The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
:.1"1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.1111111111.111111 ... 11111.11111.11111111111111111111111.111'111111111111111111 .. 1111111111111111111111111111 .. 111111111111 .. 1111111111 .. 111 ..... 111 .. 11 ....... 11111 .... 11111111'
E JIII.IIIIII.III •• IIII •• IIIIIII.IIII.IIIIIIII.III.IIIII11'111111111111111111111111111111111111,111111111111.11"".11 .11111. 111111111'111'1"1111'111'11111"'.11.111'.111111111111 •• 11 ••• 1,.11 •• '1.11 ••• 111.1111111111111.,1.1111 ••••• ,."""""11.1:: §
: :
§~
: :
§§
II
MONTHLYRU~~~ESS REVIEW
II
II
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS
I
Ii
: :
~~
c.
Cbi~....
:
CHAS. C. HALL-W. J. EVANS,
C. WALSH,
'oiNU ....... - ,
(Comoit'" J.,y IS, 192')
E
II
A_., .",.., ....". A_"
:: ',1111111111111.11 ••• 1.11.11111.1.1 ••• 1 •• ,11111,11.1111111 •••• 111,,1111111 111 11111.11.1111111'.1'11111'1'1'1'11111111.1111 •• 111111111.111 ••••• 1.11111.111.111.11111111111111'111111111,111,.11111111'1111111111111111111 1 111.11111111111111.11.11111111.":
::
'f"".II' •• II.II.I •• I ••• II ••• II •••• II ••• ,.III.I •• II •• 111.1.1111.,1111111111 "1111' 1.1.1. 111111111111.111111111.1.111111 •• 1111111 11111 11111.111.1"'1' I. '11 •••••••••••• ' 1'1'1.111'111.11111 •• 1 •• 1.1.1'111 •• ,1111'.1 ••• 1.1 •••••• 11.11 •• 11111 ••••••• 11.1 ~~ 1.11'.":
~lume 11, No.6
Dallas, Texas, August 1, 1926
T~~i:r:prn ~~~~;O;a~~~Ii-
July 29
DISTRICT SUMMARY
g:!1 ....... UU .... II ................................. I .... IIU .................... II ....... I ..... 11111 ...... 1111 .. 11111111 .... 111 .......... 1 .. 111 ...... 1 ............... '11111 .. 1111111 ...... 1111 ........ 1111 .. 1 ......... 11111 ..... 11111.1111111 .. 11 .. 11111118
THE SITUATION AT A GLANCE
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
Inc. or Dec.
Inc.
6.8%
Dec.
10.4%
Reserve Bank loans
member banks at end of month ........................................................................ _
$ 12.298,862
$ 10.492.814
Inc.
17.2%
66.6 %
62.1 % Inc.
4.4 po'ints
$ 9.415,714
$ 10586848
Dec.
11 .1%
89
"91
Dec.
67.1 %
$ 1.084.020
$
802.029
Inc.
28.9%
12,897,700
12.776.470
Inc.
1.0%
Lumber orders at pine mills (per cent of normal production)...................................................................
87 %
101 % Dec.
14 points. ~
~~~rt~~~: !<>to~:d~v~fe'!~~...~~~.~~~~. ..~~:. .~.~. .~~~~~.~:~·::~·:. . ~.:::::::::~:.::::::~.:::::::::.:.::::. :::~.::~. ::.:".:'.=':"~':.:'~':::~:::'::.:
to
June
$666,282.000
May
$629.084,000
:~::r~~ ~~~i~a!~u~ii:::ad a~f I:~~~h·~~nt;;;:~::::::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::=::~:::::::::::::::::~::~:::::::::::::
:
:
:
[E).IIII'.II.II.III'II •••••••••••••••• II •••• I ....... ' •• I.1.1.1.1.,.,., ••• ,1111111.111.11 •• 1.111.,1111111,111'111111"'11'11"111'1'1111111'11'11'11'1'11111'111"111111111111111111111;11111111111111111111111111111111.111111111111111'11111111,.1 ••••• 1.1'8
. The harvesting of one of the largest grain crops in the
history of this district, the bright prospect for feed crops,
and the excellent growth of the cotton plant have injected
new life into business. The yields of grain crops have been
unusually heavy and in many sections they are exceeding
earlier expectations. The marketing of the wheat crop is
rel.easing a large volume of funds, the effect of which is
beIng reflected in the liquidation of indebtedness and an
expansion in the demand for merchandise. The recent
rhains have insured a good corn crop and hilVe stimulated
t e growth of other feed crops. In fact, it now seems
rertain that most sections of the district will have ample
eed with which to make the 1927 crops. Reports indicate
that the cotton plant has seldom been in a better condition
for this season of the year, yet the growth of the fruit has
~ot kept pace with the growth of the plant. This condition
IS due largely to the infestation of the crop by the flea,
weevil, and other insects which in many localities have destroyed the forms as rapidly as they have appeared. The
1110st serious damage has resulted from the activity -of the
fl~a, which is spreading rapidly over the whole of the distrICt's cotton growing area. The ravages of this new pest is
caUSing widespread alarm, as the method of controlling it
and the extent to which it may damage the crops are as yet
u~certain. From present indications it seems that unless
thIS insect is brought under control, cotton production this
Year may be materially reduced.
A sustained demand for merchandise in the wholcsale
channel of distribution was an outstanding feature of the
trade situation. While seasonal influences were visible in
certain lines, the aggregate volume of trade was maintained
at near the May level and exceeded by a substantial margin
that of June, 1925. Confidence in the soundness of present conditions is increasing, yet conservatism is the ruling
factor in business as retailers are keeping orders closely
aligned with consumer demand. Department store sales
reflected a seasonal decline of 10 per cent as compared to
the previous month but were 9 per cent greater than a year
ago, the largest gain of a current month over the corresponding month of the previous year registered since last
October. Bank debits to individual accounts were not only 6
per cent larger than in May but reflected a gain of 5 per
cent over June, 1925.
There was a considerable expansion in the demand for
bank credit during the past thirty days. Federal Reserve
Bank loans to member banks which stood at $l5,4.20,440 on
July 15th, were approximately $4,000,000 greater than a
month earlier and $7,000,000 greater than on the corresponding date of 1925. The deposits of member banks reflected a further seasonal decline of $8,680,000, but the
decline was less than usual for this season of the year. On
June 23rd these deposits were only slightly less than those
on the same date last year.
The district's business mortality rate reflected an improvement in June, there being fewer failures reported than
in any month since July last year. On the other hand, there
was a slight increase in the indebtedness of defaulting firms.
Construction activity, as measured by the valuation of
permits issued at principal cities, showed a seasonal falling
off of II per cent, yet it was 28 per cent greater than in
June of last year. There was also a slowing down in the
district's lumber and cement industries.
CROP CONDITIONS
Crop conditions in the Eleventh Federal Reserve District
Continue to show a steady improvement. The generally fair
Weather during June enabled the farmers to make rapid
progress in ridding the fields of weeds and grass and at the
present time the various crops are in a fair state of cultivation. While some sections of the district toward the end
This publication was digitized and made available by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas' Historical Library (FedHistory@dal.frb.org)
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
2
of June were beginning to feel the effects of dry weather,
the heavy and well distributed rainfall during the first half
of July relieved this condition and stimulated the growth of
were smaller than in May, they were much heavier t~a~ i~
June last year and reached the highest total for any slmlls
month on record.
all crops.
Hog values were again the outstanding feature, of the
The threshing of small grains is well under way but pro· market. Prices were marked up to $15.30 but durmg the
gress has been slow due to the large amount of straw and last days of the month slight declines were registered. The
h
'eSk
the delay caused by the rains. I n some sections were
th e market for steers and cows showed some streng.th at tIm
rainfall has been excessive, reports indicate that the grain when supplies were small but the demand contmued wea
in the fields is beginning to deteriorate. The yields of these as buyers' requirements were generally easily met ~rom t~C
crops have been very heavy and in many instances have available supply. Calves generally cleared ~t. satIsfact? Y
exceeded earlier expectations. On account of the heavy prices. Lamb prices held gener?lly ~teady ~urmg the flr7s~
abandonment of acreage in grain crops last year due to the half of the month with the chOIce kmd selhng for $15.
drouth, the acreage remaining for harvest this year greatly but during the latter half there was a rapid downward reo
exceeds that of ] 925. According to the estimate of the ,De. vision and at the close the best were going at $12.00. Sh~ep
partment of Agriculture as of July 1st, Texas will produce values were generally steady but slightly lower than dUl'lng
32,436,000 bushels of wheat as compared to 6,552,000 the previous month.
.. ,.. "' ....... "'@
bushels last year; 83,662,000 bushels of oats as compared
to 13,419,000 bushels last year; and 7,920,000 bushels of 1':1 ...........
barley as compared to 835,000 bushels last year.
i
FOR'!.' WORTH LIVESTOCK RECEIPl'S
=§
OI01' ..
IIIIII .. hllllll .. III ... IIII .. IIII ... II .... II ............ IIII ... IIII.II1II.IIIII.11
Feed crops likewise, promise good yields. The recent
mins have supp1ied the moisture necessary for the maturing
. 1ate d the growt h 0 f hay nn d grain
of the corn crop an d stlmu
sorghums. On the basis of the July 1st estimate, the pro.
duction of corn in Texas will total 82,623,000 bushels as
compared to 26,809,000 bushels in 1925; the production
of grain sorghums will amount to 38,974.,000 bushels as
compared to 30,875,000 last year; and the yield of tame
E
E
;:;:
;::
CattI e
Calves
Hogs
Sheep
:
{or:
........... ,.. 94, 20 I
............ _. 12.101
................ 16.272
.............. 97.564
June
1925
107020
,
22.630
26.410
25.819
Loss or
Gain
L
L 12819
10' 629
L 9'138
G 72'245
•
8 1••••• 1111 ••••• 1111111 •••••• 11111111 ••• '11.11.111.111111.11111' •• 1 ••••••• '.,11 ••••••
:
May
Loss or §
1926
Gain
~
107,919
L
13646
L 18,71~
1.44D ::
17'129
L
867:
105'430
L 7.866 S
.. " .. :01010111 ""IOIOIOIOI"",,1lI
,,""""""""""""""~
GJUIIllIlIUIIIUIIIIIIIIIIUIIIIIU .. U ........ lllllh ....................... I ..........
:
=
COMPARATIVE TOP LIVESTOCK PRICES
June
June
~~~
::F~~~\:~;;,;~;;;~;;~;:;~~t;;:~~:;~~~;~: t;~; ~~:~:;-;=']'ll ::t'~ 'li~
time in .several yea.r~. During the past sixty days weather
and mOIsture condItIons ~ave be~n conducive to the rapid
growth of the plant, and m practICally every section of the
district it is unusually large and thrifty. On the other hand
d
f cotton 81
however, there is widespread complaint of too rapid pI ani CoUon
The June receipts an exports dO
f rther
h
h
f f
Movemenls
Houston and Galveston showe a u Ih
grow~ at t e expense 0 ruitage and of constantly in·
decline, as compared to the previous mon
creasmg d?mage fr?m the flea, weevil, and other insects. but were substantially above those for June, 1925.
The flea IS spreadmg rapidly, each week witnessina its
appearance
""""""""""",,"""""""'~
b .
d ill additional
b I counties. Extensive effort~ arc S ....
L'ltT'oN :
emg rna e to com at t Ie ravages of this new pest, but it is
COTTON MOVEMENTS THROUGH THE POR'!.' OF GALV.,.".= §
as yet to~ early to determine the results of these efforts.
August 1 to June 30 ~
In many mstances, due to the heavy foliage on the plant
June
June
'!.'his
~:::P ~
and the cool wet weather, conditions are favorable to the
1926
1925
Season
691 §
propagation and activity of the boll weevil. The leaf and
Net receipts ...................... 51.672
~~'m
::m:~~~ ~
boll worms are, likewise, appearina in some sections In
Exports .............................. 109.757
-.
'287:821
73. :,,",S
th "V 11"
.
fT
b
•
Stocks. June 80..................
e . a ey sectIon 0 exas cotton is opening rapidly but
"",Ill
conSIderable damage to the open cotton is being caused by
S
the continued heavy rains.
[!] ..
!!J""II""II"" 111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111 II 1111 II II 1111 II II 1111 1111 '0111 II II II II II II II ' "
·UIIIIUUIIIIIIII .. IIIIIIIII1I1I1I1 .. U ...... UIIIIU ........ III.........
'I:
:·m·m
..1111111111111 ..... 111111111 .....
I!lllllllllllllllll II II 1111111111111111'"11 II 1111 II II II II II 1111 11111111 II 11111111
1111111111111111111111""""""
1........ III ........ IIIII ................ IIIII ...... II ... flll.II .... III ......
LIVESTOCK
.Ran. ge and livestock conditions throughout the Eleventh
Istnct are unusua11 y f avorable. In fact, conditions are
now better than they have been for many years. There is
an abundance of pasturage and stock water and ll'vestock
f
are at.. Th.e ca If crop was generally good this year and
reports In~ICate that the c?lves arc mostly strong and
health'y- Smce the recent rams, indications are that pastur.
age WIll be excellent throughout the summer.
D
M~vement and
The June receipts of cattle, calves, and hogs
Pnces
at. the Fort Worth market reflected a de.
1
d
C me, as compare to the previous month
and the same m th 1 t
Wh 1
on
as year.
i e the receipts of sheep
E
E
E
E
:
§
GALVESTON STOCK STA'l'EME,NT
June 80,
1926
For Great Britain ....................................................... · ~,~gg
For France .................................................................. 16'900
For other foreign ports ............................................ ·· 2'000
For coastwise pO'rts .. ·······.... ······ .. ··········· ..····· .. ··· ...... ··259·221
In compresses and depots ................................·········· ~
i
Total ................ ,..................................................... 287.
:
;:
;:
m.... ·.. ·.. ·..
8
~ §
JU~~25' i
1 400 §
5:fo~ ~
17'600 :
1'079 S
48.
§
tl ... IIIU ..... IIIIIIIIII ... IIIII.I ...... III ... IIIIIIIU .. IU ...... " " " . . . . . . . . . . . .
t;1
"""",,"""":
§
, "1111""""""11"11111111"'0111'"1111"1111""11"1111""""11"11""",,""11"11"""
§
§
~
;:
i:
:
~
;s:279
"""","",,"""
SO" §
§
SeasoP S
4.7~N~~ i
HOUSTON COTTON MOVEMENTS
August Ito JU~:St
June
1926
Receipts- gross ............... 62.464
Receipts- net .......................16.397
Exports .................................. 72.843
Stocks. June so......................
June
1925
1
'82
49.2
~'i~~
4s8e::~~0
Th Is
£.699'.597
1 759 180
'819'677
'
mIlU ........ Ullltlll ........ Uu .......... III1 .. UIl .. I .. UI .. II .... IIIII ...... ".t1I .. I1 .... ..
2'~Sl:071
~
1. 87 681 •
'
............. 11.'.··
.. ,GJ
~
\
I,
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
1¥I-11I1I11 ..... UIlIlIlIlIIlIIIlIl ........ UI .... IIIIIIU ... UIlI ...... UIlIl ... III .. UIlI .. IIIIIII ..... 'IIII .. IIII .... III!J
~
SEASON'S RECEIPTS, EXPORTS, AND STOCKS AT ALL
1::::
:::::.
•
::
a
UNITED STATES PORT!UgUst 1 to June 30
This Scason
Last Senson
REcceipts .......... _................................................. 9,601,258
9,827,682
XpOl·tS: Great Britain ................................ 2,283,904
2,618,178
France ............................................ 885,198
885,899
Continent ........................................ 8,291,608
3,546,682
Jnpan-Chlna ................................ 1,141,919
877,42,\
Mexico ..............................................
45,296
19,916
S
Total fore ign ports ........................ 7,597,926
7,848,044
tC'cks at all U. S. ports, June 80................ 718 .018
851,2a.1 §
C!lIU ... U ..... IIU .. UIU .. UIlIlIIIlIlIlU .......... IU .... IIII ....... IIIU ....... UI.UIIl ....... u
!::.;::. " " " " ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' " " " " " ' " " " " " " " " " " " . . . " " " " ' ' ' ' " " " . . " " . . . . ' . . . .
"'~~"~~~m'::::::""::";~~f~f=:~;~~:'::::~;~""':;;;~:"~
N ew Orleans .................... _............................... 18.00
g ~~:t,n ....:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::: i~:g~
:: Galveston ........................................................ 18.40
r!J ......
(b) in public storage and cc'rnpresaes ................__
17.08
18. 20
17.60
18.06;:
i~:~~
U:~~
I.III.IIIII.IIIIII.I ••• II •• II .......... IIIIII ••• ,II ..... I.11I1I1I1I1I11.11I •• IIIIIIIII.IIII.,.I.ltllIlI.IIIIIII'ffi
rn
. . ' '. . .' . ' . .'. . . . . .
''"'''~~;;~:~~~::::~7:~~:~~=:
~ ~~~~~ g~nj,~':;~dJ~ne."8"Oth.....................................................
~
(a) in consuming establishments ................ __............
,;
......... UIIII ....
I:.
3
' ' '~~~~~~ :~:~~:'
Aug . 1 to June 30
This
Last
Season
Season
June
1926
June
1925
865,467
387,768
4,168.246
............
............
............
............
746,675
2,169,191
",,,,,,,,""'8
Junc
June
1926
1925
Aug. 1 to June 30
This
Last
Season
Season
3,892,970
518.504
494,088
5, 990,069
5,709,491
599,020
586,924
............
............
............
............
1.267,796
2,407,816
1,126,127 :
769,860::
l!IUIIl· ................. IIII ............. II ...... U ......................................................... 111111.111111 .. 11 ... 1111111111111 .......... 1111 .... 111111111111111.1111111" •• 11111111111111.1111111111111',1111.1111111111111111111111IIUII.@
COTTONSEED PRODUCTS
The average price received for cottonseed oil shipped by
Eh'leventh District cotton oil mills during June showed a fur~ er increase as compared to the previous month. The reportIn~ mills shipped 540,470 pounds during June at an average
Pflce of $_1072 per pound as against shipments of 5,279,982
pounds in May at an average price of $.1065 per pound.
After strengthening somewhat in May, the market for hulls,
cake and meal declined in June. Cake and meal sold at
an average price of $27.62 per ton in June, as compared
JO $28.52 per ton in May. Hulls sold for $7.82 per ton in
une as against $9.48 per ton in May.
[!JIII'1t
:
11 .. 1111111111111 ...... 11111 .. 111 ........ 111.1111111111.111 .. 11 ... 1111 .. 111 ... 111 .... 11.11.111111111111111111111'1;)
E
CorrrONSEED PRODUCTS SHIPPED AND AVERAGE PRICE
RECE!VED
June, 1926
::
~., =
~.
~
E
~
Products
A verage Price
Shipped
F. O. B. Mill
E gr de 011 ................................ ..............
640 4701bs. $ .1072 per lb.
k and meal ..................................
E li~li8
11.629 tons 27.62 per ton
: J..'
...................................................
4,498 tond
7.82 per ton
~
Inters .................................................
3,066,961 Ibs.
.0865 per lb.
.IIU .... II ..................... UIIIIIII ....... IH ......... UII .. III ........ IIU ... III 11111"1111'1'11t'1'1111111111 1
:
;;
~
~11111"
@
E
~
E
§
..... II.IIII .. I1I1I1 ..... ,I .... I1 ........ IIIIII ..... II ... IIIIIIIII .. , .. 11 III .. IIIIIII ...... IIIIIIII .............
STATISTICS ON COTl'ONS~ED AND COTTONSEED
PRODUCTS
United States
Aug. 1 to June 80
This
Last
Senson
Senson
=
!:~ CO:~~fl~~ r(c;,~iSv)ed. :iE~:T:j:~;:
Cottonseed crushed
CO~~~~~d' ~;;.. h~;;d'
C (tons ) .......- ......._.
rude oil produced
i::::::.
§
1,872,000
1.661,000
6,518,000
4,692.000
1,888,000
11,000
1,567,000
9,000
5,498,000
4,578,000
89,000
28,000
cn\~eo~~~·~'~ni.. p~~·. 391,966,000
Ii duced
(tons ) .. ..
t ~lIs pr oduced (tons )
""nters Producer
(500 lb. bales ) ...
StoCk on hand
E
June 30:
E gt de oil (pounds )
E l-I~I~ and m eal (tona )
: J..I
(tons ) ........
I!J ...... nters (600-lb. bales)
k
650.000
892,000
291,000
1,085,000
890,000
684,000
45,000
62,000
22,000
8,212,000
18,000
16.000
4,000
4,888,000
282,000
126,000
. 109,000
18,858,000
66,000
73,000
89,000
:
'.,1111111.111'.,11111 •• ,1 ••• 111111.111111 .............................. , •• , ••••••• , ••••••••••••••• , ••••••••••••
9 ... ,1 ••••••••• , •• • 111.,."
..................... 11 •• ,., ••••••• 1••• 1........................................ , •••••••••••
:
1.
TEX'l'ILE MILLING
S~;~~STICS;1~,2051e7
~12':46
[;.l
:
I:.
Number balcs cotton consumed............... 1,608
.• Number
spindles active.............................. 48,760
48,760
49,760.
§ Number pcunds cloth produced ................ 787.609
616,764
786,926 §
~I."., ••• ,.,," •• ,.,.I ••• I•• II' •••• I........... ,•••••• ,••• 1.,111"" """"1 ••• 1.1.,.11""".,1 ••• ,.1.11" ••••••• I••'I!]
WHOLESALE TRADE
Distribution of merchandise in wholesale channels was
well sustained during June. ,seasonal influences were
noticeable to some extent in certain lines, yet the slowing
down was less marked than is usual for this season. Two reporting lines showed larger sales than in May and in only
one line were sales smaller than a year ago. The continued
improvement in crop conditions has created an undertone
of confidence among both retailers and consumers and
the improved condition is being reflected in the gradually
increasing volume of buying. Conservatism, however, is
still the ruling policy in trade channels as retailers continue to limit commitments to well defined needs.
There was a strong demand for dry goods at wholesale
during the past month. Sales showed a further increase of
9.5 per cent as compared to the previous month and were
18.7 per cent larger than those in the corresponding month
last year. There was a good consumer demand for sea·
sonal merchandise throughout the month which made it
necessary for the retailers to place a large number of fill-in
orders. The outlook for fall trade is good.
466,600,000 1,697,838,000 1,898,548.000
781,000
2,667,000
2,110,000
466,000
1,529,000
1,820,000
264,000
last year. Conditions continue unsatisfactory but reports
indicate that there has been a slight improvement in demand. Prices worked to slightly lower levels.
§
E
:
;;
10
TEXTILE MILLING
The
tt.
production rate of reporting cotton mills in this disThct showed very little change from the previous month.
Co eSe mills produced 787,609 pounds of cloth in June, as
ltlpal'ed to 786,926 in May and 515,764- pounds in June
The demand for drugs at wholesale was well sustained
during June. Sales for the month were only 1.5 per cent
less than in May and were 2.7 per cent greater than in June
last year. Reports indicate that buying in the section affected by the 1925 drouth is beginning to show a marked improvement with the outlook unusually good. Prices remained generally steady. Collections continued slow.
The past month witnessed a slowing down in the demand
for implements. Sales for the month were 30.6 per cent
less than in May and 1.5 per cent less than in June last year.
Sales of harvesting and threshing implements have been
unusually heavy due to the large grain crops but the c1istri·
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
4
bution of other implements has been slow. There is some
hesitation in buying awaiting further developments in the
cotton crop situation. Prices remained fairly steady.
The June sales of reporting hardware firms reflected a
seasonal decline of 5.6 per cent as compared to the previous
month but were 7.5 per cent greater than a year ago. Sales
during the first half of 1926 averaged 1.2 per cent larger
than during the corresponding period of 1925. While buy.
ing continues on a conservative scale, dealers report that the
prospects for fall business are bright. Prices showed very
little change during the month.
that sales during the first six months of 1926 averaged 5.S
per cent larger than during the corresponding period of 11
year ago. Reports indicate that country buying has shown
a considerable improvement. Prices are generally steady.
8.11111111111 .. 1111111111111 ............ 111111111 .... 11111111111111111111111 .......
There was a sustained demand for groceries at wholesale
during the past month. The June sales of reporting firms
were not only 6.5 per cent greater than in May but were
15.6 per cent greater than in June 1925. It will be noted
::
::
1111 11111'"I'IIIII1I1I1III1ItIlIIl'~
§
CONDITION OF WHOLESALE TRADE DURING JUNE. 1926
Percentage of Increase or Decrease in
::
J~:.t ~:~est;; ~~~~~~26
!::
- Net Salesi::
June. 1926
da te compar ed
. h
compared with
with same
compared Wlt
§
June.
May. P eriod Last
June.
May. §
::
1926
1926
Year
1926
1926::
Groceries .................... +16.6
+ 6.6
+ 6.8
+8.5
:: Dry Goods .................. +18.7
+ 9.5
- 3.5
- 9.3
·S::
:: Farm Implements ....- 1.5
- 30 .6
-4.5
-3.2
- 1'2 ::
:: Drugs .......................... + 2.7
- 1.5
- 1.1
+ .8
+1 '8 ::
:: Hardware .................. + 7.5
- 5.6
+1.2
+4.4.
. r.t
+~.~ ~
§
[!]IIIIIIIII .. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I III II IIIIIIII IIII 11 11111111 1111 11111111111111111"",11 1I.:0Il
RETAIL TRADE
Stocks on hand at the end of June were 8 per cent less than
While department store sales reflected a seasonal reces·
sion of 10.4 per cent as compared to the previous month, a month earlier and 3 per cent less than a year ago . T~e
they were 8.7 per cent greater than a year ago. The de- percentage of sales to average stocks during the fi.rst Sl"
mand for seasonal merchandise was good, being stimulated months of 1926 was 125.8, as compared to 121.3 dunng the
by the conlinuance of fair weather and widely advertised same period in 1925.
"clearance sales." Sales in the following departments showed
a substantial increase over those for June, 1925: Silks and
There was a further slowing down in collections. The
velvets, Woolen dress goods, Handkerchiefs, Leather goods,
Women's dresses, Misses' ready-to-wear, Juniors' and girls' ratio of June collections to accounts outstanding on June
ready-lo.wear, Waists and blouses, Millinery and Infant 1st was 36.2 as compared to 37.5 in May and 41..8 in June,
1925.
wear.
allllllllllllllllllllln .. . IIIIIII 1111111111.1111111111111111 lit '"11111111111111111111111111111111111111, 111111111111 III I l l ' 1111 III 1'1 II 11111111111111111" 1111111 111111111111 1111 1111 111 11111111111111111111111111111111IIUU" 11I111I1I1I1I111111I11I1t;1
~
Totn~u~:.1l81926.
,
BUSINESS OF DEPARTMENT STORES
compared with June. 1925.......................................................
~al~~ For~~~:th H~S~:
~:_.:_ ~~~~rn~I~~· cc:~g::::: :;~th s~::'~' p1.9r1~d··i~~t y·~·;{r·. . .·. . . . . .. ..·. . . .·. . . . .. . . ....·. . . . . . . . . . . + +lt121S·.:.~197S
..
June. 1926, compared with June. 1925.......................................................
June, 1926. cclmpar.d with May. 1926..........................................................
Jan. 1 to date. compared with ssme period last year.................................
Stocks:
.....
June. 1926, compared with June, 1926.......................................................
::
June. 1926, cclmpared with May. 1926..........................................................
: P.rcentage oC sales to average stock. In
_
-
8.S
7.9
Ip,,~~~;~\~~~:l!il~·?:~: _: ::·~~.:~~::~ ,: :
§ ~:tl~ ~~ J~t~:;a~~\re~tr;::r~o u;,c~':,"~nr:n::~ervu:b~as~~.. ·~;;d..·~;;·t;;t;;-;;di~·g
::
11~:~
June 1, 1926 .............................................................. .................................. .....
8 ..
88.4
+ lU
+10.9
-10.8
+18.7
+lU
+ 9.S
- 18.5
+ 80
.
+ 2.4
_ 7.1
+10.1
_ 2.5
,~~~
~
O~:;'6
=
DT~~~~.7'
+1~:~ !~"': "
8':*
+22.5
- 12.2
+ 60
'
- 11.8
- 12.0
+12.0
- 12 .6
+ 6.4.
-
H
lS~:~
38.5
39.8
9
1
::
:
\~~~ I~
,: : ,: :
4.7
35.0
8.0
8.0
5.1
86.2
::
1 .. 111111 .. 11'11 .. '11111111111111111111 .. 111111 .... 1111'"1111111 .. 111111 .. 111 .. 111111111'"11111111111"1111111111 11111 11111111 1 11111111111111111111111111 1I III I III U I U II III II I IIII,II II IIIII'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11 111 11111111III'1I1111 1 1'lllllltl.1!l
FINANCIAL
The volume of checks charged to depositors accounts at
banks in fifteen principal cities of this district showed a gain
of 5.8 per cent, as compared to the previous month and was
5.0 per cent larger than in June last year. All reporting
cities except one registered a gain over May and only five
cities showed a loss as compared to a year ago . The inc~eas.es are due to the fact that trade and industry in this
d1stnct showed less than the usual. slackening at this season.
There was a substantial decline durin" June
Market
in the volume of acceptances executed by
accepting banks of this district and which
were outstanding on the last day of the month. Acceptances outstanding on June 30 amounted to $1,341,364..4,2,
as compared to $2,035,399.78 on May 31. The amount of
these acceptances executed against import and export trans·
actions declined from $1,386,4,38.33 on May 31 to $721,.
Acceptance
[!J 'IIIIIIIII • • IIIIIIIIIIIII I IIIIIII.IIIIIIIIII".111111111'1 •• 111 11.1 1111 1 111 111111'1 ••
§
1.'11.11'11.11111.1.11"II'IIIIIII~
DEBITS TO INDIVIDUAL ACCOUNTS
(l n Thousands oC Dollars )
June
June
Inc. or
May
~
;:
~;:
119~~~5
Austin ....................$
Beaumont ............ 20 .005
Corsicana ..............
6.486
Dallas .................... 189.809
~ E I Paso .................. 29.846
: Fort Worth .......... 79.318
: Galveston .............. 83.9 21
:: Houston ................ 135.154
;:
:
$
Texarkanll ............ 10.966
'l'ucso'n ..................
9.824
E Waco ........... -......... 11.089
_ Wichita Falls ....... 38.114
~ Tot" l. 11th
§
District .......... $665.282
§
Inc. or :
/G~~~9 ~2er8
$ 1ii.~71
!D~h. :~
+ 10.0
19.676
18.187
7,585'
184.294
31.980
68.761
82.820
123.945
- 15.1
+ 2.7
- 6.7
t15.4
804
+ 9.0
5.946
180.898
80.742
73.388
81 .040
126.094
8.3 ::
4.6 ::
- ~ .~ §
+ 9' a :
+ '2::
7'2 ::
10.016
9.7~2
15.3H
32.440
9.5
.8
- 8.2
+ 2.1
10.650
9.071
12.872
82.451
+ 8 ~ ;:
+ 92'0 §
'.
+ 5. 0
$629.034
, i~:v;;~~fi~:: : : :: : :tm d:m
::
§
fG3 3.G70
+
n
~l~
~H~! tt ·s:i
t
+ 5.
8
§
:
8"111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111 1111111111111111 11111 111111111111' 1111 ' 111111111 U II II II 111111 1I1 ![!l
807.39 and those based on the domestic shipment and
storage of goods declined from $64.8,961..45 to $619,557.03.
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
Condition of
Member Banks
in Selected
Cities
The combined statement of member banks
in selected cities disclosed a decline during the past month in loans and deposits
and an increase in investments. Loans on
corporate securities were reduced $3,266,000 and "all other loans" (largely commercial) declined
5
$1,302,000. There was a loss of $2,796,000 in net demand
deposits and $74.2,000 in time deposits. The investments
of these banks were increased $1,4.54,000. Their bills payab le and rediscounts with the Federal Reserve Bank were
reduced from $3,637,000 on June 2 to $3,215,000 on June 30.
~' II I II"IIIIIIII""II""""IIIIIIIII"'IIIIII"'IIIIIU"1I11I1I11I1I1I1I1I1I11I1f11l1l1l1lII Ilitl 1111 11111111 1111 1111 1111 II .. II 1I1 1 1111111UllllliliflIIIUlllflllfllllllllllllllllllllll U IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII II I 1I1lfllllllUili II III II!l
~4:. g~~~.;!.'IT::~~:.r~~~~==O:~;;;~';~~~~:::~:;:S:'~ SE~ 42~';0:384:,;oiojo'" J;'~ 4",20:g4208~,:o i02io :u~2;,90:~4'761~,;oi o
t:,~~:h:c~~dkty bTI'.dss.anG!,::;~,;:!~e: gwfg~dii~ns::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
I:::.
6. Lonns secured by stocks nnd bonds other t hnn U. S. Government obligations................
6. All other loans .................................................................................................. _...............................
7. Net demand depos its ......................................................... _.............................................................
::••_
~: ~:eerv:e~IT~tsF~d~~~j'
..R·;;.;~~~~ .. B~·,;-k::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::
Bills payable and rediscounts with F ederal Reserve Bank...................................................
§:::
}O.
1.
,;,
Ratio of loa ns· to net demand deposits ..................................................:....................................
·Loans include only items 4 and 6.
68,970,000
227,904,000
261 ,206,000
72,245,000
229,296,000
264,002 ,000
~~:~~~:~~~
3,215,000
78,811,000
212,660,000
255,957 .0 00
l~~:m:~~~
3,637,000
89 %
1:::_:
§:
~~:m:~~~
1,049,000
~:
84 %
88 %
§
1!I"11I.IIU'UIIIlI.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .... UIIlIl .. ItU ... ,IIIIIItIIIWIIlII ... ,111,1,1,111,111.,,111.111 1 1111,11111111 1 , 11111111111.11111111111111111111111111111111 • .,11111 111 111111", 1 1111,.111,1.,1'111111"11111IIII IIIII I,.,IIIIIIII.,I,IIUIIIIII,II.I!]
Savings
Deposits
The savings deposits of 98 banks in this
district operating a savings department
amounted to $111,853,974, on June 30 which
Was 3.1 per cent greater than those on May 31 and 7.8 per
cent larger than on June 30, 1925. These banks were carrying 245,417 savings accounts on June 30, as compared
to 245,674, on May 31 and 229,943 on the last day of June,
1925.
~11I1I""II1I"IIIIIIIII"IIIIII"IIII'"II1I1""I"III""IIIIIIIIIIIII"11I1I1I1I1I1I11I1I .. 1I1I1I 1I '"IIIIIIII II IIII.IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII"III"III IIIIIIIIIIIII' III I1I1II1III1It11 11 10 III IIIIOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII[!]
§
SAVINGS DEPOSI'l'S
N umber of
June 30, 1926
:
June 30, 1926
Inc.
Ri1l:n~!ngN~~~;" of AS.:':i~~sOf NS~:i~gSOf AS~~i~~Of
Depositors
1!~ [i!~-2~=~;l!J;I! lt! ~ I !III!
Deposits
Depositors
:111111111
-- 111,858,974
!!IIII
May 81, 1926
D~~. NS::'~~sof As:.~i~;sOf I~~.
Deposits
Depooitors
:111111111\!1
Deposits
!IIIII
Dec.
:1:1111111'11
+
+
Tcitnl... ..................................................................... _
98
245,417
229,943
108,791,876
7.8
245 ,674
108,608,200
8.1
: bOOnly 8 banks in Beaumont, 12 banks in Houston, 5 banlts in San Ant nio, 2 banks in Shreveport, and 44 banks in nll others r eported t he num.;. er of savings depositors.
§
::
L!.IlIltll l lllllllllflllll ll lll l .,I I III I IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.IIIIIII I . 1 11"11111111111" 1" 11111 1 111"11 11 1111"1 ' 1" ' 1111 1111111111.111. 111 1111111 1 1111.1.1"1 •• 11 1'. 1 .11 1 .11 1 11.1 •• 1 •• 1.1,.1111111111111"111.1111111.,111111"11.11111111tI •• II.,I.1118
~1""I1ItIIlIIlIlIlIUIIIIII'IfIlIlIlIIlIlUIIIIIIIII"""l1ltllllllllllllllllltlllllllll l "" 1I11. I IIII. l lIlI lIlIltlllll l o .IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII.IIIIIIIIIIIII II '1I111t 1111111 II 11111111111 11111111111 111111 II II 11I 1I11t1l 1l1l.1I1!l
§
JULY DISCOUNT RA'l'IDS
Prevailing rates
§
~
I
I
Dallos
~
•:
~
Rate charged customers on prIme commercinl paper such
as is now eligible for rediscount under the Federal
R
Ratees~~v:rg!d\;;'"i~~;;;''' td"oth;;~ ba';-~:'sec~~;;d' by" biils
6-6
§
R~::~~a~~ea~B"·B·~~;;;~d" ·by"p;i;:':;;;"B·t;;~k"·~~~·h·;{ng,;"·;;~"';;th'~~
5-6
:.:
El Pas"
Fort Worth
Houston
San Antonio
~
Waco
_~
6-8
58
-
6-7
5-6
5-6
:
E
5-8
5-6
6 .~
~
current collateral (not includin g loans p laced in other
§
m(~~e~~~~~or~..~~~~~~~.~.~~~~.~.. ~~~.~~~.~..............................
§ Rate (~~ ~:'::m~d'iiy"'p~P;;~"~;;;~;:;;d"by"~~;~i;~'';;;~''~~~;;ij;t;;:
§ R::~' o~"~~tti;;"i;;~~s:::::::~:::::::=::=::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~.
m
ll
§
5-7
7-8
6-8
G-6
5-8
6-7
5-7
6-8
6-8
5'1.0-6
5·8
7
t~
~:~
t~
t~
~:~
.~.:~ . ~
6
~
lll"UIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIUllllllllllllltlUllllllllflIIIIIIIIIII1I 1I111 It111111 1111111111111111111111111111"11111111111111111111111111111 11 111111111111 1 1111 1 111111111111""'1111.1111.1111111111111111111111111.1111111111'1111111'8
Deposits of
The combined deposits of member banks
Member Banks reflected a further decline of $8,680,000
.
' during June. The net demand deposits declIned $10,408,000 but this was partially offset by an increase of $1,728,000 in time deposits. It will be noted that
In June 23, 1926, the combined deposits were only $917,000
ess than on June 24" 1925.
Operations of
the Federal
R.eserve Bank
Federal Reserve Bank loans to member
banks showed a further substantial increase
during the month. These loans amounted
to $1 2,293,852 on June 30, as compared to
$10,492,814 on the last day of May. While there has been
an increase in the deman d for funds from some of the reserve city banks with which to finan ce the movement of the
~:
'_ "
"1111111111'111111111111111 1111111111111111111 1 111 11 1.111111111111111 1'11111111111I1I1"lIll ll lIlIlIlIlIlIlIlIllItlllf€l:_
'
DEPOS1TS OF MEMBER BANKS
:
~
'1.'otal
pemnnd
June 24, 1925 ..............
July 20, 1925 ............ _
Aug. 26, 1925 ....... _... _
Sept. 23, 1925 ........ __
Oct. 28, 1925 ..............
Nov. 25, 1926._ ........
Dec. 23, 1925 ................
Jan. 27, 1926............ _
Feb. 24, 1926 ...............
March 24, 1926 ...........
April 28, 1926 .............
Mny 26, 1926 ......... _....
June 28 , 1926 ..............
,I
-
588,601
681,088
600,664
682,784
667,418
674,607
668,749
659,813
664,008
687 ,392
605,845
698,483
588,075
Banks in cities Banks in cities
'1.'otal with a populn- with a POpulation of less
t ion of over
Time
than 15,000
15,000
iDemnnd Time Demand Time
~1267,143
168,600 261,957
168,110 268 ,000
169,416 296,77'1
166,601 318,302
166,821 322,213
168,290 316,648
167,380 1,308,899
171,024 303,350
169,1691287,084
165,668 272,389
166,099 265 ,61 3
166,827 259,680
8 . 1 111 1111111.111,., 1111111111111111111.11111 1 1111(.111111,.111.1111 •••• 111 •••
47,978
47,648
47,686
48.398
45,861
46,190
44,446
44,722
45,657
45,178
44 ,638
45,085
44,937
821,458 119,240
819,081 120,957
822,664 120,525
886,007 121,022
349,111 120,740
352,294 120,631
352,106 118,844
35 0,914 122,608
360,663 126,467
850,30R 123,981
383.466 121,036
332,870 120,014
828,44. 121,89
:
:
1111111111111111111111111'1111.111.III~IIG
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
6
serve deposits of member banks amounted to $56,563,580
in June as compared to $57,977,130 in May.
wheat crop, there has been a slackening in the demand for
new loans from banks in the agricultural sections coincident
with the harvesting of the large oat crop. There were 312
banks borrowing from the Federal Reserve Bank on June
30, or 48 more than on the last day of May and 104 more
than on June 30 last year.
FAILURES
Totnl bills held .. ...... ·....................................................................... $21.688.236.66
The past' month witnessed a substantial reduction in the
number of failures in the Eleventh Federal Reserve District
but there was a further increase in the indebtedness involved.
The 39 failures reported in June was the smallest number
reported for any month since July last year and compares to
91 insolvencies in May and 44 defaults in June, 1925. The
indebtedness of firms failing in June amounted to $1,034,
020, as compared to $802,029 in May and $526,229 in the
corresponding month a year ago.
There was a slight increase in the circulation of Federal
reserve notes during the past month. The actual circulation
of these notes on June 30 amounted to $35,715,405 which
was $177,400 greater than on May 31 but $2,796,4.50 less
than on the same date in 1925. The daily average of reo
DurinO' the first six months of the current year there were
441 fail~J'es with Habilities amounting to $5,4.89,391, as
compared to 375 insolvencies with an aggregate indebtednes~
of $6,951,566 during the conesponding period of the previ'
ous year.
Due to the increase in our rediscounts for member banks,
the total volume of bills held rose from $20,326,792.16 on
May 31 to $21,683,236.66 on June 30, distributed as follows:
Member bnnk collnteral notes s ccured by U. S. Government
oblignticlns ........................................ .. ......................................... _... $ 1.271.100.00
Rediscounts nnd all other loons to member banks .......................... 11.022.752.87
Open market purchases (Bnnkers' Acceptnnces )............................ 9.889.884.29
PETROLEUM
.
\
.
'1 to
daily average yield of the Texas fields, due pnman y r00
the large gain made by the North Texas area. Total Pis
duction in Texas for June amounted to 11,050,300 barre 0:
which compares to 11,020,585 barrels in May. TheTPras
duction of the Panhandle field located in the North eX Ilt
area continued to climb throughout the month, the
5t
having increased from 602,175 barrels. in May. tO a ;:he
double that amount in June. With an 1I1crease 111 b~\f rd
number of completions and producers, the Shac .e oed
County field of the Central·West Texas district, register p'e
a substantial gain in total production. The daily averaxi .
output of the North Louisiana fields increased a~ro ia
mately 5,000 barrel5 during the month; ~ith the ra~5t
field, which has been the center of actiVity. for the Fon.
several months, continuing its upward trend 111 produ c I
The daily average production of crude oil in the various
fields of the Eleventh Federal Reserve District during June
amounted to 429,923 barrels, representing an increase of
17,811 barrels over the previous month. The gross output
during June was 12,897,700 barrels, as compared to 12,775,.
470 barrels during May and 14,982,082 barrels in June of
last year. Although there was a decrease in the initial
flow froIU new wells for the month, an increase was no.
ticed in the number of completions and producers. There
were 729 completions in June, as compared to 711 in May,
and 97,243 barrels of new production were added from
4,20 producers, as compared to an initial flow of 106,215
barrels from 4·05 producers in May.
°ftp
There was an increase of 12,84,0 barrels of oil in the
9
~
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 111 .. 111111111111 •• 111111 ... 111.111.111 ..... 111111 ... "1111 I
, "''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''~'~~';~~~~'~;;~;'''''''''''''''''''''''''""""""''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
E
-
~or~h
(\irSt .. T........ ·........·_......................................-
~~~~~:~aC~~~~:::::::::::
: : :::::::::::::::: : : : :::::::::~ ::: ~:
Southwest Texas .... _.... _..............................................
Nort~oti1;ui'!'ia~U:
.......................................................
................. ............................ ............
T
~a1
D' t •
Total
S.785.690
June
Daily Avg.
126.189
Total
8,292.675
21.816259.27100
• . "
•
1.208,945
i:m:~~g
~tm
7S78'950992
11,050.300
1.847.400
- -12.897.700
368.843
61.580
--429.928
i:m:~~g
2.529.720
11.020.585
1.754.885
May
Dally Avg.
106.210
~U~~
81.604
38,837
855.508
56,609
--412.112
Inc,
...........
Inc.
Inc.
::
Increase or Decrens e Total
DailY ~~It074
498.015
Inc.
•911
B:~:
. 1280~.4250~
~tm i>ec~.
Dec.
DIne~,
Dec.
..........(iJ
= ~
"
a
.
29.715
92,515
-_.
122.280
Inc,
Inc.
E
i
JUNE DRILLING RESULTS
Field-
m..
... IIIU'"IIUIIUIIIIIIIIUIIIIIIIIUIII[!]
Completions
North Texas .................... 887
Central-West Texas ........ 180
East-Central Texas .......... 2
E •.st Texas ........................
2
Texas CODstal .................. 66
Southwest Texas .............. 80
Texas Wildcats ................ 28
Producere
209
94
2
1
42
21
8
Gns
Wells
1
11
·fotal. Texas ...................... 645
~orth Louisiana .............. 84
372
48
23
10
250
26
June total. , rlis trict . 72!)
May totals. diBtriet.. ........ 711
4:?0
405
~~
27
276
279
9
1
:
97.2~3
106.215 E
·IIIIII"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1I .. I~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII .. IIIIIIII'111I1I111I11I11I 1111 .. 111111111 •• 1111.11111 •••
1111
' ..
E
E
89.011
8,232
18
~
Hg~
~_
'156
1~:M~ ~
__ S
17 SI1 :
,:""""Ill
@
1.............. '" ............................IIIIII ...... IIII.......................................................III!]~
CRUDE OIL PRICES
J .uly 7.
1926
:
::
FallInitial
ul'ea Production
127
41.707
75
1'7.007
1,600
5
24
18.229
10.120
24
sua
~
_.:
o • IS rlet.......................................................
12.775.470
Inc.
Inc.
[!J •• I.I ••••••••••••• ' ••••• I ••• ' •••••••• I ••• ' ••••••• III.111111111111111.'1111111111111 •• 1111111111,.111111'.1.'11111 •••• 11111"111'1.,11111111111111111.1'.1111.1 ••• , •••• 11.1111' •••• ' ••••••• 11 ••••• 11 ••• 1111111 ••••••••••••\ ••••••••••••••• 11 •••••
~.II"tllllltl .. I .. IIIIIII.IIIIIIIIIIII ... I ... IIIIIIIII .. t l l l l ...... III .. 11 "
~
='"
~
July. 8. :
1925:
$1. 75 ~
TEXAS-Texas CORstal (Grade t·A·· .................................................... $~·~~
•
~
Nc/rth and Central Texas (52 gr. and above) ........... _.. · 1:90
~_
TexRS Panhandle (89 gr. and above) ............ .................... bl basl B•
· Prices for July 8. 1925. not available on a compara e
:
lu.8. :
7 Ju1925
J~ly.
:
LOUISIANA1926
5 S
o 45
$2. 0
:
Caddo (88 gr. and Ilbove) .................................................. $;;:26
I.S~:
Bull Bayou (88 gr, and above) ...................................... ·_.. · 2.20
1·~O:
Homer (85 gr. and above) .................................................. 2.10
1. 0 :
HayneSVIlle (a8 gr. and nbove) .................................... ·_.. · 2.30
1.9"",1ll
De Soto crude ........................................................................ ~·:: ..... It ....... IIII .. I ..
IIIU ......................... I ........ UIl ................... IIIIII ..... II ....... 1I11
Texas.)
(011 statistics compiled by The Oil WeeklY. Houston.
m..
7
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
LUMBER
D.Th~re ~as a ~ubstant!al decline in the a~tivity of Eleventh
Istnct pme mIlls durmg June. ProductIOn for the month
fell 13 per cent below normal as compared to 4 per cent
below normal in May. June shipments were 9 per cent
below normal production, as compared to 3 per cent above
normal production in May; new orders received during
Jun~ were equivalent to 87 per cent of normal production, as
agamst 101 per cent in the previous month. Unfilled
orders on the books of 4.9 mills on June 30 amounted to
62,257,825 feet, as against 67,781,448 feet on the books of
51 mills on May 31. Stocks on hand at the end of June
were 23 per cent below normal as compared to 18 per cent
below norm91 at the end of May.
m
I·ID
,,111111111111111111'111111111111111 •• 1"111., ••••••••••••• 1 ....... 1, ••••• 11.11 .... 111 ..................... 11'.'1 •••
:;
~~
~
•
::
::_:
:
:
~
~
JUNE PINE MILL STATISTICS
Number of reporting mills....................................
ProoucticJn ......._.......................................................
Shipments ............................... ..................................
O"dCl's ........................................................................
Unfilled orders. June 80........................................
N orma I pro d uc tl on ................................................
Stocks, June 80 ..........................................................
Normal stocks ..........................................................
Shipments below normal production ..................
Actual production below normal..........................
Orders below normal production ..........................
Stocks below normal ..............................................
::
-E
49
98.123,631
102,452,053
97.748.478
62,257,825
112 ,335 , 49 8
248,058,647
820,607.288
9,888,440
14,211,962
14.592.015
g
feet
feet
feet
feet
f eet
feet
feet
feet= 9%
feet = 180/0
feet = 18 0/0
72 ,G58,586 feet =28%
E
::
_::
:
:
~
~
rn .......... UI ...... III .......... IU .. IIIIIIIII .. 'IIU ................ IIU ... 1I' .. IIII .... lllllIlIlIlIlIlIlIlIlIllllIllm
BUILDING
~hile the valuation of building permits issued at twelve
pnncipal cities in this district reflected a decline of 11.1
per cent from the previous month it was 27.9 per cent
grea~er than in the corresponding month last year. Building
Contll1ued very active in some cities but showed a tendency
to slacken in others.
Statistics for the first half of 1926 disclose the fact that
~"'''''I''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''"'''"''''''''"II'III''IIII'''''''''''"IIII'''' .......................
the valuation of permits issued was 24.9 per cent larger
than that during the same period in 1925. However, there
was a slight decline in the number of permits issued indicating that there has been a large volume of business building under construction. Building has been very active this
year in the cities of Fort Worth, Houston, San Antonio and
Wichita Falls.
11 ... ' ....... 11 ...... 1111 ...... 11111111111111 ...... 11.1111 1 11111I ...... I1I1 ... III1.I1 ......... " .................. IIII .......... I ....... ' ..
I.
i
:
:
:
:
E
:
.
No
~ustin
..................
))enumont ..............
Efll~s ....................
Fort W~rih········ · ···
G I
na yeaton ..............
48
156
849
68
286
285
{;;:V'I'~
tlon
167.540
112,620
2,292.852
76,548
2.208,054
488221
No.
49
159
478
42
286
270
t'~:I'~
tlon
105.195
110.144
1.649,972
86,820
1,249,186
191,812
[;;.,,:"[.0 ~::~ [::.:'
No•
+ 59.8
+ 2.2
+ 88.9
- 10.8
+ 76.8
+126.4
28
197
314
G·t
346
288
1~~~~~~:;~ ,11 ;:~ !~ ,.~i!- : ~!:1~ ~I;r! l
~'"".U
... III .... IIIIIIII ... II.......... II ...I.. ItIIl ........II ..IIIIIIIII.II.II.IIII'Ii.
11111111111 ........ 111111 ...
"" SI. M.,,,. ""
I
t
o n No
'
82,815 +410.6
277
116,826 8.2
1,072
1.709,0 1 + 34.1
2,816
124.5 1 - 38. 5
424
1,766,8·10 + 25.0
2,210
90,208 +880.2
1,627
Valuation
685,557
886,792
10,782.584
629,879
10.758,849
1,255,748
No.
287
1,026
3,017
896
1.867
1,705
[';;,;."
Valuation
502,814
940.628
15.906.880
791 .122
4,896,874
870,507
1EI
I.
E
+ 86.5
5.7
- 82.5
- 20.4
+119.6
+ 44.8
:
:
:
:
~
:
Jl:~! t!f! ,~'! ! }:!!ll.!! ,:ll! :!:! !:!~ I111 i
·.1 '11" ............ 1111.1 ......... 11 ................................... 1 ..................................... 1.11 ............. 1111.0
CEMENT
The June production of cement at Texas mills which . stocks on hand at the end of June were 7.2 per cent less
Mtnounted to 416,000 barrels was 8.4 per cent less than in than a month earlier. However, they were 98.3 per cent
larger than on that date in 1925. During the first half of
~y but was 6.9 per cent greater than in June last year.
\hlpments from these mills in June were 1.6 per cent larger 1926, production was 9.1 per cent above that during the
t an in the previous month and 2.3 per cent larger than a corresponding period of 1925 and shipments were 2.5 per
Year ago. Due to the heavy shipments during the month, cent larger.
~.'t"I ••• I •••••••• I.I.I •••••••••••••••••• ,•••••••.•••••••••••••••••••••••
i =-
1 •••••••••••••••• , •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1111.1' •• " ••• , ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 ••• 1 ............... 1.1 ••••••••••••••• 1 ..... , ••••••••••••••• 1 •••••••••••••• [;:
:
~
~
:
§
PRODUCTION. SHIPMENTS, AND STOCKS OF PORTLAND CEMEIN'V (Barrels)
PSrOduction at Texas Mills........................
Shipments from Texas milis...................
rB]" tocks nt end ot month at Texas mills..
June
1926
416,000
454,000
478,000
June
1926
889.000
444.000
241,000
Ine. or
Dee.
6.9
2.3
98.8
t
May
11126
454.000
447,000
515,000
Ine. or
Dee.
- 8.4
+1.6
- 7.2
Six Months
1926
19211
2,456,000
2,251,000
2,459,000
2,400.000
Ine. or
Dee.
+9.1
+2.5
11 1 ,1 •• 11.11.1.' •••••• 1 ••••••• , •••••••••••••••• 1111 ............................. 11 •••••• 1'11' ••••• '11 ••• 1'.'111",' . .. ... 11 •• 1 •••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 •••• 1.1 •••••••••• 1 •• '.' •••••• 11 ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 ••••••••• , ••••••
::
§
E
:
:
1.0
MONTHLY BUSINESS REVIEW
8
SUMMARY OF NATIONAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS
(Compiled by Federal Reserve Board. July 24. 1926)
Industrial activity was at the same level in June as in
May and was slightly above the level of a year ago. The
average of commodity prices advanced further between May
and June.
PRODUCTION
The Federal Reserve Board's index of production in basic
industries remained unchanged in June. Production of iron
and steel and activity of woolen machinery contiaued to decline and there were also reductions in the output of copper,
zinc, and petroleum, while cotton consumption, the manufacture of food products, and the output of coal and cement
increased. Production of automobiles was smaller in June
than in May and for the first time this year was less than
in the corresponding month of 1925. Declines took place
in June in employment and payrolls of all textile industries,
except woolen and worsted goods arid men's clothing, and
some of these industries were less active than at any hme
since 1924. Building contracts awarded during June were
slightly less thatl in May and for the first time since early
in 1925 were smaller than in the corresponding month of
the preceding year. Crop reports issued by the Department of Agriculture indicated a slight improvement during
June. The composite condition of all crops on July 1 was
reported at 6.4 per cent below the average July condition
during the last ten years. The production of winter wheat
was estimated at 568,000,000 or 172,000,000 more than in
1925, and that of spring wheat at 200,000,000, or 71,000,000
less than last year. A production of 2,661,000,000 bushels
of corn, or 8.3 per cent less than last year, is indicated in
the same report. Cotton production, on the basis of July
16 condition, was estimated at 15,368,000 bales, or 718,000
bales less than the production of last year.
TRADE
Total volume of wholesale and retail trade in June was
larger than for the same month in 1925. Department store
sales declined seasonally in June and wholesale trade in
all trading lines except groceries, also decreased during the
month. Sales of mail order houses increased more than
usual in June and were 5 per cent 'larger than in June, 1925.
Stocks of merchandise carried by wholesale firms at the
end of June were smaller than a year earlier. Department
stores continued to reduce their stocks, and their inventories
which had been considerably above last year's level earlier
in the year, were at the end of June only about 1 per cent
larger than a year ago. Freight car loadings showed ~ea·
sonal increases during June and continued through the fust
half of J ul y at higher levels than in previous years. Load' ings of grains in the Southwestern states have been particularly large.
PRICES
The general level of wholesale prices, acccrding to the
index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, increased from May
to June by less than half of 1 per cent. Prices of livest?ck
and meats advanced and there were small increases for SIlk,
petroleum products: non·ferrous metals and chemicals .and
drugs. Price decreases occurred in grains, cotton, ~exhles,
buildinG' materials and house furnishings. In the fust two
weeks of July prices of grains, flour, cotton, wool and hides
increased, while those of cattle, hogs, silk and rubber declined.
BANK CREDIT
Loans and investments of member banks in leading cities
at the end of June were in larger volume than at any previous time, and after declining during the first half of July
were still $900,000,000 above the level of a year ago . . .Of
this increase about $385,000,000 was in loans on sec~ntles,
$340,000,000 in commercial loans and $175,000,000 mvestments. Since the beginning of 1926 an increase in com'
mercial loans, together with the growth of invest~ents, has
more than offset the reduction in loans on seCUrItIes. The
demand for credit at the end of the fiscal year and the
increased currency requirements over the hol.iday were
reflected in the growth of member bank borrowmgs at the
reserve banks and on July 5th total discounts were near the
highest point of the year. With the return flow of .currency
from circulation after the holiday, discounts declmed and
on July 21 were in about the same volume as in the last hal f
of June. The reserve banks' holdings of acceptances ~nd
of United States securities changed little during the ~en~d
and the total volume of reserve bank credit outstandmg In
the third week of J ul y was close to the June level.
Money-market conditions were firmer in J ul y as indicated
chiefly by increases in rates on call and time security loans.
Rates on acceptances and on commercial paper were also
slightly higher.
@FedFRASER