The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Atlanta, Georgia
October •
A ls o
in
1964
t h is
is s u e :
FARM INCOME
NEAR RECORD HIGH
SIXTH DISTRICT
STATISTICS
DISTRICT BUSINESS
CONDITIONS
S faferaf
% serve
Federal Reserve Bank Membership
—Fifty Years in Review
When the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta opened its doors on
November 16, 1914, its services were made available to 381 national
banks and one state member bank, or to less than twenty percent of
all commercial banks in the newly constituted Sixth District. Almost
fifty years later, by the end of June 1964, the number of national banks
had increased by 39, state bank membership had risen to 69, while
the total number of banks in the District had been reduced by one
fourth. As a result, member banks accounted for almost one third of
the number of all banks in the area, an all-time record.
These changes came about as a result of many factors operating
during the intervening years. New members were added every year,
ranging from one in 1938 to 63 in 1921, when 49 state banks in the
District joined the Federal Reserve System. Only in 1963 were there
no losses in membership, while in 1930, the year of the largest exodus,
49 banks were lost to the System, almost half from suspensions or
insolvencies. The table presented on Pages 2 and 3 summarizes these
and other changes that have taken place in Federal Reserve member
ship in this part of the South since 1914.
Changes stemming from each of the various factors affecting mem
bership have tended to be bunched into relatively short periods of
time. For example, over one fifth of the newly organized national
banks have appeared in the past two and one-half years, and another
third of these banks were opened during the 1920’s. During both of
these periods, the Comptroller of the Currency’s office was especially
liberal in granting new bank charters. Over half of the 283 state banks
that have been brought into System membership in the past half century
were admitted between 1918 and 1922, when Federal Reserve authori
ties were actively soliciting such memberships.
Viewing the “losses of membership” side of the ledger, the major
factor, suspension or insolvency, was most prevalent in the early years
of the great depression of the 1930’s. As a matter of fact, there have
been no member bank failures in the Sixth District since 1934. Mergers
between member banks were also concentrated in the early 1930’s,
while conversion of member banks to nonmember status was most
frequent in the early years of the System.
The large number of failures that occurred in the Corn Belt during
the 1920’s and the merger movements that have swept many parts of
the country since World War II have sharply reduced the number of
both member and nonmember banks in the nation as a whole. As a
result, the number of member banks in 1963, as a percentage of the
peak number, ranged from 20 percent in the San Francisco District
to about 75 percent in the Dallas area but was almost 90 percent in
the Sixth District. Sparked by the organization of several new national
banks, notably in Florida, System membership in the Sixth District can
be expected to exceed the 1920-peak level sometime in 1965.
Member Banks in th
Change
1915
1916
1917
1918
1919
192C
381
383
383
392
426
42<'
----
4
3
5
7
8
----
5
1
1
3
2
2
16
1
---32
4
16
24
39
1914
Membership, First of Y e a r ...............................................................................
Additions to Membership:
Organization of National B a n k s .............................................................
Conversion of Nonmember Banks to
National B a n k s ...........................................................................................
Admission of State B a n k s .........................................................................
Resumption Following Suspension.............................................................
Total A d d itio n s .....................................................................................
Losses of Membership:
Mergers Between Member B a n k s.............................................................
- Suspension or Insolvency...............................................................................
Withdrawal of State B a n k s.........................................................................
Voluntary Liquidation.....................................................................................
Conversion of Member to Nonmember Banks4 ...............................
Total L o s s e s ...........................................................................................
Net C h a n g e .............................................................................................................
Membership, End of Y e a r ...............................................................................
National B a n k s ..................................................................................................
State B a n k s ........................................................................................................
----------------
---------------........................
..... „
11
242
........................
.......
2
4
7
3
__________
........................
........................
........................
___
381
380
1
-
3-
7
....
...
1
2
4
10
---11
5
3
1
17
9
2
383
381
2
24
0
383
379
4
15
+ 9
392
372
20
5
+ 34
426
372
54
28
0
426
362
64
+ 346
37
8
1980
21.5
2000
21.3
210
28.
1941
1942
1943
1944
1945
194(
315
316
317
318
316
316
325
2
__
1
2
1
2
3
----
4
7
----
....
..............................
Total A d d itio n s .....................................................................................
Losses of Membership:
Mergers Between Member B a n k s.............................................................
Suspension or Insolvency...............................................................................
Withdrawal of State B a n k s.........................................................................
Voluntary Liquidation.....................................................................................
Conversion of Member to Nonmember Banks4 ...............................
..............................
3
..............................
1
..............................
1
Total L o s s e s ...........................................................................................
Net C h a n g e ..............................................................................................................
Membership, End of Y e a r ...............................................................................
National B a n k s ..................................................................................................
State B a n k s ........................................................................................................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
..............................
2
Total Banks in District5 .....................................................................................
Percent Member Banks of All B a n k s .......................................................
..............................
..............................
3
2
3
3
2
4
7
11
2
1
1
5
2
___
1
1
----
c
5
1
+ 1
318
263
55
6
— 2
316
260
56
7
+ 0
316
265
51
2
3
+ 1
316
262
54
2
+ 1
317
263
54
+ 9
325
268
57
+ 6
331
272
59
1093
28.9
1103
28.7
1098
29.0
1096
28.8
1104
28.6
1115
29.1
1144
28.9
one unclassified addition.
16 banks transferred from other districts.
transfers and unclassified addition.
conversion of national banks to nonmember banks and absorptions by nonmembers.
28
1940
Membership, First of Y e a r ...............................................................................
Additions to Membership:
Organization of National B a n k s .............................................................
Conversion of Nonmember Banks to
National B a n k s ...........................................................................................
Admission of State B a n k s .........................................................................
Resumption Following Suspension.............................................................
1 Includes
2 Includes
3 Includes
4 Includes
-
3
1
Total Banks in District5 .....................................................................................
Percent Member Banks of All B a n k s .......................................................
..............................
2
•2 •
jxth Federal Reserve District
Membership
0
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
3491
323
309
332
328
330
324
320
2
1
---
17
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
23
3
4
1
2
3
1
2
2
5
3
1
9
14
11
6
4
23
24
2
4
5
1
2
6
7
5
2
10
23
3
3
20
22
4
12
30
2
1
27
1
1
4
3
1
4
4
1
2
1
4
l921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
460
512
536
525
510
495
475
464
453
428
390
8
12
8
11
6
10
3
6
12
2
5
49
1
6
4
5
1
3
22
1
1
3
1
1
1
63
34
14
21
8
13
6
4
1
1
2
3
2
3
1
2
2
6
3
8
2
15
4
2
9
12
8
2
2
8
6
3
8
10
16
4
2
4
11
■52
{)512
,*385
127
10
+24
536
393
143
25
—11
525
385
140
36
—15
510
382
128
23
—15
495
379
116
33
—20
475
378
97
17
—11
464
380
84
20
—11
453
377
76
j>058
24.9
2045
26.2
2032
25.8
1998
25.5
1963
25.2
1865
25.5
1792
25.9
?47
1948
1949
1950
1951
1952
331
340
346
351
353
3
2
1
2
1
6
1
4
1
5
2
10
7
6
3
1
1
__
‘
1
1
_.
.......
1
t- 9
340
276
64
1
+ 6
346
279
67
1
+ 5
351
281
70
1
+ 2
353
283
70
1
+ 2
355
286
69
166
29.2
1183
29.2
1188
29.5
1197
29.5
1217
29.2
1
3
37
1
1
1
1
3
4
1
39
—25
428
366
62
49
—38
390
341
49
48
—42
348
304
44
30
—26
323
285
38
37
—14
3096
255
54
1
+ 23
332
277
55
6
—4
328
273
55
2
+ 2
330
274
56
11
— 6
324
269
55
5
—4
320
268
52
7
—5
315
264
51
1726
26.2
1608
26.6
1438
27.1
1290
27.0
1162
27.8
10556 1094
29.3 30.3
1084
30.3
1096
30.1
1101
29.4
1098
29.1
1099
28.7
1953
1954
1955
1956
1957
1958
1959
1960
1961
1962
1963
19647
Total
355
360
363
373
379
391
397
401
403
418
420
430
467
4
2
5
7
12
6
4
4
11
2
10
31
22
271
1
1
4
2
2
1
1
2
3
1
1
3
4
2
3
1
4
2
1
1
71
283
7
4
11
10
15
9
6
18
3
12
37
24
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
1
__
2
1
3
1932
2
2
4
1
__
1
2
1
+ 2
4 20
350
70
2
+ 10
430
360
70
0
+ 37
467
397
70
2
+ 22
489
420
69
1382
30.4
1405
30.6
1456
32.1
1496
32.7
1
2
2
4
3
+ 6
397
325
72
2
2
+ 4
401
331
70
+ 2
403
335
68
3
+ 15
418
349
69
1312
30.3
1323
30.3
1337
30.1
1367
30.6
+ 5
360
289
71
1
+ 3
363
292
71
1
+ 10
373
303
70
+ 6
379
310
69
3
+ 12
391
320
71
1224
29.4
1231
29.5
1244
30.0
1268
29.9
1298
30.1
1
1
6 57 3
133
210
80
33
94
550
+ 107
......
5 Number of par and non-par banks in the District at end of year. From 1934 through 1964, total banks includes substantial number of private banks not
theretofore included.
0 Total banks in District includes non-licensed nonmember banks, while membership includes only licensed members.
7 First six months of 1964.
Source: Compiled from Annual Reports of the Federal Reserve Board, Annual Reports of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, and the Bank Examination
Department, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
•3 •
Farm Income Near Record High
Things were better last year, say many farmers, especially
those who produce the District’s major cash crops. In
fact, they are able to point out enough sour spots in the
farm production effort this year to give an overall im
pression of sluggishness. This image emerges partly
because 1963 was a banner production and income year
for many farmers. Yields for important major crops rose
to new records, and cash receipts from farm marketings
in the District states jumped $316 million to a $4.2billion record. Total cash receipts for 1964 seem destined
to fall somewhat short of that peak.
Both output and prices for major crops, as well as
prices for some livestock products, have been below last
year’s levels thus far in 1964. Furthermore, a major
reversal in these trends probably is not in the cards for
the remaining months of the current season. Yet, some
farmers, notably citrus and sugarcane growers in Florida
and hog and egg producers throughout this region, will
likely wind up their 1964 seasons with an increase in cash
receipts. Even so, the 1964 production year in the Dis
trict’s farm economy will only be satisfactory rather than
record shattering as was last year’s.
Production of M ajor Crops in 1964
S ix t h
Source: Crop production estimates of the U. S. Department of
Agriculture on September 1, 1964.
Changes in Production of Livestock and
Poultry Products
S ix t h
Crosscurrents in Production and Prices
Admittedly, it is difficult for farmers always to achieve
higher peaks in production and income. In their struggle
to outdo themselves this year, some farmers hit the nasty
snags of reduced acreage allotments, rampaging weather,
and sagging prices. Others, however, have benefited from
increased plantings, larger herds and flocks, and a rise
in prices.
Official farm production estimates provided by the
United States Department of Agriculture indicate that
total crop output in the District states in 1964 will be
down from last year’s. The downswing stems primarily
from smaller likely yields of cotton, tobacco, corn, and
peanuts, the region’s predominant crops.
Cotton growers, who normally receive about 20 per
cent of the region’s farm cash receipts, are experiencing
an income shrinkage. On September 1, the prospective
1964 cotton crop for the District states was estimated
to be 5 percent smaller than the 4.9-million bale crop
in 1963. Nationally, the crop is 3 percent smaller. The
curtailed output in District states is almost wholly at
tributable to lower yields, since cotton growers planted
only slightly fewer acres than in 1963. In Louisiana,
sharply depressed yields stemming from untimely dry
weather are pushing the expected output down 12 per
cent from the extraordinarily large yield a year ago. For
similar reasons, yields will be 7 percent lower this year
in Georgia. Because more favorable weather for cotton
has prevailed in Alabama, Mississippi, and Tennessee,
smaller reductions from the high 1963 turnout are ex
pected in those states. In parts of Mississippi, the crop
size will be little changed from the unusually large out
put last year.
Prices for cotton also have dropped, primarily because
D is t r ic t S ta t e s
D is t r ic t S ta t e s
Percentage Change, Jan.-July 1964 from Jan.-July 1963 |
+5
+10
+15
Item
Cattle and Calves
i............ K K ......................................1
Egg Type Chicks
....j
Eggs
....................................................... :-i
Hogs
T . '”
“
3 3
Broiler Placements
:;-v
:
!
Broiler Type Chicks
i l l !
Milk*
H E
,
j... i... i...1
i * i t . 1 i . i—i—
*Milk production calculation excludes Louisiana.
Source: U. S. Department of Agriculture.
Change in A verage Prices* Received by
Farm ers
S ix t h
D i s t r ic t S t a t e s
Percentage Change, Jan.-Aug. 1964 from Jan.-Aug. 1963
-1 5
Cottonseed
Peanuts
-1 0
-5
O
11W 1
Milk
Rice
U
H
Soybeans
Tobacco
Eggs
Cotton Lint
m
w m m
m m
Corn
Broilers
Hogs
Beef Cattle
Calves
+5
—i—i1...i..i
i—
r—
■—
1 i—
• i—
i i—
1 i—
• i—
• i—
1 i—
i i—
1.T
..1
...'i——i—i—i—i—
m m m m rn
m m m
mmmmn
r n m r n m w r n r n tim m m m m *
[•:........
1 1 1. 1 1-- 1
-- --- ---
•
J____ L.
•
...........
1
i_. _1.. _L.... ____ J__
'' . •
1__
♦Mid-month.
Source: U. S. Department of Agriculture.
• 4 •
price supports have been reduced. Legislation enacted
by Congress early in 1964 set the support level, based
on Middling one-inch cotton, at 30 cents a pound, down
about 2.5 cents from the comparable 1963 support price.
In south-central Georgia, the average price received for
cotton may be pressed even lower if wind and rain from
Hurricane Dora in September damaged the crop’s overall
quality.
A shrinkage in income this year also is occurring in
the flue-cured and burley tobacco belts located in Georgia,
Florida, and Tennessee. Although both acreage and yields
were off sharply in the flue-cured belt, available estimates
indicate that the yields per acre of burley tobacco will
be only slightly lower when the harvest ends later this
year. Prices for tobaccos may average fractionally higher
than those in 1963, partly because of the higher price
support level and because the flue-cured crop brought a
near-record price of 58.6 cents a pound, more than a
cent higher than the 1963 average.
While the cotton and tobacco crops will subtract from
total farm cash receipts this year, income from sugarcane,
soybeans, and citrus should provide a sizable boost. The
projected gains in the output of sugarcane and soybeans
are 23 percent and 21 percent, respectively. The surge
in the sugarcane crop is occurring in Florida, as the
Louisiana crop was damaged severely by Hurricane Hilda.
Since wholesale prices for raw sugar have declined since
early 1964, there is little prospect that this fall’s cane
harvest will sell at the unusually high price that prevailed
during the last season. Mississippi, Tennessee, and
Louisiana stand out as the prime beneficiaries of the
larger soybean crop. The price support for soybeans, now
at $2.25 a bushel, will continue to provide protection
against price declines. However, since prospects for the
U. S. crop recently have been lowered by droughts, soy
bean prices throughout the nation may remain relatively
favorable.
Citrus growers wound up their 1963-64 season last
June with a total yield about a fifth smaller than in the
previous season. The reduced yield reflected extensive
tree damage caused by the severe freeze in the Florida
Citrus Belt in December 1962. Though the crop had
shrunk last season, average prices for citrus rose almost
80 percent, thus lifting growers’ incomes substantially.
Of course, individual growers who lost their trees did
not fare well last season, and this fall some citrus growers
again suffered losses as Hurricane Cleo swept along
Florida’s East Coast in late August blowing grapefruit
and oranges from trees in her path.
Two other District crops have been turning in good
records this year. Receipts from the vegetable crop,
produced mostly in Florida, were relatively favorable.
Also, a strengthening in the market for wood pulp induced
a step-up in pulpwood harvests and shipments to pulp
and paper mills. Although the wholesale price for wood
pulp has risen above year-earlier levels, the increase has
been modest and suggests that prices for pulpwood
stumpage have not changed much from earlier levels.
Unlike many cash crop farmers who had to reduce their
output, most livestock and poultry producers have pushed
their production throttles forward. The most recent figures
on marketings covering the first seven months of 1964
herald a substantial boost over last year’s volume. Few
signs point to a diminution in shipments at present or a
cutback by year end. However, prices for livestock and
poultry products have been pressed down under the grow
ing weight of available supplies, thus restricting the over
all income gain in this sector. Cash receipts from cattle
sales have been lower than those in 1963, and the 1964
total probably will be less than last year’s. Receipts from
hogs, however, have built up this year because shipments
have risen 8 percent, while prices on the average have
declined only 3 percent. Producers of milk and eggs also
are realizing larger gross receipts, but broiler growers
have received less cash from their sales to date. When we
strike a balance of these income developments, it seems
that the District’s cash receipts from livestock and poultry
products in 1964 will just about match last year’s total.
Total Income Recedes
So many pieces of the total farm income puzzle are
missing at present that a complete picture is impossible.
There is a fairly clear-cut impression, however, that farm
cash receipts in this region will not rise to the record
reached in 1963 but probably will come close to it. This
Cash Receipts from Farm M arketings and
Governm ent Payments
S ix t h
D is t r ic t S t a t e s , 1 9 5 0 - 6 3
Source: U. S. Department of Agriculture.
outcome would be a highly satisfactory one when cast
against the losses from Cleo, Dora, and Hilda, other
weather adversities, and some reduced plantings. Even
these blows— however cruel for some— did not produce a
widespread income loss. Government payments, primarily
to crop farmers, will again sustain farm income in the Dis
trict this year. Whether they will exceed the $128 million
total in 1963 is questionable, particularly since few cotton
growers cut their acreages to obtain the income payments
available to farmers who reduced their plantings.
The farm income aggregates of the District states, al
though slightly lower than in 1963, remain in the high
range that has prevailed since the early 1950’s. Such is the
dynamism of the District’s agriculture that it continues to
strengthen the position of many individual farmers, as
well as that of the overall economy.
A r t h u r H. K a n t n e r
• 5 •
Bank Announcements
On S ep tem b er 11, the B a n k o f H o l l y w o o d H i l l s ,
H o lly w o o d , Florida, a new ly organized n o n m e m b e r bank,
o p en ed fo r business and began to rem it at par fo r checks
d raw n on it w hen received f r o m the F ederal R eserve
Bank. Officers are A . L. M ailm an, C hairm an o f the Board;
Stanley M . Beckerm an, Vice Chairm an o f the Board;
R o b e rt A n derson , President; D a v id H. A u c a m p , Jr.,
E xecutive Vice President; R o b e r t W. G ordon, Vice Presi
dent; an d W alter R . Pearson, Jr., Cashier. Capital is
$4 00 ,00 0, an d surplus and un divided profits, $1 80 ,0 00 .
The S e c u r i t y B a n k a n d T r u s t C o m p a n y , A ra b,
A la ba m a, a new ly organized n o n m em b er bank, op ened
f o r business on S e p te m b e r 11 an d began to rem it at par.
Officers include R ich a rd T. B yrd, C hairm an o f the B o a rd ;
Joe F. Hollis, President; an d Charles L. Willman, Vice
P resident and Cashier. Capital is $15 0,00 0, and surplus
a n d undivided profits, $1 50,000.
On S e p te m b er 18, the M c I n t o s h S t a t e B a n k , Jackson,
Georgia, a new ly organized n o n m em b er bank, o p en ed for
business and began to rem it at par. Officers are H . W ayne
Barnes, Chairman o f the Board; W. H. Shapard, President;
and H en ry L. A sb u ry, Vice President an d Cashier. Capital
is $ 15 0,000, and surplus an d u ndivided profits, $75,000.
The B a n k o f I n d i a n R o c k s , Largo, Florida, a newly
organized n o n m em b er bank, o p e n ed fo r business on S ep
tem b er 22 an d began to rem it at par. Officers include
John A . Jenkins, C hairm an o f the B oa rd an d President;
a nd L ee Wasson, Vice P resident an d Cashier. Capital is
$3 00 ,0 00 , an d surplus and un divided profits, $ 15 0,000.
On S e p te m b e r 28, the S e c o n d N a t i o n a l B a n k o f
Tampa, Florida, a new ly organized m e m b e r bank,
op en ed f o r business a n d began to rem it at par. Officers
are R ich a rd A . Liggett, C hairm an o f the Board; L ee M .
Bentley, President; G eorge M . Holtsinger, Vice President;
an d T. C. Farrington, Cashier. Capital is $ 25 0,00 0, an d
surplus an d oth er capital funds, $ 25 0,00 0, as rep orted by
the C o m ptro ller o f C urrency at the time the charter was
granted.
T
am pa,
DEDICATION CEREMONY
The new building housing the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta
was formally dedicated on Friday, October
9,
by the Bank's
President, Malcolm Bryan. For this occasion, the Directors of
the Head Office held a joint meeting with the Boards of the
Birmingham, Jacksonville, Nashville, and New Orleans Branches.
William McChesney Martin, Chairman of the Board of Gov
ernors of the Federal Reserve System, addressed the group.
Among the distinguished guests attending the ceremony
were former Chairmen of the Atlanta Board of Directors Frank
H. Neely, Rufus C. Harris, and W alter M. Mitchell; former
members of the Board; representatives from local member
banks; Federal and state supervisory authorities; Senator Her
man Talmadge; Congressmen Robert G . Stephens and Charles
L. Weltner; Mayor Ivan Allen; and Fulton County Commis
sioner Harold McCart.
The affair also celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the
Bank and the System.
Debits to Demand Deposit Accounts
I n s u r e d C o m m e r c ia l B a n k s in t h e S i x t h
(In Thousands of Dollars)
Aug.
1964
July
1964
D is t r i c t
Percent Change
Year-to-date
8 Months
Aug. 1964 from
1964
from
Aug.
Aug.
July
1963
1963
1963
1964
STANDARD METROPOLITAN
STATISTIC AL A REASt
1,024,141
1,148,142
Birmingham . . .
1,156,865
53,717
58,615
60,488
Gadsden . . . .
140,020
148,003
127,269
Huntsville
. . .
406,537
353,088
382,801
Mobile
. . . .
250,437
257,416
250,823
Montgomery . . .
70,256
81,840
71,191
Tuscaloosa . . .
Ft. Lauderdale344,432
330,098
396,628
Hollywood
. .
1,270,601
1,020,856
1,110,151
Jacksonville . . .
l,6 4 5 ,4 6 6 r 1,360,512
1,412,151
404,379
510,737
386,086
Orlando . . . .
152,815
161,516r
140,129
Pensacola
. . .
Tampa1,002,180
885,530
919,406
St. Petersburg .
320,284
238,917
250,866
W. Palm Beach . .
60,541
Albany
. . . .
64,478
74,663
3,271,513
3,579,718
3,258,549
Atlanta . . . .
163,019
172,292
148,196
Augusta* . . . .
191,907
155,469
Columbus . . . .
182,961
168,171
160,116
171,109
Savannah . . . .
200,493
203,288
238,369
Baton Rouge
. .
349,877
378,979
314,640
Lafayette
. . .
80,557
84,050
93,294
Lake Charles
. .
89,370
107,031r
96,346r
New Orleans . . .
1,754,823
1,933,342
1,661,817
Jackson . . . .
478,164
426,483
401,843
Chattanooga . . .
408,006
389,262
452,308
Knoxville . . . .
356,719
382,439
349,099
Nashville . . . .
l,0 9 8 ,9 9 8 r
1,060,660
995,420
OTHER CENTERS
Anniston . . . .
49,799
53,902
48,727
Dothan
. . . .
43,888
46,470
42,508
S e lm a .........................
31,946
32,601
30,892
Bartow . . . .
20,993
28,045
20,162
Bradenton . . .
40,398
41,922
51,465
Brevard County . .
152,193
165,827
136,566
Daytona Beach . .
65,952
85,215
65,036
Ft. MyersN. Ft. Myers . .
48,999
55,662
46,648
Gainesville . . .
59,958
64,097
53,346
Key West . . . .
17,829
21,885
17,287
Lakeland . . . .
81,340
97,080
81,440
41,433
49,256
43,534
14,887
St. Augustine . .
15,590
17,023
St. Petersburg . .
222,870
256,258
215,989
69,046
72,084
Sarasota . . . .
88,270
Tallahassee . . .
88,466
94,599
77,443
489,604
514,895
469,623
Tam pa.........................
43,556
59,879
38,131
Winter Haven . .
51,234
Athens
. . . .
48,848
59,706
36,908
33,536
Brunswick
. . .
41,338
Dalton
. . . .
71,323
66,907
59,402
10,567
12,314
Elberton . . . .
12,913
60,761
60,558
Gainesville . . .
70,378
25,112
25,817
Griffin
. . . .
22,449
18,762
16,254
LaGrange . . . .
17,615
23,050
Newnan . . . .
26,856
23,599
55,079
60,535
52,879
R o m e .........................
47,543
46,722
44,566
Valdosta . . . .
8,347
8,182
Abbeville . . . .
7,560
97,894
103,285
91,429
Alexandria . . .
4,681
Bunkie
. . . .
4,535
5,013
25,314
24,194
Hammond
. . .
27,273
27,148
29,638
25,057
New Iberia . . .
6,692
8,310
7,853
Plaquemine . . .
15,730
19,518
14,495
Thibodaux . . .
70,593
76,800
71,786
Biloxi-Gutfport . .
42,636
40,007
Hattiesburg . . .
41,955
31,089
34,026
30,835
L a u re l.........................
50,434
Meridian . . . .
53,456
58,218
29,216
31,409
28,547
Natchez . . . .
Pascagoula46,675
45,850
Moss Point . .
43,081
29,867
30,365
25,902
Vicksburg
. . .
43,612
23,430
37,994
Yazoo City . . .
53,801
59,063
52,197
Bristol
. . . .
56,195
62,060
Johnson City
. .
51,420
105,530
118,163
95,481
Kingsport
. . .
SIXTH DISTRICT, Total 21,563,725 23,647,100r 20,652,871
3,081,932
Alabamaf
. . .
3,131,726
2,784,907
6,265,308
7,235,602r 6,034,169
Floridat . . . .
5,425,542
5,943,845
5,381,880
Georgiat . . . .
Louisianaf** . .
3,007,281
3,311,984
2,839,023
Mississippi^** . .
1,047,897
1,110,766
985,230
2,735,765
2,913,177r 2,627,662
Tennesseef** . .
U.S., 344 Cities . . 323,800,000 368,600,000 300,100,000
+1
—3
—5
—6
+3
— 14
+13
+9
+10
+8
+3
—1
+ 10
+10
+21
+8
+5
+8
— 13
— 13
— 14
— 21
—5
+4
+9
+4
+5
+9
+12
+15
4-6
+10
+12
—8
— 22
— 14
—9
—5
—5
—6
— 16
—8
— 10
— 17
—9
— 11
— 10
—7
—3
+4
+5
+7
+0
+10
+18
—5
—1
+9
+ 10
+ 10
+6
+9
+18
+5
+ 11
+5
+8
+3r
+10
+ 12
—8
—6
—2
— 25
— 22
—8
— 23
+2
+3
+3
+4
—4
+ 11
+ 1
+6
+7
+ 13
+ 13
+4r
+28
+8
— 12
—6
— 19
— 16
— 16
—8
— 13
— 22
—6
—5
— 13
— 14
— 11
+ 7
— 18
— 14
—3
—6
— 14
—9
+ 2
—9
—5
— 10
—7
—8
—5
— 19
—8
—2
—9
—8
—7
+5
+12
+3
—0
—5
+5
+3
+ 14
+4
+14
+5
+ 10
+20
— 14
+0
+ 12
+8
—2
+ 4
+7
—8
+7
—3
+5
+8
+17
+9
—2
+5
+1
+6
+2
+7
+13
+ 10
+4
+5
+4
+8
+4
+12
+9
+ 15
+10
+9
+ 22
+ 10
+6
+9
+ 12
+8
+12
+ 12
+6
+10
+2
+7
+18
+16
+13
+ 6
+6
+ 8
+3
+ 10
+2
+2
+86
—9
—9
— 11
—9
—2
— 13
—9
—9
—6
—6
— 12
+8
+ 17
+15
+3
+9
+11
+4
+11
+4
+1
+6
+6
+4
+8
+ 11
+12
+ 13
—2
+13
+ 14
+9
+4
+8
+7
+9
+10
+10
+ 11
+11
+4
—7
+6
+6
+5
+2
+7
+9
+7
+ 13
♦Richmond County only.
**Includes only banks in the Sixth District portion of the state.
tP artially estimated.
r Revised.
•6 •
S ix t h
D is t r ic t
S t a t is t ic s
Seaso nally Adjusted
(All data are indexes, 1957-59 =
Latest Month
(1964)
One
Month
Ago
Two
Months
Ago
100, unless indicated otherwise.)
One
Year
Ago
Latest Month
(1964)
One
Month
Ago
Two
Months
Ago
One
Year
Ago
S IX T H D IS T R IC T
G E O R G IA
INCOME AND SPENDING
43,465r 43,533r 41,506
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate) . . July 44,508
144
143
135
Manufacturing P a y r o lls ..................................... Aug.
145
Farm Cash R e c e ip t s ........................................... July
115
125
157
117
C r o p s .................................................................... July
99
L iv e s to c k ..............................................................July
121
108
123
113
130
Department Store S a l e s * / * * ......................... Sept.
150p
133r
143
Instalment Credit at Banks, *(M il. $)
156
191r
179
New Loans..............................................................Aug.
174
162
173
R e p aym en ts........................................................Aug.
190
183
INCOME AND SPENDING
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate) . . July
Manufacturing P a y r o l l s ..................................... Aug.
Farm Cash R e c e ip t s ........................................... July
Department Store S a l e s * * ............................... Aug.
8,328
143
102
139
8,219r
143r
116
123
B,131r
143
109
142
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment........................................... Aug.
M an u factu rin g ..................................................Aug.
Nonmanufacturing........................................... Aug.
Co n stru ction ..................................................Aug.
Farm Em ploym ent................................................. Aug.
Insured Unemployment, (Percentof Cov. Emp.) Aug.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.) . . . .
Aug.
117
Ill
120
128
83
2.6
40.9
118
113
120
130
88
2.2
40.3r
117
113
119
126
81
40.3
114
109
117
124
109
3.2
40.2
183
148
163
182
149
158
180
153
159
158
133
155
120
110
101
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment........................................... Aug.
M an u factu rin g ........................................... ..........Aug.
Apparel
........................................................Aug.
C h e m icals........................................................Aug.
Fabricated M e t a l s ..................................... Aug.
Food
..............................................................Aug.
Lbr., Wood Prod., Furn. & Fix. . . . Aug.
P a p e r ..............................................................Aug.
Primary M e t a ls ........................................... Aug.
Textiles
........................................................Aug.
Transportation Equipment
. . . .
Aug.
Non m anufacturing........................................... Aug.
Co n stru ction ..................................................Aug.
Farm Em ploym ent..................................................Aug.
Insured Unemployment, (Percentof Cov. Emp.) Aug.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.) . . . .
Aug.
Construction C o n tra c ts * ..................................... Aug.
R e s id e n t ia l........................................................Aug.
All O t h e r ..............................................................Aug.
Industrial Use of Electric Power . . . .
July
Cotton C o n su m p tio n **..................................... Aug.
Petrol. Prod, in Coastal La. and M iss.**
. Aug.
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank Loans*
All B a n k s ..............................................................Aug.
Leading C i t i e s ..................................................Sept.
Member Bank Deposits*
All B a n k s ..............................................................Aug.
Leading C i t i e s ..................................................Sept.
Bank D e b i t s * / * * ..................................................Aug.
116
114
136
Ill
120
107
92
109
103
95
121
117
107
78
2.9
41.1
129
145
116
121
110
174
116
114r
136
112
120
116
114
136
110
113
111
133
108
113
105
93
107
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s ........................................... Aug.
Member Bank D e p o s it s ..................................... Aug.
Bank D e b i t s * * ........................................................Aug.
95
116
113
L O U IS IA N A
103r
96
126
117
107
85
2.9
40.7
174
173
174
126
113
175
119
104
93
109
103
95
124
116
108
87
3.0
40.6
147
159
136
125
106
169r
87
3.6
40.9
123
141
107
118
99
171
180
170
177
166
177
165
154
150
144
140
153
143
136
145
144
132
148
131
127
141
106
94
110
121
126
101
101
INCOME AND SPENDING
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate)
July
Aug.
July
Aug.
6,464
129
113
125
6,365r
127
110
118
6,363r
126
122
118
6,129
120
118
113
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Insured Unemployment, (Percentof Cov. Emp.) Aug.
Aug.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.) . . . .
104
100
105
90
89
3.3
41.7
104
100
105
89
88
3.4
41.4r
104
100
104
89
87
3.3
41.3
102
98
103
82
93
4.0
42.0
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
162
129
141
164
127
133
165
126
142
141
120
127
July
Aug.
July
Aug.
3,365
157
121
108
3,311r
156r
131
93
3,358r
153
139
109
3,124
145
124
103
.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
119
123
117
120
67
3.4
40.2
118
122
117
117
80
3.4
40.8r
118
121
117
118
89
3.4
40.4
117
118
116
120
67
4.3
40.7
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s * ...............................
Member Bank D e p o sits*.........................
Bank D e b i t s * / * * .....................................
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
198
156
166
190
157
147
195
159
153
175
142
151
July
Aug.
July
Aug.
7,193
144
113
122
7,069r
144r
112
110
7,008r
144
103
124
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Insured Unemployment, (Percentof Cov. Emp.) Aug.
Aug.
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.) . . . .
117
118
116
139
83
3.3
40.8
117r
119
116r
140
86
3.4
40.8
116
119
115
142
93
3.3
40.3
113
116
112
131
89
4.1
40.9
185
148
152
174
142
145r
176
145
145
157
132
140
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
FINANCE AND BANKING
M ISS IS S IP P I
ALA BA M A
INCOME AND SPENDING
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate)
Manufacturing P a y r o lls .........................
Farm Cash R e c e ip t s ...............................
Department Store Sales** . . . .
July
Aug.
July
Aug.
6,075
134
132
117
5,970r
129
119
lllr
5,952r
131
118
120
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
109
104
111
102
69
3.0
41.5
109
105
111
102r
83
3.1
40.2r
108
104
110
103
81
3.2
40.8
5,754
125
126
107
INCOME AND SPENDING
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate)
Manufacturing P a y r o lls .........................
Farm Cash R e c e ip t s ...............................
Department Store S ales*/**
. . .
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.)
2.1
7,838
130
. . . .
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s ...........................................
Member Bank D e p o s it s .....................................
Bank D e b i t s * * ........................................................
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
176
145
158
173
144
141
174
144
146
107
102
109
98
79
3.9
41.0
154
131
137
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.)
.
FLO R ID A
TEN N ESSEE
INCOME AND SPENDING
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate) . .
Manufacturing P a y r o lls .....................................
Farm Cash R e c e ip t s ...........................................
Department Store S a l e s * * ...............................
July 13,083
Aug.
176
July
113
Aug.
178
INCOME AND SPENDING
Personal Income, (M il. $, Annual Rate)
Manufacturing P a y r o lls .........................
Farm Cash R e c e ip t s ...............................
Department Store Sales*/**
. . .
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
Nonfarm Employment...........................................
M an u factu rin g .................................................
Nonmanufacturing...........................................
Construction.................................................
Farm Employment..................................................
Insured Unemployment, (Percentof Cov. Emp.)
Avg. Weekly Hrs. in Mfg., (Hrs.) . . . .
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
127
130
126
98
82
2.5
41.7
126
130r
125r
98r
94
2.6
41.5r
125
127
125
100
87
2.7
41.1
121
126
120
91
92
2.9
41.2
FINANCE AND BANKING
Member Bank L o a n s ...........................................
Member Bank D e p o s it s .....................................
Bank D e b i t s * * .......................................................
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
183
146
149
183
144
143r
180
144
146
154
134
137
12,531r
172r
79
170r
12,721r
170
150
181
11,997
164
116
162
PRODUCTION AND EMPLOYMENT
FINANCE AND BANKING
♦For Sixth District area only. Other totals for entire six states.
**Daily average basis,
Sources: Personal income estimated by this Bank; nonfarm, mfg. and nonmfg. emp., mfg.
consumption, U. S. Bureau of Census; construction contracts, F. W. Dodge Corp.; petrol,
receipts and farm emp., U.S.D.A. Other indexes based on data collected by this Bank.
6,664
136
117
115
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
r Revised.
p Preliminary.
payrolls and hours, and unemp., U. S. Dept, of Labor and cooperating state agencies; cotton
prod., U. S. Bureau of Mines; industrial use of elec. power, Fed. Power Comm.; farm cash
All indexes calculated by this Bank.
•7 •
D IS T R IC T
B U S IN E S S
C O N D IT IO N S
..................
.
- Billions of Dollars
Annual Rate
~Seas. Adj.
I irms and individuals have good reason for continued optimism
about business, judging by the gains registered in most lines of
economic activity. Consumer spending, supported, by increased em
ploym ent and rising incomes, app aren tly set a new record in August;
at the sam e tim e, the rate of new saving slow ed som ew hat. R ainfall,
although dam aging some crops in Florida and G eo rg ia, aided fall
plantings and revived dried-out pastures throughout the region. Con
tracts for future construction failed to match the volum e of previous
months but continued to sustain growth in m any related industries.
Bank loans and deposits rebounded from the Ju ly lull as business firms
stepped up their borrowing from the region's banks.
Nonfari
u*
Average Weekly Hours
Worked inMfg.
v*
V*
Nonfarm em ploym ent edged up further during August despite a
decline in the number of factory w orkers. Increases in nonmanufacturing
Mfg. Payrolls
industries in all District states except Georgia provided the momentum needed
to carry the nonfarm job total to a new high. The drop in manufacturing
employment was concentrated in Georgia, where the early model changeover
in auto assembly plants more than offset job increases in other industries.
Linked to this was a rise in Georgia’s rate of insured unemployment, which,
combined with slight declines in most other states, left the District’s rate
unchanged from the previous month. A lengthening of the average workweek
more than counterbalanced the drop in factory employment, however, and
manufacturing payrolls expanded further.
Construction
Contracts
Industrial Use of Electric Power
Consumers ap p arently diverted some of their increased incomes from
saving to retail spending. Department store sales advanced sharply in
August, and preliminary figures indicate that the upturn was carried into
September. Bank debits, after slumping in July, also reached a new high in
August. The rise in spending was not supported to any great extent by credit;
new loans declined and repayments increased. Savings accumulations mounted
further but not so rapidly as earlier in the year. Personal income rose ap
preciably in July, the latest month for which figures are available, with Florida
accounting for more than half the District states’ increase.
U* V* u*
Cotton Consumption
Farm ers currently are experiencing sm aller yield s and low er prices
for their m ajor crops. Hurricanes Cleo and Dora damaged crops and reduced
yields in Florida and Georgia. Marketings of livestock and poultry products,
however, have been maintained. Prices for beef, hogs, and broilers held
relatively steady in recent weeks, while those for eggs slipped. Most prices
paid by farmers fluctuated within a narrow range, and farm real estate values
moved higher, according to the latest data for the March-July period.
The District shared in the nationw ide slowdown of new construction
contracts aw arded during August. Total awards for the first eight months
of the year, however, are running at an unusually high level, some seventeen
percent above a year ago. Gains are widely distributed over the District and
are favorably balanced between residential and nonresidential construction.
Nonbuilding construction awards, bolstered by missile and space facilities and
utility project awards, are running especially strong in the eastern section of
the District. Mortgage money remains in good supply, and rates and terms
continue favorable both for new construction and transfers of older property.
v* v*
Deposits and loans at mem ber banks moved to new records in
August. Total investments, which have been lagging for several months, also
Borrowings from F. R. Banks
6.3 \
v
AExcess Reserves
1962
^ r r .......................... j
1963
*S e a s. adj. figure; not an index.
1964
rebounded sharply as banks increased their holdings of U. S. Government
securities. Based on reports from banks in leading cities, these trends con
tinued into September: Demand deposits increased at a greater rate than time
deposits, thus reversing the situation that has prevailed throughout most of
this year.
N o t e : D ata
se aso n al
o n w h ic h s t a te m e n t s a re b a se d
in flu e n ce s.
h a v e b e e n a d ju st e d w h e n e v e r p o s s ib le to e lim in a t e
@FedFRASER