INTERPRETATION

365

TABLE 200

CoMPARISON, FOR CITIES OF DIFFERENT SiZE, OF AVERAGE RATES ON
CusTtoMERS’ PAPER REDISCOUNTED WITH FEDERAL RESERVE
Banks, QUARTERLY CALL DATES, 1923 TO 1926, FOR
MeMBER BANKS BY DISTRICTS

———

DisTRICTS

Cities: 15,000 to
100,000 Compared
with under r<.000

COMPARISON OF tTv AVERAGE RATES--NUMBER OF CALLS
Cities: 100,000 and
over Compared
with under 15,000

Total

Boston.......
New York....
Philadelphia.
Cleveland...
Richmond...
Atlanta.....
Chicago. .....
St. Louis. ....
Minneapolis. .
Kansas City.
Dallas. ......
an Francisco

same dates in cities with population under 15,000. This proportion
 increases to 91% in the second and to 98% in the third
comparison given on the total line in Table 206. Moreover,
similar proportions hold for the comparisons between the rates
in successive city sizes in each district. That is to say, differentials
 of the types indicated are general the country over for
each city-size comparison and for the various city-size comparisons
 in each district.
The district and city differences in rates illustrated in the summary
 on page 361 and in Tables 204, 205, and 206 help to explain
the differences in gross earnings ratios found to characterize banks
by districts and groups of banks within districts.
But interest rates on customers’ loans in cities of different size
in the various districts, different as they are when compared with
the “all district” level, change from time to time. Inasmuch as
the rates are available quarterly for the years 1923 to 1926,
inclusive,2® the nature of the changes may be studied in detail.
If the average rate on rediscounted customers’ paper in banks,
for the 16 calls, in each city-size group in each district is taken
as a standard from which to determine the levels of the rates on
different call dates, and the nature of the change from date to
20 Report of the Federal Reserve Board, 1026, pp. 97 to 99.