The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
ATLANTA, G E O R G IA , NOVEMBER 30, 1956
I t iT
f t 't s I s s u e :
W ill C a s h
S h o rta g e
P in c h
B u s in e s s ?
B a n k F in a n c in g f o r F a r m e r s
D is t r ic t B u s in e s s H ig h lig h t s
S ix t f iD it f r id S t a t is t ic s :
Condition of 27 Member Banks in Leading Cities
Debits to Individual Demand Deposit Accounts
Department Store Sales and Inventories
Instalment Cash Loans
Retail Furniture Store Operations
Wholesale Sales and Inventories
S ix t h d f f ir id In d e x e s :
Construction Contracts
Cotton Consumption
Department Store Sales and Stocks
Electric Power Production
Furniture Store Sales and Stocks
Manufacturing Employment
Manufacturing Payrolls
Nonfarm Employment
Petroleum Production
Turnover of Demand Deposits
3
f
c
{
e
m
[
o
j
S
f
a
n
t
a
D IS T R IC T B U S IN E S S H I G H L I G H T S
C o n tin u e d g a in s in e m p lo y m e n t a n d a d d itio n a l w ag e in c re a se s a re h e lp in g k e e p co n su m e r
sp e n d in g h ig h . A lth o u g h a g ric u ltu ra l in co m e is lag g in g b e h in d la s t y e a r, th e d e c lin e h a s n o t
b e e n la rg e e n o u g h to m a te ria lly re d u c e fa rm e rs ’ sp e n d in g a b ility . A c c o m p a n y in g th e b ris k
p a c e in o v e ra ll b u sin ess a c tiv ity h a s b e e n a n in c re a se in b a n k len d in g . M o re o v e r, b a n k s a re
b o rro w in g m o re fro m th e F e d e ra l R e se rv e B a n k .
Total nonfarm employment rose slightly again in October, after adjustment for
seasonal variation.
Manufacturing em ploym ent, after declining slightly in September, increased in
October but was still below the record of last November.
Factory payrolls set a new record in October as more wage increases became
effective and the average work-week increased.
Insured unemployment in October continued to decline seasonally.
Production of crude petroleum in Mississippi and coastal Louisiana, after season
al adjustment, rose in October for the third consecutive month, but was still below
this year’s earlier record.
Department store sa le s, seasonally adjusted, increased in November from Oc
tober, according to preliminary data.
Furniture store sales, seasonally adjusted, were unchanged in October from the
preceding month.
Departm ent and furniture store inventories, seasonally adjusted, increased
during October.
Spending by check, as measured by seasonally adjusted bank debits, increased
somewhat in October, after declining for two months.
The rate of deposit use, as measured by seasonally adjusted turnover of demand
deposits, increased slightly in October.
Consumer instalm ent credit outstanding at commercial banks increased slight
ly in October from the September level, reflecting gains in loans for automobiles
and for repair and modernization.
Consumer prices increased again in October for all major groups except food,
which showed no change.
Gasoline ta x collections, on a seasonally adjusted basis, declined in October from
the previous month.
Total output of crops is down this year, largely because of a decline in cotton
production.
Vegetable shipments from Florida through mid-November were substantially
below those in the similar period last fall; heavy rainfall damaged maturing crops.
Favorable w eather enabled farmers to complete the autumn harvest earlier than
usual in most areas; shortages of moisture in some portions of Louisiana, Missis
sippi, and Tennessee, however, slowed plantings and growth of small grains and
pastures.
Deposits at rural banks in predominantly farm areas were greater in September
than last September, but were lower than in August.
Total loans at mem ber banks increased seasonally during October; partial data
indicate a further seasonal rise during November.
Business borrowings at weekly reporting member banks continued to increase in
November, reflecting large increases by commodity dealers and trade firms. Loans
to textile firms rose somewhat after remaining stable for several months.
Total deposits at mem ber banks remained unchanged in October in contrast to
a usual increase during the month; partial data indicate a rise in November of about
seasonal proportions.
Member bank borrowings from the Federal Reserve Bank in November were
the highest they have been this year.
Le s s M o n e y in th e T i l l . . .
W
ill
C a s h
S h o r t a g e
P i n c h
B u s i n e s s ?
In the first six months of 1 9 5 6 , cash and
U. S. Governm ent securities held by all corpo
rations fell n early 1 5 percent.
necessary, could pay off only about 48 cents on the dollar
of all current liabilities. At the end of the war, when
corporate liquidity was the highest, American firms on
the average could have paid off nearly 95 cents of every
dollar of current debt.
Part of the difficulty arises because of the stage of the
business cycle we are in. Changes in corporate liquidity
occur in conjunction with changes in business activity.
Corporate liquidity becomes relatively great when busi
ness activity has been low for some time. As business
improves, heavy requirements of inventories and trade
receivables tend to draw cash balances down.
H ardest hit w ere firms with the greatest
increases in sales and spending program s.
P in c h F e lt in D is tr ic t T o o
American businesses are doing more business with less
cash lately. Corporation treasurers and small businessmen
alike are finding that the heavy expenses accompanying
high business activity are putting a strain on their bank
accounts. What is causing the pinch and what it will mean
for the future are two increasingly important questions
as the time for making plans for 1957 draws near.
Highlights on the squeeze on corporate liquidity are:
The pinch is not confined to m ajor national
com panies; even fa irly sm all firms in the Sixth
District have felt the squeeze on read y cash.
Some slack rem ains before the ratio of cash
to current debt reaches low prew ar levels for
all corporations in the agg regate; individual
firms a re undoubtedly near their minimum.
If the result of the cash shortage is a brake on business
spending, it is in line with the intent of Federal Reserve
policy.
H o w T ig h t is t h e S q u e e z e ?
Generally corporations count as part of their cash assets
their total bank deposits, till money, and also their short
term Government securities, which can be readily sold if
necessary. At the end of June 1956, American corporations
(excluding banks and insurance companies) had cash of
30.7 billion dollars in their bank accounts and in their
cash registers and some 18 billion dollars in Government
securities. The total of some 49 billion dollars, impressive
though it might sound, was puny, compared with either
the volume of business being done or the amount of money
corporations owed to others. Furthermore, the total of
their liquid assets, or ready cash, was about one-seventh
less than the sum they held just six months earlier, at the
end of December 1955.
American businesses have had to stretch out their means
of payment to cover the greater volume of business
being done. At the end of 1954 business firms on the
average had 10 cents in ready cash or easily convertible
securities for every dollar of sales that they made in that
year. At the end of June 1956 only 8 cents in liquid assets
was available per dollar of sales on a yearly basis, so much
have sales risen and liquid assets fallen.
A better way of looking at the liquidity squeeze is
to compare the amount of cash assets corporations own
with what they owe, excluding, of course, long-term debt,
which does not have to be paid immediately. Once again,
the straitened circumstances of most business firms be
come obvious. Right now American corporations, if
Many Sixth District concerns have also experienced a
shortage in cash relative to current debt. This is best seen
by looking at the balance sheets of a sample of mediumsize firms with headquarters in District states that publish
their accounts regularly in financial manuals. These firms,
all with public stock issues, now have cash equal to about
60 percent of current debt, compared with about 80 per
cent last December. At present their cash relative to debt
is about the same as that of many large national manufac
turing and trade concerns.
Both the large national firms and the medium-size
District firms are considerably more liquid relative to
their current debt than is the average national corporation.
On the other hand, the first six months of the year saw
much greater liquidity restrictions for these local and large
national firms. Undoubtedly the national average is heavily
weighted both by small firms and by retail establishments
which presumably do not require any substantial cash
positions. The cash-to-debt ratio of very small District
firms apparently changed little in the first six months of
1956, according to the meager data available at the
Federal Reserve Bank.
S l i m m i n g D ie t N o t S t a r v a t i o n
Part of the apparent shortage of ready cash on the part of
American business has been an optical illusion: Demands
have been so large that businesses have not been able to
generate enough cash to keep up. In the first half of 1956,
retained profits of all American corporations fell below
year-earlier levels, and even though depreciation allow
ances were producing more funds, the cash “throw-off” of
American business relative to their total uses of funds
dwindled from 53 percent to 41 percent. In 1954, the cash
throw-off of American corporations supplied about 95
percent of their total needs for funds.
District corporations also have expanded their use of
funds far beyond their ability to generate more from
their operations. In 1955, for the sample of 59 mediumsize corporations with headquarters in the Sixth District
and with public stock issues, 59 percent of the total funds
• 3•
requirements came from retained earnings and depreciation
allowances, in comparison with 86 percent in 1954. Small
corporations too found their internal sources of funds
insufficient for their requirements. For the sample of small
District firms shown in the accompanying chart, only 49
percent of needed funds could be supplied from retained
earnings and depreciation last year. On the other hand,
the sample of 229 national manufacturing and trade con-
Gain in cash throw-off (retained earnings and depre
ciation) is not keeping up with rise in funds used.
Billions of Dollors
Millions of Dollars
Corporation liquidity is falling.
1954
1955
All U.S. Corporations
'49
‘50
'51
'52
'53
'54
'55
'56
June
S o u rce : Data for all U. S. corporations from Securities and Exchange Com
mission; for large U. S. corporations from F e d e ra l R e s e r v e Bulletin June 1955
and 1956: sample includes approximately 250 manufacturing and trade
concerns. Data for medium-size District corporations from Moody’s In d u s
tria ls: Sample includes manufacturing and trade concerns headquartered in
District states; 61 such companies 1949-50 and 59 after 1950. Sample of
small District corporations includes 39 manufacturing and trade concerns
whose accounts are on file in the Discount Department of the Federal Reserve
Bank of Atlanta.
In all cases except that of ail U. S. corporations, estimates for June 1956
were prepared from small samples used as basis for projection of relevant
figures.
cerns (most of them quite large) showed some 70 percent
of requirements could be supplied from internal sources.
The desire of businesses to spend more money has run
head on into current Federal Reserve policy that is seeking
to hold down the growth in the money supply. Thus, in
spite of the substantial increase in loan demand through
out most of the period, the money supply expanded only
about 3 percent in the year ended June 30, 1956, com
pared with about 5 percent for the previous year. In the
first half of 1956 the money supply (deposits and cur
rency) continued to increase very slightly.
A ll of this, of course, has meant the economy has
been served a slimming diet rather than one of starvation.
Businesses sometimes have drawn down their bank
accounts when they were unable to borrow to fulfill their
building programs. That corporations’ cash positions have
fallen in dollar figures recently in the face of a slightly
expanded money supply suggests that other sectors of the
economy may be increasing their cash holdings.
Business officials have found it particularly attractive
to keep a minimum of money on hand because of the
relatively high yields currently available on virtually risk
free, short-term investments. Alert corporate treasurers
frequently calculate their immediate needs with a sharp
pencil, lending out the remainder of their bank balances to
other corporations or security dealers even for a few days
1954
1955
59 District Corporations
in addition to purchasing short-term Treasury securities.
In part, the ability of corporations to economize on
cash assets has been responsible for the increase in the
relative turnover of bank deposits that has occurred during
most of the year. From December 1955 to August 1956
turnover (checks drawn divided by deposits) had increased
over 10 percent. This, of course, tends to offset monetary
policy aimed at slowing down the growth in bank deposits:
the same deposits do more work.
W il l L e s s M o n e y M e a n L e s s B u s in e s s ?
Obviously there is no neat answer to the question of the
ultimate impact of the liquidity squeeze on American
business. Some tendencies, however, can be discerned.
Banks often ration credit by requiring higher compensating
balances when credit is tight. More important, ready cash
and easily convertible securities are to nonfinancial busi
nesses what reserve balances are to commercial banks.
Although there are no legal limitations on the amount of
cash and Government securities that a corporation must
keep relative to its liabilities, traditional standards of man
agement tend to keep many businesses from weakening
their liquidity positions beyond a certain point. This ten
dency to observe liquidity standards is particularly impor
tant to banks and trade creditors who are continually faced
with deciding whether or not credit should be granted.
Unlike many other financial ratios, ratios testing the
adequacy of the cash account have no formal rule of
thumb. There are traditional differences in liquidity stand
ards among industries, and individual companies within an
industry may have widely differing attitudes toward the
amount of cash and Governments they desire to maintain.
Even so, for corporations as a group, the only period when
liquid assets were as small a proportion of current debt as
they are today was 1939-41. Many corporations may have
considerable slack before they run up against their mini
mum liquidity requirements; others may have reached that
point already. In any case, American businesses will find
their liquidity considerations of increased importance in
their 1957 spending and financing plans.
Thomas R. Atkinson
B a n k
F i n a n c i n g f o r
A technological revolution is underway in District agricul
ture. More and more farmers are using power-driven
machinery, for example, rather than hand labor and
animal power; the number of farmers in District states
depending solely on tractor power doubled between 1950
and 1954, according to the census of agriculture.
Numerous other changes have accompanied this
increased use of machinery: There are fewer farms in
District states, and the average farm is larger than it was
several years ago. Farming is more competitive and
markets for farm products have changed considerably;
some are growing, others are shrinking.
To effect these changes and to realize the greatest
possible returns from their investments in machinery and
equipment, farmers have had to make additional invest
ments in land, buildings, operating supplies, breeding
stock, and the like. They not only need more money
than they once did, therefore, but now they have to
put a larger share of their available funds into inter
mediate and long-term projects. By supplying some of the
necessary capital for financing these changes taking place
on District farms, commercial bankers have had an
important part in bringing about a more productive agri
culture in the area, even though it has meant that they
have had to alter their lending practices to some extent.
How much bankers are lending to farmers, how many
loans they are making, what the maturities are, what
security they are asking, what the interest rates are, and
how these data compare with those a decade ago can
be learned from the 1947 and 1956 surveys of agricultural
loans at all commercial banks made by the Federal Reserve
Bank of Atlanta.
B a n k e r s E x t e n d M o r e C r e d it
Farmers have obtained production credit from banks for
current expenses, for intermediate-term investments, for
consolidation and payment of other debts, and for “other”
purposes, according to survey data. The total amount of
farm production credit outstanding at all commercial banks
in the District is about three times greater than it was in
1947. This increase, however, is probably overstated to
some extent because in 1947 some farm production loans
were classified as farm real estate loans. Most of the farm
production credit is going to farm owners. This year only
20 percent went to tenants; nine years ago 44 percent went
to tenants. It must be remembered, of course, that farm
tenancy is also on the decline, which accounts for some of
the drop in credit to tenants.
More loans and larger loans is the trend today, compared
with 1947, and that is true for all types of farm borrowers.
Bankers are making considerably more loans to farmers
today than they did nine years ago, with most of the
increase occurring because of greater lending for inter
mediate-term investments and repaying other debts. The
average size of farm production loan outstanding not
secured by real estate is now 823 dollars, whereas in 1947
it was 420 dollars. The average loan secured by farm real
F a r m
e r s
estate today is 2,066 dollars, having risen from 1,609
dollars in 1947. Loans outstanding to cotton producers
are averaging about three times larger than they were in
1947 and those to producers of livestock have nearly
doubled in size.
Apparently farmers with medium-size operations are
the principal borrowers from commercial banks, whereas,
according to the earlier survey, the very small farmers
used to obtain most of the bank credit. The number of
notes with outstanding balances of 1,000-5,000 dollars
was 23 percent of all notes this year; in 1947 the number
of such notes accounted for only 9 percent of the total.
Notes with outstanding balances of less than 250 dollars
are only 34 percent of the total today, having declined
from 59 percent in 1947. Notes with outstanding balances
exceeding 5,000 dollars changed from one to 2 percent
of the total in the period under discussion.
B a n k e r s F in a n c e d F a r m A d j u s t m e n t s
As District farmers have shifted from cotton to other enter
prises, bankers have helped supply the necessary funds.
Poultry, dairying, beef cattle, fruit and vegetable crops,
added or expanded on many farms, have been financed
to a great extent with bank credit. Livestock producers,
for example, are now obtaining 21 percent of total farm
production credit, compared with 11 percent in 1947.
Cotton growers, on the other hand, are using less credit;
they are now obtaining 20 percent of the total volume of
farm production credit— nine years ago their share was 34
percent. General farming is more prevalent in District
states today and bankers have provided the money that
farmers needed to make the transition. Forty-seven percent
of the amount of farm production loans outstanding this
year was obtained by general farmers; 28 percent was
the share in the earlier survey year.
A look at the growing amount of loans outstanding for
intermediate-term investments reveals the extent to which
bankers have helped farmers make their intermediate-term
adjustments. Currently, 37 percent of the volume of farm
production loans outstanding is for intermediate-term in
vestments; this involves 34 percent of the number of out
standing notes. Comparable percentages nine years ago
were 26 and 16, respectively. It seems that most of these
funds go to farmers as small loans, although to a some
what lesser extent now than nine years ago. About 69
percent of the outstanding notes for intermediate-term in
vestments have balances of less than 1,000 dollars; in
1947 the percentage was about 78. The percentage of
outstanding loans for intermediate-term investments in the
1,000-5,000 dollar loan bracket has grown from 20 to 28.
S e c u r ity a n d M a tu r ity
In adjusting their lending policies to meet the need for
farm credit, bankers have re-evaluated their requirements
regarding security. Real estate is becoming more impor
tant, and endorsed notes and chattels are used less than
was once the case, particularly when the farmer has few
• 5 •
F A R M P R O D U C T I O N L O A N S O U T S T A N D I N G , D IS T R IC T C O M M E R C IA L B A N K S
1947 AND
By Purpose
By Size of Loan
Percent o f Total
N u m b er
Am ount
1947
1956
1947
1956
Purpose o f L oan
C urrent ex p en se s
. . . .
In term ed ia te-term
i n v e s t m e n t s ..........................
C o n so lid a tio n or p a y m e n t o f
oth er d e b t s ..........................
O t h e r .............................................
N o t s p e c i f i e d ..........................
76
59
68
52
16
34
26
37
A ll p u r p o s e s ..........................
♦Less than 0.5 percent.
2
6
3
4
*
3
5
3
*
100
100
100
100
6
By Maturity
P ercent o f Total A m o u n t O utstanding
1947
1956
M aturities
L e ss th a n 6 m o n th s
. . .
6 m o n th s-1 y ea r
. . . .
1 - 2 y e a r s ................................
2 - 3 .............................................
3 - 5 .............................................
5 - 1 0 .............................................
1 0 - 1 5 .......................................
1 5 - 2 0 .......................................
20 years and o v er . . . .
A ll m atu rities
. . . .
♦Less than 0.5 per cent.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
52
9
4
5
5
1
*
*
100
11
49
7
9
16
5
*
*
3
100
assets; farmers are now securing about 30 percent of their
borrowings for intermediate-term investments with real
estate. Comparable data are not available for 1947,
because at that time some farm production loans secured
by real estate were classified as farm mortgage loans.
Bankers are accommodating farmers further by letting
them have the money for longer periods. Today, 16 percent
of the farm production notes outstanding have maturities
of more than a year; formerly the percentage was 6. Most
of this change has occurred in notes maturing in fifteen
months to three years.
Maturities have been adjusted on all types of farm
production loans— those for current expenses, those for
consolidating and repaying other debts, and those for
intermediate-term investments; 38 percent of the latter
have maturities of more than one year, whereas in 1947
only 8 percent had such long maturities.
Maturities on farm mortgage loans have also been
lengthened, particularly in the two-to-five-year range;
only about 60 percent of the loans outstanding at present
have maturities of less than one year— in 1947 about 76
percent of the loans were in that maturity group. Loans
made for buying farm real estate now carry longer matuE C O N O M IC S T U D Y No. 6
The Savings and Investment Function of Life Insurance
Companies in the Sixth Federal Reserve District, a special
study recently completed in the Research Department of
this Bank, is available for distribution. The study empha
sizes the role of life insurance company investments in the
current economic development of the South.
Address requests to: Research Department, Federal Re
serve Bank of Atlanta, Atlanta 3, Georgia.
1956
A m o u n t O utstanding,
A s Percent o f Total
I//
Loan
1947
U n d er $ 2 5 0
..........................
2 5 0 -4 9 9
................................
5 0 0 -9 9 9
................................
1 ,0 0 0 -4 ,9 9 9
..........................,
5 ,0 0 0 -9 ,9 9 9
..........................
$ 1 0 ,0 0 0 an d o v e r
. . .
A ll l o a n s ................................
.
.
.
.
.
.
1956
A verage
Interest R ate
1956
1947
4
7
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
15
16
34
9
10
45
14
18
. .
100
100
12
8.5
7.8
7.3
7 .8
7 .6
7.3
6.6
6.8
6.0
5.7
4 .8
6.9
5.4
6.6
rities; 33 percent are being written to mature in one to five
years, 19 percent in five to ten years, and 9 percent in over
ten years. Nine years ago, 22 percent of the outstanding
volume of such loans matured in one to five years.
T h e S tr u c tu r e o f I n te r e s t R a te s H a s C h a n g e d
The average interest rate on farm production loans is now
6.6 percent, little different from the 6.9 percent a decade
ago. Within the structure of interest rates, however, there
has been a noticeable change. Farmers who are borrowing
small amounts— less than 500 dollars— are finding that
the rate is lower than that they paid in 1947. Conversely,
farmers who are borrowing large sums— 5,000 dollars or
more— are finding that they have to pay more for the
money than they did in 1947.
Thus to maintain or increase income from farm loan
portfolios heavily weighted by large loans, bankers are
having to charge more for them. A t the same time, the
shift from small to large loans has altered the risk to the
farm loan portfolio sufficiently to induce a higher interest
charge on large loans. Lengthened maturities and increased
lending for intermediate-term investments have also figured
in the changed structure of interest rates.
Commercial bankers have helped to finance the adjust
ments recently made in District agriculture by lending more
funds, especially for capital items, and by lengthening the
terms of the loans somewhat. These changes signify an
improvement in the service that bankers offer farmers.
Further improvement will probably occur as a larger
number of bankers judge the merits of their farm loans
more on the uses for the funds and the expected income
rather than on the security offered.
A
rthur
H. K
antner
and
Jo h n
T.
H
a r r is
Bank Announcement
The Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta is pleased to
welcome into membership of the System the newly
organized Commerce National Bank in Lake Worth,
Lake Worth, Florida, which opened for business
November 26. The bank’s officers are Herbert G. Baur,
President; Oliver G. Locher, Executive Vice President
and Cashier; George C. Hopkins, Jr., Assistant Cashier.
It began operations with capital stock of $350,000
and surplus of $100,000.
Sixth District Statistics
Condition of 2 7 Member Banks in Leading Cities
In s t a lm e n t C a s h L o a n s
(I n T hou sand s o f D o lla rs)
Percent Change
V olum e
No. of
Lenders
Lender
Federal cr ed it union s . . .
S ta te cr ed it u n ion s . . . .
In d u strial b a n k s .....................
In d u strial loan com p an ies .
S m all loan com p an ies . . .
C om m ercial banks . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
17
8
11
IS
31
S ep t.
1956
+ 15
+ 20
—4
+ 15
+8
+ 12
O ct. 1 9 5 6 from
Oct.
1955
S ep t.
1956
+ 19
+ 21
+ 24
+9
+ 18
—2
O ct.
1955
+ 15
+14
+2
+ 7
+5
+9
+ 1
+0
— 1
— 1
+ 1
+ 1
Retail Furniture Store Operations
P ercen t Change
O ctober 1 9 5 6 from
Item
S ep tem b er 1 9 5 6
T otal s a le s .....................................................
Cash s a l e s ...........................................................
I n sta lm e n t and oth er cr ed it sa les . .
A c co u n ts receivab le, end o f m onth .
C o llec tio n s during m o n t h .........................
In ven tories, end o f m o n t h ...................
•
•
■
.
.
■
•
•
■
.
.
•
+
+
+
+
+
+
O ctober 1 9 5 5
—6
—6
—6
9
9
9
0
8
7
+ 4
— 1
+6
W holesale Sales and Inventories*
P ercent Change
In ven tories
S a le s
O ct. 1 9 5 6 from
N o. o f
Firm s
S e p t.
1956
30
+3
— 0
9
12
+ 8
+8
+7
—s
. . . 47
+12
+ 26
+ 20
+8
—2
+ 16
46
— 1
+27
.
.
.
.
11
14
11
27
—2
+ 12
+7
+ 12
—2
+ 5
+ 8
+ 18
10
11
+ 5
+6
—6
+6
26
— 0
+ lb
. 10
+ 66
+ 84
8
+ 27
+63
... 6
. 14
. 12
. 24
O ct. 2 4
1956
Nov. 2 3
1955
O ct. 2 4
1956
Nov. 2 3
1955
. 3 ,3 7 0 ,6 0 2
. 1 , 8 5 4 ,0 2 0
. 1 ,8 8 2 ,1 3 3
3 , 3 6 4 ,3 3 0
1 , 8 2 4 ,0 1 0
1 ,8 5 1 ,9 7 5
3 , 3 2 5 ,5 8 6
1 , 6 9 4 ,3 9 7
1 ,7 1 8 ,7 0 4
+ 0
+ 2
+2
+ 1
+9
+ 10
. 1 ,0 1 8 ,6 1 9
9 9 5 ,5 0 8
9 4 6 ,1 2 5
+2
+8
3 9 ,8 1 4
3 7 ,9 8 6
2 8 ,6 1 5
+ 5
+39
5 2 ,7 0 8
.
1 6 7 ,8 7 9
1 5 ,7 4 6
5 8 7 ,3 6 7
. 1 ,5 1 6 ,5 8 2
5 2 ,5 9 8
1 6 7 ,3 3 5
1 7 ,6 4 3
5 8 0 ,9 0 5
1 ,5 4 0 ,3 2 0
4 2 ,2 0 7
1 5 9 ,6 2 1
5 ,3 8 7
5 3 6 ,7 4 9
1 ,6 3 1 ,1 8 9
+ 0
+ 0
— 11
+ 1
—2
+25
+5
*
4 8 0 ,7 6 7
7 2 8 ,3 4 8
3 0 7 ,4 6 7
5 3 4 ,9 0 5
5 1 ,8 7 1
5 0 7 ,8 5 6
7 2 5 ,0 4 3
3 0 7 ,4 2 1
5 0 1 ,8 7 5
5 3 ,0 9 3
5 5 5 ,3 3 1
7 5 1 ,2 6 5
3 2 4 ,5 9 3
5 0 8 ,8 2 4
5 1 ,4 2 9
—5
+ 0
+0
+7
—2
— 13
—3
—5
+5
+ 1
2 5 0 ,3 1 7
Demand d e p o sits ad ju sted
. 2 ,3 2 2 ,4 2 3
T im e d e p o s i t s .....................
6 7 2 ,9 3 8
U. S . Gov’t d ep o sits . .
9 8 ,1 3 9
D e p o sits o f d o m estic banks
.
7 0 0 ,1 4 6
B o r r o w in g s ........................... . .
7 4 ,4 5 7
2 3 8 ,3 5 7
2 , 3 3 0 ,3 5 1
6 7 4 ,7 5 4
7 8 ,5 8 5
6 7 2 ,6 7 0
6 7 ,7 5 7
2 3 3 ,0 1 0
2 ,3 6 3 ,9 7 3
6 2 8 ,4 6 8
9 3 ,0 7 7
6 6 7 ,4 6 1
6 2 ,1 5 0
+ 5
—0
—0
+25
+4
+ 10
+ 7
—2
+ 7
+5
+5
+20
’•'Based on in form ation s u b m itted by w h olesalers p a r ticip a tin g
Trade Report issued by th e Bureau o f th e Census.
(I n T hou sand s o f D o lla rs)
P ercen t Change
____
1 0 M onths
O ct. 1 9 5 6 f r o m ------- 1 9 5 6
O ct.
1956
A L AB AM A
A n n i s t o n ....................
B irm ingham . . . .
D o t h a n ........................
S e p t.
1956
O ct.
1955
O ct. 3 1 , 1 9 5 6 , from
S e p t. 3 0
1956
O ct 31
1955
—1
+7
+13
+ 18
A L A B A M A ............................... .
+1
+ 6
+ 16
+ 18
B ir m in g h a m ......................... .
+4
+9
M o b i l e ................................... . + 1 6
—5
M o n tg o m e r y ......................... .
+3
+3
+3
+9
+ i6
FL O R ID A ................................. . + 2 8
+ 2
+ 4
+ 29
+7
+8
—1
+4
O r l a n d o ................................ . + 2 1
+2
+6
S t . P trsb g-T am p a A rea . . + 2 7
+9
+8
+ 13
. +35
S t . Petersb u rg . . . .
—3
+4
T a m p a .............................. . + 2 1
— 1
+7
+ 5
—0
+2
GEORGIA .................................. .
+ 6
—3
+2
+6
A t l a n t a * * ........................... .
+ 1
—6
— 1
A u g u s t a ................................ . + 1 0
+9
— 10
—1
+3
C o l u m b u s .............................. .
+8
—3
+6
—5
+8
M a c o n .................................... . — 2
+ 15
+6
R om e** .................................. .
—0
+3
S a v a n n a h * * ......................... .
+ 8
+ 3
i7
+8
L O U I S I A N A ............................. . + 1 6
+ 12
+8
+29
+ 15
B aton R o u g e ........................ . + 1 3
+0
+6
+ 16
New O r le a n s ........................ . + 1 9
+ 11
—3
+ 5
+6
+4
M I S S I S S I P P I ......................... .
+ 1
+ 2
—0
+6
+6
Jack son ................................... .
+ 5
— 11
+ 5
M e r i d ia n * * .......................... .
+6
+ 0
+5
+3
T E N N E S S E E ............................ .
+7
—5
+8
+ 16
+3
B risto l (T en n . & V a .) * * . — 3
B risto l-K in g sp o rt—6
+3
Joh n son C ity * * . . . . — 2
—6
+3
+0
C h attan ooga ........................ .
— i.4
+8
+2
+7
K n o x v i l l e .............................. .
+ 8
+ 6
+ 14
+ 10
N a s h v i l l e .............................. . + 1 3
+6
+ 9
+11
D I S T R I C T ................................. . + 1 1
+ 1
♦ R ep ortin g sto r es acco u n t for over 9 0 percen t o f to ta l D is tr ic t d ep artm en t sto r e sa les.
* * l n order to p erm it p u b lic a tio n o f figu res for th is c ity , a sp ecia l sam p le h as been co n
str u c ted th a t is n o t con fin ed e x c lu siv ely to d ep artm en t sto r es. F igures fo r n o n -d ep art
—4
—z
+io
+io
+io
—4
ment stores, however, are not used in computing the District percent changes.
+
S e p t.
1956
O ct.
1955
from
1955
3 7 ,5 7 8
6 1 0 ,7 2 0
2 4 ,9 5 4
3 1 ,6 1 8
2 1 0 ,7 1 2
1 2 2 ,3 1 6
4 3 ,8 9 0
+8
+14
+10
+ 13
+19
+25
+9
+ 3
+ 13
+ 0
+ 6
+23
+19
+2
+ 11
+18
+11
+5
+12
+ 7
+ 7
5 5 5 ,0 3 9
6 3 6 ,7 9 1
1 , 0 1 2 ,3 2 8
1 3 5 ,9 8 3
7 7 ,9 9 1
1 3 8 ,8 6 5
2 6 3 ,4 3 5
7 9 ,7 2 1
5 2 8 ,9 8 1
5 2 6 ,1 5 6
7 9 5 ,5 3 9
1 2 2 ,9 7 9
7 5 ,0 3 6
1 2 4 ,6 6 7
2 4 1 ,9 2 8
6 8 ,3 5 3
5 2 5 ,8 0 7
4 9 7 ,8 6 0
7 8 2 ,0 2 8
1 0 5 ,9 9 0
6 5 ,0 8 3
1 1 7 ,3 8 7
2 2 2 ,4 0 7
7 1 ,6 7 5
+ 5
+21
+27
+ 11
+4
+ 11
+9
+17
+ 6
+28
+29
+28
+20
+18
+18
+11
+
+
+
+
+
5 7 ,0 2 5
1 , 7 2 6 ,4 9 2
9 6 ,8 4 1
1 7 ,8 1 1
9 8 ,1 6 7
7 ,7 5 4
4 6 ,2 8 8
1 7 ,0 1 0
1 0 8 ,0 9 2
1 5 ,5 5 5
4 5 ,5 7 3
1 7 3 ,4 8 1
2 4 ,4 5 5
5 1 ,4 7 4
1 ,4 2 9 ,8 1 7
9 0 ,6 2 6
1 6 ,6 9 6
9 7 ,5 3 7
7 ,6 0 7
4 7 ,8 0 9
1 5 ,5 3 4
1 0 3 ,5 3 3
1 1 ,9 0 0
3 7 ,6 6 0
1 3 8 ,7 2 5
2 4 ,7 3 1
5 2 ,7 0 3
1 ,4 9 6 ,8 1 5
9 4 ,7 0 4
1 6 ,3 7 0
1 0 4 ,5 3 0
6 ,4 6 1
4 3 ,4 4 2
1 6 ,5 5 7
9 8 ,9 4 6
1 4 ,9 0 9
4 4 ,6 5 9
1 3 8 ,8 7 9
2 3 ,6 1 1
+11
+21
+7
+ 7
+ 1
+2
—3
+10
+4
+31
+21
+25
—1
+8
+15
+2
+ 9
+20
+ 7
+ 3
+ 9
+4
+2
+25
+4
+8
+8
— 1
+21
+ 5
+37
+18
+ 6
+ 7
+ 5
+4
+10
+3
6 3 ,9 9 0
1 7 7 ,8 1 9
7 6 ,5 1 7
1 ,2 6 2 ,4 8 4
6 0 ,2 4 9
1 5 0 ,0 5 1
7 4 ,8 6 5
1 ,0 9 0 ,3 6 9
5 3 ,4 1 7
1 5 4 ,6 1 3
7 1 ,5 1 5
1 , 0 7 2 ,1 8 9
+6
+19
+2
+ 16
+20
+15
+7
+18
+20
+7
+12
+10
2 9 ,2 4 2
2 1 2 ,5 5 4
3 7 ,2 6 4
2 2 ,3 4 9
2 7 ,5 9 0
1 8 9 ,4 0 1
3 5 ,5 1 8
1 8 ,1 9 8
2 6 ,8 6 7
1 9 2 ,1 4 4
3 2 ,8 2 0
1 8 ,4 2 8
+ 6
+12
+ 5
+23
+9
+11
+ 14
+21
+ 15
+8
+11
+6
4 2 ,8 5 7
3 3 ,7 4 4
3 3 ,6 3 5
C h attan ooga . . . .
2 8 0 ,7 8 5
2 4 5 ,4 7 2
2 3 6 ,0 0 5
Joh nson C ity * . . .
3 4 ,4 2 9
3 3 ,0 5 1
3 3 ,8 3 4
K in g sp o rt* . . . .
6 8 ,6 6 4
6 0 ,0 3 2
6 4 ,1 3 1
K n o x v i l l e ....................
1 4 4 ,1 5 4
1 6 2 ,7 1 9
1 6 4 ,9 7 7
N a s h v i l l e ....................
5 9 3 ,4 2 2
5 1 8 ,8 0 9
5 2 8 ,7 2 2
S IX T H D IST R IC T
3 2 c i t i e s ..................... 8 ,1 8 2 ,3 0 7
7 ,1 1 4 , 7 8 0
7 ,1 1 8 ,6 4 0
U N IT E D ST A T E S
3 4 5 c i t i e s . . . . 1 9 3 ,1 4 0 ,0 0 0 1 6 7 ,1 5 4 ,0 0 0 1 7 5 ,8 4 8 ,0 0 0
+27
+14
+4
+ 14
+13
+14
+27
+19
+ 2
+7
—1
+ 12
+13
+11
+8
+ 5
—6
+9
+15
+15
+10
+16
+10
+9
P e n s a c o l a ...................
S t . Petersb u rg . . .
W est P alm B each * .
GEORGIA
A t l a n t a ........................
B r u n s w ic k ...................
C o lu m b u s ...................
E lb erton .....................
G a in e sv ille* . . . .
+io
—9
Oct
1955
3 5 ,7 6 4
6 0 5 ,2 7 3
2 2 ,7 4 3
2 9 ,6 9 8
2 1 8 ,1 3 6
1 1 6 ,3 4 6
4 1 ,1 0 3
M ontgom ery . . . .
T u sc a lo o sa * . . . .
FLO RIDA
J a ck so n v ille . . . .
M i a m i ..........................
Greater M iam i* . .
Inven tories
1 0 M onths
1 9 5 6 from
1955
S ep t.
1956
3 8 ,5 3 4
6 9 2 ,0 9 6
2 4 ,9 5 7
3 3 ,4 7 7
2 5 8 ,6 9 5
1 4 5 ,6 1 6
4 4 ,9 5 8
P ercen t Change
S a le s
P la ce
.
Debits to Individual Demand Deposit Accounts
in the M onthly W h olesale
Departm ent Store Sales and Inventories*
O ct. 1 9 5 6 from
.
+9
—7
* 0 v er 1 0 0 percent
+ 16
+ 33
+ 12
+4
+ 2
+9
. 31
N o. o f
Firm s
O ct.
1955
O ct.
1955
G rocery, co n fe ctio n er y , m eats
.
E d ib le farm p rod ucts . . .
D rugs, ch em s., a llie d prod. . .
T obacco ........................................... . .
P ap er, a llie d prod..................... . .
A u t o m o t i v e ...............................
E le ctrica l, e le ctr o n ic and
ap p lia n c e good s . . . . . .
H a r d w a r e ................................... . .
P lum bin g and h ea tin g good s . .
M achinery: eq u ip , and su p p lie s
Iron and ste el scrap and w aste
m a t e r i a l s .............................. . .
Nov. 2 1
1956
Item
Loans and in vestm en ts—
T o t a l .................................. ,
Loans— N e t ......................... .
Loans— G r o s s ...................... ,
C om m ercial, in d u stria l,
and agricultu ral loans
Loans to brokers and
d ealers in sec u r ities
Other loans for purchasing
or carrying s e c u r it i e s .
Real e s t a te loans . . . .
Loans to b a n k s . . . .
Other l o a n s .....................
In vestm en ts— T otal . . .
B ills , c e r tific a te s , and
,
U. S . b o n d s .....................
Other s ec u r ities . . .
Reserve w ith F . R. Bank .
Cash in v a u lt ........................
B alances w ith d om estic
O ct. 1 9 5 6 from
S e p t.
1956
T ype o f W h olesaler
P ercent Change
Nov. 2 1 , 1 9 5 6 , from
O u tstan din gs
O ct. 1 9 5 6 from
Savannah ....................
V a l d o s t a .....................
L O U ISIA N A
A lexan d ria* . . . .
B aton Rouge . . .
Lake C harles . . .
N ew O rleans . . . .
M IS S IS S IP P I
H attiesb u rg . . . .
M e r i d ia n ....................
V ic k s b u r g ...................
T EN N ESSEE
*Not included in Sixth District totals.
•7•
—6
10
15
14
13
19
+9
+ 15
+13
Sixth District Indexes
19 4 7 -4 9 = 100
Nonfarm
Employment
SEASONALLY ADJUSTED
District T o t a l .................... .
A la b a m a ............................. .
F lo r id a ..................................
G eorgia................................ .
Lo u isian a............................ .
M ississip p i..........................
Tennessee........................... .
UNADJUSTED
District T o t a l .................... .
A la b a m a ......................... .
F lo r id a ............................. .
G eorgia............................ .
Lo u isian a........................ .
M ississip p i.................... .
Tennessee........................ .
Sept.
1956
Aug.
1956
Sept.
1955
128
118
156
128
128
116
156r
128
122
122
125
124
120
120
125r
115
149r
124r
120 r
123r
120 r
128
119
149
129
123
126
127
117r
147
129
12 1
120
122
124
Manufacturing
Employment
Sept.
1955
Sept.
1956
Aug.
1956
Sept.
1955
118
118
109
153r
186
175
238
189
163
203
181
183
164
235
192
162
205r
182
174r
160
207r
181r
155r
188r
171r
109p
112 p
116p
112 p
130p
188
181
223
193
166
209
185
181
164
217r
190
164
207r
180
175r
165
195r
185r
158r
194r
175r
12 1
122
98
124
117
99
124
117
117r
107
146r
12 1r
lO lr
123r
118r
119
113
145
123
118
118r
153
110
110
142
123
139r
124r
103r
125r
119r
100
100
126
118
126r
118
Adjusted
D ISTRIC T S A LES * . . . .
A t la n t a l...................................
Baton R o u g e ..........................
Birmingham............................
Chattanooga............................
J a c k s o n ....................................
Jacksonville.............................
K n o x ville .................................
M aco n .......................................
N ash ville ..................................
New Orleans............................
S t. Ptrsbg-Tampa Area . .
T a m p a .......................................
D IS T R IC T STOCKS* . . . .
144
13 7
130
128
127
112
126
148
134
141
137
154
129
174p
Sept.
1956
157
162
128
140
144
127
149
162
143
149
138
157
135
167
210
252
148
161
Unadjusted
Oct.
1955
Oct.
1956
148
150
141
147
117r
134
136r
128
140
129
114
123
128
149
160
153
144
140
133
142
142
140
157
154
138
131
157__________ 189p
Sept.
1956
Oct.
1955
152
170
133
150
145
132
131
161
153
141
133
136
123
174
154
151
121r
136r
142
125
152
165
151
134
145
157
141
171
Reserve Bank Cities
• Branch Bank Cities
mm District Boundaries
— Branch Territory Boundaries
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
266
304
Sept.
1956
253
331
235
245
152
181
Oct.
1955
Oct.
1956
197
235
222
359
174
276
Sept.
1956
109
109
114
117
Oct.
1955
120
12 1
131
129
127
124
88 p
84
io i
109p
llO p
120 p
109p
126p
112 r
122
12 1
120
84 p
116
129
135
123
12 1
120
86
97
O ther District Indexes
xTo 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, how
ever, are not used in computing the District index.
*For Sixth District area only. Other totals for entire six states.
**D aily average basis.
Sources: Nonfarm and 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, turnover of dem. dep., FRB Atlanta; petrol, prod., U. S. Bureau of Mines;
elec. power prod., Fed. Power Comm. All indexes calculated by this Bank.
O
Oct.
1956
Furniture Store
S a le s * / * *
Aug.
1956
Department Store Sales and Stocks**
Oct.
_________________________________ 1956
Construction
Contracts
Sept.
1956
110
125r
115
141r
125
12 1r
124r
120 r
Manufacturing
Payrolls
Oct.
1956
Adjusted
Sept.
1956
Oct.
1955
Oct.
1956
249
246
251
156
lO lr
109
164
Construction contracts* . .
R e sid e n tial..................................
Petrol, prod, in Coastal
Louisiana and Mississippi**
Cotton consumption** . . .
Furniture store stocks* . . .
Turnover of demand deposits* .
10 leading c i t i e s ......................
Outside 10 leading cities .
Elec. power prod., total**
Mfg. emp. by type
.
. 165
. 98
. 116p
. 22.2
. 23.1
. 16.9
Sept.
1956
164
90
11 2
21.2
22.8
18.0
Aug.
1956
164
131
159
Ill
84
162
162
134r
158
112 r
84
163
110
100
92
192
92
194
162
91
10 1
120 p
22.2
11 2
21.6
20.4
16.0
Sept.
1955
24.0
17.7
Sept.
1956
284
23.0
18.0
Aug.
1956
295
161r
130
155r
lllr
85r
155r
106
96r
194r
166
132
160
20.0
.
.
.
.
Fabricated metals . . . .
.
Lbr., wood prod., furn. & fix. .
.
Paper and allied prod. . .
Primary m e ta ls .......................... .
.
Trans, equip................................... .
p Preliminary
r Revised
Unadjusted
Sept.
Oct.
1956
1955
262
259
256r
242
261r
278
84
163
163r
130r
155
113
84
163
110
100
92
190
92
186
112
155
104r
114
20.0
21.2
16.8
Sept.
1955
273
163 r
132r
156r
11 2 r
85r
156r
107r
97r
192r
@FedFRASER