TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Bureau of Business Research 
The University of Texas 
Vol. XVIII, No. 8 September, 1944 
A Monthly Summary of Economic and Busineu Conditions in Texas By the Staff of the Bureau of Bminess Research, The University of Texas 
F. A. Buechel, Editor. 
Entered a1 eecond clue matter on May 7, 1928, at the poet 05.ee at Au1tin, Teua. a.oder Act of Aup.tt 24, lY.l.S 

/. I 
1!;!43-90,226 1942-68, I 13 1941-43, 140 1940-38,750 1939-.31,08 I 1938-28,704 19;37-34, 586 19~6-26,974 1935-25,2 78 
1934-25,52.8 
1933-23,088 1932-18131 I 1931 -26, 777 1930-38,957 1929-.31,239 1928-52,385 1927-43, 227 

TEN CENTS PER COPY 
ONE DOLLAR PER YEAR 

TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
--·-··==-==================~:=== 



Bu.si11ess:.]teview ·and -Prospect 
'' .• .•·· . . 
L: Fite problems of major importance .loom :o.n .the do­
. 'n\.estic economic horizon as the prospect ,for peace in ;Europe promises to be measured in weeks. rather than ·months br years, <viz. the problems of: . · 
L Inflation or deflation and how to meet it. 
2 . . Reconversion froril war to civilian production. .3: Attainment of maximum employment. . · 4. Small business in relation to reconversion. · 
; ' 5. Federal tax policies. . . 
; , . A sixth problem, monetary .stabilization, might .have been . added to this list but cannot be discussed in this 11rticle because of lack of space. ·· For a discussion of the first of the problems listed, the .reader is referred to the September, 1943,. issue of the REVIEW. Reference wa~ there made to an article .by Dr. Julius Hirsch in the September 6, 1943, issue of Barroi:i's in which Dr. Hirsch stated that in his opinion "t.he danger of undesirably low prices a-couple of years after the war is greater than the danger of skyrocketing prices" and went on to enumerate and analyze a num­ber .of factors in support of his arg ument. Since writing the article referred to, Dr. Hirsch has written a number of others amplifying his position in the light of Sl.\b_se­quent information but without greatly modifying the )IJitial conclusions reached in. the article referred to. 
The writer in commenting upon the . foregoing i;irticle pointed out that "a more fundamental approach to the question of whelher there shall be post-war i:nftation or deflation (perhaps it would be better to say rising or falling prices) is an analysis of the capacity of the nation to produce; and an analysis of the total produc­tive power of the nation must of necessity be based upon an ·analysis of the major natural regions which com­pose it, together with the natural resources of these regions and. the economic developments built thereon." Specific reference was made to work which is being · done in this Bureau along these lines with special reference to Texas. 
The closing paragraph of the article is perhaps worthy of repetition for it is as applicalJfe now as it was at that time and the problem referred to is still as much before the State 'as it was then. It reads ns follows: "It remains for the leadership of the State (or rather of ihe communities of the State) to develop a comprehensive policy for dealing with post-war problems, a policy which will include a concrete program of action based upon the natural resources of the State in conjunction with ·such factors as technologic advancement and. in­dustrial and financial organizating ability essential to the most advantageous utilization of Texas natural re­sources. To the extent that Texas succeeds in mobiliz­ing its vast potential productive power, to that extent will it contribute in a practical way toward preventing inflation and toward promoting the living conditions 
-of the people of the State. If similar action ·is taken in other states and in other regions 'Of·'the nation, a powerful deterrent will have been created, guarding not .only against the immediate menace of inflation, but more basically against -the depressing influence of h high public debt, the servicing of which must be counted upon to continue for decades to come. Only with a permanently much higher level of national in­come than that which prevailed during pre-war years ca:n a standard of living be developed in keeping · with the ·aspiratio.ns of our democracy. This national income must, of course, be represented not merely by a higher level of dollar income, but rather by a correspondingly higher level in the quantity of available goods." 
· The problem of reconversion to civilian produc­tion is still, to all superficial appearances, in a highly nebulous condition although it is believed by able ob­servers that greater progress is already being made. than the current reports on the subject would indicate. This failure to appreciate the progress already b-:ing made in the problem of industrial reconversion is probably the result of emphasis upon and dramatization of the problem of reconversion of the mammoth mass produc­tion industries-automobile, shipbuilding, aircraft, steel and the like. No doubt there will be challenging prob­lems in these fields but it is believed that considerable ground work has been and is being laid to meet them and that this process will go on at an accelerated pace. 
Encouraging in this connection are the following sen­tences from the recent testimony of ]. A. Krug, the new acting chairman of W.P.B. before the Senate War In­vestigating Committee: 
. "While doing everything possible to keep war pro­duction on schedule, W.P.B. has the task of preparing for the day when peace will be here, when large cut­
-backs come. We hope to make the £pot authorization procedure effective in absorbing local unemployment and using released manufacturing resources. 
"W.P.B. can release its controls, but that does not automatically mean that production will start up promptly or efficiently. We feel that the small business­
.man is the h<'y tn reconversion. The small companies will be able to get started quickly. It is our intention to prepare the way for smaller enter prises to get going when the time for reconversion is here. (The italics are mine.) 
· "In my opinion, the War Producti<rn Board now has too mci.ny and too complicated controls. Wherever it r-an be demonstrated that a control is not essential to tl:e progress of the war, it will be abandoned." 
Since the above testimony was given Mr. Krug has, on various occasions, clarified still further the policy 
,Lis organization intends to pursue as W.P.B. goes into cdipse and the problem of civilian production gains the qscendancy. · 
The problem of attaining maximum total employment is presented in an interesting and informative manner .in the ~eptember 16 issue of the Saturday Evening Post by Louis Ruthenburg, President of Servels, Inc. Mr. Ru thenburg states: 
"Grave responsibilitie8 will rest on the shoulders of all American business. There will be room for neither privilege nor special treatment. I see three things," he states, "as urgent requirements. One is that all Govern­ment military and other procurement agencies make prompt settlement of all accounts. Two, that all sur­plus war materials and plants be quickly moved out of the way of post-war production. And three, that Government continue, temporarily, its control over prices and the distribution of goods, but only until supply of goods is in reasonable balance with demand." 
In this same issue of the Post Maury Maverick, chair­man of the Smaller War Plants Corporation, has an article on "How Shall We Reconvert?" and he holds that "Small business must get the breaks." He states: "Give the little man first right at reconversion ... some money loaned him in his pocket, the easing of the tax load on his sore and bending back." 
"The Government is an umpire," says Mr. Maverick, .. . "Going around shops over America, talking to people big and little, listening to our staff of economists, and poring over statistics, I have worked out a set of rules for the umpire. Some are special and some general. Here are three general ones: 
"I. We want free enterprise, competition and an un­planned economy. Yes. But war is a planned economy; we've got to plan ourselves and schedule ourselves out of it. Also, let us realize now that the only way to get an unplanned peacetime ecenomy is to plan for it. I don't mean at all that we plan for each industry. But I mean we plan both negatively and affirmatively, as I point out in 2 and 3. 
"2. The Sherman Anti-trust Act must be enforced to 
give the little man a chance. Cartels-which are inter­
national combinations in restraint of trade against the 
people's necessities-and monopolies must not be tol­
erated in America. 
"3. Besides the negative job of enforcing the anti: trust laws, the little businessman must have affirmative help, such as the farmer has gotten for fifty years. 
"The little man," says Mr. Maverick, "should he al­lowed to convert first. If materials and labor can he spared, to any extent that won't hurt the war effort, let an appropriate number of littles do it now. There are several thousand fairly simple 'gizmos' and gadgets that can be made by little factories." 
Fortunately for the small business outlook, Mr. Krug, as already noted, holds essentially the same view as Mr. Maverick when he states: "We feel that the small business man is the key to reconversion." 
Federal tax policies now in process of formation will have a marked bearing on post-war economic reconstruc­tion. Three different groups engaged in economic plan­ning and research have recently prepared comprehen­sive post-war federal tax recommendations as follows: 
I. Harold F. Groves, Professor of Economics, at the . University of Wisconsin, published under the auspices of the C~mmittee for Economic Development in book form entitled "Production, Jobs and Taxes" (McGraw­Hill Book Co., New York). 
2. 
A group of Minnesota business men, "Twin Cities Plan Realistic Approach to the Problem of Federal Taxation." Published in pamphlet form (Twin Cities Research Bureau, 332 Cedar Street, St .Paul, Minnesota). 

3. 
Beardsley Ruml and H. Christian Sonne, "Fiscal and Monetary Policy," under the auspices of the National Planning Association (800 21st N.W., Washington, D.C. or 184 E. 64th St., New York, N.Y.). 


The following summary furnishes a comparison of the three plans with the present law. 

COMPARISON OF THREE FEDERAL POSTWAR TAX PLANS WITH THE PRESENT LAW 
Corporation income taxes  Pre1ent Law  Groves (Com. for. Econ. De•.)  Twin Cities Plan  Ruml-Sonno (Natl. Plan. Aua.)  
Normal and surtax­---· Excess profits tax ___ Tax on undistributed income__ Franchise tax -----­ 4-0% 95% None None  Repeal Repeal Possibly None  4-0% Repeal None None  Repeal Repeal 16%-New 5%-New  
Other corporation taxes  
Capital stock tax ----­­Deel. value excess profits ta:x__ Penalty tax on conwl. return_ Dividend receipts subject to tax_  Sl.25 per M 6.6 to 13.2% 2% 15%  Repeal Repeal Repeal Repeal  Repeal Repeal Repeal Repeal  Repeal Repeal Repeal Repeal  
Individual income  taxes  
Exemptions-single -----­Exemptions-married ------­Credits for dependents ____ Normal tax ------­---­Surtax begins at Surtax maximum -------­------­Dividends received -----­Interest on goT't obligations_____ 
 $ 500 1,000 500 3% SO to S2M @ 20% Over $200M @ 91% Fully taxable Partially exempt  Maintain broad base and high standard rates. Some moderation · in middle and upper brackets. Fully taxable Fully taxable  s 600 1,400 400 10% S2M to S4M @ 6% Over $300M @ 50% 40% exemption ?  s 500 1,000 500 16% $2M to $3M@ 1% Over S200M @ 50% Fully taxable Fully taxable  
Retail sales tax ----­-----­ None  None  5%-New  None  
Exciee  taxes  Various  Repeal or reduce  At 1943 rate•  Tobacco, alcohol,  
possibly gasoline  

TEXAS BUSINESS 
and the Southwest, business men in this State and re­gion have much at stake in the reconversion policiesIn the foregoing discussion, from the national point which are now in process of development.

of view, considerable emphasis was placed on problems Of special interest to Small Business in this State o( reconversion in relation to Small Business. Because and Region are the policies to be formulated for the of the great preponderance of small business in Texas disposal of Surplus War Property and the machinery to be set up for carrying out these policies. Few greater economic problems have ever been presented than those involved in the disposal of this property in such manner as to cause a minimum of dislocation in our normal economic activities. Texas business men who classify themselves in the "small" category are deeply concerned about this problem. Close coordination of effort as be­tween local, regional and national agencies responsible for working out this problem is, in their opinion, indis­pensable to a constructive solution. 
In discussing the problem of Surplue war good dis­posal with a considerable number of Texas individual business men in the small business group, it was particu· larly emphasized that the policy to be employed by the Government in the disposal of its surplus property should be made clear-especially as to that portion of the property which is directly competitive with small business. It was suggested that a i;;ystem be worked out by which each small business man may know precisely what he shall have to do to attain access to Government war goods and that big bidders who may have access to inside information should not be given the advantage. 
It was felt that steps should be taken on the part of Government and private business organizations to guard against the use of misleading names in connection with establishments selling surplus goods-names, for ex­ample, that would give the impression that ~oods are being sold by an agency at greatly reduced prices when, in fact, such might not be the case. The type of "fly by night" establishments selling Government war goods which appeared after World War I should, it ie stated, not be permitted after this war. 
CURRENT BusINES5 
Business activity continues at a high level in Texas. Department store dollar sales for August were up 26 per cent from a year ago and the increase in sales from July to August was sharply above the advance normally expected between these two monthe. Sales in all typee of storee, including department stores, were 18 per cent above August, 1943. The tendency which has prevailed for many m\)nths to purchase an increaeing proportion of merchandise for cash continues, while the tendency to pay for the merchandise bought on credit more promptly aleo continues. 
Commercial power consumption during August was more than 11 per cent above that of August last year, industrial power consumption was up 20 per cent and residential power consumption gained 9 per cent, while the overall gain in power consumption over August, 1943, was nearly 10 per cent. 
Output of petroleum in the nation during Augm;t reached an all-time peak and of this production nearly 46 per cent occurred in Texas. Sales of gasoline in Texas during July for civilian use were virtually the same as they were a year earlier. July sales of gasoline to the Government were more than twice that to civilians. 
Postal receipts during August were moderately above those of the preceding month and well . above those of the corresponding month last year. There was but slight change in aggregate building permits during August in upwards of forty Texas cities, in comparison with July and with August, last year. 
TEXAS AGRICULTURE 

The current over-all outlook for Texas agriculture ae reflected in the most recent crop report by the United States Department of Agriculture cannot be character­ized as either optimistic or the reverse but rather as average. Declines in prospectiYe production of such major crops as cotton and corn are offset by increases in wheat and grain sorghums, both in comparison with last year and the ten-year average. 
Estimated production of cotton, as of September l, is 2,450,000 bales compared with 2,823,000 bales actu­ally harvested last year and the ten-year average of 3,213,000 bales; corn is estimated at 64,649,000 bushels compared with 88,416,000 last year and 75,569,000 the ten-year average. On the other hand, the latest estimate places wheat production at 77,071,000 bushels com· pared with 36,360,000 bushels last year and the ten­year average of 28,195,000; and grain sorghums at 84, 708,000 compared with 71,817 ,000 a year ago and the ten-year average of 33, 790,000 bushels. 
Rice estimated at approximately 18 million bushels indicates a decline of more than 2 million bushels from a year ago but is still well above the ten-year average. 
Declines from last year also are indicated in the production of Irish and sweet potatoes, but substantial gains are expected in comparison with the ten-year average. A substantial gain over last year and the ten. year average is forecast for peanuts which have come to be an important crop in Texas during the war period. 
Range feed and pasture condition declined until late August as a result of dry, hot weather. Late Augusr and early September rains, however, gave ample moi11­ture to make range feeds and pastures, and to supply stock water in most areas. 
Cattle condition at 81 as of September 1 showed a 

2 point decline during August and also a 2 point decline 
from the twenty-year average. Satisfactory gains are ex­
pected during September, however, as a result of im­
proving feed and pasture condition. A similar situation 
prevails with respect to sheep condition, having declined 
slightly during August and declined 3 points from the 
twenty-year average. 
f ARM CASH INCOME 

Income from agriculture in Texas during Auguat totalled $96 million, a decline of approximately 22 pe1 cent from the corresponding month in 1943. This de­cline was primarily the result of the sharp decline in cotton ginnings as compared with August last year. Dur­ing August, 1943, ginnings totalled almost 706 thousand bales; whereas, during August this year the total was only 254 thousand bales, or a difference of 452 thousand bales between August of the two years. At present prices, 452 thousand bales are worth approximately $45 million. Income from livestock was well above August lruit year, a result of considerably larger marketings, which wa11 only partly offset, from the income standpoint, hy the lower level of livestock prices. Income from _wheat was well above that of a year ago, a · result both of higher prices and larger marketing:;. . _ · 
Reflecting the sharp drop in in~ome from cotton, the State index of iru::ome is well below both that of July, 1944, and August, 1943. · · · 
Estimated cotton production in Texas for the 1944-45 season as of September 1 is 2,450,000 bales, or . a de­cline of 373,000 bales from the actuai production of 2,823,000 bales a year ago. Income from cotton lint ih Texas during the 1943-44 season totalled $271 mil­lion against an expected income from lint for the current season of ·approximately $245 miilion. ·'Income from cotton lint plus ln2ome from seed during the current year will approximate $300 million compared with nearly $340 million during the 1943-44 season for the8e two products, a decline of 12 per cent. Of an expected totai farm cash incorrie in Texas for the current calendar year of ·upwards of $1,200,000,000, inc;ome from cotton and co:toiiseed represents approximately 25 per cent. In the late '20's, by way of corriparison, income from cotton and cottonseed represented approximately 65 per cent of the total farm cash ihcom~ of the State. 
. In spite of the expected sharp decline in income from cotton, total farm cash income for the current year is ex­pected to be about 10 per cent greater than a year ago. A substantial part of this gain is to be credited to wheat and to fruits and' vegetables. . 
·1i;· (-P J ")f. llH II Jlt>,.._ b\..j l 1·1 P. q-• -'!L J ::J d.; i:'H!r~.::­
!JNDRXEsf!QF .'.A,CTRrnlYL'PtJRA~):cA\g;A'[INCQM m "f.EXA's: 
~H ()') ,.,J;JI d·1[[t I/ ~BJfH~ ( ,j ;.,J r· '-~... ,d!.:11;1 /,; ·r~')'/ 
.foir•Jq -i.:.,<~n:r!g~.,~9nt~)?'2S-'32,equa)si ·l90%hi" {!Ji ~d oJ ·>fol lilrw buib")h nu·;i!i' '' ,·q;!ai,q du.Y~lati 't~sli'1;. J' • 
J;..u_ ;/-. •iJ1d :1:,,rl~1~· tr ",' ·1iJ ),, • -9! D Jl~~)JJ..
H¥1Pl0"A'~~d•

..... . · . an.-Ufl., 1ncl usive ...J 
· J?l•l•i:cto;I !J [ '.~'!i·<.Jl9~,\ July, 1944'< •A:u1.; 194S ' ·1")rh 9411l1 l'1G ~I -l943 Jill; 
(kij')ICl---•-!--1?.<il.7.o'' !342;4-! f!i.38.4;•,J"t ' 94 327 "):iiLl'<72l22Q1JJ! 
1-S --------576.3 373.6 314.g.,:;3111 ~.1k2ni -r<:>J tl-2.f2lt7iuk 
--·---------222.81 201.6 1 190 9l' 4819"' ~3 427

21 11
1< 3. 'L'.!.~!__<;_)325;2 !f ·~l!'.(7 <) 331:4 ,, I; .:fa;~f4)~-:J'• Z6;So . <:>Aif ,~.:L.1.ll.!!)('54:51; r -i96. ., lWQ,q l >;r·, w,20711"·;<,f.l79;(jt.g l ~ ,,5 ·ff;--.j.L'fi3,.0ot· ,i;i}53!'.t G .•1:53;3'; I!' .r·33{5li!7t.~ 'l) ·39;84$011 _,4~ :ji;---;-T_ 144£ ;-f; H\4,°f.i 1,,lp2.l.,Jrr:•;_fs,3,3!1_11hu~~9, ·Sl>J<oq
7. ---~----209.o ; 304.7. ·r 248.9 .QL8 . · 4~ 'l:7 
i ~u.r.:..:!_l_!.".__.,_,i; wB.re .n. . ?f.'4L1 Hrn9. . ·r.iJ,::,· 3:sQz ~~.,, ~;~b1 ·1•i 911 •L:!!L.:'-!l Jil6:9 _no 1164'.QO'.J <¥'61!0 ' J J 39 969 1 !l rn 4'5 '01~1'i .~O ·-i;o-.-,..--17'~3.4! E Ui3;2f·y;bl9.8:2, 1~ ~2~44!11irnb 3~J5o.'slil~ 
10-A -----579.9 201.9 278.4 .::.~Uh 1 r; 5 55.&JiiJuJ 
State -·----145.6 255.6 183.3 616,270 5W,112 
-· 3:!l0~J/I 1121) IIJ!fa1 . 
•The inde.1c1 for District 10-A were omitted in the Augu1t REviz". They are 
l~•~"~ol\liwo:,}Jr'/17.•11 9'"eJ0,1,.Jf J ff• ~~~+, uly,fl~;-2'!§f!W:JMnula-
Hve~ ttcom anuar . to Jutf rn~lu11ve i .\9:u;.:78,6451 l.9i1Jr-SS, 16 . 'l'J o•<"· F.. ml '{ :rnM"lll • J&tnp'alcll1't,if h.,; Bb e'a\P JflJer\?.a ls ~?!! ,J 0 )m -t: h ~ · • bl1 ffpS' .•i:'\ i•0 i!Wlt.i!H ~11.,;bl.llh_i11,.ini:aJio'il res.liiu11:i.cr 1lle1'.lac1 
t y at m.eans Lo eec u rng C?lllP ete lp~il -1.par ehngs ·e ~c·a1 b k 
1 r

thot ar \>e~nJ rtftHr;tte~e10ifea. frt ,a~'<lJf~·on, n• ~ 1ve;_s1atVt ~~~~ ~c~e 0~!: ~ @>mP.'\t OJ a,~ lnqo~frr/rp. AIJ-agriculJurl lfflij>eliialiiti 110.1"'1.I " i jxA-la\iee 110 •caller • thro~out t t te Thia •'t · n:11h · 
.n ii ' .b,. r t;.'/f i' e: '' .:."i lTPTi'''1. ua1 -c _o -~ er,u oea,rpot 
.. rmp 1 e ~accuracy o e i e%e to any · a ._preCTa1He" et:teot • • "'::. d ~ .L.. ~.. ~~· ., lc-ir..t .urft -r1H\·1 :..ir f l:..rt·ou ,.nf·111h. ~c· ~~·tL.ul n -~~lr:,r 
ESTIMATED TREND OF FARM CASH INCOME IN TEXAS 
. Beginning with the January, 1944, issue oI the REVIEW ·and continuing through July each issue of .the REVIEW 
contained one ot two . "tabulations 'giving -estimates' tit . 
far_1il . cash in cori1.e.· f ~r-t~e . principal .. commercial: :crop 1:md hwstork enterprises for the penod 1927 to 1943; inclusiYe. The data were· entered for the State as a wliol~ ancl"for each of the crop reporting disfricts. . . ' .'' . On the outer . front cover page of this iss~e oft}i; REVIEW are presented .the annual summary totals . Qt farm rnsh income for each crop :reporting distric~. in:d 0r the State during the period 1927 to 1943, iru:lW>~V~ 1hesc totals are an understatement of approxiiriately 6 pe,r cent, a result of incomplete figures on local ,rtiar­~~tings . and the non-i_nclusion of certain minor ~'t~j# grown ·1n scattered areas . over the State, such,· ror·,'el; 'ample, as broom-com, flax, and roses. Efforts are 'coli,: stantly being made to reduce this margin of ulidet­statement and to refine tl:ie data in other respects. No substantial changes in the trends of total income -.lb indicated on the chart will result from these refinements of the data. 1­
. l\ot~ble differences in the level and in the trends Qf mcome are to . be noted among the various districts: Dif­foren -.'es in le··e! of income are the result of vario~s factors, primaril~ geographic, thus showing concretely the value· of havmg the crop reporting districts deliiJ'­eated on the basis of the natural regions of the State. T,he differences in trend of income is largely a func­t1?n ?f the types of agricultural activity in the respective cl1stncts and the changes in market conditions for•the major product.s ·of each district. In general, the olde~ cotton producmg districts of the State have made' the inost unfavorable showing, while the districts ~t adapted to the production of livestock and livestoek produc~s as well as those best adapted to the production of frmts, vegetables and other specialties for which there ha.s been a growing demand, have made the :best slrnwing. ·.. . ..Jj 
These -Oillerences in cash income among the dist~i~ are ·.brought out even more strikingly when compritlid on a per farm basis. Using the figures given in the 1939 census on the ninnher of farms per district and the iP­(:ome -as ·coinputed, th~ following income per . f~'.·, js ubtairied for' 1943. 
'l1orn lib l'""~ ci;... Ji!swv i ~-; ·r·r.t · 'c edCuh
. 
·~---~ _. omput D' . ~--;~.,: ·. o. of ,.-•1 1AY. Acrea l J fJIOOJR01)9' utncte ·alii.a ~·~ . · 1 Fa:me ' • per FanD Fanp ' <'. 'f lai.nµJi:._..'£.UL!Jl!J •12,868 ·1 1i-r1 . 1,083 · '8,435' :1b~ .ce-1--l"'-'>:;1--f~-· o l,5,7_85 i1 · Ii; l 547 ,r : f 1 'r6,7~ · 
b~; ::r~~~=:i:s:::~ ~h·~;!1'.i,qr1·u~· n4fl ., .,,.~ I. ·a.~,11 · 'l!41{1!___~!_!1~.!___!_'!.~L~:~~:.>1a6:2si''•rlqm11-111,f~i ._ q lr-1fi1~ '. . l> !;llL __1_").N___ JJQ~_lJIli1Jl 8;8@3J ''J ·:0'! ii 99i • r· n ! I f"! ) '726' 
~ ---------------------------3,185.J 1'1 '1 5,727' ' . !! >•·15~'<1 
lP !j'~t!E:::~~~J2~;~:::!.i~_'.1r·~~:~g~~ r,i '~~•tj i ; "f~~~
f; 
{f9.w1!.l.__ 11mtWLQ:I.t-_: '27,800~ n,, ;11.Jq 11111 ·-!k 1 S,'246 ' i,10 .., .i-·')"B'~--i<•--'"~ "".' 10,151 •T ni Ii n 992 J 1·, 3,272 ~ ! mr.-i,-·--·rr""-4i~·~i-ii -i, .., t J,,~~ _r.;.,.;' 8,3.(3 :
·+01~
':1f1!1'J"L!! }(__, -~--; E;-i.Lu ' i·, rL!. • '·r; ' c~9... '! -::~,60~ 1 ~ 
hi :crop -reporti~g districts su~h as 1-N and ''10:::A the income per farm fqr 1944 wiH be even mor~ ~t~g. 
. ·.,:· :""i. 
F. A.. Bu&eHiL.:1 
. 

Outl~ok for Cotton 

The, immediate outlo~k for cotton in Texas in terms of casldncome is rel~tively good. The September 1 esti­mare : of production for Texas was 2,450,000 bales, and the pric,e to the farmers will average about 20 cents a poutj~. It is.safe then .to predict that the 1944-45 cotton crop<will contribute dose to $245,000,000 of farm cash incdtne from lint and possibly $45,000,000 from the seeq)o· Jexas. The bulk of this money will be injected into 'the· economy of the State between September 1 and January 1. While a substantial part of this income has been spent by the farmers through borrowings to make the crop, the bulk of it will be in one way or another spendable cash income, it being a 100 per cent cash crop. The wide range of activities connected with the harvesting, ginning, and marketing of the cotton crop giv.es the .income from it wide distribution through the community and makes cotton harvest the period of greatest economic activity in the State. Throughout a Mme pa~t of th~ State the cotton harvest period is the ;~!lbt paymg• penod. Maturity dates for loans are made to synchronize with this harvest, and it is the period 
when there is most free money to spend. ~(:'.:This income does not come into existence at the same 'iihie throughout the State, and it is not distributed uni­
formly over the State. Since cotton is the greatest value producing crop per acre of major crops grown in the ,$~r. it tends to claim. the best soils, and this means ,tli~t: the 'alluvial ·soils and dark colored upland !oils such as the black waxie lands of central Texas the Abilene Haskell plains, and the Southern High Plains are devoted in a large measure to cotton. . . '.;·:·:))e; B~ac~ ,and Grand Prairies make the largest con­J~1~~t1on to ·cotton production of any region in the State, some ~0.'000 bales this year worth nearly $75,000,000. Many cities and towns in this region developed as cot­ton t~ad11 centers, such as Dallas, Waco, Temple, Taylor, Corsicana, Kaufman, McKinney, Greenville Sherman and Paris, and will benefit greatly from this \ncome. ' 
Crop reporting District Two which includes the Abilene-Haskell plains and a number of other good but smaller .• areas is estimated to produce 540,000 bales. Ty!l!cal towns in this area are Coleman, Ballinger, Abi­lern:!, ;Anson, Haskell, Wichita Falls, Vernon, Qu~na, and We~hngton: .· 
The ~hir~ m?st importa~t cotto~ producing district in Texas is Distnct 1-S. This years crop is estimated at 425,000 bales. Lubbock, Lamesa, Tahoka, and Level­land are typical cotton towns in this region. 
Many ~t~er cities and towns in Te:ic;as are largely of cottoA ongm and stand to benefit greatly from a valu­abl~ c.o.tton crop such as Corpus Christi, Hearne, Bryan, Navas~ta, Segum, Cameron, Clarksville, and Bastrop. 
. Active harvest of the cotton crop starts in the Lower ~io Grande Valley in late June and is practically fin­ished there by September, By September 1, cotton bar-vest has spread over all of south, east, and central Texas and has reached its peak in these regions to the Okla­homa border as far west as Gaines\'ille by October L 
Cotton harvest begins subs tan ti ally in central west Texas in such areas as Brownwood, Coleman, Abilene, and Vernon, but docs not normally reach its peak until from the middle of October to the fir$t of November. 
Harvesting of the crop on the Hi gh Plains gets under way in the latter part of October. NoYCmber is the big harvest month in this region, and in some of these coun­ties little more than half of the cotton is ginned befor~ December 1. · 
It will be observed that actually the period of cotton harvest in Texas is spread over six months or more­from July to December, inclusive but the large bulk of the crop is harvested in the three months of September, October, and November. 
The more fundamental longer range outlook for cot­ton is far from bright. While the present price of American cotton is close to parity with the 1909..;.14 average, it is being held at this high level by Government loans at 92112 of parity. !fhe world market price is far below the price in the U:ni.ted States. · · ·. The capac~ty ?f the United State!. to produce cotton is at least twice its normal capacity to cotisume it: This means the cotton situation ca{lnot be stabilized without a large export inarket. --. ­
·. Technological .de~elopments have now. made it pos­sible to make artificial fibers capable of competin« ·\vith cotton in both quality .a~d price; arid there seems 0 every assuranci; th1;1t the qualities of these fibers will be further improved and their prices low~ted. · · 
Cotton theri is confronted ~ith the necessity of both reducing the price of its finished goods and of improv­ing their qualities. 
The solution of cotton's -problems then necessitates two important changes in national policy. Fortunately, both of these changes are constructiYe for the nation as a whole. In the first place, whe have learned that national sec~rity de~ands t~.at we. sub~titute a constructive policy of mternat10nal coope'.·ation m a more liberal exchange of goods for our pohcy of economic isolationism. In the second place, the situation demands the abandon­ment of the defeatist policy of seeking relief for farmers through u~sound artificial price boosting schemes and the. adopt10n. of. a construc~ive agri cu ~ tural policy in which the 0?1ect1v~s are .to. mcrease the net incomes to fa~mers by improvmg the qualities of products now at­tamable through better breedinv and culture and b 
. . h . 0 ' y
mcreasmg t e margms of profit to farmers through 1 
. . . ower 
costs per umt attamab e thro.u 1 rrh ·better u~e· o·r· Ill d 
· 1 1 · c ~ . o ern 
agnc~ tura science, machine equ.ipment, and mana erial practices. g 
A. B. Cox. 

~,, .:!. : ·.::_. -, .: 
\ .'. 
COTTON BALANCE SHEET FOR THE U.S. AS OF SEPTEMBER 1, 1944 
On Thousands of Running Bales Except as Noted) 

Carryover Imports to Gov. Est. as Con. to Exports 
S.!luce

Year Aug. I Sept. l * of Sept. l* Total Sept. 1 to Sept. 1 Total Sept. I
1935---1936_________________________ 7,138 8 11,489 18,635 408 241 649 
17,986

1936--1937_
_____________ 5,397 13 11,121 16,531 574 182 756 15,7751937-1938_
________ 
-'--_ 4,4%\ 8 16,098 20,604 604 220 824 19,780193S-1939___ 11,533 18 11,825 23,376 201 561 762 22,6141939-1940 13,033 13 12,380 25,426 631 215 846 24,5801940-1941_____________ 
10,596 10 12,772 23,378 
655 65 720 22,6581941-1942____ ~-----------12,376 43 10,710 23,129 874 5 879 22,250

1942-1943________________ ...
10,590 I 14,028 24,618 925 t 925 23,6931943-1944______...__________ 10,687 t 12,558 23,245 842 t 842 22,4031944-1945__ __ ________~-----------------10,727 13t 11,483 22,223 841 lOOt 941 21,282 
The Cotton Year begins Auguat 1. 

•Firuree are in 478 net po1lllld bales. 
lFi1ures of the New York Cotton i:xchange e1timate. 

DAIRY PRODUCTS MANUFACTURED IN PLANTS IN TEXAS 
Preduct and Year ]~n. Feb. Manh April May June July Aug. Sept.' Oet. Nov. Doc. Total
CREAMERY BUTTER 
(1000 lb.) 1944• 2,043 2,126 2,765 3,535 4,008 3,527 3,569 2,792 1943• ----------2,636 2,743 3,076 3,652 4,544 4,120 4,363 3,584 2,629 2,581 2,236 1,924 38,071
1930-39 average ____
__ 2,074 2,109 2,392 3,138 3,556 3,166 4,113 2,867 2,513 2,608 2,301 2,211 32,048
ICE CREAM (1000 gal.) i 1944.• ~---1,115 1,211 1,520 1,687 2,491 2,944 3,200 2,997 1943• ---· ---1,125 1,187 l ,396 -1,770 2,302 2,478 2,778 2,898 1,990 1,622 1,443 940 22,2371930-39 average ____ 215 262 434 570 752 893 904 845 686 460 259 205 6,486
A.MERJC.A.N CHEESE 
(1000 lb.) 
1944• -------902 956 1,229 1,884 2,273 2,159 2,076 1,621 
1943• ---914 948 1,063 1,594 2,010 1,866 1,782 1,319 1,019 819 621 809 

15,272

1930-39 average __ __ ___ 554 590 737 1,050 1,215 1,129 1,119 1,025 866 852 718 641 10,496
MILK EQUIVA.LENT OF DAIRY PRODUCTSt 
(1000 lb.) 
_______________67,873


1944• 71,519 92,663 119,889 144,977 137,502 140,357 115,184
1943• ' ____ ____
__________ _ 80,106 83,301 94,470 118,447 149,577 139,948 147,397 126,028 93,186 85,084 73,290 62,253 1.291,7()1)

1930-39 average __
______54,675 57,139 67,456 89,641 104,323 97,562 97,075 89,185 76,165 73,444 60,119 55,872 922,656 

•EstimatH of production made by the Bureau of Businesa Research. 
t Milk. Eqaivalent ef Dair.y product• wa1 calculated from p.roductioa data by the Aareav ef Busineu Researsh. 
Unclw.de1 ice cream. 1herbet1, ice1, etc. 
Non: 10-year &Yera1e preduction oa creamery butter, i'e cream and America• ehcese baud o• data from the Agrieultural Marketin1 Service, U.!.D.A. 

SHIPMENTS OF LIVE STOCK CONVERTED TO A RAIL-CAR BASIS* 
Cattle Calves 
Swine Sheep Total1944 1943 1944 1943 1944 19« 1944

1943 1943 19'5

Total Interstate Plus Fort Worth_______________. 
6,257 4,439 1,432 1,163 930 1,326 1,395 2,242 10,014 9,170
Total Intrastate Omitting Fort Worth_
____ 
285 331 51 130 41 
57 151 190 528 708

TOTAL SHIPMENTS_____________ _ 
__________ 
6,542 4,770 1,483 1,293 971 1,383 1,546 2,432 10,542 9,878 
TEXA~ CAR-LOT• SHIPMENTS OF LIVE STOCK FOR YEAR TO DATE 
Cattle Calvee Swine Sheep Total
1944 1943 1944 1943 
1944 1943 1944 1943 1944 1949

Total-Inten;tate Plus Fort Worth__________________ 38,414 40,032 6,520 5,531 11,266 11,500 10,370 9,055 66,570 66,118Total Intrastate Omitting Fort Worth________ _ 
4,688 5,65'5 1,438 525
882 726 784 583 7,080 8,201

TOTAL SHIPMENTS________________________ 
43,102 45,687 7,402 6,969 
11,992 12,025 11,154 9,638 73,650 74,319 

•Rail-car Basit: Cattle. 30 head per car; calves, 60; swine, 80; and -sheep, 250. 
Fort Worth 1hip.inent1 are combined with interatate forward.ings in order thae the bulk of mark.ct disappearance for the mouth may be 1hown. 
Nen : ThHe data are furnished .the United States f:!ureau of Acricultural EconGmics J,y railwa,y officials through more than 2 iOO station a1enl1, repreHD~ every HYe1tock 1h!ppiag peint ia the !tate. The data are compile« J,y the B•reau of Bu1in111 Research. • • 
g

EMPLOYMENT AND PAY ROLLS IN TEXAS 
August, 1944 
E1timated Number of Percenta&e Chan1e Estimated Ameunt of PKcentare Cha111• Work.en Employed• from from Weekly Pn Roll from from July, Auguot July, .A.oguat, Jwly, Ae.JUtt, Jaly, A11ru1t,
1944(1)

1944(1) 1944(2) 1944 1943 	19441» 1944 19.U 
MANUFACTURING All Manuf acturing lnduatries____ l69,999 172,571 + 1.5 + 3.2 $6,133,822 $6,035,128 1.6 + 11.3 
Food Prnrlucu 
10,469 10,500 + 0.3 +33.5 390,067 392,772 + 0.7 +62.9
Baking ----------------------------­
Carbonated Beverages --··--------·-· 
4,242 4,166 1.8 -2.2 126,648 128,924 + 1.8 + 5.4 Confectionery 1,336 1,339 + 0.3 +15.3 18,242 19,818 + 8.6 +39.3
-----------·--------­

2,396 2,366 1.3 + 4.0 81,000 75,008 7.4 +18.6
Flour Milling ------------·-·----·--­1,717 1,655 3.6 + 6.7 44,883 43,621 2.8 + 8.0
Ice Cream ---------------------------· 
Meat Packing --------------------­6,729 6,755 + 0.4 +10.7 213,657 220,490 + 3.2 + 3.7 
Textiles 
5,142 5,100 0.8 -13.6 116,968 117,790 + 0.7 5.3
Cotton Textile Mills -------------------­Men'a Work Clothing --------------· 4,173 4,193 + 0.5 -3.7 67,253 75,382 + 12.1 +10.6 
Forest Products 
1,123 1,213 7.9 -28.3 30,907 32,303 -15.0
Furniture -------------------------+ 	+ 4.5 
Planing Mills ----------------­
1,870 1,833 1.9 -11.5 54,440 56,936 + 4.6 + 1,6 Saw Mills -----------------·----0.8 3.5
14,322 14,617 + 2.1 -7.7 279,106 276,965 
Paper Boxes ----------------------. 

851 857 + 0.8 -11.5 21,417 21,417 (5) + 1.0 
Printing and Publishing 
Commercial Printing 2,423 2,342 3.3 0.3 80,189 82,524 + 2.9 +11.9 ----·-------­
New~paper Publishing 3,753 3,832 + 2.1 5.7 110,717 112,664 + 1.7 -2.6 
Chemical Products 
Cotton Oil Mills ------------1,738 1,949 + 12.1 -24.6 27,599 30,272 + 9.7 -20.7 Petroleum Refining -"--------------25,323 25,556 + 0.9 +12.0 1,485,539 1,449,857 2.4 rJ-6.7 
Stone tJnd Clay Products 
Brick and Tile ----------1,613 1,656 + 2.6 + 4.5 27,915 30,004 + 7.5 +15.4 Cement -----------------745 742 0.4 29,358 28,884 1.6 -29.1
-34.8 
Iron and Steel Products 
Structural and Ornamental Iron___ 2,428 2,511 + 3.4 -13.2 82,737 80,579 2.6 ..... 6.4 NONMANUFACTURING 
Crude Petroleum Production___ 28,040 28,127 + 0.3 + 9.7 1,543,104 1,543,104 + (5) 
+19.9 Quarryine ---------------------------------(3) (3) 1.9 -13.4 (3) (3) 0.5 -8.2 Public Utilities -----------------------(3) (3) + 0.1 + 2.5 (3) (3) 0.3 -2.8
Retail Trade _____________________206,544 
204,472 1.0 2.6 5,055,011 4,974,540 1.6 + 8.7 Wholesale Trade ---------------62,903 62,022 1.4 + 1.1 2,479,302 2,481,551 + 0.1 +10.6 Dyeine a nd Cleaning ------------2,874 2,902 + 1.0 + 0.6 66,724 67,871 + 1.7 +12.8 Hotels ---------------------------------19,593 20,066 + 2.4 + 2.5 348,756 363,708 + 4.3 +17.9 Power Laundries -----------------14,912 14,573 2.3 + 3.1 260,350 255,628 1.8 +11.9 
CHANGES IN EMPLOYMENT AND PAY ROLLS IN SELECT.ED CITIES«> 
Employment Pay Rolls Employmewt Pay Rollo Percenta:::e Chan1?e Percentac& Change Percent•ll'• Chan.:e Percenta&e Chana:•July, 1944 Aug., 1943 July, 1944 Aug., 1943 July, 1944 Aug., 1943 July, 1944 Aur., IMS
to to to to to to to toAag., 1944 Aur., 1944 Aue., 1944 Aug., 1944 Aug., 1944 Au1., 19« Aug., 1944 Au1., 1944 
Abilene -------1.4 1.9 + 3.8 + 17.9 Galveston + 0.5 + 0.4 2.7 + 30.0 Amarillo --------6.3 + 0.7 4.7 + 1.8 Houston 3.9 13.8 6.4 0.9 Austin 1.1 + 6.6 + Port Artlmr _ _
1.5 + 3.7 	+ 2.5 + 9.5 + 3.4 + 11.9 
Beaumont ----0.2 3.2 4.1 10.7 . San Antonio _ 1.1 0.5 0.9 + 4.1 
Dallas --------------1.4 + 29.:l 7.3 + 60.5 Sherman --+ 8.0 + 27.0 + 9.0 + 55.0
Paso _______

El + 0.4 + 1.9 2.0 + 11.8 Waco 2.1 7.0 + 7.3 + 9.4 Fort Worth _ 1.3 -17.5 0.9 12.7 Wichita Falls_ 
+ 0.4 9.8 8.4 8.7 Corpus Oiristi 0.5 (3) 4.6 (3) STATE ---1.3 0.3 3.5 + 3.7 
ESTIMATED NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES IN NONAGRICULTURAL BUSINESS 
AND GOVERNMENT ESTABLISHMENTs <•> 

1942(1) 1943(1) 1'44 	19.UCl> 194a 
January -------------------1,170,000 1,385,000 1 429 000<0> July ·-------------1,317,000 l ,450,ooo<1> 
1.433'000<2)
February ------------·-1,199,000 li397,000 August _________ 1,352,000 1,441,ooom 
March --------------1,226,000 1,415,000 1:433:ooocs> September ____ __ 1,373,000 1,448,ooom 
April --------------------1,222,000 1,433,000 1,435,000(2) Octob~r ------------1,384,000 l.,455.ooo<•> 
May ---------------------1,251,000 1,458,000 1,435,ooo<•> November _______ 1,389,000 l,461,000<21 
June ------------------1,291,000 1,478,000 1,448,lJOO<» December ---------1,413,700 1,470,000(1) 

•Does not include proprieton, firm membere. oflicera of corporatien1, or other principal executives. Factory employment exchade1 aho omce. aaln, technical and profe11ional penonnel. 
<t> Revi11ed. 
(l')Sub ject to reTl1ion. 

<•>Not available. 
<'>Based on unweichted figures. 
<&>Less than 1/10 of one per cent. 
tmNot includinc 1elf-employed penoo1, cuual worken, or domestic 1ervant1, and exclusi•e of military and maritime p~nonnel. Theto 6gurea are furnished hr 

ll1t 	Bureau of Labor Stati1tic1, U.S. DepartmeRt of Labor. Prepared from report1 from repre1e ntatlve Texae estabJi1bment1 to the Bureau of Buainese Reeeanh co~peratlng with the Bureau of Ltbar 5tatfitfct. Due lo Iha national emergency, publieulon of data for certain lnduotrlOI-lo llekiJ wlthlfold until further 118tice. 

AUGUST RETAIL SALES OF INDE 
IN TEXAS c 

•:tnerlJ ei111lr:"' '1'l.,.'~ 
«llt PJ.MPPH,;·' "!,'~;·)"
mo'll m(11l 
,i~u;quA ~"flul 
.1'~•A of ti"' Changee f"
" ,n, fr rcentage ·'""'"'
11!1 t
HY! U.QI 

sta · Aug., 19'4'.4 Aug., 1944 Year, 1944 ,lishments from from from f,.II + o.I -~Jl"~(Xi£1lo~ug.~·g~4~i:J Jµly, 1944 Yeait~43 1 TOTAL TEXAS _____________ 975 + 17.8 + 15.7 + 11.5 
Tlll2M.S-STORJES-!'.l'iSQf, 'i o,nor. ' ('<'-+ :GcR01JPEil..iBYr -l5:Q,8~I H •· c)'.: r P.R:ODUCfNG -AREASIHll.QI S:t'..'..8I f.cI . ilfl t9 ct i t N -::............?.00:,).1 + 22:0i8 + 13.7 +~f.O 
~ .rl 
l.tpr inviJvf. ________________QQl>fS:'..'. + 22:sr. l ~ + 13.8 l.fJI -;· 
All Others ----------------32 + 23.2 + 14.7 
.istrict g: ::l:.............O.Q'i'3'2.I +lll7\2')1 f + 8.8 + 11g.2 ­M tdbbockl .S:L±__
________S:8f,2Jr + 88!6\cl + 14.4 ·.r. ­
All Others -------------···· 12 -9.3 -12.1 
~~ti:ict 2;;. ···+----------~-Or.7~'1: + \,<ft(i,)(: + 6.7 -r J;>,-1} 
!Strict 3 . ·---+-----····--.fJf.P~ + {14 <?1.;; t 15.5 +Jg_.9 

0.8Am:arill .'.:__ 
+_:________J'>o!f4• + 1§~17 1 l + 11.3 
, ·strict . -~-------···· {'l2~'S: + 2'l!4\> ':"S: 24.3 +a .2­
~ 
o: rDa-Jlas . ~--------------X-It-~4; + 2~:?r::: + 37.6 crr ­Fort Worth ----------------26 + 12.9 + 17.1 

QI aco ~---+-----------~2~ + f~ 3f•ll + 10.9 · I 0th fs -=~------------!'~ 3i I + o.5,lf I -1.5 Cllistfict 5'-~------------------:..' 0 + 6:0 + 18.8 District 6 ---··------·------------43 + 19,8 + 9.1ltfl net 7\.~___±__ __ ________~\<;:4w. +fy;27':'. + 19.2 "\D")st 'ct 8-~·~---"'."::............IC. ;'/ t.I +%.:,i':fl< .J+ 13.1 

San Antonio· -------------45 + 27.2 + 17.2 
t-.i'.All-Otli !is -1:: ............to0.2-S' +1CY.2"" + 6.5 ?.1 
O'Js:tri-ct 9 0..L.::::............-ll.llil.Q5: + ao:o0 <:: + 13.6 

Houston -----··---___________ 41 + 12.2 + 11.6 
., ,,AU. Othf11~ -=------·-·-Ki'.9'4 + -;9;Sz,) + 15.3 ( 
District 10 . .. ... ......... 25 + 21.l -1.6 + 15.1 
District 10-A -----------·-·.-41 " + j.{3•0,. ·( ,+ 0.8 + 13.6

......i!..2J (i' -t r!l_,t.:~.1 11I 
" ·-? ft -(/;. (( ' 
dTE: Prepar9d, from reports O/. 'independent Jetail stores to the Bureau ,of Buei· nc~s .ReSCarch, o63peTating witll 'tlie VS. Bureau of_the Census. , c -.r. + il.1 -O!-?..t I 1!ll.t;G I'·
• 
.. f,,r;..,f o ~ ,.,hnf I

!l.O. + f.'.l -r I2.?.. f!V !: S:Of..Q";-1 ::: J I 
8.S:l + l.f + f\P,,7(1 E1.1JA 1. , Gasoline sales as indicated by taxes collectecL-b't the State-:C67np­Qr;-r~-fl. -f H{)Lf.ilf. '\<:~.~'f ,_ troller were: July, 1944, 113,617,721 gallons; July, 1943l" 113,. If PER,~ENTAGE ~~NGES diN ., €©NSUMPTION : 474,525 gallons; June,' 1944, 120,961,675 gallon s:h 1 '· l , 'vo• July sales of gasoline to the Unit d States Government as re· 
Of.:[}1 'gl J~ • 2 YU e ' 109 YI <T p'drt&d 'by• motor ~'ftiel di~tribut ~;in Te'ias were 240,078,530 gal· Ions. -" . , .,. 
.. ff,,Ji t"C'f ..._111:~t\~~!p~4\."'.,e-(..:.!'~"'!3 A 1944 . . ~r
"' <;r fl

..,~t·,.:IJ ..~._.:•1"'1 ·~· q -f uf;~m --'' 
-r,M~l t·~uA .t>l"f .xful. Ef•QI ·~~u>.A. ro~9P4l3 .-<ru: 
,.., M 01 .n.ug., l v' July, 1944 
' .

CO!l'Ul'lt!/;(:ial ...lk~.!....;wA......H\'1.•-~rrA + lil.'.llf . ~11f. + 6.4 Nort: From Atnerlcani P etroleum1 Insthute. t See accompanying map 1howing the 
oi l 1produci_ng dist~i~ts of Texas. . • I 11 t f;
1

Ind1JiitJ<ial+ · -------'-S-----=~--------t...D. -i-+ 19:51 + 12,8li 
Conection for fi~es: Augu5t, 1942, product~o~' for East CentraJ pistrict1 should

Resi;_dential .....i..n.....___ _
_SJ'J -+ 9~'.a +H6.~ ,11 
bet ~,700 barrels, ~ystead of ~,700 aa given ( ~f September, 1943, ~Vlf:'!·

All Qthe"I's .....!J:.____ 
l.________L_J!.. -f -142'": ;·114-i/4,9, '1 1
TO'D L .±.........f!J.J__ __:_:__ _
_
__ !}}J_ -+ 9!i ·•P1<:!fi 14.2 < \ ' I I 1 n 1' in• ,• " 

0 1 , TEXAS CHAR_,ERS , i, 

__If: I 0.(l + 0,\'.: f-0.8 'J,ff" ·~ -~ f J• . IT D I . . C ).~ . r ~ug., 1944 Aug., 194a. ·)dly11944 
Pr P• red om re ·arts or 10 ele t ic power co Panies to thq.[Biueau o( Bu8ine111 
1 omest1c orporat1ons : ( \ ( r I ·' ;, '
IReeefirJ~ . -.E -.Q -JI i-"'• i;·t J ' n -i ?,.t i:.o F. r n t , rpitalization• ------------~--------------$' l,,(>42 $ .r 818 $ .1;54i umber ---------------------·-·------------------71 42 58 c:e3YIIEU8 JA5 UT...Itnrn:""1,.'J110vr YI Cla:.s.sification ·-i·of . n'ew fl' Cfipcf a; rt t.IH!'~ LUMBER '"'cTVf3f'"H2J.rn.~,\ r! tlofis: • ''"'~, ,11 •, l.;('I tr ';..'"Of Banking-Finance ' -"-'""--------------t:..i '! O 2 1 M1v1u~ac.turing , L••••,.,,_,,L...._____ , 11-,i:r, J 1 8 4 nr. .. ,.18
"'000.0\: · Boa:1 ·f~~t ,i,,i 
-·'11)0 O· -,l l'llJ..:..,., 11 •1 Me1jcl-\andising il."-'-·-·r··'--------.!.c..r-f'-'!• • 13 7 ,.,.1 20 ''flOO,l)t t·J (!(l~g::nllil4 Aug., 1943 •"J.uly«l944 on .';·'i"-···;-····-··7';r'"-, -.--·-·-·····144---~ r 6 7 ·!16 Southern Pine Mi1lsfl0.<:?J.,r con rlt. I .,.,,1 ,.,() Pub)ic) 8ervice cJ-,,--.c·.;..;..•..--~---' · •! 4 0 I : /4 Re,a,I .:Estate Bujldi~g _L ________i:.u.••• ,. r 15 11 rr.1 5
Average Week. OF~· uf. tion'i0ff('flf.. r •'''"' ":,. 
· ·· Xl\J · -~3' 3 '·· 1«· -ro' Tujqp_po~~ation <.•t.,. s ......,........ ,.\!..,1 .·".. r 3 2 '" ,115

r>0~21' ;;,.oo
per unit -------------·'---'...! .......... · ;.,, · 24 ,851 .i:Og,3 8 

Al Others -----------------------···----------22 11 9 

r.,AvAfagei,. Weeklr,;-Ship:ments"'•rvi.1 ,., v'"' •• _,.,. ,,,_ •" · <; 
Numbet "capitalized' at ·Jess than '.. :·::'.' '",.,. , ,,, ... 

per unit --------------------------------230,299 252,119 225,720 
$5,000 ··················----------------········ 22 . 16 h • •l}'T,
Average Unfilled Orders per 
Number capitalized at $100,000 or ""' ..~;J~:,;;', 0, ~. 

unit, end of month -----·--------1,440,172 1,430,954 1,444,054 
more ---------------------·------··-··---------•"''lll f4 t 11.f• (.,w,T~ \/') "'• 5
t:• 
Foreign. CornoratiQns (Nnmb ) "" '''II"" ' nr ·9 ' 'i· · 1' 3· 
"'"' •, f' •' ,.I). 'H'\ ,,, ' I• .r., ,......,.. ei;-,.•-11•1 fr 10,.,,-f • ,.;:'" dlli'Jr"I ~t• 


-.-1-h rl ."; Hir.J _,,., 1r• Hnf"".~ I ·G. -~ u .... :J:; .. :1 -~ , .J:,.l 11· • I .l 
,n:,,.,.,q<;.,~ d~1r "!"111 •?.'.VS .. ,~,l '• ,..,., :. n l ouean ;8•'11 -1 .,ir ..., ' '°"' 1.-,._ ,n""I m<-• ' ~:-. -3, m:rl !.•P ·1· !"'' 
t'lhr.r: J!"rltJul iHn i.d::-rl;/•iw ~(!''),. • ~oµ;: ,Cpmp.i-~a..Iroqi-rp~ords,,of.~l}e-:;~~CI:flAfJnof.,St#l.te;,,rr,.f1z~ .,-·, C>!.. 'H~ 

BUILDING PERMITS POSTAL RECEIPTS 
• Aue•• 1944 Au1., 1943 July, 1944 Au1., 1944 Aug., 1943 July, 1944 Abilene ___
_______ __
_
___
_
____ $ 59,335 Abilene ___________________
_____ 
$ 49,669
$ 42,967 $ 10,990 s 36,555 $ 47,536 Austin ----------------------------40,675 28,107 76,119 Amarillo -----------------------59,386 52,649 56,117t Beaumont ---------------------151,061 24,140 34,758 Austin ---------------------------94,833 93,087 101,844 Big Spring --------------------123,875 11,758 55,605 Beaumont --------------------51,449 41,049 48,039 
Brownsville _
_____ _
_
_____: 3,615 2,795 10,329 9,798 10,257
Big Spring --------------------12,523 Brownwood ------------------28,500 850 5,300 Brownsville ---,--------------11,122 11,294 12,908 Cleburne -----------------------6,075 • 8,990 Brownwood ----------~-------23,345 22,456 22,302 Coleman ------------------------0 0 0 Childress --------------------5,932 4,289 5,650 Corpus Christi ------------202,015 83,766 177,223 Oeburne ----------------5,980 4,924 6,058 Corsicana ----------------------7,350 5,545 1,260 Coleman ------------------------4,208 3,537 4,696 Dallas ----------------------------323,110 755,350 465,131 Corpus Christi ------------71,812 58,463 68,194 Denton --------------------------3,930 150 800 Corsicana ----------------------9,759 7,545 11,181 Edinburg ----------------------10,260 470 2,361 Dallas -------------------------547,917 453,858 529,162 El Paso ------------------------179,776 34,471 201,608 Del Rio -------------------------6,855 5,283 7,035 Fort Worth ------------------293,998 677,690 225,874 Denison -----------------------10,632 9,541 10,748 Galveston ---------------------11,055 64,797 64,379 Denton ------------------------10,660 8,387 10,842 Gladewater --------------------2,000 0 3,490 Edinburg -------------------3,989 2,829 4,398 Graham --------------------------4,000 0 7,226 El Paso ---------------------95,075 87,010 93,304 Harlingen ---------------------140,660 523 123,625 Fort Worth --------------263,633 . 192,013 231,763 Houston -----------------------678,420 826,275 718,187 Galveston ----------------55,618 45,123 49,947 _ Jacksonville -----------------9,750 1,850 1,975 Gladewater ----------------4,765 3,013 4,464 Kenedy --------------------------0 1,000 1,500 Graham ------------------------3,274 • 3,680 Kerrville ------------------------3,500 883 980 Harlingen -------------------13,712 10,375 13,652 .Longview ----------------------16,630 2,705 3,160 Houston ------------------------400,478 318,909 386,397 Lubbock ------------------,-----80,049 35,716 328,956 Jacksonville ----------------5,461 4,357 5,451 McAllen ------------------------26,675 4,535 12,575 Kenedy -----------------------2,658 2,218 2,665 Marshall ------------------------9,203 7,193 11,120 Kerrville ---------------------4,844 3,560 5,125 Midland ------------------------19,550 5,075 74,481 Longview ---------------------14,299 12,597 15,696 New Braunfels ------------3,505 295 1,646 Lubbock --------------------36,350 29,904 35,548 Palestine ------------------------700 1,170 1,850 McAllen -----------------6,829 5,270 7,543 Pampa --------------------------1,400 3,300 700 Marshall --------------------11,971 8,677 11,370 Paris -----------------------------10,445 29,350 13,685 Palestine ------------------8,231 7,405 7,935 Plainview ----------------------2,650 850 3,781 Pampa -------------------------11,308 9,044 11,925 Port Arthur -------------·--27,040 8,503 37,846 Paris -----------------------------24,847 19,136 24,119 San Antonio ----------------482,886 256,593 344,307 Plainview --------------------6,260 4,852 5,533 Seguin ----------------------------3,878 150' 2,325 Port Arthur ______________ 27,040 23,280 27,153 Sherman ------------------------16,858 6,986 8,050 San Angelo ---------------23,176 17,841 22,996 Snyder --------------------------0 0 0 San Antonio -------------252,130 216,218 249,432 Sweetwater --------------------10,730 4,500 7,025 Seguin -------------------------4,887 3,005 3,765 
10,522 16,900
Texarkana --------------------10,200 Sherman ----------------------12,641 10,446 13,334 Tyler ------------------------------15,776 9,344 33,896 Snyder -------------------------2,249 1,846 2,299 Waco -----------------------------24,539 41,978 63,111 Sweetwater -----------------7,401 6,177 8,599 Wichita Falls --------------58,925 46,750 17,973 Temple -----------------------15,498 13,562 14,948 
TOTAL __
__
____________________$3,104,599 . $3,038,902 $3,181,097 Texarkana --------------------34,546 25,048 28,381 Tyler ---------------------------29,596 24,268 30,334 *Figurea not available, · Waco --------------------------53,607 45,383 51,749 Non: Compiled from reports from Texae chambers of c~mmerce to the Bureau Wichita Falls -------------40,173 40,336 41,326 of Bu1ine!lt Research. TOTAL ________________________ $2,452,628 
$2,016,417 $2,367,400 
•Not a•ailable. 
tReviscd figure in August RtTIEW. 
Non~ : Compiled from re11ort1 from Texa.! chamben ef commerce to the Bureau 


of Bu1lnee1 Research.
COMMODITY PRICES 
Aug., 1944 Aug., 1943 July, 1944 Wholesale Prices: 
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 
(1926=100%) -----------------------------103.9 103.1 104·.l Farm Prices: TEXAS COMMERCIAL FAILURES 
U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics 
Au1•• 1944 Aug., 1943 July, 1944 

(1926=100%) -----------------------------122.6 123.5 124.l 
Numher ----------------------------------------0 0 1 Retail Prices: !.iabilities* ------------------·--------------­0 0 $ 8 Food (U.S. Bureau of Labor Sta-Assets• --------------------------------------0 0 6 tistics (1935-1939=100%) ________ 137.7 -137.2 137.4 . AYerage Liabilities per failure• 0 0 8 
Cost of Living Index (1935­
*In thousand!.

1939=100%) -------------------------------126.3 123.4 126.1 
NoTE: From Dun and Bradstreet, Inc.

Department Stores (Fairchild's 
Publications 
January, 1931=100%) ----------------113.4 113.1 113.4 

AUGUST RETAIL SALES OF INDEPENDENT STORES IN TEXAS 
Percentage Change• Number of io Dollar Saleo 
Eotab-Aug., 1944 Au11., 1944 Year, 1944 liah'menta from from . from Re,orting Au1., 1943 July, 1944 Year, 1943 

TOTAL TEXAS ························································-····-···-·······-···········-·····----~---······-·--· 975 + 17.8 + 15.7 + 11.5 STORES GROUPED BY LINE OF GOODS CARRIED: 
APPAREL ········-················-····-···-····-·······--·-·········---···-·····-:·-··-··-······-·-··--···-····-lll +28.2 +34.7 + 13.6 F[lmily Oothing Stores...-----·-··-······-··-······:...'---··-·-······-······-··-········---------25 + 17.9 +ll.9 + 9.8 Men's and Boys' Clothing Stores......·-··-····--···-····-···-······----···-··--·--·-·--36 +19.9 + 16.0 + 6.0 Shoe Stores --····-·-·····-··········---~---··-·······-··-··-······-······--·-·-·-··--··--··----·· 15 +42.0 + 8.1 + 6.5 . Women's Specialty Shops ········-················-·····················-···---·-···-·--------··-··-35 +33.4 +54.9 +19.5 AUTOMOTIVE* ·····-····-············-··············-·-····--·-······-···--·-··-··-··-·---------· 81 + 4.9 5.7 + 7.6 .Motor Vehicle Dealers..............·-······-······-··········-··-··-·····-~-----------··-··-·-·-· 72 + 2.8 -6.8 + 7.9 COUNTRY GENERAL ···-······-·······-·····-······-··········-···-·-······-··-·--·-··-··--··-··-·-­91 + 9.8 + 1.7 + 9.7 DEPARTMENT STORES ··············-···-····-·······-·--···--··-···-···-·······--······----····· 65 +24.0 +24.2 +14.5 DRUG STORES ···························-······-··-······-···'··-··-···-·-·-··--·-··-·-·-·-----···· 106 + 7.6 0.7 +11.6 DRY GOODS AND GENERAL MERCHANDISE......·-··-·-···-···-····-·-··--­'29 +15.2 + 5.6 + 9.1 FILLING STATIONS···················-···········-········--·-···-··-····-··--·-······------· 22 +15.4 8.2 + 6.5 FLORISTS ········-···-····-····---·"··--·-················-··-···-···-···-·-··-···~~---22 + 17.1. 3.8 +27.1 FOOD* ···········--········-·····················--·--··-···--·-------·-··--·· 126 +17.9 + 4.1. +11.8 Grocery Stores .·······-·····-···-···--·-·-···-···········-····-···-··--···--·--·· 28 + 6.7 + 1.3 + 6.7 .Grocery and Meat Stores......·-······················-··-··--·····-··---------'--· ____ 90 +19.4 + 4.6 +13.1 FURNITURE AND HOUSEHOLD* ···········-·--··--··-···--·-·····---------78 + 6.3 + 8.1 1.5 Furniture Stores ···-······-··-··················-······-··-··-··-··-·-·-··-··-··-··-··-·-··-·-···---·-··· 72 + 7.0 + 7.9 0.2 JEWELRY ···-·············-·-················-······-··-··············-·········-···--·-··-··--·--·----·-··--··· 25 1.4 + 28.6 + 1.6 LUMBER, BUILDING, AND HARDWARE*.··················-······-·············-·····-----­168 3.5 -6.0 + 4.4 Farm Implement Dealers ···-·········-···-··············-······--·-··-······-··-·····--·~---·-·--······ 14 +34.6 + 10.2 +28.0 Hardware Stores ··········-···-····-············-····················-··-···-····-··-··-··--------··-···· 52 +18.8 + 5.0 +22.4 Lumber and Building Material Dealers ·············-··--··-··-··-···-·····-··-----99 -12.2 -12.3 -3.1 
RESTAURANTS ·······-·····-···--·····-····-················-········--·---····-··---~·-···-··---------36 + 11.8 + 3.1 +12.9 ALL OTHER STORES ···············-··················-----·-··-··-····-····-··---···---~.:_ 
. ---·· IO + 6.3 -3.0 + 5.9 TEXAS STORES GROUPED ACCORDING TO POPULATION OF CITY: A11 Stores in Cities of­
J.56 +29.9 +32.l +13.8~O~gQo:~o~~PP~~~1~it~~n ··::=:::=::::=::::=:::::::::::=:::::=::::::~~::==::=::::::::::=::::::==-~~==--~-133 +15.9 +ll.4 + 9.0 .2,500-50,000 Population ·············-···················-···············-·······-·--···---·-··-··-··--·· 458 + 11.l + 5.9 + 9.0 Less than 2,500 Population.......-···················'·-··········-·-····-·····-······-··-·--··-·--·---228 + 9:3 -0.6 + 12.9 
it.Group total includes· kinds of busines.e other than the claeeification lieted. 
Prepared from reports of independent retail etoree to the Bureau of Buaine1111 R esearch. ~oOperating with the U.S. Bureau of the Census. 

AUGUST, 1944, CARLOAD MOVEMENT' OF POULTRY AND EGGS 
Shipments from Texas Stati6ns 
Can 0£ Poultry Caro of Egg• Shell Ch:iekeno Turkey• Shell Frozen Dried Equivalen&.t *Destlnation 1944 1943 1944 1943 1944 1943 1944 1943 1944 1943 1944 ·1943 
TOTAL ·························-········--············-··-··········-·-······ 34 16 1 3 37 14 ll7 32 132 157 1,327 1,334 Intrastate 15 4 l 0 27 14-64 10 21 45 323 394 Interstate 19 12 0 3 IO 0 53 22 lll ll2 1,004 940 
.Receipts at Texas Stations 
TOTAL ··························-······················-····-···········----·· 16 0 0 0 205 29 91 17 20 8 547 127 Intrastate ···-······-··················-··-··-··-··-·······-----·-· 6 0 0 0 28 9 63 14 17 8 290 101 Interstate ········-·····················-··········-····-···-·-·-·····-10 0 0 0 177 20 28 3 3 0 -257 26 
*The destination above is the first distination as shown by the original waybill. Changes in desti·nation brought about by diversion factors are not ehown. 
fDried eggs and frozen eggs are converted to a ehell egg equivalent on the following basis: I rail carload of dried eggs=8 carloads of shell eggs, and 1 carload of frozen eggs=2 carloads of shell egge. 
NoTE: These data furnished to the Division of Agricultural Statietice, B.A. E., by railroad officials through agents at all etatione which originate and receite carload shipments of poultry and eggs. The data are compiled by the Bureau of Bu1incH Research. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS Business ReviPw and Prospect, F. A. Buechel.____ _______ _ 3 Commodity Price lndexeo -·--------~---------------I~ Outlook for Cotton, A. B. Cox --··------------------------7 Cotton Balance Sheet -·-···-···-···-····----··-··-···--··--·------·­
8 Trend of Farm Cash Income in Texas by Crop Reporting Dietrict1_ l Employment and Pay Rolla in Texas ---··-······-··-·-·----·-9 lndexes of Business Activity in Texas--··--·--··---··--2 Lumber -----·-------------------­LIST OF CHARTS Dairy Produc·u Manufactured in Plante in Texas________ 
10 LIST OF TABLES Percentage Changes in Coneumption of Electric Power-----10 Building· Permits --·---·-·-·--------------11 Carload Movement of Poultry and Eggs_··-··------··-----12 
~~~~~eu:ecciJ;i~·--=========--=-----~-----------: Charters --·-··-··-··-·--···---··-·--··------~-----10 
Retail Sales of Independent Storee in Texas_________________IO, ~ Commercial Failures -·--:·-··--··-·-···---------·---·-----11 
Shipments of Livestock_____