36 
BANKING STANDARDS 
in 1923 and Cleveland in 1925) were high in 1922, 1923, 1924, 
and 19235, as compared with the preceding years. That is, in the 
upward swing from year to year, beginning in 1922, all districts 
fexcept New York, which began its year-to-year increase in 
r921 and showed a slight decrease in 1923; Philadelphia, which 
increased from year to year throughout the whole period; and 
Cleveland, which showed a decline in 1925 compared with 1924) 
participated. The rates are uneven, but consistency of direction 
is almost universal. This phenomenon, apparent from Table 21, 
probably finds its explanation in the fact that relatively larger 
and larger proportions of earning assets are represented in invest- 
ments and smaller and smaller proportions in loans and discounts, 
thus restricting relatively the form of assets normally giving rise 
to deposits.? But the character of total deposits likewise changed 
TABLE 21 TABLE 22 
NuMBER OF Districts wirHE Ratios oF COMPARATIVE POSITIONS AND YEAR-TO- 
Totar DErosiTs To EARNING As- YEAR DirectioNs oF CHANGE IN Dis- 
SETS INCREASING OR DECREASING TRICT RATIOS OF ToTAL DEPOSITS 
FROM YEAR TO YEAR, 1910-1925 TO EARNING ASSETS 
NTe—-—r~ - = DISTPICTS Direction of Change 
CC — from Year to Year 
1acreasing 
' Total 
30 
42 
72 
Laws 
during these years, which fact supplies the basis for the isolation 
of norms and trends relating to the components. The correlation 
of the dispersion and year-to-year changes in related ratios is dis- 
cussed later. 
It is of interest, before leaving the subject of year-to-year 
changes, to discuss briefly the changes when they are related to 
the districts with high or low ratios relative to the seven-year 
level. Do ratios which are high in a given year tend generally to 
move downward, and those which are low generally to move up- 
ward in the following year? Are the net percentage changes 
from year to year functions of the positions of the ratios relative 
to the “long-time” levels? Table 22 supplies a negative answer 
to the first question. Of the 30 district ratios which were high, 
"8 See Charts 2 and 4, pages 22 and 30.