The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
M O N T H L Y R E V I E W O f F in a n c ia l, A g r ic u ltu r a l, T r a d e a n d I n d u s tr ia l C o n d itio n s in th e S ix th F e d e ra l R e s e r v e D is tr ic t F E D E R A L VOL. 16, N o . 6 R E S E R V E O F A T LA N TA This review released lor publication i afternoon papers o flo a e 80. A T L A N T A , G A ., June 30, 1931. NATIONAL SUMMARY OF BUSINESS CONDITIONS Prepared by Federal Reserve Board Volum e of industrial production show ed little change betw een April and M ay, follow ing upon increases for four consecutive m onths, w hile factory em ploym ent declined by the usual seasonal am oun t. T h e general level of wholesale prices continued to decline. Production and Employment Volum e of industrial production, as m easured by the B oard ’s seasonally adjusted in d ex, w as ab ou t th e sam e in M ay a s in April, 9 per cent larger than in D ecem ber, and 14 per cent sm aller th an in M ay 1930. S teel o u tp u t continued to decline m ore rapidly than is usual a t th is season, an d consum ption of cotton by dom estic m ills w as also curtailed) while w ool consum p tion continued to increase, contrary to the usual seasonal tendency, and sh oe production, w hich ordinarily declines in M ay, show ed little change; daily average o u tp u t of autom obiles, according to prelim inary reports, w as ab ou t th e sam e as in A pril. D uring the first three weeks of June activ ity a t steel m ills declined further. In th e first five m onth s of the year taken as a w hole, ou tp u t of textile m ills an d shoe factories h as been in about th e sam e volum e as in th e corresponding period of last year, w hile ou tp u t of steel, autom obiles, and lum ber h as been ab ou t one third sm aller. C hanges in em ploym ent from th e m iddle of April to th e m iddle of M ay were of th e usual seasonarcharacter in m any m anu facturing industries. In th e iron an d steel industry, how ever, a t car building shops, and a t establishm ents producing m achinery, em ploy m ent declined considerably, w hile it increased in th e autom obile and tire industries. A t tex tile m ills em ploym ent increased som ew hat, contrary to seasonal tendency, while in the cloth in g industry th e num ber em ployed decreased. V alue of building contracts aw arded in M ay was som ew hat sm aller th a n in April, reflecting chiefly a decline in aw ards for public w orks an d u tilities. In th e first h alf of June, daily average value of contracts aw arded increased som ew hat, reflecting larger awards for public works an d u tilities, offset in part by decreases in awards for other types of construction. Distribution B A N K Sales by departm ent stores decreased in M ay, contrary to th e usual seasonal tendency, an d the B oard ’s in d ex declined to th e level prevailing before th e sharp increase in April T otal freight carloadings increased som ew hat less th an u s u a l Wholesale Prices T h e general level of w holesale prioes declined 2.7 per cen t further in M ay, according to th e B ureau of Labor S tatistics, reflecting large decreases in prioes of agricultural prod u cts, textiles, nonferrous m etals, and building m aterials. In th e first half of June prices of live stock , w hieh had declined rapidly in April and M ay, advanced, while prices of petroleum continued to decline. Bank C redit Loans and in vestm en ts of reporting m em ber banks in leading cities declined further by ab ou t $285,000,000, in th e four weeks en d in g June 17, reflecting reductions in Loans on securities. “A ll O ther” Loans, largely com m ercial, have show n little change since th e early part of M ay. T h e banks1 in vestm en ts, which reached a new high level late in A pril, were reduced som ew h at during M ay and have fluctu ated w ithin a range from $7,800,000,000 to $7,850,000,000 since th a t tim e. D uring the four weeks en d in g June 17 there were im ports of gold from Argentina and Canada, and in ad d ition a large am ount of gold previously earm arked for foreign account w as re leased in th e U n ited S tates. T h e to ta l increase in th e stock of m one tary gold was $120,000,000 for the period, of w hich $90,000,000 w as added during th e la st w eek. P aym en ts o f currency in to circulation, accom panying b an k suspensions in th e C hicago district, absorbed a large part of th e fun d s arising ou t o f th e ad d ition s t o th e gold stock , w ith th e consequence th at there w as little change in th e volu m e o f re serve bank credit. Money Rates M on ey rates in th e open m arket con tinu ed at a low lev el during M ay an d th e first three w eeks o f June. There w as a further decline in prevailing rates on com m ercial paper from a range of 2-2} to a lev el o f 2 per cent, w hile rates on bankers ac ceptances were unchanged a t J o f 1 per cent. R a tes paid o n d ep osits by banks were further reduced an d clearing house banks in a number of financial centers established a rate o f § of 1 per cent on bankers balances. PERCENT 120 120 WHOLESAUE PRICES 110 110 100 ! r* w ' \ 90 r 100 ------Toods 90 Commodities 80 70 60 In d e x n u m b e c s o f p r o d u c t io n o f m a n u f a c t u r e ! a n d m in e r a ls o w n b in e d (1991-1915 a v e r a g e * 100). L a t e s t f ig u r e ju sFRASER t e d f o r s e a s o n a l v a r ia t io n s Digitizeda dfor M a y 89. \ 1927 1928 1929 1930 a e s o f t h e U n it e d S t a t e s B u r e a u o f L a b o r Indexes Latesi^ K g iu r ^ M a y : F a r m p r o d u c t s 6 0 ; t oooo d com: 80 V 1931 70 60 p ro d u c ts^ 8 3 ; O th e r 2 M O N T H LY BILLIONS OF DOLLARS R E V IE W ilCllflNS or DOLLARS 10 5500 R E S IR VC BANK CItE Dlt AND rACTQRS IN CH/\NGES r v.■■ Money mGircfolatmn 5000 ' -------- *»500 <•000 2500 ernbtrBwSr ReserveBabifcts 2000 •■ . 2000 .A 1000 1500 V. . f Reserve Bank Credit 1000 500 500 1927 1928 1929 T930 5000 1*500 Gold Stock-— - , X _____ 4000 2300 1500 ^ 5500 1931 M o n th ly average of w eekly figures fo r re p o rtin g b a n k s in le a d in g cities. L a te sflg u re s a re averages of firs t th r e e w eeks Jn Jiin O . M onthly Averages of d ally figures. L a te st fig u res are averages of first 17 d ay s in J u n e . SIXTH DISTRICT SUMMARY Varying trends are indicated in the available aeries of statistics re lating to business, finance, industry and agriculture in the Sixth Dis trict during May. Department store trade was in about the same volume as in April but wholesale trade declined, and both continued less than a year ago. Discounts for member banks by the Federal Reserve Bank increased between May 13 and June 10, but loans and investments of weekly reporting member banks declined. Debits to individual accounts at 26 clearinghouse centers of the district declined 2 per cent h i May compared with April and were 19 per cent less than in May 1930. May sales by reporting department stores declined less than one per cent compared with April, and were 8.3 per cent less than in May 1930. Wholesale distribution decreased 5.9 per eent from April to May and averaged 23.7 per cent smaller than in May a year ago. For the first five months of the year retail trade has been 9.8 par cent, and wholesale trade 25.4 per eent, smaller than in that period of 1930. Building permits reported from twenty cities declined substantially from the April total, which included several large projects, and were 45.7 per cent less than in May last year. Total contract awards in the sixth district were 66 per cent, and residential contracts 37.3 per cent, less than in May a year ago. Consumption of cotton in May by mills in Georgia was 12.4 per cent, and in Alabama 1.1 per cent, smaller than in May 1930 Output of cotton cloth mills increased over the month and was slightly larger than a year ago, but production of yarn declined. Production of coal in Alabama and Tennessee declined in comparison with April, and was less than a year ago, but total output of pig iron in Alabama gained 3.7 per cent from April to May. For the first five months of 1931 pig iron production has been 25.5 per cent less in Alabama, and 38.2 per cent less in the United States as a whole, than in that period last year. Production of turpentine and rosin, re flected in receipt# at the three principal markets of the district, show decreases in May of 24.1 per cent in turpentine, and 19.7 per cent in robin, compared with May last year. The lack of rainfall, and lower than usual temperatures, continued through May in many parts Of the district, arid mosi crops have been affected to some extent by both of these factors* Some rains have improved conditions during the first half of June. Peaches are report ed much better than a year ago, and a larger crop is estimated by the United States Department of Agriculture. Sales of fertilizer tags in this district from August through May have averaged 30.4 per cent less than in that part of the preceding season; any other Wednesday since January 7. With the exception of the last report date of 1930, and the four weeks from March 19 through April 9 of that year, this total was smaller than for other weekly report dates in 1930,1929 and the last nine months of 1928. The gain since the low point at the middle of April has been due largely to an increase of nearly 8 millions of dollars in this bank’s holdings of United States Government securities, although holdings of purchased bills have in creased 3.5 millions, and discounts have increased 2.6 millions since April 15. Total discounts increased from 10 millions on May 13, figures for which date were shown in the preceding issue of this Review, to nearly 12.5 millions on June 10, compared with 30 millions a year ago. Dis counts secured by United States Government obligations increased from $343,000 on May 13 to $986,000 a week later, but declined to $534,000 on June 10. Qther discounts gained approximately 2.2 millions between May 13 and June 10, but were less than half those a year ago. Holdings of purchased bills increased slightly during this four week period and were 1.3 millions less than at the same time last year, but holdings of United States securities, although slightly less than on May 13, amounted to $20,673,000 compared with $3,433,000 at the same time last year. Total holdings of bills and securities on June 10 amounted to $42341000, compared with $39,946,000 four weeks earlier, and with $44,142,000 on the same report date a year ago. Reserves and Federal Reserve notes in actual circulation declined, but deposits increased, between May 13 and June 10, and decreases are shown in each of these items compared with the corresponding report date last year. Principal items in the weekly statement are shown comparatively in the table. FINANCE Reserve Bank The volume of reserve bank credit outstanding at the Credit Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, represented by its total holdings of discounted and purchased bills and securities, increased from 28.3 millions of dollars on April 15, the lowest level in six years, to 42.3 millions on Jtme 10, larger than for (000 O m itted) Ju n e Iff. 1931 Bills Discounted: Aa Others.. : * n M . Bills U. S. Reserve Ratio--. . . - . * . . » . «« ^ *6 1 fr207 42 so, m ,m K s r i* . 1931 $ 343 Jttn e 11, 1930 10,041 30,189 10,520 3,433 44,142 155,206 #,368 64,972 134,092 78.0 8,989 20,918 . 149,660 3 9 J4 I 15*101 - 61,580 124,715 80^ 60,026 129,669 8UI Condition of After increasing from 562 millions on January 28 Member Banks III to approximately 587.6 millions on April 15^ total Selected Cities loans aiid investments of 25 weekly repiorting member banks located in Atlanta, New Orleans, Birmingham, Jacksonville, Nashville, Chattanooga, Mobile and Savan nah have since that time declined to 550.6 millions oti Jfcne 10, the lowest l^vel since June 3, 1925. M O N T H L Y L o an s b y th e se b a n k s a g a in s t se cu rities in crease d slig h tly b etw een M a y 13 a n d J u n e 10, b u t w ere a b o u t 33.5 m illions less th a n a y e a r ago, a n d A ll O th e r L o an s, w h ich in clu d e th o se fo r com m ercial, in d u stria l a n d a g ric u ltu ra l p u rp o ses d eclined 7.9 m illions fro m M a y 13 to J u n e 10 a n d w ere 60.4 m illions less th a n on th e sa m e re p o rt d a te la s t y ear. T o ta l lo an s o n J u n e 10 w ere sm a ller b y $6,939,000 th a n fo u r w eeks earlier, a n d $83,857,000 less th a n on J u n e 11, 1930. T o ta l in v e s tm e n t h o ld in g s of th ese b a n k s d eclined a b o u t 10.2 m il lions fro m M a y 13 to J u n e 10, b u t w ere 37.6 m illions g r e a te r th a n o n J u n e 11 la s t y e a r. H o ld in g s of U n ite d S ta te s se cu rities d eclin ed $12,390.000, b u t in v e s tm e n ts in o th e r b o n d s a n d se cu rities in crease d $2,206.000, fro m M a y 13 to J u n e 10, a n d h o ld in g s of G o v e rn m e n t obliga tio n s w ere la rg e r b y $17,410,000, a n d th o se of o th e r se cu rities g re a te r by $20,203,000 th a n a y e a r ago. T im e d e p o sits of th ese b a n k s on J u n e 10 w ere slig h tly less th a n fo u r w eeks earlier, a n d w ere $16,875,000 sm a ller th a n a y e a r ago, a n d de m a n d d e p o sits d eclin ed $4,237,000 fro m M a y 13 to J u n e 10, a n d w ere $11,690,000 less th a n o n th e sa m e re p o rt d a te la s t y e a r. B o rro w in g s b y th e se b a n k s fro m th e F e d e ra l R eserve B a n k of A tla n ta in crease d fro m $1,056,000 on M a y 13 to $2,430,000 a w eek la te r, a n d o n J u n e 10 w ere $1,980,000 c o m p ared w ith $11,272,000 a y e a r ago. P rin c ip a l ite m s in th e w eekly r e p o rt are show n co m p arativ ely in th e ta b le . (000 O m itted) J u n e 10. L o an s: 1931 O n S ecu rities............................................... $116,280 All O thers...................................................... 265,846 T o ta l L o a n s.......................................... 382,126 U. S. S ecurities.................................................. 80,395 O th e r B o n d s a n d S ecu rities........................... 88,103 T o ta l In v estm en ts............................... 168,498 T o ta l L o an s and In v estm en ts................. 550,624 Tim e D eposits........................... -....................... 227,431 D em and D ep o sits.............................................. 305,783 D u e to B a n f c T - ................................................ 117,859 D ue from B a n k s............................. -............. ~ 87,781 B orrow ings from F . R . B a n k ......................... 1,980 May 13. 1931 $115,318 273,747 389,065 92,785 85,897 178,682 5^,747 228,350 310,020 117,417 86,533 1,056 J u n e 11. 1930 $149,765 316,218 465,983 62,985 67,900 130,<85 596,868 244,306 317,473 98,245 70,395 11,272 D ep o sits of All M em ber B anks D a ily av erag e of d e m a n d d ep o sits h e ld in A pril b y all m em b er b a n k s in th e S ix th D is tric t reg istered a fu rth e r sm a ll increase over preced in g m o n th s. A ver age tim e d ep o sits d eclin ed slig h tly , a n d b o th d e m a n d a n d tim e de p o sits av e ra g e d low er th a n a t th e sam e tim e la s t y e a r. D e m a n d d ep o sits in A p ril av erag ed 0 .6 p e r c e n t la rg e r th a n in M a rch , a n d w ere 2.7 p e r c e n t ab o v e th e low p o in t reach ed in D ecem b er, b u t w ere 9.4 p e r c e n t less th a n in A p ril la s t y e a r. T im e d ep o sits in A pril av erag ed 0 .2 p e r c e n t less th a n fo r M a rc h , b u t w ere 1.5 p e r c e n t larg er th a n i n F e b ru a ry , a n d a v erag ed 10.5 p e r c e n t less th a n in A p ril 1930. C h a n g es in th ese d aily av erag es o v er th e p a s t y e a r a re show n in th e ta b le . D em and Time D eposits D eposits 1930: A pril..................................................................... 1563,762.000 $439,980,000 May....................................................................... 550,343,000 450,145,000 J u n e .............. ...................................................... 518,808,000 447,126,000 J u l y ...................................................................... 513,185,000 440,316,000 A u g u s t................................................................ 508,651,000 439,054,000 Septem ber........................................................... 441,347,000 O ctober...................... ......................................... 511,050,000 437,617,000 Novem ber............................................................ 512,420,000 434,502,000 D ecem ber............................................................ 498,707,000 413,822,000 1931: J a n u a ry .............................................................. 497,490,000 397,942,000 F e b r u a ry ........................................................... 503,634,000 388,008,000 M arch........................................................ - ........ 508,016,000 394,622,000 A pril— . ............................................................... 510,940,000 393,918,000 S av in g s D e p o sits T o ta l sav in g s d ep o sits h e ld b y 63 re p o rtin g b a n k s lo c a te d th ro u g h o u t th e d is tr ic t a t th e e n d of M a y av erag ed 1.4 p e r c e n t sm a ller th a n a m o n th earlier, a n d w ere 9 .4 p e r c e n t less th a n a t th e en d of M a y la s t y e a r. G ain s over A p ril a t A tla n ta , B irm in g h am a n d N ew O rlean s w ere o ffset in th e d is tr ic t to ta l b y d e creases a t o th e r p o in ts. N ew O rleans show ed th e o nly in crease over M a y 1930 in clu d ed in th e ta b le . P e rc e n ta g e co m p ariso n s a re show n fo r A tla n ta a n d fo r cities in w hich b ra n c h e s of th e F e d e ra l R eserve B a n k a re lo c a te d , a n d re p o rts fro m b a n k s lo c a te d elsew here a re g ro u p ed u n d e r “ O th e r C itie s” . R E V IE W $ (000 O m itted) No. of May B a n k s 1931 ivme.. ______ Ue....... . New O rleans.. O th e r C ities... A pril 1931 P ercentage ch an g e— May 1931 com pared w ith : May A pril May 1930 1931 1930 4 3 4 5 6 41 $40,838 21,171 16,093 31.496 52,481 81,158 $ 40,528 21,045 18,283 32,741 51,868 82,295 $ 43,123 24,490 18,620 33,218 52,036 97,032 63 243,280 246,760 268,519 + 0.8 + 0.6 -1 2 .0 - 3.8 + 1.2 — 1.4 - 5.3 -1 3 .6 -1 3 .6 - 5.2 + o.« -1 6 .4 - — 0.4 1.4 D e b its to Individual A ccounts T h e re w as a f u r th e r decrease of 2.0 p e r c e n t in th e to ta l of d e b its to in d iv id u al a c c o u n ts reflec tin g th e v o lu m e of bu sin e ss tra n sa c tio n s s e ttle d b y check a t 26 re p o rtin g cities o f th e d is tr ic t in M a y c o m p a re d w ith A pril. T h e M a y to ta l is sm a ller th a n fo r a n y o th e r m o n th since A u g u st la s t y ear, a n d e x c e p t fo r t h a t m o n th is th e sm a lle st sin ce A u g u s t 1924. T h e re w ere increases in M a y o v er A p ril a t A tla n ta , C o lu m b u s, Ja c k so n a n d K noxville b u t d ecreases co m p ared w ith M a y la s t y e a r a re sh o w n fo r all re p o rtin g cities. M o n th ly to ta ls show n in th e ta b le a re d eriv ed fro m w eekly re p o rts b y p ro -ra tin g figures fo r th o se w eeks w h ich do n o t fall e n tire ly w ith in a single calen d er m o n th . May 1931 A pril 1931 May 1930 A labam a—4 O ities............. ............................$153,740 $159,329 $ 188,122 B irm ingham .............................................. 105,517 108,550 124,694 D o th a n ....... ............................................... 2,535 2,601 Mobile......................................................... 28,571 29,170 AT M ontgom ery.......................................... 17,117 19,008 22,1 F lo rid a—4 O ities............................................. 117,119 125,233 144,550 Jacksonville.............................................. 62,967 66,560 70,900 M iami.......................................................... 21,139 23,161 36,432 P ensacola................................................... 5,989 6,553 6,685 T a m p a ....................................................... 27,024 28,959 30,533 G eorgia—10 O ities.......................................... 221,252 225,343 274,136 A lb an y ........................................................ 2,885 3,207 3,789 A tla n ta ....................................................... 139,594 138,744 169,134 A u g u sta...................................................... 17,827 19,843 22,289 B runsw ick................................................. 2,469 2,521 3,352 O olum bus.................................................. 11,362 10,987 13,526 810 E lb e rto n ..................................................... 714 952 M acon......................................................... 12,831 12,865 17,395 N ew n an ...................................................... 1,308 1,575 1,536 S a v a n n a h ................ . ................................ 29,253 31,595 38,318 V ald o sta..................................................... 3,009 3,196 3,845 L o u isia n a : New O rleans............................ 255, 255,977 34,391 M isgsslppi~4 O ities.................. ................... 33,710 W H a ttie s b u rg .............................................. 4,819 5.069 18,578 (a) 18,202 JaC kson...................................................... 24,l__ M eridian.................................................... 6,084 6,489 13,645 V icksburg.................................................. 4,229 4,631 5,584 T en n essee-3 O ities........................................ 135,615 135,951 186,193 39,610 C h a tta n o o g a ............................................. 39,542 48,794 Knoxville.................................................... 25,995 22,109 31,698 N ashville.................................................... 70,078 74,232 105,701 T o ta l 2 6 0 itie s................................................. $917,388 (a) Revised. $936,224 $1,137,016 AGRICULTURE In most parts of the sixth district weather conditions during May were not particularly favorable to growing crops. Temperatures continued to be lower than usual at that time of the year and rainfall was insufficient. There have been scattered rains during the first half of June, but rain is still needed in most sections. Florida crops generally are later than usual, because of the cool weather and lack of rain. Com is backward, setting of sweet potato slips has been retard[ed and growth of tobacco is stunted. Condition of citrus fruits declined materially between May 1 and June 1. Oranges declined from 89 per cent of normal on May 1 to 75 per cent a month later, and grapefruit declined from 77 per cent to 65 per cent. More than the usual amount of insect damage is reported and loss from dropping has become heavy in some of the groves. Georgia reports indicate the best yields of small grain in several years, and good pros pects for fruit crops. Most field crops need rain, however, and early plantings of tobacco have suffered. Watermelon vines are shedding some of the young melons. Rainfall in Tennessee was almost two inches below normal, and temperatures averaged about four degrees colder than usual. Tennessee wheat is reported at 91 per cent of nor mal compared with 76 per cent a year ago, and rye is reported at 87 per cent compared with 75 per cent a year ago. Peaches The condition of peaches on June 1 this year, and the prospective production as estimated by the United States Department of Agriculture, are considerably higher than at this time a year ago. A comparison of the condition of the crop in each of these 4 M O N T H LY s ta te s , a n d t h e e s tim a te d p ro d u c tio n fo r ea c h s ta te , a re sh o w n in th e ta b le follow ing. E stim ated P ro d u c tio n C o n d itio n J u n e 1 (bushels) 1961 1930 1931 1980 A lb an ia.................— . ............................. 77 66 1,292,000 1,106,000 F lo rid a ....................................... . ........... 82 61 128,000 102,000 G eo rg ia..................................................... 82 64 7,830,000 4,698,000 60 218,000 112,000 L o u is ia n a ................................................ 76 M ississippi............................................... 82 62 722,000 490,000 Tennessee................................................ 82 28 2,240,000 630,000 F e rtiliz e r A cco rd in g to s ta tis tic s co m p iled b y th e N a tio n a l F e rtiT a g S a le s U ser A sso ciatio n , sa les o f fertiliz e r ta g s b y s ta te a u th o ri tie s in th e six s ta te s of th is d is tric t re g iste re d a fu rth e r s u b s t a n t i a l seaso n al d ecline in M a y , a n d c o n tin u e d less th a n for th e sa m e p e rio d a y e a r ago. T h e m o n th of M a rc h u su a lly a c c o u n ts fo r a larg e p ro p o rtio n of th e a n n u a l to ta l, a n d w ith th e p assin g of th e p la n t in g seaso n sales of ta g s d ecline m a te ria lly . C u m u la tiv e to ta ls fo r th e te n m o n th s A u g u st th ro u g h M a y sh o w d ecreases c o m p ared w ith t h a t p a r t of th e p re c e d in g season ra n g in g fro m 10 p e r c e n t fo r F lo rid a to 51.6 p e r c e n t for M ississippi, as in d ic a te d in th e ta b le follow ing. May May 1931_______ 1930 A labam a................ F lo r id a ..---- -----G eo rg ia.......... . L o u is ia n a ........ M ississippi........... T ennessee......... 8,800 38,360 18,110 1,096 9,600 10,442 T o ta l............... 86,407 A ugust-M ay P ercen tag e 1930-31 1929-30 C om parison M 60 46,160 28,130 860 20,000 11,883 116,663 416,360 383,620 688,413 96,468 196,720 123,379 644,600 421,128 916,247 183,646 404,611 169,768 -3 5 4 -1 0 .0 -2 4 .9 -4 7 .6 -6 1 .6 -2 2 .8 1,903,860 2,734,899 -3 0 .4 S u g a r C an e an d S u g a r T h e fin a l r e p o rt of th e U n ite d S ta te s D e p a r tm e n t of A g ric u ltu re on th e L o u isia n a su g a r cro p of 1930 in d i c a te s a to t a l p ro d u c tio n of 183,693 to n s, c o m p a re d w ith 199,609 to n s p ro d u c e d th e y e a r before. A c o m p a riso n of t h e p ro d u c tio n of c an e, su g a r a n d sy ru p o v er th e p a s t th r e e y e a rs is sh o w n in th e ta b le . 1930 1929 F acto ries m ak in g su g a r.................... 61 66 S u g a r m ade, to n s ............................... 183,693 199,609 O ane u se d fo r su g a r, to n s * .......... - 2.669,067 2,917,926 S y ru p m ade, g allo n s......................... 6,207,872 6,773,086 16,886,749 19,619,018 M olasses m ade, g allo n s............... . SUGAR MOVEMENT (P ounds) R eceip ts: May 1931 A pril 1931 N ew O rlean s.................. .............. 94,794,134 166,674,847 S a v a n n a h ...................................... 14,673,86941,104,937 M eltings: . N ew O r le a n s - ------- ----------- --- 74.419,854 146,789,059 S a v a n n a h ...................................... 9,306,004 34,130,180 Stocks* N ew O rlean s............................ .... 73,980,900 63,938,392 S a v a n n a h ...................................... 73,126,420 67,869,066 R E FIN E D SUGAR P o u n d s) S h ip m en ts: M ay 1931 A pril 1931 New O rlean s............................ 104,617,468 123,407,962 S a v a n n a h .................................. 24,664,064 23,609,103 S tocks: New O rlean s............................ 66,009,623 80,808,146 S a v a n n a h .................................. 18,086,323 17,482,060 1928 66 132,063 1,860,261 6,678,847 13,634,689 May 1930 190,161,068 73,267,888 144,734.773 86,299,681 161,343,014 61,412,857 May 1930 144,947,496 36,092,912 107,388,640 80,630,799 R E V IE W RIOE M O V EM EN T-N ew O rleans B o u g h R ice (Sacks): M ay 1931 A pril 1931 R eceipts........................................................... 29,257 24,707 S h ip m en ts.................................................. 26,169 20,847 _ S tocks-......................................... .................. 21,997 17,899 C lea n R ice (P ockets): R eceipts.......................................... ................ 49,977 60,966 S h ip m en ts....................................................... 88,718 68,763 S tocks........................................ ...................... 86,211 123,962 M ay 1930 14.263 27,466 12,819 106,362 107,430 116,604 RIOE M ILLERS’ ASSOCIATION STATISTICS (Barrels) R eoaipts o f R o u g h R ice: S eason 1930-31............................................................... S eason 1929-30-................................................. ........... D istrib u tio n of M illed R ice: S eason 1930-31............................................................... _ S eason 1929-30........................ .................................... S tocks of R o u g h a n d M illed R ice: J u n e 1. 1931.................................................................. May 1. 1931................................................... ................ J u n e 1. 1930........................... ..................... . M ay 519,573 182,698 A ug. 1 t o M ay 81 9,462,624 8,958,306 617,121 662,662 9,112,084 9,092,086 1,292,671 1,387,874 949,661 TRADE Retail Following a gain of a little more than 33 per cent from FebTrade ruary to April, retail distribution of merchandise through department stores reporting to the Federal Reserve Bank de clined less than 1 per cent in May, andcontinuedsomewhat less in dollar volume than at the same time last year. Stocks continued to decline but the rate of turnover is higher than a year ago. May sales by 41 reporting department stores located in 23 cities of the sixth district averaged 0.9 per cent less than in April, and were 8.3 per cent smaller than in May 1930. There were increases over April reported from New Orleans, Birmingham, Chattanooga and Nashville, and an increase at Atlanta over May last year, but these increases were offset in the district average by decreases at other points. Department store sales during the first five months of the year aver age 9.8 per cent less than in that period of 1930. These comparisons are of dollar amounts and do not make allowance for the lower level of prices. Reports from some of these firms indicate that their prices in May averaged approximately 19 per cent lower than a year ago. Stocks qf merchandise at the end of May averaged 3.2 per cent smaller than a month earlier, and 17.1 per cent less than a year ago, and the rate of stock turnover was higher for the month, and for the first five months of the year than for those periods in 1930. Accounts receivable at the end of May increased 1 per cent over those for April, but were 5.8 per cent smaller than for May last year, and collections declined 3.2 per cent over the month and were 9.5 per cent smaller than a year ago. The ratio of collections during May to accounts receivable and due at the beginning of the month for 33 firms was 31.3 per cent, compared with 32.3 per cent for April, and with 31.4 per cent for May last year. For April the ratio of collections by these firms against regular ac counts was 33.5 per cent, and the ratio of collections against install ment accounts for 11 firms was 17.4 per cent. Detailed comparisons of reported figures are shown in the table. RETA IL TRADE IN TH E S IX T H D IST R IC T D U R IN G MAY 1931 BASED ON CONFIDENTIAL R E PO R T S FROM 41 DEPARTM ENT STO R ES May 1931 w ith May 1930 A tla n ta (4 )....— . W rm tayhftm (4 ).. O h a tta n o o g a (5).. i S S 'M ® : : O th e r C ities (19).. D IS T R IC T (41)... N o te : + 3.6 —10.0 — 9.9 — 5.0 -1 2 .7 —13.6 — 8.3 C om parison of N et Sales May 1931 J a n . 1 to May 31, w ith 1931. w ith sam e A pril 1931 period i n 1930 —10.8 + 6.7 + 1.7 +11.0 + 0.6 —1.2 - 0.9 + 0.4 -1 0 .9 —12.7 - 9.0 —14.2 —12.8 - 9.8 C om parison of S tocks May 31. 1931. May 31. 1931. w ith w ith May 31. 1930 A pril 30, 1931 -15.0 -14.8 -17.8 -15.8 -18.4 -18.0 -17.1 T h e rate o f sto c k tu rn o v e r i s th o ra t io o f sales d u r in g give n p e rio d t o average sto c k s o n h a n d . - 4 .9 —4.0 - 3 .2 - 4 .8 —2.2 - 2 .2 —3.2 R a te of S tock T urn o v er May May 1931 .30 .21 .19 .25 .21 .20 .23 .37 .23 .20 .27 .21 .23 .25 J a n . I t o M ay 31. 1930 1931 1.66 1.00 .89 1.10 .89 .92 1.04 1.83 1.05 .86 1.14 .97 1.06 1.13 M O N T H LY Wholesale Trade Distribution of merchandise at wholesale in this district reflected in sales figures reported by 124 wholesale firms declined 5.9 per cent in May compared with April, and was smaller by 23.7 per cent than in May last year. Dur ing the past ten years wholesale trade has increased from April to May in only two instances. The decrease at the same time last year was 4 per cent. There were small increases reported over April in sales by firms dealing in furniture and electrical supplies. Stocks, accounts receivable and collections also declined and were at lower levels than in May last year. Cumulative sales for the first five months of 1931 have averaged 25.4 per cent less than in that period of 1930, comparisons for individual lines being indicated in the following percentages. This cumulative comparison is followed by a table showing detailed percentage compari sons for the month. All of these comparisions are of dollar figures and make no allowance for the difference in the prevailing level of prices. P ercen tag e com parison of sales Ja n u a ry -M a y 1931 com pared w ith sam e p erio d In 1980: G roceries................................................................ —23.2 D ry G o o d s............................................................. —27.2 Has& waxe.............................................................................. F u r n itu r e ........... ................................................... E lectrical S u p p lies............................................. Shoes....................................................................... S ta tio n e ry ............................................................. D ru g s...................................................................... —29.8 —24.9 —28.2 —29.2 + 1.8 —16.6 T o ta l.. -25.4 WHOLESALE TRADE IN MAY 1931 SIX T H FEDERAL RESERVE D ISTR IC T (a) P ercentage ch an g e May 1931 com pared w ith : L ine, item a n d are a A pril 1931 May 1930 . of firm s All L ines Com bined: A ccounts receivable.. C ollections.............. G roceries: S ales.............................. A tla n ta ................. Jack sonville......... . New O rlean s........ V icksburg............. O th e r O ities.......... S tocks o n h a n d ......... A cco u n ts receivable. C ollections— ........... D ry G oods: Sales............................. . A tla n ta ................. N ashville......... .... O th e r C ities......... S tocks o n h a n d .......... A ccounts receivable-. C o llections.................. H ard w are: Sales........................ . A tla n ta -................ Mobile................... N ashville.............. New O rlean s........ O th e r O ities........ S tocks o n h a n d ......... F u rn itu re : Sales............................. A tla n ta ................. O th e r O ities......... Stocks On b a n d ......... A cco u n ts receivable. C ollectio n s.................. E lectrical Supplies: Sales ................ A tla n ta ................. Jacksonville......... New O rlean s....... . O th er C ities........ . Stocks o n b a n d - ....... A ccounts receivable-. D rugs: S a le s ............................................. A ccounts receivable.................. C ollections................................... Shoes: Sales............................................... S tatio n ery : Salce....................................... 124 32 58 63 — 5.9 — 2.2 — 0.8 — 4.3 -2 3 .7 —15.5 -1 2 .7 —26.9 28 4 4 5 3 12 4 12 13 - 8.9 — 3.3 — 6.0 -1 5 .8 — 9.8 — 7.6 — 8.1 - 0 .9 — 9.0 -2 3 .0 —16.9 —17.3 -2 9 .3 —20.5 —24.6 —15.3 -1 0 .0 —27.7 22 3 3 16 11 12 14 — 9.1 — 3.5 -1 7 .0 — 7.2 — 6.6 - 2 .0 - 6 .3 -1 7 .4 -2 3 .8 -3 1 .0 -1 1 .1 -3 2 .5 —18.0 -2 6 .1 29 3 3 4 5 14 9 16 19 — 5.9 -1 9 .0 - 0 .8 — 1.4 - 8 .7 - 2 .4 — 1.8 — 1.2 -0 .1 —29.6 -2 1 .8 —16.7 -2 4 .7 -4 4 .1 —23.0 —10.2 — 6.5 —24.1 13 5 8 4 8 7 + 0.2 - 5 .6 + 1.0 -6 .1 - 1.0 - 8 .2 — 9.3 — 5.8 —10.2 —37.1 —19.9 —41.4 17 3 3 5 6 4 6 6 + 4.4 - 6 .2 +30.0 - 7 .3 +47.2 +14.6 + 6.0 + 0.5 —32.2 —36.7 +15.8 -4 1 .7 -3 4 .6 +22.5 -2 4 .7 -3 0 .1 8 4 4 - 2.6 - 1.5 - 3 .8 -1 3 .7 —12.0 -1 6 .7 3 - 8 .5 4 - 6 .6 (a) B aaed u p o n c o n fid en tial re p o rts from 124 firm s. -1 5 .1 - 1.6 5 R E V IE W Life Sales of new, paid-for, ordinary life insurance increaseed Insurance in May over April in Alabama, Georgia and Mississippi, but declined in Florida, Louisiana and Tennessee. The May total for the six states was 0.5 per cent larger than for April, but 21.7 per cent smaller than for May last year. Cumulative sales for the first five months of 1931 average 24.4 per cent less than for that period of 1930. Comparisons of figures compiled by the Life Insurance Sales Research Bureau are shown in the table. (000 O m itted) May 1931 1930 A labam a.............................................$ F lo rid a ........................ ..................... G eorgia....................... ....................... L o u isia n a ................... ....................... M ississippi_________....................... T ennessee................... ....................... T o ta l................ Ja n u a ry --M ay 1931 1930 5,157 5,418 10,179 6,379 2,752 7,791 $ 6,635 7,066 10,352 7,964 4,000 12,131 $22,155 24,335 40,400 27,359 12,010 37,754 $ 30,212 30,259 46,842 35,152 18,873 55,582 .......................$ 37,676 $48,148 $164,013 $216,920 Commercial According to figures compiled by R. G. Dun & Co., Failures there were 2,248 failures in the United States during May, compared with 2,383 in April and with 2,179 in May last year, and liabilities for May totaled $53,371,212, against $50,863,135 for April, and $55,541,462 for May 1930. In May there were 138 failures in the sixth district, against 121 in April and 58 in May a year ago, and liabilities for May this year were reported as $370,979, compared with $2,117,635 for April and $2,338,007 ior May 1930. Cumulative totals for J a n u a ry — May inclusive amount to 861 fail ures with liabilities amounting to $13,575,450 this year, compared to 590 failures with liabilities of $12,273,160 in the first five months of 1930. GRA IN EX PO RTS—New O rleans (Bushels) May May J u ly 1 to May 31. 1930-31 1931 1930 1929-30 W heat................................... 1,098,855 935,288 13,699 12,428 C o m ..................................... O a ts..................... ................ 15,295 30,034 B arley............................................................................ R ye........................................................... T o ta l.......................... 1,127,849 977,750 7,144,385 98,758 124,233 8,577,423 469,340 545,159 68,336 7,367,376 9,686,651 INDUSTRY Following a gain in April to the largest monthly total since July last year, building permits issued at twenty reporting cities in the sixth district declined in May. There was also a decrease in contracts awarded in May, and both per mits and contracts were smaller than for that month a year ago. Permits issued during May at twenty cities in the district for the construction of buildings within their corporate limits totaled $2,359,435, compared with $5,148,425 in April, and $4,342,161 for May last year. Only four cities, Miami, Tampa, Pensacola and Anniston, re ported increases over May 1930, and the district total averaged 45.7 per cent smaller than for that month. Cumulative totals for the first five months of 1931 amount to $13,689,243, a decrease of 38.1 per cent compared with the total of $22,128,925 for that period last year. Comparisons for the month are shown in the table, and index num bers appear on page 8. Building and Construction N um ber May 1931 1930 A labam a: A n n isto n ........... B irm ingham __ M obile................ M o n tg o m ery ... F lo rid a: Jack so n v ille.— Miami............ O rlan d o ............. P ensacola.......... T am p a............... •L ak elan d .......... ♦Miami B e a c h - 15 234 48 142 15 364 65 118 303 ** 57 ** 298 332 58 13 238 9 77 294 8 39 1931 $ V alue May 1930 P ercen tag e C h an g e In V alue 17,860 304,302 40,060 83,780 16,900 345,225 241,275 84,435 5.7 + — 11.9 — 83.4 — 0.8 120,435 221,917 18,450 326,070 84,786 1,820 123,275 155,190 210,503 46,790 28,025 81,343 9,650 717, _ 22.4 5.4 + — 60.6 +1063.5 4.2 + — 81.1 — 82.8 m 6 M O N T H L Y N um ber May 1931 1930 366 290 99 94 36 57 253 209 20 11 P ercen tag e V alue ch a n g e May 1930 in value 1931 460,606 — 20.2 367,396 44,498 48,717 — 8.7 29,165 57,930 — 49.7 103,304 — 23.6 78,887 58,615 82,900 29.3 137 53 117 197,373 19,344 239,199 42,901 247 4 46 147 81 10 175,387 3,450 40,812 126,848 209,563 20,110 207,807 1,659,438 T o ta l 20 C ities.................... 2,478 3,007 $2,359,435 In d ex N o.............................. 21.0 •N ot in c lu d e d in to ta ls or index n um bers. ••N ot rep o rted . $4,342,161 38.6 G eo rg ia: A tla n ta ............ A u g u sta ......... . O olu m b u s....... M acon.............. S a v a n n a h ----L o u isian a: N ew Oxleans-. A lex an d ria.--. O h a tta n o o g a .. J o h n s o n C ity . K noxville------N ashville......... - 17.5 64.9 — — ~ — 16.3 82.8 80.4 92.4 - 45.7 There was a further decline of 10.9 per cent in total contracts award ed in the sixth district during May compared with April, according to statistics compiled by the F. W. Dodge Corporation and subdivided into district totals by the Division of Research and Statistics of the Federal Reserve Board. The May total for this district was $12,876,971, compared with $14,445,124 for April, and with $37,923,178 for May 1930. Residential contracts in this district during May amounted to $3,070,858, smaller by 22.2 per cent than in April, and 37.3 per cent less than in May 1930. In May residential contracts accounted for 23.8 per cent of the total awards. Cumulative totals for the first five months of 1931 have amounted to $85,725,588, a decrease of 29.5 per cent compared with the total for the corresponding part of last year. Total contracts awards during May in the 37 states east of the Rocky Mountains amounted to $306,079,100, a decline of 9.2 per cent compared with the total of $336,925,200 for April, and 33.1 per cent smaller than the total of $457,416,000 for May 1930. In May public works and utilities accounted for $108,948,400 of the total, non-residental building for $108,231,100, and residential building for $88,899600. Lumber Press reports continue to indicate unsatisfactory condi tions in the lumber industry, not only in regard to' the small demand for lumber, but also the lack of stability of prices. Buy ing by retail dealers is still limited to their current requirements, and reports indicate that retail stocks have been allowed to run very low, with no visible evidence of buying for replemishment of stocks. There has recently been a slight improvement in the market for big timbers. Weekly reports issued by the Southern Pine Association indicate that orders being received by reporting mills continue to exceed their out put. For the six weeks ending with June 6, orders booked by report ing mills averaged 7 per cent greater than their output, while at the same time last year orders were 13 per cent smaller then production. For the mills which reported for corresponding weeks last year, orders during this six weeks period have averaged 17.7 per cent smaller than a year ago, production has averaged 33.1 per cent smaller and unfilled orders have averaged 35.2 per cent less. Unfilled orders average some what less than three weeks production. Comparisons of reported figures are shown in the table. No. of Week E n d ed : May 2........ May 9........ M ay 16— May 23— M ay 30— June6— M ills O rders 1931 1980 P ro d u c tio n 1931 1980 U nfilled O rders 1931 1930 155,658 53,648 118 39,018 49,192 100,170 34,072 144,736 116 31,836 42,650 31,217 50,313 93,597 142,246 115 30,114 39,187 30,823 47,648 89,292 44,657 133,851 118 29,421 37,639 31,169 83,349 38,661 37,885 29,907 40,753 79,359 119,946 102 80,488 83,433 43,391 120,397 114 31,920 37,710 C en su s B u re a u s ta tis tic s in d ic a te a decline in th e con- Consumption of Cotton sumption of cotton by American mills from April to May, and a decrease of only 1.6 per cent in May com pared with that month last year. Exports also declined seasonally, but were substantially greater than in May 1930. Spindle activity also declined. May consumption of cotton in the United States totaled 465,770 bales, smaller by 8.4 per cent than in April. Stocks held by consum ing establishments at the close of May also declined 8.2 per oent com pared with those a month earlier, and were 17.6 per eent smaller than for May 1930. Stocks of cotton in public storage and at compresses 9.0 per cent from April to May, but were 62.6 per cent great Digitizeddeclined for FRASER R E V IE W e r th a n a y ear ago. E x p o rts in M a y w ere 14.3 p e r c e n t less th a n i n A p ril, b u t w ere la rg e r b y 60.9 p e r c e n t th a n in M a y la s t y ear, a n d th e n u m b e r of sp in d les activ e d eclin ed b y 247,498 c o m p ared w ith A p ril, a n d show a d ecrease of 1,960,002 c o m p a re d w ith M a y 1930. C u m u la tiv e to ta ls sh o w t h a t e x p o rts fro m th e U n ite d S ta te s d u rin g th e te n m o n th s of th e c o tto n season, A u g u st th r o u g h M a y , h a v e to ta le d 6,237,391 bales, a d eclin e of only 1.5 p e r c e n t c o m p ared w ith e x p o rts of 6,329,221 b ales d u rin g t h a t p a r t of th e p reced in g season, a n d A m eri c a n c o n su m p tio n d u rin g th is p e rio d h a s to ta le d 4,365,042 bales, sm a ller b y 18 p e r c e n t th a n th e to ta l of 5,321,582 b ales fo r th e sa m e p a r t of th e season before. C o n su m p tio n of c o tto n b y G eo rg ia m ills a m o u n te d in M a y to 80,686 bales, a decrease of 11.3 p e r c e n t c o m p a re d w ith A pril, a n d 12.4 p e r c e n t less th a n fo r M a y 1930, a n d A la b a m a c o n su m p tio n in M a y w as 46,164 bales, 6.5 p e r c e n t less th a n in A p ril a n d 1.1 p e r c e n t less th a n in M a y la s t y ear. C u m u la tiv e to ta ls fo r th e te n m o n th s of th e se aso n th ro u g h M a y a m o u n t fo r G eo rg ia to 768,153 bales, a decline of 18.4 p e r c e n t, a n d for A la b a m a to 434,820 bales, a decrease of 13.4 p er c e n t, c o m p ared w ith t h a t p a r t of th e seaso n before. U N ITED STATES (Bales) C o tto n C onsum ed: May 1931 A pril 1931 May 1930 465,770 508,744 473,284 L in t.............................. .................. L in te rs ............................................ 66,949 66,807 67,201 Stocks in C on su m in g E stab lish m en ts: l i n t .................................................. 1,258,222 1,370,044 1,527,853 272,908 290,883 237,690 L in te rs............................................ S tocks in P u b lic S to rag e a n d a t Com presses: L in t.................................................. 5,494,025 6,034,295 3,379,414 L in te rs............................................ 70,114 86,767 94,150 E xports....................... .......................... 335,796 391,871 208,605 Im p o rts.................................................. 15,189 17,257 53,328 Active S pindles (N um ber).............. - 26,397,906 26,645,404 28,357,908 C otton M a n u fac tu rin g P ro d u c tio n a n d s h ip m e n ts b y c o tto n c lo th m ills re p o r tin g to th is b a n k in crease d f u rth e r in M a y a n d w ere also slig h tly g re a te r t h a n in M a y la s t y ear. O rders bo o k ed by re p o rtin g c lo th m ills in crease d s u b s ta n tia lly over A p ril a n d w ere g re a te r th a n a y ear ago, a n d th e n u m b e r of w o rk ers in crease d 1.5 p e r c e n t over th e m o n th . U n fille d o rd e rs a n d sto c k s d eclin ed a n d w ere sm aller th a n a y e a r ago. P ro d u c tio n b y re p o rtin g y a rn m ilk w as sm a ller th a n in A p ril, o r in M a y la s t y ear. O th e r ite m s r e p o rte d w ere also sm a ller th a n fo r A p ril, b u t s h ip m e n ts , o rd e rs u n filled o rd e rs a n d sto c k s w ere g re a te r t h a n a y e a r ag o . P e rc e n ta g e c o m p ariso n s of r e p o r te d figures a re sh o w n in th e ta b le . P ercen tag e ch an g e No. of May 1931 com pared w ith : C o tto n C lo th : Mills A pril 1931 M ay 1%) P ro d u c tio n ................................................ 14 + 3.1 + 0.7 S h ip m e n ts.— ....................... ................ 13 + + 3.5 O rd ers b o o k e d ........................................ 8 +54.4 +34.9 U nfilled o rd e rs ........................................ 11 — 7.2 —20.1 11 — 0,6 —31.1 S tocks o n n a $ d ........................................ N um ber o n p a y ro ll................................. 13 + 1 .5 —11.6 C o tto n Y a m : P ro d u c tio n ........„....................................... 8 —12.9 — 8.1 S h ip m en ts.................................................. 8 — 7.7 + 6.7 O rders bo o k ed ..................... - .................. 4 —23.6 +13.7 U nfilled o rd ers......................................... 6 —12.6 +29.7 S tocks o n qagid...........-........................... 6 — 3.9 + 2.9 N um ber o n p a y ro ll.................................. 6 — 1.4 —18.0 Cotton S e e d P ro d u c ts A ctiv ity a t c o tto n se ed oil m ills in th is d is tr ic t, a n d in th e c o u n try as a w hole, h a s c o n tin u e d to d eclin e w ith t h e a p p ro a c h of th e e n d of th e p re se n t se aso n a n d th e b eg in n in g of th e n e x t one. F o r th e te n m o n th s of th e p re s e n t seaso n , A u g u st th r o u g h M a y , th e a m o u n t of c o tto n seed receiv ed b y m ills in G eorgia, A la b a m a , L o u isian a a n d M ississippi h a s b een 1 p e r c e n t sm a ller th a n d u rin g t h a t p a r t of th e p reced in g season, b u t th e q u a n tity c ru sh ed b y these m ills h a s b e e n 1.8 p e r ce n t g re a te r. S to c k o f se ed o n h a n d a t th e m ills a t th e close of M a y w ere very m u ch less t h a n a y e a r ag o . P ro d u c tio n of c ru d e oil d u rin g th is te n m o n th s p e rio d h a s b een 1.8 p e r c e n t less, a n d p ro d u c tio n of lin te rs 9.4 p e r c e n t sm a lle r, b u t p ro d u c tio n of cak e a n d m eal in c re a se d 4.7 p e r c e n t, a n d of h u lls 1 p e r c e n t, o v er o u tp u t d u rin g t h a t p a r t of th e seaso n before. S to ck s of cake a n d m eal, a n d of lin te rs , w ere g re a te r t h a n a y e a r ag o , b u t sto c k s of cru d e oil a n d of h u lls w ere sm aller. F o r th e c o u n try a s a w hole p ro d u c tio n of c ru d e oil h a s b e e n 6.8 p e r o ent, cak e a n d m eal 1.6 p e r e e n t, h u lls 4.3 p e r c e n t, a n d lin te rs 19.1 p e r c e n t sm a ller t h a n d u rin g th e f irs t te n m o n th s of th e l9 2 9 - S 0 seaso n , a n d sto c k s of c ru d e oil a t th e e n d of M a y w ere 19.3 p e r c e n t sm a ller, b u t sto c k s of o th e r p ro d u c ts la rg e r, th a n a y e a r e a rlie r. M O N T H LY Combined totals for Georgia, Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi are shown comparatively in the first two columns of the table, and totals for the country are shown in the last two columns. OOTTON SEED AND OOTTON SEED PRODU CTS (*) S ix th D istrict U n ited S ta te s Aug. 1 to May 31, A ug. 1 to May 31, 1930-31 _____ 1929-30 1930-31 O o tto n Seed, T o n s: 1929-30 1,831,426 1,8§0,079 Received a t m ills... 4,649,832 4,947,022 1,833,352 1,800,339 4,649,873 C ru sh e d ................... 4,867,585 45,375 9,714 61,826 O n H a n d , May 31118,928 P ro d u c tio n : C ru d e Oil, lb s.......... 570,143,671 580,427,411 1,420,137,363 1,523,643,516 C ake a n d Meal, to n s 809,790 773,696 2,130,507 2,164,729 H u lls, to n s ................ 515,590 510,575 1,286,317 1,343,919 L in ters, b a le s........326,065 359,735 813,303 1,004,821 Stocks a t m ills, May 31: C ru d e o a lb s.......... 5,527,919 6,273,781 17,387,852 21,557,461 C ak e a n d Meal, to n s 76,701 25,513 223,084 100,371 H u lls, to n s ................ 16,173 16,353 82,903 52,328 L in ters. b a le s........... 83,661 54,554 248,340 185,299 (*) G eorgia, A labam a. L o u isian a a n d Mississippi. Electric Power Total production of electric power for public use by plants in the six states of the sixth district declined 0.6 per cent in April compared with March, and was 0.4 per cent greater than in April last year. Output of plants using water power to gene rate current declined 0.6 per cent from March, but increased 2.6 per cent over April 1930, and production by the use of fuels decreased 0.7 per cent from March and was 3.7 per cent less than in April a year ago. The proportion of total current produced by the use of water power was 66.7 per cent in March and April this year, and 65.3 per cent in April last year. There was an increase of 10 per cent in the amount of natural gas used by these power plants in April over March, but de creases of 11 per cent in coal and 8.4 per cent in fuel oil, and there were decreases of 24.1 per cent in the amount of coal, 0.5 per cent in fuel oil, and 11.1 per cent in natural gas, used compared with April last year. Cumulative totals for the first four months of 1931 show increases over that period last year of 0.5 per cent in total production of electric power, and 1.3 per cent in production by water power, but a decrease of 1.1 per cent in output by use of fuels. Consumption of coal declined 25.3 per cent, fuel oil 3.9 per cent, and natural gas 3.9 per cent, com pared with the first four months of 1930. Comparisons for the month are shown in the table. April 1931 M arch 1931 A pril 1930 T o ta l P ro d u c tio n of E lectric P ow er: 000 k . w. h o u r s - . - ........... 485,538 488,455 By u se of: W ater P ow er....................... 324,093 325,941 F u e ls.................................... 161,445 162,514 F uels C onsum ed in P ro d u c tio n of E lectric Pow er: Coal—to n s .......................................... 11,693 13,132 206,798 F u el oil—b b ls..................................... 181,346 N a tu ra l G as-000 cu. f t . . ................ li» v 9 1 3 1,503,340 N ote: A pril fig u res p relim in ary —M arch figures revised. 15,409 190,385 1,860,242 Total production of bituminous coal in the United States during May declined 0.6 per cent, but the aver age daily output increased 1 per cent, over April. Total output was 21.2 per cent, and daily average production 18.1 per cent, less than in May last year. A comparison of monthly totals, compiled by the United States Bureau of Mines, is shown below. N um ber of Average w orking p e r w orking days day (to n s) May 1931— .......................................... 28,314,000 A piil 1931.......................... ......... ........ 28,478,000 May 1930— .......................................... 35,954,000 1.115.000 1.104.000 1.362.000 25.8 26.4 Weekly figures for Alabama and Tennessee continue to decline, the average output for those weeks ending in May being 2.5 per cent less in Alabama and 10.5 per cent smaller in Tennessee, than for April, and 15.5 per cent smaller in Alabama and 26 per cent smaller in Ten nessee than for May last year. Weekly comparisons are shown in the table. Week E n d in g : (In th o u sa n d s of tons) U n ited S tates A labam a 1931 1930 1931 1930 May 2............................. ..6,422 May 9........... ....................6,715 May 16— — ................ ..6,783 May 23....... .................... ..6,628 May 30..............................6,481 J u n e 6............................ ..6,595 8,335 8,285 8,169 8,272 7,590 8,151 224 249 248 245 229 318 294 278 276 270 May 1931 -----------U nited S tates: P ro d u c tio n , to n s — ........... ........... 1,994,082 Average p e r day —to n s .................... 64,325 105 ♦Active fu rn a c e s............................... A labam a: P ro d u c tio n —to n s ............................. 193,445 6,240 Average p er day—to n s .................... ♦Active fu rn a c e s................................ 13 A pril 1931 May 1930 2,019,529 67,317 113 3,232,760 104,283 180 186,534 6,218 13 234,289 7,558 17 Naval There were further seasonal increases in receipts of both Stores turpentine and rosin at the three principal markets of the district in May, but for the first two months of the new Naval Stores year receipts of both commodities have been less than a year ago. Receipts of turpentine in May this year were 24.1 per cent lees, and receipts of rosin were 19.7 per cent less, than in May last year, and for the months of April and May receipts of turpentine were 17.8 per cent smaller, and those of rosin 11.7 per cent less, than in those months of the preceding season. Stocks of both commodities increased and continued to be greater than those recorded a year ago. Press re ports indicate some improvement in demand and strengthening of prices during the last week of May, but generally unsatisfactory condi tions have prevailed and the business being done has been in small lots*. According to reports dry weather is affecting production adverse ly in some sections of Georgia and South Carolina. Comparisons of receipts and stocks are shown in the table. R eceipts—T u rp e n tin e (1): S a v a n n a h ............................................. Jacksonville............................... P en sa co la............................................. T o ta l...............— — ...................... R eceipts—R o sin (2): Tennessee 1931 1930 81 85 83 68 67 95 112 85 83 90 Pig Iron Production According to statistics compiled and published by the Iron Age the total production of pig iron in the United States declined in May compared with April and Con at a substantially lower level than a year ago. Production in Digitized fortinued FRASER the same time last year. Total production of pig iron in the United States during May amounted to 1,994,082 tons, a decrease of 1.3 per cent from April, and 38.3 per cent smaller than in May 1930. Daily average production, however, was 4.4 per cent smaller than in April, and was also smaller than for March, but was larger than for the four months November through February. There was a further loss of 8 in the number of furnaces active on June 1, compared with a month earlier, and a de crease of 75 compared with those active on June 1, 1930. Pig iron output in Alabama has increased each month since the low point in Deoember. May production was 3.7 per cent greater than in April, and was larger than for any other month since June last year, but was 17.4 per cent smaller than for May a year ago. Daily average output in May increased only 0.4 per cent over April because of the different number of days in the month. There was no change in the number of Alabama furnaces in active operation. Thirteen furnaces have been active at the beginning of April, May and June, compared with 17 active on June 1 last year. Press reports indicate no improve ment in sales of pig iron, and the market continues spotty and inactive new tonnage being in small lots for prompt shipments. Production in May is reported to have been somewhat greater than shipments. Quotations remain at $12 to $13 per ton. Cumulative production for the first five months of the year for the United States as a whole totaled 9,466,746 tons, a decrease of 38.2 per cent compared with the total of 15,327,183 tons produced in that part of 1930, and output in Alabama during the first five months of 1931 has amounted to 857,112 tons, a decrease of 25.5 per cent compared with the production of 1,150,916 tons in that part of last year. Com parisons for the month are shown in the table, and index numbers ap pear on page 8. •F irst of follow ing m o n th . 315,891 167,702 Bituminous Coal Mining T o ta l P ro d u c tio n (tons) 7 R E V IE W at Stocks—T u rp e n tin e (1): Saav an n ah .. S JJacksoni a Stocks—R osin (2): S a v a n n a h ........ J a c k so n v ille -. P e n sa c o la .— T o ta l........................... 1) Barrels of 50 gallons. (2) Barrersofsoo founds. May 1931 Apxill931 17,779 12,199 14,726 10,750 4,521 3,153 May 1930 25,284 17,736 5,783 37,026 26,102 48,803 57,015 50,288 13,515 41,246 38,403 9,092 77.751 55,279 17,356 120,819 88,741 150,386 24,145 23,127 18,976 16,216 17,037 20,140 14,919 14,136 18,075 66,248 53,393 47,130 178,545 131,806 41,197 164,583 110,333 35,660 74,089 58,017 11,578 351,548 310,576 143,684 8 M O N T H LY R E V IE W M O N T H L Y IN D E X N U M B E R S T h e fo llo w in g in d e x n u m b ers, e x cep t those of w holesale prices, are co m p u te d b y t h e F ed era l R e s e r v e B a n k o f A tla n ta m o n th ly . T h e in d ex n u m b ers o f reta il a n d w h o lesa le tr a d e a re b a sed u p o n sa le s figu res re p o r te d co n fid e n tia lly b y r e p r e s e n ta tiv e firm s in t h e lin e s o f tra d es in d ica ted , a n d t h e o th e r se ries o f in d e x n u m b ers are b a sed u p o n figu res r ep o rted t o t h e b a n k o r c u rren tly a v a ila b le th ro u g h t h e d a ily or tr a d e p ress. T h e s e in d e x n u m b ers, e x c e p t a s in d ic a te d in t h e fo o t-n o te s , a re b a se d u p o n t h e m o n th ly a v e r a g e s for t h e th r ee y ea r p erio d 1 9 2 3 -2 5 a s rep resen ted b y 100. M arch 1931 April 1931 M ay 1931 M arch 1930 April 1930 M ay 1930 1 5 5 .5 9 2 .5 6 4 .1 9 4 .2 6 8 .3 8 1 .7 9 0 .lr 1 7 6 .7 8 6 .7 7 2 .8 9 7 .0 7 7 .9 8 4 .7 9 7 .6 r 1 5 7 .6 9 2 .5 7 4 .0 1 0 7 .7 7 8 .3 8 3 .0 9 6 .7 1 5 0 .6 9 7 .6 7 3 .1 1 0 0 .0 7 9 .2 8 9 .3 9 3 .0 1 7 5 .8 9 4 .8 8 1 .8 1 1 0 .1 9 1 .3 9 8 .0 1 0 4 .0 1 5 2 .3 1 0 2 .8 8 1 .3 1 1 3 .3 8 9 .7 9 7 .3 1 0 1 .0 W H O L E S A L E T R A D E 6 th D IS T R IC T G roceries _____ _______________ _____________ D r y G o o d s _______ . . . . ___ H a rd w a re....... ............................................. F u r n itu re_____________________________________ E lec trica l S u p p l i e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . — _ S h o es. . . . . _______ . . . ____ ____________ S ta tio n e r y . . ______ ____ ______________________ D r u g s_____ _____________. . . _____________ _____ TOTAL 6 6 .4 5 1 .8 5 6 .1 7 0 .0 7 0 .5 5 1 .8 6 1 .7 8 8 .4 6 2 .6 6 5 .7 5 3 -2 , 7 2 .1 5 9 .4 5 5 .7 8 7 .3 6 3 .0 5 9 .8 4 8 .3 5 5 .5 5 9 .2 6 6 .4 5 4 .4 5 2 .0 8 5 .0 5 8 .5 8 5 .0 7 3 .0 7 4 .1 9 2 .8 9 1 .1 8 2 .3 6 4 .0 1 0 1 .7 8 1 .4 8 2 .3 6 8 .9 7 3 .7 7 7 .7 8 2 .3 7 6 .3 5 6 .3 1 0 1 .5 7 8 .0 7 7 .4 6 0 .3 7 3 .9 6 6 .4 8 9 .3 6 4 .0 5 2 .9 9 8 .1 7 4 .6 L IF E IN S U R A N C E S A L E S 6 th D IS T R IC T A la b a m a . „, _____ F lo r id a _______________________________________ G eo rg ia __ _______________________________ L o u isia n a . M ississip p i ....... - Tpnnpflflpp! _ _ __ T O T A L . . ............ .... ...................................... ............... 7 8 .6 9 8 .3 9 7 .2 8 8 .3 7 9 .7 8 4 .5 8 8 .5 8 5 .6 1 0 8 .3 1 0 4 .0 1 0 9 .0 7 2 .6 9 3 .4 9 7 .1 8 9 .1 9 8 .7 1 1 8 .8 1 0 7 .1 7 5 .1 8 5 .3 9 7 .6 1 0 4 .3 1 0 9 .2 1 0 8 .1 1 1 7 .4 1 0 1 .4 1 3 3 .7 1 1 4 .6 1 0 4 .7 1 0 3 .4 1 1 6 .0 1 3 8 .6 1 1 0 .0 1 2 9 .5 1 2 2 .5 1 1 4 .6 1 2 8 .7 1 2 0 .9 1 3 3 .7 1 0 9 .1 1 3 2 .8 1 2 4 .7 1 5 .8 2 5 .7 2 8 .8 8 1 .2 2 0 7 .7 1 9 .8 4 5 .8 2 3 .7 2 0 .5 1 4 .6 2 0 .0 1 5 .3 2 2 .7 2 1 .0 1 3 6 .8 2 5 .8 3 5 .2 t r .e 6 5 .8 4 3 .8 5 8 .1 5 6 .6 2 1 .9 3 1 .0 N a s h v ille ______________________ _______________ N e w O rlea n s_____ . ________________ ________ ___ (15) O th er C i t i e s . . _________________ . . . ______ _ D I S T R I C T (2 0 C it ie s ) .............................................. 2 6 .1 1 8 .9 j a .o 3 2 .3 26*5 1 8 .6 2 1 .7 2 2 .0 3 2 .5 3 5 .6 2 9 .8 2 3 .3 1 8 .9 2 6 1 .6 1 8 .6 2 7 .1 3 8 .6 C O N T R A C T S A W A R D E D 6 th D IS T R IC T R esidential . ________ ____ __________________ A ll O ther. _______________ ____________ ___________ T o ta l.......................... ................................................. ........... 2 2 .6 8 0 .8 5 7 .5 2 8 .1 4 9 .8 4 1 .2 2 1 .9 4 6 .5 3 6 .7 5 0 .4 6 5 .6 5 9 .5 5 1 .1 6 9 .2 6 2 .0 3 4 .9 1 5 6 .8 1 0 8 .0 W H O L E S A L E P R IC E S U . S . (*) A L L C O M M O D IT IE S ................................................... F a rm P r o d u c ts__________________ _____________ F o o d s___________________________ ______________ O ther C om m od ities. _______________________ ____ H id e s a n d le a th e r p r o d u c ts______. . . . . . . __ T e x tile p r o d u c ts______ _____________ . . . . ___ F u e l a n a lig h tin g ______ . . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . M e ta ls a n d m e ta l p r o d u c ts______ ___ . . . . . . B u ild in g m a te r ia ls .__________ . . . _______ ___ C h em ica ls a n d d r u g s_______________ ________ H o u sefu ra ish in g g o o d s .. _. . . ___ ___ _____ _ M isc e lla n e o u s________ _____ _______________ 7 4 .5 7 0 .6 7 6 .7 7 5 .6 8 7 .4 6 9 .2 6 4 .5 8 9 .0 8 1 .9 8 1 .9 9 0 .S * 6 4 .7 7 3 .3 7 0 .1 7 5 .6 7 4 .2 8 7 .3 6 7 .6 6 1 .6 8 8 .7 8 0 .9 8 0 .1 9 0 .8 6 3 .9 7 1 .3 6 7 .1 7 2 .9 7 3 .2 8 7 .3 6 6 .3 6 0 .9 8 7 .8 7 8 .4 7 9 .1 8 9 .2 6 2 .8 9 0 .8 9 4 .7 9 3 .9 8 8 .7 1 0 3 .2 8 6 .5 7 7 .4 1 0 0 .6 9 5 .4 9 1 .2 9 6 .5 7 8 .2 9 0 .7 9 5 .8 9 4 .6 8 8 .3 1 0 2 .7 8 5 .5 7 7 .9 9 8 .8 9 4 .7 9 1 .0 9 6 .2 7 8 .5 8 9 .1 9 3 .0 9 2 .0 8 7 .5 1 0 2 .6 8 4 .6 7 8 .0 9 6 .8 9 2 .9 8 9 .9 9 6 .2 7 7 .5 1 0 4 .7 1 1 8 .2 1 2 3 .3 1 4 8 .6 1 4 7 .4 7 5 .1 5 6 .9 9 3 .2 1 0 6 .1 1 1 8 .2 1 3 5 .7 1 3 6 .5 6 5 .0 3 4 .0 D E P A R T M E N T S T O R E T R A D E 6 th D IS T R IC T A tla n ta .............................. ........ B irm in g h a m ......... ... .. T _ _ ___ C h a tta n o o g a . . „ ,___ Iir --r____________ N a s h v ille ____________ _____ __________ N e w O rlean s „ „ _ O th er C itie s_________ - __________ . . . . . . . . . . . __ D I S T R I C T ...... . .............. ...................— ....................... B U IL D IN G P E R M I T S 6 th D IS T R IC T A t l a n t a . . ________ B irm in g h a m _______________. . . . . . . . . . . . . — 4 •off 0.S 1 , COTTON C O N SU M E D : U n ite d S ta tes.____ _________________________ _ C o tto n -G ro w in g S t a t e s ___________ . . . . . . . . __ G eo rg ia _________ - _____________________________ A la b a m a ________ _______________________________ T e n n e s s e e _____________________________________ A ll O th er S t a t e s . . _____ ______________________ E x p o r ts _________ ____ ;___________ ;___________ *i 9 6 .5 1 0 9 .8 1 0 9 .9 1 3 8 .7 1 2 8 .1 6 7 .8 9 8 .5 1 0 0 .1 1 1 1 .8 1 1 6 .7 1 4 3 .6 1 2 6 .4 7 4 .4 6 3 .8 9 1 .6 1 0 3 .7 1 0 3 .5 1 3 4 .3 6 5 .2 5 4 .6 1 0 0 .1 1 1 3 .0 1 1 5 .4 1 3 5 .6 1 3 0 .5 7 1 .5 7 7 .7 P IG IR O N P R O D U C T IO N : U n ite d S t a t e s ______________________ ____ _____ A la b a m a __________ ____ ______________________ 6 8 .0 7 4 .5 6 7 .6 8 0 .3 6 6 .7 8 3 .3 1 0 8 .7 1 0 5 .9 1 0 6 .5 1 0 0 .7 1 0 8 .2 1 0 0 .9 U N F IL L E D O R D E R S — U . S . S T E E L C O R P O R A T IO N ............... ........................................... 8 3 .7 8 1 .6 7 5 .8 9 5 .7 9 1 .2 8 5 .0 (*) C o m p ile d b y t h e B u rea u o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s . r-R ev ise d . B a s e 1 9 2 6 -1 0 0 .
@FedFRASER