TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Bureau of Business Research The University of Texas Vol. XIII, No. 10 NoYcmhcr 28, 1939 A Monthly Summary of Business and Economic Conditions in Texas and the Southwest Bureau of Business Research, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas Entered H •econd clue matter on May 7, 1928, at the poat office at Auatio, Ten•, under Act ef Au1u1t U, 1912 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW INDEX E S Of BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN TEXAS AVERAGE MONTH OF 1930=100% W l I 0 H T COlo'IPOSITt IMOl>I [ MPL O V M[HT ---21"• rR t ltlHT CAALOAOINGS---ao "'· CRUD[ OIL RUMS . ,.. D CPARTMCMT STORE SA L.CS-I 0 '!'0 [L[CTfUC POWCR CONSUMPTIOt+-1 S "• PAY ROLLS 2!"' Th t Uftl'f'trl l fJ Of TU j J \ 0 c 0 p ,.., 0 r (.I'\ .,., c r­ (fl '" 3: ~ ' 0 () 0 " I" I" z -I ,. l'"'1 -< CJ -I ~ r;y z ,. I:: c >-3 M -""Or 0 ~ ~ ..0 -< CfJ ,,. 'F' -. tO p " -a-0 c:::: CfJ T'"1 c " CJ I -2 r " J> M c c CfJ - ,. () 'F' CfJ I" "° :::0 VI -f ~ ;. M '.? O> (,/) <-M c < . z < . ~ ,. -c:7 ,. ~ 0 ~ z -70 ~ z ~ ~ (\ () p ,. ~ 0 -f rn ~ v (fl ['"1 % x 0 < l> ... (fl "' -< 0 r " : ;' +>­ I )> II __, I Business Review and Prospect GE'i'ERAL BusI'.'IEss Busines:; activitv in the inrlustrialized and commercial­ized areas of the l'nited States continues on the relatively hip:h level reached soon after the outb•·eak of war in Europe. hut the ri~e rlmin!! rerent weeks has become more µ-radual. Barron's index of industry and trade, adjusted for seasonal changes and lon oh·(:'s it;;elf not into one of maturity of industry, but solely into one of prioo-primarily the price of labor. "~fost of the talk about a mature economy and lack of opportunitiee for employment and capital investment For Other Texas Dat,a, See Statistical Tables at the End of This Publication must, therefore, be looked upon either as a camouflage to conceal a defeatist philosophy or as an apology for the blundering ineptitude of entrepreneurs, lahor unions, and government in fostering monopoly, raising prices and wage-rates, and curtailing output, rather than co­operating in such a way as to make effective use of our still abundant natural resources. The papers presented by McLaughlin, Watkins, and Weintraub show how easy it is to arrive at erroneous deductions apparently on the basis of thoroughly authenticated and well-presented statistical data. In this instance the data appear to fur­nish no support whatever for the conclusions presented in the papers here discussed." That mannfacturers are giving more attenti')n than formerly to the influence of price upon vol­ ume of sales is evidenced by their action several weeks ago when war hysteria seized the nation. The automobile industry hastily reaffirmed the price cuts made prior to the outbreak of the war; and even the steel companies have not taken advantage of the present situation of capacity operation by raising the official prices of steel during the first quarter of 1940. Could not the steel companies go even further than this in announcing their future price policy? At the present rate of operation and existing prices of steel, profits in this industry are enormous and may soon tempt labor leaders to demand even higher wages than is now paid, which in turn may cause the management of this industry lo start the upward spiral of steel prices; thus setting the stage for an increase in prices of all durable consumers goods, as well as machinery and other capital goods. Could not the public be given a greater share of the benefits of the technological improvements which have been made in the steel and allied key indus­ tries during the past ten years? Would not the prospect of a slowly declining price level in the products of key industries at stated periods tend to discourage inventory accumulations which have been so treacherous in the past and promise to become so again? Is it inherent in these key industries to be "prince or pauper" and to drag other industries with them in their violent gyrations? T EXAS BUSINESS Texas business continued through October the favor­able margin of improYement over the corresponding month a year ago, but there was a slight recession in the composite index from September to October as indicated in the following table. INDEXES OF BUSINESS ACTIVITY IN TEXAS Oct. Oct. Sept. 1939 1938 1939 Employment -----------·-·-­92.0 Pay Rolls ------------------96.5 Miscellaneous Freight Carload­ings (Southwest District) ___ 65.1 Crude Runs to Stills _______198.5 87.8 89.9 62.6 176.7 90.4 93.0 67.4 195.1• Department Store Sales ________ 100.3 Electric Power Consumption_ ____ 131.2 95.8 116.5 109.4 134.9. COMPOSITE INDEX ---­99.8 92.8 100.3• *Revited.. It will be noted that the composite index was one­balf point below that of the month before, but seven points, or nearly eight per cent, above that of October last year. Some ground for optimi~m may hr glc'nrn'd frnm the fart, howe\Tr. that althou ~h thr < 'OlllJHl~ite indt'X de­clined, pay roll ~ i1wrra, Pd nea• h fe111r pn ('l'llt from Septembrr to Ot·td>C'r: while the t"tal 11u111lwr nf workers ro~e ncarh t\l·o prr rrnt. anrl thr ,·ol1111w of ni l rdining. Texas' lar!!est manufactmi n!! indu;;trY. !!ai11ed nearly two per cent. ,The indexrs sho\\-'ing del'li;1r; rcpre;;entecl con­sumption and mav hr PxprC'!ed to show more fayorable lenrlencies as pa,-rolls imprn,·e. There is usuallv a time la!:! hrtwren thr occurrence of increasing in!'~me and it"' reflrr·tion in retail sales, but since the formrr has alrrarh· hegun. thr latter may be expected to follow sonn. It is rxpccterl. thr rdore, that the indus1rial inrlrxes of thr 5tatc will continue to impro,·e, and these \\·ill soon he suppnrtrd ln· a rise in the indexes \rhir·h "epr<'le al1110<1 ~olelY to the decline in produr·tion and pri('e of cotton. Siner this crop is markc!ccL in the main, clt1rin'.! thr months of August to December. 11·e may exper-t this relatin,1'· un­fanHable showin~ duri11~ thc;;r month,.; until su('h time as the ne('essary ;.cndj11 and has re-empha~ized the potential nee~ for huge. adch­tional outlays for equip:i1ent. and supplies that Will be needed before this War 1s fimshed. The warfare of 193') require~ a mtwh larg<' r fi11a1H·ial inYe,tmcnt and makes i11li11itcl1 !!realer indtHrial dc­111ands per m~m at tlie frunt tf1a1~ in 1'J l l. :\ nd in a 11·ar of any substantial duratiun it i~ JllJ\\' 'a,t!1 111un: important to ha1c, in addition tu a l't>lltinu"us o'll!'l'IY of foodstuffs and raw material•. a rdi:dile ;:uun c ,,1 rna11u· facturccl equipment and ll1Ui1itio11,; tu rcpk11i,h thl' rnore rapid use and de;:tnwtiun occmri11g at the ]!"int .,f ,·011­tuct with the cnem\" For tlw;;e rl'as"11" it rna1· J.e ;1,:'t111wd that a blockade, .l9J11c F1m\T Despite her loud b"a•ts tu the rnntran'. th: \azi Co\ernmcnt is today pru!Jal,h n1u..h /t-., sl'lt-•:H:1lll111g 1han 11·ere the Central l'Ulll'I> 1:1 l'Jl l. Fur l'\a;1i]'le. tlw Central Po11crs had large li11amial rt'Sl!ltrt·cs in the furm of fureigu iu1 cslmr11tc; together 11·ith a one billi,_, 11 doHar "'old re:'cn·e comparccl at preof:!It tu n :ry 11oi11t11..d l"rc:1gn fme:'tme11ts r.nd total gold huldi:1g' ui le":' than nirit:ly rnilliun;;, e\cn including the Czecho.:::lu1 aki:m a,·,pi~i­tion. ~loreo1er, the steel producing capacity of the Central Powers in 1914. exceeded that of the Allies, and was based largely on domestic ores. The iron mines which assisted Germany during the World War are now within the French borders. With the British and French blockade already reported to be fairly effective except as to the Baltic Sea, Ger· many's trade will be limited to dealinrrs with neutral 0 countries on her borders together with those countries having ports on the Baltic, including Soviet Russia. And, assuming acquiescence of Hungary or Yugoslavia, ship· ments could be obtained from Rumania, Bulgaria, Greece, and Turkey. Most of these countries, however, with the possible exception of Italy and Russia, have had unhappy experiences in recent years from trade agreements with Germany, resulting in the accumulation of large "blocked Mark" credits in Berlin which had to be sold at hurre discounts. These countries are likely to find British a~d French gold and their comparatively stable currencies much more attractive than credit balances in Berlin; and Germany now has nothing but credit to offer in payment. It may be argued that Germany, if unable to buy needed materials, will go in and take them by force from her neighbors. The advantages of seizing Rumanian oil might be more than counterbalanced by the initial cost of the force required together with the subsequent necessity of maintaining military control of the country. Moreover, the chaotic conditions usually attendant upon present-day military operations, as are now evident in Poland, would seriously delay and demoralize subsequent productivity and transportation in the subdued area. Already the British and French are actively buying up the available raw materials and surplus foodstuffs of the Balkan countries and in Denmark and Sweden, thereby accomplishing the dual objective of obtaining needed supplies, and at the same time, removing re· sources which would otherwise be available to the Reich. The latter objective is considered by far the most important of the two. The recent renewal of ordi­nary trade relations between Britain and Russia may be a blow to Germany's claim that the Soviet Union was to act as her quartermaster and chief supplier in this war. Inadequate transportation facilities are likely to hamper large-scale shipments of oil from Russia into Germany. It must _be granted that Russia constitutes an enigma, as ~~ual, rn any a~tempt to analyze Germany's supply posi~10n and her ab1l1ty l~ carry on a sustained struggle. But it does not seem possible that the hard-boiled Soviet ~egime would be willing to pile up large credit balances m such a doubtful currency as the Reichsmark. And, the unreliable and unpredictable characteristics of the So~iet Government would seem to render definitely pre­carious and vulnerable the position of any nation solely dependent thereon for_ sustaining aid in the present European conflict. It is remembered that Russia took a relatively large portion of Poland at the Russian­German partition ta_b!e after contributing a relatively sm_all part of the m1htary operations necessary in sub­durng that country. :;ubsequent divisions between one power so desperately in need of the assistance of the other are also likely to be heavily in favor of Russia. ALLIED FINANCIAL RESOURCES Assuming that the present restrictions on American loans to belligerants remain effective, foreign nations at war will be limited in their purchases from the United States by the amount of purchasing power which they c?u_l~ mobil!ze without such loans. The present pro­hibit10n agamst long-term loans retained in the Neu­trality Act and the Johnson Act of 1934 seem likely to stand for the present, at least. The President has already emphasized that ordinary "Commercial Credits" and s_hort-term loans ~n aid of transactions customarily used rn normal peacetime commercial trade do not come within the scope of the restrictions against loans. It appears, quite doubtful, however, that Allied Govern· m~nts could float long-term loans in amounts comparable with th~ $2,600,000,000. (approximately) sold publicly here prior lo our entry m the first Great War in April 1917, even if permitted by law to do so. There woulcl be vast_ly greater sales resistance in view of the generally recogmz~d d_oubt in the probability for repayment. The greater hkehhoo_d of cornp_let_e social and economic up­heaval and outright repudiat10n would be impediments from the start. The drastic price decline of most foreirrn bonds. ?utstanding in this country since the outbreak ~f !10stihties reflects a recognition of the inherent risk mvolved. . On t~e other hand, the question of long-term loans is no.t likely to be important during the early months of this war because of the funds which can be obtained fr_om oth~~ ~ourc~s. As their ~ndustrial plant and ship­ pmg. f~c1htie~ will be occupied almost exclusively in pr?vidrng their own war needs, the Allies will have two chief sources of purchasing power: 1. Their gold reserves, and 2. !he funds. they now have invested abroad, principally m the Umted States. The gold holdings of Central banks and Governments as ~f ~ugust 3~, 1939, are tabulated in Schedule I from s~atlstics compiled in the Federal Reserve Bulletin for No~ember, 1939. The principal gold reserves of the Alhed Governments amount to approximately $5 500. 000,000, as summarized from Schedule I: ' ' Country Gold Holdings at $35 Per Ounce Bank of Canada _____$ 213,000 000 Bank of England -----·---1,162 ooo'000 British Equalization Fund ' ' (approximate) ___ 1,000,000,000 Total British and Canadian ------$2,375,000,000 Bank of France__ _______$2,714,000,000 French Equalization Fund (approximate) --------449,000,000 Total French ------3,163,000,000 Total British, Canadian and French --------$5.538,000,000 While n~t all of this gold would actually be available for u~e, it may be assumed that a considerable amounto! .private gold holdings could be mobilized from the c1~izens of the respective countries. And these, together with new gold production of approximately six hundred TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW fift~ millions annually, should provide a substantial available gold war chest in the neighborhood of $1,500,­?00,~00. A large portion of this Allied gold is already m this country for safe keeping, ear-marked for account of the Foreign Central banks. SCHEDULE I REPORTED Gow STOCKS OF CENTRAL BANKS AND GovERNMENTS August, 1914* August 31, 1939 Argentine ----------­$ 431,000,000 Belgium -----------­614,000,000 Brazil -------------­34.,000,000 Bulgaria -------------­24,000,000 Canada --------­218,000,000 Chile ---------­30,000,000 China ---------------­21,000,000 Colombia ---------­20,000,000 Czechoslovakia --------­60,000,000 Denmark --------­53,000,000 Egypt -----------55,000,000 England ------------$ 795,000,000 1,162,000,000t France -----------1,750,000,000 2,714,000,00ot Germany ----------1,000,000,000 29,000,000 Greece-------------28,000,000 Holland -------------769,000,000 Hungary ---------24,000,000 Italy --------------­ 193,000,000 Japan ---------------164,000,000 Mexico ---------------­ 29,000,000 New Zealand ------­ 23,000,000 Norway ----------­ 107,000,000 19,000,000 Peru ----------­ 84,000,000 Poland -------­Portugal -----­ 69,000,000 137,000,000 Rumania -----------­ Russia (U.S.S.R.) ____ 1,190,000,000§ 525,000,000 Spain ----------­ 348,000,000 Sweden -----------­ 585,000,000Switzerland ----­219,000,000South Africa ------­30,000,000 Turkey -----------­ 16,646,000,000 United States -------750,000,000 68,000,000 Uruguay -----------­ 57,000,000 Yugoslavia --------­ *The figures in this column are estimated in dollars of 1914 weight form statistics in National City Bank's Monthly Letter for Octo.ber, 1939. tin addition the British Equalization Fund reported hold10gs of $~,732,000,000 of gold in March 1939 · believed to have been reduced to approximately one billion since that' date.' Nearly all of the Bank of England's reserves were transferred to the Equalization Fund on September 6, 1939. . . lThc French Equalization Fund reported gold holdings of an add111ona1 $449,000,000. §Estimated. Looking to the other source of potential purcha~ing power, investments in the Lnited States held by Canadian, British and French nationals were estimated at $1-,300,­000,000 by a U. S. Department of Commerce release dated August 29, 1939. These holdings are divided as follows: Investments in the United States- Canadian ---------______$1,400,000,000 British ----------------------2,350,000,000 French ---------------550,000,000 TotaL__________________$4,300,000,000 The Governments of Canada, England, and France have already issued decrees requiring their n.ationals to rerrister all foreirrn investment~, thereby seltmg up the m~chinery for th; eventual rquisitio1_1in~ of t~ese private holdings, making payment therefor m Canad1~n dollars, Pound Sterlinrr, and French Francs, respectl\·ely. All three Govern~cnts are maintaining rigid control of foreign exchange movements to prevent depletion of funds which may later be needed in financin~ war pur­chases. That the Allied Go,crnments will utilize the vital purchasing po\\·er realizable from thc~t> re:'oun-es in the absence of an early termination of the war appears certain. The exact method of expropriation is not yet definitely known-nor is it particularly important. During the World War the French and British Govern· ments "borrowed" their nationals' securities by offering various inducements. But in view of the recent adrnnces in authoritarian technique ir:i the democracies as well as the totalitarian states, it may be expected that nothing more subtle than forced transfer to the home currencies at fixed prices will be decreed. The combined external purchasing power of the Allied GoYernments. on the basis of the foregoing summary, amounts to a total of nearly $10,0W,OUU,OUO. The liquidity or availability of these resources on short notice is believed to be much greater than was the case in 1914. Their gold reserves are double the amount held in 1914 and are concentrated in Central banks, \\:hereas in 1914, owr 60 per cent of their gold was in circulation as exchange media. ( \\"hile the actual weight of gold dollars is lower today, there has been little change in terms of purchasing power.) Another element ?£ availability is provided by the large portion of present rnvestments in this country now in the form ot bank balances, as indicated in the following summary: Foreign Depo iu in U.S. Bank. aa of August 2, 1939 Canadian ------------S 300,077,000 British 511,798,000 French 276,686,000 1,088,561,000 Source: Bulletin of Treasury Department, October, 1939, pp. 33. This one billion dollars, together with the liquid gold resources, should be ample for the near-term needs of the Allies, and large scale liquidation uf securities will come later, if at all, and may be expected to be Ycry orderly, much in contrast to the demoralization which resulted from foreign selling during the early months of the \Var in 191-J.. ;\loreu\er, actual expenditure of the proceeds of the Allies' present gold hul A~lt:IUC.\:'> BLSl:'>ESS \'\"hi le immediate use of the . .\!lies' external pun bas­ing power is likely to continue to Le _cvuce11tratcd. in the Balkans and other neutral countries still haung access to Germany because of the obvious dual purpose accomplished thereby, the united States is being looked to as a reserve if the war drags on, as well as a present source of airplanes and other articles which our indus­trial plants alone can supply. With the outbreak of hostilities on September 1, 1939, came a tremendous shift in American industry from a comparatively low to a comparatively high level of activity. Steel operations exhibited the most rapid in­crease in history, improving from 60'/o of capacity late in August to 90.3 'iO of capacity for the last three weeks of October, and further to 92.5'/o for the second week of November. In physical volume the recent rate of steel output represents the highest level of production on record, exceeding the best levels reached in 1937 and 1929. There are genuine fears of a shortage of freight cars over the next few months as carloadings during the second week in October were the highest since November, 1930. Of course, no ambitious conclusions should be held in regard to the permanent nature of present level of steel activity, for it is admitted by in­formed sources that present steel production is more than meeting current consumption by a margin of about 20%, and depleted inventories are being temporarily accumulated. There seems to be a definite feeling that at least a mild reaction may occur in the first part of 1940. The hesitant trend of stock prices since the be­ginning of October is the result of a cautious attitude on the part of business men as well as the small but steady selling for British accounts. During the first 2% months of this war, there has occurred no important foreign buying in this country except in the airplane field. Moreover, orders from abroad in the future are not likely to be great should the Allied nations decide to confine their offensive solely to an extended and persistent economic blockade. On the other hand, from a purely dome~tic standpoint, the enlarged purchasing power created by recent increases in emplo) ment together with the rise in farm commodity prices should stimulate domestic consumption to an extent which should go a long way toward substantiating a relati,·ely high level of business activity during the coming months. Business reeo,·ery, already under way in the summer months of 1939, has been gi\·en a large impetus and there is a possibility of these factors feed­ing on themselves to generate further momentum. l\lore· o\·er, the warring nations must neglect their foreign com­mercial trade just as they did in 1914, and this country may again make strides in building up its trade with neutrals, notably South American countries, if facilitating financial arrangements can be set up. It should be recognized generally that the long-term consequences of a war in the modern manner would be disastrous to neutrals as well as belligerents, both vic­tors and vanquished. A war to the finish would cause such tremendous destruction of wealth as to consume the accumulated capital of several generations, and bring about the deterioration and possible disintegration of capitalism in Europe. And still, the opportunist, a de­scri plion which seems to fit American industry at present, while he cannot disregard the day of reckoning, tries to do what he can for himself pending its arrival. WALDO B. LITTLE, Investment Analyst, The Fort Worth National Bank. Production and Manufacture of Peanuts in Texas Peanuts adapt themselves to a wide range of climate and are grown to some extent in all parts of Texas where rainfall is moderate and the growing season at least one hundred to one hundred forty days without frost. Although they are produced commercially in Texas in fifty or more counties, the area of greatest concentration of the production of peanuts are in Hale, Lamb, and Jones Counties located in Districts 1-N, 1-S, and District 2 of the agricultural crop reporting districts; Brown, Comanche, Eastland, Erath, and Wise Counties in the north-central region of the Stale included in Dis­trict 3; Denton, Grayson, Johnson, and Lamar Counties in District 4; Anderson, Bowie, Harrison, Houston, Husk, and Shelby Counties in the northeastern part of the Stale in District 5; also Gillespie, Lee, Wilson, Wharton, Atascosa, Rio, and La Salle Counties in the southern part of the State centering around San Antonio. Production of peanuts in the Cnited States increased from 1,093,261,000 pounds in 1919 to 2,084,900,000 pounds in 1938, according to estimates of the Department of Agriculture. During this period imports of peanut oil decreased from 165,13'.3,000 pounds in 1919 to 45,038,000 pounds in 1936. The increase in production of peanut oil in this country and the decrease in imports indicate that the demand is being more nearly supplied by domestic sources. Little commercial peanut oil was produced in the South until after 1915. Since that time experimental work on peanuts has resulted in a large increase of acreage and a corresponding increase in the uses of pea­nuts and peanut products. The manufacture of peanut butter consumes at least 400,000,000 pounds of peanuts each year, while other large quantities are consumed by industries producing vegetable shortenings, oleomargarine, and salad oils. Besides the use of peanut meal-a residue of the oil mills-which constitutes a valuable stock food, many acres of peanuts arc planted in Texas and other Southern States for forage crops or for improving the soil. As has been the case in certain other instances, efforts to convert the surplus portion of a crop into marketable products has resulted in new uses for the original product and has created a demand for the resulting by-products thus giving rise to still greater production. Some of the uses of peanuts are in the manufacture of peanut butter, oleomargarine, shortening, and salad oil. Large amounts are also used by the confectionary industry. The oil cake resulting from the manufacture of oil contains a high percentage of protein similar to that TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW found in eggs and meat and constitutes a valuable stock feed. The lower grades of peanut oil arc used in the manufacture of soap. Every part of the plant and all by-products resulting from factory processes can be utilized to good advantage. The finest grades of peanut oil are used for food pur­poses, and have become widely used particul.arly in European and Asiatic countries. These countries als.o consume large quantities of second grade. peanut ?11 in the canning of seafoods, or used in combmat10n with coconut and other fats in the production of oleomar­garines. As additional uses for the poorer gra~es of peanuts and peanut oil are devel?ped, the quality of peanuts and peanut products avail.able fo: f~od pur­poses are improved and Letter pnces mamtamed for both the farmer and the manufacturer. Introduced into North America during the early colonial days, peanuts are today an important money crop in at least nine Southern ~tales and ran.k high. as a food product in all parts of this country. S01l require­ments differ according to varieties, and although they are produced comrnercialiy on several different kinds of soils, light sandy types are most often preferred since the soil does not adhere to the pods and the crops are more easily harvested. At present more than one million acres are planted in the United States an­nually for food purposes besides an even larger area grown for use as hay or left in the fields for grazing and soil building. The total acreage planted in peanuts in the United States for all purposes during the year 1938 totaled 2,744.,000 acres. Peanuts planted in Texas in 1938 totaled 358,000 acres. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates of production of peanuts in Texas and the number of pounds sold are shown in the following table grouped according to crop reporting districts. Estimated Total Production Estimated Amount Sold Pounds Pounds Pounds Pounds District 1938 1937 1938 1937 2 -----------1,205,000 88,000 1,061,000 61,000 3 _______ .57 ,692,000 36,187,000 53,134,000 31,736,000 4 ____ll,092,000 14,456,000 9,750,000 12,548,000 5 ---3,370,000 2,215,000 1,561,000 716,000 7 ------5,593,000 7,513,000 4,933,000 6,544,000 8 ______l 7,047,000 11,260,000 15,308,000 9,986,000 10 --------·20,943,000 15,726,000 19,958,000 13,776,000 Other __ 58,000 115,000 26,000 36,000 NOTE: For location of crop reporting districts see page 14. Peanuts arc a legume rich in fat, proteins, and other food and soil-building properties. The Spanish ~eanut averages approximately 52.0 per cent oil, accordm? t.o United Stales Department of Agriculture tests, and 1t is found that it is this trpc of peanut that is especially suitable for commercial production in Texas. The 19.33 peanut crop in Texas was 9~.0 .p~r cent of the Sparnsh variety and only 4 per cent V1rgmrns, Runners, and other types. The wei(Yht of shells and trash per ton is usually about 600 ;ounds, so that the a\·cragc amount of oil in a ton of unshelled Sp:111i,'11 iwanut,;;. fi!!11rc'd on a b:1"i" of 50 per cent of oil, is approxi111<1 lc·h /\)() Jl 1.2Amarillo___________ 3 60.7 61.0 50.4 42.9 1.5 1.9 Austin _________________________________ 5 61.5 58.8 47.2 47.2 1.0 0.9 Beaumont___________________________________ 3 70.9 68.7 42.2 45.2 1.0 1.4 Dallas ------------------------------------------------0.7 1.0 9 78.l 75.9 37.7 35.3 Fort Worth_________________________________ 6 67.4 64.1 35.8 35.8 0.9 1.2 Houston__________________ 8 66.5 64.7 41.0 36.6 1.2 1.4 San Antonio ___________________________ 7 66.3 M.7 45.0 46.8 0.8 0.7 Waco _ 4 65.9 64.4 31.2 30.9 1.1 1.1 All Others _____________________________________ 20 61.0 61.6 36.7 37.9 1.2 1.2 Stores Grouped According to Type of Store: Department Stores (Annual Volume Over $500,000) ______________ 20 68.2 66.5 40.3 37.2 0.9 1.1 Department Stores (Annual Volume Under $500,000) _____________ 11 59.8 61.4 36.7 36.9 1.5 1.5 Dry Goods Apparel Stores ________________ 5 66.9 60.6 42.1 37.4 1.3 1.4 Women's Specialty Shops____________ _ ________ 12 7.5.3 72.5 33.9 36.1 0.8 0.8Men's Clothing Stores ____________________ 19 68.4 68.3 40.3 41.3 1.3 1.6 Stores Grouped According to Volume of Net Sales During 1938: Over $2,500,000 ___________________________________________ 10 70.9 69.0 42.4 42.4 0.8 0.8 $2.500.000 down to $1,000.000 ___________________________________ _ 10 63.0 61.0 40.4 40.6 0.9 1.0 $1,000,000 down to $500,000 ________________________ 9 64.0 60.9 41.4 43.0 1.2 1.4 $500,000 down to $100,000 _________________________ 28 61.0 61.3 39.6 40.7 1.4 1.2 Less than $100,000____________________ 11 63.1 62.9 39.9 40.6 3.0 2.6 Non: The ratios shown for each year. in the order in which they appear from left to right, are obtained by the following computation•: (I) Credit ealer divided by net sales. (2) Collectiona during the month divided by the total accounts unpaid on the first of the month. (3) Salaries of the credit departl ment divided by credit sales. The dnta are reported to the Bureau of BusinclH Research by Texu retail 1tore1. PURCHASES OF SA VIN GS BONDS TEXAS COMMERCTAL FAILURES October, 1939 January I-November l, 1939 Oct. Oct. Sept.•Cost Maturity Cost Maturity 1939 1938 1939 Price Value Price Value Number ----------­21 31 17 Abilene ___________________ $ 10,3.31 $ 14,025 $ 165,788 $ 221,110 Liabilitiesll --------------------------$214 $492 $337 Amarillo -------------30.019 40.025 t t Assets II _______ -----------------------------123 366 104 Austin --------------36,919 49,225 346,444 461.925 Average Liabilities per Fail- Beaumont -----------23.569 31,425 404,983 540.075 ure --------------------------------10 16 20 Big Spring -------2,306 3.075 72.057 96,075 *Revised. Brownsville _______ 9,919 13,225 88.932 118,575 II In thousands. Brownwood -------2.138 2_850 47,847 62.800 NoTE: From Dun nnd Bradstrtet, Inc. Dallas -----------------166,331 221,775 2,149.612 2,866.150 CEMENT Del Rio -----------------563 750 6,808 9,075 Denison ---------------2,775 8,858 94,912• t (In Thousands of Barrels) Denton -----------------1.744 2.325 '14,571 59,425 Oct. Oct. Sept. El Paso -----------28.388 37_850 699.600 932.800 1939 1938 1939 Fort Worth -------172,594 230.125 1,144,746 1,526.325 TEXAS PLANTS Galveston ----------15,206 20.275 343.781 458,375 Production ------------------704 536 685 , Gladewater ---------1,406 1,875 82.221 109.250 Shipments ------------------------568 650 585 Harlingen ---------------2,588 3,450 58.220 77,600 Stocks __ _ ___ _ ------------------958 748 822 Kenedy ------------------56 75 7.219 9,625 UNITED STATES Kilgore ------------------9.356 12,475 100.107 1.33-475 Production ·-------------------------12.538 11,556 11,937 Shi pm en ts ____________________ 12,830 Longview -----------20,906 27,875 218.006 293.225 12,357 13,104 Stocks __________________________________19,868 Marshall -------______ 1,613 2,150 58,689 78,250 20,574 20,160 McAllen ----------------1,256 1,675 55,407 74.030 Capacity Operated ------------57.2% 52.9% 56.3% Pampa ---------------3,019 4.025 34, 708 46,355 Non: From U.S. Department o{ Interior, Bureau of Mines. Paris ----------------------806 1,007 102,263 136.857 Plainview -------------975 1,300 56,289 75,050 LUMBER Port Arthur ----------30,394 40.525 199,914 266,550 (In Board Feet)San Angelo -----------11,831 15,775 120.394 160.525 Oct. Oct. Sept. San Benito -------2,063 2,750 24,451 32,600 1939 ~938 1939 Sherman -----------731 975 68,008 91,275 Southern Pine Mills: 69,639. t Temple -----------4,481 5,975 Average Weekly Production Tyler -----------------5,738 7,650 226.875 292,498 per unit 304,313 300,564 298,289 Waco -.. --_ -----------38.269 51,025 446,174 594.900 Average Weekly Shipments Wichta Falls____ 14,006 18,675 352,289 469,715 per unit 362,818 347,732 373,583 TOTAL ----$ 652,296 $ 870,065 $7,726,4-03 $10,294,490 Average Unfilled Or.Qers per Unit, End of Month__ 976,202 690,929 1,167,136 •Not Included in total. tNot availablo. !llo:a:: From Soutberu Pino Aoooci&tion. BUILDING PERMITS POSTAL RECEIPTS Oct. 1939 Oct. 1938 Sept. 1939 Oct. 1939 Oct. 1938 Sep t. 1939 Abilene ------------$ Amarillo -----­----­ 40,483 172,584 $ 56,201 181,398 $ 48,195 270.265 Abilene -------­Amarillo _____ 18.526 34.660 s 19,139 32.273 $ 17.248 30.395 Austin -----·-------·-­ 504.208 483,472 346.133 Austin ----­ 70.667 61.162 71.986 Beaumont --------­Big Spring -------­Brownsville -----­ 183,848 16,150 473,76911t 73,914 19,405 t 99.241 13,140 13,645"t Beaumont ___ Big Spring ___ Brownsville ____ 25.922 6.198 13.225 25.795 6,770 5.321 25,703 5.520 4.842 Corpus Christi ___ 1,368,445 182.050 225,709 Brownwood ______ 5,601 6.470 5.237 Corsicana ------­--­ 15.971 13.050 2.070 Corpus Christi _ 27.515 23.835 23.915 Dallas -----·--------­ 1,559.054 977.683 787,276 Cor2icana ___ 6.329 5.974 5.148 Del Rio ------------­ 10,635 8,555 3,635 Dallas ----------­ 400.618 398.122 376.110 Denton --------------­ 36.405 13,150 37.400 Del Rio -------­ 4.756 3.329 4.496 El Paso ---------­Fort Worth ---·----­ 120,522 1.910.643 204,615 269,193 871.52011 264,535 Denison ----­----Denton ------­ 5.695 9.157 5.293 8.534 5,135 6.988 Galveston -----------Gladewater ---------­ 122,675 0 99,320 2,7.55 112,501 2 El Paso -·---­Fort Worth ____ 50.185 163.Tl7 44.376 157.950 43.139 144.998 Graham ----------------­ 7.900 6,650 1,790 Galveston --·--·-­ 33.292 29,611 28.078 Harlngen -·----­------­ 23. 200 17.710 14.210 Gladewater ____ 2.816 3.097 2,465 Houston ----------­Jacksonville -------··­ 1,974,015 18.875 3,055,045 200 2,521.210 1.200 Graham -·-------Harlingen _____ 2,760 6.371 2.606 5,256 1.978 5.930 Kilgore -----------­Laredo -------------------­Lon g;view --------------­Lubbock ----------­ 70,750 1. 700 7,100 263.640 87,000 18,500 7.500• 300.9()() 77,000 0 13.050 248.667 Houston 1acksonville _____ Kenedy _____ Kilgore ______ 257.508 :l,420 1.405 6.382 241.255 3.228 1.407 6.258 234.913 2,763 1,125 5.082 McAllen Marshall -------------­-·-------------­ 50.200 20. 702 46,867 26,689" 29,240 23.845 Longview ________ Lubbock _____ 9.959 20.683 9.857 18.579 8,322 23.642 New Braunfels ··­Palestine --------­ 10.975 10.993 3,405 13.137 9,935 13.750 Lufkin -------McAllen _____ 5.410 4.916 4,388 5.008 4.393 3.710 Pampa ------------­ 25.150 19.500 25.000 Marshall ·-----­ 7.157 6,481 5.650 Paris ------·----·------­ 6,369 15.195 9.675 Palestine ____ 5.207 5.024 4.882 Plainview -----------­Port Arthur ______ San Angelo ------­-­San Antonio _______ 775 93.069 20.994 507.225" 4.201 80.939 54.120 269,741 4.625 115.090 33,448 423,547 Pampa ---------­Paris -·--·---­Plainview ___ Port Arthur ___ 7,092 6,369 4.252 13.926 6.881 5.117 4,377 12.363 5.836 6.185 3.941 11.238 Sherman --·---------Sweetwater -----------­ 34,375 7.760 34.160 5.945 34.037 15.470 San Angelo ______ San Antonio ___ 12.749 127,703 12.295 121.321 11,41 6 114.382 Tvler -----------------­ 715 988 40,839" 57,272 San Benito ___ 2.429 2,177 2.515 Waco ----------------­ 71.010 81.943 109.850" Sherman _____ 7,979 7,529 7.470 Wchita Falls____ __ _ 113.780 127,206" 83,965 Snyder -------­ 1,803 1,805 1.240 $6,902,243 $9,937,498 Sweetwater --·-----5,955 5.587 4.!m TOTAL -----·---------$10,118,168 Temple ------------7.301 6.776 6.734 Tyler --------18.539 17.206 14.110 •Docs not include public works. Waco .. _ ___ __ 33,081 33.263 30.660 t ot included in total. !Not available. Wichita Falls __ 2.3,968 23,500 22,3IB IJ incJudes an F.H.A. project. TOTAL _____ 1,491,604 1,413,827 1,3-16,025 NOTE: Compiled from reports from Texaa chambers of commerce to the Bureau of Business Research. NOTE: Compi1ed from reporll from Texas chambers of commerce to the Bureau of Business Research. TEXAS CHARTERS Oct. Oct. Sept. OCTOBER CARLOAD MOVEMENT OF PO LTRY 1939 1938 1939 AND EGGS Domestic Corporations-­Capitalization II ____________________$1,333 $1,810 $1,785 Shipments from Texas Stations 112 108 Number -----·----------------------------112 Can of Poultry Live Dreued Cart of Eu!it Classification of new corporations: Deatination• Chickens Turkey• Chicken• Turkeys 8 6 Oc t. Oc1 . Ort. Oct. Oct. Oct. Oct. Oct. Oct. Oct. Banking-Finance ----------­1 1939 1938 1939 1938 1939 1938 1939 1938 1939 1938 24 16 24Manufacturing ------------­2 4 40.0 74.5 27 21 22 TOTAL ---------· 1 18 26 17 0 0 0 6.5 10.5 Merchandising ---------------­ 0 ii ----------·----------------------------Intrastate -·-----·­ 3 0 3 1 2 4 33.5 61-.0 Public Service ----------­Interstate ------­Real Estate-Building -----­13 12 10 Origin Receipts al Texas tations 1 3 0 Transportation ------­15.0 10.S 23 29 25 TOTAL ---·-·----­ All Others ----------------­6.0 8.5 Intrastate ------­Number capitalized at less than 9.0 2.0 48 45 38 Interstate -----· --­ $5,000 ---·---·-----------­Number capitalized at $100,00 --;;:;e destination above la the 6rat de8tlnation H ahown by tbe orlclnal waybill. or more -------------­ 2 3 5 Cha nges in destination brought about by diversion orders are not e.bow-n. tPowdered egg• and canoed frozen cgp are converted to a shell fill equ_lvalont. 24 29 11 Foregn Corporations (Number) -Non: T heee data. are furnbhed the United State.e Depar~cnt of A(Tlcult~rc b ·troad official• through agent. at all 1t.1.tlo na wbJcb ortcJo.ate and rece.ive C:r1:'d shipment• of poultry aDd Ot!P. the dat:a no oompilcd by tho lluroau fl W thousaDd!. of Bulinell a-rob. NoTE: Compiled from 1ooords of the Secretary of 5tete. BANKING STATISTICS (In Millions of Dollars) October, 1939 October, 1938 September, 1939 Dallas United Dallas United Dal1as States District Sta tea District State1 District United DEBITS to individual accounts__ s 1,064* $41,964* s 976* $42,182* $ 801 $33,483 Condition of reporting member banks on- November l, 1939 November 2, 1938 September 27, 1939 AssETS: Loans and investments--total___________ Loans-total_____________________ $ 583 273 $22,728 8,521 $ 526 243 $21,408 8,327 $ 516 263 $22,419 8,350 Commercial, industrial, and agricultural loans________ Open Ma1·ket paper___________________________________ ________ 182 2 4,310 317 158 1 3,899 347 173 2 4,229 316 Loans to brokers and dealers in securities___________ 2 603 3 728 2 533 Other loans for purchasing or carrying securities__________ Real estate loans_____________________ Loans to banks__________________________ 14 22 512 1,184 36 14 21 571 1,164 llO 14 22 510 1,180 35 Other loans ·---------------------------------­Treasury Bills_______________________________ 51 22 1,559 667 46 t 1,508 t 50 13 1,547 419 Treasury Notes----------------------------------­U. S. Bonds -----------------------·----------------­ 53 82 2,159 5,858 t t t t 49 80' 2,137 5,881 Obligations fully guaranteed by U.S.Gov't___________________ 50 2.232 42 1,686 55 2,232 Other securities ------··----------------------------­ 58 3,291 55 3,263 56 3,400 Reserve with Federal Reserve Bank.___________ 133 9,885 Ill 7,116 133 9,794 Cash in vault --------------------------------­Balances with domestic banks___________________ Other assets--net________________________________ 10 277 30 458 3,111 1,258 10 211 27 419 2,166 1,243 12 271 30 486 3,018 1,220 LIABILITIES: Demand deposits-adjusted_________________________ 464 18.556 416 15,766 4-56 18,333 Time deposits ----------------------------------------­U.S. Government deposits___________________ 137 30 5,249 537 133 31 5,155 540 136 31 5,231 540 Inter-bank deposits:Domestic banks_______________________ Foreign banks__________________________ 267 7,954 727 215 1 6,219 475 248 7,667 753 Borrowings -------------------------­Other liabilities_ _________________________ 4 689 6 2 822 5 1 700 CAPITAL AccouNT_____________________________ 86 3,728 83 3,673 86 3,712 *Five Weeks. tNot avai lable. NOTE: From f edcral Reserve Board. ANNOUNCEMENTS The following organizations are among those which have announced convention dates for meetings in Texas: Texas Bankers Association, Trust Section, Houston. George M. Irving, Secre~ary, Second National Dank, Houston, November 30, 1939. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Houston. J. F. Callie, P. 0. Box 777, Austin, November 30, 1939. Texas Sheep and Goat Raisers Association, Fort Worth, December 7, 8, 1939. Soulli wc:;t Drug Corporation, Dallas, December 29, 1939. Texas Wl1olcsa!P Hardware Association, Dallas. Nat M. Johnson, Secretary, Ilutd Adolphus, Dallas, January 18, 1940. Texas Agriculture Workers Association, Dallas. Miss Maurine Hearn, Secretary, Cullc;;c Station, January 29, 1910. Tcx:is Association of Insurance Agents, Casualty and Surety Division, Dallas. D. G. foreman, Secretary, Chamber of Commerce, Fort Worth, January 29, 1940. Texas Association of Petroleum Retailers, Dallas. C. C. Hayley, Secretary, Dallas, January 29, 1940. Texas Seed and Plant Board, Dallas. Dr. E. P. Humbert, College Station, Jan· uary 29, 1940. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW DIRECTORY OF WHOLESALE EST ABLISH:'.\1E:.'\TS IN TEXAS Supplementing the Directory of Texas Manufacturers, published by the Bureau of Business Research in January, 1939, a bulletin listing the wholesale establish­ments located in Texas has been compiled, and is being prepared for distribution. The wholesale firms in the State have been listed alphabetically by cities and by typs of products distributed. It has been the effort of the Bureau to arrange the material contained in this supplement to serve the manufacturing, wholesaling, and retailing industries of the State by defining the purposes of the various kinds of wholesale establishments doing business in Texas, and to give as accurate informa­tion as is obtainable concerning the firms included in the lists of wholesalers. In the present volume we have attempted to differentiate between wholesale establishments and the group included under brokers, agents, and factory representa­tives. The latter are not included in the forthcoming directory but will be compiled in an additional list to be arranged as soon as the necessary information is available. The wholesale lists have been compiled with the cooperation of the chambers of commerce and the trade associations in Texas. In several instances where a firm is reported both as a manufacturer and as a wholesaler, if the name has already been included in the manufacturers directory, it is not repeated in the wholesale list. For example, printers, bottlers, etc., are included in the manufacturer's lists. The wholesale directory will be made available at an early date and will be distributed as a supplement to the Directory of Texas Manufacturers. LIST OF PUBLICATIONS PRINTED BULLETINS The Basis of the Commercial and Industrial Development of Texas, by Elmer H. John•on. Price S2.00. Natural Regions of Texas, by Elmer H. Johnson. Price $1.00. Directory of Texas Manufactures, by F. A. Buechel and Clara H. Lewis. Price $2 .00. Eight Years of Livestock Shipments in Texas, by F. A. Buechel. Price Sl.00. A System of Accounting Procedure for Livestock Ranches, by F. W. Woodbridge. Price !l.50. Methods for the Study of Retail Relationships, by William J. Reilly. Price Sl.00. What Place Has the Advertising Agency in Market Research, by William J. Reilly. Price $1.00. MIMEORAPHED BULLETINS Studies of Employment Problems in Texas, by A. B. Cox. Price Sl.00. Price Manufacture of Dairy Products in Texas, by F. A. Buechel and Elmer H. Johnson. $1.00. l'ricP Farm Cash Income in Texas, 1927-1938, by F. A. Buechel and Elmer H. Johnson. $1.00. MONTHLY PUBLICATIONS TEXAS Bus1NESS REVIEW. Price $1.00 per year. New Passenger Car Registrations in Texas. Price ~2.00 per year. New Commercial Registrations in Texas. Price Sl.50 per year. CONTENTS PAGE Announcements . . --------------. _____. _____ . _____ _--------------__ _ ___ 18 Business Review and Prospect, F. A. Buechel______ ___ __ ______ _____ _ 4 Cotton Balance Sheet, A. B. Cox__________________ _____________···-··-·· 12 Financial Review, Watrous H. Irons_______________________________________________ _ ________ __ ____ 6 Financial Aspects of the War in Europe, Waldo B. Little _________ . ______ ___ 7 Production and Manufacture of Peanuts in Texas, Carroll Brown and Clara H. Lewis . _ . 10 LIST OF CHARTS Index of Business Activity in Texas....------·-··-·······--------····-----------·····---------------·········-·-----------------····----···· ·-······-··-··--···-···-·--············· 2 Monthly Farm Prices of Selected Products in Texas, 1916-1938__ ____ __ __ ··-····--····---·--··-·····-·-·········-····-·---·····----····--------------------------1, 3 LIST OF TABLES Banking Statistics --·-····· ······-.. -------··----··-·--····.....··------------··-·····-·······-··--·-----------·-········--·····--· ____ ----------·-····· .. ...... ···---······. ···-·--· --· ------·--·· 18 Building Permits -·····-·-······---····--··--·--······· -·· ···-------·····-·····-··-···-······-·-·--------------····-·-·---····------···-·----··-·-····· .. -----------·---···-·-·-··---····----------------17 Carload Movement of Poultry and Eggs ...... . .. ·--··· ·····--······· ·-·--·-------··-··--····----17 Cement ····-·····---..... ···-·-·-----······--------········· ···-···-·· ···· ······-···-· . ·--·· ·-····----····---···-···-·----------16 Charters ---------------------------··--·----------·-·············----·--·-----········-----------········-·····---···------------------------··········-·-···---------17 Commercial Failures ·····--··-·····-··-·· --····· -·-· ---·-· .----------------------16 Commodity Prices ____ --------·----··········· .. ··········--····----------------12 Consumption of Electric Power.................................................................................... ... ·····-················ . . .... ----···-----------------------------12 Cotton Balance Sheet......---·················-················ .......................................·········-··· ·····--····· ...... .. . ..... ............ ·····-···········-··· 12 Credit Ratios of Texas Retail Stores. ········ 16 Employment and Pay Rolls in Texag ............. 13 Lumber ...... ·······························-················ ................................................. ............. .................. ....... ···-····-····--···-··· 16 Petroleum ------------------·--···········-·--------------------·----------·---·------·-···------------------·-·---···-·····----------------· -------·--··-------··-····--·····-----···-------- --------15 Postal Receipts ·························-···················································································--···-----------------· ---·-·· . ·----------···-··· 17 Purchases of Savings Bonds__ _ _____ ___ _ ··--------------·-··· 16 Retail Sales of Independent Stores in Texas __ . __ ____ __ 14, 15 Shipments of Livestock__ ____ _________________ ____ _ .. -----· 12