
be the most profitable system for some. For others, bulk
delivery may build volume, since fewer and fewer poultry-

men want to wrestle with 100-pound bags of feed. Bulk
delivery, however, does not necessarily cut feed handling
costs. Then there is the perennial problem of pricing fin­
ished goods. Should the small volume items be marked up
sufficiently to carry their share of the manufacturing and
marketing costs? This matter is especially troublesome to
mills producing many feeds.
Finally, District millers speculate about how intensive­
ly they should seek higher volume. True, they see oppor­
tunity or potential for more sales. The broiler market,
for example, evidently is still growing and farmers’ mount­
ing interest in laying flocks generates potential sales of
laying mash. Rising pork and beef output should also
build the feed market.
Although feed makers see those potentials for added
business, they are uncertain about how best to get it.
They are not sure how far to push financing programs
and contract farming. And they wonder about how much
emphasis to put on trade credit as a competitive weapon.
Those whose business is based on broiler feed can decide
most easily. They have had experience with it. They are
less decisive, however, about their programs for laying
mash and livestock feed. Simply building tonnage without
controlling manufacturing costs or the costs of buying,
storing, and moving raw materials or the risks on their
capital can prove an illusory gain.
Feed firms that have made investments so far have not
only benefited themselves but farmers and other business­
men as well. To the extent that feed men justifiably invest
funds to lower costs, raise output, and increase over-all
efficiency, livestock and poultry producers here gain ad­
vantage over those in other areas. To the extent that small
mills can cut their costs enough and raise their volume
enough to keep them in the competitive struggle for feed
sales, our agriculture also is strengthened.
A r t h u r H. K a n t n er

Flow of Bank Loans to District Business
The South needs more funds to finance its expanding
economy than can be generated within the region. It is
necessary, therefore, to supplement funds from its own
sources with credit from other parts of the country.
These facts are generally recognized, but little is known
specifically about how much financing is obtained from
sources outside the South, where the funds come from,
0r to whom they go.
Answers to some questions relating to one phase of
the financing of southern economic activity, that is, bank
lending to businesses in the South, are now forthcoming.
A recent analysis of a survey of commercial bank loans
conducted by the Federal Reserve System in October
1955 provides detailed information on the flow of bank
loans into and out of that part of the South lying within
Sixth Federal Reserve District—Alabama, Florida,
Georgia, the southern half of Louisiana and Missis­
sippi, and the eastern two-thirds of Tennessee. In addi­
tion, data on the location of District borrowers relative to
their banks are available for the first time.




The survey showed bank financing of Sixth District
businesses is largely provided by District banks, although
some businesses, particularly the larger ones, obtain bank
funds from outside the District, mainly from New York
City. Funds do not flow in only one direction, however,
and some District banks extend credit to businesses in
cities outside this District. Since more funds flow into
the District than flow out, the District as a whole is a
net borrower.

Local Banks Are Major Source of Funds
Do borrowers in the Sixth District patronize banks in
their own vicinity or do they go away from home for
financing help? In order to answer this question, we
placed banks in three groups: those located in the same
city, county, or metropolitan area as the borrower, those
located outside the county or metropolitan area in which
the borrower is situated, and those located outside the
District. When borrowers and lenders were grouped in
this manner and loans were tabulated by amount, we
•

3

•

is quantitatively much more important than nonlocal
lending. District banks that do the most nonlocal lending
— lending to borrowers outside the metropolitan area or
county in which the bank is situated— are the large
banks. Since banks with deposits of $100 million or more
tend to locate in large cities, nonlocal lending is relatively
more important there than in smaller cities and towns.
Banks in major cities in the District for which separate
loan data were obtained accounted for more than 50 per­
cent of all nonlocal loans outstanding. The proportion of
nonlocal loans outstanding in the portfolios of banks
varied substantially among major cities in the District,
ranging from a high of 39 percent for banks in Atlanta
to a low of 13 percent for banks in Miami. Jacksonville
and Nashville ranked behind Atlanta, with 32 and 28 per­
cent of their outstanding loans going to nonlocal bor­
rowers, followed by Birmingham and New Orleans with
26 and 20 percent, respectively.
A l f r e d P. J ohnson
Debits to Individual Demand Deposit Accounts
(In Thousands of Dollars)
Percent Change
June 1958 from 1958
May
June
from
1958
1957 1957

June
1958
ALABAMA
Anniston . . . .
Birmingham
. .
Dothan . . . .
Gadsden . . . .
Mob le . . . .
Montgomery
. .
Selma* . . . .
Tuscaloosa* . . .
FLORIDA
Daytona Beach*
Fort Lauderdale* .
Gainesville*
. .
Jacksonville . . .
Key West* . . .
Lakeland* . . .
Miami
. . . .
Greater Miami*
Orlando . . . .
Pensacola . . .
St. Petersburg . .
Tampa . . . .
West Palm Beach*.
GEORGIA
Albany . . . .
Athens* . . . .
Atlanta . . . .
Augusta . . . .
Brunswick . . .
Columbus
. . .
Elberton . . . .
Gainesville* . . .
Griffin* . . . .
LaGrange* . . .
Macon
. . . .
Marietta* . . .
Newnan . . . .
Rome* . . . .
Savannah
. . .
Valdosta . . . .
LOUISIANA
Alexandria* . . .
Baton Rouge . .
Lafayette*
. .
Lake Charles . .
New Orleans
. .
MISSISSIPPI
Bilaxi-Gulfport*
Hattiesburg . . .
Jackson . . . .
Laurel* . . . .
Meridian
. . .
Natchez*
. . .
Vicksburg . . .
TENNESSEE
Bristol* . . . .
Chattanooga
. .
Johnson City* . .
Kingsport* . . .
Knoxville
. . .
Nashville
. . .
SIXTH DISTRICT
32 Cities
. . .
UNITED STATES

May
1958

June
1957

34,978
726,663
23,355
28,529
239,551
139,994
43,316

35,855
711,070
24,155
32,791
243,332
144,793
21,476
46,183

36,133
693,551
22,809
33,661
243,255
122,035
19,365
40,018

54,878
183,573
33,518
626,514
14,394
63,690
759,119
1,131,635
165,477
76,627
149,074
311,980
95,549

52,696
173,637
33,536
641,240
15,045
61,648
691,607
1,059,591
166,123
78,436
145,324
327,750
104,794

47,691
159,334
30,719
609,973
11,838
57,310
653,080
997,730
152,118
83,523
141,259
289,951
84,580

54,695
35,892
1,625,495
87,952
18,672
93,990
8,534
49,341
15,782
16,302
101,217
24,032
14,401
35,693
184,156
20,713

60,076
34,844
1,599,704
89,266
20,990
93,422
10,435
53,391
16,965
18,408
104,858
26,797
15,810
36,541
177,200
23,031

48,986
30,909
1,604,851
83,713
17,899
96.878
8,008
44.878
16,046
18,841
99,000
25,022
14,542
35,804
165,% 7
21,144

66,616

—3
—8
— 15
—3
+3
—5

20,111

64,665
184,061
51,351
80,804
1,211,772

60,148
83,5%
1,236,988

61,072
169,898
47,664
75,588
1,179,837

41,353
29,680
237,149
22,523
36,067
18,414
17,148

40,141
31,397
252,212
22,882
43,163
19,581
18,640

35,978
29,093
170000
21,831
35,064
21,025
16,825

40,316
287,673
37,631
70,143
206,122
618,139
8,400,301

‘ Not included in Sixth District totals.




201,011

39,426
269,543
37,765
68,055
201,382
589,189
8,364,389

37,350
268,862
36,209
62 806
199,938
572,535

— —3 — 3
2
+2
+5
+0
— +2 —
3
0
—13 — 15
—7
— — —
2
2 10
— 3 +15
+4
+4
+2
+8

+4
+6

+8

+ 15
+15
+9
+3

+9
+3
+9
+9
+3

—
0
—
2
— +22
4
+3
+10 + 1 1
+ 16
+7
+ 13
—
0
tl
—2
+3
—5
—9
—9
+3

+2

—
1
—
11
+1
— 18
—8
—7

+6

+8

+13

+12

+ 16
+1
+5
+4
—3
+7

+10

—
2
—1 — 13
1
—3
+2
—
10 —4
—9
—1
— —
2
0
+4 +11
— —
10
2

—
2

—6

—
2

— 16

+6

•+6
+8

+15
+2
+39
+3
+3
— 12
+2

+12
+3

+8

The newly organized City Bank and Trust Company,
New Iberia, Louisiana, opened for business July 9 as
a nonmember bank and began to remit at par for
checks drawn on it when received from the Federal
Reserve Bank. Officers of the bank are Leon J. M
invielle, Sr., Chairman of the Board; Francis J. Voorhies,
President; Wilfred J. Begnaud, Senior Vice President;
John T. Abdalla, Vice President; Paul Romero, Jr.,
Executive Vice President and Cashier; and Marlin /.
Nereaux, Assistant Cashier. Its capital totals $150,000
and surplus and undivided profits, $120,000.
On July 15, the Hancock Bank, Gulfport, Missis­
sippi, a nonmember bank with branches at Bay St.
Louis, Long Beach, and Pass Christian, began to remit
at par. Officers are Leo W. Seal, President; Donald
Sutter, Vice President and Cashier; George E. Estes,
Vice President and Senior Trust Officer; N. D. Good­
win, Vice President and Trust Officer; W. B. Stewart,
T. W. Milner, Jr., W. C. Helveston, W. C. Lewis, Leo
W. Seal, Jr., Ruth Cazeneuve, and Robert L. Hamil­
ton, Vice Presidents; C. E. Hutchins, Jr. and Margaret
P. Gause, Assistant Vice Presidents; Gertrude 0.
Dowling, Charles A. Webb, Jr., J. B. Rouse, Russell
W. Chapman, and Drusilla Courtenay, Assistant Cash­
iers; James T. Tune, Auditor. Capital totals $350,000
and earned surplus and undivided profits, $1,283,000.
The First Park Bank, Pinellas Park, Florida, opened
for business August 1 as a nonmember par-remitting
bank. Officers are George Ruppel, Chairman of the
Board and President; Lewis E. Scruggs, Executive Vice
President and Cashier; Stanley W. Mohr, Vice Presi­
dent; and Ray L. Coon, Assistant Cashier. Capitol
stock of the bank amounts to $250,000 and surplus
and undivided profits to $150,000.
Department Store Sales and Inventories*
Percent Change

+2

+6

_____________ Sales___________
June 1958 from
6 months
June 1958 from
May
1957
1957
1958

+2

+1

+11

+8

+6

+3
—7
+1

—
0
+3
—3

+0

—7
+1

+6
—
2

+8

+8

+2

+6

+7
+3

+7
+4

+3

+3

—3
+1

+8

+2

+5

+6

+8

—
0

+7

+8

Bank Announcements

+9

+7

+1
+10
+7
+4

—
2
—
2
—
0
—1
+4

+3
—3
+3

+0

+6

+2

+ 12

+ 14

State and
Metrop. A r e a _________
A L A B A M A ............................
Birm ingham ..............
M ob ile.....................
Montgomery.................
FLO RID A.....................
Daytona Beach
Jacksonville.........................
’
Miami A r e a ..............
Miami
O rla n d o ..............
’ \
St. Petersburg-Tampa
GEORGIA
. . . .
Atlanta**
. . . ! ! ’ **
Augusta
Columbus.................
’
M acon..............
Rome1
**
Savannah
L O U ISIA N A .................
Baton Rouge ..............
New Orleans .
M ISSISSIP P I . . . .
Jackson ...................
Meridian** . . . .
TENNESSEE
Bristol-Klnqsport>Johnson City** !
Bristol (Tenn. & Va.)** . .
Chattanooga..............
Knoxville.............. ! ’ * ’
D IS T R IC T ..............

; ;

— 13
— 14
— 13
— 13
—8
+4
— 21
—4
— 2
— 12
— 10
— 11
— 13
— 10
—9
—8
— 23
— 1
— 11
— 8
— 13
— 15
— 18
— 13
— 17
—6
— 10
— 20
— 21
— 11

Inventoria__

jiie30TW
58jf*!
May 31,

J"eM.

1958

1957
—c
—3

+U

—3
— 4
— 2
— 3
+0
+1
—5
+1
— 3
— 3
+5
—0
+1
—8
+5
+1
— 22
— 2

—5
—5

+0

—4

—7
— 11

— 2
— 1
— 3
— 2
+3
+6
— 3
+3
+1
— 3
+8
+6
+7
— 7
+1 1
+10
— 25

til
—c

— 1
— 2
—3
+1
+6
— 3
—7
+2

— 1
— 5
— 2
— 4
— 1
— 5
— 11
— 3
—2
6
— 2

—5
••
—5
—6
••
—4
—6
—7
••
—2
—3

-b

—3
—3
-— 6
—5
—6

—
-4
—6

+5

. . r ep°rVn» stores account for over 90 percent of total District departmem
department stores, hmever, are not used in computing the District P«fC*nt

-2
-0

-14
__2
+0
-2
-10
— 20
-7
-3
-2
—8
-18
-7
-7
-5

-jy ,

Sixth District Indexes
Seasonally Adjusted (1947-49 = 100)
1958

1957

SIXTH DISTRICT

OCT.

NOV.

DEC.

JAN.

FEB.

APR.

MAY

JUNE

135r
119r
166
131
186r
lllr
78r
161
106r
89r
220r
195r
85r
303

135r
118r
166
131
185r
lllr
76r
159
lO lr

134r
118
164
132r
181r
lllr
76r
159
lOOr
89r
226r
194
78r
295

134
117
167
130r
181r
114r
75r
158
96r
88r
215r
187
82r
317

133
115r
167
129
177r
113r
74r
156
91r
87r
200r
182
79r
325

133r
115r
165
127
174r
llO r
72r
157r
91r
85r
194r
183
79r
311

132r
114r
161 r
131r
176r
llO r
72r
158
90r
85
187r
182
74
306

132r
113r
167r
133r
176r
109r
72r
157r
93r
85r
172
183
75
297

133
115
170
131
183
109
72
158
91
84

88r
297

136r
120r
166r
133
186r
112r
77r
159
105r
90r
235r
198r
91r
299

172
330
319
340
142r
131r
155r
171
159
177
128
149
119
127
151
147
267
148
183
204
114
162
263
231
152
168
111

160
330
341
321
104r
79r
154r
175
167
194
138
151

164
315
324
308
89r
70r
152r
168
154
181
132
147

167
283
334
241
99r
84r
158r
154
149
187
128
141

175
259
294
229
128r
103r
172r
169
156

169
264
272
257
119r
97r
161r
157
151
181

170
298
293
303
118r
92r
156r
147
147
171

118
139
136
244
145
177
208
103
159
265

167
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
153e
n.a.
n.a.
175p
169
205p
129
144
106
126
137p
165
259p
144p

107
161
270
227
146
157

128
99
116
128
137
227
135
174
199
93
161
269
226
144
155

110

162r
318
301
332
150r
134r
177r
155
153
164
117
136
99
108
141
151
242
135
181
190
103
170
275
229
141
160
106

169
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
157r
145r
176r
164
154
172
130
145
107

132
156
141
267
151
189

142
109
127
146
139
234
132
192

168
309
279
333
121r
87r
160
158
157
175
132
141
97

135
158
166
274
148
185
203

161
261
288
239
104r
90r
152r
162
154
205
123
147
115
130
144
143
231
140
195
206
108
159
263
216
136
144
99

123
114
185
113
140
219

122r
114
187
131
140
219

123
113
193
125
139
223

123r
109
186r
100
139
226

123r
107
173
117
139

121r
105
170r
123
139
224

119r
103
162
99
139
221

119r
102
165
104
140
223

119
103
162
109
150
226

119
104
166
117
147
229

178r
175r
277r
115r
201
405

180r
176r
284r
124
206
410

180r
179r
287r
114
207
414

181r
177r
290r
111

179r
178r
287r
106

176r
171r
278r

176r
171r
273r
99
206
428

175r
168r
264r
95
213
436

176r
167r
271r
109
218
448

177r
171r
280r
107
221
444

128r
122r
194r
105
142
216

129r
121r
197r
106
145
218

128r
115r
183r
107
141
210

132r
lOOr
172r
128
155
262

133r
101 r
171r
137r
155
261

. 125r
. 121r
. 206r
90
. 155
. 280

122r
Nonfarm Employment . . . .
120r
Manufacturing Employment . .
191r
Manufacturing Payrolls . . . .
87
[urnlture Store Sales* . . . .
Member Bank D e p o s it s * .............. 144
229
Member Bank L o a n s * .................. 229

MAY
Nonfann Employment..................... 135r
Manufacturing Em ploym ent.............. 121r
Apparel................................... 171r
Chemicals................................135r
Fabricated M e t a ls ..................... 182r
Food...................................... 114r
Lbr., Wood Prod., Fur. & Fix.
. . .
77r
Paper & Allied P ro d u c ts.............. 163r
Primary M e t a ls .........................109r
Textiles................................... 92r
Transportation Equipment.............. 223r
Manufacturing P a y r o lls ..................
194
Cotton Consumption**..................... 87r
Electric Power Production**..............
308
Petrol. Prod, in Coastal
Louisiana & Mississippi**
. . . .
195
Construction C o n tra cts*..................
311
Residential................................
291
A llO tlie r................................
327
Farm Cash Receipts.........................122r
C r o p s ................................... 98r
Livestock................................155r
Dept. Store Sales* /*•
..................168
Atlanta ...................................
163
183
Baton R o u g e ............................
Birm ingham ............................ 134
Chattanooga............................ 144r
Jackson................................... 112
Jacksonville............................ 128r
Kn oxville................................ 154
M a c o n ................................... 149
M ia m i................................... 250r
New O rle a n s............................
142
Tampa-St. Petersburg..................
185
Dept. Store Stocks*......................... 200
Furniture Store S a l e s * / * * .............. 108
Member Bank D e p o sits* .................. 160
Member Bank L o a n s * .....................
260
Bank D e b its*................................ 224
Turnover of Demand Deposits* . . . .
144
In Leading C itie s.........................
159
Outside Leading C it ie s .................. 109

JUNE

JULY

AUG.

SEPT.

135
121
171
135r
189r
114r
77r
164r
108r
90
235r
197r
89
310

136r
121
165r
135r
193r
115r
77r
158r
108
90r
240r
201
88r
298

136r
121r
164
132r
189r
lllr
76r
161
107
90r
248r

170
320
325
315
127r
108r
147r
171r
158
186
131
148r
107
130r
148
151
251
148
187
201r
111
159
261
223
140
160
103

200

121

110
160
268
225
147
166
106

111

201
105
161
268
231
144
158

110

102

221
138
145

101

ALABAMA
Nonfann Em ploym ent.............. ... 123
Manufacturing Employment . . . .
113
Manufacturing Payrolls..................181
Furniture Store S a l e s ..................117
Member Bank D eposits.................. 140
Member Bank Lo an s.....................
215

123

112
188
111
136
223

88
1%

220r
84r
299

122
112
185
120
136
218

201
126
145
117
133
156
149
255
147
207
207
113
162
269
235
149
160
113

222

121

202

111

FLORIDA
Nonfarm Employment . .
Manufacturing Employment

M ber Bank Loans . . . .
em

. 176r
. 172r
271r
113
201
. 404

212

415

416

213
417

177r
177r
288r
126
213
423

129r
119r
198r
107
141
219

129r
118
191 r
107
141
217

129r
116r
186r
103
138
212

128r
118r
l% r
HI
137
208

128r
117r
190r
HO
142
212

133r
101
172r
139
156
267

134r
100
172r
147
155
272

134r
lO lr
173
133
154
271

133r
101 r
172
133
153
268

132r
99
170r
135
151
265

124r
122r
208r
105r
155
283

125r
124r
217r
83
157
286

124r
123r
217r
75
158
288

126r
123r
212r
85
154
282

126r
123r
206r
80
147
293

125r
121r
205r
95
149
294

121r
120r
189r
86
144
233

120r
119r
192r
85
148
236

120r
119r
194r
82
148
236

120
119r
191 r
82
147
236

120r
118r
190r
82
146
230

119r
118r
188r
80
147
233

211

178r
180r
287r

111

100
210
427

111

112

GEORGIA
Nonfarm Employment........................ 129r
Manufacturing Employment . . . . 121r
Manufacturing Payrolls.........................193r
Furniture Store S a l e s ........................ 106
M ber Bank Deposits........................ 142
em
M ber Bank Lo an s............................. 214
em
LOUISIANA
Manufacturing Employment

132r
%r
172r
148
153
274

125r
120r
210r
107
154
2%

TENNESSEE

s r r s

zxuzzs?™-




118r
116r
186r
87
148
236

122
139
148
233
125
186
193
95
166
272

220
139
150

122

147
159
244
137
203
191r
104
171r
276
219
141
155

112

192
80
n.a.

202

191 p
104p
174
278
237
147
168

110

119
105
173
HOp
151
234

180
174
292
108p
226
446

126r
113r
177r
91
147
212

125r
112
171r
92
150
214

131r
98
169r
116
154
269

130r
96
168r
137
156
266

129r
96
171r
123
155
267

129r
95
169r
121
158
270

127
94
167
125p
160
269

126r
122r
211r
88
163
302

125r
122r
207r
77
164
305

125r
122r
226r
79
167
308

125r
124r
221r
90
187
309

125r
123r
221 r
88
189
333

123
123
226
97
191
338

119r
116r
179r
85
146
239

117r
H 2r
179r
72
148
233

118r
113r
181r
75
155
236

118r
112r
178r
84
156
242

117r
112r
179r
84
158
246

117
114
180
79p
160
251

131 r
98
171 r
135
151
268

124r
109r
167r
104
150
214

201

126r
114r
177r
86
141
208

MISSISSIPPI
Nonfarm Employment . .
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls . .
Furniture Store Sales* . .
Member Bank Deposits*
Member Bank Loans* . .

MAR.

125
114
182
102p
153
218

-

SIXTH DISTRICT BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS
Nonform Employment

M.

L ost i n d i c a t o r s of economic activity have im proved recently.

Mfg Employment

Nonfarm employment rose in June as a result of gains in most types
of manufacturing employment. A longer work week, together with
the expanded employment, increased factory payrolls appreciably.
Bank lending continued to rise. Farm receipts, however, declined
slightly, reflecting softening in prices for fruits, vegetables, and some
livestock products. Consumers stepped up their spending, judging
from increases in both bank debits and sales at most retail outlets.
Nonfarm employment, seasonally adjusted, increased slightly in June after
declining almost steadily since last summer. Improvement in manufactures
employment was primarily responsible for the gain; the nonmanufoctuHnf
sector changed little. An increase in the average work week, together wiA
the rise in employment, brought a sharp rise in factory payrolls. The rat# ti
insured unemployment dropped more than usual.

Cotton Consumption

Form C o sh Receipts

Cotton textile activity, as measured by seasonally adjusted cotton consump>
tion, increased in June for the second consecutive month, but is still coa*
paratively low. Steel output declined in July, which is usual for that tin*
of year. Crude oil production in Coastal Louisiana and Mississippi declined
slightly in June.
Bank debits, seasonally adjusted, increased sharply in June, suggesting *
rise in total spending. Department store sales, seasonally adjusted, remainsi
unchanged in July at the record high; inventories also were unchanged
Furniture store sales held steady in June at recently improved levels tai
household appliance stores reported larger-than-usual gains in sales.
Cash receipts from farm marketings, seasonally adjusted, declined i
June, but still exceeded year-ago levels by a sizable margin. Farm prices &
clined in June, largely because of lower prices of fresh fruit and vegetables
beef cattle prices also declined, but hog and broiler prices improved. Beskhl
being slightly larger than last year, the flue-cured tobacco crop— now movtaj
to market—is of high quality.

Member Bonk




Member bank deposits and loans, seasonally adjusted, rose sharply •
June. All states shared in the rise in deposits, and only Louisiana failed •
register an increase in loans. Investments also rose as banks, principal
those in major cities, added to their holdings of both Government and otW
securities. In July, loans outstanding at banks in leading cities dropp*
more than they did during the same period last year. Member bank bor­
rowings from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta declined further 4
July.