*4 
BANKING STANDARDS 
TABLE 351 
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCE FROM DISTRICT AVERAGE, 1019-1925, OF 
RATIOS OF GROSS EARNINGS TO EARNING ASSETS FOR ALL MEM- 
BER BANKS, BY YEARS AND FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICTS 
FEDERAL RESERVE 
DISTRICTS 
d0stown..... oe 
New York...... .... 
Philadelphia.... -.... 
Cleveland. ........... 
Richmond............ 
Atlanta. ....cc000-0i0 
Chicago. ...ooeeene. on 
St.Louis. ...ooo0en.s 
Minneapolis. ..... 
Kansas City.... 
Dallas. ....... 
San Francisco..... 
PERCENTAGE DIFFERENCE FROM DISTRICT AVERAGE, 1910-1925 
raz 1923 | 1024 1925 
eI 
- ,.02 
-~XI.55 
~10.1] 
yc not 
Lf 
«3 
+ .4 
-2.7 
- 
+ 6.4 
t17.5 
+ 5.0 
+ 2.4 
+ ” 3 
+ <a 
= .49 
—6.80 
+ .08 
+2.58 
+1.57 
-3.13 
4.7% 
a; 
9.C 
X.73 
-4.55 
4+ .43 
LL 
equal, to be attracted to regions where rates are high and to be 
deflected from those where rates are low. In spite of this fact, 
however, district differences in the ratios of gross earnings to 
earning assets, as will be seen later, tend to persist over a series 
of years. Yet the years in which rates are relatively high or low 
in one district tend also to be high or low in others. 
From Table 50 it was seen that for all districts combined, the 
rates were higher in 1920 than in 1919, and in 1921 than in 1920. 
[n 1921, a recession began, lasting through 1925, except for a 
slight revival in 1924. Accordingly, it is well to observe the 
nature and amounts by which the ratios in the different districts 
changed from year to year in order to determine the similarities, 
if any, which obtain. A summary of such changes, expressed on a 
percentage basis, is given in Table 52. 
How nearly are the directions of change, true for the country 
as a whole, duplicated in the respective districts? This table 
shows that in all of the districts, except Minneapolis, the rates 
were higher in 1920 than in 1919, and in all except Richmond, 
higher in 1921 than 1920. Contrariwise, all of the districts ex- 
cept three (Philadelphia, Cleveland, and Richmond) followed the 
downward trend experienced by the combined districts between 
1921 and 1922. A decrease—by unequal percentages—between 
1922 and 1923 occurred in every district. Complete uniformity 
in the direction of change does not obtain among the various dis- 
tricts between 1923 and 1924 and between 1924 and 19235, al- 
though between the latter years, in all but three of the districts,