Mercantile Conditions of Crisis of 1893 101 



such comparisons, we can quite permissibly and accurately 

 compare these ratios. 



Let us place in tabular form under each cause of failure 

 the order of the sections and the ratios of the liabilities of 

 failure therein in 1893 to the same in 1892. Then we have 

 the following: 



Incompetence, M 3, E 2, W 2, N 2^. S 2^, P 1 

 Inexperience, S 2, W 2, E 1%, N l}4, P 1^. M 1 

 Lack of capital, N 6, M 3, S 2, W 2, P 1, E 1 



Unwise credits, N 10, W 4, P 4, M 3, E 2, S 3^ (since '93 W higher) 

 Failure of others E 6, P 6, M 4, S 3)^, N 2%, W 2}4 

 Competition, S 5, W 5, P 4, M 1, N 1, E 3^ (in '94 E extraordinarily) 



Disast-rs, N 11, W 9, M 8, E 6, S 2, P 2 



Extravagance, W 10, N 3, E 1, S 1, M }4, P Vs 

 Fraud, M 5%, N 213. E 2, P 2. W m, S 1 



(From 1893-95 S and W are high) 

 Neglect, P 10, N 2, M 2, W 13^, E 1, S 1 



Speculation, P 20, S 5, M 4, E 1%, N 13^, W M 



If mere change in number of failures be considered, the 

 result is in some cases similar to the above, but in only 

 very few. The figures can not be extensively discussed 

 here, since such discussion would take too much space 

 and time; but every line of the table is full of intensely 

 interesting material. 



Perhaps it is best to notice, however, that in failures 

 "due to the failure of others" the East ranks first in 1893, 

 1. e., the crisis struck it higher than the other sections in 

 this respect; this is what we would expect, perhaps, and 

 must be placed as a corollary to the fact established else- 

 where, that in 1892 the East showed an increase of "neg- 

 lect," but shrinking "speculation," and that failures due 

 to "disaster" and to "failure of others" were rising. 



If we take all causes combined the ratio of liabilities -in 

 1893 to those in 1892 stands : 



N 6, W 4, E 2i, P 2^, S 2. 

 And if we add all the ratios in the above table for each 

 section we obtain: 



P 52, N 43, W 40, M 35, S 25, E 25. 



307 



