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 pro- 
portion 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, differ- 
entials of the types indicated are general the country over for 
each city-size comparison and for the various city-size compari- 
sons in each district. 
The district and city differences in rates illustrated in the sum- 
mary 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.