This section is from the book "Organized Banking", by Eugene E. Agger. Also available from Amazon: Organized banking.
The facilities provided by the Reserve System in connection with commercial paper have not been uniformly utilized in the several reserve districts. The following table shows the distribution among the reserve districts of the percentages of the different forms of paper redis-counted or purchased in the open market for the period indicated. In the last column there is shown also the number of member banks in each district which have availed themselves of the rediscount privileges:
Discount and Purchases of Commercial Paper, and Member
Banks Securing Accommodation
1914-1915 and 1916
80 day | 60 day | 90 day | Agricultural Live Stock | Commodity | Bunkers' Acceptance | |||||||||
1914 - 15 % | 1916 % | 1914 - 15 % | 1916 % | 1914 -15 % | 1916 % | 1914 -15 % | 1916 % | Sep. Dec. 15 % | 1916 % | Feb. Dec. 1915 % | 1916 % | Sep. Dec. 1915 % | 1916 % | |
29 | 20.4 | 12 | 30 | 0.8 | 1.3 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 21.7 | 13.6 | .00 | 8.41 | ||
New York...... | 16.7 | 18.1 | 2.9 | 53 | 2.2 | 5.0 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 39.8 | 32.0 | .29 | 3.26 |
Philadelphia.. | 11.1 | 12.8 | 2.4 | 2.2 | 16 | 1.2 | 0.2 | .3 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 11.7 | 13.8 | .00 | 1.46 |
Cleveland..... | 3.8 | 4.6 | 3.4 | 23 | 2.0 | .9 | 1.7 | .9 | 00 | 0.0 | 4 6 | 7.1 | .25 | 3 43 |
Richmond.. . | 18.3 | 9.9 | 31.2 | 30.0 | 30.3 | 31.6 | 9.6 | 6.7 | 27 93 | 41.8 | .4 | 2.9 | 23.00 ! | 29.47 |
Atlanta...... | 9.0 | 6.4 | 21.4 | 20.3 | 24.7 | 22.7 | 16.9 | 6.7 | 68.17 | 44.6 | .1 | 3.2 | 51.41; | 31.11 |
Chicago ..... | 10.6 | 17.5 | 7.1 | 8.5 | 5.5 | 6.0 | 13.2 | 17.6 | 00 0 | 0 0 | 89 | 7 0 | .00 | .16 |
St. Louis...... | 6.1 | 42 | 4.5 | 5.8 | 4.0 | 6.2 | 3.0 | 26 | .96 | 9.12 | 2.8 | 5.4 | 8.56 | 12.25 |
Minneapolis... | 2.7 | 2.5 | 2.3 | 50 | 2.2 | 2.0 | 99 | 12.2 | .24 | .12 | 2.2 | 35 | .00 | .81 |
Kansas City .. | 7.1 | 1.2 | 63 | 4.3 | 4.9 | 51 | 8.4 | 133 | 0.0 | 2.15 | 2.8 | 2 1 | 4 48 | 3.93 |
Dallas....... | 6.1 | 2.0 | 142 | 11.8 | 16.2 | 161 | 32.9 | 37.2 | 2.34 | 1.34 | 0.0 | .9 | 8.2 | 4.67 |
San Francisco | 5.6 | .4 | 3.1 | 1.5 | 5.6 | 1.9 | 4.0 | 2.4 | .36 | .87 | 5.0 | 85 | 3.78 | 1.04 |
Collateral Loans Sep. -Dec. 1916 | No. of Member Banks | |
in Thousands | 1914 - 15 % | 1916 |
$ 1,882.1 | 29 | 56 |
7,939.5 | 54 | 62 |
13,644.3 | 70 | 143 |
2.385.0 | 88 | 50 |
3.483.0 | 226 | 202 |
1,512.3 | 248 | 209 |
5,417.5 | 221 | 212 |
1,302.5 | 131 | 114 |
1,056.0 | 197 | 174 |
115.8 | 274 | 189 |
287.5 | 366 | 301 |
000 | 169 | 76 |
%39,025.5 | 2073 | 1788 |
(Prepared from 1915 and 1916 Reports of Federal Reserve Board, and from Federal Reserve Bulletin for 1916.)
A glance at this table discloses that banks in the South and West have utilized the facilities of the Reserve System more than the banks in the East. Yet in foreign operations represented by acceptances the Boston, New York, and Philadelphia reserve banks have done the bulk of the business. In the main, borrowing by member banks themselves is still from each other. This is indicated in the following table compiled from the December 27, 1916, "statement of condition'" issued by the Comptroller of the Currency:
(All Member Banks) | ||||
District Number | Number Banks | Bills payable with other than Reserve Banks (Thousands) | Bills payable with Reserve Banks (Thousands) | |
Boston ......................... | 1 | 398 | $ 4,243 | $ 610 |
New York ... | 2 | 622 | 4,446 | 94 |
Philadelphia ............... | 3 | 631 | 1,256 | 3,503 |
Cleveland ................ | 4 | 753 | 2,554 | • • • • |
Richmond .................. | 5 | 519 | 4,879 | 557 |
Atlanta ...................... | 6 | 383 | 2,572 | 760 |
Chicago .................... | 7 | 991 | 2,319 | 1,580 |
St. Louis .................... | 8 | 468 | S6S | 645 |
Minneapolis ............... | 9 | 764 | 1,223 | 334 |
Kansas City ............. | 10 | 943 | 1,003 | 40 |
Dallas ........... | 11 | 619 | 1,035 | • • • |
San Francisco ........... | 12 | 523 | 716 | 10 |
Total .... | 7,614 | $27,114 | $8,133 | |
 
Continue to: