View original document

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

r::::=:=:::::~::~=:::~~:="~:::;::~~lIIaullillttlUl::~~::'n:=~:::::::::::::,~=::::::,:~:::~:::::::::~:I~::::!::::II::::::::::::::::f"'I'~:::U-::~I:::!::~I:::::::"::::I:::::J~I'I'II::I~,:t~,I"I=:~::;:~1'1111:;~

I!

!I

=~

~~

I~

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND
INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

I;
iE
il

II
ji

IN THE

i=

~~

ELEVENTH FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICf
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS

e!
I§

Ii

!I
i;

g
=5
~!

==

II

II

LYNN P. TALLEY. Ch.irman end F.d.ra1 R...Ne A,ant

=~i

¥J!
aE
~e

(Compiled July 15. "J 23)

ii'IH'IIIIIIUWli1W11IU ' UUlUUWIAUU
UllUlftllWURI ' ',UII&IIIJIIIIIlUIIJIIU'OUItUMUIIWUIIIWlUUUUIIUI' UIII,IIIIIIJIIUI,UI"IU1IIIIIUU"IUIIIIJJIIUlUIMIIIlDlJlt'UUln, """'"tlIIIWI,n_ UI1U41I1I1"IIIUI....U_Ullulw~mul..........'*"II....UIi
Lill1tUl4UWUlUIWIIiWimlwuuulWJummwwltu.. tlIIlUIIJlMI'" IWnlWllltttlfJtWllllUhUItIIIM'U"llllllllIIIUUIIUudIUIUU" IIIUUIIIIIIHm mJIIIIIUlllltlH"flUWWJWJIIIUUI"U m.iiJIUIUlUlDlIIBUI
UIIUJIllifl,m UUlutlllll .IUIII II'WlUIIllMWWWn"I.~

E

i

Volume 8, N". 6

Dallas. Texas. August I. 1923

THIS COPY .aLaA.SaD .POR PU_LJCATION IN APT.RNOOH PAP •• S

JULY

30

DISTRICf SUMMARY
IUUWlIUlPjilnluul........1IWUJWDH

i

I

UWlIIIWftWljlI.WUMUt"W"lu... II ..mtIW&&l:lllllllWltntUUluu.uWWlIIWIIUIIltDflIIWUlltJUIll .... '".UlllilllIlWUlUiWMt IU.....II

JUlWlIllmIUU"I"'IJI,"III IUitUlIlItNMUJNllllUiIlI l ~UUiIIUIIIUWUWUli

i

THE SITUATION AT A GLANCE
Eleventh Federal Reserve District

i
i

I

E

!

;
i

A
..

June

Bank debits to individual aceonnts (at 13 cities) ..•.... ~ ........._._

I ~~~B!:l~~~~ember-banks at-end of mo~th..::~~===_
I Reserve Bank ratio at end of month- __ ..___ .__.__........

I

I

$569,142,000

May

695,142,000

······ .. ··33;931.450
-······--0;329;881
3
47.0%
48.7%
Building ~rmit valuations at larger centers._...................__......
6,605,734
7.004,676
CommeI'Clal faila.ru (Number} _ ...._ ....._... _ ...__ ._..._ ... _. __ ..
97
78
Commercial failures (Liabilities}_.. _ .. ___ ....._....... _..._.._ __ .
1,293,018
8.779,969
Oil production (:barrels) ----.- - - ....- --.-----.- - ..--11 911,230
11,771,760
Lumber orders at pine milla (per cent of normal production)
•
76%
86%

IDe. or Dec.

Dec.

Pnec~'

Dec.
Dec.
[nco
Dec.
Inc.
Dec.

4.4%

~~:~~

i

i
i
=
i

1.7 points
7.1%
24.4%
66.8%
1.2%
10 points

&&111 .....11111111111 ltiiililllIUtimIlDlUmlltflllmnUrtUllmnllnmnUiUII.U, UUIllIIi'UUIUllllllUllllltullllllltunltlllllUllnlllllUmllTllUll1l1n'IlI'lIl1nm'lIItllIlHIlIlIIIIIUUU,Utf"IIIItUlllllfllnUlllu"n JUII1I1IUfII ' "I1I1tUlllutlllUlIIlllIlJli.l'ilUltltltllllll&pIlIlUWUl

A healthy decline in the Eleventh District's business mortality rate was the most significant feature
of the Southwestern business situation during the
month of June. The aggregate indebtedness involved in the district's commercial failures for that
month was 65 per cent smaller than the total for
the preceding month, indicating that the CUI'rent revival of business has injected new strength into the
financial position of mercantile concerns and brought
about a more normal percentage of casualties.
Business in both wholesale and retail channels,
though affected by the slackening in the demand
that is to be expected at this season of the year, continued in June to reflect the bouyant spirit of confidence that has been in evidence for several months
as a result of the district's exceptionally bright crop
outlook. Jobbers and wholesalers are waging an
aggressive advertising campaign in anticipation of
an augmented public buying power that is expected
to develop next fall with returns from the district
cotton crop.

A healthy sign of the times is the volume and
character of the present demand for credit. Between June 1st and July 14th our accommodations
to member banks have increased, in round figures,
from $30,000,000 to $38,000,000; and the composition
of current rediscount offerings clearly indicates that
the demand is based on industrial and business
operations of a more normal character than has' been
visible in this district since pre-war days. Texas
now has in prospect one of the largest and most
profitable cotton crops it has ever produced, which
of itself would mean a prosperous year for the state.
An unusual feature of the agricultural situation,
however, is the fact that prospects for all other
crops are almost equally as satisfactory.
Labor appears to be fully employed, except for
small surpluses in the supply of oil and lumber
operatives.
Building statistics for June reflected another moderate decline in the volume of construction work in
the larger centers. At the same time, the value of

This publication was digitized and made available by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Historical Library (FedHistory@dal.frb.org)

2

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

contracts awarded last month continued well above
the figure recorded for the corresponding month of

e

last year, and the building trades are still finding
ample employment to keep them busy.

CROP CONDITIONS

The past month has witnessed a continuance of
the favorable crop conditions in this district reported
in last month's REVIEW. While the government's
estimate of the condition of the Texas cotton crop
on June 25th, 77 per cent of normal, showed no
change from the previous month's condition figure,
it was regarded as a very satisfactory showing, the
percentual condition of the plant being 5 points
higher than that of June 27, 1922, and one point
higher than the ten-year average. Based on an estimated acreage of 14,077,000 acres, the Texas production for 1923 is indicated to be 3,910,000 bales, or
an increase of 25 per cent over last year's production.
According to the United States Department of Agriculture the condition of the Texas crop is more favorable than that of any other important cotton-producing state. An unusually advanced state of cultivation is observed in Texas, where the plant is strong
and vigorous as a rule, and fruiting well.
Weevil infestation, though reported in many sections of the district, has not yet developed alarming
reports of damage. The plant in most sections, however, is just reaching the stage of development (the
formation of squares) in which it stands in greatest
danger from the weevil and other insects, and the
next thirty days will be the critical danger period
, with respect to the insect menace. A continuation of
the present dry, hot weather will go far towards
reducing the activity of weevils and worms.
The district is now harvesting one of the most
satisfactory grain crops it has grown in several
seasons. The small grain yield in Texas is about
twice as large as that of 1922. Favorable reports
are also being received in regard to feed crops.
New Mexico reports indicate that that state will
produce a larger crop of cotton, corn, wheat, oats,
hay, and potatoes than was produced last year, due
largely to better weather conditions, particularly in
the eastern part of the state, where beneficial rains
have greatly improved the situation.
Louisiana upland cotton showed substantial improvement in June, although excessive spring rains
delayed cultivation and the crop will be two to three
weeks late. Louisiana farmers are complaining of
a shortage of farm labor, although elsewhere in the
district the supply appears to be ample.
Southern Oklahoma reports the need of rain, but
the crop outlook in that section generally is much
more promising than was the case a year ago.

On the whole the district's crop outlook seems to
justify the belief that the year 1923 will be an unusually successful one for the farmers. The only
serious complaint that is being made is that corn
has suffered from the scorching heat of the past
three weeks, and needs rain to insure the proper filling out of the ears in the final stages of maturity.
Nevertheless the crop is sufficiently advanced to
make a fair yield reasonably sure, and unless subjected to an unusually prolonged period of heat and
drouth there is little danger of a complete crop
failure.
Cotton
Movements

Receipts, exports and stocks of cotton at the port of Galveston established new low records during the
month of June. The season's exports, to June 30th,
were 140,000 bales below those of last season. Stocks
on hand at the end of the month amounted to only
46,628 bales, while the total number of bales at all
United States ports was only 306,033 bales. Great . Britain's takings of American cotton continue to lag . .
far behind those of the Continent.

=

IlUUJIIUtllllllt.lnnllltlllll1llUIII1IUlllUUIIIIWUUULUlUIIIIIIUIJIIII1II1IUlllll lunllUUllnmIIlIImlllU]UIIUIlIUIIIIII IIIIIIHlIIIJII U!,.

~

= COTTON MOVEMENTS THROUGH THE PORT OF II

~

I
§

GALVESTON
1une

June

1028

1922

A:~.t to
5.......,1>

~

J:.:Otb I
8"""01>

§

~ Gross Receipts ...... _
32,221 115,5802,375,527 2,515,274 ~
Exports._.__ ._...........
5'7,614 182,9142,398,6342,628,309 §
§ Stocks, June 30th.. ..... _~ ...... __...........
46,628 129,662 §
~

iiIlIllIIllIJII1I1II1lIlIIiIIlIIlIllIlUUIIUlUUIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIUIIJUIUllJlIIIIIIIIJIIIUllU!1IJ1IllnUlllmII1UIIII IIUIUUIIIIIIIIJUUIIUUIIIIu:.
:: IUtnl l llntlU I lilUlIIlInUII I UIIIIlIII1I1111nU I Illllllllllllllllilltlll1mlUIIIIIIUJIllmi111t1ll'"111IJ1 1111IUUlmUllllllnIlIIlIllIIIllUIIJIIII~

§ SEASON'S RECEIPTS, EXPORTS, AND STOCKS AT
g
ALL UNITED STATES PORTS

I
1_

~

~

=~, t.:t~~.{~~:::: '1~~ "'i:~i I
r::!~~~~y{~':::::::::::: 1'~~~:1~~ 2,~~~:~~~
Ie

Mexico ......................

19,185

2,150

L,~;,,~~:~~7L~,;.,_,,~,;,;~:;~,;~,~,~,j

IF" G~a:::~::~T:~:.:~AT~·t~ '·~·~i~ I
:""l1l11l1lllUlUwuuunUIIIIIIIIIIIIlI IIlIl IIIIIllU l lllnUIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIUIIIIUtllIII1111 1
111IUIIIIHUJllIIIIIUllllllllllUl l rII,'IIIIIUUI,t

~_! ~~~ !fh~ef~;~ig';;"p~~t~::::::::::::::::::::.
For coastwise ports ...........................
~
~

In compresses......................................

i.,~g~ 1~,,~~~ ~=~

31,1 '78

96,147 ~

=

'"nlfn"'U1I11;,I~I~I~I I;:.;:.;:I;:I;:I;:.; I; I; ,; I; I; I; ,~:;:I;I; I:;I; :~:I; I:;I;""""III"'~~':~~~If"III!I:I~'::::,J

3

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL. CONDITIONS
LIVESTOCK
The need of rain is beginning to manifest itself
throughout most of the ranges in West Texas, the
Panhandle, New Mexico, and Arizona, according to
reports of local observers. Livestock in Arizona has
suffered from a shortage of grass and stock water
during the past month, although elsewhere stock is
in good condition, particularly in South and West
Texas, despite the fact that the ranges are beginning
to dry out. Precipitation during the month of June
and the early part of July improved conditions in
Eastern New Mexico and the Texas Panhandle, but
more rainfall is needed to insure pasturage.
June witnessed a heavy movement of cattle and
calves to the Fort Worth market, calf receipts being
the heaviest of the year, while thl1 supply of cattle
was larger than that of any other month except
May. There was a dearth of hogs, however, and
only a fair supply of sheep. The market on cattle
weakened under the pressure of heavy receipts and
the rather poor quality of the average run of shipments, although a few choice consignments of fed
cattle from North Texas feeding grounds met with
a ready sale at satisfactory prices.
Sheep and lamb supplies were not sufficient to
satisfy the demand, and the sheep market maintained the strong undertone that has characterized
it for several months. Wethers touched a top price

of $7.35, yearlings $11.25, while lambs sold as high
as $14.25, but closed the month at about $13.00.
During the first few days of July there was a further decline in cattle values, but towards the middle
of the month the market rallied and brought price
levels up to about the same point that marked the
close of June.
~UllllltlUUtllnl"'lIInllllll."UIiUlUllllllllllltllllllllllllllllllfIlUIIIlIUIIIUllllllllllllltltIlIIIlIlUIUIlIl1I1t11111 1 IUtlllI l lIllI l llIlIllllIlII~

I
g

I

FORT WORTH LIVESTOCK RECEIPTS

~

=

=

I~:::...:'~~ ~[~~ i~i~ ~i1~ ~~i~: I
i

Sheep .. .. .... 43,437

86,278

L 42,841

18,270

G 25,167

i

3

=

I

!

~lIIlllIIllllIIllllIlI1ll1l11ml"IIIIIUIIIlItlIlI"IfIIIU"UlllllUUUIIIIIIIIUIIIII IUl"1I1l1U1U1"lImlllllllllluIIIIUilIIlIUl I IIIIIIIHIIIIIIHIII"~

;:NIIIIIIUIIII1II1UUIII1I 1IUUWUIIIIIHIIIHltlltluUU.lUUlIUIIIUlIlIlIlIlUIUIUUI.UIIIU..... u'JJ'JW1UJIltUllUUUI/I.UIlIIUIUIUUIUlllili::.

~

COMPARATIVE TOP

_ Beef Steers ............. _.. __ ... _.
~ Stocker Steers ............. _....

Ii~~:~~::;::~::;~~::.~
I .

~:es :=:=::::::::::::=:::~=:::~:=

L1~~:.r~:7;~oo
v

6.60

7.15

1~:~~

l~:~g

i:~ l~fi

jmttIUIlUllllltllmntftlHltlUUfttIlIIIlIUUlU"UIIII· UUluunlllnlllUlllflU ttIlUmllfllIIllU",lfItllllhUIUUlttIUI

=

Jli i
I
6.25

g

l~:gg

unUI.uIIllIUlI:;

WHOLESALE TRADE
Sustained buying in most of the reporting lines of
trade in the face of the midsummer dullness was
the characteristic feature in the wholesale channels
of distribution during the past month, and is a reassuring factor in the tenor of business. Groceries,
dry goods, and furniture reflected a larger volume
of sales in June than during the previous month, and
the sales of drugs and hardware showed only slight
recessions from the previous month. All lines of
trade reported an increased volume of business as
compared to June a year ago. While some irregularity in the distribution of merchandise has been
apparent, the aggregate volume of business for the
first six months of the year has greatly exceeded
that of the corresponding period of 1922, ranging
from eight per cent in drugs to 85.9 per cent in farm
implements.
The uncertainty as to the future trend of prices
is still regarded as a matter of considerable importance. The steadily rising prices on farm implements has had the effect of curtailing demand. In

other lines of trade while generally firm markets
have been maintained, developments are being
closely scanned in an effort to detect a probable
future trend. Meanwhile merchants are displaying
caution in buying, and are showing a disposition to
limit commitments to actual and well-defined requirements. However, there is a large potential demand for merchandise in view of the present bright
crop prospects, and wholesalers are optimistic regarding future developments and are anticipating
a good business throughout the fall season.
Despite the effect of seasonal influences, the sales of ten dry goods
firms were not only 5.0 per cent
greater than those of last month, but were 6.2 per
cent greater than sales during the same month last
year. While the sales of these firms during the
first six months of the year exceeded those of the
corresponding period of 1922 by 15.5 per cent, the
movement of merchandise has been very irregular.
Dry

Goods

4

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

An exceptionally large distribution was obtained during January and February, but the lack of seasonable temperatures and the rapidly advancing textile
prices caused a considerable diminution in sales during March and April. However, with the advent of
hot weather, the movement of summer merchandise
has been more satisfactory. Early in the year indications showed that retailers were making forward
commitments to cover their prospective demand, but
with the ~lackening of retail sales they again turned
to the policy of limiting their purchases to immediate needs. Although dry goods prices are now holding steady, considerable interest is being shown relative to the future trend of the market, and retailers
are exercising caution in present purchases. However, they are buying fall requirements conservatively. The appearance of retailers in large numbers
at distributing centers late in July is indicative of
the improved demand. With the present favorable
prospects in crop outlook and with the interest being
shown in the formal opening of the fall buying season, which will take place early in August, the trade
generally is optimistic as to the fall business.
Drugs

The reports from eight wholesale
drug firms reflect a decrease of one
per cent in sales during June as compared to the
previous month, but a gain of 4.5 per cent as compared to the corresponding month of 1922. The
drug trade has enjoyed a fairly active business during the first six months of the year, sales being
8 per cent greater than during the same period last
year. However, buying has been on a conservative
basis and retailers have followed the policy of supplying their needs as the demand materialized rather
than placing orders for forward delivery. Prices
during the past month remained on a steady basis.
Some dealers reported July collections better than
during the previous month. Indications are that
July buying is some better than June and the trade
generally is looking forward to an active business
during the coming months.

Although conservatism seems to prevail among buyers, the demand has been good for current requirements. Prices in general have worked to higher
levels on account of the increased costs of labor and
raw materials.
The sales of farm implement firms
were 45.8 per cent larger than sales
during June a year ago, but showed
a further decline of 11.7 per cent as compared to
May sales. While the recession in sales from the
previous month is in part due to seasonal influences,
the steadily advancing prices which have characterized the market since the opening of the year have
been a large factor in restricting sales. Despite the
fact that the distribution this year has been practically double that during the first half of 1922, the
trade is still considerably below normal. Dealers
generally characterize the outlook for fall business
as favorable, and are expressing confidence in the
outcome of this year's crop.

Farm
Implements

Reports from thirteen wholesale
grocery firms reflect a further gain
of 1.9 per cent in sales during June as compared
to the previous month, and a gain of 10.3 per cent
as compared to June, 1922, sales. Dealers state that
while the demand for groceries has been good for
the past few months, buying during July has slackened considerably and but few futures have been
sold. Prices on a number of items have been revised
downward. Flour quotations have receded in sympathy with lower grain prices. Sugar showed a substantial reduction during the latter part of June and
the early days of July, but later regained part of the
loss. .
Groceries

The continuance of active business
characterized the developments in
the hardware trade during the past month. The
June sales of ten firms showed practically no change
Furniture
The June sales of reporting furni- from May sales, and exceeded those of a year ago
ture firms were practically the same by 37.9 per cent. The active distribution of hardas during the previous month, but were 18.7 per cent ware during the present year is shown by the fact
larger than sales during the same month a year ago. that the volume of sales during the first six months
Active buying has characterized the trade through- was 35.4 per cent greater than during the correout the first half of the year and sales have exceeded sponding period of 1922. Hardware prices remained
those of the corresponding period last year by 14.7 steady during the past month. Dealers report that
per cent. Seasonal influences have been responsible while July business is showing a tendency to slacken
for a slowing up in sales recently, but indicationsAsomewhat as compared to June, sales are holding up
point toward a good business during the fall season.pwell for the dull season of the year.
.
Hardware

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS
~UIIII_umnumlU:r" IIII"UIUUJlllnuJU"'tt1UU

~

I

IluUlllllnnllmnru.........ununulillUIDIllIIUIUIU

m,JlIIUUmlllla_

,IIIHUII" UlUllllllUuuuuaIlIUUlluUUlllnUII1IU1III1UIltUIIItIlIIIlmlllnu nlmm.Jll1lfi1"'mlllllllflltlWUlUUUJlllmnl,"",,"

Net Sale.

JUDe. 1928
ColllJ)al'ecl with

~

i
i

JUDtl

1922

Groceries ................................___ ._ ............__................ _ ................ _
Dry Goods _..
_ ....... _
.
~ Hardware ___ .................. _ _ ...................... __....._ ........._...._ ..
._ .... _ ....................._
__..................... _ _.
~
Farm Implements....... _
......... _. __ ................. ___ ... _ .._ ................ _ ...
....
Furniture ................................... _ .... _ ......._ ......... _..._.......... _..._. __ ..
Drugs ..._ ......._ ....__..._ .._ ..... _ .._ ..................._ ..... _ ........... ___

i t ·iIUlllnUUIfIIIIIIUI'ltltilllItIlINtUm llU,m "iIIf

1IIIItlUUWUIUJ Nm "llUllinvurrrmnmnl

hun,,,,,,nmllllttliit

+10.3
+ 6.2
+37.9
+46.8
+18.7
4.6

+

m4a.mnw ,n,..,.'IIIIIIIIIIUUllntmH

-Net Sal_
J aD1lAr7 1 to elate
compared with IllUDe
period Jut 7e&r

11&7
1828

+ 1.9

+ 5.0
,,3
- 11.7
+ .S
- LO

-Stocb-

JUDe. 1928
compared with

June
1828

+14.7
+16.5
+36.4
+85.9
+14.7
+ 8.0

Jnj,

"
!
g

CONDITION OF WHOLESALE TRADE DURING JUNE, 1923
Percentage of Increase or DecreaBe in

I

I

6

11&7
1822

+20.4 - 5.6
+46.'1
+ 9.9
+20.2
1.8
- 8.8 - . 8
_ ._ .__ ~ . _ _ _
+13.5
+.6

+

~

i
,;;
!!

~

~
~

=
1_

_

~

IHlnmnllftOllUDllllnlTlllmmlnmUIHIIHIIII,nllllllml1lUll1nlllllllllllU'tllltRUIllIIIItA,nmm"nJJ

RETAIL TRADB

A sharp reduction in retail distribution occurred
during June, when the net sales of twenty-two Texas
department stores declined 13.1 per cent as compared to the previous month. This decline, although
seasonal, was larger than usually takes place at this
time of the year, but is accounted for by the fact
that sales showed a larger increase in May than normally occurs in that month. June Males were 3.5 per
cent greater than during the same month a year ago,
indicating that a satisfactory business is being obtained. From the appended chart, which shows the
monthly fluctuations in total sales and credit sales
for the years 1921, 1922, and 1923, it will be seen
that while the trend of this year;s sales has been the
same as that during the two previous years, the
month-to-month changes have been more pronounced.
Stocks on hand at the close of June were 6.1 per

cent less than those on hand at the close of May,
due to the fact that department stores feature clearance sales at this season of the year in order to
move the summer goods in preparation for the new
shipments of fall merchandise. However, the stocks
of these stores on June 30th were 8.1 per cent larger
than those carried on the corresponding date of 1922.
The ratio of stocks to saleM for the half year was
444.2, as compared to 456.8 for the same period a
year ago.
The ratio of outstanding orders to last year's purchases was 6.0 per cent on June 30th as compared to
6.4 per cent on May 31st and 5.8 per cent on June 30,
1922.
The ratio of June collections to accounts receivable
on June 1st was 38.1 per cent, as compared to 39.3
per cent during May, and 36.2 per cent during June
a year ago.

TOTAL SALES AND CREDIT SALES OF TWENTY·TWO TEXAS DEPARTMENT STORES DURING 1921, 1922, 1923

6

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

iUnmllllUlluumllllnmmlDmmnml\lUUUUJllnUtfhhlinUllttllllilnnnlltlUllllll1l11lUII1IH'.IUllllllllltllUIIUII,Utllllllltlllllt JlllllllllltlmmUl1IllUllatHlIIKUUllIIlI1'Ullllllln

~

i
~

~

~

~

~

=
5"

=~:
II

1111.1

IlIlIInlflllllltlUlnlJllllmtimnlUllllmflnllnnlllllUlIiUmllllllWnttrlM1~

§

BUSINESS OF DEPARTMENT STORES
Total SalesJune, 1923, compared with June, 1922 ........................... .
June, 1923, compared with May, 1923............................. .
Jan. 1st to date compared with same period last year ..
Credit SalesJune, 19,23, compared with June, 1922 ..... .
June, 1923, compared with May, 1923............................. .
Jan 1st to date compared with same period last year .. \
StocksJune, 1923, compared with June, 1922.............................. \
June, 1923, compared with May, 1923............................. .

! ~::: ~~ ~~~~:~~e:;-ci~~-·t~·l~~t··;~~;~·~;~·~h·~~~~:::::::::::: I

! Rati~u~~~~din~l~~~~n:e~, \92L~~.~~~~~~~~~. ~~~. ~_~~..1

itrllll"'illlllflllln-ffmmll1mltllllllIIII11U 'llIIuURIllmnIUUlulIllIlIIlI~urnIUIUHIII'~"'JIIUIIIIUIllIUIIIIIIIUIIIIIIII""IIUlllllil"lIIt1.II"n'

FINANCIAL
A further seasonal decline in the volume of public
spending at the principal cities of this district as
measured by charges to depositors' accounts occurred during the month of June. Debits to individual
accounts at these centers amounted to $569,142,000
as compared to $595,142,000 during May, and $563,427,000 during June a year ago. While debits to in-

DaHu

Ft. Worth

~

+

5.0
-16.4
+ 7.8

+ 6.6
-11.4
+ 6.2

+
+

+ 2.4
-21./)
+ 9.9

+17.2
-14.0
+15.6

+13.3
- 1.0
+16.2

+

+

-

2.7
1.7
2.8

9.9
4.5
449.9
6.1

6.3
- 4.4
482.3
7.0

-13.6
417.7
6.3

34.0

-

i
i

All
Otb.".

Houotoa

39.2

41.2

u )

+ .6
-17.4
+ 4.7
+ 6.8

+ 3.5 §
-13.1 !
+ 5.7 ~

+13.0
4.3
435.0
5.0

+

8.1 ~
- 6.1
444.2
6.0

44.2

38.1 ~

-25.0
+12.3
~

;:

:1!

+

7.5 i
-17.7
+12.3 ~

I
i

f
I

""llliDn'_"1 ,mIlW"'lllUu'n IIWlIlIUitm~IIUIlIII4AUIUl •• mlllDll1lllJmllm_ IIIIIDlflmtml IlIlnIIIlIH"IIna.Jilllmlln.":
m

dividual accounts for the first half of the present
year were approximately 8 per cent greater than
during the corresponding period last year, it will be
noted from the appended chart that there has been
a gradual decrease this year as compared to steady
improvement last year. The June, 1923, total
amounted to practically the same as during the corresponding months of 1922 and 1921.

DEBITS TO INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTS AT TIJIRTEEN CITIES IN THE ELEVENTH FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT
DURING 1920, 1921, 1922 AND 1923

7

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

~llIIltmllllmllllln I UlIIUlUUIJlIUJ1OIIUltmiiUHmil_U I IIiUltllUIllI IIllJUjmllllH.IIInWUWHWUW l liimJUWllIllllIUUlIIllUl UIllWIIIUIUJJUlJtlUUlUlIllUlIUllI llnUlUlUlWltW IWITl1I11I11IUlIlIIlI ll1IlIIhn lllll llllltl lllnnJillllll llmmuulluUlllUlllllllllnnn........

~

.

g

I

CHARGES TO DEPOSITORS' ACCOUNTS

~

a
~

§

=
g

~
e
~

i

I
!
I
=

!

I

~

~

~ntllllllllllllllllrnll"rnIllIlUlUIIIIllIIIIIIllUlliIWJlUlIllJtllIUlJllllllln'UI'tUUIIUU11II11U1l1ll1ll11lttll11ll1l1lllll1l1l111l11ll1ll11lillU1lt1l1ll1ll1Jl1ll1lnU1ll1l1U1l1l11Utl1I111lIIIIiIIlIllIlIIlIhUI,rlIIIIUlUllmllllnnfllllnllll1t1I1UIIIUllllln.,unnmUtHfIllUIIllIllIUUII

Acceptance
Market

The volume of acceptances executed
by banks of this district and outstanding on June 30th showed a
small reduction as compared to those outstanding
at the close of the previous month. Acceptances outstanding on June 30th amounted to $1,195,499.89 as
compared to $1,357,148.71 on May 31st. There was a
decline in the amount executed against import and export transactions, being $454,281.21 on
June 30th as compared to $661,221.07 on May 31st.
On the other hand, the amount based on the domestic
shipments and storage of goods increased from
$695,927.64 on May 31st to $741,218.68 on June 30th.
The Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas increased its investment in this type of paper from $9,179,949.93 on
May 31st to $12,354,595.35 on June 30th.

I
I

Uil1u n n:

Condition of
Reserve City
Banks

Reports from reserve city banks reflect a further decrease of $2,085,000 in loans and $6,395,000 in net
demand deposits. The United States
securities owned by these banks increased from
$60,582,000 on May 30th to $62,914,000 on June
27th, representing a gain of $2,333,000. Their reserve deposits with the Federal Reserve Bank declined from $24,147,000 on May 30th to $22,698,000
on June 27th. It is to be noted that these banks
increased their borrowings at the Reserve Bank
$679,000 during the month. The ratio of loans to
deposits rose from 91 per cent on May 30th to 93
per cent on June 27th.

i!.!IIII11UlllUIIIUJUIUUllilU UIIUU1JIIUJ II,Uuh tUU.llUJLlUUIJIIIIIIIIUIIlUlIlitntIUUIII1UUlI IIIU, II I1I11UII1 ,U,lII l l1nUIIU1n tm1m ,"IIIUlll llltllllU,IUIII IIIUIIIIIII1IIIIIIII ItllU l m nnHilIJUIIIJlIIlIIIIIllIIIUlimllnUIIIIlllllllllnlllllllllllllm UIIIunUIII IIIIIUl uuullll nllll Ullintg

I~: ~~~1:;{f;jiit~~iii~;~ii~i~;~i~~~~~iS :~~~;t.~D ~:~ !;il :ii~~r I
$

=
~

~

~
~

~
~
~

obligations .................................................................................... _.........
6. All other loans............................................................................................
7. Net demand deposits ..... _............................ _.............................................
8. Time deposits..............................................................................................
9. TIeserve with Federal Reserve Bank......................................................
10. Bills payable and rediscounts with Federal Reserve Bank................
11. Ratio of loans (*) to net demand deposits...... .................................
*Loans include only items 4 and 6.

49,024,000
195,088,000
214,175.000
75,806,000
22,698,000
8,163,000
93%

46,927,000
195,820,000
220,570,000
73,667,000
24,147,000
7,484,000
91%

43,154,000
185,264,000
208,737,000
64,964,000
23,072,000
6,758,000
91%

~

~

~

§
~

~
~
~

:'IIU1ll1l11mIJIIUll lllllllltIUI1I11I11III11I1II11I11III1I11II1IIJ1I1III IU,IIII IIUi1lIIIIIUIIIIIIIIUI1Ullll lmlllll~II'IIIIIIIUIIIII"IIIIUllllllllliIiIiDlIIIIIIIImllllllJlmnlllllllrr'lIl1l1l1lt11l1l1ttlllllllllllllllll1llr11U1 ltIIIllJUllllll ttllII'''1II1 IlttllnUJ11l11ulllIIUl rtlllUlllunmllUmlllnu lllIlI~

Operations of
the Federal
Reserve Bank

The continued business and agricultural activities which strengthened
the demand for credit, have resulted
in a further gradual expansion of
loans to member banks during the past month. The
volume of loans outstanding on June 30th amounted
to $33,931,449.98 as compared to $30,329,881.32 on
May 31st. While loans rose $3,601,568.66 during

June, the first half of July witnessed a further expansion of $4,689,142.55, thus bringing our total
loans to member banks to $38,620,592.53 on
July 14th.
The total bills held by this bank increased from
$39,509,881.32 on May 31st to $46,286,045.33 on June
30th, distributed as follows:

8

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

~ 'UUlIIIIHIUUIIIIIIIUlUIllIIU.lllllllllltlIIIIIU

~

IIlIIUIIUIIUUlIIIIUUlIUIIII1I1WIIIUfUtlIllIl1I11IUlllllufllllllnJIIUl1IlUlllllllllllllII{i

§

Member .banks' collateral notes secured by
§
U. S. Government obligations ....................$ 2,405,500.00 §
Rediscounts and all other loans to mem~
ber banks ... _...................................... _......... 31,525,949.98 §
Open market purchases (Bankers' Accept~
ances) .......................................................... 12,354,595.35 ~

I

Total bills held ......................... _............... $46,286,045.33

~

~

~
~

i

iJ"nllllllllUmIilIUJIUI'''l1f1l1ll .&hIIUlrIIl&UlllIUUIIWW'UlIllJllUIIUUWnUln1Inm'IIIIIIIIIUlllllttHl1IUIIHltlfUIYIUlIIIIIIIIUIiItH.

After reaching the low point of the year on May
31st at $26,724,070, Federal reserve notes in actual
circulation began to increase, and on June 30th had
risen to $28,949,770, or an increase of $2,225,700
during the month. The actual circulation of these
notes on June 30th was $2,709,000 greater than on
the corresponding date of 1922. The reserve deposits
of member banks on June 30th totalled $46,241,704.06, or $786,848.05 less than those on May 31st,
but were $435,000 in excess of those on June 30,
1922.
Movement of
The active demand for bank credit,
Loans to
which has characterized the bankMember Banks ing situation throughout the pres-

ent year, is indicative of the more
normal business and agricultural operations, and is
a healthy development in the trend of conditions.
In the agricultural districts the farmers during the
last liquidating season were able in a large measure
to payoff their accounts and notes of long standing,

which in turn enabled the banks to liquidate a large
portion of their frozen loans carried over from the
two previous seasons and enabled business firms to
recuperate from losses sustained during 1920 and
1921. In t'he larger centers the full employment of
labor has had a like effect upon business enterprises.
Consequently the present year opened with a comparatively small percentage of carryover loans. Thus
the present expansion of credit more nearly reflects
the seasonal demand of business and industry.
In the accompanying chart depicting the movement of Federal Reserve Bank loans to member
banks during 1922 and 1923 a marked contract is
observed in the trend of loans during the two years.
The gradual upward trend in the volume of loans this
year shows how the Federal Reserve Bank operates
to relieve the credit strain on commercial banks during crop-growing season. In 1922 continued liquidation was being obtained and during the first four
months of the year it greatly exceeded the new aemands, with the result that our loans reflected a
sharp decline. From May to September there was
a slight upward movement, but it did not reach normal proportions. Thus it will be seen that while
our loans on July 14th exceeded those of that date
a year ago by $6,489,290.69, they represent to a
larger extent credit demands growing out of current operations.

LOANS OF HE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALL AS TO MEMBER BANKS DURING 1922 AND 1923.

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL. CONDITIONS

9

: •.tUtlllllltUlllftUtllUlUlllmUlIllJllllllllllllllllflllllllllllllltllIII1IIU1I11UIlIUIUtlllllllllllll1IIIIIfIIIUllIlIlIIUllllmIIIIllIUIIIlIUIUIIUlUllllllunnIlIlIllUlIIIIIII I,IUllnIlIIUUUUlIlJ llnlllllU 1I111111 1111111111U1I1 IIIII11UII IIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIJ IIIIIIIII UIIII III IIII IIIIIUUl tfllIlUIIIIIUU1111.2

I
g

JUNE DISCOUNT RATES

;

!

=

=

!

l_~

5

=

~

:"~
~

;
I
"
I

I
~

I

~

f

:;

I
e

~

I

~mlllltllllnlUIUlUtl1UJlllllluUJIWt1WnUIIIJ.lII1If1I1I1InUlllltlUlllllllllttlilliltlll1tl1l111l1l1U1tl11l1li1l11ll"nJlllllllllllllllilIlIllIUJllulrrnlllmnmllllrllll""llJIlllIIllllII1III11II1I11ItIIllIIlIllIIUlIllIt"tnn1I1U1I1I1fI01TJ1l11nun.U11nnllmIlIlIlII)III11.111l1l1tlmlll~Ultllnllllllt~

Savings
Deposits

Savings deposits on June 30th, as
reflected from reports from 113
banks which operate a savings de-

partment, show an increase of 1.6 per cent as compared to those on May 31st, and 17 per cent as compared to those on June 30, 1922.

:;UlllllllltilllllllllllllllllllUllllllllllllltIllIlIIlIlIlIlII llIIlIlIIUllll llthlllllmnUHIJIllI I1IIIIIIIInnllllllllllillllll1IUIIIWUlltUlUUWIIIUlUIUlUillUIIJJnlllllUllllflllllllllllllllUIIIIIIJIIIIII11I111111111lflUIIIIIJlAIIIlIIIIIIII1111111111 1111111 1
tllll1lIJllllllllllllllnlllHIlltlllUl1I UUI1111111tllJl

=
~

I

5':

~=_

=
~

SAVINGS DEPOSITS

E

Number of
RcPOrUnJr
Bllnb

~~~~~~-~. =~.:~:~.:::.=.=.=~:~. ~. . ~. :::. ~. . . . . ~."~~.",~,,. . . ::
Dallas ..... . . . -..... ..- . . . . . . . . . . . . . _
................_ *--_.............
.............
EI Paso _......._............. _..._..... _ ....... _ ...._ ....... _ ...................
~

~

Fort Worth ...... -- ........... --.-........ --.---..- ........... .... .....
Houston ..._._--.....,. .................................... _-.-._- ..............__ ..........__ ..........-.
~

~

Son Antonio .._ ....... _..............................____ . ___ ._ .....
Sllreveport ... _ ... _.. _. __..__........_ ........ _._....... _ .. __ ._ ..
Waco __ ........ _... _............ __ ............ _ ....... _. __........ _._._
Wichita Falls - ... .......... ---.- ............. ....... .... -.......
......
All others ........_._ ............................... _ ............... _....._..... _.

--

~

_

Total ..... .............

__--.._

-

........................

-~-~.--.--

-

3
3
6
5
446
4
5
4
69

_ ..•.-..-._."' ..-.-..-..-.. - -._._
113

June 30,
1923

June 30,
1922

I

Ine.or
Dec.

May 31,

1928

Ine.or
Dec.

E
i

s
i

1,811,383
1,618,558
1,369,758
1,130,497
11,157,159
8,016,9°°1
7,295,538
6,867,469
6,277,713
5,697,501
12,745,198 11,396,098
9,466,430 1 8,781 ,842
7,992,962
6,887,757
2,357,679
1,697,142
2,323,950
2,051,842
22,456,237 18,714,893

1,733,061
+11.9
1,321,785
+21.2
+39. 2 10,7 6,473
'7,188,062
+ 6.2
6,026,889
+10.2
+11.8 12,571,497
9,218,971
+ 7.8
7,936,361
+1 6.0
2,268,206
+38. 9
2,631,440
+13.3
+20·°1 22,289,1 93

+ 4. 5 ~
+ 3.
+ 4.
+ 1.
+ 4. 2 E
~
+ 1. 4 "
2
+
+
+ 3
-11
+ .7

85,254,007

+17·°1 83,901,938 1

+ 1 .6 ~

1

72,860,499

II

:
n
1
"

?'llIIul,m.lltl,n,m llllllll,nu IIJnuIIIIIUllIIlIlIUIIIIIIIIIIUUIIIIIIIIIIIIUlliII1J1UUIHIIIIIII'IUll lllfIIl,"fllllT 1
,lnl1 ll11ll1 l ' IIIII"IUIIIIIIIIII'IIIUlllllllUtlilllt1I"IIIUIIIUIIUlIlIllIl1(jIllUI'UlU l unUIIlUUIlIUlllll llllllll l lllll l ftllll ll 'IIIIIUI IIIIm l l'III,,"nU II' IIIU IIII III 'Ull muwuu.;

FAILURES
The insolvency statistics compiled by R. G. Dun
& Company show that there were 97 failures in June

as compared to 78 in May, but there was a decided
reduction in the indebtedness of defaulting firms.
The liabilities of these insolvent firms amounted to
$1,293,018 during June, as against $3,779,959 for
May, representing a reduction of 65.8 per cent.

The statistics for the six months period disclose
that while the number of insolvencies declined 36.0
per cent from the record-breaking number of failures
during the first six months of 1922, the amount of
money involved in these failures was only 3.8 per
cent less.

10

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

...'''lIIlIlllInUllllllllIlIUUIUllUlUlIlU1IJ11l1llllmUIllWIIUIIIUIUllllUUIIIRIUIIIIIU,llII1UWIIIJIlIlIIlIlIIlIIUUllllllfllUUUUllIlIUUIllUUtulflllUUlIllIlIUUlllltUUlllllltHltnllUlnUUIIUUllUiinUmWlllH UIUUWmJlUmmuwluullllllllllllllJlllrulllllunnmUllllUllUlIlTlTf;

EleYiOlItb

Fedenl

RI!$U'¥e

1923

January . ___ .. _______________________________
February __________________________________
March _______________________________________ __
April .. ________________________________________
May ____ .. ________________ .. ____________________
June ____________________________________________
::

Total, six months __ ...._ .. ________

No.

Amount

Dwt;rict
lU2

No.

ADIo"nt

No.

All F.der&1 R ..en_ Diltrio.ta
11122
lill
Amount
No.
AmOWlt

117
91
91
93
78
97

1,524,107
2,104,596
2,474,504
8,874,897
3,779,959
1,293,018

207
207
107
167
84
114

4,326,594
5,889,143
2,121,725
3,865,301
2,175,351
2,481,679

2,126
1,508
1,682
1,520
1,530
1,358

49,210,497
40,627,939
48,393,138
51,491,941
41,022,277
28,678,276

567

20,051,081

886

20859793
J
•

9,724

259,424068
•

2,723
2,331
2,463
2,167
1,960
1,740

73,795,780
72,608,393
71,608,192
73,058,637
44,402,886
38,242,450

13,384 373,716,338

=

S-UIIUIIIUUllnUUII ,UIIIUIIIIUlIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIIIIJHIIU'JlnIlIIIIlIlUl,11II1I11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111 11111111111111111111'''11111111IIIlIlllIUlll ltllUlIUlIlIlllIlIlIUlIUlII llllUllllllllflfflllfl:11ll lll1l1lJ1l11l ll l1l1Ufllm trnmIllIIIUUtflllllnIllUIIlUUUlUmnnIIU'IUC.
...

PETROLEUM
Despite the continued downward course in the
crude oil market, operations in the oil fields of this
district continued on a broad scale during June, there
being more new wells completed and more new production added than during any previous month of
the year and production being larger than any month
except January. The district's total output for June
amounted to 11,911,230 barrels, as compared to 11,771,760 barrels during the previous month, thereby
registering an increase of 17,307 barrels in the daily
average run. There were 752 wells completed during the month, including 507 producers yielding an
initial flow of 128,837 barrels, which compares to
532 completions during the previous month with
78,332 barrels of new production added from 382
producers. Completions in Texas fields numbered
691 wells, of which 459 were producers yielding an
initial output of 125,087 barrels as compared to 468
completions during May, of which 338 were producers with a flush production of 73,576 barrels.
Production in these fields amounted to 9,423,530 barrels as compared to 9,415,285 during the previous
month.
While the actual production in the North Texas
district fell slightly under the new high mark established for that field in May, the daily average run
exceeded that of the previous month by 2,561 barrels. There were 183 producers obtained out of 268
completions, which made a flush production of 22,340
barrels as compared to 151 producers out of 200 completions during May, which yielded an initial production of 21,268 barrels. The Archer County field
established a new record in the number of completions, there being 130 wells drilled in with a combined initial flow of 13,295 barrels.
Active drilling in the Central-West Texas fields,
which netted 271 completions, including 178 producers making a flush production of 76,349 barrels,
resulted in a substantial increase in the monthly output. The total yield for June amounted to 3,925,830
barrels as compared to 3,803,870 barrels during the

previous month, or a gain of 8,156 barrels in the
daily average production. Although completions
were more numerous in all fields during June than
during May, the exceptionally large gain in flush
production was due almost entirely to the completions in the Corsicana-Powell field, where some wells
were completed flowing as high as 20,000 barrels per
day. Out of twenty completions in this field, 11 were
successful and added 63,360 barrels of new production. It will be recalled that the first deep well in
this field was completed in January, and at this time
development work is experiencing its most active
stage. Drilling operations are reaching large proportions, but it has been necessary to hold production in check on account of the lack of storage and
pipe line facilities. However, work of this character
is being rushed to completion to take care of the
over-production.
The Gulf Coast fields reflect a decline in production in June as compared to the previous month.
The yield amounted to 2,747,590 barrels as compared
to 2,846,770 during May. There were 66 completions, of which 52 were producers yielding an initial
flow of 21,535 barrels as compared to 61 completions
in May, of which 46 were producers yielding a flush
production of 20,510 barrels.
The Louisiana fields registered 61 completions, of
which 48 were producers of oil and gas with an initial
yield of 3,750 barrels as compared to 64 completions
during May, of which 44 were producers of oil and
gas with a flush production of 4,756 barrels. June
production showed a substantial increase, being
2,487,700 barrels as compared to 2,356,475 during
the previous month, showing a gain of 6,909 barrels
in the daily average yield.
Crude Oil
Prices

Lower prices for crude oil were
posted at all Texas fields (with the
exception of North Texas) during
the past month. Mexia and Currie oil suffered the

11

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS
heaviest reduction, being quoted on July 12th at
$1.00 per barrel. This represents a loss of ninety
cents on Currie oil and sixty cents on Mexia oil.
Corsicana light oil was reduced twenty-five cents
per barrel and Corsicana heavy was reduced ten cents
per barrel. The price at Texas Coastal fields was

cut for the first time since the market started its
downward trend, being reduced from $1.75 per barrel to $1.50 per barrel. The posted price at North
Texas fields and at Louisiana fields remained unchanged.

;UUfIIUUUIIUUllillUlfI,IIII1I11IlI I1I11Il1II11I11II1II11II11I11II1U1l1llll1nllllllllllllfllUIiUlU1II.IIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIIUUItUIiWIUJUlltlllllH1ll11l1lt1tt1l1l1l1l1l11l11l1l11ll11l11111I1UIIIIIIUITIUIIIII'III1lIlIlIIfIllIllIlUlllIlIlIllIllUUIIUnllllll1l1f11U1l1l1l1l1lmmlnl'lIffUlU~JIIJIIIUIUIII U I~

;

JUNE

~

OIL PRODUCTION

=

e

1_

N!,i!:"-r."",.

Central-West Texas ....................................
~= TM~xasll Coastal :·············································
Isce · aneous f Iel ds ....................................

2~:'''.

MAY

D.n, . : : :.

3,926,830

130,861

INCREASE OR DECREASE

2~::'7•• 7::~' 0",
Dd"

91,~866

11....1

3,803,870
2,846,770
349,945

9,423,630

814,117

9,415,285

303,719 Inc

2,487,700

82,924

2,356,476

T...,

122,705 Inc.
9111'288391 DDec.
•
ec.

76,015 Inc.

2,7 4 7,~g600
3 36
,'*

a

t

~ North Louisiana ......................................... .

!

~

Totals, 11th District......................................

I--------,~------·I-------~-----~
'I

11,911,230

397,041

11,771,760

8,156
246
74

8,245 Inc.

----10,398

131,226 Inc.

;;

~ Totals, Texas

14. In":" A~,561
,0

121,960 Inc.
95
9 9 ,1480 DDe<:.
1 3,
ec.

6,909

-------I

379,734 Inc.

~
e

139,470 Inc.

17,307

~U""""ftfllnIUIiUlIIUHlJIIIIIIJIUUlIU"lIIlmlllllllllllllllllllllltlllll"'tllUllltllllt"llIlIIUllllllltlllUlmtllillllllltlittlUlIlUllltlllUtllttllllnllllllltllllllllllUlIllUUjlUllIllIIUIIUlliUlUJJlIlIIll l Ulilll l liUlltIlllllJ l Ul1l1ll11l1lll11l11l1llhminnmllfllllIllJIUllllIlIlIJUIl1U1111ll1l1U'
UIIUUIII","'UIIIU1fIIUIJIlIUllllIJI 1IIIII IUIIIIIIIlllllllllllllUlllllillmllllnlllll ll lllill IIImnlllllllll1l1nUJlllllnllllllllllll1l1l1l1mUIlIlIllIIlIlIllUIIIIIII,nnmnHlUIIIIUfPIlIIJJlUUUIlIlImilIIIlIlIIiIIllUII"lIlIllIlIlIlImllljllllllll ll llllllmlllllllll"III II IIIIUlII~IUIII'IilnUIlIlI1II~

~

~

JUNE DRILLING RESULTS

:;

!
!

Field
North Texas ...................................................................................................... ..
Central-West Texas ... ,.................................................................................... ..
Texas Coastal ..................................................................................................... .
Miscellr.neous fields ............................................................................... _....... ..
Texas Wildcats ....................... ,........................................................................ ..

Initial
Production

C<lmpletlom

26$
271
66
30
56

183

Totals, Texas ......................................................................................................
North Louisiana ................................................................................................

691
61

'*
A59

= June Totals, District......... ........._...................... _ ........ _..................................

752
532

I
~

I
I
i

May Totals, District...................... _ ............ _............................ .......................

86
93
14
40

22,340
76,349
21,535
3,688
1,175

48

232
13

125,087
3,750

607
382

2451
150

128,837
78,332

178
62
30
16

I
I
~
~

~=
~

~
I

'3l1tmlllt1ll1l1l1lltllU,lulllllllllllltiliUI IUlimUllflll1l1l1l1nlllllUlIIlllmUlIUIDIIIUIJIlIl fIIlllfllllflllllUlllllllllllllllllllllltlltllllllllltllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllltUllllllll tJllI11tIIllIlIIlIllIlrtll1l1ll11lt1l1l11l11l11ll11l1lll11l1l1l1lll1ll1l11l1l1ll11un'IUUlIIIIIJT[lIlIIlUlllllllfli11111111111';
iJlflIltIllIUIIIIIIIIIIUII1I1I1U11II'1II1I11II1I1I1'I1II1I1I11I1I1I11I1I1I11111111",1II1I11II11I1I1I1I11t1l1l1l11lJUIUIII1I11IUnnU1I1I11II1I1II111I1II11111111111111111l1ltr1lUlIlIlIIlIlI1n111l1UiIl IfJ1IIIIIIIIInIJIIIIUl1l1JUIIIIIUnllU1UmUllllllltllIIJUli lUlUllllllllluuuunnUlillUIIIIIIII"""lItllllllt!lIl!

§
1-:·

=
=--=

~

~
~
~

if

corsic::~:ht

CRUDE OIL PRICES

~;f~~· J!{~~

~aado-~:~I::;~

~$t~~~' J~~i:

~

....................................
and abOVe) ...........
Corsicana Heavy.................................... .60
.75
Bull Bayou (38 gravity and agove) .... 1.60
1.90
Texas CoastaL. ....................................... 1.50
1.25
Homer (39 gravity and above) ............ 2.00
2.00
Mexia ...................................................... 1.00
1.60
Haynesville (39 gravity and above) .. 2.00
2.00 ~
Currie ...................................................... 1.00
......
De Soto Crude........................................ 1.80
2.00 _
North Texas (41 gravity and above) 2.20
•
*1922 prices for North Texas oil are not comparable with 1923 prices, due to the fact that this oil was not ~
purchased on a gravity basis until December, 1922: North Texas crude on July 13, 19,22, was selling for $2.00 per barrel. ~
I=_-----=e

f

~11II'III I I11I1I"'flltlmlHllnllnlfJnnnlllnmlllllnl1"l1I lll1l11l1nIlI11II1I1111111111111111hllUlIIllIlillunllllllllllllllRllIIlIlIIlIl lII lIUllIIlIIllIlIIlIIIlIllIIlIIlllIIllIlIUIIIIIIII I Ul llll1i1lililllillUllllllllillfllllutHlUllllllllIfIIIIIIIIIIIUllnllUUtlllllUlIIIIUUUlI11111ml IllrnUlI 'IIIIII'Jlffl'~

(Oil statistics compiled by The Oil Weekly, Houston, Texas.)

LUMBER
The summer lull in the lumber industry was reflected in the reports from Eleventh District pine
mills, which showed a sharp decrease in the June
production rate. The actual production of reporting
mills was 9 per cent below normal as compared to
4 per cent during the previous month. The June
shipments fell 8 per cent below production as compared to 10 per cent above production during May.
There was a large reduction in the new orders re-

ceived at the mills during June, being equivalent to
76 per cent of normal production as against 86 per
cent during May. The unfilled orders on the books
of 41 mills amounted to 62,939,457 feet on June 30th
as compared to 61,416,660 feet on May 31st. There
was a slight gain in the stocks at the mills, being
19 per cent of normal on June 30th as compared to
21 per cent on May 31st.

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

12

~mll1flll nmllll nnTIIUnmlllnnllnUlUn",lIImlllmlllllllnlnnllllllnU lllllltlUIlIlIUJllmlllUUllllltlmnllf1I1 I "'ml l lllllllllllm~

~
~
~

Number of reporting mills............
41
Production ........................................ 95.446.503
Shipments _ __ ..... ____ ... __ ._._ ... ____ ....... _ 87,405,179
..
..
Orders ....................... _..................... 79.112.846
Unfilled orders, June 30th__ ... __ .. __ . 62,939,457
Normal production ........................104.355.803
Stocks. June 30th............................252.555.699
Nonnal stocks ................................ 310.534.894
Shipments below production __ ....... _ 8,041,324
Actual production below nonnaL 8.909.300
Orders below normal production .. 25.242.957
Stocks below normaL. ................... 57,979.195

ii
I

~

::

1
_
=
!
~

;;
II

I

cities of this district during June declined 7.1 per

~ cent as compared to the previous month, but was
~

JUNE PINE MILL ST ATISTICS
feet
feet
feet
feet
feet
feet
feet
feet=: 8%
feet= 9%
feet=24%
feet=19%

!
i

19.2 per cent greater than during the corresponding
month of 1922. There were 2,608 permits issued at
~
§ these cities during June, with an estimated cost of
~
$6,505,734, as compared ~o 3,075 permits issued duri
ing May with an estimated cost of $7,004,576.
l!
§
~
~

§
§

,tll llllllll,IUt,III!llI ll lllllllt,lllItIIIIIlII I IIIIIUIII111'llIllUlIIlllllnUlIIJIIlllIIllIlllllmllnIllIIlIllIllIJllIllllllUlllllllmlmnmlllunlln~

BUILDING
The value of building permits issued at eleven

It will be noted from the table shown below that
the valuation of permits issued during the first six
months of this year was 38.7 per cent larger than
during the corresponding period of 1922. The only
cities to show a smaller valuation than last year
were EI Paso, Galveston, and Waco.

,::,,(lImUI- '11111lflllml1IlIIlIllUllllIIlllmnUllmmlllJHIIIIIJIIIUIUlIUJlIIIIIDHlIIllIlmUIlI1I1I11II1l11nmWlm trUlltUlIlIlIlIlIlIJlI.illl11lnlllllllUIIIIII IUIIIIIUIIIIIHlllllllnllllllllllUl'lUU",rnuuunnIImlllIIllIlJlIIUDUIlI1lIlllll1IfllIIITIlIIII1I11flllU11Ulllllnll1nmmtIII IlIllIl IIllC

~

~

I
~

~

BUILDING PERMITS

;

~

~

~

~

!

I

~
~

~

j

l

I
e

~rtlllnmllnlll UlUllIlluwmnlimIUII I IIIIIUIII'"I IU1UIUIllIIUIIIIIUrnllllJmllllll'lIIIrUIIUIiIl1l1UlmlllmrrlllllmUllftlUUllilltIl1lU1UlillilllllllllllllllllUIUllIlIUIIUIiUlUlIlIUUlllIIlI1II11 111111UllllUIIIIIIUUIIIIIIUlllUUIIIIIIUJIUUUllllllllllluumlillUIIIIIIIHnmummu;~

CEMENT
The June production of portland cement at Texas
mills was 10.9 per cent less than May production,
but exceeded June, 1922, production by 21.4 per cent.
The output of these mills for the first half of this
year was 38.1 per cent greater than during the cor-

I

responding period of last year. The shipments from
these mills during June were 13.2 per cent less than
May, but 11.5 per cent in excess of shipments during
June, 1922.

I

.Jllllllll l lrmmIJIIIIIUIII'II"'"l1t1 l l1l1f1ll1nll l l l lllll"I'm""I1~lInllnllnllfiUIII,lIlnnlnll'"I1UllllllmIUIllIlIlIl1l1ll1l1ll1l1l1IllunHllllllllllllllllnlllllfllllll,IIIIUDllmnUIIIIJJlIII11I11UnnUlllUIlIIUUIUIlUllumllnIIlIIUiUlnUIIIIII1II1,IIU1IIIImnllUmllm!II III IIIIIUmUIIIII!

'iinurmmmrnUIiIt

PRODUCTION, SHIPMENTS AND

~~~,';!\~) OF PORTLAND CEMENT

1

IIml lllllrummmrflllII11U1mlllllllllllU l lIIlIll lllllnl1l,lIlIlJllllllflllllllltl l lllllllm"'II""1IIIIUlllllllllllllmIlIUIIIIIIUIIIJ~lIIruIlIHIUUIIUUUlll1lJ1mIIIIU,Ultlllll l fllUI'UIIUII"II,lftllllllllllll!IIIUmllII11I1lIIIIIWII11lIIIIIUIIIIIJlllllllrllll11111"'111111111:

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND

L.~DUSTRIAL

CONDITIONS

13

SUMMARY OF NATIONAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS
(Compiled by /he Federal Reserve Board

Production of basic commodities declined in June,
but employment was maintained at last month's
high level, freight shipments were exceptionally
large, and the volume of wholesale and retail trade
continued heavy. Wholesale prices showed a further
decrease.
PRODUCTION

e

~

I

,

The Federal Reserve Board's index of production
in basic industries, which makes allowance for seasonal variations, was four per cent lower in June
than in May, and stood at about the level of the late
winter. Mill consumption of cotton, steel ingot output, and sugar meltings showed particularly large
reductions. The value of permits for new buildings
and of contracts awarded declined in June more than
is usual at that season.
The Department of Agriculture forecasts, on the
basis of July 1st condition, a large increase in the
cotton crop, a slight reduction in the corn crop, a
winter wheat crop of about the same size as last
year, and a spring wheat crop which will possibly
be about forty million bushels below 1922.
The number of factory employees at work in June
in the country as a whole was about as large as in
May, though a reduction is reported by New England establishments. The proportion of factories reporting full time operations decreased and consequently average earnings per employee were smaller.
Wage advances continued to be reported in June, but
they were not nearly so numerous as in April or May.

.~-~;~:-::::.~~~~:;-~~~=;?L~.:::~:~;:;~
TRADE

Distribution of commodities, as measured by railroad freight shipments, was active throughout June.
The number of cars loaded exceeded one million in
each of four successive weeks, and in the week ended
June 30th was the largest on record. The volume
of wholesale and retail trade in June was about the
same as in May, and continued to be substantially
larger than in 1922. Sales of groceries and dry goods
were much larger in June and this increase was reflected in an advance of four per cent in the Federal

u

of July

~s. Iq~,.)

Reserve Board's index of wholesale trade. This index, which makes no allowance for seasonal changes,
was nine per cent above the June, 1922, level. Department store and mail order sales were smaller as
is usual at this season, while sales of reporting chain
stores were at about the same high level as in May.
Stocks of merchandise at department stores were
reduced about six per cent.
WHOLESALE PRICES

The decline in commodity prices, which began late
in April, continued during June and the first two
weeks of July, and the index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics for June was two per cent less than
for May. The largest decline, amounting to four
per cent, occurred in the prices of building materials,
and decreases were shown also for all the other commodity groups except house furnishings, which remained unchanged. During the first half of July
price declines were shown for wheat, sugar, petroleum, and lead, while the price of corn and hides
advanced.
BANK CREDIT

Banking developments between the middle of June
and the middle of July largely reflected the payment
of income taxes on June 15th, dividend and interest
payments at the turn of the half year, the demand
for additional currency for the July 4th holiday, and
the return flow of currency after that date. At
the end of the period the volume of member bank
and Federal reserve bank credit in use was approximately at the same level as a month earlier. At the
Federal reserve banks the amount of discollilts for
member banks on July 18th was about $100,000,000
larger than on June 13th, but this increase was practically balanced by a decline in holdings of acceptances and government securities. During the month
of June gold and gold certificates in circulation increased by over $40,000,000, and this increase is reflected in an equivalent decline of gold held by the
Federal reserve banks.
Money rates were slightly finner, as is usual at
this season of the year.

14

MONTHLY REVIEW OF BUSINESS AND INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS

INDEX Of PRODUCTION IN BASIC INDUSTRIES
PER CE.T

COMB I OJATION or 22 I OJOI V IDUAL SER I ES
CORRl e no FOR S[A50NAl V AR I AT ION
, ,!JIJ . ' 00 ,

14

160

I

o.

14 0

lZ 0

10

PER C[N T

a -~·

16 0

• ..•-

O ~ ~,
~

120

l Oa

I

iIiiiiiiiiiiiii eo

80

=== - ====

60

40

~O

~.

~':

20
I

I

o
1919
Note ;

B ..... Adopted b7 United Stat. Bureau of Labor Statiatb

60

1920

1921

1922

1923

o

ELEVENTH FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT

"'L...~_"-

N.MEX.

•

I

I

I

I

,
,
I

DAL~AS~

L--,

.....--..ElPu·o-·.J ..1
•

~-"""-.6

'--.,•

~

•

- - -

(8)
•

BOUNDARY OF ELEVENTH DISTRICT
BOUNDARIES OF BRANCH TERRITORIES
BOUNDARIES OF STATES

FEDERAL RESERVE CITY
FEDERAL RESERVE BRANCH CITIES

TEXAS