The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
TLANTA, GEORGIA, MAY 3 ! a 1955 JnJnisIssue: H om e and A u to Boom Sp u rs Bank Lendinq F a r m e r s ’ F in a n c ia l L iq u id ity W e a k e n s D is tric t SixtfiDifindStatistics: e s s H ig h lig h ts Condition of 27 Member Banks in Leading Cities D e b i ts t o I n d i v i d u a l D e m a n d D e p o s i t A c c o u n t s d e p a r tm e n t S t o r e S a l e s a n d I n v e n t o r ie s is ta lm e n t C a sh L oans R e t a i l F u r n itu r e S t o r e O p e r a t i o n s h o l e s a l e S a l e s a n d I n v e n t o r ie s SixthDiftridlndhes: o n s tr u c t io n C o n t r a c t s o tfo n C o n s u m p tio n D e p a r tm e n t S to r e S a le s a n d o w e r P r o d u c ti o n re S to r e S a le s a n d S to c k n u fa c tu r in g E m p lo y m e n t M a n u f a c t u r i n g P a y r o lls f n f c r m E m p lo y m e n t r o l e u m P r o d u c ti o n u m o v e r o f D e m a n d D e p o s i ts DISTRICT BUSINESS HIGHLIGHTS Economic activity continues strong but a few indicators have weakened slightly. Residential construction awards and department store sales are down from previous highs, and manu facturing activity is still short of its 1953 peak. On the other hand, new highs have been established for bank debits, bank loans and deposits, and nonfarm employment. Agricul tural production prospects are brighter because of widespread rains in May. N o n fa rm e m p lo y m e n t , seasonally adjusted, advanced to the highest on record at mid-March. F arm has risen seasonally, but remains below a year ago. e m p lo y m e n t measured by seasonally adjusted cotton consumption, rose mod erately in April after showing virtually no change in the first quarter. T e x t ile a c t iv it y , R e s i d e n t i a l c o n t r a c t s awarded during April were off from March, but were con siderably greater than a year ago. Other-than-residential awards rose sharply in April. E x p o r t s t h r o u g h D i s t r i c t p o r t s in the first two months of 1955 were somewhat higher than during the like period of last year, but imports were lower. A f t e r a t h r e e - w e e k d r y p e r i o d in most areas, heavy rains have improved pros pects for germination and growth of crops; in parts of Florida, however, the drought is persisting. S p r in g v e g e t a b le o u tp u t in Florida is somewhat below that of last spring, but prices are higher. M ilk p r o d u c tio n is greater than a year ago; egg, broiler, pork, and beef production are also up. C a t t l e p r i c e s are up this year as are broiler prices, but hog prices are down sub stantially. Prices of milk and eggs are also down somewhat. D e p a r t m e n t s t o r e s a l e s , seasonally adjusted, were slightly off in May from the peak level of April, according to preliminary data. g o o d s at department stores continued to expand more rapidly from a year ago than nondurables. . S a le s o f d u r a b le C on su m e r s a v in g s , seasonally adjusted, declined slightly in April from March. b a n k l e n d i n g to consumers further expanded in April, reflecting increased auto and personal instalment cash loans. C o m m e r c ia l N e w c a r r e g i s t r a t i o n s in the District during the first quarter of 1955 showed larger gains over a year ago than in the nation. from the Federal Reserve Bank declined in May as the banks’ reserve positions improved, largely through Treasury expenditures and gains of funds from other parts of the country. M e m b e r b a n k b o r r o w in g of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta was raised from one and one-half to one and three-fourths percent on May 2. T h e d is c o u n t r a t e d e p o s i t s at all member banks increased contra-seasonally in April, and according to preliminary data, continued to expand in May. T o tal B a n k d e b its , seasonally adjusted, increased in April and were well above a year ago. l o a n s , seasonally adjusted, at all member banks increased in April and continued to gain in May. T o tal •2• . Home and Auto Boom Spurs Bank Lending Customers of banks are borrowing more money this spring than they usually do during the first part of the year. Since the business revival began last fall, demand for bank credit has apparently been greater in the Sixth District than in the nation. District member banks in creased their loan portfolios in the first four months of 1955 by 103 million dollars, in contrast to only a 14 million-dollar rise in the same period last year. Although local conditions played some part in the higher demand for loans, in general the rise in loan portfolios at District banks reflected the same forces as those responsible for the national economic recovery that began last fall. During the first half of 1954 while loans at all banks in the nation remained relatively stable, total loans at District banks expanded, with most of the rise occurring at banks outside of the major cities. Accordingly, the xasonal pick-up in loan demand in the fall, coinciding as it did with a general revival in business activity, came on top of a moderate, steady expansion in bank credit in the smaller towns of the District. From June 1954 through the first quarter of 1955, District member bank loans rose by nearly 13 percent, in contrast to an 8-percent rise for all member banks. In April, 288 of the 374 District Loan e x p a n s io n at D is t r ic t m em ber banks has ex c e e d e d t h a t a t m e m b e r b a n k s in t h e n a t i o n in r e c e n t member banks Had higher loan portfolios than a year ago. In general, the types of loans most in demand at Sixth District banks are those most in demand throughout the nation. Particularly significant has been the expansion in real-estate loans and loans to individuals for the purchase of consumer durables. Loans to business firms accounted for almost half of the District increase over a year ago, but many of these loans reflected increased credit needs of builders and building supply companies, as well as greater credit requirements of trade firms. About one-fourth of the rise in total bank loans since last fall and nearly half of the rise since December have occurred in instalment and single payment loans to indi viduals, mostly for the purchase of durable goods. Rising automobile sales appear to be prominent in accounting for the growing volume of direct consumer loans by banks. Perhaps of equal or even greater importance has been the indirect financing of consumer purchases of durables through bank loans to sales finance companies and to retailers, enabling them to extend credit to their customers. Some of the loan expansion has been necessary to finance higher inventories required by larger sales volumes. Over one-third of the loan increase at District banks F lo r id a le d th e o th e r D is t r ic t s t a t e s in t h e m em ber b a n k lo a n a d v a n c e o v e r a y e a r a g o . m o n th s. percent percent increase april '55 "'54 fla. R e a l e sta te banks have and c o n s u m e r lo a n s in c r e a s e d m ore t h is a t D is t r ic t m e m b e r s p r in g th an o th e r To m ake la. th e lo a n ga. ala. e x p a n s io n tenn. p o s s ib le , banks d u c e d t h e ir h o l d i n g s o f G o v e r n m e n t s e c u r it ie s . t y p e s o f lo a n s . percent change apr 55" dec 54 miss. billion $ •3• re this spring is accounted for by real-estate loans, and half of the dollar volume of these loans is on residential property. The extent of recent bank loan demand arising from the housing boom, however, is not accurately meas ured by loans secured by owned mortgages. Not included in the 414 million dollars of real-estate loans held in mid-April by District member banks was a sizable volume of temporary loans to construction and real-estate firms and of business loans to building material firms and sup pliers, all of which also represented uses of bank financing associated with the current building boom. The rising demand for bank loans, of course, has created some problems at District banks. In some months since the first of the year deposits have risen less than loans. Furthermore, at 19 percent of the District member banks, deposits for the first four months of 1955 were actually below a year ago. Only a few banks have been able to meet the expanding loan demand out of an increase in deposits; most District banks have been forced to make other provisions for funds. Many banks, of course, were able to handle the in creased loan demand by drawing on idle reserves, cor respondent balances, or other cash assets. A number of banks, however, sold Government securities or did not replace those that matured, thus freeing funds with which F a r m e r s ’ F in a n c ia l For some people in the Sixth District the 1954 economic recession was a mild one; for some there simply was no recession; but for many farmers the recession had a bite to it. Farm cash receipts and net income in parts of the District declined significantly from 1953 levels because of reduced acreages of cotton, lower prices for some prod ucts, and drought damage to the important peanut, corn, and tobacco crops. Adverse farm income developments were accompanied by a weakening in farmers’ financial liquidity: their holdings of bank deposits dwindled and their debts mounted. Farmers’ holdings of demand deposits at all commercial banks in the District were 14 percent lower at the end of January 1955 than a year earlier, according to a demand deposit ownership survey made by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Farmers in Alabama and the District portion of Mississippi suffered the greatest loss of demand deposits in the District. The reductions were modest for the state of Georgia and the District portion of Louisiana. In Florida, however, a 25-percent gain occurred. Time deposits in rural areas increased further in 1954, but in some trade areas strongly influenced by agricultural income, deposit growth was apparently dampened by re ductions in farmers’ savings. Although time deposits at all District country banks increased about 18 percent be tween December 1953 and December 1954, such deposits at country banks in the Dothan, Alabama, trade area, to meet loan demands. In general, it was banks in the larger District cities that sold Government securities, whereas banks in medium-size and small cities increased their holdings of securities. In addition to providing funds for loan expansion by shifting cash assets or by selling securities, some District banks chose to increase their borrowings, either from other commercial banks or from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. On May 18, for example, District banks in major cities were borrowing twice as much from other banks as they were a year earlier, and their borrowings from the Federal Reserve Bank were also double last year’s figure. Prospects for continued loan expansion during the remainder of 1955 are good if the current business revival continues. Normally an expansion of business credit needs starts around mid-year and if these seasonal re quirements are added to the already heavy demands for credit, banks should experience a growing volume of lend ing in the remainder of the year. There is the possibility, of course, that some of the normal summer and fall rise in demand for credit came earlier than usual this year. Never theless, the high volumes of durable sales and building construction have shown little slackening and should be the basis for strong credit demands in the immediate future. T homas R. A tkinson L iq u id it y W e a k e n s where income from hogs, cotton, and peanuts is important, rose only 8 percent. In the Hattiesburg-Meridian-Laurel trade area of Mississippi, heavily dependent on cotton for its income, time deposits rose only 7 percent in 1954. The same percentage gain occurred in the Lafayette-IberiaHouma trade area of Louisiana, where rice and sugar cane are important. On the other hand, in the Orlando trade area of Florida, where citrus production is important, a 21-percent gain was registered in 1954, compared with a rise of 15 percent in 1953. The general decline in farmers’ income and deposits was accompanied by a sizable expansion in their debt to production credit associations, commercial banks, and Federal Land Banks. At production credit associations, which carry about 22 percent of the region’s short-term •farm debt, outstanding loans to farmers increased about 9 percent, with gains showing up in all states. There was also some growth in farmers’ debt to all commercial banks in the region, judging from the slight increase in total farm loans outstanding (excluding loans guaranteed by CCC) at District member banks between December 1953 and December 1954. Most of the growth in total loans at banks was asso ciated with a marked shift from non-real-estate to realestate loans outstanding— a shift apparently brought about by the tendency for bankers to seek farm real-estate mort gages to secure farm loans made for operating purposes •4 • Changes tu ral in Farm In c o m e of C ash R e c e ip ts , P a ym e n ts, F arm e rs, a n d S ix t h Item Total cash receipts from farm marketings, 1953 to 1954 . Estimated income payments to agriculture, 1953 to 1954 . Farmers’ holdings of demand deposits, Jan. 1954 to Jan. 19551.......................... Production loans to farmers out standing at production credit associations, Dec. 1953 to Dec. 1954 ..................... Real-estate loans to farmers outstanding at Federal Land Banks, Dec. 1953 to Dec. 1954 .......................... Non-real-estate loans to farmers (excluding loans guaranteed by CCC) outstanding at mem ber banks, Dec. 31. 1953 to Dec. 31, 19541 .............. Real-estate loans to farmers outstanding at member banks, Dec. 31, 1953 to Dec. 31, 19541 .......................... Non-real-estate loans to farmers (excluding loans guaranteed by CCC) outstanding at mem ber banks, April 1954 to April 19551 .................. Real-estate loans to farmers outstanding at member banks, April 1954 to April 19551 E s tim a t e d Dem and F arm D e p o s it A g r ic u l H o ld in g s B o r r o w in g s D is t r ic t S t a t e s Percent Change Ga. La. Ala. Fla. —9 +7 —S Miss. Tenn. —9 —21 —6 — 14 + 1 —2 — 13 —22 —1 — 15 + 25 —6 —9 — 40 +6 +s +4 +6 + 31 +5 +3 + 12 +6 10 + 14 +4 —6 —5 — 23 +7 + 22 + 47 2 +3 —3 —6 + 15 +9 + 80 + 39 f + + 10 + 11 + 10 0 +2 10 +5 —5 +7 2 +8 + — 'Sixth District portion of the state. Estimates based on a sample of banks in each state. as well as for the purchase of capital items like cattle and land. Farm real-estate loans outstanding at District mem ber banks increased 17 percent between December 1953 and December 1954, but non-real-estate loans outstand ing declined about 3 percent. Of course changes in farm short-term and long-term debt outstanding at member banks in 1954 were not uni form in all parts of the region. Modest declines in outstand ing short-term production loans occurred in Florida and Georgia, although there were relatively sharp reductions in the Florida citrus belt and the flatwoods section of South Georgia. Meanwhile, farm real-estate loans out standing increased sharply in those local places as well as in the states as a whole. Both short- and long-term farm loans outstanding rose only slightly in Tennessee and Alabama, but in the peanut and black prairie belts, which extend across the southern portion of Alabama, there was a substantial growth in outstandings of both types of loans. In Louisiana, member banks experienced a large decline in non-real-estate farm loans outstanding and a sizable increase in farm real-estate loans. Farmers’ inclination to rely more strongly upon realestate mortgages for securing funds in 1954 is also shown by the growth in farm real-estate loans outstanding at Fed eral Land Banks serving the District. Outstandings for District states at those banks rose 11 percent during 1954. Louisiana farmers increased their borrowings from the Land Banks the most and Florida farmers the least. The growth in total farm debt and the wider use of real-estate mortgages for securing operating credit is ap parently continuing in 1955. Total farm real-estate and non-real-estate loans outstanding (excluding loans guar anteed by CCC) at member banks, for example, rose 10 percent between April 1954 and April 1955. Much of the gain was due to an increase in real-estate loans. The in crease in farm real-estate loans outstanding is partly accounted for by bank purchases of Government guaran teed farm mortgages. Also playing a part in the increase, however, has been a greater use of real estate as security for loans, particularly in drought-plagued Georgia. There are a number of reasons why the growth in farm debt and the change in its character are likely to continue this year. For one thing, the persistence of drought con ditions and the paring of farm incomes in parts of the Dis trict, especially south central and southwest Georgia and portions of Alabama and Mississippi, have increased farm ers’ need to borrow. At the same time the uncertainty about the extent and effects of drought has likely caused more short-term lenders to seek real estate as security for the operating funds lent to farmers. Also, District farmers require substantial sums to pay their current large operating expenses and to accomplish adjustments in busi ness operations dictated by changed demands for im portant District farm products. On top of that, some farmers who suffered losses from the sharp freeze this spring will borrow funds to replant crops or otherwise tide themselves over until the next crop year. A rthur H. K antner B a n k A n n o u n c e m e n ts The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta is pleased to welcome two new members into the System, both of which came in on May 2. The First National Bank of Biloxi, Biloxi, Mississippi, was formerly a non member state bank under the title of First Bank of Biloxi. Officers are: E. C. Tonsmeire, President; A . L. Gottsche, Executive Vice President; A . S. Gorenflo, Vice President and Trust Officer; F. A. St. Amant, Vice President; B. F. Wimberly, Cashier; and A . H. Kruse and Edna M. Scheurich, Assistant Cashiers. The bank's capital stock amounts to $150,000 and surplus and undivided profits to $450,000. The other new member is the newly organized National Bank of Murfreesboro, Murfreesboro, Ten nessee. Officers of this bank include: Carl Walling, President; Charles W. Wikle, Executive Vice President and Cashier; and N. C. Maney, John R. Rucker, and Dr. Carl Adams, Vice-Presidents. The capital stock of this organization amounts to $200,000 and the surplus and undivided profits to $150,000. The Capital Bank and Trust Company, a newly organized, nonmember bank in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, opened for business May 20 and began remitting at par for checks drawn on it when received from the Federal Reserve Bank. Gene Bridges is President and Embree K. Easterly is Cashier. Capital amounts to $500,000 and surplus and undivided profits, $500,000. • 5• Farmers Continue to Cut Cash-Crop Acreage Farmers in Sixth District states have made striking changes in the use of their farm land in recent years. The acreage of principal crops harvested in District states dropped from a prewar average of over 34 million acres to about 25 million acres in 1954. Declines in harvested acreage of corn, cotton, sorghums, hay, and peanuts amounted to more than 11 million acres, but an increase of about one million acres in rice, soybeans, and tobacco offset some of the decline. Although precise data on changes in the number of acres used for pasture are not available, agricultural authorities generally agree H A R V E S T E D A C R E A G E O F P R IN C IP A L C R O P S Sixth District States Acres Harvested (In Thousands) Percent Change Average 1933-42 Average to Crop___________ 1933-42 1943-52 1953 1954 1943-52 Avg. 1953 1954 59 Principal Crops . 34,465 28,936 C o r n ............... 15,655 11,880 C o t to n ............ 8,946 6,857 Sorghums . . . . 302 214 5,140 5,145 All H ay............ Peanuts1 ............ 1,041 1,453 207 233 Tobacco............ R i c e ............... 485 592 Soybeans 122 428 Acreage picked and threshed only. 26,549 9,518 7,456 188 4,249 816 233 604 591 24,842 9,716 5,506 237 3,813 704 234 652 915 — 16 — 23 — 28 — 24 — 39 — 38 — 23 — 17 — 39 — 29 — 38 — 22 +0 — 17 — 26 +40 — 22 — 32 +13 +13 +13 +22 +25 +34 +251 +384 +650 that much of the acreage removed from crop production has been shifted to pasture. Most of the shifts in the use of District farm land were made because of changes in markets for agricultural prod ucts and in farm production costs. Cotton acreage, for example, was reduced because of a shrinking cotton market and because improved production techniques have enabled farmers to produce more cotton on each acre. As a result, fewer acres are required to supply the market at prevailing prices. Price-support programs, of course, have been instru mental in reducing acreage, but even without such pro grams District farmers would have either reduced their cotton acreage or received lower prices for their crop. Acreage of peanuts picked and threshed for edible uses was reduced in response to smaller consumption. Increases in the acreage of rice and soybeans reflect in part sub stantial increases in war and postwar markets for those commodities and in part efforts of farmers to replace income lost because of reductions in other crop acreages. Another important factor influencing farmers to make a substantial reduction in the harvested acreage of prin cipal crops has been the trend toward the increased use of mechanical equipment on District farms. Much like the problem of determining which came first, the chicken or the egg, it is difficult to determine whether the move ment of labor from District farms caused farmers to mechanize or whether farmers’ efforts to mechanize pushed labor from farms. But the fact remains that District farmers are now using more mechanical equipment in their farm operations. Gasoline and tractor fuel has re placed corn as a source of energy for planting and culti vating crops and has consequently eliminated many of the acres formerly planted in corn for mule feed. Pastures and close-growing crops have proved more adaptable to mechanized operations, and that too has influenced farm ers to reduce row-crop acreage. Judging from announced acreage allotments and the annual spring report of farmers’ planting intentions re cently released by the United States Department of Agri culture, trends in the use of District farm land will continue in the direction started in the last few years. The District cotton allotment is about 17 percent below last year’s allotment; rice plantings are reduced 18 per cent from last year’s planted acreage; and the allotment of all tobacco acreage for District states is reduced about one percent. The picked and threshed peanut allotment, A L L O T T E D A C R E A G E O F P R IN C IP A L CROPS Sixth District States Allotted Acres (In Thousands) Percent Change 1954 1955 Crop 1954-1955 Cotton . . 6,090 5,082 —17 Rice . . . . . . 7401 608 —18 Tobacco . . . . . 234 233 — 1 Peanuts picked and 872 threshed . . . . 811 + 8 1Planted acreage; no restriction on 1954 crop. however, is up nearly 8 percent. The decrease in acreage of allotment crops will total over one million acres, most of which will be cotton acreage. District farmers, however, have expressed an intention to increase acreages planted to other crops. A substantial rise in acreage of oats, sorghums, and soybeans will offset PLANTED ACREAGE OF P R IN C IP A L CROPS Sixth District States Planted Acres (In Thousands) Percent Change 1955 Est. 1954 1954-1955 10,156 —2 9,927 —0 1,087 Peanuts (all purposes) 1,092 1,473 Soybeans (all purposes) 1,457 + 1 Barley . . . . . 104 110 + 6 + 15 2,859 3,290 Oats...................... Sorghums . . . . 245 298 +22 Crop some allotment crop acreage lost and will substitute in part for planned reductions in acreages of corn. Little change in the acreage of peanuts for all purposes is indicated. Apparently District farmers will emphasize feed and forage production again this year in an attempt to replace cash income losses from allotment crops. Also, they will likely make more intensive use of their allotment crop land by using heavy fertilizer applications and the best cultural practices. Success with these efforts, which de pends largely on favorable weather, will help offset some of the anticipated reduction in District farm income. Jo h n T . H a r r is Sixth District Statistics Retail Furniture Store Operations Instalment Cash Loans No. of Lenders Lender Federal credit unions . . State credit unions . . . Industrial banks . . . . Industrial loan companies Small loan companies . . Commercial banks . . . 36 17 8 11 32 32 Percent Change Apr. 1955 from Mar. Apr. 1954 1955 —1 + 13 —1 + 38 +4 + 55 + 15 + 99 + 53 —6 + 36 +4 Outstandings Percent Change Apr. 1955 from Mar. Apr. 1954 1955 +1 +1 +2 +1 +7 +2 + 16 + 13 +11 + 16 + 50 +9 C o n d i t i o n o f 2 7 M e m b e r B a n k s in L e a d i n g C it ie s (In Thousands of Dollars) Item Loans and investments— T o t a l .................. Loans— N e t............... Loans— G r o s s ............ Commercial, industrial, and agricultural loans Loans to brokers and dealers in securities Other mans for purchasing or carrying securities Real estate loans . . Loans to banks . . . Other loans ............ Investments— Total . . . Bills, certificates, and notes ........... U. S. bonds . . . . Other securities . . . Reserve with F. R. Bank Cash in vault ............ Balances with domestic banks .................. Demand deposits adjusted Time deposits............ U. S. Gov’t deposits . . Deposits of domestic banks Borrowings.................. May IS 1955 April 20 1955 May 19 1954 Percent Change May 18, 1955, from April 20 May 19 3.954 1955 857,018 847,804 760,118 +0 +1 +1 +1 20,123 19,567 16,827 +3 36,607 36,912 131,438 125,818 5,132 6,387 458,244 455,824 1,764,083 1,768,064 34,356 89,180 12,839 401,461 1,703,639 —20 +1 —0 3,248,216 3,236,051 2,996,984 1,484,133 1,467,987 1,293,345 1,508,562 1,492,312 1,314,781 633,461 802,712 327,910 518,776 44,695 639,940 800,029 328,095 521,800 45,245 610,806 815,158 277,675 508,641 44,667 262,170 260,535 2,370,111 2,354,932 636,836 628,269 99,127 78,351 642,719 678,964 39,450 40,000 229,619 2,196,329 592,516 103,518 598,919 20,700 D e p a rtm e n t Sto re S a le s and —1 +4 —1 +0 +8 + 15 + 15 +20 + 13 +7 + 47 —60 + 14 +4 +4 —2 +2 +0 —0 + 18 +1 +1 +1 + 14 —1 —1 + 27 —5 —1 In v e n t o r ie s * Percent Change Place ALABAMA .................. Birmingham............... Montgomery............... F L O R ID A .................. Jacksonville............... M iam i..................... O rlando.................. St. Ptrsbg-Tampa Area . St. Petersburg . . . . Tampa.................. GEORGIA .................. A t la n t a * * ............... A u gu sta.................. Columbus.................. Macon..................... R o m e * * .................. Savannah** ............... LOUISIANA.................. Baton R o u ge ............ New Orleans.............. M IS S IS S IP P I............... Jackson .................... Meridian**............... TENNESSEE ............... Bristol (Tenn. & Va.)** Bristol-KingsportJohnson City** . . . Chattanooga ............... Knoxville.................. Nashville.................. D IS T R IC T .................. Sales April 1955 from March April 1955 1954 4 Months 1955 from 1954 + 10 +8 +3 + 15 —2 + 20 —4 —8 —9 — 15 —4 +8 +7 +6 + 14 + 16 + 36 +8 —3 +7 —7 +8 +7 + 10 + 14 + 15 +7 +8 +4 +8 + 14 +8 + 26 + 10 +3 +6 —0 +9 +9 +6 + 29 + 6, +8 +4 +2 +1 —0 +0 —2 + 11 +4 — 14 + 10 + 11 +8 + 12 + 15 +6 + 26 + 11 +5 +9 +1 + 14 + 15 +7 + 26 +8 +4 + 10 +7 +5 +7 +5 +3 + 10 +6 —9 + 16 + 13 + 18 + 11 +5 —8 —4 + 10 +7 +8 —5 —0 + 13 +8 + 11 Inventories April 30, 1955, from Mar. 31 Apr. 30 1955 1954 —1 —2 +5 +4 __5 —3 —5 +3 +0 +6 —7 +6 +1 +2 + 12 + 13 — 10 —1 +6 +3 —0 +1 —1 —2 —2 +9 +9 +9 +8 +4 —1 —0 +6 —6 —2 —0 —1 + 33 +4 +7 ^Reporting stores account for over 90 percent of total District department store sales. **ln order to permit publication of figures for this city, a special sample has been constructed that is not confined exclusively to department stores. Figures for non-' department stores, however, are not used in computing the District percent changes. Item Instalment and other credit sales . Accounts receivable, end of month . . . Collections during month . . Inventories, end of month . W h o le s a le S a le s a n d No. of Firms Reporting Type of Wholesaler Grocery, confectionery, meats 54 Edible farm products . . . 19 24 Drugs, chems., allied prods. 16 7 Dry goods, apparel . . . . 11 Furniture, home furnishings 9 Paper, allied products . . 7 33 Electrical, electronic & appliance goods . . . . 8 Plumbing & heating goods . 21 Lumber, construction mat’ls . 5 Machinery: equip. & supplies 41 Industrial ............... 15 Iron & steel scrap & waste materials . . . . 8 In v e n t o r ie s * Sales Percent Change April 1955 from April March 1955 1954 +2 —3 + 13 + 27 — 13 +1 —7 +4 +4 —7 — 19 —2 —21 + 23 +4 + 16 —5 + 19 +6 + 11 —4 +7 —1 + 10 + 21 + 10 +2 —3 + 36 —6 No. of Firms Report ing 44 15 10 6 5 8 6 28 6 14 19 6 6 Inventories Percent Change April 1955 from March April 1954 1955 —2 —7 +28 —5 0 +2 —0 +2 —1 — 13 +3 +8 +7 +8 0 +8 —2 —1 — 26 +1 +5 +5 +6 +1 2 + 60 + *Based on information submitted by wholesalers participating in the Monthly Wholesale Trade Report issued by the Bureau of the Census. D e b its to +8 +7 —4 +7 + 91 Percent Change April 1955, from March, 1955 April, 1954 + 10 + 12 +6 + 16 + 10 + 11 +5 —0 —4 +8 —4 +2 Place ALABAMA Anniston . . . Birmingham . . Dothan . . . . Gadsden . . . Mobile . . . . Montgomery . . Tuscaloosa* . . FLORIDA Jacksonville . . Greater Miami* Orlando . . . . Pensacola . . . St. Petersburg . West Palm Beach GEORGIA Augusta . . . . Brunswick . . . Columbus . . . Elberton . . . Gainesville* . . Griffin* . . . . Macon . . . . Newnan . . . . Rome* . . . . Savannah . . . Valdosta . . . LOUISIANA Alexandria* . . Baton Rouge Lake Charles . . New Orleans . . MISSISSIPPI Hattiesburg . . Jackson . . . . Meridian . . . Vicksburg . . . TENNESSEE Chattanooga . . Knoxville . . . Nashville . . . SIXTH DISTRICT 32 Cities . . . UNITED STATES 345 Cities . . In d iv id u a l D e m a n d D e p o s it A c c o u n ts (In Thousands of Dollars) Percent Change April 1955 from 4 Months April March April 1955 from 1954 1955 1954 1954 April 1955 March 1955 32,820 486,628 20,049 27,484 191,599 118,121 36,316 33,573 545,101 21,747 27,605 200,390 123,145 37,053 27,767 435,260 503,570 532,818 840,532 121,579 63,381 136,007 241,797 94,959 587,239 590,882 919,888 136,192 63,829 138,998 260,371 92,521 458,374 432,624 672,106 95,904 57,082 105,317 204,207 71,937 48,257 1.355,451 93,326 13,576 90,305 5,126 36,084 13,885 99,172 13,284 36,359 131,581 21,375 50,357 1,505,965 94,556 13,865 92,825 4,753 36,305 14,506 93,667 13,290 36,603 139,356 21,839 37,999 1,298,365 81,591 12,594 74,981 4,653 26,902 12,774 82,357 10,207 29,634 120,217 18,532 50,726 149,797 68,027 1,027,713 49,573 167,204 67,938 1,136,529 24,032 181,814 30,016 16,518 23,632 182,277 31,617 15,549 233,029 162,208 476,079 253,256 166,361 546,415 6,716,539 7,350,323 —2 —11 20,666 —8 23,104 —0 + 18 + 12 —3 + 19 + 16 +23 + 13 + 11 + 13 +1 + 14 + 11 + 19 + 10 +23 + 25 + 27 + 11 +29 + 18 +32 + 13 + 21 + 23 +29 +6 + 22 + 15 + 20 +27 +4 + 14 + +34 +9 + 30 +23 +9 + 15 +27 +7 +23 + 21 + 16 +9 + 12 + 13 + 12 +29 +7 +7 + 10 + 21 + 10 + 15 + 16 + 14 +9 +9 +7 + 11 +3 —3 — 13 + 12 + 16 + 10 +9 + 10 + 11 6,004,269 —9 + 12 + 158,289,000 178,917,000 154,565,000 —12 +2 -Not includedinSixthDistrict totals. 164,823 95,853 32,030 —4 —4 —2 — 14 —10 —9 —11 —1 —2 —7 +3 —4 —10 —1 —2 —3 +8 —1 —4 +6 —0 —1 —6 —2 +2 44,715 133,265 —10 +0 52,911 956,198 —10 20,886 + 2 —0 156,681 26,294 —5 +6 15,198 207,475 —8 139,888 432,996 •7• +8 +20 + 10 +20 +8 22 +8 + 14 +7 + 18 +2 12 +5 Sixth District Indexes 1 9 4 7 -4 9 = 100 UNADJUSTED District Total............... Alabama.................. Florida .................. G e o rg ia .................. Louisiana.................. Mississippi............... Tennessee.................. SEASONALLY ADJUSTED District T otal............... Alabama.................. Florida .................. G e o rg ia .................. Louisiana.................. Mississippi............... Tennessee.................. N o n fa rm M a n u fa c t u r in g M a n u fa c t u r in g C o n s tr u c t io n E m p lo y m e n t E m p lo y m e n t P a y r o lls C o n tra c ts Mar. 1955 Feb. 1955 Mar. 1954 Mar. 1955 Feb. 1955 120 111 142 122 120 110 121 119 113 105 147 118 98 113 103 150 116 97 114 117 115 120 111 135 123 115 118 115 142 113 115 114 120 110 134 122 115 117 115 110 139 118 115 113 113 118 110 132 119 116 115 114 111 112 104 141 118 100 114 110 112 111 110 112 102 141 116 101 113 109r Mar. 1954 Mar. 1955 Feb. 1955 Mar. 1954 April 1955 Mar. 1955 April 1954 111 160 147 205 167 146 156 160 158r 143r 208r 163 142 163r 158r 150r 135 193r 150 144r 159r 152r 577 271 317 398 266 186 142 375 160 204 189 159 147 192 167 151 161 160 157r 143r 194r 161 148 166r 160r 149r 135 180r 150 148r 164r 152r 104 143r 114r lOlr llOr 110 110 102r 137r 114r 103r lllr 110 D e p a r t m e n t S t o r e S a le s a n d S t o c k s * * ■ Adjusted Unadjusted April March April April March Apr,l 1955 1954 1954 1955 1955 1955 133r 128r 129r 130r DISTRICT SALES* . . . . 142 p 141p 133r 139 Atlanta1 ............... . 151p 145p 131 133r 113r 105r 104 Baton Rouge . . . . . 112 116 115r lllr 109 114r Birmingham............ . 126p 113 122 136r 122 138r Chattanooga............ . 134 133 113 116r 117r 109 Jackson ................. . 117 115 103 118r 109 126 101 117r Jacksonville............ . 128 134r 131r 122r 135r 149 Knoxville............... . 146 127 131r Macon..................... .151 135r 139 116 158 129r 168 134 M ia m i.................. . 165 169 115r 121r 125 130 113 Nashville............... . 124 121r 127 132 127r 137 New Orleans........... . 126 137r 141r 154 St. Ptrsbg-Tampa area . 141 149 145 120 Tampa.................. . 120 129 123 123 123 149r 153p 155r DISTRICT STOCKS* . . . 145p 135 143 'To permit publication of figures for this city, a special sample has been constructed that is not confined exclusively to department stwes. Figures for non-department stores, however, are not used in computing the District index. *For Sixth District area only. Other totals for entire six states. **Daily average basis. Sources: Mfg. emp. and payrolls, state depts. of labor; cotton consumption. U. S. Bureau Census; construction contracts, F. W. Dodge Corp.; furn. sales, dept, store sales, turn over of dem. dep., FRB Atlanta; petrol, prod., U. S. Bureau of Mines; elec. power prod., Fed. Power Comm. Indexes calculated by this Bank. 222 365 192 221 201 115 117 F u r n itu r e Sto re S a le s * / * * April 1955 Mar. 1955 April 1954 98p 84 84 89 90 89r 89 84 96 87 95 102p 100 104 96p 83 70r 80 ll lp 109p 115 116 106p 96r 97 100 102 104r lOlr 90r lllr 97r 104r 83r 89r 92 O t h e r D is t r ic t In d e x e s April 1955 Construction contracts* . . . Residential.................. Other ........................ Petrol, prod, in Coastal Louisiana and Mississippi** 143 Cotton consumption** . . . 103 Furniture store stocks* . . . 109p Turnover of demand deposits* 20.7 10 leading cities . . . . 22.4 Outside 10 leading cities . 18.5 March 1955 Elec. power prod., total** . . Mfg. emp. by type A p p arel..................... 150 Chem icals.................. 130 Fabricated metals . . . . 153 F o o d ........................ 109 Lbr., wood prod., furn. & fix. 82 Paper and allied prod. . . 148 Primary metals............ 100 94 Trans, equip................. 164 r Revised p Preliminary Adjusted March April 1955 1954 144 96 142 92 113r 19.8 21.7 16.7 18.3 Feb. March 1955 1954 112r 20.9 21.8 149 127 155 109 84 147 97 95 159r 145r 125r 151r 108 Sir 145r 96r 94 164r April 1955 322 279 355 146 103 116p 20.9 21.8 Unadjusted March Aprn 1955 1954 293r 185r 222r 323r 271r 156r 145 100 113r 21.1 145 92 120r 20.0 21.2 22.3 16.7 18.5 17.9 March Feb. March 1955 1954 1955 236 195 230 150 133 157 108 83 148 101 95 171 148 128 157r 108 83 149r 98 95 164r 145r 128r 155r 107 82r 145r 97r 95 170r