Full text of Review (Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas) : June 1964

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

business
•
review

june 1964

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

contents

remarks by the honorable
douglas dillon, secretary
of the treasury of the
united states, vienna,
austria, may 21, 1964. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

3

district highlights. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..

8

Remarks by The Honorable Douglas Dillon
Secretary of the Treasury of the United States
Before the 11th Annual International Monetary Conference
of the American Bankers Association
at the Palais Schwartzenberg, Vienna, Austria
Thursday, May 21, 1964, 12:30 P.M.

I am very pleased to be with you at another
of your Annual International Monetary Conferences, which offer such a unique and valuable opportunity to confer with one another
and with our European friends.
All of us recognize the need to improve the
process of balance of payments adjustment
among the free industrial nations. We have
fOund that the old "rules of the game" - whateYer their values in the past - are no longer
adequate. For instance, the classical presumption that balance of payments deficits call for
the restriction of domestic economic activity
has had little relevance to the situation facing
the United States in recent years. Nor has the
other side of the classical coin - easy monetary policies designed to stimulate demandbeen any more appropriate as an antidote for
recent European payments surpluses.
The selection of suitable international payIllents policies has also become more difficult
because domestic economic policies now encompass so many more objectives than they
once did. For example, the promotion of full
employment has come to be accepted as a high
priority responsibility of governments throughOut the free world. Price stability, the promotion
of international trade, and the stimulation of
OYerall economic growth, all now occupy prominent places in national policy objectives.
All of this means that we have had to seek
new techniques - and new combinations of

old techniques - to deal with payments deficits
and surpluses. We have also learned that our
search for effective policies cannot proceed in
isolation. In moving to solve their own balance
of payments problems, major countries must
find ways to achieve their objectives without
creating serious difficulties for others. The success of balance of payments adjustments increasingly depends upon the coordination of
national efforts. We have learned the lessonparticularly in the short-term capital areathat close international cooperation can contribute in very specific ways to the improvement
of the adjustment mechanism.
Although we have made substantial progress,
many unresolved questions remain. Nowhere
is this more evident than in the area of longterm portfolio capital flows. The importance
of some of these unresolved questions was becoming apparent at the time of your Conference
in Rome two years ago. I spoke then of the
dangers inherent in the growing pressure of foreign borrowers upon the United States capital
market. Within six months, those pressures
began to mount rapidly and, by mid-1963, the
volume of new issues in the New York market
was running at more than three times its previous level. That, unfortunately, left us no recourse but direct governmental action. Accordingly, last July, we launched an intensified
program to improve our balance of payments,
in which the proposed interest equalization tax
is a key element.

business review/june 1964

3

l
We look upon that proposed tax solely as a
transitional measure. It must not be allowed
to obscure the desirability of working out measures that can permanently strengthen the international adjustment mechanism, nor our own
need vigorously to pursue other elements of
our balance of payments program, such as the
reduction of government expenditures overseas and the pursuit of appropriate fiscal and
monetary policies. But the necessity for the
interest equalization tax highlights the serious
problems that have arisen in attempting to reconcile freedom of capital movements with
the harsh necessities of balance of payments
adjustment.

balances in payments, rather than to assist in
their adjustment. The greatest difficulties on
this score have arisen for countries which do
not have controls on their capital marketsGermany and the United States.

If long-term portfolio capital flows are to
make their maximum contribution to our mutual
growth and welfare, they should be permitted
to respond freely to shifting patterns of trade,
to differentials in profit opportunities, and to
the basic capacity of various nations to save.
But if they are not to undermine the adjustment mechanism, long-term portfolio capita]
movements must also be responsive to the balance of payments position of borrowers and
lenders alike.

In our case, it was necessary to reduce an
excessive net outflow of portfolio capital, while
the German problem has been the reverse one
of discouraging an excessive net inflow. Our
approach was the proposed interest equalization tax to increase the effective cost of foreign
borrowing in our markets. The German approach - in some ways complementary - was
to propose a withholding tax on non-resident
purchasers of German interest bearing securities, thereby lowering the after-tax yield to
some foreign investors and thus tending to discourage capital inflows. Perhaps even more
significant in terms of progress toward more
efficient capital markets, the German authorities coupled this with an important structural
reform, in the proposal to remove the 21;2
percent tax on the purchase of newly issued
securities - a step designed to offer encouragement to new capital issues, both foreign and
domestic.

The difficulties inherent in accomplishing
both of these goals simultaneously become clear
when we consider the kinds of problems that
have recently plagued us in the area of international flows of portfolio capital. Countless
borrowers and lenders are constantly making
decisions to buy or sen foreign securities on
the basis of price and yield differentials and
availabilities of funds, as these factors are reflected in the market place. But we have no
assurance that these decisions will, at any given
time, reflect basic differences in the underlying
capacity of various countries to provide capita]
for domestic uses - much less their capacities
to transfer that capital abroad. Instead - in
the case of more than one country - flows of
portfolio capital have recently shown a disturbing tendency to seriously aggravate im-

The fact that a country as basically committed to the free flow of funds as is the United
States found it necessary to propose the interest
equalization tax underscores the importance
of achieving a better balance in the structure
and efficiency of world capital markets. Until
that better balance is achieved, it will be difficult, or even impossible, to influence the direction and amount of long-term portfolio capital
flows through the normal action of monetary
policy, without the help of special measures
aimed at encouraging or discouraging sucb
movements. Consequently, progress in improving the free world's capital markets has become
essential if the uninhibited flow of long-term
international portfolio capital is not to be a
disturbing element in the quest for payments
equilibrium.

4

I

I

In seeking the reasons why portfolio capital
flows have become disturbing to payments
equilibrium, one is immediately struck by the
current wide disparity between European longterm interest rates and our own. Long-term
interest rates in Europe have been very high
throughout the postwar period. Although conditions vary from country to country, Europe
can generally be characterized as having been
on something close to a "6 percent basis" since
World War II. Certainly, in the light of past
experience, 6 percent is an unusually high level
of long-term interest rates for Europe. ThroughOut the 19th century, the annual average of
prime long-term bond yields in continental
EUrope was only slightly above 414 percent.
In England, it was just under 31 percent.
12
And, during the early decades of this century,
the overall averages, with the sole exception
of Germany, were little, if any, higher.
Because of the vast needs of postwar reconstruction and, more recently, of rapid economic
growth, reasons can be found to justify the
current high level of European long-term interest rates. In addition, relatively recent experience with inflation has discouraged postwar
European investors from the purchase of bonds.
But these transitory conditions do not suggest
that 6 percent is desirable as a permanent level,
Or that it is likely to be maintained over any
very long period of time. History would seem
clearly to indicate otherwise.
While the prevention of inflation remains
Vitally necessary, in Europe as well as elseWhere, current inflationary threats appear to be
different from those of the immediate postwar
period. There now seems to be much greater
ground for the use of income policies to restrain upward pushes on the cost-price structure, and much less reason to place primary
reliance on high and inflexible levels of longterm interest rates. I do not suggest that the
necessity for interest rate variation is at all
diminished. I only question whether it is

desirable, as a long run proposition, that European interest rates should continue to fluctuate
around levels so much higher than their historic averages. While the immediate and visible
threat of such high rates is to international payments balance, one can reasonably expect that
the maintenance of sustained growth in Europe
itself will, in time, require appreciably lower
long-term rates of interest.
Even with due allowance for the special factors that I have mentioned, the question arises
as to the extent to which institutional frictions
and government restrictions are to be held
accountable both for the current high level of
long-term interest rates in Europe and for other
impediments to the availability of funds.
Throughout history, efficient capital markets
have tended to produce lower rate structures
and, conversely, inadequate capital markets
have generally bred high interest rates. European capital markets once led the world, but in
the postwar period they have fallen far behind
the needs of the times, particularly in the access they offer to foreign borrowers. This is
partly because government intervention and
controls have impeded the development of
broad and integrated capital markets in Europe,
and partly because private financial institutions
have sometimes been slow to adapt imaginatively to changing situations.
A broad and responsive capital market helps
to insure that temporary influences can be
readily and rapidly absorbed within an acceptably narrow range of changes in security prices
and yields. However, where governments follow the practice of pre-empting and channelling
large proportions of the funds potentially available, it becomes difficult to provide sufficient
breadth in the private sector of the market.
Unless security prices and yields are free to
react to changing patterns of supply and demand, and to respond to broad and vigorous
competition among private financial institutions, the prospects for the development of

business review/ june 1964

5

truly efficient capital markets cannot be
bright.
The failure of European capital markets to
keep pace with the expanding capital requirements of the industrialized world has been a
major factor in stimulating pressures upon the
New York capital market. The imbalance has
been so large that the greater availability of
funds to potential borrowers in New York has
often seemed more important than interest rate
considerations.
With such wide disparities in market capacity and accessibility, there is no use looking
to relatively minor international variations in
long-term interest rates to guide the flow of
capital and to encourage balance of payments
adj~stment. And the major variations in interest rates that would be required to bring
long-term portfolio capital flows into better balance do not seem possible for either Europe or
the United States. The heavy accumulations
of savings in the United States make it doubtful
that even an extremely restrictive monetary
policy could cause our long-term interest rates
to approach the European level- and any
such extreme monetary policy would clearly
run counter to our current domestic need for
fuller employment and higher utilization of our
industrial capacity. In Europe, on the other
hand, efforts to reduce long-term interest rates
cannot hope to achieve really significant success until broader and more active capital market facilities come into being.
It is encouraging that this need is now recognized on all sides. During recent years,
Europe has taken significant steps toward improving her capital markets. The increasing
economic integration of Europe offers an opportunity for much greater progress in the
future, and it is imperative that the opportunity
be seized. Recent experimentation in achieving
a broad European market for security flotations deserves to be carried further despite the

6

difficulties that have been encountered. The
increase in dollar-denominated loans under
the stimulus of the proposal for the interest
equalization tax, the use of unit of account
loans, and the proposal by Dr. Hermann Abs
for separate national shares in large European
security flotations, are all developments of considerable significance.
I recognize that institutional changes of the
required scope cannot be achieved easily or
quickly. However, there are promising signs
of progress. The task now is to push ahead
vigorously in a concerted effort to enlarge and
improve European capital m~rkets as a necessary prerequisite to our common effort, within
a framework of free markets, to harness longterm portfolio capital flows to the stark realities
of balance of payments imperatives. Until this
has been successfully accomplished, it must be
recognized that portfolio capital calls on the
New York market from abroad will, in some
fashion or another, have to be contained within
the limits set by our own overall balance of
payments situation.
This is, for us, a new and unpleasant fact
of life, but it is one with which our European
friends have long learned to live. And it is only
one of many ways in which we must accommodate our policies to the exigencies of our international payments situation. We must continue
to reduce our military expenditures overseas,
as well as the dollar cost of our foreign aid
programs. We must continue vigorously to
press the sale of advanced military equipment
to help offset the cost of maintaining our forces
abroad. We must continue to increase the attractiveness of direct investment in the United
States. And, above all, we must continue to
seek out ways of enlarging our exports while
maintaining price stability at home.
Until our payments deficit is entirely removed, and our gold losses halted, our work
will be unfinished. The past ten months have

seen a dramatic improvement in our payments
situation, stemming in good part from the intensified action program introduced last July,
but also from a noticeable longer term improvement in our underlying competitive position.
The seasonally adjusted annual rate of deficit
on regular transactions during the second quarter of 1963 was swollen by massive foreign
borrowing in our markets and exceeded $5
billion. This rate of deficit was cut sharply to
a little under $2 billion in the third quarter of
1963, and to a little over $2 billion in the fourth
qUarter. Preliminary data for the first quarter
of this year indicate that after seasonal adjustment our deficit · on regular transactions has
declined even further to an annual rate of about
$550 million.
But it must be recognized that these first
quarter results overstate the actual improvement. There is evidence of a substantial temporary inflow of short-term funds from Canada
during March - an inflow that was completely
reversed early in April. Even so, after taking
this into account, the first quarter still weighed
in as our best quarter since 1957. On an overall basis and without allowance for favorable
seasonal influences, our international payments
so far this year have been in approximate balance. This cannot be expected to continue as
seasonal effects will soon shift against us. But
although 1964, as a whole, is expected to
record another sizeable deficit on regular transactions, there are excellent reasons to hope that
it will be sharply reduced from the levels of the
past six years. We have, therefore, every right
to be encouraged.
But we must remember that a good part of
OUr recent progress is due to the proposal for
the interest equalization tax. By the end of
1965, when this tax is scheduled to expire, a
secure payments equilibrium will require a

much better balanced international flow of longterm portfolio capital than characterized late
1962 and the early months of 1963. Specifically, this means that United States portfolio
capital in large amounts should not be asked
to support the expansion of developed areas
with strong balance of payments positions. Increasingly flexible and efficient capital markets
in Europe - capable of supplying funds at
reasonable rates of interest - will remove one
major source of difficulty. It is then that opportunities should emerge for long-term capital
movements to contribute more actively to the
process of balance of payments adjustment
among nations.
We do not by any means have all the answers
in the long-term capital area. But as international capital markets achieve a better balance,
both in terms of interest rates and of lending
capacity, it should prove possible to apply in
the long-term capital area some of the lessons
we have learned in the short-term area.
A narrowing of existing differences in longterm interest rates among industrialized countries, together with wider access of borrowers
and lenders to a variety of national markets,
implies a growing sensitivity of long-term portfolio capital flows to relatively minor interest
rate variations. This sensitivity can be turned
to our mutual advantage, for it will provide
opportunities for governments to make greater
use of acceptable variations in monetary policy
to influence these flows in the interest of balance of payments adjustment, without violating
their own domestic needs. It suggests another
way in which we can all work together to
strengthen the adjustment process, while continuing our progress toward a world of free
capital movements and ever freer trade and
payments.

business review /j une 1964

7

district highlights
The development of the negotiable time certificate of deposit as a widely accepted financial
instrument has significantly altered the nature
of commercial bank time and savings deposits.
To an increasing extent, these deposits are
being represented by negotiable certificates
sold to business firms, individuals, and others
having sizable amounts of funds to invest for
relatively short periods of time.
Member banks in the Eleventh Federal Reserve District are quite active in the certificate
of deposit market. At the year-end call date,
"other time deposits of individuals, partnerships, and corporations" - consisting primarily
of certificates of deposit - accounted for almost 30 percent of total time and savings
deposits in the District. In order to determine
the maturity of these financial instruments, the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System has instituted a quarterly survey of
outstanding negotiable certificates of deposit
in denominations of $100,000 or more at the
weekly reporting member banks.
The first survey of weekly reporting member
banks in the Eleventh District indicates that,
on May 20, 1964, these banks had negotiable
certificates of deposit outstanding of $917.2
million, which is $121.5 million, or 15 percent, greater than the amount outstanding on
January 1. The amount of certificates outstanding is subject to sharp month-to-month
fluctuations, partially reflecting the use of these
instruments as temporary investments by corporations in anticipation of quarterly tax payments. In the first 2 months of this year, the
amount of certificates outstanding expanded
$144.2 million to $939 .9 million. A decline
was recorded in March, but there were modest
advances in April and May.

8

The maturity of certificates of deposit issued
by the reporting District banks is highly concentrated in the short-term area. Slightly over
one-half of the amount outstanding matures
within 4 months, and 85 percent falls due
within 8 months. Approximately 6 percent of
the outstanding certificates mature on the June
15 tax date.
Partly reflecting heavy pre-Mother's Day
buying, April sales at Eleventh District department stores were at a new high for the
month. The seasonally adjusted index of sales
for April, at 120 percent of the 1957-59 base,
was 2 percent below March but 10 percent
higher than in April 1963. Although the shifting dates of Easter affect the comparison of
March and April department store sales this
year with those in 1963, seasonally adjusted
sales during January-April 1964 were 11 percent above the same 4-month period last year.
A new high for April also was established
by registrations of new passenger automobiles
in four major market areas in Texas. Registrations were 4 percent above March and 16 percent higher than in April 1963. During the
January-April period of 1964, registrations in
Houston and Dallas each were 15 percent above
a year ago, while those in Fort Worth and San
Antonio were up 10 percent and 2 percent, respectively. The four markets combined showed
a 13-percent increase over the first 4 months
of 1963.
Nonagricultural wage and salary employment
in the five southwestern states advanced almost 1 percent during April to a level that
was slightly more than 2 percent above a year
earlier. All five states participated in both the
monthly and yearly increases. The gain over
March in the number of wage and salary

workers was paced by nonmanufacturing employment, wmch rose 0.8 percent; manufacturing employment expanded 0.5 percent, largely
because of hiring in the durable goods industries. Among the nonmanufacturing categories,
construction and services posted the largest
relative increases in employment during April.
However, all of the major groups of nonmanufacturing industries experienced some improvement except transportation and public utilities,
which showed a fractional employment decline.
Prospective winter wheat production in the
District states declined 11 percent during the
month ended May 1 to a total of 141.4 million
bushels; however, the 1964 output is indicated
to be 15 percent above last year. Except for
Louisiana, decreases during the month were reported in all of the District states, ranging
from a 3-percent decline in Arizona to a 28percent reduction in New Mexico. Continued
dry weather conditions accounted for the decrease from the preceding month's forecast.

The 1964 Texas wheat crop is estimated at
50.5 million bushels, which is 17 percent less
than the April 1 indication but is almost onefourth larger than the 1963 figure.
According to a recent U. S. Department of
Agriculture release, cotton production in the
District states in 1963 is now placed at 6.5
million bales (500 pounds gross weight). Thus,
output last year was 4 percent below 1962.
The combined value of cotton lint and seed
in the Southwest in 1963 amounted to $1,149
million, reflecting a 3-percent reduction from
the previous year.
Cash receipts from farm marketings in the
District states during January-March 1964
amounted to $892.7 million, or 13 percent less
than in the first quarter of 1963. Receipts from
crops were down sharply, and those from livestock and livestock products declined slightly.
Total cash receipts from farm marketings were
below a year earlier in all of the District states
except Louisiana.

new
par
bank

-

The Howe State Bank, Howe, Texas, an insured nonmember bank located in
the territory served by the Head Office of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas,
was added to the Par List on its opening date, May 23 , 1964. The officers are:
A. L. Geer, Chairman of the Board; Cleon L. Hamilton, President; O. w.
Lamb, Vice President; N. R. Langford, Vice President (Inactive); and Edwin E.
Hayes, Cashier.

business review/june 1964

:9

The Lackland National Bank of San Antonio, San Antonio, Texas, a newly
organized institution located in the territory served by the San Antonio Branch
of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, opened for business May 11, 1964, as
a member of the Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital
of $250,000, surplus of $250,000, and undivided profits of $100,000. The
officers are : W. F. Castella, Chairman of the Board; G . B. Lacy, Vice Chairman
of the Board; Jud Watson, President; James G. Law, Jr., Vice President; and
Allen R. Byrn, Cashier.

new
metnbet·
b"nl~s

The Corpus Christi Bank and Trust Company, Corpus Christi, Texas, located
in the territory served by the San Antonio Branch of the Federal Reserve Bank
of Dallas, became a member of the Federal Reserve System on May 18, 1964.
The new member bank, which was organized in 1928, has capital of $2,000,000,
surplus of $2,000,000, undivided profits of $667,000, and total resources of
$45,201,000. The officers are: W. P. Pittman, Chairman of the Board; James
T. Denton, Jr., President; T. S. Scibienski, Chairman of the Executive Committee; Leroy Beavers, Vice President and Cashier; Jerry D. Minton, Vice President and Trust Officer; James E. Powell, Vice President; William E. O'Kelly,
Vice President; Roger T. Powell, Assistant Trust Officer; Ethel Goebel, Assistant
Cashier and Assistant Trust Officer; W. J. Bower, Assistant Cashier; H. A.
Dickerson, Assistant Cashier; Loyd G. Lipsey, Assistant Cashier; Russell M.
Thomas, Assistant Cashier; and I. V. Trevino, Assistant Cashier.
The National Bank of Oak Cliff in Dallas, DaII as, Texas, a newly organized
institution located in the territory served by the Head Office of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Dallas, opened for business May 27, 1964, as a member of the
Federal Reserve System. The new member bank has capital of $200,000, surplus
of $200,000, and undivided profits of $120,000. The officers are : Frederick
Harman, Chairman of the Board; Dan G. Bennett, President; James E. Anderson, Vice President; and R. B. Gunnels, Vice President and Cashier.

10

--"

STATISTICAl! SUPPLEMENT
to the

BUSINESS REVIEW

June 1964

FEDERAL RESERVE BANK
OF DALLAS

CONDITION STATISTICS OF WEEKLY REPORTING
MEMBER BANKS IN LEADING CITIES

RESERVE POSITIONS OF MEMBER BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District

Eleventh Federal Reserve District
(Ave rages of dally figures. In thousands of dollars)
(In thousands of dollars)

---

5 weeks end ed

May 20,
1964

Apr. 22,
1964

May 22,
1963

1,975,432
54,633

2,037,311
44,445

1,796,077
46,960

274
53,161

1,774
57,959

289
59,348

2,486
268,486
104,688
2,332

3,455
248,628
31,881
2,780

2,108
236,170
92,665
2,548

All other laans •• ... •••.•••.. •••.•.• .•••. ••

116,232
259,239
355,748
1,078,772

97,684
261,916
350,351
1,071,833

89,937
225,716
311,515
885,134

G ross loans ••.. ... .. .. .... ... . .. ...... .
Less reserves and unallocated charge-offs ••

4,271,483
75,410

4,210,017
75,370

3,748,467
68,909

Net loans.. ...... ... ... .. . .. ......... •.

4,196,073

4,134,647

3,679,558

Treasury bills ...........•.................
Trea sury certiflcates of indebtedness ... .... .. .
Tr ea sury notes and U. S. Governm ent bond s,
including guaranteed obligations, maturing:
Within 1 ye ar ... •.•.•..•.•... . ....... ..

107,200
52

)02;174
6,642

133,024
128,091

After 5 years • . . ... .............•...... .
Oth er securities ..•... ... ..........•. • .•••.

117,805
750,547
364,328
703,190

107,510
768,972
363,850
747,913

128,835
708,279
488,968
538,963

Total investments . •.•.. . . ..... ... .. ......

2,043,122

2,097,061

2,126,160

Ca sh items in proc ess of collection •• .......•..
Balances with banks in th e Unite d States ...... .
Balances with banks in foreig n countries ..• •.. .
Currency and co in ........................ .
Reserves with Federal Reserve Bonk •••... ... ..
Oth er a sse ts • .•..........•............• ...

653,950
453,082
3,554
62,450
488,809
252,659

848,279
511,710
3,278
66,290
477,374
239,878

632,706
467,603
4,803
60,961
574,986
224,710

TOTAL ASSETS ••••.••..••.•••••••••••

8,153,699

8,378,517

7,771 ,487

3,041,481

3,301,556

3,059,267

3,759
204,016
261,118

3,876
79,201
253,023

2,869
165,853
309,435

957,635
15,257
52,582

1,026,070
17,2 19
67,714

984,057
15,021
52,211

4,535,848

4,748,659

1,130,755
1,099,922

1,050,766
902,984

500
5,480
365,686

500
3,917
341,994

511
6,152
304,056

6,856
1,900

5,629
2,400

8,333
2,3 50

4 weeks ended

April I, 1964

Ma y I, 1963

583,776
543,209
40,567
579,896
3,880
21,383
-17,503

585,321
545,496
39,825
580,686
4,635
22,715
- 18,080

587,050
545,663
41,387
582,504
4,546
2,804
1,742

561,765
437,139
12 4,626
525,436
36,329
2,809
33,520

560,243
436,874
123,369
524,209
36,034
1,201
34,833

539, 101
424,354
114,747
493,425
45,676
1,614
44,062

1,145,541
980,348
165,193
1,105,332
40,209
24,192
16,017

1,145,564
982,370
163,194
1,104,895
40,669
23,916
16,753

1,126,151
970,017
156,134
1,075,929
50,222
4,418
45,804

4,588,713

1,139,245
1,114,067

4 weeks en ded

May 6, 1964

It em

Item
ASSETS
Commercial and industrial loans ... ....... .. . .
Agricultural loans...... ... . ... •... .. .• .• ...
Loons to brokers and dealers for
purchasing or carrying:
U. S. Governm ent securities • ••..•. . ... • ....

Other sec urities ........................ .
Other loons for purcha sing or carrying:

U. S. Government securities .. ....... . ..... .
Other securities .. ...... .. ........ ... ..•.
Loan s to domestic comm erci al banks . • . •.. .... .

loon s to foreign banks .................... .
loans to other flnoncial institutions:

Sales Anance, personal flnance, etc .•........
Savings banks, mlge. cos., ins. cos., etc . . •.. ..
Real estate loans . .. .•.•.... . ......... . ..•.

After 1 but within 5 years • • • • ••• •.• • ••••••

LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS
Deman d d eposits
Individuals, pa rtnership s, and corporations• . ••
Foreign governments and ofAcial Institutions,
centra l banks, and international institutions ••
U. S. Governmen t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
States and political sub divisions .....•..•.••
Banks in the Unite d States, including
mutual savings banks.•• ••.• .. .•........
Bonks in foreign countri es ................ .
CertiAed and ofAcers' ch ecks, etc . .•••... . ..

Total d ema nd de posits •••.. •••• . ••..• • •
Tim e and saving s d eposits
Individual s, pa rtnershi ps, and corporations
Savings d eposits .•....................
Other tim e dep osits . .. •.. .. .. . .. . . .....
Foreign governments and ofAcial institutions,
central banks, and international institutions .•
U . S. Gove rnm ent, including postal saving s . .•
States and political sub divisions ........... .
Banks in the Unite d States, including
mutual savings banks•.•...... ... .. .. . . .
Bonks in foreign countries •..... .. .........
Total time and saving s d eposits . . . •... ...

2,633,734

2,585,117

2,275,152

Total deposits •••••...••••••..•.. ..•
Capital accounts • . . •••..•.. ... . ..... •...•.

7,169,582
119,668
161 ,919
702,530

7,333,776
185,193
161,167
698,381

6,863,865
131,525
107,695
668,402

TOTAL LIABILITI ES AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS

8,153,699

8,378,517

7,771,487

Bills payabl e, rediscounts, etc ............. . . .

All ather liabilities ..• • .••••• • ..•••. • •..• ••.

RESERVE CITY BANKS
Total reserves held •.•. . .......
With Federal Reserve Bank .. ..
Curr ency and coin .. . .. . . . .•.
Required reserves . •• . . .• .. ...•
Excess reserves •... . ..... .. . •.
Borrowing s. .......• .. . . ..•...
Free reserves .........••......

COUNTRY BANKS
Total reserves held ............
With Federal Reserve Bank ....
Currency and coin ........ . . .
Require d reserves . . .. . ....• ...
Excess reserves . ..•. ...• . . . ...
Borrowing s... ....... ... . . . . ..
Free reserves .. ........• ......

ALL MEMBER BANKS
Total rese rves held .••..••.....
With Federal Reserve Bank .. ..
Currency and coin .. ......•.•
Re quired reserves ••... . .. .....
Excess reserves •.•..•.••......
Borrowings .... ..... ......... .
Free rese rves ••. .. .... . . .....•

GROSS DEMAND AND TIME DEPOSITS OF MEMBER BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
(Av erag es of dally figures. In millions of dollars)
GROSS DEMAND DEPOSITS
Date

Reserve
city banks

Country

Total

banks

Total

Reserve
city bonks

Country
banks

1962, Ap ril ••••••
1963, April ••. ...

8,148
8,2 84
8,508
8,682
8,744
8,359
8,359
8,422

3,963
4,016
4,100
4,192
4,120
3,887
3,944
3,975

4,185
4,268
4,408
4,490
4,624
4,472
4,415
4,447

3,2 34
3,836
4, 106
4,167
4,321
4,440
4,470
4,483

1,625
1,886
2,018
2,047
2, 141
2,217
2,220
2,214

1,609
1,950
2,088
2,120
2,180
2,223
2,250
2,269

Nove mber .•
Decem ber .•

1964, January • .•
February .. .

March • • • ..
Ap ril •• • ••.

CONDITION STATISTICS OF ALL MEMBER BANKS
Eleventh Federal Reserve District
(In millions of dolla rs)

=========================~
Apr. 29,

Mar. 25,

Apr. 24,

7,067
2,617
1,509
847
191
974
4
708
395

7,017
2,678
1,477
906
181
1,087
4
674
414

6,195
2,894
1,223
920
177
1,067
6
686
355

14,438

13,52 ;!.

1,150
7,018
4,508

1,243
7,180
4,472

1,22 2
7,041
3,844
12,107
125
149
1,142

Ite m
~~~__________________________~~ ______1 9~:4______1~9~6:-3
19 6~4
~ 6
___
ASSETS
Loans and discounts. . .. . . ....... •.. .... •
U. S. Governm ent obligations. '" ......•..
Oth er securities .. .. .... . . ..... ....... .•
Rese rv es with Federal Reserve Bank . •.•....
Ca sh in vault e ..... .. ..... •... . • . .•• .. •
Balances with banks in th e United Sta tes ••..
Balances with banks in foreig n counlriesO ... .
Ca sh items in proc ess of coll ection ........ .
Oth er asse ts e . ••.. •.•. ...••• . ...•.•...•

TOTAL ASSETse •••..••... .• •••.•..••

CONDITION OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE BANK OF DALLAS

-=

TIME DEPOSITS

LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS
(In thousand s of dollars)

De mand d eposits of banks ...•. . •... •• . . .

Othe r d e mand deposits •••••••• • •.••• ••. •
Tim e d eposits . . ...........••......•....

Item
Total gold certiAcate reserves . •.. .. .... . .. ..
Discounts for memb er banks • .. .............
Oth er d iscounts and advances • ... .•....•. . .
U . S. Gov ernment sec urities ..•..... ........•
Total ea rning a ssets ..• ..... . . .. . .. .•.••••.
Member bank reserve d eposits .•.. •. . • . .. . •.
Federal Reserve notes in actual circulation • ••••

2

May 20,
1964
528,037
12,708

o

1,314,090
1,326,798
854,904
968,854

Apr. 22,
1964
551,762
23,677
285
1,300,248
1,324,210
841,975
965,589

May 22,
1963

Total de posits ••••.••• •• ..• • •••.•••.•

667,661
17,098

Borrowings e . .....• ......... '" .. .. . . "
Oth er liabiliti es e .. . . . .. ... •. .. • . ... ....
Total capital accountse • . .•. . •. .•. •. . . . .•

12,676
176
231
1,229

12,895
122
20 1
1,220

TOTAL LIABILITIES AND CAPITAL
ACCOUNTS e ••• ..• •• • • ••.•••.•. •• •

14,3 12

14,43B

o

1,179,867
1,196,965
9 29,498
892,672

INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION

BANK DEB ITS, END-OF-MONTH DEPOSITS
AND ANNUAL RATE OF TURNOVER OF DEPOSITS

(Seasonally adjuste d indexes, 1957·59

= 100)

(Do ll ar amounts in thousands)

Demand depositsl

April
1964

ARIZONA
Tucson .... . . . ..... . $
LOUISIANA
~onro e • ••••• •• ••••
rovepart ..•.... . .

NEW MEXICO
Rosw ell ... ....... . .
TEXAS
~bil ene............
Amarilla. . . . • • • . . . •
8 ustin.. . . . . . . . .. . .
Ceoumont......... .
Corpus Christi... . • • •
oorsicona .. . . . . . . . .

Mar .

1963

102,798
340,530

Te ~crkcnc 2 . .. .. ...

W~cro"" """ ''''

.•
Wichilo F~il; : ::::::

10
5
12
4
9

24.4r

23.5

24.2

56,642
174,949

20.9
22.6

20.6
20.5

34,739

18.2

17.8

19.4

62,558
128,004
186,401
107,876
116,837
20,879
1,337,154
239,0 15
412,074
61 ,075
1,500,2 10
26,35 1
134,048
43,413
48,324
428,920
19,894
69,925
79,563
97,015

21.0
28.7
20.6
25.3
23.5
10.6
33.2
20.0
25.3
19.7
29.5
18.4
21.8
17.8
15.6
22.0
18.6
18.8
20.6
16.9

20 .0
25.9
20.4
22.8
22.7
9.7
33.1
23 .9
25.0
19.3
30.6
16.1
21.8
17.5
14.8
21.5
18 .5
19.0
19.2
16.8

18 .1
25.3
19.6
21.4
21.4
10.4
33 .6
22.8
24.5
19.0
26.2
17.4
20.3
17.0
13 .9
22.3
19.3
18 .4
20.8
15.1

$5,554,750

26.9

26.9

25.7r

3
-2
5
1

-4

13

9

12

o

124
142
136
146
10 1

15
4
15

123
142
136
147
98

125
142
134
147
103

117
132
124
139
98

129
130
131
130
109
145

128
129
129
129
107
144

128
129
129r
129
108
144r

123
123
123
123
107
136

Mining, .•... . .•...• •.. .... .
Total indu strial production .. . .. . ..
Manufacturing • . •.•••.... • • ..

20.8
23.2

1
-6
1
2

April
1963

UN ITED STATES

7

o

°b

Apr.

1
7
4
12
12

1

1964

Durcble . .. ...............
Nondurable .. .... .. .. . . ...

1963

3
21
14
20
11
5

52,408

TOlo l_ 24 cities ••. . • • • $ 12,442,953

0.. .. ........

Mar .

1964

- 10

o

4
4
3
2
1
7
- 1

Elc~I~:........ .. ...

Apr.

1964

5
- 1

-3

February

Total industria l production • • • . ....
Manufacturing •• ... . •••..••••

168,884

338,676

113,114
308,735
316,729
228,551
229,825
18,489
3,725,04 1
361,033
873,443
99,448
3,709,990
40,633
248,569
64,0 18
62,942
788,275
31,730
109,255
137,236
14 1,485

F
G'rt Worth . . . . . •. • .
H olveston.... .. . . . .
LOUs lon. . • • . . • • . . .
L e do • • • . . . . . . • . .
pU bock. .. .... ... .
sort Arth ur . . . • • • . . •
Son Angelo. • • • •• . .
r"n Antonio... . ....

April 30,
1964

Apr .

1964

Mcrch
1964

TEXAS

Annua l rate
of turnover

Percent
change from
Ar ea

April
1964p

Area and type of inde x

Debits to demand
deposit accounts!

Durable ..................

-----------------------------------------------~--~

S U~d~ep?sits of individual s, partne rships, and corporations and of states and po litical

~ Ivl slon s.
.
ban Th ~se Ag ures include on ly two ba nks in Texarkana, Texa s.. Tota l ~e blts f?r ,all
am ks In Tex arka na, Tex as-Arkan sa s, including one bonk located I n the Eighth Dls tnct,

Ounted to $66,738,000 for the mont h of April 1964.
r - ReV ised.

Nondurable •. . ....•.......

Mining •..... .. ... ..........
Utiliti es • .. ........ . . . ......•
p -

Pre liminary.

r -

Rev ise d.

SOURCES, Board of Gov ernors of th e Federa l Reserve System.
Fe de ral Rese rve 8ank of Dallas.

NONAGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT
Five So uthwes tern States'
Percent chang e

Apri l 1964 from

Number of persons

Apri l
1964p

Manufacturing • ......... .
Nonmanufacturing . . . .... .
Mining ...............
Construction •.........•
Tran sportation and
public utilities .•......
Trade •... .. .. .... ...•
Finance ••. . .... . ..... •
Servic e •. • .. •. ... . ....
Government . ..........
1

Apri l
1963r

March
1964

April
1963

4,785,100
834,900 .
3,950,200
231,300
309,600

4,716,100
8 15,500
3,900', 600
231,500
306,200

0.7
.5
.8
.7
2.4

2.2
2.9
2.1
.6
3.5

384,100
1,15 1,800
244,600
689,900
960,400

Tota l nonagricultural
wage and salary workers . •

March
1964

4,8 19,500
838,800
3,980,700
233,000
316,900

Type of employment

384,600
1,147,000
242,600
679,000
956, 100

386,400
1,133,900
237,400
669,800
935,400

-.1
.4
.8
1.6
.4

-.6
1.6
3.0
3.0
2.7

Ari zona, Loui siana , N ew Me xico, Ok lahoma, and Texas .
p Pre liminary .
r Rev ised.

SOURCE , State employment age ncies.

INDEXES OF DEPARTMENT STORE SALES
Elevent h Federal Reserve Dis trict
(Dei ly ave rage sales, 1957· 59

= 100)

~~~~~========================================
Date

Seasona ll y
cdjusted

963, April.. . ........ . .. .... .
~ovemb e r.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .
196
ecember .. .............
Janu
4, F c ry.................
M'brucr y ................

110
109
12 1
117
125

BUILDING PERMITS

Unadjusted
108
126
210
92
91
111

-----~--------------------~--------------~~-----1

m

---i;;t:::::::::::::::::

VALUATION (Dollar amounts in thousand s)
Percent change

April 1964
from

NUM8ER

4 months,

113

Apr.
1964

4 mos.

1,029

3,184

9,974

6

-3

13

390

1,208

2,6 10

8,11 9

26

23

-17

118
282
399
294
355
2,606
51 1
694
15 1
2,224
2 12
128
96
169
1,303
243
16 1

404
973
1,382
954
1,244
8,27 1
1,76 1
2,138
535
7,748
697
380
286
556
4,74 1
956
359

1,346
4,864
7,009
902
2,644
29, 11 6
4,324
4, 106
1,263
29,971
3,743
1,07 1
588
323
5,007
2,365
1,374

6,474
15,152
32,549
4,91 1
8,570
91,060
12,490
16,582
2,598
125,384
19,689
5,635
2,809
1,768
19,425
7, 154
5,724

3 -32
25
25
20
20
-34 -55
43
19
60
31
-18
9
3 -16
85
139
1
-5
-12
5
1
68
-16
38
- 14 -44
-32
40
80
72
127
80

-27
10
-20
10
13
-13
27
3
16
- 6
-9
-9
-17
35
22
-6
-32

Total-19 cities • . 11,365

37,777

$105,605

$396,067

13

-5

Area

Apr.
1964

1964

4 mos.

Mar.

1964

1964

Apr.
1963

1964 from
1963

ARIZONA
Tucson ••.•....

$

2,979

$

LOUISIANA
Shreveport • . . •

TEXAS

DEPARTMENT STORE SALES
(Perc entage chango in re tail volue )

~~~=====================================
April 1964 from

~

Are o

TOlal El eve nIh D'Istnct .. . • .. ...
.
C
D~lrous Christi ...... ... ...... .

~~~~~~n:.:.:::::::::: :: :::::: :

--

Shrev ntonia •. • . ••. .•.• •. .•. •
'Waco~~~~tl La •• .• ..•. . •• ...•
Other citie~ ...•...•.••....•.

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

March
1964

April
1963

5
4
1

-2
4

-8

5
3
7

-5

3

o
8
1

2

5

6

4 months,
1964 from
1963

11
1
10
8
15
8
4
11

9

Abilene . . •... .
Am a rillo .... . .
Aust in .... . • ..
Beaumont .. ...
Corpus Chri sti..

Dalles .. .. . ...
EI Paso .......
Fort Worth ....
Ga lveston •••••
Houston .•.•..

Lubbock •....•
Midland ...•.•
Odessa . ......
Port Arthur ....
San Antonio ...
Waco .•......

Wichitc Falls ••

12

VALUE OF CONSTRUCT ION CONTRACTS

W INTER W HEAT PRODU CT IO N

(In mill ions of dol la rs )

(In th ousa nds of bushe ls)
January-April

Ap ril
1964p

Are a and type

f iVE SOUTHWESTERN
STATES ' • •• • .••••••. .• ••
Resid ential build ing . . . . . ..
Nonresi dential building .. . •
Nonbuilding construction • ••

UNITED STATES ••••• . •• ••• •
Resi d ential b uilding . . . ....
Nonres id ential building . . . .
Nonbuilding construction . . .
1

Ma rch
1964

40 1
198
120
83
4,359
2,006
1,420
933

April
1963

434
213
114
106
4,215
1,991
1,252
972

1964p
1,639
777
480
382
15,063
6,786
4,891
3,3 87

375
194
91
89
3,983
1,986
1,2 10
787

1964,
indicated
Ma y 1

1963

1958-62

Texas • . . . . . •.•• . .. . . .

1,290
1,584
2,730
85,2 18
50,544

1,188
1,484
3,800
75,4 11
40,6 18

2, 154
7 82
4,892
10 1,844
66,334

Tota l • • • . . • ••.. ••• • .

141,366

122,501

176,006

1963
1,521
687
443
390
13,190
6,079
4,348
2,763

Area
Ari zona .. .. . . . . .. . . . .
louisiana • • . .. . . . ... . .
N ew M exico . • . . . . . • . . .

Oklahoma • . • •••• ••• • •

Av erag e

SOURCE, U. S. De partment of Agric ul ture.

Arizona , Lou is iana , N ew Mex ico, Ok lahoma, and Texa s.

p -

Pre limi nary.

NOTE . -

De tai ls may not add to to tal s be cau se of round ing .

SOURCE, f . W . Dodge Corporation.

CO TTON ACREAGE, PRODU CTION, AN D VALUE OF PRODU CT IO N
(I n thousands)

=================================~

CASH RECE IPTS FROM FARM MARKETINGS

Acreag e ha rvest ed

Bal es p rod uced I

Va lue of lint and seed

( Dollar amounts in tho usand s)

1962

1963

1962

387
519
190
590
5,850

405
565
201
612
6,500

839
681
27 1
336
4,4 17

942
547
268
311
4,726

Total •• • .. • • 7,536
Un ited States 14,2 12

8,283
15,569

6,544
15,327

6,794
14,867

1963

Area

January-Ma rch
Area

1964

1963

Percent
chang e

Arizona • • ••.. ..... .•.• .••.•••

loui siana . ... . ... . ... . ....... •
Ne w Mexico . . . ... . .... ... .. . . .
Oklahoma • • ••. • •• ••• •••• ••• • •
Texa s .. .. .. . . ..... . . . . ...... .

$ 11 2,001
88,314
39,271
116,340
536,780

$ 128,004
64,794
43,473
135,775
649,02 2

- 13
36
-10
- 14
- 17

Total • ••..••.• •• .. • • ••• • • •••
Unit. d Stat.s •••••• .. ••••• •••

$ 892,706
$8,186,060

$1,021,068
$8, 156,663

-13

Ari zona . .. .. .
Louisiana ••. ..
N ew M exico ...

Oklahoma • • • •

o

Texa s.... • .. .

1

1963

1962

$ 154,324
124,497
52,393
56,460
761,2 25

$ 172,293
99,905
49,421
51,156
812,7 19

$2,776,477

$1, 185,49 4
$2,664,325

-1,148,899
- -$

500 pound s gro ss we ight.

SOU RCE , U. S. Depar tment of Ag ricult ure.

SOURCE , U. S. De po rtm ent of Agr icu lture.

NATIONAL PETROLEUM ACTI V ITY INDI CATORS
DAILY A V ERAGE PRODU CTIO N O F CRUDE O IL

(Seasona ll y adjusted indexes, 1957·59

= 100 )

(In th ou sands of barrels)
April
1964p

Ma rch
1964p

April
1963

CRUDE OI L RUNS TO REfiNERY
STI LLS (Dolly ove rag e) •• • •• . . • • ••••••
DEMAN D (Doily avera ge)

11 3

11 2

109

G a soline . . • •.... • ... .•. . . • ..... .. .•
Kerosene . . . •. . ...•.• . .•• ........ .•
Di sti ll at e f uel oil •• .. .. . .. .. . . .. . •... .
Resid ua l fuel .oil • • . . . .. . . . .. .• •. . . . . .
Four refin ed p ro ducts •• •• . ... .. • ...

112
189
127
102
11 7

11 2
134
111
90
108

Area

ELEVENTH DISTRICT. • •• • • ••
Texas . . . ... . ..... . . . •..
Gulf Coast • . • • •• • • • •.•
W est Texa s . ... • . . .. . .

East Texas (proper) •••••
Panhandl e •• .... . . .. ..

Rest of State •• .•••• • • •
South ea ste rn N ew M exico . .
North ern louisiana . • . •.. ..

O UTSIDE ELEVENTH DISTRICT.
UNITED STATES • • •• ••• •• •••
p -

Pre liminary.

April
1964p

Ma rch
1964p

April
1963

3,175.3
2,729.6
519.5
1,203.8
111 .3
104.7
790.3
284.0
161.7
4,460.3
7,635.6

3,158.4
2,714.0
512.8
1,200.5
111.3
103.9
785.5
284.0
160.4
4,441.7
7,600.1

3,090.2
2,667.3
508.7
1,192.7
113.7
109.3
742 .9
271.5
151.4
4,5 18.8
7,609.0

SOURCES , Am erican Pe tro leum I nstitute . .'
U. S. Bureau of Min es.
f edera l Rese rve Bank of Dal las.

4

March
1964
0.5
.6
1.3
.3
.0
.8
.6
.0
.8
.4
.5

April
1963
2.8
2.3
2.1
.9
-2 .1
-4.2
6.4
4.6
6.8
- 1.3
.3

109
138
120
78
11 0

108
152
128
80
113

104
130
11 3
91
107

-=

-

11 4
155
104
94
109

Indica tor

Pe rcent chang e f rom

STOCKS (End of mo nth)
Gasoline • • • •. ... •• .• •• . . . . . . •.•.. • .
Keros ene . . . .. .•.. .. ..... •. .. . ... . .

Distillate fuel oil ••• • • • ....• • ••••••• ••
Residual f uel oil ••..... . .•.• . . .•. . ...
Four refin ed prod ucts . .• • • . .••. ... .
p -

Preliminary .

SOURCES, America n Petrol eum Institute.
U . S. Burea u of M ines .

f ederal Reserv e Ba nk of Dal la s.

---