The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Vol. 5
^rii£&>
No. 8
FEDERAL
HOME LOAN BANK
REVIEW
MAY
1939
ISSUED BY
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK BOARD
WASHINGTON D.C.
CONTENTS
FOR
MAY
(939
FEDERAL
SPECIAL
ARTICLES
pagd
HOME
LOAN
BANK
REVIEW
Published monthly by th#
FEDERAL HOME L O A N
BANK BOARD
John H. Fahey, Chairman
T. D. Webb. Vice Chairman
F. W. Catlett
W. H. Husband
F. W, Hancock, Jr.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN
BANK SYSTEM
Business promotion expenditures of savings and loan associations during 1938 . . 230
Reserve policies of savings and loan associations
233
Does home ownership pay?
236
Mortgage recordings during the first quarter of 1939
240
STATISTICS
Residential construction and home-financing activity
Residential construction
Small-house building costs
Foreclosures
Mortgage-lending activity of savings and loan associations
Federal Home Loan Bank System
Federal Savings and Loan System
Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation
Statistical tables
Nos. 1, 2: Number and estimated cost of new family dwelling units . . . .
No. 3: Indexes of small-house building costs
Nos. 4, 5: Estimated lending activity of all savings and loan associations . .
No. 6: Index of wholesale price of building materials
No. 7: Monthly operations of Federal and State-chartered insured associations.
No. 8: Institutions insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation
No. 9: Lending operations of the Federal Home Loan Banks
Nos. 10, 11, 12: Home Owners' Loan Corporation
,
242
244
244
245
245
246
246
247
248
248
250
252
253
254
254
255
255
FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATIONS
FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN
INSURANCE CORPORATION
HOME OWNERS' LOAN
CORPORATION
w
REPORTS
F. H. L. B. Directors announced
232, 247
Directory of member, Federal, and insured institutions added during March-April. 256
SUBSCRIPTION PRICE OF REVIEW The FBDBEAL HOME LOAN BANK REVIEW is the Board's medium of communication with member
institutions of the Federal Home Loan Bank System and is the only official organ or periodical publication of the Board. The RBVIEW
will be sent to all member institutions without charge. To others the annual subscription price, which covers the cost of paper and
printing is $1 Single copies will be sold at 10 cents. Outside of the United States, Canada, Mexico, and the insular possessions, sub•rrintinn nrW is 15l60« single copies, 15 cents. Subscriptions should be sent to and copies ordered from Superintendent of Documents,
^rZ^t^nlgokce,
Washington, D. C.
APPROVED BY THE BUREAU OF THE BUDGET.
143691—39
1
BUSINESS PROMOTION EXPENDITURES OF
SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
DURING 1938
First in a series of articles based upon 900 replies to the
second "Hunt for Facts" questionnaire on promotional programs. This article is recommended to executives who determine, and directors who approve, advertising budgets.
•
T H E second " H u n t for Facts" questionnaire,
distributed at the end of February by the
Public Eelations Department of the Federal Home
Loan Bank Board to every savings and loan member
of the Bank System, has met with a remarkable
response. To date, replies have been received from
900 associations—almost one of every four members
of the Federal Home Loan Bank System. Of these,
838 included data about their 1938 expenditures for
business promotion. The assets of these institutions
range from $17,500 to a maximum of almost $49,000,000 and account for more than one-third of the total
amount of savings and loan assets held by the membership of the Bank System. The replies represent
592 communities, distributed in every Bank District,
in 46 States, the District of Columbia, and the
Territory of Hawaii.
In the case of Federal associations and of insured
State members, assets of reporting institutions amount
to nearly one-half of all assets held by these two
groups, with one-third of their total memberships
represented. For uninsured State members, the
reporting sample is smaller: replies suitable for
analysis were received from 127 associations holding
about one-sixth of all the assets in their group, and
representing 7 percent of this group's total number
of members.
Such a volume of spontaneous response has resulted in the accumulation of a great mass of material representing the most extensive study of
savings and loan business promotional activity
undertaken up to this time. Because this study is
so wide in its scope, so thoroughly distributed
throughout the country, the conclusions reached
from analysis of these returns are significant and
are recommended for careful attention by executives
who determine, and directors who approve, business
development budgets.
230
Preliminary work with these returns reveals certain highlights in the 1938 pattern of business promotion of savings and loan associations.
TOTAL B U S I N E S S PROMOTION E X P E N D I T U R E S IN
1938
These 838 reporting associations spent a total of
$1,834,407 last year for various types of business
promotion—an average of $2,189 for each institution
in the survey. One fact is clear: the total business
development expenditures of savings and loan associations constitute an important contribution to
advertising revenues. The need for an intelligent
approach to the problem of how much to appropriate
for promotional activity, how to apportion the funds
among the different media and different forms of
activity, how to check the results from the institutions' merchandising programs, was never more
strikingly apparent.
The 1938 Hunt for Facts brings definite proof of
the fact that savings and loan expenditures for
business promotion have taken on the aspects of
"big business". The primary need now is the
development of techniques which will assure adequate
results in return for the disbursement of such large
sums of money. Expenditures ranging into millions
of dollars demand careful study of markets, they
demand definite methods for tracing and recording
results, they demand thorough advance planning
and then consistent adherence to the plan.
M A R K E D INCREASE IN BUDGETS FOR ADVERTISING
IN
1939
Some gauge of the progress savings and loan
associations have made in developing techniques to
guide them in the disbursement of advertising appropriations more effectively is the number which report
that they are making precise plans and developing
definite budgets. The 1938 H u n t for Facts shows
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
t hat
3 percent of the reporting members had
I >lanned their business promotion in advance on
e ither a calendar year or a 6-month basis in 1938.
Most striking fact, however, was that whereas 298
r eporting associations used advertising budgets in
] 938, 536 (approximately two-thirds of the total
r mmber) have already estimated their business de\ e'opr ent plans for 1939. Greatest increases in
s uch advance planning were reported by insured and
uninsured State members: in each of these two
c;roups the number of associations establishing such
]) »grams for 1939 was more than twice as great as
[ or last year. In 1938, four out of every 10 reporting
Federal associations followed a predetermined pror notional schedule. For the current year, this ratio in•: rea^'.l to seven out of every 10 reporting associations.
These figures indicate that it is rapidly becoming
general practice to allot business promotion a definite
place m the association's yearly budget. They do
n o t tell to what extent this appropriation is distributed among the different promotional media
gtccording to known results from previous programs.
They do not tell to what extent these associations
bii'G studying their markets. They do not tell
whether these budgeted funds, once disbursed, will
he checked to see what results they actually produced in the form of new business. Nevertheless,
i »ne primary stage in the development of a technique
t g iup the business promotion of savings and loan
stssociations is very evidently attracting greater
attention—the budgeting of funds in advance.
1 low
MUCH
D I D T H E S E ASSOCIATIONS SPEND
IN
RELATION TO ASSETS? T o GROSS
OPERATING INCOME?
Average expenditures for business promotion in
) 938 were: for Federal associations—$2,573; for
insured State-chartered associations—$1,863; and
for uninsured State-chartered members—$1,358.
The typical association spent 2.75 percent of its
jross operating income during 1938 for promotional
purposes. Tables 1 and 2 show for each class of
institution the ratio of the total expenditure for
business promotion to gross operating income and to
;Otal assets. In each instance, only those institutions for which complete figures were reported were
included in the tabulation. Reporting Federal associations disbursed 3.64 percent of their gross operating income for business development, insured State
members used 2.11 percent, and uninsured State
ijnembers employed 1.24 percent.
fAay 1939
Table 7.—Ratio of business promotion expense
fo gross operating income of 796 members
of the F. H . L B. System, by class of association
[Calendar year 1938]
Total
Relation
NumClass of associa- ber of Gross operat- expendi- to gross
ture for
operatassoci- ing income
tion
business
ing
ations
promotion income
Federals
Insured State
Uninsured State. _
Total
461 $32, 094, 926 $1, 169, 346
224 19, 004, 224
400, 956
111 10, 969, 376
135, 479
796
62, 068, 526 1, 705, 781
Percent
3. 64
2. 11
1.24
2.75
Two of the most frequently mentioned standard
ratios of an association's appropriation for business
development are an amount equal either to 3 percent of gross operating income, or to one-quarter of
1 percent of assets. Table 1 shows that the average
promotional expenditure in 1938 came fairly close
to the standard of 3 percent of gross operating income. Table 2, which summarizes the relationship
of business promotion expense to total assets of
members on December 31, 1938, shows an average
expenditure equivalent to about one-seventh of 1
percent of assets.
EFFECTIVENESS AND RELATIVE COST OF BUSINESS
PROMOTION
One test of the effectiveness of savings and loan
business promotion campaigns is the acquisition of
new private share capital. Approximately 90 percent of the associations reported the amount of new
Table 2.—Ratio of business promotion expense to
total assets of 829 members of the F. H . L. B.
System, by class of association
[Calendar year 1938]
Total
NumClass of associa- ber of Total assets, expendi- Relation
ture for to total
Dec. 31,
assocition
business
1938
assets
ations
promotion
Federals
Insured State
Uninsured State._
475 $637, 719, 604 $1, 222, 254
435, 230
231 390, 234, 725
123 266, 926, 620
169, 537
Percent
0. 192
0. 112
0.064
Total
829 1,294,880,949 1, 827, 021
0. 141
231
private share capital which they had obtained during
the past year. The 452 Federal associations received new private share capital of $93,864,000 or
more than $207,000 for each institution. Almost
200 insured State members gained $38,288,000 or an
average of $192,000, and the 92 uninsured State
members covered in this survey received $9,867,000
new capital—$107,000 per association.
Analysis of the relation of business promotion
expenditures to amounts of new private share capital
gained during 1938 reveals that the 743 associations
for which complete figures were obtained actually
spent 1% cents for each dollar of new private share
capital received (Table 3). For each dollar of new
private share capital obtained in 1938, Federal associations disbursed 1% cents, insured State members
spent 1 cent, and uninsured State members used 1%
cents, for business promotion.
Table 3.—Ratio of business promotion expense to
new private share capital acquired by 743
members of the F. H . L. B. System, by class of
association
[Calendar year 1938]
Relation
Total
Num- New private expendi- to new
private
Class of associa- ber of share capital ture for
share
associ- received
tion
business
capital
ations
promotion received
Federals
Insured State
Uninsured State. _
Total
452 $93, 863, 670 $1, 166, 422
199 i 38, 288, 395 i 387, 108 i
9, 866, 683
138, 895
92
743 142,018,748 1,692,425
Percent
1.24
1.01
1.41
1. 19
I n addition to attracting new private share capital,
these expenditures for business promotion had a certain value in retaining the investments of old investors and in building the volume of loans. Taking
this fact into consideration, it may be assumed that
the actual net business promotion cost for each dollar
of new private share capital obtained was less than 1
cent. This is a very modest annual investment for
the purpose of creating new business in comparison
with prevailing ratios in many other fields.
LARGER PROMOTIONAL EXPENDITURES ANTICIPATED
IN
1939
Apparently the associations themselves felt that
their promotional campaigns had been productive.
More than 500 of the reporting members indicated
the amounts that they intend to devote to business
232
promotion during 1939, and these estimates a -age
9.2 percent above the actual amounts disbursed for
these purposes in 1938. Uninsured State-chartered
associations intend to spend 13.6 percent more than
they did in 1938; Federal associations report a 9.6percent increase, and insured State members estimate
that their combined expenditures will be 6.7 percent
greater than in 1938.
CURRENT T R E N D S
From the great mass of information accumulated,
two trends stand out in this preliminary analysis of
salient features. The first is the increase in business
promotion expenditures planned by these associations for the current year. The second is that,
accompanying this expanding promotional expenditure, there is a truly noteworthy improvement in the
number of associations establishing definite budgets?
to provide for a more scientific use of these business;
development funds. Taken together, the two trends
seem to indicate not only an added emphasis upon
public relations, but, equally important, a growingconviction that promotion expenditures must be
carefully planned in advance to assure maximum
productiveness. The merchandising of the services
of savings and loan associations has reached the point!
at which a scientific technique must be developed
with appropriate yardsticks to measure the results.
*
*
*
*
*
Later articles based on the 1938 H u n t for Facts will
present in greater detail the topics summarized in thispreliminary survey. Business development expenditures and programs will be analyzed according to sizo
of institution. Distribution of promotional expenditures among the different advertising media will b*
discussed. Cooperative programs will be treateu.
Studies covering other phases of 1938 business promotion can be made if sufficient requests for a special
analysis are received from savings and loan executives. Address recommendations and inquiries to the
Editor.
F. H. L. B. Director Announced
Due to the resignation of George A. Mortimer, th^
Board recently appointed Sam H. Dehnert as Class
B Director of the Federal Home Loan Bank of PorU
land—to serve for the remainder of the year 1939.
Mr. Dehnert is Secretary-Treasurer of the First
Federal Savings and Loan Association of CoeuJr
d'Alene, Idaho.
I
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
..ESERVE POLICIES OF SAVINGS AND LOAN
ASSOCIATIONS
Greater emphasis is placed on reserves for savings and loan associations, not only as increased protection against losses, but to assure
more flexible operating policies.
MORE adequate reserve policies for savings and
loan associations have been developed during
recent years. This trend has been due in part to the
.
.
.
Assets
• * establishment of new minimum reserve requirements
« mder Federal regulations and State enactments.
•
Of equal importance, however, have been the deoisions of boards of directors, conscious of their
responsibilities as trustees of investors' funds: in
r
.
.
Association A.—Statement of condition, Dec- 3 1 1
1937
.
A
i
•
$1, 720, 000
150, 000
25,000
30,000
^ ' ^
I
45,000
many cases associations are building reserves substantially in excess of minimum requirements to
afford added protection to investors. Management
in general has not only welcomed the setting of
Other assets
10 000
j n -i
Share accounts
i u x i .
i
__
Office building, furniture a n d equipment
•
-i T
Mortgage loans. _ _._
Real estate contracts
Real estate owned
Investments
~~ "H'-iY-"""*""""*
^
J
X
J
definite reserve requirements, but has adopted a
policy of building reserves larger than those required
for two reasons: (1) adequate reserves are a cushion
against unusual losses and contingencies; (2) substan tiai reserves permit management to vary interest
rates, to alter dividend rates, and to meet other
problems arising from changing conditions; this is
possible because the larger the reserves, the larger the
amount of assets in excess of the invested capital and
borrowed money on which dividends and interest
must be computed
At the latest date for which complete figures are
available, general reserves, undivided profits and
surplus of Federal Home Loan Bank System member
savings and loan associations amounted to approxi. iT n
4. * 4.x. - A * i
4.
mately 7 percent ol their total assets.
AT 4. l i
N o t all asso-
$2, 030, 000
Capital and liabilities
$1,740,000
F. H .
L. B. advances__
L o a n s i n pr0C ess
Specific reserves
General reserves
Undivided profits
_
General
reserves amounted to slightly less than
P e r c e n t of a s s e t s a t t h e e n d of t h e s e f o u r ^ e a r s of
ra ld
P expansion, although all the required mmimum
transfers to reserves had been made. A comparison
of
Association A's operating statements in 1937 and
m 1938 wlU show h o w the
? analyzed the problem
and w h a t the
d l d a b o u t lt
^
*
. ..
•
•
A
A
A ^
L7
Association A.—income
and expense statements
ciations have been able to establish so large a ratio of
r e s e r v e s , b u t t h e f o l l o w i n g a c c o u n t s , i l l u s t r a t i v e of
important current trends, indicate that management
is placing more and more stress upon their steady
accumulation.
R E S E R V E PROBLEMS D U E TO R A P I D GROWTH
^
.
,.
. 71
.
. .
.,,
Occasionally a rapidly growing association will
find that it is expanding much faster than it is able to
accumulate reserves against the additional risks.
The A association is a good illustration of such a
KI
744.4-'
i
mo.
problem. I t u
began active operation in early 1934,
yet by the end of 1937 its assets amounted to
$2,000,000.
May 1939
200,000
30, 000
20,000
34,000
6,000
$2 030 000
r
19S7
Gross operating income (5H p e r c e n t ) . $100,000
pera m g expense
Net operating income
Interest on F . H. L. ft. advances
'
$60,000
i9S8
$125,000
?
$87,500
9,000
$54,000
$78,500
$5,000
46, 000
3,000
$14,000
58, 000
6,500
$54,000
Net income
Distribution:
To general reserves
Dividends (3 percent)
To undivided profits
6,000
$78,500
The major problem faced by Association A was
that of reducing operating expense (40 percent of
233
gross income in 1937), to permit the building up of
more adequate reserves. Analysis of the expenditure items showed that during 1937 advertising expenditure amounted to $10,000, or 10 percent of
gross income—a proportion far in excess of the
percentage of gross income generally expended for
promotion purposes by savings and loan associations.
Association A decided to reduce its advertising
program substantially. From the advertising experience gained during the preceding four years, the
manager was able to determine the most productive
forms of advertising in the community and to concentrate expenditures in these three or four media.
He recognized that the association might not grow
as rapidly on the reduced advertising budget, but
found the board of directors in complete agreement
with him that the accumulation of reserves over and
above the minimum requirements was far more important than continued rapid growth.
Following this plan, the advertising budget in
1938 was limited to 3.5 percent of anticipated gross
income, or $4,375. As a result, operating expense
during 1938 was cut from 40 percent to 30 percent
of gross income, in spite of the fact that the savings
on advertising expenditure (over $5,500) were partly
offset by increased operating expense involved in
handling the larger volume of business during 1938.
The balance sheet at the end of 1938, after one
year's trial of the new policy, presents a satisfactory
trend picture: a net growth in assets of $600,000
during the year, and a 50-percent increase in the
general reserves and undivided profits of the association, which were augmented by the addition of
Association A—Statement of condition, Dec. 31,
1938
Assets
Mortgage loans
Real estate contracts
Real estate owned
Investments
Cash
Office building, furniture and equipment
Other assets
$2, 241, 000
200, 000
15, 000
35, 000
80,000
40, 000
25, 500
$2, 636, 500
Capital and liabilities
Share accounts
F. H. L. B. advances
Loans in process
Specific reserves
General reserves
Undivided profits
$2, 150, 000
350, 000
46, 000
30, 000
48, 000
12,500
$2, 636, 500
234
$20,500 during the year, and amounted to 2.3 rcent
of assets. (The increase of $10,000 in the specific
reserves was due largely to the increase in the reserve
for uncollected interest, which represents all uncollected interest.)
SPECIFIC R E S E R V E S DISTINGUISHED FROM
GENERAL R E S E R V E S
The growing use of more understandable balance
sheets reflects the increasingly general agreement
that the financial statement of an association can He
a very important factor in its relations with t h e
public. The tendency today is to distinguish clearljy
between specific and general reserves, since the|r
consolidation tends to conceal the identity or typie
of losses the reserves are intended to cover. A n
example of this would be Association B, in which t h e
general reserves are apparently ample—10 percent
of share capital. No further additions to reserves
would be required by Federal regulations or by most
State statutes. The balance sheet presents this
picture:
Assets
Mortgage loans
Real estate contracts
Real estate
Investments
Cash
Furniture and
Other assets
fixtures
$600, 000
100, 000
200, 000
20,000
60,000
15, 000
55, 000
$1, 050, 000
Capital and liabilities
Share accounts
F. H. L. B. advances
Loans in process
Specific reserves
General reserves
Undivided profits
$863, 000
65, 000
10, 000
2, 000
90, 000
20, 000
$1, 050, 000
Appraisal of the real estate owned by the association, however, indicates an aggregate book value
$30,000 in excess of the total appraised values. Aiji
investor would have a more informative picture oif
this particular asset item if $30,000 were deducted
from general reserves and set up as a clearly indicated
specific reserve against the depreciation of the real
estate. I t would then be evident that the tru<3
reserve against unknown losses is $60,000—or V
percent of share capital, and that annual additions*
to general reserves are still necessarily dictated b y
sound business judgment.
Distinctions can be clearly drawn between specific:
and general reserves in a financial statement to>
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
rep "t the basis upon which reserves are determined
and what they are intended to cover. Provided
that the total amount is the same, the actual protection to the shareholder is precisely the same whether
specific reserves are earmarked or merged into a lump
sum, but an investor can scarcely judge the wisdom
or soundness of the reserve policy unless he is certain
that all assets are stated at their realizable value,
insofar as this is known.
covering the minimum requirements, and $1,000 for
undivided profits in 1936.
I t was about this time that Association C began
to feel the effect of the downward trend of homemortgage interest rates. I t was evident that the
association would have to lower its interest rates in
order to continue to secure the best loans in its area.
The manager can show how a sounder reserve
policy was established under these conditions: " I
realized that the first thing we must do was to cut
our operating expense, which included an item of
RESERVES AND F L E X I B L E MANAGEMENT POLICIES
$9,000 for compensation. The position was placed
Even a small association can make its modification
squarely before the officers and employees: We
in reserve policy a pivotal point for improvement of
needed to retrench in every possible way in order to
the general operating conditions, permitting more
lower our interest rates and at the same time to build
flexible management policies. Association C is an
up a more satisfactory reserve position. Here is
example. In 1936, this comparatively new associwhat we did. We adopted a budget and reduced
ation was charging a relatively high rate of interest,
salaries from $9,000 to $7,500 and held our normal
and operating at a high expense ratio. Reserves
operating expenses in 1937 and in 1938 to about the
amounted to $6,000, only X% percent of share capital, same level as in 1936. At the same time, by aggresin spite of the fact that all minimum requirements had
sive personal efforts, we were able to build up our
been met.
volume of mortgage loans.
"At the end of 1938, our balance sheet shows an
Association C—Statement of condition, Dec. 3 1 ,
institution which has increased $200,000 in size in
1936
two years, with earning assets amounting to $700,000.
Assets
All of our new mortgage loans are made at rates of
Mortgage loans
$450, 000
5y2 percent or less, and our average return on mortReal estate contracts
50, 000
gage loans is a flat 6 percent today.
Investments
10, 000
"At the end of 1938 here is the way our income and
Cash
28,000
expense statement looks:
Furniture and fixtures
10, 000
Other assets
55, 000
$603, 000
Capital and liabilities
Share accounts
F. H. L. B. advances
Loans in process
Specific reserves
General reserves
Undivided profits
$565, 000
25, 000
5, 000
1, 000
6, 000
1,000
$603, 000
This association had over $500,000 in earning assets
which produced a gross operating income of $35,000.
Operating expenses, however, amounted to $14,000,
leaving net operating income of only $21,000 in 1936.
Gross operating income (7 percent)
Operating expenses
$35, 000
14, 000
Net operating income
Interest on F. H. L. B. advances
$21, 000
750
Net income
$20, 250
Dividends were paid at the rate of 3 percent
($17,000), which left $2,250 to carry to reserves,
May 1939
Gross operating income (6 percent on $700,000)
Gross operating expense
$42, 000
12, 500
Net operating income
Interest on F.H.L.B. advances
$29, 500
1, 000
Net income
$28, 500
"We have maintained our dividend rate at 3 percent and declared dividends in the amount of $21,600
on December 31, 1938. This left us a total of
$6,900 to transfer to reserves and undivided profits,
which is more than twice as much as we were able
to transfer at the end of 1936.
"As a result of these changes our association is
able to meet the lending competition in our territory
on its own terms with a variable interest rate which
goes down as low as 5 percent on the best risks.
There is less risk in our loan portfolio, and in addition
we now have $19,900 in our general reserves and
undivided profits account, as compared with $7,000
two years ago. Our general reserves and undivided
profits are now equivalent to almost 2% percent of
(Continued on p. 247)
235
DOES HOME OWNERSHIP PAY?
Yes—is the conclusion one reaches in studying the
report of 25,802 nonrelief Chicago families. The
first published report by the U. S. Department of
Labor * of its urban consumer purchases series reveals
the economic characteristics of owners and renters.
•
GIVEN two families with the same monetary
income and the same living standards, if one
group owns their home and the other rents, it is
quite likely that the owning family will have more
money left for other purchases after they have paid
the operating expenses of their home than will the
renting family after the rent has been paid. 2 This
difference between owning a home and renting the
same piece of property in the city of Chicago has been
estimated to average $224 a year or almost $19 per
month.
Although this additional income is not in the form
of money, it must be added to the monetary income
of an owning family to provide a comparable basis
for studying consumer purchases by both owning
and renting families. How great the income from
owning will be depends upon the living standards
of the individuals, and whether or not the home is
mortgaged. However, even the lowest income
group (under $1,000) added $150 a year or $12.50 a
month to their income by owning rather than renting.
The average rental value of mortgage-free homes
of nonrelief native white families in the city
of Chicago was $466, from which it was necessary
to subtract estimated annual expenses of $120.
This left a sum of $346 a year, or almost $29 per
month for the average home-owning family whose
residential property was free from debt.
If there was a mortgage on the homestead, as
there was on two-thirds of the dwellings, the additional factor of interest was equal to 37 percent of
the rental value. The interest charges on mortgaged homes averaged $171 and when other expenses
of $116 had been deducted from the average rental
value of mortgaged property ($458), there remained
an imputed income of $169 or more than $14 monthly
for those home owners.
» "Family Incomes in Chicago, 1935-1936", U. S. Department of Labor, study
of consumer purchases: urban series.
1
Operating expenses include taxes, interest, insurance, and repairs, but do not
include depreciation, or neighborhood deterioration. Tenant rental statistics
are affected to a degree by variations in the amount of services which are included
in payment of rent.
236
The net amount of imputed income derived
through home ownership increased consistently as
the income of the families rose indicating a higher
standard of living in the upper income brackets.
The addition of this income to the monetary earnings of an owning family was believed to have been
of sufficient value in most cases to advance that
family at least one notch on the income scale.
This partly accounts for the fact that the median
family income among native white home owners was
$340 higher than for renters.
A second reason which supports the position of
the home owner is found in the rental statistics of
this study. At any given income level, it appears
that an owner is provided with a higher standard of
housing facilities than is a renter. With only minor
exceptions, the average rental value of property
owned exceeded the rent paid by tenants in every
earnings bracket up to $1,750 (Table 1). Note t h a t
the estimated rental value of the home of a wageearning owner in the $1,000-$ 1,249 income group
and the rent of a wage-earning tenant in the $1,500Table 7.—Comparison of monthly rent paid by
tenants and estimated rental value of owned
homes among Chicago families in a given
income class
Wage
earner
Income class
Total
Under $500
$50O-$749
$750-$999
$1,000-$1,249__$1,250-$1,499___
$1,500-$1,749___
$1,750-$1,999___
$2,000-$2,499-_
$2,500-$2,999.-_
$3,000-$4,999-.
$5,000 and over.
Clerical
Business and
professional
Rent- Own- Rent- Own- Rent- Owner
er
er
er
er
er
$27. 60 $33. 00 $36. 60 $39. 80 $46. 30 $48. 40
20.60
20.60
20.60
23.20
25.90
28. 40
31.00
34.40
37. 10
41.00
62.60
24.30
25.20
27.40
28.60
30.00
30.90
31.70
34.50
37.90
39.20
46.90
30.00
25.90
25.60
28.20
30.50
32.40
36.30
39. 10
43.30
50.90
66.30
27. 10
30. 10
28. 10
30.60
34.60
33.80
35.90
37.50
41.60
48.00
61.20
28.90
27. 10
29.20
32.40
33.00
35.60
37.90
43. 30
45.60
55.60
82. 10
26.50
32.00
32. 10
31.80
34.80
39.30
39.60
42.70
45.00
51.30
77.50
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
$1,2^.9 class are almost identical—this in spite of a
difL ence of $500 in annual incomes. Bearing in
mind that the "nonmoney" income has already
advanced the average home owner one earnings
bracket, it is evident that the advantage of better
living accommodations applies to home owners in
virtually all income and occupational classifications.
A GUIDE TO THE HOUSING MARKET
This new economic study was designed "to throw
light on the patterns of consumption prevailing
among families of different income levels, occupations, and family types." Included in its material
is the relationship of family incomes to home ownership, a field in which the collection of data had
hitherto been inadequate. This information offers
lending institutions an excellent opportunity to
study the economic characteristics of present and
prospective home owners as a guide to mortgage-
lending policies, and as a basis for directing effective
advertising and promotional campaigns. It points
the spotlight on the housing market and outlines the
boundaries within which the desire for the attainment of home ownership is most likely to be realized.
Data were collected from one family out of ten of
Chicago's 822,687 families as enumerated by the
Civil Works Administration census of 1934. This
meant an accumulation of more than 82,000 individual records on such subjects as the amount and
source of income, the occupation and number of
income contributors, family composition, home
ownership, and biographical material such as the
age, color, race, and nativity. In addition, a complete record of the family expenditures for a 12month period was obtained for 25,802 complete
(i. e., containing both husband and wife) native white
nonrelief families. The material for this article is
based upon the data contained in this restricted
family sample.
DISTRIBUTION OF FAMILIES IN CHICAGO BY THEIR AVERAGE ANNUAL INCOME, 1935-1936
(Complete native white non-relief families)
INCOME
CLASS
AVERAGE INCOME
UNDER
$1,000
2,000
$2,0003,000
$3,0005,000
OVER
$5,000
EACH SYMBOL REPRESENTS 1.000 FAMILIES
Source: U.S.Department of Lobor-Family Incomes in
May 1939
EACH DISC REPRESENTS 500 DOLLARS
Chicago,/935-I936*
237
FAMILY INCOME
Expenditures for the average American family are
necessarily determined in any given period of time
by its income. In studying the market for houses
an analysis of just how much a family takes in is
the surest method of discovering how much it can
spend for housing facilities.
The median annual income for nonrelief white
families was $1,798, a figure higher than that in any
of the 33 cities studied with the exception of New
York City. Approximately one-seventh (14.8 percent) of the families were classed as having received
incomes of less than $1,000, while an additional 44.6
percent were in the income range between $1,000 and
$2,000. The chart on the preceding page shows the
distribution of these 25,802 Chicago families according to income classes, together with the average
income of each group.
Six out of every 10 independent native white
families received less than $2,000 during the period
of this survey. In the light of a suggested housing
formula equal to two and a half times annual income,
these family groups should not pay more than $3,000
to $5,000 for residential properties. Actually, 65
percent of the residential building permits issued in
the city of Chicago between 1929 and 1935 were for
structures costing between $6,000 and $10,000, including an estimated $1,000 average cost for building site. This is one more set of data added to the
accumulated evidence that America has not been
building homes within the economic reach of the
typical American family.
T H E INFLUENCE OF OCCUPATION IN FAMILY INCOME
The variation between the incomes of various
occupations is self-evident, but the relationship of
this factor to housing is not as easily discernible.
In our restricted sample, we find that wage earners
constitute 45.4 percent of the entire group, and that
almost three-fourths of the families in this earning
group received less than $2,000. The clerical group
of families, next largest, contains 30.5 percent of the
total. Two-thirds of this classification are located
within the $1,000 to $2,500 incomes (Table 2).
By combining the independent and salaried business and professional groups into one classification,
the remaining 22 percent of these nonrelief families
are accounted for. (An additional 2 percent of the
families were reported as having no gainfully employed members.) Two-thirds of these business and
professional families are in the levels above $2,000
238
and more than a third are above $3,000. The m ^ a n
income of this group is more than half again as .Jrge
as that of the median wage-earning unit.
Table 2.—Distribution and median income of all
complete native white nonrelief families in the
Chicago sample
Occupational group
Number of
families
Percent
All occupational groups .,
25, 802
100.0
$1, 798
Wage earners
Clerical.
Business and professional
No gainfully employed members
-
11, 705
7,864
5,714
45. 4
30. 5
22. 1
1,557
1,934
2,377
519
2.0
225
Median
income
H O M E O W N E R S H I P AND INCOME
Having determined the relative proportion of
families at various income levels, and in accordance
with occupational grouping, a key to some of the
problems of lending institutions and the building
industry is hidden in the statistics on renting and
owning among these classifications.
With the exception of the very lowest income
classes, the percentage of home owners among the
native white families increased with each succeeding
money bracket (see chart). The surprising number
of families with incomes in the lower brackets who
owned homes is accounted for probably by the fact
that these were made up of individuals in retirement
or of families which had undertaken these dwellings
in previous years under more favorable conditions.
Among these nonrelief families home ownership
was least common among those with incomes between
$500 and $2,000 and yet, it was in this income grouping that more than 55 percent of the total number of
families were found. Owned homes were most prevalent among the families with incomes above $5,000.
There are striking variations within the occupational grouping which merit additional analysis.
In relation to the totals of each employment classification the business and professional families have a
slight excess in the percentage of home owners. This
occupational group showed the highest percentage of
owners with incomes from zero to $1,750 and the
lowest percentage in all classes above $1,750 in
relation to the other vocational groups.
Wage earners are apparently more anxious to
become home owners as quickly as their income will
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
allf . There is a steady increase in each succeeding
income level from $750 through the top bracket. At
the $2,000 level, 28.7 percent of this group are owners,
as compared with 21 percent and 18 percent for the
clerical and business groups. Almost half of the
wage earners whose annual income was at least
$3,000 were property owners, and in the maximum
earnings range the ratio was increased to seven out
of every 10 families. The pattern of ownership
among clerical families is very similar to that of wage
earners, but the extent of their participation in
owning homes is not as great.
The figures of this study prove that the greater a
family's income the more likely that the family will
be able to realize home ownership. The dominance
of ownership among the wage-earning group in all
incomes above $1,750 indicates their importance in
the entire field of construction and home finance.
PERCENTAGE OF HOME OWNERS AMONG OCCUPATIONAL
GROUPS AT GIVEN INCOME LEVELS
(Complete native white non-relief families)
70r
.,' **
60
WAGEEARN *My
50
1' v '
Note:The greatest urge for home ownership L
is concentrated between the incomes n
| J of *2,000 and *3,000.
|
i- 40
z
m
o
i § ».**
i.
TIONA
.ALL )CCUP/
o. 30
GROU
PS
1 BUSHVESS >\ND
\rJ
PI10FESI
5IONAL
20
10
v
V
y
&«*
c
3
m
it
i N
^
o»
O
»0
*
>
<
OLERI ZAL
o
0>
O
lO
N
-
8
0>
o
>
I
S
*•*?—•—
V
o
"A
O
o -*
io
o
>
ow
o
o O
INCOME
CLASS
69
o
8
8
Source: U.S. Department of Labor- "Family Incomes in Chicago, 1935-/936"
May 1939
Und igested Property
•
<&?"*>
N
* N
V \
In reviewing any statistical survey, allowance must
always be made for the economic conditions which
prevailed at the time of the study. Considering the
fact that this survey was undertaken during 19351936 it is quite likely that were a similar study to be
completed at the present time the balance would
swing farther in the direction of home ownership.
The index of housing rentals is now considerably
above the levels of those years, and would thereby
add to the rental value of owned properties and thus
increase the nonmoney income. Secondly, there
have been innumerable changes in the home-mortgage
field with regard to interest rates and methods of
financing. These have had the effect of reducing
interest charges and again the imputed income of
mortgaged properties would be increased.
These facts are significant: (1) this report confirms the fact that the greatest portion of our families are in the earnings levels under $2,000 even in a
metropolis like Chicago where families had the
second highest median income in the cities studied;
(2) the greatest urge for home ownership is found
in the income groups between $2,000 and $3,000,
although home ownership is most prevalent among
those with incomes above $5,000; (3) wage earners
when provided with sufficient income prove to be
the greatest home buyers; (4) home ownership offers
a family in a given income group a higher standard
of housing than can be afforded by renting families
in the same income bracket; and (5) home ownership returns an economic addition to income sufficient to increase the total family earnings of the
median family approximately 10 percent.
••••••••• /
\
\
O
lO
TJ
\
CONCLUSION
ACCORDING to the Sixth Annual Eeport of
the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York,
"An opportunity exists in many localities for prospective home owners to buy housing for less than
the cost of reproduction. Rather than ignoring
that fact, it would be better for the economic health
of the country that this condition be frankly faced,
that the general public be so informed, that institutional owners of repossessed real estate prepare their
marketing plans accordingly, and that those civic,
social, and economic minded citizens, who earnestly
desire an acceleration in the building curve, should
first lend their efforts to aid in the absorption by the
public of this high volume of undigested property."
239
MORTGAGE RECORDINGS DURING THE FIRST
QUARTER OF 1939
•
MOKE than three-quarters of a billion dollars in
nonf arm mortgages were recorded during the first
quarter of 1939, according to the recently developed
monthly study of this field by the Division of
Research and Statistics of the Federal Home Loan
Bank Board. Savings and loan associations accounted for 29 percent of the total dollar volume of
recordings during this period—a greater proportion
than that shared by any other class of mortgagee.
Among institutional lenders, savings and loan associations ranked first in relation to the total volume,
followed by banks and trust companies, "other"
mortgagees, insurance companies, and mutual savings banks.
This new survey of all nonfarm mortgages of
$20,000 or less is the first nationwide summary of
recordings by all types of lenders.1 Now in its fourth
month, the coverage of this report has been broadened
considerably. Figures for the month of March were
based upon statistics gathered from 491 counties,
containing 49.6 percent of the total nonfarm population and located in 45 States and the District of
Columbia.
The estimated total of nonfarm mortgages recorded during March is $312,465,000—an increase of
38 percent over the preceding month. While this
increase is to be expected at this time of the year,
comparison with closely related series indicates that
the rise this spring is considerably larger than the
normal February-to-March advance. Added significance lies in the widespread geographic distribution of the improvement with 40 States and the
District of Columbia contributing to the March
increase.
Savings and loan associations maintained their
position as the most active lender by recording
mortgages aggregating more than $92,000,000 during
March. This accounted for 33 percent of the
number and 30 percent of the dollar amount of all
mortgages registered. Insurance companies, "other"
mortgagees, mutual savings banks, and banks and
trust companies, however, showed greater percentage
gains over their February volume of business.
The per capita rate of mortgages recorded increased almost one dollar to $3.38, with the greatest
gains shown in the States of California, Connecticut,
Nebraska, Nevada, and the District of Columbia.
" For a complete description of the development of this survey, together with
a discussion of its use by individual associations, see p. 202 of the April 1939
FEDERAL HOME LOAN B A N E REVIEW, "Mortgage recordings—a new statistical
service."
Table 1.—Estimated volume of nonfarm mortgages recorded, by type of mortgagee
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Savings and
loan associations
Insurance
companies
Banks and
trust
companies
Mutual
savings
banks
Individuals
Other
mortgagees
All mortgagees
Period
Total
Percent
Total
Number:
December 1938-_ 32, 934; 31.9| 5,491
1939
January
27, 283 30. 1 4, 8661
27, 666 32.51 3, 688
February
36, 0081 32.8 5, 547l
March
Amount:
December 1938-1939
January
February—
March
___
240
Percent
Total
Percent
Total
Percent
Total
Percent
Total
Per- Combined Percent
total
cent
5.3] 21, 970 21.2|
3,601
3. 5| 25, 927 25. 1 13, 424 13.0]
103, 347j 100.0
5.41 20, 003 22. 1
4.31 19, 138 22.51
5. 1 23, 764 21.6
2, 1431
2, 059
2, 895
2.4] 24, 974 27.61 11, 286 12.4]
2.4 22, 903 26.9| 9, 706 11.41
2.6 28, 729 26. 1 12, 930! 11.81
90, 5551 100.0
85, 160 100.0
109, 873 100.0
$80,838 29.01 $27,217
9.8 $71,061 25.5 $10,838
3.9 $48,582' 17.5 $39,786 14.3] $278, 3221 100.0
66, 114 27. 1 22, 704
68, 840 30.31 19, 278
92, 337 29.5 28, 316
9.3 62, 697 25.7
8.5] 57, 843 25.5
9.1 79, 9201 25.6
3. 1 49, 032 20. 1 35, 943 14 7]
3. 1 42, 528 18.7 31, 471 13.9
3.1 57, 036 18.3 45, 0341 14.4
7, 525
7, 031
9, 822
244, 015 100.0
226, 991 100.0
312, 465 100.0
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
TaHe 2.—Summary of estimated nonfarm mortgage recordings1 under $20,000, during March 1939
F e d e r a l Home Loan Bank
D i s t r i c t s and S t a t e s
Savings 8 Loan
c
Associations
Number Amount
(Amounts shown are in thousands o f d o l l a r s )
Mutual
Banks And
Insurance
Other
T r u s t Companies Savings Banks I n d i v i d u a l s
Mortgagees
Companies
Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount
Amount 1
per
capita 1
(nonfarm)
Amount |
Total
Number
1,010
1,520
5,547 $28,316 23,764 $79,920 2,895 $9,822 28,729 157,036 12,930 $45,034 109,873 $312,465
4,648
404
1,393 6,993 20,209
583
819 2,764 1,453 4,496 2,081
70
6,325
1,344
508
344 1,110
257
1,228
928 1,674
573
307
5,819
636
68
2
413
260
265
2381
323
151
1,011
1,780
721
2
2
620 2,189 I,050 2,59l
850
9,581
3,951
227
3,214
173
1
606
1,114
425
82
408
5
68
56
224
416
178
2
10
60
1,471
404
239
456
126
99
81
48
444
188
127
230
74
16
33
7,676 1,378
5,413 10,974
7,800
455 2,864 2,338 9,672 1,032 4,055 3,241
37,480
31
116 1,232
3,368
609 2,153 4,149
1,070 1,087 4,521
180
14,338
3,110
769 3,260 6,825
5,151 1,001 3,939 2,009
4,308
1,794 1,251
23,142
4,690
275
2,340
6,143
250
1,493
1,756
6,459
33
71
1,6 39
3,664
1,063
4,009
7,081
21,839
55
1,730
555
142
4,666
1,335
7
230
13
37
1,394
62
122
5,385
952
1
10
22
6
33
32
38
1,346
255
92
3,272
300
20
953
90
78
3,721
210
153
5,639
1,289
477
18,471
2,891
5.663
13,793
1,181
5,083
32
l,37C
354
1,868
4,990
60
274 4,205
8,011
2,050
239
475
389
550
1,104
2,000
356
550
319
2,320
1,375
1,247
2,531
3,415
800
1,786
113
87
280
229
41
66
75
290
467
500
1,064
1,018
323
279
384
1,048
188
73
325
304
213
50
165
550
365
453
736
747
918
57
330
1,384
459
312
461
295
336
612
473
1,257
534
968
1,052
507
904
839
440
2,767
350
329
826
115
159
165
55
51
No. 5—Cincinnati
5.717
15.522
481
Ken :ucky
Ohio
Tennessee
1,057
4,245
415
2,592
12,295
6 35
60
323
98
2.558 2.246
271
351
1,892 1,498
397
395
2,320
4,528
416
2,129
1,659
661
2,855
1,673
160
256
789
1,340
2,158
5,980
304
1,579
579
4,415
1,565
226
78
2,555
5,936
615
892
839
99
110
1,210
2,534
1,829
234
129
6
Jj
2.885
285
846
232
102
1,420
7,616
554
2,691
576
164
3,631
655
30
26
51
3,417
136
215
244
548
..
2,666
5,852
349
_ __
_ _ _
313
679
583
1,091
798
1,320
1,359
2,375
28
105
153
63
1,721
3,679
414
313
152
354
113
707
82
487
470
750
287
f,423
26 2
13
94
74
19
212
2
No. 12—Los Angeles
3,2S7
9,163
476
Arizona
California
Nevada
195
3,051
41
528
8,529
106
9
462
5
36,008 $92,337
United S t a t e s
No. I—Boston
2,166
_
190
277
1,317
162
113
107
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island
Vermont
2,530
No. 2—Hew York
New Jersey
New York
No. 3— Pittsburgh
Delaware
Pennsylvania
West V i r g i n i a . .
_.
No. 4— Winston-Salem
Alabama
D i s t r i c t of Cofumbia
Florida
Georgia
Maryland
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
___
I
_
__
„
No. 6—Indianapol i s
Indiana
Michigan
_
No, 7—Chicago
Illinois
Wisconsin
No. 8—Des Moines
IowaMinnesota
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
_
No, 9 — L i t t l e Rock
Arkansas
Louisiana
Mississippi .
New Mexico
Texas
No, I0--Topeka
_
.
^
Colorado
Kansas
Nebraska
Oklahoma
J
1
1
. .
.
No. II—Portland
Idaho
Montana
Oregon
Utah
Washington
Wyom i n g
..
___
_
6,007 15,027
876
1,570
1,960
226
568
643
79
85
$ 3.38
3.83
2.84
2.32
2.77
2.19
1.80 1
3.67
1.95 1
2.49
2.'II
2.26 J
38,158 1
1,349
1,276
2,281
1,493
1,913
2,893
1,124
2,698
2,561
5,811
6,187
3,745
5,518
5,233
2,033
7,070
60
274
7.372
810
5,769
793
48
174
1.777
3.928 11.486
32.845
48
174
3.291
200
2,068
1,023
1.217
158
1,096
523
91
808
318
259 1,717
2,997 8,018
672 1,751
4,132
25,195
3,518
2,072
6,157
72
134
1,014
1,730
764
2,811
6,658
17,489
681
1,391
1,580
4,577
72
134
473
541
657
1,073
26*3
501
551
2,260
3,308
3,350
6,566
10,923
1,723
1,313
4,948
13
27
1,582
3,6 23 1,238
6,039
6,608
22,340
1,346
377
917
396
3,701
1,247
13
27
779
803
2,139
1,484
1,075
163
5,256 4,576
783 2,032
16,857
5,483
496
2,139
1,384
2,829
51
100 2,084
3,864
789
2,395
157
1,398
577
567
260
493
31
33
1,188
56 3
972
43
63
428
498
100
1,016
54
88
667
958
2,070
57
112
73
117
571
17
II
7,359
144 1,728
374 2,154
1,846 3,028
14
201
17
248
17,263
45
336
109
2,414
419
59
189
77
1,670
2,200
202
272
171
254
1,301
4,389
299
756
291
287
2,756
1,767
2,822
827
218
21
93
41
454
100
140
207
10
1,310
5,932 8,334
168
835
679 1,305
512
754
1
407
4,572 5,033
23,768
1,576
4,400
1,812
529
15,451
1,549
826
1,894
1,645
2,647
1,019
2,845 6,505
14,787
286
424
528
311
125
278
92
, 331
352
573
268
701
607
255
189
594
1,166
310
302
869
275
230
514
1,591
32
426
313
72
742
6
1,336
3,076
fT!74
1,766
387
138
116
108
300
620
54
307
230
352
821
1,221
145
200
130
303
75
392
74
270
195
418
107
629
147
12
36
127
68
115
29
6,087
11,727
854
165
5,870
52
259
11,378
90
44
799
II
3,248 17,683
95
652
3,128 16,846
25
185
1.96
11.95
5.20
2.51
3.96
3.33
2.47
4.81 J
3,187 6,979 27,345
21
239
846
3,147 6,664 26,259
76
19
240
51
133
491
13
52
120
439
813
694
3,366
5,827
7,294
348
328
1,338
1,348
1,547
1,017
2,593
3,415
3,321
2,457
5,594
1.014
5.165
1,116
1,446
2,325
1,401
4,697
632
2.71 1
2.69
2.54
2.66
2.25 1
3.55
2.90
1.23
1.08
2J4
3.46
2.80
2.00
4.45
11,617
20
676
528
125
979
440
575
114
243 2,166
241
72
2.87
4.47
2.51
4.54
2.83
3.10
4.08
4.35
4.34
3. 18
3.57
3.73
4.15
54.670
1,749
5.20
52,441
10.37
480 1 6.43 1
Based upon county reports submitted through the cooperation of savings and loan associations, the U. S. Building and Loan League, the Mortgage
Bankers Association, and the American T i t l e Association.
^Includes Insurance Companies and Other Mortgagees.
May 1939
241
SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION
AND HOME-FINANCING ACTIVltY
I. First quarter mortgage lending by savings and loan associations, showing improvement in all 12 Bank Districts, increased 14 percent over
1938.
A. Total mortgage recordings for first quarter of 1939: $783,000,000.
$227,000,000
(29 percent—the largest single share)
recorded by savings and loan associations.
B. New construction and home-purchase loans by savings and loan associations during first quarter: 61 percent of total savings
and loan lending in 1939/ 57 percent in 1938.
II. Seasonally adjusted index of residential construction declined during March for the first time in 1939, due to absence of expanding
building volume.
A. All Bank Districts except New York reported greater volume of residential building permits for first quarter of 1939, compared
with same period in 1938.
III. March trends in building costs: wholesale prices of building materials gently upward.
Retail prices of building materials unchanged
from February.
Labor costs rise fractionally for second successive month.
IV. Foreclosures evidence a purely seasonal rise from February to March.
Comparisons for the first quarter show foreclosures 13 percent
below 1938 and 63 percent below 1933.
V. The normal seasonal expansion in industrial production was still not evident in March and early April as business activity continued at
about the level of February.
VI. Interest rates: average yield on long-term Treasury bonds continues to decline, reaching new record low levels below 2.3 percent in April.
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ACTIVITY AND SELECTED INFLUENCING FACTORS
1926* 100
600
600
1929
242
1930
1931
1932
1933
1934
1935
1936
1937
1938
1939
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION and HOME-FINANCING ACTIVITY
•
WHOLESALE building material prices in March
continued the gentle upward trend registered
during the three preceding months. Paint and paint
material prices led the February-to-March rise. As
compared with the same month of last year, March
wholesale material prices were down 2 percent.
Dealers' prices for home-building materials have
not as yet reflected the recent rises shown in the
wholesale series. For several months now the price
index for materials used in constructing a standard
house has remained practically unchanged, after a
steady decline which had continued for over a year.
Construction labor costs have risen fractionally
for two successive months, again continuing the
movement toward higher levels which had been
checked at the turn of the year.
Residential construction volume, which rose rapidly in 1938, expanded very little in March of this
year, due principally to a slackening of government
low-cost housing activity in New York City. However, other sections of the country responded to
favorable seasonal influences so that total residential
construction for the United States remained practically unchanged from February. As the normal
increase between February and March is better
than 50 percent, the seasonally corrected index of
residential building for March of this year receded
34 percent from February. March residential construction was one and one-half times the volume of
March 1938.
A year ago the 1937-1938 recession was close to the
bottom: industrial output currently stands about
one-fourth above that level. Business activity in
general, however, continues to reflect the absence
of the usual seasonal expansion. The Federal Reserve index of industrial production, adjusted for
seasonal variation, remained unchanged in March at
the February level of 91 (1926=100). During
the first three weeks of April, industrial output on a
seasonally corrected basis was lower than in March,
being affected by the reduced volume of bituminous
coal production and the decline in steel ingot output. National income payments have declined
slightly on a seasonally adjusted basis. One favor-
ESTIMATED NUMBER AND COST OF FAMILY DWELLING UNITS
IN ALL CITIES OF 10,000 OR MORE POPULATION
PROVIDED
(Source: Federal Home Loan Bank Board. Compiled from residential building permits reported to U. & Dept. of Labor)
NUMBER OF UNITS
PROVIDED
COST OF UNITS
PROVIDED
I20i
120
110
110
100
100
90
90
1938
f
V
80
80]
70
60
50
r
\
y
T
1
39 I
1
30
4
r^v
^
May 1939
APR MAY
JUN. JUL. AUG. SEP OCT. NOV. OEG.
DEC.
A
-*- \
•
AV
R
30
20
1 10
10
FEB. MAR
60
40
/, >J/-J 5
JAN.
70
50
40
20
\J
>" .
JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
Oivision of Reseorch£ Stotij tics 1
Fe deraUtome I.oanB ankBc ard I
-i
i
i
JUN. JUL. AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV. DEC
0
243
able sign was the further substantial advance,
resulting mainly from larger domestic bookings,
recorded in machine-tool orders during March—a
continuation of the better volumes in evidence since
last fall.
During the past two months, the average yield of
long-term Treasury bonds declined from 2.40 percent
to new record low levels below 2.30 percent, indicating that the decline in long-term interest rates
has by no means come to a halt.
All types of lenders (savings and loan associations,
insurance companies, banks and trust companies,
mutual savings banks, individuals, and others)
reported a greater volume of mortgage recordings
in March than in the preceding month. Savings
and loan associations recorded $227,000,000 in mortgages during the first quarter of 1939, or 36 percent
of the business done by all institutional lenders.
[1926=100]
Type of index
Residential construction l
Foreclosures (metro, cities)
Rental index (N. I. O. B.)___
Building material prices
Manufacturing employment
Manufacturing pay rolls. _
Average wage per employee
Mar.
1939
Feb.
1939
Percent
change
Mar.
1938
Percent
change
42.3
157.0
85.0
89.8
89.8
83.3
92.8
63.9
138.0
85.0
89.6
89.2
81.9
91.8
-33.8
+13.8
0.0
+0.2
+0.7
+1.7
+1.1
28.2
176.0
86.4
91.5
86.3
74.0
85.7
+50.0
-10.8
-1.6
-1.9
+4.1
+12.6
+8.3
* Corrected for normal seasonal variation.
Savings and loan associations of all classes and in
all sections of the country shared in the spring rise
in mortgage-lending activity evidenced in March.
Construction and home-purchase loans in the first
quarter of this year accounted for 61 percent of all
loans by savings and loan associations; during the
corresponding period of last year only 57 percent
was loaned for these purposes.
Residential Construction
THE total number of residential dwelling units
placed under construction in March was practically unchanged from February. Reference to Table
1 on page 248 reveals that while each of the three
groups—1-family, 2-family, and joint home and business—each showed sizeable increases, the volume of
multifamily units receded by nearly 6,000 units.
This decline in apartment house construction is due
entirely to the sharp decline of 7,500 units in New
York City where unusual activity was registered for
February in government financed low-cost housing
projects.
Since there is normally a rise of over 50 perjywit
in total construction for the United States as a w*3ie
between February and March, the fact that totals
for these months of this year remained constant does
not on the surface appear encouraging. Even after
subtracting the number of government financed
housing units from the totals, a rise of only 34 percent
is indicated. However, since March is the first
month this year in which a decline in the seasonally
corrected index is registered, no conclusions as to the
significance of this movement can be drawn at this
time.
New York is the only one of the 12 Federal Home
Loan Bank Districts to show a decline (10 percent)
from the first quarter of last year to the same 1939
period in the total volume of residential building
permits issued. Four of the 11 remaining Districts
more than doubled their activity during the first three
months of this year as compared with last. Quarterly totals for 1-family dwellings indicate a rise of
over 50 percent from 1938 to 1939, while data for
multifamily units show a rise of about 15 percent.
The inception of a new building code in the opening
months of 1938 caused a rush of permit applicants
for apartment structures; otherwise the percentage
increase for this type of structure would probably
be much greater than the 15 percent registered.
The chart on page 251 portrays the rate of residential building expressed in terms of the number of
units per 100,000 population for each of the Federal
Home Loan Bank Districts. Insofar as possible,
this represents only privately financed construction
for 1938 and 1939 compared with the low levels established in the 1931-1935 period. The Los Angeles
District, which usually shows a higher rate than any
other District, again increased in March—bringing
its rate to a new post-depression high level of 97 units
per 100,000 population in that month. The Winston-Salem and Little Rock Districts were the only
other areas to show rates of over 40 units.
•
244
Small-House Building Costs
[Table S]
•
PRICES for materials used in constructing a
standard 6-room frame house remained unchanged in March at a level 3 percent above the
1936 average; declines during the past year have
brought this index of dealers' prices 3 percent below
the March 1938 level.
Labor costs in the home-building trades showed a
fractional rise from February, and stood in March
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
Construction costs for the standard house
Mortgage loans distributed by purpose
[1936=100]
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Percent
change
Total
Feb.
1939
Percent
change
Mar.
1938
103.0
112.2
0.0
+ 0.2
105.7
111.4
-2.6
-fO. 9
106. 1
Material
Labor
Mar.
1939
103.0
112.4
Element of cost
106.0
-fO. 1
107.6
-1.4
more than 12 percent higher than the average 1936
month and 1 percent above March of last year.
Those cities reporting cost data for both April and
January of this year indicated mixed trends, but
with a tendency to rise on the average (Table 3,
page 250). Of the 25 cities in this group (covering
the New York, Indianapolis, Des Moines, and
Portland Districts) six reported increases of over $100
in total cost, while only three cities reported declines
of over $100.
Foreclosures
•
THE 14-percent rise of real estate foreclosures
in metropolitan communities during March,
which brought the index from 138 for February to
157 (1926=100), was purely seasonal. In relation
to the same month of last year, March foreclosure
activity was 11 percent less.
For the first quarterly period of this year, foreclosures in these communities were 13 percent and
63 percent, respectively, below those for like periods
of 1938 and 1933.
Of the 82 communities reporting for March, 58
(70 percent) showed increases and 21 decreases, while
three indicated no change in foreclosure activity from
February.
Purpose
Mar.
1939
Feb.
1939
$21, 254 $16, 027
Construction
Home purchase. _ 24, 705 19, 118
14, 871 12, 551
Refinancing
Reconditioning. _ 4,211
3,593
Other purposes __ 8,337
7,020
Total
73, 378
58, 309
Percent
change
Mar.
1938
Percent
change
+ 3 3 $16, 648
+ 29 21, 056
+ 18 14, 391
4,953
+ 17
8, 170
+ 19
+ 28
+ 17
+ 26
+ 13
65, 218
+3
+2
-15
During the first three months of this year, total
loans of all savings and loan associations rose 14
percent from the corresponding period of last year.
Federals, during the first quarter, loaned 27 percent
more than in the same 1938 period, while State
members increased their activity by 9 percent, and
nonmembers, 3 percent (Table 4, page 252).
Comparison of first quarter figures for 1939 and
1938 reveals that total lending volume improved in
each of the Federal Home Loan Bank Districts.
Increases ranged from 5 percent in the Boston
District to over 20 percent in the Cincinnati,
Indianapolis, and Little Rock Districts.
TOTAL LOANS MADE BY ALL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
UNITED STATES - BY TYPE OF ASSOCIATION
MILLIONS
Mortgage-Lending Activity of Savings
and Loan Associations
[Tables 4 and 5)
•
NEARLY $73,400,000 was loaned by savings and
loan associations in March, a gain of $8,200,000,
or 13 percent from the same 1938 month. The gain
was largely due to increased loans for construction
of homes, which rose $4,600,000, or 28 percent from
March of last year. Each loan class indicated large
rises from February to March of this year, with construction and home-purchase loans showing the
greatest increases.
May 1939
245
Federal Home Loan Bank System
[Table 9]
D U E I N G the month of March 1939 the daily
total of advances outstanding continued the
downward trend initiated since the beginning of the
year. Total new advances made by the Banks during March amounted to $3,900,000 and repayments
amounted to $12,900,000, resulting in a net reduction
of $9,000,000 in advances outstanding to a balance
of $161,600,000 on March 31.
The average balance of advances outstanding during the calendar year 1938 was $189,700,000—a figure
closely approximating the balance outstanding in all
12 Banks during each of the four months of August,
September, October, and November of 1938. Advances outstanding at the end of March 1939 constituted approximately 85 percent of the average balance outstanding during 1938. The largest reduction
in advances outstanding has occurred in the Southeastern area while the Pittsburgh and Des Moines
Banks have sustained the smallest reductions.
The daily reports on advances during the latter
part of March indicate that outstanding advances of
the Pittsburgh, Portland, and Los Angeles Banks are
on the upward trend while the decline of advances in
the Winston-Salem, Des Moines, Little Rock, and
Topeka Banks is levelling off. During March the
Portland Bank was the only one to report advances
made during the month in excess of repayments.
Although the net gain was small it is significant that
this is the first end-of-month increase reported by any
of the Banks since December 1938.
During the first three months of this year total
new advances have amounted to $9,155,000, while
repayments have totaled $46,384,000. As Table 9
shows, new advances for the first quarter of 1939 are
substantially below new advances for the same period
in 1938 and in 1937 while repayments during the
current year have amounted to an appreciably
larger total than in either 1938 or 1937.
The admission of 12 new members and the withdrawal of six members during the month of March
resulted in a net gain of six members during the
month and a total membership of 3,950 members on
March 31, 1939.
tions. Although new advances will be written t
percent, interest will be collected on both new auu
outstanding advances at the rate of 3 per centum per
annum.
•
Federal Savings and Loan System
[Table 7]
•
T H E Federal system of privately owned mutual
savings and loan associations has grown rapidly
since its inception nearly five years ago, and as of
March 31, 1939, consisted of 1,375 institutions with
total assets of $1,354,000,000, a mortgage investment of $1,068,000,000, and nearly 1,250,000 private
investors with repurchasable accounts aggregating
$928,000,000.
Inflow of investment funds to Federals has been
considerably in excess of the lending requirements
over the past quarter year, according to a study
recently completed by the Division of Research and
Statistics.
Mortgages held by Federal savings and loan associations increased $38,100,000 from December 1938
through March of this year, while during this same
period outstanding private repurchasable capital
rose $69,000,000, and the number of shareholders
increased by 85,000.
In the February-to-March summary presented in
Table 7, page 254, it may be seen that mortgages
held and private repurchasable capital of 1,301
identical Federal savings and loan associations each
increased approximately the same amount, $14,300,000, or over 1 percent. Mortgage loans made by
these associations amounted to $29,100,000, arise of
$7,600,000, or 35 percent, from February; each of
the five loan types participated in this increase.
New investment by private shareholders amounted
to $26,100,000—more than twice the amount of
repayments for the month.
Progress in number and assets of Federal savings
and loan associations
Number
Type of association
Mar.
31,
1939
Feb.
28,
1939
Approximate assets
Mar. 31, 1939 Feb. 28, 1939
INTEREST RATES
The Federal Home Loan Bank of Portland has
announced a reduction from 3% to 3 percent in its
interest rate charged on advances to member institu246
New
Converted
639
736
638 $364, 593, 000 $356, 209, 000
736 988, 969, 000 977, 521, 000
Total- __ 1,375 1,374 1, 353, 562, 000 1, 333, 730, 000
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
r ^ o r the third consecutive month, Federal Home
I>v,dH Bank advances declined for Federal associations. The 1,301 associations reporting in both
February and March had $6,100,000, or 7 percent less
borrowings outstanding from their respective Banks
in the latter month; borrowings from other sources
decreased $300,000, or 12 percent during March.
Federal Savings and Loan Association of Little Rock,
has been appointed to the Board of Directors of the
Little Rock Bank and designated Vice Chairman to
succeed Mr. Jones. Mr. Gulley will serve as Director-at-Large and Vice Chairman for the balance of
the calendar year.
Federal Savings and Loan Insurance
Corporation
Reserve Policies
[Tables 7 and 8]
•
S I X more State-chartered savings and loan
associations were insured at the end of March
than at the close of the preceding month. Assets
of the 753 State institutions covered by insurance
on March 31 amounted to $842,300,000, a rise of
$17,200,000 from assets of the 747 associations
insured as of February 28.
Borrowings both from the Federal Home Loan
Banks and from other sources declined from February to March in the reporting sample of 640
comparable State-insured associations (Table 7,
page 000). This is the third consecutive month
that loan repayments have exceeded new borrowings.
Mortgage loan balance of the comparable reporting sample of State associations rose more rapidly
than the balance of private repurchasable capital
during March; mortgage loans outstanding increased
$4,500,000 from February to a total of $528,800,000
while private capital showed a net rise of $2,700,000
to a net balance of $551,500,000. Accelerated lending activity in all loan classes was responsible for
the large rise in mortgages outstanding.
F. H. L B. Directors Announced
•
T H E Federal Home Loan Bank Board announced recently the appointment of Lucius R.
Eastman, President of Hills Brothers Company,
New York City, as Public Interest Director of the
Federal Home Loan Bank of New York. Mr. Eastman will serve for the unexpired portion of a 4-year
term ending December 31, 1939.
Former Vice Chairman Will C. Jones, Jr. of the
Federal Home Loan Bank of Little Rock has been
designated by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board
to serve as Chairman for the remainder of the year
1939, due to the recent death of Chairman J. Gilbert
Leigh. Wilbur P . Gulley, President of the Pulaski
May 1939
(Continued from p. 285)
our assets, giving our shareholders more than double
the protection which they had two years ago. The
most important fact of all, in the opinion of our board
of directors, is that we have definitely established an
operating policy which provides for sound reserves."
DESIRABILITY OF E X C E E D I N G M I N I M U M AGGREGATE
KEQUIREMENTS
Recent studies show that many States require
periodic transfer of earnings to reserve accounts
until aggregate reserves are equal to at least 5
percent of assets or share capital. 1 Although there
has been a marked tendency during recent years on
the part of legislative and regulatory bodies to
increase the aggregate reserve requirements to be
established by savings and loan associations, management today is voluntarily planning to create substantial undivided profits accounts and reserve
accounts in excess of minimum requirements.
The establishment of reserves in excess of minimum
statutory requirements has been recognized by
management as increasing the association's ability
to absorb unforeseen losses and a substantial undivided profits account as promoting a greater flexibility in operation. The greater the amount of
previous earnings retained and transferred to reserve
and undivided profits accounts by an association,
the greater is its ability to increase its earning assets,
thereby making available to the association an
additional amount of income to be used for operating
expenses, interest on borrowed money, and also, if
desired, to aid in the payment of future dividends.
The resulting increase in earnings made possible by
the increased amount of invested assets equivalent
to reserves and undivided profits accounts likewise
permits lending at lower rates of interest to meet
local competition.
i See "Mandatory loss reserve requirements for savings and loan associations
operating under State laws," FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK REVIEW, November
1938, p. 38.
247
Table 7.—Number and estimated cost of new family dwelling units provided in all cities of 10,0^0
population or over, in the United States1
[Source: Federal Home Loan Bank Board.
Compiled from residential building permits reported to U. S. Department of Labor]
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Number of family units provided
Jan.-Mar.
totals
Monthly totals
Type of dwelling
Mar.
1939
Feb.
1939
Total cost of units
Mar.
1938
1939
Jan.-Mar.
totals
Monthly totals
1938 Mar. 1939 Feb. 1939 Mar. 1938
1939
1938
1-family dwellings.
_ 14, 842 9,447 10, 060 33, 484 22, 100 $58, 755. 4 $36, 707. 5 $39, 835. 6 $130, 896. 4 $84, 473. 3
1,092
652
2-family dwellings
918 2,462 2,622 2, 782. 5 1, 774. 3 2, 549. 4
6, 249. 9
6, 619. 6
2
44
93
160.9
188
189
379.0
Joint home and business
_
273. 1
97
575.6
719.5
7,294 13, 135 2,215 29, 626 25, 891 23, 517. 3 43, 227. 5 6, 746. 4 93, 956. 8 82, 258. 4
3-and-more-family dwellings
23, 321 23, 278 13, 290 65, 760 50, 802 85, 434. 2 81, 870. 2 49, 404. 5 231, 822. 6 173, 926. 9
Total residential
1
Estimate is based on reports from communities having approximately 95 percent of the population of all cities with population of 10,000 or over.
3
Includes 1- and 2-family dwellings with business property attached.
Table 2.—Number and estimated cost of new family dwelling units provided in all cities of 10,000
population or over, in March 1939, by Federal Home Loan Bank Districts and by States
[Source: Federal Home Loan Bank Board. Compiled from residential building permits reported to U. S. Department of Labor]
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
All 1- and 2 -family dwellings
All residential dwellings
Federal Home Loan Bank Districts and
States
Number of family
dwelling units
Mar.
1939
23, 321
UNITED STATES __
No. 1—Boston
Connecticut
Maine
Massachusetts
New Hampshire
Rhode Island._
Vermont
No. 3—Pittsburgh
Delaware
Pennsylvania. _
West Virginia
_
248
_ -..
Mar.
1939
13, 290 $85, 434. 2 $49, 404. 5
16, 027
Mar.
1938
Estimated cost
Mar. 1939 Mar. 1938
11,075 $61, 916. 9
$42, 658. 1
629
123
18
364
31
89
4
2, 783. 8
982.6
31.4
1, 274. 9
21.8
473. 1
0.0
2, 862. 3
596.4
57.8
1, 764. 4
75.4
353.7
14.6
537
157
11
242
12
115
0
574
111
18
321
31
89
4
2, 537. 8
755.4
31.4
1, 256. 1
21.8
473. 1
0.0
2, 707. 3
553.4
57.8
1, 652. 4
75.4
353.7
14.6
4,941
475
4,466
..
No. 4—Winston-Salem
Alabama
District of Columbia
Florida
Mar. 1939 Mar. 1938
Number of family
dwelling units
607
219
11
250
12
115
0
__
No. 2—New York
New Jersey
New York
Mar.
1938
Estimated cost
2,160
299
1, 861
19, 108. 8
1, 639. 8
17, 469. 0
8, 819. 8
1, 449. 6
7, 370. 2
1,747
285
1,462
1,295
230
1,065
7, 634. 5
1, 375. 3
6, 259. 2
5, 817. 1
1, 283. 7
4, 533. 4
730
11
634
85
5, 924. 3
141.0
5, 329. 3
454.0
3, 635. 7
51.8
3, 258. 6
325.3
1,171
13
1,040
118
691
11
599
81
5, 385. 8
71.0
4, 8Q4. 3
450.5
3, 570. 5
51.8
3, 205. 4
313.3
1, 848 10, 787. 9
274.4
127
3, 482. 6
285
2, 921. 5
362
6, 276. 3
265.8
1, 327. 7
1, 280. 9
2, 151
145
341
584
1,522
119
184
350
7, 350. 9
274.4
1, 893. 1
1, 950. 3
5, 268. 1
250.8
1, 056. 2
1, 241. 9
1,333
22
1, 190
121
3, 452
145
i
897
!
943
Federal Wo/iDC loon Beink Review
P " fe 2.—Number and estimated cost of new family dwelling units provided in all cities of 10,000
population or over, in March 1939, by Federal Home Loan Bank Districts and by States—Contd.
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
All 1- and 2-family dwellings
All residential dwellings
Federal Home Loan Bank Districts and
States
Number of family
dwelling units
Mar.
1939
N o 4.—Winston-Salem—Continued.
Georgia
Maryland
North Carolina
South Carolina
Virginia
_
Mar.
1938
Estimated cost
Mar. 1939 Mar. 1938
Number of family
dwelling units
Mar.
1939
Mar.
1938
Estimated cost
Mar. 1939
Mar. 1938
224
398
399
129
317
209
152
290
100
323
$675. 8
1, 074. 3
924.4
286.0
1, 148. 9
$561. 0
565.4
783.0
281.3
1,211.2
220
247
275
126
213
205
146
263
96
159
$668. 2
785.7
634.7
283.9
860.6
$554. 0
559.4
697.7
266.3
641.8
1,207
732
5, 156. 4
3, 216. 4
862
606
3, 858. 4
2, 780. 4
121
950
136
118
483
131
351.5
4, 430. 5
374.4
405.4
2, 494. 6
316.4
121
605
136
118
369
119
351.5
3, 132. 5
374.4
405.4
2, 068. 6
306.4
1, 952
866
8, 868. 4
3, 731. 8
1,498
776
6, 935. 9
3, 514. 8
581
1,371
263
603
2, 447. 4
6, 421. 0
708.6
3, 023. 2
305
1,193
190
586
1, 168. 9
5, 767. 0
548.6
2, 966. 2
810
395
4, 033. 6
2, 209. 0
663
391
3, 604. 9
2, 190. 0
_
521
289
272
123
2, 953. 7
1, 079. 9
1, 641. 8
567.2
517
146
272
119
2, 939. 7
665.2
1, 641. 8
548. 2
No. 8—Des Moines
771
557
3, 065. 4
2, 073. 1
689
514
2, 755. 4
1, 968. 6
740.5
752.8
1, 183. 4
26.2
52.5
496.2
787.9
612.9
26.8
44.8
No. 5—Cincinnati
Kentucky
Ohio
Tennessee
No. 6—Indianapolis
Indiana
Michigan
No. 7—Chicago
-
Illinois
Wisconsin
__
Arkansas _ _ _ _ __ _
Louisiana
_ _
Mississippi
New Mexico
Texas
No. 10—Topeka
_
No. 1 1 — P o r t l a n d . .
Idaho
Montana
Oregon-
_
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
No. 12—Los Angeles
Arizona
California
Nevada
May 1939
__
128
195
198
9
27
740.5
947.8
1, 298. 4
26.2
52.5
507.6
803.0
690.9
26.8
44.8
195
147
315
9
23
2, 183
_
No. 9—Little Rock
Colorado
Kansas
Nebraska
Oklahoma
195
189
355
9
23
1,716
6, 414. 5
4, 124. 9
1,898
1,627
5, 290. 2
3, 922. 5
63
229
183
62
1,646
66
217
101
47
1,285
113.8
544.2
271.6
189.7
5, 295. 2
145.3
522. 1
218.3
131. 1
3, 108. 1
51
215
172
57
1,403
61
205
101
47
1,213
102.3
512.8
266.3
178.7
4, 230. 1
131. 9
501. 6
218.3
131. 1
2, 939. 6
733
Iowa
Minnesota
Missouri
North Dakota
South Dakota
124
192
162
9
27
530
2, 385. 9
1, 729. 1
671
500
2, 301. 4
1, 674. 3
199
159
77
298
85
154
68
223
593. 1
468.8
290.6
1, 033. 4
304.5
492.4
230.7
701.5
152
148
77
294
77
140
64
219
536. 1
442.8
290.6
1, 031. 9
284. 5
475. 6
220.7
693. 5
664
535
2, 170. 6
1, 680. 8
607
487
2, 046. 5
1, 584. 3
11
44
160
129
289
31
28
45
120
69
220
53
30.0
94.4
540.5
456.6
921.4
127.7
75. 1
128.8
448.7
200. 1
646.3
181.8
11
44
141
115
275
21
21
42
116
69
214
25
30.0
94.4
499.0
430.8
899.6
92.7
60. 1
126. 8
442. 2
200. 1
636. 3
118.8
4,668
2,592
14, 734. 6
9, 045. 3
3,533
2,092
12, 215. 2
7, 660. 2
31
2,545
16
215.5
14, 380. 9
138.2
76.2
8, 891. 7
77.4
59
3,445
29
31
2,045
16
208.5
11, 868. 5
138.2
76. 2
7, 506. 6
77.4
64
4,575
29
249
Table 3.—Cost of building the same standard house in representative cities in specific m o n t H |
NOTE.—These figures are subject to correction
[Source: Federal Home Loan Bank Board]
Cubic-foot cost
Federal Home Loan Bank Districts
and cities
Total cost
1939
1939
Apr.
1937
Apr.
Apr.
No. 2—New York:
Atlantic City, N. J._
Camden, N. J
Newark, N. J
Albany, N. Y
Buffalo, N. Y
Utica, N. Y
$0. 239
.237
.231
.246
.250
.247
1938
1938
Apr.
$0. 237
.226
.253
Jan.
July
Oct.
Apr.
1936
Apr.
$5, 745 $5, 790 $5, 907 $5, 932
5,705 $5, 688
5,559
5,676
5,581
5,479
5,537
5,536
5,539
5,427
5,957
5,847
5,906
5,800
6,149
6,007
6, 115 6,303
6,073
5,524
5,660
5,938
5,726
$6, 546
5,873
5,658
5,782
6, 136
$5, 806
5,157
5,093
5,162
5,499
No. 6—Indianapolis:
Evansville, Ind
Indianapolis, Ind
South Bend, Ind
Detroit, Mich
Grand Rapids, Mich.
.240
.249
.248
.255
.243
,240
,242
,248
,251
,246
5,750
5,966
5,947
6,118
5,834
5,854
5,831
5,821
6,181
5,900
5,742
5,765
5,750
6,166
5,871
No. 8—Des Moines:
Des Moines, Iowa
Duluth, Minn
St. Paul, Minn
Kansas City, Mo
St. Louis, Mo
Fargo, N. Dak
Sioux Falls, S. Dak_.
. 261
.250
.274
. 248
.252
. 236
.259
256
,258
,272
,239
,255
, 245
,258
6,275
5,995
6,569
5,959
6,053
5,655
6,210
6,279
5,975
6,529
5,808
6,078
5,658
6,272
6,164
6,186
6,532
No. 11—Portland:
Boise, Idaho
Great Falls, Mont__.
Portland, Oreg
Salt Lake City, Utah
Seattle, Wash
Spokane, Wash
Casper, Wyo
.257
.293
. 224
.251
.263
.254
.272
244
297
225
248
268
273
270
6,161
7,035
5,366
6,026
6,304
6,089
6,532
6,078
6,996
5,495
5,880
6,272
6,001
6,456
5,806
5,739
6,142
5,914
6,002
_
5,~455"
5,880
6,259
6,286
6,430
2
5,816
5,836
6,374
6,055
5,541
5,570
5,458
5,860
5,265
5,118
6,117
6,199
6,546
5,751
6,027
5,843
6,374
5,989
5,832
6,436
5,770
5,812
5,964
6,026
5,911
6,139
6,195
6,539
5,730
6,122
5,868
6, 196
6,399
5,898
6,371
5,787
6,597
5,985
5,995
6,032
5,616
5,233
5,304
6,064
5,542
5,665
5,860
7, 109
5,397
5,911
6,256
6,620
6, 452
5,848
7,137
5,391
5,961
6,428
6,545
6, 486
6,128
7,023
5,829
5,923
6,623
6,543
6, 382
5,648
6,508
5,234
5,707
5,624
5,892
2
1
The house on which costs are reported is a detached 6-room home of 24,000 cubic feet volume. Living room, dining
room, kitchen, and lavatory on first floor; 3 bedrooms and bath on second floor. Exterior is wide-board siding with brick and
stucco as features of design. Best quality materials and workmanship are used throughout.
The house is not completed ready for occupancy. It includes all fundamental structural elements, an attached 1-car garage,
an unfinished cellar, an unfinished attic, a fireplace, essential heating, plumbing, and electric wiring equipment and complete
insulation. It does not include wall-paper nor other wall nor ceiling finish on interior plastered surface, lighting fixtures, refrigerators, water heaters, ranges, screens, weather stripping, nor window shades.
Reported costs include, in addition to material and labor costs, compensation insurance, an allowance for contractor's
overhead and transportation of materials, plus 10 percent for builder's profit.
Reported costs do not include the cost of land nor of surveying the land, the cost of planting the lot, nor of providing walks
and driveways; they do not include architect's fee, cost of building permit, financing charges, nor sales costs.
In figuring costs, current prices on the same building materials list are obtained every 3 months from the same dealers, and
current wage rates are obtained from the same reputable contractors and operative builders.
2
Revised.
250
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
RATE OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING IN ALL CITIES OF 10.000 OR MORE POPULATION
REPRESENTS THE ESTIMATED NUMBER OF PRIVATELY FINANCED FAMILY DWELLING UNITS PROVIDED PER 100.000 POPULATION
Source: Federal Home Loon Bank Board. Compiled from Building Permits reported to U S-Department of Labor.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK
DISTRICT I
BOSTON
DISTRICTS
DISTRICT 2
NEW YORK
DISTRICT 3
PITTSBURGH
1
DISTRICT 4 1
WINSTON SALEM
m9
~\
1
r-n
IA
-1939
1
-I
L
L
.
r
|
j
1931-35 AVQ-,
, r
1 1
» MAY JUN. JUL. AUG
SER OCT NOV. DEC.
ni iruj h
I
W938
i
JAN FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
r—^-i
LJ
\r'939
I
.
.,
f-1931-35
AVG.
J
1... '
1931-35 AVG.-}
I. FEB. MAR. APR MAY
JUN. JUL. AUG. SER OCT. NOV. DEC.
,
L. AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV. DEC.
JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
JUN
JUL. AUG SEP OCT NOV. DEC.
DISTRICT 7
CHICAGO
DISTRICT 5
CINCINNATI
DISTRICT 6
DES MOINES
1939-^
.. AUG. SEP. OCT. H
JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
JUN. JUL. AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV. DEC.
JAN. FE& MAR. APR. MAY
JAN.
JUN. JUL. AUG SEP. OCT. NOV. DEC
# • • » 97.00
ffi
1 Z939-*.
DISTRICT I I
PORTLAND
DISTRICT 10
TOPEKA
DISTRICT 9
LITTLE ROCK
h
TF~
f~/938
1 1
P
'J^J
n
LJ
L
j DISTRICT 12
LOS ANGELES
1
/-I93/-35 AV0.
,.J
1931-35 AVG.*\
•35 AVG.
„
/ 9 3 Z - 3 5 AV©.->
J^^-.
I. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
JUN. JUL. AUG. SEP. OCT NOV DEC.
JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
JUN. JUL. AUG. SEP. O C X NOV. C
JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
—"»-•••••
^-v_|
r-,7
JUN. JUL, AUG. SER O C X NOV DEC.
* FEB. MAR. APR. MAY
JUN. JUL. AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV
DEC
UNITED STATES AVERAGE
1930-1939
1938
x:
_1
May 1939
I
1—J
SEP
L_
1939
h^lrjy
EXCLUDING
NEW YORK
±f-
<4
CITY-
-J
DEC.
SEP.
DEC
SEP
DEC.
MAR.
I
L_J
L.
JUN
251
Table 4.—Estimated volume of new lending activity of savings and loan associations, classified
District and type of association
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
No. 3: Total
Federal
State member. _
Nonmember
No. 4:
No. 5:
Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
$187, 254
73,003
77,386
36, 865
4, 415
1,271
2, 125
1,019
+
+
+
+
19.4
25. 6
12. 1
26. 7
5, 132
1, 338
2,569
1,225
+ 2.7
+ 19.4
-7.3
+ 5.4
4, 854
1,377
1,252
2,225
+ 17.7
+ 52. 1
+ 23.3
-6.8
5,845
1, 727
1, 662
2,456
4,051
1,076
1, 106
1,869
+
+
+
+
49. 6
35.6
61.9
50.3
8, 778
3,274
3, 636
1, 868
+ 11.3
+ 20.3
+ 17.2
-15.8
9,585
3,259
4, 794
1, 532
+ 33. 8 1
+ 61.2
+ 23. 1
+ 8.7
3,309
1,515
1,571
223
3,215
1,566
1,450
199
+ 2.9
-3.3
+ 8.3
+ 12. 1
2, 712
1,200
1,283
229 |
1938
$164,
57,
70,
35,
Percent
change
413
657
787
969
+ 13. 9
+ 26.6
+ 9.3
+ 2.5
14, 576
4, 148
6,911
3, 517
13, 920
3,630
6,802
3,488
+ 4.7
+ 14. 3
+ 1.6
+ 0. 8
-2.3
+ 21.3
-7.1
-15.6
16,300
5,349 1
4, 146
6, 805
14, 320
3,876
4,144
6,300
+13. 8
+ 38. 0
0.0
+ 8. 0
5, 249
1,061
1, 715
2,473
+ 15.4
+ 37. 5
+ 4.4
+ 13.6
14,483
3,427
4, 130
6,926
13, 480
2,614
4, 193
6,673
+7 4
+ 31. 1
-1.5
+ 3. 8
8, 237
3,084
3,715
1,437
+ 18.6
+ 27. 6
+14. 7
+ 9.4
26,214
10, 150
11, 171
4,893
22, 440 i
7, 844
10,453
4, 143
+ 16. 8
+ 29.4
+ 6.9
+ 18. 1
10, 277
4,006
4,549
1,722
+ 24. 8
+ 31.2
+ 29. 7
-3.3
30, 947
12,032
14,7,67
4, 148
25,095
9,961
11,228
3,906
+ 23. 3
+ 20. 8
+ 31.5
+ 6. 2
8,965
4,214
4,221
530
7,353
3,354
3,430
569
+ 21. 9
+ 25. 6
+ 23.1
+ 6. 9
15, 658
5,139
7,635
2,884
+ 11. 1
+ 14.2
+ 0.3
+ 34. 1
No. 6:
Total
Federal..
State member
Nonmember
No. 7:
Total.
Federal
State member _
Nonmember
6,820
2,418
3,049
1,353
5,444
1,787
2,561 j
1,096
+
+
+
+
25.3 |
35.3
19. 1
23.4
6,482
2,208
2,995
1,279
No. 8:
Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
4,348
2,033
1,406
909
3,305
1,498
1,057
750
+
+
+
+
31.6
35.7
33.0
21.2
3,991
1,707
1,268
1,016
+ 8.9
+ 19.1
+ 10.9
-10.5
10, 229
4,598
3,443
2,188
8,915
3,738
2,945
2,232
+ 14. 7
+ 23.0
+ 16.9
— 2.0
No. 9:
Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
5,089
2,081
2,766
242
4,235
1,772
2,253
210
+
+
+
+
20.2
17.4
22.8
15.2
4,428
1,727
2,464
237
+ 14.9
+ 20.5
+ 12.3
+ 2.1
13, 177
5,454
7,056
667
10, 759
4,201
5,869
689
+ 22.5
+ 29. 8
+ 20. 2
-3.2
No. 10: Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
4,187
2,189
1,028
970
2,888
1,234
923
731
+
+
+
+
45.0
77.4
11.4
32.7
3,646
1,607
1,256
783
+ 14.8
+ 36.2
-18.2
+ 23.9
10, 098
4,817
2,824
2,457
9,286
4,059
2,928
2,299
+ 8.7
+ 18.7
-3.6
+ 6.9
No. 11: Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
2, 720
1, 619
1, 014
87
1,915
1,174
581
160
+ 42.0
+ 37.9
+ 74.5
-45.6
2,712
1,613
794
305
+ 0.3
+ 0.4
+ 27.7
-71.5
6,356
3,755
2,263
338
5,957
3,532
1,907
518
+ 6.7
+ 6.3
+18. 7
-34. 7
No. 12: Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
7, 271
3,612
3, 412
247
5,624
3,010
2,453
161
+
+
+
+
6,507
2,077
3,565
865 1
+ 11.7
+ 73.9
-4.3 1
252
__ __
__
+ 12.5
+ 27. 6
+ 8.2
-4.2
12,821
5,255
5,900
1,666
.. _
$65, 218
23,356
27,835
14, 027
9,771
3,938
4,261
1, 572
Total
Federal
State member _
Nonmember
25. 8
33. 7
24. 5
13.7
6,059
1,459
1,791
2,809
__
+
+
+
+
5,713
2,095
1,544
2,074
__
$58,309
22,298
24, 191
11, 820
5, 270
1, 597
2,382
1,291
Total
Federal
State member
Nonmember
No. 2:
1939
$73, 378
29,811
30, 124
13,443
United States: Total
Federal
State member. J
Nonmember
No. 1:
Cumulative new loans
(3 months)
Percent
Percent
change,
New
change,
loans,
Feb. 1939
Mar. 1938
to Mar. Mar. 1938 to Mar.
Mar. 1939 Feb. 1939
1939
1939
New loans
Federal Home Loan Bank
District and type of
association
_
j
29.3
20.0
39. 1
53.4
+ 22.0
+ 26. 3
+ 22.4
-2.6 !
+
+
+
+
5.2
9.5
1.8
5.8
17,398
5, 870
7,661 1
3, 867 1
+71.4 1
18, 511
9, 189
8,793
529
17, 230
5,709
9,253
2,268 1
+ 7.4
+ 61.0
-5.0
-76. 7
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
T
le 5.—Estimated volume of new loans by all savings and loan associations/ classified according
to purpose and type of association
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Type of association
Purpose of loans
Mortgage loans on homes
Period
Federals
State
members
$896, 579
$307, 278
$379, 286
$210, 015
20, 155
8,474
118,443
46,638
39, 179
15, 310
51, 418
19, 776
27, 846
11, 552
58, 623
93,263
797,996
286, 899
333, 470
177, 627
Construction
Home
purchase
Refinancing
Reconditioning
$234, 102
$326, 629
$180, 804
$62, 143
$92,901
23, 841
9,725
30, 898
11,920
33, 952
12, 842
9,597
3,677
220, 458
265, 485
160, 167
1937
January-March
March
1938
Total
loans
Loans for
all other
purposes
Nonmembers
Januarys-March
March
April
May
June
July
August.September
October
November
December
1939
40, 889
16, 648
17, 710
19, 4Q0
19, 892
19, 096 j
22, 575
21, 018
22, 099
18, 627
19, 152
52, 069
21, 056
25, 494
24, 123
25, 636
21,924
23, 833
25, 698
24, 677
21, 205
20, 826
37, 018
14, 391
15, 772
15, 281
13, 885
13, 194
14, 701
12, 416
12, 913
12, 182
12, 805 j
12, 024
4,953
5,683
5,416
5,211
5,397
5,528
4,791
5,727
4, 821
4,025
22,413
164,413
8,170
65,218
8,648
73, 307 |
8,059
27, 279
8,443
73, 067
8,028
67, 639
8, 072
74, 709
7, 724
71, 647
7,515
72, 931
7, 235
64, 070
7, 126 j 63,934
57, 657
23, 356
26, 107
24, 721
26, 310
23, 823
26, 858
25, 650
26, 534
24, 220
25, 019
70, 787
27, 835
30, 238
31, 196
30, 350
28, 973
29, 506
29, 255
30, 546
26, 115
26, 504
35, 969
14, 027
16, 962
16, 362
16, 407
14, 843
18, 345
16, 742
15, 851
13, 735
12, 411
January-March
January
February
March
53, 380
16, 099
16, 027
21,254 1
61, 326
17, 503 I
19, 118 1
24,705 1
39, 171
11,749
12,551 1
14,871 1
11, 193
3. 389 j
3.593
4,211 1
22, 184
187, 254
6,827
55, 567
58, 309
7, 020
8,337 1 73,378 1
73, 003
20, 894
22, 298
29,811
77, 386
23, 071
24, 191
30, 124 1
36, 865
11, 602
11, 820
13,443
1
Table 6.—Index of wholesale price of building materials in the United States
[1926=100]
[Source: U. S. Department of Labor]
Period
1937: March
1938: January
February. _
March
April
May
June
July
August
September.
October
November.
December.
1939: January _ _
February.
March
All build- Brick and
ing matile
terials
Cement 3
Lumber
Paint and Plumbing Structural
paint ma- and heatsteel
ing
terials
93.3
91.0
89. 1
99.0
83.4
77.4
104. 7
91.8
91. 1
91.5
91.2
90.4
89.7
89.2
89.4
89.5
89.8
89.2
89.4
91.8
91.5
91. 1
90.4
90.5
90.6
90.7
90.6
90.9
91. 1
91.5
91.5
89.8
89.8
89.8
89.9
90. 1
89.9
91.0
91.0
90.7
90.7
90.6
90.6
92.6
91.0
91.3
91. 1
89.3
88.7
88.8
90.2
90.4
90.3
90.2
90.9
80. 1
79.2
82.2
81.4
80.9
80. 1
80.5
80.5
80.4
81. 1
80.9
81.0
79.6
79.6
78.9
77.2
77.2
77.2
79.5
79.2
78.5
78.5
78.7
78.7
114.9
114.9
114.9
114.9
114.9
113.0
107.3
107.3
107.3
107.3
107.3
107.3
89.5
89.6
89.8
92.4
92.4
92.5
90.6
91.2
91.5
91.7
92.6
92. 1
81.0
80.5
81.5
78.7
79.2
79.3
107.3
107.3
107.3
Change:
Mar. 1939-Feb. 1939.
Mar. 1939-Feb. 1939.
- 0 . 5%,
+ 0.3%
+ 1.2%
+ 0. 1%
o. o%
+ 0. 9%j
+ 0 . 5%|
-0.9%
+ 1.9%
- 6 . 6%|
1
Based on delivered prices at 48 cities and introduced into the calculation of the Bureau's general indexes of wholesale
prices beginning with March 1939.
May 1939
+ 0. 2%
-1.9%
+ 0.1%
+ 1.5
253
Table 7.—Monthly operations of 1,301 identical Federal and 640 identical insured State-chartei
savings and loan associations reporting during February and March 1939
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
1,301 Federals
Type of operation
March
Share liability at end of month:
Private share accounts (number)
February
640 insured State members
Change
February
to March
1, 192, 976
Percent
+ 1.4
801, 225
798, 280
Percent
+ 0.4
$901, 314. 9
$887, 041. 3
+ 1.6
$551, 506. 0
$548, 768. 5
+ 0.5
0)
2
1, 097, 042. 5
+ 1.3
26, 096. 4
12, 059. 2
25, 267. 9
11, 975. 4
+ 3.3
+ 0.7
10, 579. 4
8, 105. 6
6, 287. 6
1, 530. 1
2, 574. 6
7, 468. 5
6, 052. 7
4, 776. 4
1, 090. 4
2, 099. 2
29, 077. 3
1, 037, 039. 1
210, 051. 2
210, 001. 2
1,111,366. 1
Private share investments during month.
Repurchases during month.
Mortgage loans made during month:
a. New construction
b. Purchase of homes
c. Refinancing
d. Reconditioning _
e. Other purposes __ __
39, 264. 2
+ 0. 8
591, 079. 2
588, 032. 7
+ 0. 5
11, 119. 8
8, 118. 4
10, 455. 1
7, 744. 1
+ 6.4
+ 4. 8
41.7
33.9
31.6
40.3
22.6
4, 214. 8
4, 219. 1
2, 521. 4
677.5
1, 413. 0
2, 847. 3
3, 187. 0
1, 916. 4
523.9
1, 198. 8
+ 48 0
+32. 4
+ 31 6
+ 29 3
+ 17. 9
21, 487. 2
1, 022, 762. 3
+ 35.3
+ 1.4
13, 045. 8
528, 849. 8
9, 673. 4
524, 340. 5
+ 34. 9
+ 0.9
76, 873. 2
2, 499. 5
82, 956. 8
2, 828. 2
-7.3
-11.6
32, 994. 7
2, 758. 0
33, 979. 9
2, 939. 6
-2.9
—6 2
85, 785. 0
-7.5
35, 752. 7
36, 919. 5
— 3. 2
1, 315, 159. 3
- -
Total _ --Mortgage loans outstanding end of month.
1, 300, 948. 4
+ 1.1
743, 692. 8
739, 623. 4
+ 0.6
Borrowed money as of end of month:
From Federal Home Loan Banks
From other sources
_ __
Total assets, end of month
2
39, 573. 2
3
79, 372. 7
Total _
1
Change
February
to March
February
1, 210, 236
Paid on private subscriptions
Treasury and H. 0 . L. C. subscriptions
Total
March
+
+
+
+
+
Less than 0.1 percent.
Includes only H. O. L. C. subscriptions.
Table 8.—Institutions insured by the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation
l
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Cumulative number at specified dates
Assets
Private repurchasable
capital
Mar. 31,
1939
Mar. 31,
1939J
$842, 297
988, 253
364, 593
$624, 554
712, 245
215, 005
2,122 2, 255, 800 2, 195, 143
1, 551, 804
Number of
investors
Type of association
Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Dec. 31, Feb. 28, Mar. 31, Mar. 31,
1937
1939
1936
1938
1939
1939
1935
State-chartered associations
Converted F. S. and L. A
New F. S. and L. A
Total
136
406
572
382
560
634
566
672
641
1,114
1,576
1,879
2
737
723
637
2,097
3
747
728
638
2,113
753 1, 007, 600
* 730
912, 700
639
335, 500
1
Beginning Dec. 31, 1936, figures on number of associations insured include only those associations which have remitted
premiums. Earlier figures include all associations approved by the Board for insurance.
2
In addition, 6 Federals with assets of $1,505,000 had been approved for conversion but had not been insured as of Dec. 31.
8
In addition, 8 Federals with assets of $1,291,000 had been approved for conversion but had not been insured as of Feb. 28.
4
In addition, 6 Federals with assets of $716,000 had been approved for conversion but had not been insured as of Mar. 31.
254
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
7"^ e 9.—Lending operations of the Federal
Home Loan Banks
Table 7 0 . — H . O . L. C subscriptions to shares
of savings and loan associationsl
[Thousands of dollars]
[Amounts are shown in thousands of dollars]
Advances
outstanding at
ReReAdend
Adpay- vances! pay- the the
of
vances ments
ments month
Federal Home Loan
Banks
Boston
New York
Pittsburgh
Winston-Salem.
Cincinnati
Indianapolis
Chicago
Des Moines
Little Rock
Topeka
Portland
Los Angeles
Total___.
Jan.-Mar. 1939
March 1938
Jan.-Mar. 1938
March 1937_._.
Jan.-Mar. 1937
$30
228
416
353|
611
891
155|
491
1341
323
240
828
State-chartered
February
1939
March 1939
$883
837
710
2, 147
1, 791
1, 225
1, 999
770
495
742|
212
1, 0881
$94
547
225
119
480
120
175
69!
152|
57
30
2661
$505
653
626
1, 929
1, 998
683
1, 232
683
469
516
575
702
$6, 369
16, 800
16, 277
12, 433
21, 283
10, 427
27, 626
14, 424
8,445
10, 089
4,856
12, 585
10,
3, 898 12, 899 2, 3341 571161,614
9, 155 46, 384
4,901 9, 293
12, 694 29, 663
8, 591 7, 077
19, 421 22, 102i
183, 125
Federal
savings
Insured and loan
associa- associations
tions
Uninsured
F. H.
L. B.
members
Requests and subscriptions
Requests:
Oct.1935-Mar.1939:
864
4,512
73
Number
5,449
Amount
$4, 648 $54, 074 $196, 165 $254, 887
March 1939:
4
17
8
5
Number
$600
$240
$299
Amount
$1, 139
Subscriptions:
Oct. 1935-Mar. 1939:
Number
Amount
March 1939:
Number
Amount
4, 121
16
701
4,838
$808 $42, 293 $173, 319 $216, 420
0
0
6
$184
Mar. 1,
1939,
Cumulative
through
through
Mar. 31, Mar. 31, 1939
1939
1, 032, 130
12, 435
1, 044, 565
Cases received 2
Contracts awarded:
Number
656, 555
8,090
664, 645
Amount
$128, 384, 619 $1, 902, 193 $130, 286, 812
Jobs completed:
Number
649, 070
8,533
657, 603
Amount
$124, 976, 637 $2, 016, 719 $126, 993, 356
1
All figures are subject to adjustment. Figures do not
include 52,269 reconditioning jobs, amounting to approximately $6,800,000, completed by the Corporation prior to
the organization of the Reconditioning Division on June 1,
1934.
2
Includes all propety management, advance, insurance,
and loan cases referred to the Reconditioning Division which
were not withdrawn prior to preliminary inspection or cost
estimate prior to Apr. 15, 1937,
May 1939
9
$204
1
Refers to number of separate investments, not to number
of associations in which investments are made.
Table 12.—Properties acquired by H . O . L.
through foreclosure and voluntary deed 1
Period
Type of operation
3
$20
142, 720
Table. 11.—Reconditioning Division—Summary
of all reconditioning operations of H . O . L. C.
through Mar. 3 1 , 1 9 3 9 *
June 1,1934,
through
Feb. 28, 1939
Total
Prior to 1935
1935: Jan. 1 through
July 1 through
1936: Jan. 1 through
July 1 through
1937: Jan. 1 through
July 1 through
1938: Jan. 1 through
July
August
September
October
November
December
1939: January
February
March
June
Dec.
June
Dec.
June
Dec.
June
Number
30
31
30
31___„
30
31
30
Grand total to Mar. 31, 1939
9
114
983
4,449
15, 875
23, 225
26, 981
28, 386
4,056
3,886
3,856
3,616
3,534
3,585
3, 400
2,771
3,410
132, 136
1
Does not include 10,006 properties bought in by H. O. L. C.
at foreclosure sale but awaiting expiration of the redemption
period before title in absolute fee can be obtained.
In addition to the 132,136 completed cases, 707 properties
were sold at foreclosure sale to parties other than the H. O. L.
C. and 17,582 cases have been withdrawn due to payment of
delinquencies by borrowers after foreclosure proceedings were
authorized.
255
Directory of Member, Federal/ an<
Insured Institutions
I. INSTITUTIONS ADMITTED TO MEMBERSHIP IN
THE FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK SYSTEM
BETWEEN MARCH 16, 1939, AND APRIL 15, 1939 *
[Listed by Federal Home Loan Bank Districts, States, and cities]
VIRGINIA:
Norfolk:
,
State Building Association of Norfolk, Incorporated, 23 Seldon Wcade
(sale of assets to Norfolk Federal Savings & Loan Association, Norfolk,
Virginia).
WISCONSIN:
Milwaukee:
Sobieski Building & Loan Association, 515 West Mitchell Street (voluntary withdrawal).
II. FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS
CHARTERED BETWEEN MARCH 16, 1939, AND
APRIL 15, 1939
DISTRICT NO. 1
D I S T R I C T NO. 3
CONNECTICUT:
PENNSYLVANIA:
Bridgeport:
Bridgeport Savings & Loan Association, 900 Varnum Street.
Washington:
First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Washington, 28 Court
Square Arcade (converted from Industrial Building & Loan Association of Washington).
Philadelphia:
Harry T. Rosenheim Federal Savings & Loan Association, 1616 Walnut
Street (converted from Harry T. Rosenheim Building & Loan Association).
DISTRICT NO. 2
N E W JERSEY:
East Rutherford:
Boiling Springs Building & Loan Association, Railroad Avenue.
Passaic:
New Jersey Building & Loan Association, 625 Main Avenue.
DISTRICT NO. 3
PENNSYLVANIA:
Philadelphia:
Cahill Building & Loan Association, 3014 North Seventh Street.
Locomotive Engineers Building Association, 542 Real Estate Trust
Building.
DISTRICT NO. 4
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA:
Washington:
Anacostia Building Association, 2014 Nichols Avenue, Southeast.
DISTRICT NO. 5
CANCELATIONS OF FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION CHARTERS BETWEEN MARCH 16, 1939, AND APRIL 15,
1939
KANSAS:
Wichita:
Sedgwick County Federal Savings & Loan Association of Wichita
(merger with First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Wichita).
MARYLAND:
Baltimore:
Bond Street Federal Savings & Loan Association (merger with Atlantic
Federal Savings and Loan Association, Baltimore, Maryland).
OHIO:
Chillicothe:
Mutual Loan & Savings Association of Chillicothe, Ohio, 24 West Second
Street.
Columbus:
Allemania Building & Loan Company, 24 East Main Street.
III. INSTITUTIONS INSURED BY THE FEDERAL
SAVINGS AND LOAN INSURANCE CORPORATION
BETWEEN MARCH 16, 1939, AND APRIL 15, 1939
DISTRICT NO. 6
DISTRICT NO. 2
INDIANA:
Gary:
First State Savings & Loan Association of Gary, 2300 Washington Street.
Indianapolis:
Turner Building & Savings Association of Indianapolis, Indiana, 1000
Lemcke Building
D I S T R I C T NO. 7
ILLINOIS:
Granite City:
State Loan Association, 1933 Edison Avenue.
N E W JERSEY:
East Rutherford:
Boiling Springs Building & Loan Association, Railroad Avenue.
Passaic:
North Jersey Building & Loan Association, 34 Broadway.
NEW
YORK:
Fredonia:
Fredonia Savings & Loan Association, 25 West Main Street.
Long Island City:
Long Island City Savings & Loan Association, 35-01 Broadway.
DISTRICT NO. 8
DISTRICT NO. 4
IOWA:
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA:
Burlington:
Mississippi Valley Savings & Loan Association.
Washington:
Anacostia Building Association, 1338 Good Hope Road, Southeast.
DISTRICT NO. 10
DISTRICT NO. 5
COLORADO:
OHIO:
Montrose:
Montrose Building & Loan Association.
Cleveland:
Progress Savings & Loan Company, 5454 Broadway.
D I S T R I C T NO. 11
DISTRICT NO. 6
OREGON:
Grants Pass:
Josephine County Building & Loan Association, Masonic Temple.
WITHDRAWALS FROM THE FEDERAL HOME LOAN
SYSTEM BETWEEN MARCH 16, 1939, AND APRIL 15,
BANK
1939
CALIFORNIA:
San Francisco:
Globe Mutual Building & Loan Association, 465 California Street (voluntary withdrawal).
IDAHO:
Lewiston:
Lewiston Land & Building Company (sale of assets to First Federal
Savings & Loan Association of Lewiston, Lewiston, Idaho).
N E W JERSEY:
East Rutherford:
East Rutherford Savings Loan & Building Association (voluntary withdrawal).
Passaic:
Union Loan & Building Association of Passaic, New Jersey, 34 Broadway
(voluntary withdrawal).
Rutherford:
Rutherford Mutual Loan & Building Association, Corner Glen Road &
Park Avenue (voluntary withdrawal).
PENNSYLVANIA:
Pittsburgh:
Juniata Premium Building & Loan Association, 1601 Beaver Avenue
(voluntary withdrawal).
INDIANA:
Gary:
First State Savings & Loan Association of Gary, 2300 Washington Street.
MICHIGAN:
Dowagiac:
Dowagiac Savings & Loan Association, 114 Commercial Street.
DISTRICT NO. 7
ILLINOIS:
Chicago:
"Zgoda" Building & Loan Association, 1424 South Leavitt Street.
WISCONSIN:
West Bend:
West Bend Building & Loan Association, 120 North Main Street.
DISTRICT NO. 8
IOWA:
Burlington:
Mississippi Valley Savings & Loan Association, Medical Arts Building.
DISTRICT NO. 9
LOUISIANA:
Alexandria:
First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Alexandria, Guaranty
Bank Building.
DISTRICT NO. 10
KANSAS:
Council Grove:
Morris County Savings <e Loan Association, 116 West Main Street.
f
NEBRASKA:
i During this period, 1 Federal savings and loan association was admitted to
membership in the System.
256
Plattsmouth:
Plattsmouth Loan & Building Association.
Federal Home Loan Bank Review
• . t . f OVCKHHEHT PRINTING OFFICE i 19S8
FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK DISTRICTS
-{OW
©
BOUNDARIES OF FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK DISTRICTS.
FEDERAL HOME LOAN 8ANK CITIES.
OFFICERS OF FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANKS
BOSTON
CHICAGO
B. J. ROTHWELL, Chairman; E. H. WEEKS, Vice Chairman; W. H.
NEAVES, President; H. N. FAULKNER, Vice President; FREDERICK
C. E. BROUGHTON, Chairman; H. G. ZANDER, JR., Vice Chairman; A. R.
GARDNER, President; J# P . DOMEIER, Vice President-Treasurer; CON-
WINANT, JR., Treasurer; L. E. DONOVAN, Secretary; P. A. HENDRICK,
STANCE M. WRIGHT, Secretary; UNGARO & SHERWOOD, Counsel.
Counsel.
N E W YORK
D E S MOINES
GEORGE MACDONALD, Chairman; F . V. D. LLOYD, Vice Chairman;
G. L. BLISS, President; F . G. STICKEL, JR., Vice President-General
Counsel; ROBERT G. CLARKSON, Vice President-Secretary; DENTON
C. LYON, Treasurer.
C. B. BOBBINS, Chairman; E. J. RUSSELL, Vice Chairman; R. J. RICHARDSON, President-Secretary; W. H. LOHMAN, Vice President-Treasurer;
J. M. MARTIN, Assistant Secretary; A. E. MUELLER, Assistant
Treasurer; E. S. TESDELL, Counsel.
PITTSBURGH
LITTLE ROCK
E. T. TRIGG, Chairman; C. S. TIPPETTS, Vice Chairman; R. H. RICHARDS, President; G. R. PARKER, Vice President; H. H. GARBER,
Secretary-Treasurer; R. A. CUNNINGHAM, Counsel.
W. C. JONES, J R . , Chairman; W. P . GULLEY, Vice Chairman; B. H.
WOOTEN,^ President; H. D. WALLACE, Vice President; W. F. TARVIN,
Treasurer; J. C. CONWAY, Secretary; W. H. CLARK, JR., Counsel.
WINSTON-SALEM
TOPEKA
S. F. CLABAUGH, Chairman; E. C. BALTZ, Vice Chairman; O. K. LAROQUE,
President-Secretary; G. E. WALSTON, Vice President-Treasurer; Jos. W.
HOLT, Assistant Secretary; RATCLIFFE, HUDSON & FERRELL, Counsel.
G. E. MCKINNIS, Chairman; P . F . GOOD, Vice Chairman; C. A.
STERLING, President-Secretary; R. H. BURTON, Vice President-Treasurer; JOHN S. DEAN, JR., General Counsel.
CINCINNATI
PORTLAND
THEO. H. TANGEMAN, Chairman; WM. MEGRUE BROCK, Vice Chairman;
WALTER D. SHULTZ, President; W. E. JULIUS, Vice President; DWIGHT
F. S. MCWILLIAMS, Chairman; B. H. HAZEN, Vice Chairman; F. H.
JOHNSON, President-Secretary; IRVING BCGARDUS, Vice PresidentTreasurer; Mrs. E. M. SOOYSMITH, Assistant Secretary.
WEBB, J R . , Secretary; A. L. MADDOX, Treasurer; TAFT,
STETTINIUS
& HOLLISTER, General Counsel; R. B. JACOBY, Assigned Attorney.
Los ANGELES
INDIANAPOLIS
F. S. CANNON, Chairman-Vice President; S. R. LIGHT, Vice Chairman;
D. G. DAVIS, Chairman; J. F. TWOHY, Vice Chairman; M. M. HURFORD, President; C. E. BERRY, Vice President; F. C. NOON, Secretary-
FRED T. GREENE, President; B. F. BURTLESS, Secretary-Treasurer;
Treasurer; VIVIAN SIMPSON, Assistant Secretary; RICHARD FITX-
JONES, HAMMOND, BUSCHMANN & GARDNER, Counsel.
PATRICK, General Counsel.
@FedFRASER