Annual Issue !TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW A Monthly Summary of Business and Economic Conditions in Texas BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS It ro ,, VOL. XXXIII, NO. 2 TWENTY CENTS A COPY-TWO DOLLARS A YEAR FEBRUARY 1959 The Texas Economy: 1958 0 10 20 30 40 Residential Building Authorized Farm Cash Income Retail Sales-Nondurables Texas Business Activity Nonresidential Building Authorized Crude Oil Runs to Stills Miscellaneous Freight Carloadings Retail Sales-Durables Industrial Electric Power Use Crude Oil Production 30 20 10 0 • Percentage cha.nges in selected barometers of Texas business activity are charted above. The bars to the right indicate gains from 1957; those to the left, declines. u • H is estimated that Texas business activity, de­spite the recession, gained about I% from 1957. This compares with a 3 % gain in 1957 from 1956. • This issue contains a special summary of busi­ness and economic activity in the state during the past year, and a report on the prospects for the year ahead (page 2). • A special report on industrial expansion in Texas, industry by industry, begins o.n page 7. This report will be concluded in the March issue. The Business Situation in Texas By FRANCIS B. MAY After hesitating in November the Index of Texas Busi­ness Activity pushed strongly upward in December to an all-time high of 211 % of the 1947-49 average rate of activity. The December index value was 9% above Novem­ber, after adjustment for seasonal variation, and 2.9% above its previous peak value of 205%, reached in May 1957. The average value of the Index of Texas Business Activ­ity for the twelve-month period ending in December was 1 % above the monthly average for 1957. This is the result of the strong fall pick-up in business and the fact that there was no protracted period of reduced economic activity after the low point was reached last March. Instead there was an immediate sharp rebound. As a result the index was above the corresponding monthly value for 1957 in each of the last four months of 1958. This was due in part to the fact that the index was declining in the late months of 1957. The 1 % higher value of the monthly average in 1958 shows that, on balance, 1958 was as good a year as 1957, if not slightly better. This was in spite of the fact that a large part of the state's economy, the oil industry, suffered severely. Other factors, notably the improvement in the agricultural segment of the Texas economy, com­bined to offset the depressed condition of the oil industry. Crude petroleum production in December increased 6% over November, after allowing for seasonal factors. The average value of this index in 1958 was 14% below 1957. The index value of 124% of the 1947-49 average produc­tion was only 85% of the high value of 146%, reached in March 1957 when allowables were raised in order to speed the flow of oil to a Europe cut off from its Middle East supplies by the closing of the Suez Canal. Reopening of the canal loosed a flood of imports which has plagued domestic producers ever since. As the largest producing state, Texas has borne the brunt of the cutbacks. In 1958 Texas sup­plied 38.4% of total domestic crude production, 3% less than in 1957, and an all-time low value. Domestic demand for crude is expected to increase in 1959. The increase is expected to be about 6% over 1958. If effective means are found to preserve a reasonable share of the market for domestic producers, their lot should im­prove. Texas production so far this year has been restricted to 12 days in January and 11 in February. Because of the length of the month, the February quota permits a slight increase in average daily production. Imports in Decem­ber were 13% above the December 1957 level. For the three months ending Decembr 31, imports of 1.8 million barrels a day were 11 % above the final quarter of 1957. These figures include imports of both petroleum and petroleum products. As a result of the prolonged and severe reduction in oil production, employment in the oil and gas fields has de­clined from 122,400 in December of 1957 to 115,500 in December 1958, a loss of 6,900. Since gas production is booming, the loss actually is confined to the oil producing sector of the industry. Average weekly earnings of em­ployed in this area were $107.44 in December. Reduction of employment in this industry has impeded the general re­covery of the state's economy. Texas Business Activity Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation • 1947-1949=100 01940 '41 '42 '43 '44 '45 '46 '47 '4B '49 '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 O TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Crude oil runs to stills in December were 1% below November, after seasonal factors are taken into account. They were 4% above the December 1957 rate of activity. Colder weather has increased the consumption of heating oils and helped the state's refiners. Since two-thirds of the nation's market for heating oils is concentrated on the East Coast, which is the principal recipient of imports, Gulf Coast refiners are finding competition to be increas­ingly severe. The unusually cold weather in December in­flated demand, giving an assist to the Texas refiners. How­ever, they have a long-run competitive situation brought about by imports that will hamper them in their marketing efforts. In 1958 the average rate of production of Texas refiners was 6% below the 1957 average. Curbing imports of re­fined products will have a very beneficial effect on the state's refining industry and its more than 48,000 em­ployees. Total electric power consumption in December declined 2% after adjustment for seasonal variation. The fall in consumption was a result of reduced domestic and com­mercial use of electric energy, for industrial consumption for the month increased 1% over November. December power usage was 2% above December 1957. For 1958 as a whole total electric power consumption averaged 1 % below 1957, due largely to the 9% decline in industrial power consumption. Shutting down the oil fields restricts industrial power consumption. Ordinary life insurance sales in December were 413 % of the 1947-49 average, a level 5% above November, after allowance for seasonal influences. This volume of sales was 9% above December 1957. Insurance sales exceeded the corresponding 1957 levels in ten of the twelve months of 1958. This excellent showing was partly a result of the increased propensity to save during a recession and partly the result of increasing realization of the probable erosion of the purchasing power of the dollar by the long-term inflationary trend of the nation's economy. Provision for the welfare of dependents will take more and more dollars if the long-term rise in the price level continues. There is no evidence at present to support the conclusion that it will not. The sharp rise in over-all activity in the state received a strong impetus from retail sales. Total sales corrected for seasonal variation rose 16% in December above the November volume. At 216% of the 1947-49 average, sales were 7% above December 1957. Both durable and non­ durable goods contributed to the rise and to almost the same degree. After spending much of the year in the doldrums, largely because of public apathy toward the 1958 automobiles, sales of durable goods rose 15% in December after seasonal adjustment. Since November sales were 15% above Octo· ber, the last two months of 1958 witnessed a startling re· versal of form. Both automotive and furniture and house­ hold appliance stores contributed substantially to the December increase. Lumber, building material and hard· ware stores made a smaller contribution to the rise. Decem­ ber sales of durables were 11 % above December 1957. Sales of nondurable goods, corrected for seasonal vari­ ation, showed equally large gains in December, rising 16% above November. All categories of nondurables showed gains. December sales were 6% above December 1957. Total retail sales for all of 1958 averaged 1 % below the 1957 volume. This was caused by the sag in consumer dura­bles, which averaged 8 % below 1957. Consumer nondur­ables averaged 2 % above the 1957 volume. Urban building, which has been one of the mainstays of the economy during the latter months of the recession, made another advance in December. Total urban permits issued in that month were 3% above November, seasonally adjusted, and 37% above December 1957. Both residential and nonresidential permits increased. Residential authori­zations were up 10% over November and 48% over Decem­ber 1957. Nonresidential permits were 1 % above Novem­ber and 29% above December of 1957. For all of 1958, total urban permits averaged 18% above 1957. Residential permits averaged 39% above the preceding year. Nonresidential permits were 2% below 1957. SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSI NESS Percent cban~e Dec 1958 Dec 1958 Dec Nov Dec from from Index 1958 1957 1958 Nov 1958 Dec 1957 Texas Business Activity _ 211 193 188 + 9 + 12 Miscellaneous freight carloading in S.W. district . 75 78 78 4 4 Crude petroleum production .... 124* 117* 118 + 6 + 5 Crude oil runs to stills 142 144 137 + 1 + 4 Total electric power consumption 330 336 325 2 + 2 Industrial electric power consumption --­---------­----­- 338* 335 350 + 1 Bank debits ....... 251 230 223 + 9 + 13 Ordinary life insurance sales .. 41 3 392 379 + 5 + 9 Total retail sales ........................ 216* 187 + 16 + 7 Durable-goods sales ................ 241* 208* + 15 + 11 N ondurable-goods sales ---­···· 241* 208* + 16 + 6 Urban building permits issued 247* 239* 180 + 3 + 37 Residential ................................ 313* 285* 211 + 10 + 48 N onresidential ---···-·-·-·­-­-····---­ 183* 181* 142 + 1 + 29 Adjusted for seasonal variation, except annual average and farm cash income. * Preliminary. Viewed in retrospect the third post-World War II reces­sion was not a severe one. It was somewhat worse than either of its predecessors but still should be classed as mild. It was primarily the result of a cutback in military expendi­tures and a reduction in the rate of industrial expansion as measured by investment in new plant and equipment. A decline in exports augmented the downward pressures. In Texas the oil situation was an outstanding feature of the down-turn. This drop-off in production was due only partly to the slowing of the general rate of business activity. Severe competition from cheaper foreign imports was a major factor. The fact that most of the state's industry is engaged in the manufacture of nondurable goods was a sus­taining factor. Nondurable goods are not subject to the wide cyclical swings that characterize the steel, automobile and other durable goods industries. A strong upturn in agricultural income helped to cushion the state's economy. The upturn in the recession was brought about by a re­versal of policy in regard to military expenditures by the Federal government. An increase in the amount of credit available for housing as the result of a special emergency program initiated by both Congress and the Administration provided a strong upward boost in an area where it was badly needed. As a result of more than $1 billion in mort­gage money being made available at subsidy rates, pri­vately financed housing starts rose from a low rate 0£ 915,000 a year in February 0£ 1958 to a high of 1.4 million in December, at which time the rate 0£ activity was still rising. It seems unlikely that this rate can be maintained unless more low-cost credit is provided by the current Con­gress. Strong sustaining factors which retarded the decline and provided a base from which the recovery began were the unemployment insurance program, the large highway pro­gram which was gathering momentum when the recession struck, and the fact that corporations maintained dividends despite the sharp drop in profits. The easy money policy inaugurated by the Federal Reserve System undoubtedly helped. The resulting sharp drop in interest rates made it easier for state and local governments to finance their loans for construction projects. These loans were made freely dur­ing the first half of 1958, helping to keep the public con­struction program going. AVERAGE WEEK LY HOURS, TEXAS MANUFACTURING INDU STRI ES, 1947-1958 As we enter the final year 0£ the fabulous fifties, we can look back on a decade of great accomplishments in both the state and the nation. In 1950 per capita real personal income in Texas was $1,304. By 1957 it had advanced to $1,490, a 14% gain. While 1958 may show a slight decline, 1959 should be a year of increase in this measure. Per capita real personal income is total personal income in the state adjusted to remove the effect of inflation and divided by the total population. The resulting figure is a measure of the increase in the people's ability to purchase goods and services. During the 1950-57 period national per capita real per­sonal income increased from $1,450 to $1,686, a 16% gain. The higher rate of increase for the nation is the result of the periods selected for the basis of comparison. If the entire period for which data are available (1929-1957) is used, the average annual rate of increase in per capita real personal income is 3.4% for Texas and 2.5% for the nation. This means that the standards of living of the popu­lations of the state and nation have advanced at approxi­mately these rates. The decade which lies before us is one 0£ great promise. Every appraisal 0£ the 1960's sums it up as a period 0£ great advances in population, scientific discovery, technological achievements, and national welfare. The standard of living should rise to a new high, and individual opportunities for leisure, recreation, education, and cultural attainments should all improve in great measure. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Editor_______________________________ _ _ ______________ __John R. Stockton Managing Editor_________________ __ __ _________ Robert H. Drenner CONTENTS Texas Business Activity ------------------------------------------2 Retail Trade ------------------------------------------------------------5 Texas Industrial Expansion, 1958 --------------------------7 Finance --------------------------------------------------------------------11 Industrial Production ----------------------------------------------14 Agriculture --------------------------------------------------------------16 Building Construction --------------------------------------------18 BUSINESS RESEARCH C OUNCIL J ohn Arch White, Acting Dean of the College of Business Adminis­tration (e:i; officio); J ohn R. Stockton ; W. H. Baughn ; L . G. Blackstock; E. W. Cundiff; J . Neff; G. H. Newlove. BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH J ohn R. Stockton Stanley A. Arbingast Florence Escott Director Assistant Director Administrative Assistant Francis M. May Resources Specialist Robert H . Drenner Statistician Alfred G. Dale Research Associate Research Associate Deirdre C. Handy Tina Piedrahita Research Associate J acquie LeRoy Research Associate R esearch Associate Charles O. Bettinger Marjorie T. Cornwell Research Associate Arvid A. Anderson Administrative Clerk Research Associate Mildred Anderson Candler P. Cass Statistical Assistant Roberta Steele Statistical Assistant Cartographer E'va A. Arias Crescencia M. Stanley Statistical Technician Marie Fletcher Senior Secretary Senior Secretary J osephine J. Knippa Marilyn Whites Senior Clerk Typist Anna Merle Danz Publication A ssistant Library Assistant Gail McElroy Barbara Warden Clerk Typist Dorothy W . Smith Clerk Typist Clerk Robert Dorsett Daniel P. Rosas Offset Press Operator Offset Press Operator Assistants Wayne Ferguson, Robert B. Gentry, Hugh Herndon, Richard B. McGregor, Robert Parker, Marie Payne, and Charles J . Turner. Publi~hed mont~l:r by _the Bureau !'f Businesa Research, College of Business AdmmJStrat10n, The University of Texas, Austin 12. Ente~ed as second class matter May 7, 1928 at the post office at A~tm, Texas, und~.r the act of August 24, 1912. Con tent of t his publi· cation 1s not copynl!'hted and may_ be reproduced freely. Acknowledire­me1_lt_ of sou~ce will be appreciated. Subscription $2.00 a year • lnd1v1dual copies, 20 r.<>nts. ' ' TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Retail Trade: DECEMBER INDEX RISES TO NEW MONTHLY RECORD By TINA PIEDRAHITA Dollar Sales. The December rush of pre-Christmas shoppers plus after-Christmas sales promotions brought Texas retail sales in December to an estimated $1,287.9 million, or 29% above November 1958 sales and 7% above December 1957. But sales for the year ($12,179.5 million) fell 1 % below the level of 1957 sales. This compares with an estimate by the U.S. Department of Commerce that total U.S. retail sales for 1958 were at approximately the same level as 1957 sales. December durable goods showed an en­couraging improvement, up 25% from November 1958 and ESTIMATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES (Unadjusted fer seasonal variation) Millions of dollars Percent change Dec 1958 Dec 1958 Ja n-Dec 1958 Dec Jan-Dec from from from Type of store 1958 1958 Nov 1958 Dec 1957 Ja n-Dec 1957 TOTAL --------____ l,287.9 12,179.5 + 29 + 7 1 Durable goods* --------325.5 3,471.5 + 25 + 11 -8 Nondurable goods -·-· 962.4 8, 708.0 + 31 + 6 + 2 •Contains automotive stores, furniture storee, and lumber. buildina­material, and hardware stores. 11 % above December 1957. But, because of the poor show­ing of durables during most of the 12 months of 1958, cumulative sales were 8% below sales of 1957. Nondurable goods sales, however, continued an upward trend and posted a 31 % increase over similar sales in the preceding month; December sales of nondurables were also 6% above December 1957 and, for the year, were 2% above sales in 1957. December indexes. The preliminary December index of total Texas retail sales (1947-49= 100 and adjusted for seasonal variation) was 216, or 29 points above the re­vised November 1958 index, 33 points above the average month for 1957, and the highest monthly index of total sales ever reported. The December gain amounted to a 14% rise in the index, compared with a preliminary esti­mate of the Department of Commerce that the seasonally adjusted index of U. S. retail sales rose 3% in December. The durable goods index (168) was 22 points above the revised November 1958 index but fell short of equalling Retail Sales in Texas Index , Adjusted for seasonal variation , 19-47-19-49-100 the average month for 1957 by one point. Deflated for price changes, the December index of total retail sales stood at 183, also a new record. Sales by store types. All Texas retailers except lum­ber and building material dealers (-6%) reported in­creases in sales over November 1958 ranging from 2% to 139%. Among durable goods stores, sales by farm imple­ment dealers were 35% above sales of December 1957, sales by hardware stores were up 17%, motor vehicle dealers showed a 12% improvement, lumber and building material dealers gained 10%, and furniture store sales were 9% above December a year ago. Total sales for 1958 were above those for 1957 among farm implement dealers ( + 11 % ) , lumber and building material dealers ( +6% ), hardware stores (+5%), and furniture stores (+2%). However, sales by motor vehicle dealers were 12% below 1957, bringing total 1958 Texas sales of durable goods 8% below 1957 sales. Among nondurable goods stores, best showings over December 1957 were made by unclassified apparel stores ( + 15%), groceries without meats ( + 12%) , gasoline and service stations (+11% ) , drug stores and liquor stores (each +9%), and men's and boys' clothing stores and women's ready-to-wear stores (each +8%). For the same period, shoe stores reported a 3 % sales decrease. In the cumulative comparison, increases over 1957 were made by drug stores ( +7%), groceries without meats and country general stores (each +6%), gasoline and service stations ( +5%) , groceries with meats ( +4%), unclassi­fied apparel stores and florists (each +2% ), and women's ready-to-wear stores, department stores and jewelry stores RETAIL SALES TRENDS BY KINDS OF BUSINESS Percent change in sales Kind of Busin ess Number of reporting stores Dec 1958 from N ov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 J a n-Dec 1958 from Jan-Dec 1957 DURABLE GOODS Automotive stores -·-· ---­·--·· 293 + 28 + 11 -12 Furniture and household appliance stores ----------··-------­ 166 + 26 + 12 + 4 Lumber, building material, and and hardware stores -------------· 294 + 2 + 13 + 6 NONDURABLE GOODS Apparel ---------------------------------------­ 213 + 78 + 7 2 Drug stores ------------------------··---­ 167 + 43 + 9 + 7 Eating and drinking places .... 85 + 4 + 2 2 Food stor es -···············-·········-···-·-· 227 + 5 + 3 + 4 Gasoline and service stations.... 921 + 19 + 11 + 5 General merchandise stores ---­ 180 + 73 + 6 + 1 Oth er r etail stores ------------·-----·--­ 219 + 58 + 7 + 1 (each + 1 % ) . Family clothing stores suffered a 7% de­crease from 1957 sales, liquor stores registered a 2% loss, and men's and boys' clothing stores and shoe stores fell 1 % below sales in 1957. Volume of department and apparel stores. Decem­ber sales of Texas department and apparel stores were 76% above November 1958 sales, and bettered December 1957 by 7%. For the year, however, sales were 1 % below sales in January-December 1957 . With 31 cities reporting sales by department and ap­parel stores, increases over November 1958 ranged from +116% reported by El Paso. Of the 25 cities reporting in- creases over December 1957, best showings were made by Edinburg ( + 19%), Lubbock and Plainview (each + 17%), Brownwood and Temple (each + 12%), Big Spring and Fort Worth (each+10% ), McAllen and Sher­man (each +9%), and Henderson, Houston and Waco (each +8%). Increases over 1957 sales were reported by Plainview ( + 14%), Edinburg ( + 11 % ) , Big Spring (+8%), Lubbock ( +7%), Brownwood and Temple (each +6%), Marshall (+3%), Bryan, Fort Worth, McAllen and Port Arthur (each +2%), and Austin and Lockhart (each+1 % ) . Sales in Texas cities. Of the 27 Texas cities reporting enough retailers to permit individual city listings, increases over November 1958 ranged from +67% reported by Gal­veston to + 13% reported by Corpus Christi. Twenty-one of the reporting cities registered increases over December 1957 and seven cities bettered January-December 1957. Increases over December 1957 were made by Plainview (+53%), Brownsville (+36%), Lubbock (+23%), Waco ( + 19%), Greenville ( + 15%), Amarillo, Austin, Dallas and Fort Worth (each +11%), El Paso, San An­tonio and Temple (each +10%), Galveston (+7%), Wichita Falls (+6%), Brownwood and Corpus Christi (each +4%), Abilene and Houston (each +3%), Big Spring and Bryan (each +2%), and Henderson ( + 1 % ) . In the annual cumulative comparison, retail sales in­creases over 1957 were reported by Plainview ( +7%), Temple ( +6%), Big Spring and Brownsville (each +4%), and Fort Worth, Greenville and Lubbock (each + 1 % ) . Credit and collection ratios. The December ratio of credit sales to total net sales in 62 Texas department and apparel stores was 67.3%, or 0.4 points above the ratio for December 1957. Highest credit ratios were reported by Dallas (74.8%), San Antonio (68.0%), and Houston (65.7%). By type of store, highest ratios were made by dry goods and apparel stores ( 71.4%) and department stores with sales with sales over $1 million ( 69.2%). CREDIT RATIOS IN DEPARTMU IT AND APPAREL STORES Cred it Collection r atios* ratios** N umber of ---­­ report ing Dec Dec Dec Dec Classificat ion st or es 1958 1957 1958 1957 ALL STORES 62 67 .3 66.9 37.5 34.7 BY CITIES Austin 62.0 61.2 52.3 51.6 Bryan 53.6 48.8 36.l 34.4 Dallas -­ 74.8 73.6 40.9 36.2 Ga lvest on 64.4 64.2 43.5 45.0 Houston __ __ 65.7 65 .6 33.7 32.5 Sa n Antonio __ _ 68 .0 66.3 45 .9 41.9 Waco ------------------------------------------­ 5 55 .2 56.5 43.2 43.4 BY TYPE OF STORE Department stores (over $1 million) 16 69.2 68.7 36.1 33. 2 Department stores (under $~ million) 18 46.4 47.4 47.8 41.5 Dry goods a nd a ppa r el stor es _ 5 71.4 69.7 56.7 54.2 Women's specialty shops ____ ____ 14 61.6 61.4 42.5 41.6 Men's clothing stor es ----­---­------· 9 60.5 59 .9 46.7 46.0 BY VOLUME OF NET SALES Over $1,500,000 ----------------­------­ 23 68.6 68 .1 37.1 34.4 $500,000 to $1.500,000 ---­--­ 13 50.2 50.9 46.3 43.5 $250 ,000 to $500,000 -----­------· 11 51.8 50. 6 44.4 41.2 Less tha n $250,000 -------------­·-­ 15 46.0 46.4 44.7 42.0 • Credit sales as a percent of net sales. •• Collections during the month as a per cent of accounts unpaid on the first of the month. The ratio of collections during the month of December to accounts unpaid at the first of the month was 37.5%, or 2.8 points above December 1957. Highest collection ratios were made by Austin (52.3%), Cleburne ( 48.2%) and San Antonio ( 45.9%) . By type of store, highest col­lection ratios were made by dry goods and apparel stores (56.7%) and department stores with sales under SI mil­lion ( 47.8). Austin, Bryan, Cleburne, Dallas, Houston and San Antonio improved their collection ratios over Decem­ber 1957. Secondary trade indicators. December advertising linage in 24 Texas cities was 2% above November 1958 but 1 % below December 1957. Of the 100 Texas cities reporting postal receipts for the November 12-December 12, 1958 period, 92 bettered October 18-November 11, 1958 and 88 were above Novem­ber 16-December 13, 1957. Sixty-nine Texas cities reported higher postal receipts for 1958. POSTAL RECEIPTS Percent change Cit y N ov 13· D ec 12 1958 Dec 14 1957­Dec 12 1958 Dec 15 1956­D ec 13 1957 Dec 14 '57­Dec 12 '58 from Dec 15 '56­Dec 13 '57 Alice $16,353 $171,384 $155,996 + 10 Brownfield 11,116 89,940 Cameron 6,491 81 ,543 Childress ·--------------------7,077 62,679 Cleburne 14,882 152,192 130,955 + 16 Coleman 8,101 72,770 67,487 8 ----· --------··-····-------­ ····-····-··················· + Crystal City 3,305 55,139 -------·····-·· Cuero ...... 6,394 61,140 55,983 + 9 Del Rio ··········-----------------132,174 Denton 33,421 311.953 292,342 7 Eagle Pass 7,227 72,273 G7,716 + 7 Edna 4,505 56,820 E l Cam po ............. 9,983 112,972 102,360 + 10 Gatesville 5,959 51,450 ··-················ + --······-----­Graham ---·---·---······-········--11,214 95,058 87,502 + 9 ----------······-···· Granbury 6,110 43,500 48,044 9 H ale Center ----------2,133 20,786 20,556 + 1 H illsboro ······----------------······---7,479 77,236 82,728 7 Hun tsville 10,333 109,663 -···-······················· --···-···-··· + Jackson ville 11,402 177,753 167,539 6 Kenedy ---···········------7,112 44,426 37,948 + 17 -···-········-····-· Kermit 10,682 88,315 73,125 + 21 Kerrville --------13,349 132,405 Kingsville --------------------····--17,983 147,913 Kirbyville --·---······ 3,058 33,680 41,592 -19 L a Grange ----------············ 4,839 55,728 48,905 + 14 Levelland ···-··-·-------------····· 8,838 91,640 78,921 + 16 Littlefield 8,009 80,466 Llano ··----····-·----------2,905 26,637 24,309 + 10 McCamey ------------················-· 40,450 Marlin --·-·--·------------14,530 87,098 78,847 + 10 Mercedes -5,332 59,131 Mission ----------------------------------9,873 102,488 92,826 + 10 Navasota 5,078 55,791 50,881 + 10 Odessa ---------------------------------77 ,616 767,351 668,707 + 15 Pam pa 25,513 23 1,497 Pecos ---------------14,431 152,519 137,527 + 11 P ittsburg ------3,426 43,597 36,481 + 17 Raymondville ____ -------------------6,469 64,000 S in ton -----------------------------------5,846 80,477 T aft -------·-------------------------------3,588 34,705 31,881 9 + T errell -----------------------------------· 79,935 Waxahachie ----------------------··· 11,496 138,447 Weatherford 12,050 ·-------------- Yoakum 13,036 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Texas Industrial Expansion, 1958 By ROBERT H. DRENNER Although the 1958 recession did substantially slow in­dustrial expansion in Texas, there were nevertheless im­portant additions during the year to both the magnitude and diversity of Texas industry. The Texas Employment Commission reported that 136 new manufacturing plants (as distinguished from expansions and changes of loca­tion hy existing manufacturers in the state) began opera­tion in Texas last year, initially employing nearly 3,000 persons, and the 1958 Industrial Development & Manu­fa.cturers Record, in its annual list of major new plant con­struction projects (including plant expansions by already­located Texas manufacturers) in the 15 southern states, showed Texas leading the list with 257, more than one­quarter greater than the second-ranking state. Remembering, however, the recent history of industrial expansion in Texas, 1958 showed a marked drop from the average rate of growth of the past decade. New factory construction, down one-third from 1957, showed the effects of the uncertain economic outlook and the fact that, in several major areas, demand had not yet absorbed indus­trial capacity constructed in the immediately preceding years. To some extent industrial growth follows a cyclical pattern independent of variations in over-all business ac­tivity, and in Texas last year the recession reinforced the effect of the state's being in a temporary downward phase of the cycle. This same characteristic of industrial growth gives grounds for the expectation that, in the immediate future, an upward curve in capital investment for new plant and equipment will lag somewhat behind the improve­ment in business activity as a whole. Industrial growth in Texas in the next decade will de­pend to a great extent upon developments in the oil in­dustry, and, in lesser measure, on the development of a strong electronics and missile industry in the state (a special report on Texas aircraft and missiles production begins on page 14) . The long-term outlook for chemicals manufacture in Texas continues bright, but best immedi­ate prospects for industrial growth appear to he in those lines that will most benefit from the population and mar­ket growth of the Southwest--construction materials, furni­ture, fabricated metals, transportation equipment, proc­essed foods, apparel, and similar products. OIL REFINING Texas has the largest refining industry in the United States, with a capacity of approximately 2.5 million bar­rels per day and 27% of the national total. With such a large portion of U. S. capacity, Texas refinery activity is linked closely to the strength of domestic demand for pe­troleum products. Demand last year was weak, and output of the state's refineries, measured by crude runs to stills, fell 5% below the 1957 level and 8% below record produc­tion in 1956. With substantial excess capacity, expendi­tures for refinery construction dropped to about half the 1957 amount. Industry forecasts, however, strike a much more en­couraging note. An average annual gain of 4% in prod­ucts demand is anticipated, and the 1959 market in par­ticular is expected to be much stronger. A large portion of 1958 refinery construction-which though smaller than in 1957 still represented an important strengthening of the Texas industry-was the result of an optimistic reading of the industry's future. There were also a number of im­portant projects aimed at modernizing facilities and up­grading products at individual refineries, including in several important instances the addition of new product streams. Late in 1958 both Skelly Oil Co. and the Texas Co. an­nounced plans to build $2-million facilities in the Perryton area. Magnolia Petroleum Co. will spend $7 million this year at its Beaumont refinery to remodel and convert a catalytic reformer unit into a Sovaformer. At Bishop, Champlin Oil & Refining Co. has a $3-million refinery ex­pansion and modernization program in progress; all prod­ucts will be upgraded, and increased ethane, butane, and propane capacity will be built. At Baytown, Humble Oil & Refining Co. put a 55,000 barrel-per-day catalytic crack­ing unit on stream in mid-1958 and announced that it will soon double refinery ethylene facilities. Texas Calgary Co. completed a new cracking plant at its Carrizo Springs re­finery in August, increased refinery capacity to 3,000 bar­rels daily, and raised the octane rating of its gasoline production. At Corpus Christi, Pontiac Refining Corp. be­gan a $1.5-million program to modify a crude unit and build a 5,000 barrel-per-day Unifier. La Gloria Oil & Gas Co. started a $2-million renovation and expansion of its Tyler refinery to increase capacity by 20% and upgrade products. Republic Oil & Refining Co. completed a 5,000 barrel-per-day Udex unit to produce benzene, toluene, and xylenes at its Texas City refinery; also atTexas City, Amoco Chemical Corp. substantially increased ultra-forming and hydroforming capacity. Suntide Refining Co. completed construction of new orthoxylene facilities at its refinery in Corpus Christi, and a large number of smaller projects were completed or begun by other companies at refineries over the state, though chiefly, of course, along the Gui£ Coast. In addition, as noted below, there were a number of important refinery expansions of chemicals output. GAS PROCESSING Construction of new facilities to process natural gas was extremely active during 1958 and into 1959, the result in part of record national demand for Texas gas to be used as fuel and the necessity of removing undesirable constituents before it can be marketed for that purpose, and in part the result of demand for the various hydrocarbons themselves (including natural gasoline) that are often found in gas streams. Design of the individual plant depends ordinarily on which of these two aims is regarded as primary, though in some instances the plant is constructed to serve both purposes. The following list includes most of the larger con­struction projects for natural gas processing facilities begun, completed, or planned in Texas during the past year. Sunray Mid-Continent Oil Co. has work under way on a completely automatic natural gasoline plant 16 miles northeast of Port Lavaca in Jackson County. The plant will have a capacity of 40,000 m.c.f. daily and will turn out 27,000 gallons of products daily when operating at capacity; completion is scheduled for March. Western Natural Gas Co. recently announced plans to build three small natural gasoline extraction plants, one each in Hidal­go, Victoria, and Aransas counties, with products of the three plants to be used as feedstocks for a refinery the com­pany is renovating and will soon put on steam at Browns­ville. Northern Natural Gas Co. late last year completed a 100,000 m.c.f.d. natural gasoline and dehydration facility near Spearman. Tidewater Oil Co. recently began building a $15-million plant at Scroggins to extract sulfur, propane, and butane from natural gas. The plant is to be completed this year and will employ about 60 persons; the processed gas will be returned to the Smackover formation for pres­sure maintenance. Pioneer Gathering System, Inc., is build­ing a gas cleaning plant 20 miles northwest of Sonora at estimated cost of $1 million. Cities Service Oil Co. has a $3.5-million natural gasoline and LPG plant under con­struction near Midland, and Anchor Gasoline Corp. re­cently completed a 35 m.c.f.d. natural gasoline plant in the Tabasco field near Mission. At Crane, Warren Petro­leum Corp. expanded gas processing capacity at its Wad­dell Plant by 60 m.c.f.d. at a cost of $8 million; the plant produces LPG and natural gasoline. Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corp. recently completed a $2.5 million gas pro­cessing plant (including gathering lines and storage facili­ties) near Tilden, and completed a $2-million, 75 m.c.f.d. gas treating and dehydration plant in McMullen County. Lone Star Producing Co. is nearing completion on a $3. 75 million natural gas processing plant and associated facili­ties in the Pleasanton area, and El Paso Natural Gas Co. completed a new $4-million dehydration plant in the Puckett Field near Fort Stockton. A number of other im­portant projects on which construction was completed during the year were noted as underway in last year's Review summary. CHEMICALS The Texas chemical industry has grown to the point that, like every major established industry (such as oil refining in Texas) , a large amount of capital on new construction is expended every year at existing plants for facilities to ex­pand production or to manufacture new products. Since the added facilities and production will usually be planned as an integrated part of plant operations, a relatively smaller capital outlay is usually necessary than if an inde­pendent plant had been built for the new production; new employment will also be somewhat less. Such additions, however, strengthen the position of existing plants and in the long run are as important a contribution to Texas in­dustry as new plant construction. Major construction in the Texas chemical industry last year, listed below, in~cates that the major portion of new investment was of this na­ture, though the list of individual chemical plants in the state also showed an encouraging growth. On the whole, expansion of the Texas chemical industry slowed markedly in 1958, compared with the very active growth in the immediately preceding years. Even a year ago, troublesome excess capacity in some organic lines-­polyethylene, for example-had begun to appear, and the recession aggravated the difficulty; construction of new inorganic capacity also fell sharply. Sales by the Texas industry, on the other hand, set a new record, and in the past few months estimates of 1959 construction for new production have edged upward. Capital expenditures for new chemical plant and equipment in Texas, which last year fell 40% from the 1957 level, will move up to per­haps $200 million. Long-term growth of demand for petro­chemicals should assure the continued growth of chemical manufacture in Texas; the state's locational advantages for the industry are outstanding (see the February 1958 Review, pp.10-11). Jefferson Chemical Co. has a major expansion of facili­ties underway at its Port Neches chemical plant; ethylene capacity will he tripled, glycol capacity doubled, and ethyl­ene oxide production increased 50% ; the company will also add facilities to further diversify its production of organics based on ethylene and propylene. Du Pont is building a laboratory and pilot plant adjacent to its Sabine River Works at Orange, to he used to evaluate polyethylene resins and to develop polyethylene film manufacturing techniques; as a result of successful pilot plant production of linear polyethylene, the company has announced that it will build a full-scale plant, scheduled for completion in mid-1960, for linear production at its Orange location. A new plant to manufacture synthetic resins will be completed this spring by Reichhold Chemicals, Inc., in Houston; plant investment is expected eventually to reach $25 mil­lion. Texas-American Dye & Chemical Corp. will soon open a new plant in Hempstead to produce organic dyestuffs and auxiliary chemicals. Dow Chemical Co., at Freeport, com­pleted a small aluminum chloride plant, increased methyl chloride and methylene chloride capacity by 20%, com­pleted a program to double the original capacity of its polyethylene facility, and in July will complete another major expansion of polyethylene capacity. Dow has also begun construction at Beaumont on a SO-million pound­per-year unit to produce caprolactam and cyclohexlyamine (used in fibers, plastics, and rubber products) . Dow also, with BASF (a German company), formed Dow-Badische Chemical Corp., which is building a plant adjacent to Dow's Plant B in Freeport to manufacture chemicals de­rived from acetylene. Shell Chemical Corp. plans to build a phenol and acetone unit this year at its Deer Park site; ~lso, in Dallas, ~agnolia ~hemical Co. of Texas is expand­mg heavy chemical capacity. Texas Butadiene & Chemical Corp. last month completed facilities at its Channelview plant for the production of propylene concentrate. At Bay­town, near its r~finery location, Humble Oil &Refining Co. began construction last f~ll on a 4?-million pound-per-year polypropylene plant. Umon Carbide Chemicals Co. is re­modeling the recently-purchased Carthage Hydrocol plant (which has not operated for several years) at a cost ex- TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW pected to exceed $1 million; though the company has not revealed its plans it is thought that the plant will be made into a major petrochemical facility. At Deer Park, Shell Chemical Corp. is constructing a new phenol-acetone unit, to be completed this year; at Houston, Sinclair Chemicals, Inc., will soon put new facilities for production of paraxyl­ene, toluene, and mixed xylenes on stream. Union Carbide Chemicals Co. is constructing two new units at its Seadrift plant to manufacture industrial alcohols and esters; com­bined capacity of the units will exceed 100 million pounds annually, and completion is expected in 1960. Olin Mathie­son Chemical Corp. raised sulfuric acid capacity of its Beaumont plant by 250% and also completed a new am­monium sulfate unit; in Baytown, Consolidated Chemical Industries, Inc., increased plant sulfur-recovery capacity by 100 tons per day, and Humble Oil &Refining Co. placed a butadiene unit, shut down earlier in the year as a result of weak butadiene demand, back on stream. At Deer Park, Diamond Alkali Co. completed a 50-million pound-per-year vinyl chloride unit and is considering a $10-million acety­lene plant there, and, in Houston, Petro-Tex Chemical Corp. completed a one-million gallon-per-year isobutylene plant. Early in 1958, both Crown Zellerbach Corp. and Ludlow Papers, Inc., announced plans to build major poly­ethylene film plants at Orange, both to use resins supplied from Spencer Chemical's Orange facility; economic re­covery and stronger polyethylene film demand are expected to encourage the two companies to begin construction soon. At Port Arthur, Gulf Oil Corp. added new facilities to produce 30 million gallons of benzene per year, and, at Port Neches, Goodrich-Gulf Chemicals Corp. expanded copolymer and butadiene capacity. Monsanto Chemical Co. completed a 40-million pound-per-year expansion of sty­rene-monomer capacity at its Texas City plant, where it also increased acetylene capacity by 12 million pounds annually and plans to construct polyethylene facilities and add equipment to increase acrylonitrile output to 100 mil­lion pounds per year. BUILDING MATERIALS The record pace of Texas highway and building con­struction last year encouraged the establishment of an un­usually large number of new plants and expansions of existing plants manufacturing building materials, as was , the case to a slightly less extent in 1957. Texas economic and population growth, and the growth of the entire region at the heart of which Texas lies, can be expected to con­ tinue to generate new demand for building materials, and 1959 will also be a year of increased output of a wide . variety of such materials. The industry is characterized · by a large number of relatively small firms; transportation costs on sand and gravel, ready-mixed concrete, and brick, for example, are so high that production is heavily oriented to local consumption. Only the larger new plants or ex­pansion programs in the Texas building materials industry are consequently noted below. Southwestern Portland Cement is building a new cement plant near Odessa. At Lone Star (near Daingerfield), Lone . Star Steel Co. has added facilities to up output of structural steel. In Tyler, National Homes Corp. doubled production . of the company's line of prefabricated houses, Tyler Pipe & Foundry Co. installed $300,000 in new equipment for in­creased production of soil and water pipe and various metal Miss Florence Stullken, a member of the faculty (Secretarial Studies) of the College of Business Ad­ministration of The University of Texas, retired after the 1958 summer term, and her forty years of service and devotion to the College and University will be commemorated on February 14 by a dinner to be given in her honor at the Driskill Hotel in Austin. Miss Stullken' s friends and former students can find her at her ranch on Route 1 (Box 123) , Round Rock. building materials (a$300,000 expansion program has been announced for 1959), and Western Foundry Co., which manufactures soil pipe, fittings, and plumbing specialties, spent $250,000 on expansion and improvement of prod­uctive facilities. Texcrete Co. of Houston completed a $250,000 plant expansion; also in Houston, Mosher Steel Co. added $400,000 in new facilities for the manufacture of structural steel, Scholz Homes, Inc., is building a new plant to turn out prefabricated homes, Metallic Building Co. is doubling fabricating capacity at a cost of $500,000, and Barclite Co. of America is building a new $750,000 plant to manufacture fiberglass panels. In Henderson, Hen­derson Clay Products has an $800,000 expansion of facili­ties for brick manufacture in progress, and WM Products Co. has opened a new plant for aluminum window fabrica­tions. In Sweetwater, Gifford-Hill Pipe Co. will soon com­plete a new $250,000 plant to produce concrete pipe. Texas Lime Co., at Cleburne, has begun a $750,000 expansion of facilities for the production of lime and crushed limestone, and, at Seguin, Structural Metals, Inc., is installing new rolling facilities and other equipment to manufacture struc­tural steel. (To be concluded in the March issue) New 1959 Directory of Texas Manufacturers Available The eleventh and completely revised edition of the Directory of Texas Manufacturers, with entries for over 10,500 manufacturers in the state and detailed informa­tion about each, is available for distribution by the Bu­reau of Business Research at The University of Texas. The 1959 Directory is the product of two years of exten­sive research and revision by the Bureau's Directory staff. In order that the listings in this new edition might be as complete and accurate as possible, the staff contacted every known Texas manufacturer and chamber of commerce. Wherever possible, a bank in every town lacking a cham­ber of commerce was contacted. A questionnaire was mailed to all home offices of multi-location firms. Finally, the staff checked its data against all available trade and industrial association lists. In addition to its revised listings of firms, the new Directory incorporates several significant improvements over previous editions. The most important of these im­provements is the addition of an entire section, Part I, listing all manufacturing plants in Texas and their home offices alphabetically by firm name. Part II of the new Directory lists these plants by cities in which they are located, and Part III classifies them by their products in accordance with the 1956 Standard Industrial Classifica­tion. Another significant innovation in the present edition is the grouping of small towns with major cities under Metro­ politan Area headings. This new method of listing, employ­ ing the concept of Metropolitan Areas, is much more repre­ sentative of the industrial complex of a given area than were previous listings which adhered to arbitrary political boundaries. Also added in the new edition is a "County List of Texas Cities Having Manufacturing Plants." This section, used in conjunction with Part II, makes it convenient for the user to compile complete county lists of manufacturing firms. Another addition in this year's revision is a map of the state showing the major metropolitan areas and urban places with populations over 25,000. With the in­ formation given under each city entry in Part II, the ap· proximate location of any Texas city having manufacturing plants can be quickly determined by reference to this map. The Directory of Texas Manufacturers is a valuable , source of information for anyone engaged in business any­ where in Texas. It is particularly useful to salesmen, market analysts, advertisers, purchasing agents and manufacturers seeking new plant locations or sources of supply for parts and materials. Part III will perhaps be the most widely used section of the Directory, for it is in effect a complete mailing list of Texas manufacturers by product classification. Since this section has proved so useful to Texas businessmen, this year it is printed in larger type and the plants' employment codes have been added. Part II is of general use as a source of detailed informa­tion concerning individual Texas manufacturers. This sec­tion contains the following information: I) the Standard Industrial Classification code numbers and descriptive classifications of the plant's products; 2) the area of dis­tribution of its products; 3) its employment by coded groups; 4) its form of organization; 5) the date of its establishment in Texas; 6) the name and title of a prin­cipal officer; and 7) its street and mailing address. These data on individual plants have been entered on punched cards which are available for special analyses at the Bu­reau of Business Research. The Bureau will make special listings, at cost, by these characteristics. The newly-added Part I of the Directory will be invalu· able to those who desire a complete listing of the home offices of multiple-location firms in Texas. In addition to the home office address, entries in this section contain the name and location of all plants operated in the state by each firm. Apart from its service to businessmen, the Directory is an important source of information for anyone engaged in general economic research, for it contains a wealth of data indicating the broad outline of the pattern of Texas' in­dustrial growth. For example, additions to its listings sug­gest the categories of manufacturing which, during the period of revision, have experienced the most rapid expan· sion. The greatest number of additions to the present Directory was among firms manufacturing plastic products, boats and prestressed concrete products. Since it classifies manufacturers by product, the Direc­tory's revised listings are good indicators of product diver­sification among Texas firms. The new listings indicate, for example, a remarkable diversification in chemicals prod­uction since the publication of the previous directory. The new Directory lists nine manufacturing plants in the state with employments exceeding 5,000. These nine largest manufacturing employers are engaged in three basic cate· gories of activity: chemicals production, petroleum refin· ing, and production of aircraft and aircraft parts. A rough comparison of the listings for the Houston and Dallas metropolitan areas shows that the relative positions of those areas have not altered appreciably during the period of revision. Now, just as two years ago, Houston has a substantial lead over Dallas in number of manufactur· ing plants employing over 250 persons. In total number of manufacturing establishments of all sizes, however, the Dallas Metropolitan Area is still first in the state. Some additions to the new edition's city lists indicate an expansion of manufacturing activity in certain areas which warrants special notice. In the Dallas Metropolitan Area, the city of Garland shows a remarkable increase in number of manufacturing plants. Arlington, in the Fort Worth Metropolitan Area, has enjoyed a similar growth. To the north, both Denison and Sherman have had several impor· tant additions to their lists of manufacturers in the past two years, and the West Texas communities of Lubbock and Odessa have also recorded large increases in the Directory lists. The new Directory is now available on order from the Bureau of Business Research at $10 a copy. In future, the Bureau will publish revised editions of the Direcwry annu· ally, rather than biennially as in the past. It will continue to be supplemented by Texas Industrial Expansion, which will be published hereafter by the Bureau every two months (rather than quarterly, as in the past) . -CHARLES R. McCoRD TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Finance: BANK CAPITAL IN TEXAS By IRVING O. LINGER* Texas bank capitalization plans have made headlines a number of times in in recent months. "Republic Plans Capital, Surplus of $100 Million." "First National, Dallas, to Propose Capital Increases." "Texas State Bank Plans Capital Hike." "Capital Stock Increase Announced by North State, Houston." "Grand Saline Bank Increases Capital Stock." "First National, Port Arthur, to Add Stock." And others. The chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpor­ation has stated that for the next 25 years bank supervisory authorities will have to make adequate capitalization a car­dinal point in their programs. He said that retained earn­ings will continue to be an important source of new bank capital, and added that the sale of stock to the public is potentially an important source of new capital.1 One reason for renewed interest in bank capital is the increasing need to reconsider the old problem of bank liquidity. Banks have gone through postwar transitions that have made them less able to adjust independently to chang­ing loan demands and deposit demands, the most obvious one being the reduction of U.S. Government security hold­ings from about $91 billion at the end of 1945 to around $66 billion reported last summer (holdings had gotten as low as $56 billion a year earlier, but recession policy and economic conditions led to a temporary reversal of the general trend). Liquidity and capital are highly interrelated, as the banker well knows. Reduced liquidity may require more capital to meet extra demands and to avoid insolvency. Ideally management needs a fine combination of liquidity and capital so that depositor protection and confidence can be combined with the bank's ability to take reasonable risks required for servicing the community's credit needs. However, an individual bank's problem will vary with the economic and financial conditions peculiar to its own lo­ • Financial Economist, Dallas Federal Reserve Bank ; formerly As­ sistant Professor of Finance, The University of Texas. 1 Journal of Commerce, September 18, 1958, p. 4. FEDERAL INTERNAL REVENUE COLLECTIONS Source: Internal Revenue Service, U. S. Treasury De partment July 1-December 31 Percent District 1958 1957 change TEXAS ............................... . $1,044,005,413* $1,051,885,827* -1 Income -·-············ ----------··············· 373,385,672 390,828,210 -4 Employment ................... . 6,222,238 7,186,807 -13 Withholding ............................... . 554,004,893 539, 704,538 3 Other ............................ . 110,392,611 114,166,270 -3 SOUTHERN DISTRICT.. 539,615,783* 558, 762,634* -3 Income .................... . 189,455,222 210,935, 725 -10 + Employment ............................... . 86,345 80,776 7 + Withholding ............................. . 281,957,860 276,615,179 2 Other ................................. 68,116,357 71,130,952 -4 NORTHERN DISTRICT.. 504,389,631 * 493,123,193* + 2 Income ............... . 183,930,450 179,892,485 2 + + Employment ............................... . 6,135,894 7,106,031 -14 Withholding ............................... . 272,047,033 263,089,359 3 Other ........................................... . 42,276,254 43,035,318 -2 + •Details do not add to total due to rounding, cale-growth rate, kinds of industry, special seasonal re­quirements, kinds of accounts, etc. What are some of the factors involved in judging the adequacy of bank capital? What are the capital account trends in Texas? How do they compare with those in the nation as a whole. 2 Old rules, based upon such ratios as capital-to-deposits and capital-to-total assets, have to be altered to take into ac­count changes in the nature of hank assets, ability to ac­quire emergency liquidity from the Federal Reserve Sys­tem, and certain stabilizing influences not prevalent in the pre-depression years. Better cost controls, reserve handling, and economic analyses have contributed to improved man­agement. Asssets now tend to be evaluated more on the basis of quality and inherent soundness rather than on cur­re~t market values, which means avoidance of arbitrary wnte-downs of capital funds. More care is taken in estab­lishing new hanks. A vast Treasury-bill market (perhaps not vast enough, considering growth trends) has facilitated the use of Treasury bills as secondary reserves. Deposit in­surance has been helpful. Government guaranties have taken some of the risk out of real estate loans. The Federal Government is learning, though slowly and only partially, ho~ to counteract ~xce~sive recession. And monetary policy, for the first time m our history, has scope to use, more artfully, tools that heretofore have been hampered for one reason or another. ~t should be of some interest to examine capital account ratios for Texas hanks and compare them with those for hanks in the country as a whole. With this in mind data for insured commercial banks have been taken fro:n the semiannual reports of the Federal Deposit Insurance Cor­poration and ratios computed therefrom. The following ratios have been chosen: Capital.-deposit ratio: This is the time-honored (time­worn?) ratio of all the capital accounts to all the deposits. It is concerned with providing that the stockholders' stake in the success of the bank will be large enough to assure conservative lending and investing policies. Capital ac­counts are expected to serve as a buffer to protect deposi· tors. Although the rule-of-thumb that capital should at least equal 10% of deposits is no longer recognized as stand~rd, t~e amount of total capital in relation to deposits remams an important consideration in the determination of the degree of liquidity required in a bank's investment port­foli?. "As ~ general rul~, the higher the proportion of capi­tal m relation to deposits the more liberal the investment policy may be, depending, of course, on other factors, such as the nature of deposits and the type and volume of loans ... Banks with total capital ... of less than 5% of deposits should he especially conservative in investment policies."a Capital.-total assets ratio: This ratio indicates the per· centage by which the assets may decline in value before losses will be incurred by depositors. For instance, a bank 2 There is some difference in the usage of the term "Capital Ac­counts." It is taken here to mean the capital stock account, the main surplus acount, surplus set aside for potential dividends ("undivided profits"), and any further reservation of surplus for contingencies. Some bankers think, not without good reason of course that con­tingency reserves are better shown with the liabilities p;oper. The writer believes that such reserves, which are not tax deductible, are part of net worth and should be included in the capital accounts section of the balance sheet. 3 "Commercial Bank Investment Policy," Bank Management Com­mission, American Bankers Association, New York, 1951, p. 12. with total assets of $100 million and total capital of $10 million will be able to pay its creditors in full so long as its assets do not decline by more than $10 million, or 10%. Some writers think that this ratio is more meaningful than the capital-deposit ratio. "The important question is not the abstract and ethical consideration of how much should be supplied by owners in proportion to funds supplied by creditors, but the practical determination of the amount of protection for the latter afforded by the cushion of capital. Furthermore, the specific possibility against which protection is provided is that assets might fall in value."4 Capital-risk assets ratio: This is the ratio of capital accounts to total assets minus cash and U. S. Government securities. "The function of the capital accounts in their role of buffer for the protection of depositors is to provide a margin of safety in case of a decline in the value of assets. The ratio that has significance, therefore, is not the ratio of capital to deposits or to total assets but rather the ratio of capital to "risk assets."5 When the ratio of capital accounts to total assets is declining, the ratio to risk assets may remain constant or even rise. In the postwar years the Comptroller of the Currency has shifted attention from the capital-deposit relationship to the relation of capital to risk assets. Chart I shows that there has been a gradual but steady improvement in the capital structure of Texas banks, not only absolutely but also relative to banks in the country as a whole, and, in fact, the ratio of capital to deposits is now about the same for both categories (almost 9% ). Of course the ratio may be modified by change in either capital or deposits. Deposits have appreciably increased in both Texas 4 Eugene S. Kline, Money and Banking, South-Western Publish­ing Company, Cincinnati, Ohio, 1955, p. 359. ~Charles R. Whittlesey, Principles and Practices of Money and Banking, The Macmillan Company, New York, 1954, p. 141. REVENUE RECEIPTS OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER Source: State Comptroller of Public Account. September I-December 31 Percent Accoant 1958 1957 change T OTAL ............. .............$341,989,733 $309,596,603 + 10 Ad valorem, inheritance, and poll taxes ............................. .............. 17,452,243 16,789,601 + 4 Natural a nd casin ghead gas production taxes .............................. 14,390,291 18,255,525 + 9 Crude oil production taxes ................ 44,934,691 46,587,872 3 Other gross receipts a nd production taxes ............................. 5,788,649 5,855,334 I nsurance companies and other occupation taxes .............................. 303,022 226,281 + 34 Motor fuel taxes (net) ..... 57,897,613 55,550,474 + 4 Cigarette tax and licenses ··········--·-·--­ 16,855,847 15,525 ,011 + 9 Alcoholic beverage taxes and licenses ·····--·--·-·-·--------------------····· 11,372,732 11,520,392 Automobile and other sales taxes...... 5,887,517 6,787,389 -13 Licenses a nd fees -------------­-­ 11,810,780 10,369,287 + 9 Franchise taxes -----------­------------------­---­ 907,199 888,975 + 2 Mineral leases, lan d sales, rentals, and bonuses ....... 10,960,644 4,586,521 + 139 Oil a nd gas royalties .......... 9,424,476 9,141,364 + 3 I nterest earned ................................... 10,207,249 11,920,683 -14 U nclassified receipts .................... 15,786,620 17,001,901 - 7 Ot her m iscellaneous revenue -----------­ 4,147,427 3,560,789 + 16 Federal aid for highways ...... 51,554,780 84,794,459 + 48 Federal a id for public welfare .......... 45,819,117 89,628,116 + 16 Other federal a id ............ 5,783,315 5,215,780 + 30 Donations a nd grants .......................... 205,521 390,899 -47 CHART I CAPITAL TO DEPOSITS RATI05; TEXAS AND THE UNITED STATES ALL INSURED COMMERCIAL BA NKS Percent Percent 10',--,--,---,,--,--,---,----,----,---,---r--r--ilO 'f--f---f----!l----l---l--+--+--+--+--+---t--::J9 1__.--::"' 1b.. ············ 7 'r---ttt"±!Xtt· ····:w··8 ·-+'···~····1···1-·r···-·---l---t---t-16 ···~··~···_···-__···_···1· 6,f--f---r..~---·= · · -~--b---~ -·-=··-~-~ ······--·········-······ 4>--1---1----!1----i---l---I---!---!--+--+--+_, 311---1---1----ll----l---l---l---l--+--+--+--+-13 2'>--l---l----!l----1---1---1---!--t~=--~----~1 -=···~~-~~~~~~~:'_"_"_'+-I ..... •' 0.c••b•t 31 SOUt Cli S••i..1111vo1 ot...h 011cl IOobility ,. ,.rt, of ..J11..-23,19SI tli• p,c1.,ol O•p•uit l•H•••u Cor,.roti• •­ and the United States, but there has been a much greater proportionate increase in Texas capital accounts.6 In view of the quality of assets in bank portfolios today compared with that prior to the depression years, and taking into consideration the various aspects of economic and policy improvements mentioned above, it would appear that the present ratio of capital to deposits is respectable and even must be some satisfaction to F.D.l.C. examiners. Chart II indicates a similar improvement in the ratio of capital accounts to total assets. Here, too, Texas banks have caught up with the national average and for the same reason given in the comments pertaining to changes in the capital-deposit ratio; namely, a proportionately greater im- CHARI II CAPITAL TO TOTAL ASSETS RATlos; TEXAS AND Percenr THE UNITED STATES, ALL INSURED CO MMERCIAL BAN KS Percenr SO\llCf, s, ,.;.• ,.,.wol o•HI ol>CI Hob;Gl'J report• of th• f•cl•rol Oepo,;1 '"""•"'<• Corporotio11 provement in the volume of capital accounts when com· pared with total assets and when compared with increases in the capital of banks nationally. Chart III shows a higher ratio of capital to risk assets for Texas banks compared with banks throughout the country in the last few years. It will be recalled that "risk assets" exclude cash and U.S. Government securities. Both lines in the chart go steadily downward in the earlier post· war years as banks unloaded Governments and turned to their regular job of financing business, and this went on more rapidly than increased capitalization, thus causing the ratios for both Texas and the U. S. to go down until 1956. Then Texas banks, compared to banks in the coun­try as a whole, either began holding proportionately more cash and/ or proportionately more Government securities. F.D.l.C. figures indicate proportionately more Government security holdings compared with banks in the nation. 6 Bank capital accounts increased 201% in Texas during the chart period and 93% in the country as a whole. Deposits increased 87% in Texas and 48% in the United States. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW CHA RT Ill CAPITAL TO RISK ASSETS RATIOS~ TEXAS AND Percent THE UNITED STA TES, ALL INSURED COMMERCIAL BANKS Percent u u o ·55 '56 57 58"" SOVRCL Seffti.onnual asHI and liabiliry •• pa•I• ol the federal Oepooil lnowan" Co•pa•otian A question should be raised with respect to the classifi­cation "risk assets"-how riskless are Government securi­ties? Banks today have good reason to be guite conscious of the money rate risk involved in holding them; invest­ment portfolios have been partly "locked in" because of low market prices on these obligations. Despite some need for adjustment because of the 1958 bond market developments, it can be said that the period from 1946 to 1958 has shown a reasonably healthy capi­talization trend, especially for Texas banks. The number of recent and pending new capitalization plans of Texas banks probably has been more the result of the desire to support growth and to make larger loans than of a need to "catch up" with deposits. It should be kept in mind that data such as the above is more useful for indicating trends than it is for passing judgment upon the individual bank, each with its own variations in relationships among assets, deposits, economic conditions, and state of development. Bureau of Business Research Publications A Selected and Annotated Bibliography of Personnel Administration by Charles T. Clark Assistant Professor of Business Statistics and Director, Classified Personnel Office, The University of Texas fifty cents Texas Industrial Expansion October-December 1958 by Stanley A. Arbingast Assista.nt Director Robert H. Drenner Research Associate twenty-five cents CHANGES IN CONDITION OF WEEKLY REPORTING MEMBER BANKS IN THE DALLAS FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT Source: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System Percent change• Dec 1958 Dec 1958 Dec 1957 from from from Account Nov 1958 Dec 1957 Nov 1957 TOTAL ASSETS .-···-·-··-+ 5 + 11 + Loans and investments, less loans to banks and valuation reserves ...... + 2 + 14 + Loans. Jess loans to banks Financial, Insurance, and Real Estate Employment in Texas Thousands Tho usands 150 I 50 100 I 00 50 0 1946 0 'AS '49 50 51 '52 53 55 56 57 58 ° Ordinary Life Insurance Sales in Texas* Index • Adjusted for seasonal variatio n • 1947-1949·100 500 400 300 200 100 ° •face amount of ordinary life insurance policies sold FEBRUARY 1959 and valuation reserves + 5 Commer cial, industrial, and ag ricultural loans + 7 ·--················· Loans for purchasing or carrying securities .................... + 14 Real estate loans ................................ 3 Other Joans .................... + 2 Total U.S. Government securities 4 Treasury bills ............... -33 Treasury certificates of indebt edness .. 2 Treasury notes .................. + 2 Bonds .. 1 Other securit ies ............................ + 5 Loans to banks -89 Reser ves with F ederal Reserve banks .. + Cash in vaults •• Balances with domestic banks + 49 Other net assets •• TOTAL LIABILITIES... + 5 Total adjusted deposits + 2 Dema nd deposits + 7 ······· ························· Time deposits . u. s. Government deposits -50 ··-······· Total interbank deposits ........ + 22 Domestic banks ..................... + 23 Foreign ba nks -16 ····························· ·· Borrowings -100 ······················· Other liabilities 8 ·············-··-···--·­CAPITAL ACCOUNTS.. -1 *Percentage changes are based on the week month. ••Change is less than one-half of one percent. + 10 + 4 + 12 + 4 + 24 + 2 + 15 + 2 + + s + 20 + 4 -11 + 53 + 57 + 6 + 47 + 2 + 12 •• + 22 -1 +500 -93 5 •• 6 + 6 + 6 + 43 + 6 + 4 + 11 + 7 + 14 + 1 + 9 •• + 26 + 1 + 11 + 30 + 4 + 36 + 5 + 37 -11 •• -100 -64 + 3 + 1 + 7 + 2 nearest the end of the Industrial Production: THE TEXAS AIRCRAFT AND MISSILE INDUSTRY By ALFRED G. DALE Since World War II a significant part of the nation's air­craft industry, now the nation's largest industrial employer, has been located in Texas, and the Texas industry has as­sumed an increasingly larger part in the economic life of the state. In terms of employment the aircraft industry is currently about as important to Texas as either petroleum refining or the chemical industry, with an estimated 47,300 workers in November 1958. The accompanying table illus­trates the growth of the industry in the United States and Texas since 1940. The employment figures underestimate the total amount of activity related to aircraft production, since important segments of the output of other industries are directly produced for incorporation in aircraft and mis­sile assemblies. In Texas alone there are more than 40 com­panies, not counting the major airframe producers, that manufacture airplane parts and auxiliary equipment. Some of these firms, such as Menasco Manufacturing Company in Fort Worth, which produces aircraft landing gear and missile components, concentrate entirely on the aviation industry market. In many cases, however, firms also make other products--plastics items, fabricated metal goods, ma- EMPLOYMENT IN THE AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY, UNITED STATES AND TEXAS SELECTED YEARS, 1940-1958 Year U nited States T exas Texas as p ercent of U. S. 1940 107,631 118 Neg. 1950 289,646 23,116 8.0 1954 457,618 41,148 9.0 19581 686,000 47,300 6.9 1 Estimated November levels. Sources: U. S. Bureau of the Census; U. S. Department of Commerce; Texas Employment Commission. chinery parts-for consumer and other industrial markets. Because of this, it is difficult to estimate how much of their employment may be related to aircraft industry demand, but the number is probably in the range of 1,000 to 1,500. Additionally, a substantial segment of the rapidly growing Texas electronics industry is oriented to the production of electrical control systems and subassemblies for aircraft and missiles. Aircraft industry demand may support as many as 4,000 Texas workers in electronics. If to these figures are added the employment of the two major missile Industrial Electric Powar Usa in Texas Index. Adjusted for seasonal variation .1947-1949·100 PETROLEUM AND GAS ACTIVITY Source: State Comptroller of Public Account& and Railroad Commission of Texas January-December Percent Product 1958 1957 change CRUDE OIL Production (thous of bbls) ................. . 908,721p 1,065,611 -14 Value (thous of dols) .................. . 2,763,648 3,313,966 -17 Runs to stills (thous of bbls) ... 765,700 809,576 5 NATUR AL GASt Production (thous of dols) .......... . 615,719 593,112 + 4 SULFUR R ecovered from gas (long tons) 3,005 3,833 -22 pPreliminary. tincludes casinghead gas. propellant manufacturers located in the state, it appears that about 55,000 Texans were employed more or less di­rectly in the production of aircraft, missiles, and component assemblies and materials toward the end of 1958. Dominant in the Texas aviation industry are the hig four airframe producers-Convair, Bell Helicopter, Chance Vought, and Temco. Together they account for perhaps 95% of employment in the state in the aircraft industry proper. Convair, located in Fort Worth since 1942, is the largest single plant, and is currently producing the super­sonic B-58 (Hustler) bomber and undertaking experi­mental work on nuclear propulsion for aircraft, as well as manufacturing portions of the F-106B fighter and han­dling a maintenance and modification program involving C-54 military transports. Bell Helicopter, now an independ­ent subsidiary of Bell Aircraft, with plants at Hurst and Saginaw (both in the Fort Worth Metropolitan Area), is manufacturing both commercial and military helicopters, among them the U-lA Iroquois, the first U.S. helicopter to use a gas turbine engine. Across the county line at Grand Prairie in the Dallas Metropolitan Area is Chance Vought, which migrated from Connecticut to the vacated wartime North American plant in 1948, and has subsequently proved an important factor in the rapid postwar growth of western Dallas County. With a long tradition as a manufacturer of naval aircraft, Chance Vought has been engaged in recent years in the production of versions of its F8U Crusader jet fighter for the Navy, the Regulus I missile, also for the Navy, and the improved Regulus II missile. At the end of last year abrupt cancellations of the F8U·3 contract and the Regulus II missile system by the Navy forced the com­pany to lay off about 3,500 employees-a disquieting ex­ample of the feast and famine character of the military aviation industry. However, the company is making efforts to cushion the immediate blow of the loss of the $75-$80 million worth of contracts by building up short-term sub­contracting business from industry prime contractors, re­portedly with some success. The firm recently received a subcontract to develop a system of standards for Polaris, the 1,500-mile submarine-to-surface missile. Additionally, Chance Vought has large and continuing investments in missile development work, and is planning to double its 1959 investment in research and development facilities ~ompared wit.h its 1958 expenditures .. ~ore perhaps than m any other mdustry, the future stab1hty, not to mention growth, of a company depends upon its investment at the frontiers of new technology. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Temco Aircraft Corporation is a native Texas corpora­tion, with headquarters in Dallas. With plants at Gra.nd Prairie, Garland, and Greenville, Temco has been active during the postwar period in aircraft modification, sub­asembly, and prime contracting work. Currently the com­pany is manufacturing components (e.g., ailerons, wing flaps, wing tips) for the new Lockheed Electra turboprop commercial transport, the C-130 military transport, and the F-104 Starfighter; Temco also is engaged in aircraft maintenance work (its activities in this area having been recently supplemented by the establishment of facilities at Ardmore, Oklahoma), manufactures a light jet trainer, and developed and is producing the Corvus air-to-surface missile. While the bulk of aircraft production in Texas is ori­ented to military demand, there are a number of smaller firms engaged in light commercial plane production or modification. The most important of these is Mooney Air­craft at Kerrville, which manufactures the Mark 20, a fast, low-wing, single-engined aircraft, one of which recently completed a round·the-world flight. Mooney is planning to introduce a new twin-engined light plane in the next year or so which should compete successfully in the expanding executive plane market, and the company expects that the size of its Kerrville operation will grow substantially dur­ing the next few years. Other smaller companies in San Antonio, Fort Worth, Galveston, and Olney (north-central Texas) undertake modification work, the Olney plant spe­cializing in the production of aircraft bodies suitable for crop-dusting and similar agricultural aviation uses. In keeping with the times, Texas also accounts for sig­nificant production of solid missile propellants. Two of the four major producers of solid rocket fuels have plants near Marshall and at McGregor, near Waco. Thiokol Chemical Corporation rehabilitated the Longhorn Ordance Works near Marshall in 1952 as a production plant for solid rockets developed at the Army's Redstone missile develop­ment center. Contracts awarded last year were expected to result in increased employment at the plant, which may have as many as 1,800 employees by mid-1959. At McGregor, Astrodyne, Inc., a company formed jointly by Phillips Petroleum and North American Avia­tion in February 1958, is an important new entrant in the missile propellant field, employing about 900 personnel. Utilizing facilities originally created for the production of JATO units when Phillips alone operated the plant, Astro­dyne is engaged in research and development work in new high-energy solid propellants in addition to manufacturing extruded nitrate products. The company also plans to en- Crlde Petroleum .and Natural Gas Prod1ctlo1 Employmut 11 Texu Thousands 1946 '47 '48 '49 '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 ·57 '58 REFINERY STOCK S* (in thousands of barrels) Sou rce: The Oil and Gas Journal Average mon th A rea and product Dec 1958 1958 1957 P ercent change (1958 from 1967) (thousands of barrels) UNITED STATES Gasoline --·-···-· ·----··--­--­·--· 186,913 189,367 189,646 •• Distilla te ·······-················ 126,056 118,628 126, 673 - 6 Residual .......................... 60,525 62,246 47,631 + 31 Kerosene ------­------------­-----­ 26,057 24,818 28,166 -12 TEXAS Gasoline ............................ 33,322 32,606 33,107 - 2 D istillate --------------­--­--·----­ 14,326 14,306 16,213 -12 R es idual ··-·············--········ 8,446 8,538 8,222 + 4 Kerosene ······--·-··············-­ 2,717 2,850 3,554 -20 ••Change is Jess than one-half of one percent. *Figures shown for week ending nearest the last day of the month. gage in development of rocket hardware and control de­vices in addition to its work in the propellant field. This brief review of the Texas aviation industry under­scores the fact that it will continue to play a most important part in the economic life of the state. As a recent editorial in a leading trade journal noted, the new missile industry is being absorbed largely by the traditional manufacturers of aviation equipment. The field has not been characterized by the emergence of an entirely new industry composed of new companies. The existing aircraft manufacturing base in Texas may therefore be expected to provide solid grounds for future development in missile production. Con­vair, for example, is the prime contractor for the Atlas, currently assembled in its California plant; Boeing and Chance Vought are cooperating in the proposed Dyna­Soar orbital bomber project; Temco is producing the Corvus missile. It should be noted, however, that in the last few years the growth of the Texas industry has apparently lagged behind that of the nation as a whole, employment (before the recent Chance Vought layoffs) having in­creased by only 15% as compared with the national in­crease of 50% since 1954. This probably reflects the very rapid initial growth in the missile field elsewhere in the United States (e.g., in California), and it may not be truly indicative of a long-run decline in the relative importance of the Texas aircraft industry. The figures do, however, suggest the importance to the future of the economy of the state of measures which might directly increase the volume of activity in the Texas industry, or which might (e.g., by increasing the output of trained engineers and scientists) create an environment that would encourage its continued development. Gasoline Consumption in Texas Index • Adjusted for sea~onal variation • 1947-1949·100 250 20< 50 Agriculture: TEXAS HOG PRODUCTION By ROBERT L. PARKER Texas' 1958 pig crop totaled 1,777,000 head, according to the Texas Crop and Livestock Reporting Service. This is 24% above the 1957 figure, but 5% below the 1947-56 average. Fall farrowings numbered 127,000 sows, 27% above fall farrowings in 1957, but 11 % below average for the 1947-56 period. The average size of fall 1958 litters, 7.0 pigs, is an all-time record. Estimates based on farmers' reports on breeding intentions indicate that some 175,000 sows will farrow during the spring 1959 season. This num­ber, if it materializes, will be a 40% increase over last spring, 18% over the average, and will be the largest num­ber of farrowings in the state since 1951. At least partially responsible for renewed interest in Texas hog raising was the unusually favorable ratio that existed between grain and hog prices during 1958. Grain growers, especially those growing sorghums, found that they could get more for their grain by marketing a part of it indirectly-by feeding part to hogs and marketing the hogs. Hog raising is carried on in all 254 counties of Texas, but figures from the Agricultural Census of 1954 indicate that it is more prevalent in certain major farming areas. In 1954 there were 15 counties in the state with hog and pig populations of between 10,000 and 20,000 head, and 52 counties with between 5,000 and 10,000. The included maps CARLOAD SHIPMENTS OF FRUIT AND VEGETABLES Source: Compiled fr om reports received from Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Ag riculture J anuary-December P ercent Commodity 1958 1957 change T OT AL SHIPMENTS 28,22 6 25,120 + 12 VEGETABL E S ----­-------­ 23,996 21,073 + 14 Beets __ ______ -------­-------------------­ 61 69 -12 Br occoli ................. . 46 79 -42 Cabbage ___ _ 2,883 1,062 + 171 Carrots ------------------­ 5,769 4,385 + 32 Cauliflower 451 1,585 -72 Corn --------------------­ 295 143 +106 Cucumbers --­-----··· ...................... 19 18 + 6 L ettuce --­------------­-----------------------­ 829 1,578 -47 Onions 4,303 3,145 + 37 Peppers 383 450 -15 P otatoes -----------------------­ 620 551 + 13 Radish es ------------­-----------­ Spinach ___ -----------­-------­------------------­ 1,664 1,164 + 43 Tomatoes -­---­ 2,792 3,101 -10 Mixed vegetables ___ --­--------------------------­ 3,880 3,746 + 4 F RU IT ----------­ 4,099 3,953 + 4 Cantaloupes ----------------------------­ 1,212 1,623 -25 Gra p efruit _ -------------------­-----­ 335 250 + 34 H on eydews -­-----------------------------­ 604 459 + 32 L emons ------­----­······ -------­-------------­ 16 22 -27 Mixed citrus .... ------------------·········· 569 336 + 69 Mixed melons ----------··-······· ---------------------­ 1 -80 Oranges ------------·-··---------------------·----······-----­ 113 60 + 88 P lums and prunes .. -------------········­- 4 43 -91 Strawherries ---------------------­---------------------­ 6 T angerines ····------·-··------------------------------·· 11 Watermelon s -----------­--------­------------­---------­ 1,228 1,155 + 6 ALL OTHERS ----­---------------------------­ 131 94 + 39 NUMBER OF HOGS AND PIGS ON FARM 1954 ltfffh%& 1,000 • 5,000 m s,ooo. 10,000 ~10,000 . 20,000 Source: Dept. of Comme rce, Bvreou of Ce.n1v1 shows the distribution of hogs and pigs over the state in 1954. Crop Reporting District 5, which includes the Piney Woods area of Central East Texas, had 210,000 hogs on farms in 1958. In some of the large contributing counties of this district-Jasper, Newton, Tyler, and Polk-hogs feed on range. In the other large hog-raising counties of the area-Leon, Freestone, and Anderson-hogs are fed corn and grain sorghums. District 4, containing large hog raising counties such as Tarrant, Dallas, Fannin, Falls, and Milam, had 180,000 hogs on farms on January 1, 1958. This district is the major corn producer in the state, and consequently, corn makes up a large portion of the hogs' diet. Sorghum is also an important hog feed in this area. District 8 is also a major hog producer. Wilson, Fayette, Washington, Lee, and Bexar counties raise the largest num­ber of hogs in this district. Again, corn and grain sorghum are the primary feeds. The Panhandle and the Low Plains, District 1-N and District 2, had a combined total of 122,000 hogs on farms on January l last year. Hogs in the area are fed largely on grain sorghum. Large sorghum supplies in these areas coupled with relatively high hog prices in 1958 have accele­rated interest in hog raising, and some farmers in the area who have never before raised hogs are reportedly planning to do so in 1959. The West Cross Timbers farming area in North Central Texas, District 3, had 65,000 hogs on farms on January 1, 1958. The most important hog counties in this area are Co­manche and Eastland. In these counties hogs salvage the peanuts left by mechanical harvesters and are also fed on grain sorghums. Just north of these counties, in the same farming area, in Wise County, where a significant number of hogs is raised on grain sorghum and corn. District 7, in the eastern part of the Edwards Plateau, contains some of the major hog raising counties in the state. The district total was only 55,000 in 1958, but four counties-San Saba, Llano, Gillespie, and Mason-ac­counted for nearly all of this total. Llano County is ordinarily one of the state's top hog producing counties. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Hogs in this area are fed primarily on corn and grain sorghum; some are also fed on range. Generally, a large number of hogs and pigs in an area reflects a large supply of grain, but this is not necessarily the case. In areas where there are large cities or military installations, a large number of hogs can be raised on the high-quality garbage available from such sources. Most of the hogs shipped into Texas are for slaughter by pork packing plants rather than for breeding purposes, but in the last few years Texans have imported an increas­ingly large number of hogs for breeding. Recently, a 1,000­pound Landrace boar caused a considerable stir when news photographers saw him disembarking from a plane in Dallas. The boar was imported by a Dallas "agribusiness­man" to improve his stock. There is an increasing interest in raising hogs of the meat type today. A meat-type hog is a hog with a high percent­age of lean meat, but with enough fat to cause his meat to be juicy and flavorful. No single breed has a monopoly on the term meat type. Meat-type hogs are developed by selec­tive breeding of meat-type individual hogs. Some breeds do, however, offer the advantage of being more prolific than others and are favored for this reason. Bacon-type hogs, having even more lean meat than the meat type, are FARM CASH INCOME* 1957 Actual and 1958 Estimated By Commodities P ercent Commodity 1957 1958 change Thousand of dollars CROPS Cotton ----------------------------$ 407,219 $ 513,096 + 26 Cottonseed ----------------------68,137 67,456 -1 Wheat ----------------------------56,624 118,344 +109 Oats --------------------------------8,714 9,139 + 5 Corn ----------------------20,538 21,154 + 3 Grain sorghum ------------155,058 190,721 + 23 Flaxseed ------------------------334 885 +165 Peanuts --------------------------18,351 29,729 + 62 Rice --------------------------------59,170 60,353 + 2 Hay --------------------------------10,962 9,865 -10 F ruits and vegetables_ 80,620 113,454 + 27 Other produ cts ------------41,804 53,509 + 28 Total --------------------------------927,531 1,187,705 + 28 LIVESTOCK AND PRODUCTS Cattle and calves ________ 426,298 485,980 + 14 H ogs --------------------------------39,384 35,839 -9 Sheep and Jambs ----------17,392 16,175 -7 Broilers --------------------------57,168 65,743 + 15 Turkeys ---------18,388 20,962 + 14 Fa rm chickens --------------2,412 2,750 + 14 Mohair _--------------------------16,404 17,552 + 7 Wool --------------------------------25,127 18,343 -27 Eggs _------------------------------55,718 62,961 + 13 Dairy products _____________ _ 140,155 120,533 -14 Other _---------------------------­8,788 9,315 + 6 Total -----------------------------807,234 856,153 + 6 TOTAL FARM CASH INCOME __________ $1,734,765 $2,043,858 + 18 • Specific breakdown by commodities is computed by the Bureau of Business Research using the monthly farm income as published in Farm Income Situation as the final total income. Individual components are, therefore, subject to revision by the Bureau, while the total figure is final unless revised by the U. S. D. A., with the only exception being the month of October 1958, which is a preliminary Bureau estimate until the final figures are received. In addition, m eans have not yet been developed for computation of farm cash income from all agricultural specialities of local importance In scattered areas and are, therefore, omitted. Source: 1957, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 1958, estimated by Bureau of Business Research, The University of Texas. Prices Received by Farmers in Texas Index , Unadjusted far seasonal variation , 1909-1914·100 ., 400 400 "\ I 350 350 ~ (\ }r 300 300 ,,,... /' '-v., l\Y ~ 250 250 """' ) 200 200 v ,.r-/1/ 150 150 v 100 100 50 50 I 0 1940 '41 '42 '43 '44 '45 '46 '47 '48 '49 '50 '51 ·52 53 54 · 55 56 57 58 ° also still profitable, but the immensely fat lard types appear to be on the way out. Lard is being replaced by vegetable oils in nearly all its applications. Some experts today are expressing the opinion that Texas hog raisers may soon produce twice as many hogs as they now do. They point to the fact that Texas raises some 46% of the nation's grain sorghum. If, they say, 40% of this sorghum (the percentage of total feed grain that hogs con­sume on the national level) were fed to hogs, state hog raisers could produce 4 million hogs annually. Grain sor­ghum was once considered to be second-rate feed for hogs, but this is no longer the case. Recent tests have proven that grain sorghum compares very favorably with corn as a hog feed for meat-type hogs. Tests have also revealed that grain sorghum can be fed far more economically than was for­merly thought possible. These experts also point to the increasing interest in hog breeding shown by Texans, many of them businessmen never before concerned with agriculture, as evidence that there is an increasing interest in the profit possibilities that hog raising offers. In 1957 Texas ranked fifteenth among the states in num­ber of hogs and pigs on farms. However, the state had only 2% of the national total of hogs and pigs on farms. The five major hog growing states-Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, and Minnesota, in that order-had a combined total which amounted to 73% of the 1957 national hog population. In consequence of low relative production, Texas is a heavy hog-deficit area. State pork consumption is far greater than production. In 1957, for example, 260,000 of the state's total hog crop of 1,433,000 were slaughtered on individual farms for farm home consumption. This left only 1,173,000 Texas-grown hogs to supply the whole urban population of the state which normally consumes in excess of 3,500,000 hogs a year. There is therefore a market de­mand for state-grown hogs. However, whether hog raising in the state will expand further depends on a number of complex factors. The decisions that will determine its future will be made by individual raisers based on their ap­praisals of the relative merits of hog raising and alternative operations. Hog prices tend to vary quickly in response to changing supplies, and prices are expected to drop later in 1959 as larger than usual supplies hit the market. This situa­tion may temporarily discourage Texas farmers from get­ting into the business or from expanding what stock they presently have, but it alone should not permanently dis­courage farmers from giving serious thought to what hog raising has to offer them. Building Construction: STRONG DECEMBER SHOWING ENDS RECORD BUILDING YEAR By ROBERT H. DRENNER An estimated $87,653,000 in urban building constr~c­tion was authorized in Texas in December, a 2% declme from November authorizations but 37% above December a year ago. Ordinarily in Texas there is an approximate 7% seasonal drop from November to December in build­ing permits issued-last year the decline between the two months was 6%-and as a result of the small decrease this December the seasonally adjusted building index rose from November's 239 to 247. B1ildiag Coutructioa i11 Texas' •value of building construction authorized. Urban building construction valued at approximately $1.195 billion was authorized in Texas in 1958, an amount 18% above 1957 authorizations and 19% greater than the 1955 total. In terms of dollars, 1957 was the previous record year, and since construction cost increases fr?m 1957 to 1958 were not significant, most of the 1958 rm­provement over the preceding year was real, i.e., physical volume of building authorized was also about 18% larger than in 1957. In terms of physical volume, however, 1955 was the previous record bu~lding year in Texas. _Construc­tion costs rose 8% to 9% m th 1955-1958 penod; 1958 volume, therefore, was about 10% greater than in any previous year. Throughout 1958 cumulative permit totals progressively improved over the comparable months in 1957, bu~ the improvement in the first half of the year was relatively LOANS BY SAVIN GS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION S Source: Federal Home Loan Bank of Little Rock Percent change T ype Dec 1958 Nov 1958 Dec 1957 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 ALL LOANS Construction ---····· Purchase ................ . Other ............................... . ALL LOANS Construction -····-­Purchase ······-----·········---­Other -----------·-··· N umber 3,827 3,74() 3,479 + 2 + 10 + + 852 817 825 4 3 1,737 1,746 l,258 + 38 1,238 1,177 1,396 6 -11 + Value (thousands of dollars) 36,426 31,898 26,479 + 14 + 38 9,782 8,781 8,625 + 11 + 15 + 16,687 15,890 11,19() 4 + 48 10,057 7,227 6,764 + 39 + 49 small. Compared with 1957 the real building boom in 1958 occurred in the last six months of the year. For the first six months the gain from January-June 1957 was 10% ; compared with July-December 1957, however, the last six months of 1958 showed an authorization total 27% higher. Although the index of building declined o~ the average from its record level in July, the December m?ex tends to confirm the evidence of earlier months that hmld­ing is still very strong in Texas. Consequentlr: the ~rst few months of 1959 will probably show a substantial gam from the same months in 1958. Whether the gain holds up throuah the remainder of the year will depend on a nmn­her of interrelated factors, including the general course of the economy, new federal credit assistance, and the level of spending on building construction by federal, state, and local governments. RESIDENTIAL Of the three major building classifications, only the residential category showed an improvement in December from November. A total of $54,919,000 in new residential permits was issued, up 4% from the preceding month; one-family residences were up 3%. The improvement from December 1957 was almost 50%. For the year, new residential construction authorized amounted to $704,­745,000, or almost 80% of all new building and 69% of all building (including additions, alterations, and repairs). Residential construction was also the only category to show a gain in 1958 from the 1957 total. Up a remarkable 38%, it was wholly responsible for the fact that the year just ended was a record building year in Texas; nonresidential construction and additions, alterations, and repairs all declined. Multiple-family dwelling permits continued to show un· usual strength in December, up 19% from November. Apartment buildings accounted for all of the gain, improv­ing 29% from the preceding month; duplexes were down 33%. Both categories, however, posted very large increases over 1957-for duplexes, a 58% rise, and a 218% im­provement in apartment permits. Total multiple-family dwelling authorizations in 1958 were valued at $62,168,000, less than 9% of the residential total hut one of the largest percentages ever recorded. NONRESIDENTIAL Nonresidential building authorized in Texas in Decem­ber totaled $26,710,000, down 5% from November but almost 30% greater than in December 1957. Furthermore, the December decline was less than the seasonal normal; the adjusted nonresidential index actually rose two points. For the year as a whole, nonresidential permits in 1958 were at roughly the 1957 level. Considering the recession, and the fact that the large percentage of nonresidential building does not benefit from governmental credit assist· ance programs, 1958 was not nearly a had a year for this class of construction as many observers seemed to believe. After all, 1957 was the record year for such building, and 1958 volume was nearly as great. There were of course large variations within the non· residential category from the showing of that category as a whole, both for December and for the year. For Decem· her residential nonhousekeeping buildings (hotels and TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Coastructlon Employmut in Texas ThouJOnds Thousonds 250 250 200 200 ../'-- r"\ /'v f..J\ / A ;v150 150 ..._,, " .J \. V\. / /' 100 I00 I/' 50 50 0 0 1946 'Al 'AS 'A9 '50 '51 '52 '53 'SA '55 '56 '57 'SB tourist courts, primarily) were up 15% from November, and 72% for the year. Amusement buildings dropped 56% from November but gained 68% for the 12-month period. Churches fell 26% for the month but showed a 1958 gain of 11 %. Factory authorizations, which were generally down throughout the year-declining 28% in the January­December comparison-rose an encouraging 51 % in December; this important catgory is expected to improve substantially as 1959 progresses. Hospital construction was a second large nonresidential category to show a 1958 de­cline, down 39% from 1957; December permits fell 84% from November. Office-bank buildings also dropped sharply in December, off 42% from the preceding months, but posted a 4% gain from 1957. Works and utilities, up 158% from November but off 27% for the year, was another im­portant category to show an annual decrease. School con­struction both in December and for the year showed small gains from the earlier periods-up 5% from November and 6% from 1957. Store and mercantile building authori­zations rose 36% from November and also posted a nomi­nal gain of 4% from the preceding year. Additions, alterations, and repairs (the category in­cludes such permits applying to both residential and non­residential structures) declined 29% from November and were down 5% from January-December 1957. Additions, alterations, and repairs usually account for about 10% of total building. Building construction in 1958 in the state's larger cities showed some significant variations, both as between the cities themselves and between residential and non­residential construction in the individual cities. In the following list, the percentage change from 1957 in new residential authorizations is the first figure following the city named; the change in new nonresidential per­mits is the second: Abilene (+56%, +59%), Amarillo (+44%, -45%), Austin (+35%, +6%), Beaumont (+76%, -12%), Corpus Christi (+60%, +33%), Dal­las (+38%, -12%), El Paso (+105%, +45%), Fort Worth (+29%, -34%), Harlingen (+13%, -9%), Houston ( + 16%, -1% ) , Longview ( + 105%, + 149%), Lubbock ( + 101 %, +5%), Lufkin (+74%, -64%), Odessa ( +43%, -54%), Port Arthur ( + 11 %, +306%), San Angelo (-20%, -71%), San Antonio (+49%, -13%), Texarkana ( +57%, +207%), Tyler ( +60%, -27%), Waco (+50%, -43%), and Wichita Falls (+3%,-42%). 1959 U. S. BUILDING OUTLOOK The U. S. Departments of Labor and Commerce forecast an 11 % increase from 1958 in total new residential build­ing expenditures for 1959. Although most of the increase is expected to be the result of a 13 % rise in expenditures for new private residential building, a 37% increase in spending for new publicly owned housing is also predicted. The forecast improvement in new private residential building is based on the assumption that mortgage money will continue to be generally available in spite of an antici­pated moderate rise in interest rates. Construction costs are also expected to rise somewhat. A further decline in 1959 in private nonresidential build­ing construction is predicted. The anticipated 3 % fall covers sharply different trends in the various types of building that constitute the nonresidential category. Out· lays for new industrial plants will fall 15%, although a rise from 1958 in new projects is expected. Aggregate spending for commercial building should exceed last year's. Construction of churches and schools will rise to all-time high levels, but hospital construction will be at about the 1958 rate. ESTIMATED VALUE OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED Source: Bureau of Bu siness Research in cooperation with the Bureau of Labor Statistit:=s, U. S. Department of Labor J anuary.December Dec P ercent Classification 1958 1958 1957 change Thousands of dollars CONSTRUCTION CLASS ALL PERMITS ------------­ 87,653 1,195,244 1,013,795 + 18 New const ruct ion .................... . 81,629 1,082.053 894,228 + 21 Residential (housekeeping) __ 54,919 704. 7 45 512.,304 + 38 One-family dwellings -------­ 49,132 642,577 489,566 + 31 Multiple-family dwellings 5,787 62,168 22,737 + 173 Nonresidential buildings 26,710 377,308 380,393 - 1 Nonhousekeeping buildings (residential) 572 11,917 6,948 + 72 Amusement buildings _______ _ 547 10,730 6,403 + 68 Churches __________ __ 2,240 37,618 34,022 + 11 Factories and workshops ... 2,371 26,754 36,985 -28 Garag es (commercial and private) 236 4,950 8,895 -44 Service stations --­---­---­·-····· 780 9,640 12,408 -22 Institutional buildings 154 15,777 25,943 -39 Office-bank buildings• ______ __ 3,204 63,799 61,329 + 4 W orks and utilities _ 1,002 14,273 19,543 -27 Educational buildings _____ __ _ 10,170 97,378 92,076 + 6 Stores and mercantile buildings 4,630 71),163 67,201 + 4 Other buildings a nd structurest 804 14,309 10,412 + 37 Additions, alterations, and repairs§ --------­----------­ 6,024 113,190 119,381 - 5 METROPOLITAN vs. NON­ METROPOLITANt Total metropolitan -------------­-----­ 66,360 900,220 771,552 + 17 Central cities ---------------------­ 57,052 768,645 679,022 + 13 Outside central cities _______ 9,308 131,575 92,530 + 42 Tota l nonmetropolitan ---------­---­ 21,294 295.025 242,243 + 22 10.000 to 50,000 pop ulation ....... ·---·····--·-------­ 14,879 212,370 176.302 + 20 L ess t han 10,000 population __ -----------------------­ 6,415 82,655 65,941 + 25 *Includes public (nonfederal) administration buildings beginning July 1957. tincludes government (non!ederal) oervlce buildings beginning July 1957. §Includes additions and alterations to public buildings beginning July 1957. tAs defined in 1950 census. Local Business Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 ABILENE (pop. 55,000") Retail sales_____ ___ _____________ ___ __ __ ___ _______ + 25 + 3 2 Apparel stores_______________________ _ + 71 + 3 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores__________ + 28 + 36 Postal receipts___ -----------------------­-----­-----------­ $ 118,717 + 21 Building permits, less federal contracts -----------------­$ 2,723,868 + 44 +116 $ 22,871,085 $ 14,940,170 + 53 Bank debits (thousands) ------­----­---------­End-of-month deposits (thousands) $ $ 104,644 64,987 + 28 + 4 + 12 + 6 $ 1,038,535 $ 60,489 $ 999,209 $ 60,637 + 4 •• Annual rate or deposit turnover Employment (area) _________ ---------------------­Manufacturing employment (area) __________ 19.7 31,600 4,260 + 23 + •• + + + 10 17.2 30,554 4,116 16.5 30,594 3,708 + + 4 •• 11 Percent unemployed (area) -----------------------------­ 4.8 2 + 12 6.0 5.1 + 18 ALPINE (pop. 5,261) Postal receipts______ -------------..---------------------------­------------­-$ 4,043 + 4 - 2 $ 49,744 $ 48,894 + 2 Bank debits (thousands ) ____ ______ $ 2,511 - 12 - 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ___ $ 4,957 + 21 + 20 Annual rate of deposit turnover__________ ---------------------­ 6.6 - 20 - 10 AMARILLO (pop. 125,049r) Retail sales_ _____ _ Apparel stores-------------------------------------------------------­Automotive stores__ Eating and drinking places______ Filling stations___ _ Furniture and household appliance stores__________ ·--·-----------------­Lumber, building material, and hardware stores... --------------------­Building permits, less federal contracts_______ __ ___________$ Bank debits (thousands) __ __ _____ --------------------__ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) _________________________ $ Annual rate of deposit turnover.. Employment (area) ___ ____ ---------------------------­Manufacturing employment (area) ____ _ Percent unemployed (area) ______________________ 1,465,814 222,447 125,506 21.7 50,700 5,760 3.8 + 24 + 11 + 66 - 1 - 17 + 36 + 21 - 11 + 29 + 15 + 14 + 8 - 12 + 32 + 5 18 $ 26,423,693 $ 25,457,055 + 16 + 12 $ 2,265,738 $ 2,113,119 + + 5 14 + 12 •• $ 114,525 19.9 $ 104,882 20.2 + + 2 49,408 48,667 + 4 5,680 5,380 + 6 - 31 5.6 4.8 -4 -2 -15 2 + 22 + 4 + + + 2 + 6 + 17 ARLINGTON (pop. 27,550r) Postal receipts______ ___________ ___________ ___________________ -----­----­----· $ 49,902 + 45 + 42 $ 369,020 $ 314,797 + 17 Building permits, less federal contracts______ ,,_ --------­Employment (area) ........ _________________ ..______ $ 1,312,271 197,800 + + 61 2 + 46 •• $ 13,298,535 191,342 $ 12,288,597 198,492 + - 8 4 Manufacturing employment ( area) _____ _ Percent unemployed (area) ______..____ ......_____________ _ 53,475 5.6 + 2 -- 2 14 52,748 6.6 60,417 5.7 -+ 13 16 AUSTIN (pop. 186,000r) Retail sales______ -----------·---....-----------­Apparel stores Automotive stores................ -------·········---------------·· Drug stores__ .._____..______ _............................. Eating and drinking places____..__ Food stores............ ______............................. Furniture and household appliance stores Lumber, building material, and hardware stores............ Postal receipts____________.. ________ ,,_____ ,,_______.............. $ Building permits, less federal contracts__ __________________ $ Bank debits (thousands) ____ ........._..______,,___ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) _______ ... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover.... Employment (area) _______ .. ____________,,____ ..____ .. Manufacturing employment (area) Percent unemployed (area) ---­ 356,084 5,3()9,932 192,692 146,884 16.7 73,500 5,43() 3.6 + 38 + 11 + 80 + 10 + 46 + 38 + 35 + 21 -10 + 20 -5 -8 + 29 + 19 + 8 + 10 + 10 + 15 + 26 +254 + 20 + 20 + 13 + 11 + 11 + 8 •• + 2 •• + -3 $ 3,800,145 $ 50,637,028 $ 2,157,188 $ 129,026 16.8 72,717 5,422 4.2 $ 3,486,022 $ 42,199,789 $ 1,945,982 $ 122,260 16.0 71,079 5,276 3.9 + - + + + + + + + + + + 7 10 5 4 8 9 20 11 6 2 3 8 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. TEXAS BUSINESS REV1EW Conditions Percent change Percent change Dec 1958 Dec 1958 1958 Dec from from from City and item 1958 Nov 1958 Dec 1957 1958 1957 1957 BAY CITY (pop. 14,042r) Post&! receipts................................................................ $ 17,759 + 37 •• $ 126,270 $ 122,514 + 3 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................ $ 18,281 + 17 + $ 138,844 $ 134,824 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ...... . ......... $ 21,072 + 2 -31 $ 19,063 $ 19,316 Annual rate of deposit turnover......... . 7.7 + 17 + 28 7.2 BAYTOWN (pop. 22,983) Postal receipts............................................................... $ 26,267 + 24 + 4 $ 275,245 $ 251,179 + 10 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 181,100 -52 -52 $ 4,497,835 $ 4,769,960 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................ $ 22,855 + 20 -1 $ 248,760 $ 250,271 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ 23,473 + 4 .. $ 23,971 $ 24,766 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover................................ . 11.9 + 18 + 11 10.5 10.2 + 3 Employment (area) .................................... . 449,600 2 1 433,308 430,925 1 + + + Manufacturing employment( area) 88,875 .. -6 90,067 94,017 4 Percent unemployed (area) ..................... . 5.6 -5 + 30 6.4 3.6 + 78 BEAUMONT (pop. 122,485r) Retail sales ······························································-······ + 35 - 8 -12 Automotive stores·------­-----------·-------­-----­--------------­ + 21 -11 -19 Eating and drinking places................................. . + 1 8 Food stores ............................................... . + 4 + Furniture and household appliance stores___________________ ____ _ + 42 9 General merchandise stores. + 83 4 4 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores............................................. . -12 -13 4 Post&! receipts............................................................... _ $ 134,478 + 40 + 13 $ 1,327,153 $ 1,213,718 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 1,594,281 + 86 + 203 $ 18,902,031 $ 15,834,555 + 19 Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 173,830 + 18 + 2 $ 1,790,824 $ 1,865,9 93 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) .......................... $ 110,231 - 3 4 $ 107,687 $ 108,860 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover................................ . Employment (area) ..................................................... . Manufacturing employment (area) ................. . 18.6 85,400 26,490 + 15 ••.. + 4 4 8 16.6 85,417 27,307 17.1 87,396 29,397 3 2 7 Percent unemployed (area) ....................................... . 9.5 - 7 + 86 9.6 4.8 +100 BEEVILLE (pop. 10,500r) Retail sales...................................................................... . AutomotiYe stores................................................. . + 7 + 3 Furniture and household..................................... . appliance stores............................................. . + 8 - 14 Postal receipts..·-··························································­$. 12,762 + 32 $ 129,106 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 50,800 - 5 - 64 $ 1,356,464 $ 1,079,804 + 26 Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 10,086 + 13 + 3 $ 108,042 $ 102,118 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ......................... $ 14,248 + 2 + 8 $ 18,044 $ 12,631 + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover ................ . 8.6 + 12 3 8.1 BIG SPRING (pop. 24,442r) Retail sales............................................... -.................... . + 43 + 2 + 4 Apparel stores................................ . + 91 + 9 + 13 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores....................... . + 22 + 17 + 17 Post&! receipts............................................................... $ 37,837 + 48 + 32 310,108 $ 278,030 + 12 BRADY (pop. 5,944) Post&! receipts.......................................... . ................ $ 5,098 + 7 + 21 $ 52,090 $ 48,380 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 1,890 - 65 - 86 $ 227,160 $ 74,150 + 206 Bank debits (thousands) ·······-·········· .......................... $ 4, 783 + 5 + 15 $ 54,168 $ 46,780 + 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ............ $ 6,970 + 11 + 2 $ 6,697 $ 6,458 + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover ................................ 8.7 + 7 + 23 8.1 7.3 + 11 BRENHAM (pop. 6,941) Post&! receipts............................................................... $ 10,058 + 59 + 36 $ 87,685 $ 78,906 + 11 Building permits, less federal contracts .................... $ 49,744 +109 + 70 $ 595,587 $ 552,579 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 8,009 + 8 + 7 $ 88,273 $ 83,424 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands) .......................... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover..................... . 13,598 7.1 + + 2 6 + 8.. $ 12,511 7.1 $ 12,121 6.9 + + 3 3 For explanation of symbols, see page 81. FEBRUARY 1959 Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 D ec 1958 f rom Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 BROWNSVILLE (pop. 36,066) Retail sales---·­-----------------­-----------------------------------------------­Automotive stores________________________ ______ _ Lumber, building material, and hardware stores...... Postal r eceipts Building permits, less f ederal contracts__ _ $ -­$ 32,597 95,880 + 32 + 38 + 65 + 10 -35 + 36 + 51 + 55 + 19 + 71 $ $ 332,890 2,620,258 $ 1,924,897 + 4 + + + 36 BROWNWOOD (pop. 20,181 ) Reta il sales----------------------------------­----­------------------------------­ + 63 + 4 Apparel s tores---------------­---------------­--------------­--------­ + 85 + 13 + 4 Automotive stores ..-----·-­---·······-···-----·······-····-······-· + 28 3 Furniture a nd househ old appliance stores.......--------·----------------------------­ + 29 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts________ ____________ $ 13,050 -59 -64 $ 390,954 $ 796,063 - 51 Bank debits (th ousands> --------------------------------------­------­$ 13,206 + 23 + 20 $ 138,040 E nd-of-month deposi ts (thousands >-----------------------­$ 13,625 + 5 + 13 $ 12,731 Annual rate of deposit turnover.......... ------···-------------· 11.9 + 20 + 7 10.9 BRYAN (pop. 23,883r) Retail sales..·-----·-----------·---·------·-----···--·············-·············­ + 27 + 2 Apparel stores.­--··--··-·-·--···----------------·--·--·-············­ + 116 + 7 + Automotive stor es ·-···-··--···············---··--···--·--·-···· 8 -14 Food store•-----------·---------­···-······-···-·--···-···········-·····­ - 1 -11 Furniture and h ousehold appliance stores·­--·-·-·-------·---·------------·--·······­ + 33 -13 L umber, bu ilding material, and hardware stores............................................... + 15 + 15 -16 Postal receipts---·-----···--···························-·-·········--··-···­$ 23,453 + 18 - 6 $ 258,603 $ 253,624 + 2 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 95 ,480 -21 -35 $ 3,390,044 $ 3,689,896 - 8 CISCO (pop. 5,230) P ostal receipt•-·-·--····--····--·-··-····---·-·--···-··-----··----·--······­$ Ban k debits (thousands) .........................---··-··-···-····--·-$ 5,230 3,118 + 38 + 29 + 18 + 19 $ $ 51,353 31,532 $ $ 48,106 30,380 + + End-of-month deposits (thousands) ____________________ ____ $ 3,823 - 2 + 1 Annual r ate of deposit turnover.·--····-------------·-··----··­ 9.7 + 26 + 15 CORPUS CHRISTI (pop. 165,458u) Retail sales.---­··-·--··-------·-----­------------·--·-·-··---···­·---··------·-­ + 13 + 4 - 13 Apparel stores ------------------·-··-·····---·---·---·­·--·---------­Automotive stores ..... ·--··-················---­·-··---­ + 73 + 13 + 6 9 -- 3 16 Lumber, b uilding material, and h ardware store•­···­·------·----------------··-·-···-······-· + 4 + 14 + 6 Posta l receipt•---­-·-·--·-·····---··---·--------------······-············· --·· $ 182,045 + 22 + 7 $ 1,737,364 Building permits, less federa l contract•----·-···----·-··--­$ 1,344 ,366 - 2 - 55 $ 23,793,903 $ 17,851,425 + 33 Bank debits (thousands> ----------··-············-···---·---·---··--.. $ End-of-mon th deposits (thousands ) ·------------------------· $ 193,718 121,748 + 12 + 4 + + 8 2 $ $ 2,203,981 113,218 $ 2,264,274 $ 112,638 + 3 A nnual r ate of deposit turnoTer______________ ___________ _ Employment (area) _________ _____ ____ -----------·---·--­·--··-·-­·-·-··­Ma n ufacturing employment (ar ea ) ·­----­ 19.4 65,500 8,410 + 10 •••• + + + 19.5 64,608 8,401 20.1 65,192 8,386 •• P ercent unemployed (area> --·---·-··--· --­ 6.1 2 + 7 7.1 5.3 + 34 CORSICANA (pop. 19,211) Postal receipt•-··-----·-----------·-···--··---------------·-·---·---$ 75,885 +240 + 20 $ 321,103 $ 287,215 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts______ ____ $ 180,375 + 92 -81 $ 1,288,165 $ 2,097,350 -39 Bank debits (thousandsl -----------------···--·-·---··--· ------------$ 19,205 + 12 + 10 $ 200,679 $ 191,665 + End-of-month deposits (thou sands) __ -----------------· $ 22,854 + 3 2 $ 21,963 $ 22,262 Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 10.2 + 11 + 9 9.1 8.6 + DENISON (pop. 17,504) Postal receipts___________________ ----------------··-·----··· $ 22,749 Building permits, less federal contracts ---------·-·------$ 117,517 Bank debits (thousands) ___________________________________________ --$ 17,302 End-of -month deposits (thousands) -----··-------___ $ 23,028 An nual rate of deposit turnover_ 9.1 + 29 + 14 $ 197,800 + 68 + 38 $ 1,379,005 $ l,580,243 -13 + 9 -2 $ 198,916 $ 186,293 + 7 + 2 + 28 $ 19,509 $ 17,031 + 15 + 12 -24 10.5 11.0 -5 EDINBURG (pop. 15,993r) 11,969 Bu ilding permits, less federal contracts___ -------$ 75,600 Bank debits (thousands) _____________________________ -------···------$ 9,978 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ___________ -------·-----· $ 9,818 Annual rate of deposit turnover.................. 12.5 Postal receipt•----·---·------·-··-··---------··-····--···----· ------··-------$ + 15 + 32 $ 120,643 $ 105,298 + 15 -33 + 177 $ 1,741,390 $ 617 ,1Z6 + 182 -3 + 23 $ 126,732 $ 109,310 + 16 + 4 + $ 8,734 $ 7,700 + 13 -10 + 21 14.8 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Percent chang e Percent change City and item Dec 1968 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from D ec 1957 1968 1967 1958 from 1967 DALLAS (pop. 621,500r) Retail sales___ --------------------------------­-­-­-------------­------­ + 39 + 11 - 1 Apparel stores____ ---------------------------------------------------­ + 70 + 6 - 1 Automotive stores -----------------------­------------------------­Drug stores--------­----------------------­-----------------------------­Eating and drinking places____ ----------------­-----------­ + 27 + 39 3 + 11 •••• -14 + 4 6 Filling stations_----------------------­ + 17 + 11 + 6 Furniture and househ old appliance stores.............................................. + 29 + 49 + 12 Jewelry stores ---------------­-------·­----­---­--------------­----­-General merchandise stores........... + 146 + 87 + + 6 + 5 •• Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ---------------­--------­ - 2 + 8 + 13 Office, store and school supply dealers____ ____ ____ ________ ____________________________ _ + 25 + 20 - 8 Postal receipts---------------------------------------------------------------­$ Building permits, less federal contracts_____ __ _______ __ ____ $ 2,237,636 9,618,309 + 7 + 10 + 38 $1 45,164 ,286 $134,016,488 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) ---­----------------------­---------­--------­$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) ___ ____________ ___ ______ _ $ 3,014,916 1,271,9 63 + 32 + 12 + + 16 18 $ 27,973,942 $ 1,069,508 $ 27 ,016,545 $ 991,886 + + 4 8 A n nual rate of deposit turnover__________________ __ ____ ____ ______ Employment (area ) ______ -----------··--··----·-·--·-·--·------­··--·--­Manufacturing em ploym ent ( a rea) 30.0 353,200 85,200 + 23 + •• + 1 1 4 26.3 344,450 86,306 27 .2 843,454 89,637 - •• 4 Percent unemployed (area) ___ ----------·--------­--­--­ 3.5 - 3 + 9 4. 3 2.8 + 54 EL PASO (pop. 244,400r) Retail sales_ _____________ _____ ______________ _ + 24 + 10 •• Apparel stores·--··--------­------------­--------------------------­--­Automotive stores ---­-------­··················------------------­ + + 50 45 + - 14 24 9 16 General merchandise stores........------·-·-····-···-·····­ + 33 + 3 + 2 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ------·········---­---------------·-·-------­ - 4 + 44 + 11 Postal receipts $ 315,553 + 31 + 19 $ 2,988, 544 $ 2,684,756 + 11 Building permits, less federal contracts_________ __________ $ 6,482,374 + 38 + 93 $ 66,939, 151 $ 35,659,227 + 88 Bank debits (thousands) --------------------------------------------­$ End-of-month deposits (th ou sands> ------­----------------­-$ Annual rate of deposit turnover................................. 379,999 176,368 26.5 + + + 21 5 14 + + 14 15 1 $ $ 3,660,789 156,746 23.5 $ 3,364,966 $ 141,997 23.7 + + 9 10 E m ployment (areal ------------------------­--------------­----­--------­Manufacturing employment ( area) ___________ ______ 83,600 13,540 + •• + + 4 1 80,950 13,502 79,592 13,091 + + 2 3 Percent u n employed (area) __ ------------------------------------·­ 4.2 + 11 - 14 4.7 4.3 + 9 FORT WORTH (pop. 315,578u) Retail s ales_______ _____ ----------------------------­---------­------------------· + 27 + 11 + Apparel stores_____ __ ------------------··-·---···-···--·········· + 93 + 7 + 2 Automotive stores..·-·-·-··--·······················--------------­ + 13 + 18 - 11 Drug stores _____ ______ ----­-------------·-····­······················--·· + 18 6 + Eating and drinking place•-----------------­-------------­-- - 2 - 5 F illing stations___ ___ -----­---··---··-························----···· + 12 - 1 + 1 Liquor stores.______ __ ----­-----­--------­------------················· + 66 + 20 + 6 Food stores ----·· -----------·····-······························ + 10 + 11 + 8 Furniture and household appliance stores ·---------------·-···--······················ + 32 + 36 + 2 Hay, grain and feed stores..................---------·····-· + 17 + 14 15 General merchandise stores..... ----·····················­ + 62 + 9 + Lumber, building materia l, a nd hardware stores--­·····-----·-------·····-··················· - 10 + 32 + 17 Postal receipts·····-···­-·······-·····················--------·-·············­$ Building permits, less federal contracts_______ ________ _____ $ 835 ,142 3,630,378 + - 20 12 + + 25 4 $ 7,963 ,614 $ 53,712,076 $ 7,S.3,401 $ 67,778,681 + 4 7 Bank debits (thousan ds) ----­------------­---­--­--------------·----­$ 882,188 + 30 + 16 $" 8,586,616 $ 8,361 ,674 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands) -----------------­------­$ 389,030 + 3 + 8 $ 368,147 $ 364,783 + Annual rate o! deposit t u rnover--------------------­------------Employmen t (areal -----------­--­---------------------------------------Manufacturin g employment( areal ---­-------------­ 27.6 197,800 63,475 + + 27 2 •• + - 9 •• 2 23.5 191,342 52,748 22 .9 198,492 60 ,417 + 3 4 13 Percent u n employed (areal ---­-----­-----------------------­ 5.6 + 2 - 14 6.6 6.7 + 16 GARLAND (pop. 28,15Ir) Postal receipts.................................................... ----· $ Building permits, less federal contracts______ ___ __ _­---­-$ Employment (areal --------------------------------------­--------------­Manufacturing employment (area) ___________________ Percent unemployed (area) ____ __ ________ 33,435 1,173,080 353,200 85,200 3.5 + + + - 49 43 •• a + 36 +167 + 4 + 9 $ $ 14,048,984 344,450 86,306 4.3 $ $ 222,006 9,062,720 343,454 89,637 2.8 + 56•• -4 + 64 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. FEBRUARY 1959 Percent change Percent change 1958 Dec from from Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from City and item 1958 N ov 1958 D ec 1957 1958 1957 1957 GALVESTON (pop. 71,527u) -7 + 67 + 7 Apparel stores.·------------------------··----------------------·-----· Retail sales........ --------------------------------------------------------------· + 96 + 2 -4 + 50 -19 Automotive stores.. + 87 -9 •• Food stores... ----·-----------------------------------------------------+ 92,908 + 11 + 26 $ 1,010,523 $ 915,485 + 10 Postal receipts..... -----------------------------------------------------------$ Building permits, less federal contracts........ $ 515,268 -20 +501 $ 4,262,073 $ 3,772,873 + 13 100,918 + 21 + 3 $ 1,066,373 $ 1,167,929 9 End-of-month deposits (thousandsl ------------------------· $ 62,898 -5 -13 $ 66,656 $ 70,249 5 Bank debits (thousands) ----------------------------------------······ $ 15.9 16.8 5Annual rate of deposit turnover....---------------------·-------18.8 + 22 + 13 3 47,654 49,371 a Employment (area) _____ _____ -------------------------------·-----------48,300 + 1 ­Manufacturing employment (area) _________________ _ 10,896 + -5 11,040 11,672 6 7.0 + 17 7.5 5.8 + 29 Percent unemployed (area) ----------------------­ GIDDINGS (pop. 2,532) + 20 + 26 $ 34,854 s 32,265 + 8Postal receipts -----·----------------------------------------------S 3,500 16 24,287 $ 22,890 + 6 + 23 + $ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) _____________ $ 3,933 + + Bank debits (thousandsl ---------------------------------···---------· S 2,493 3 9 $ 3,594 $ S,175 + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover ...... --------------------------7.7 + 18 + 5 6.8 6.7 + GLADEWATER (pop. 5,305) 5,973 + 37 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 34,250 + 23 + 5608 $ 345,119 Bank debits (thousands) _____________ ------------------·------------$ 3,736 + 3 -8 $ 42,51 8 $ 44,764 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ---··--------------------$ 4,808 4 + 1 s 4,603 $ 4,426 + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover............. -------------------9.1 + 6 -12 9.3 10.2 Employment (area) ______________ ____ __ __ -----------------------------26,250 + 1 •• 25,667 25,873 1 Manufacturing employment (areal ---------------·­4,860 + 5 -5 4,635 5,032 8 Percent unemployed (areal ---------------------------------------· 4.6 4 + 31 Postal receipts----------------------------------------------------------------S 5.6 3.9 + 44 GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,566) 3,189 +109 + 66 $ 27,396 $ 30,571 -10Postal receipts·--------------------------------------------------------------S Bank debits (thousands) --------------------------------------------· $ 2,697 4 + 19 $ 38,105 $ 38,144 •• End-of-month deposits (thousands l ------------------------· $ 3,557 1 + 14 $ S,527 $ 3,246 + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover .. ---·-·················--------9.0 5 + 3 10.9 11.7 -7 GONZALES (pop. 5,659) Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 200 -lOOtt -lOOt t $ 1,115,031 $ 396,970 +181 Bank debits (thousandsl --------------------------------------------· $ 6,357 + 14 + 25 $ 60,609 $ 59,947 + 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ._______________________ $ 5,146 -2 + 1 $ 4,893 $ 4,959 -1 Annual rate of deposit turnover..-------------------------------14.7 + 17 + 23 12.3 ttPercentage change for Gonzales indicates a minus 100% due to rounding to the nearest whole percentage. GRAND PRAIRIE (pop. 14,594) Postal receipts·--------­--------­---------------­-­----­------­----­------­--­$ 27,408 + 6 + 16 $ 243,712 $ 222,565 + 10 Building permits, less federal contracts.. --­$ Employment (areal .---­-----­------------­-­-------­-----­-------------­Manufacturing employment( areal -----·----------­ 245,746 353,200 85,200 -+ 33 1 •• +104 + 4 $ 5,812,034 344,450 86,306 $ 3,866,200 343,454 89,637 + - 50 •• 4 Percent unemployed (areal ­----------­-----­---------------------­ 3.5 - 3 + 9 4.3 2.8 + 54 GREENVILLE (pop. 17,500r) Retail sales.... --­------------­--------------------­----­------------­-----­-----· + 30 + 15 + Apparel stores.·--­--­----------------------------------------------­ + 52 - 16 2 Automotive stores.... --­-----------------­------------------------­ + 34 + 42 8 Drug stores·----------------------------­-------------------------------­ + 44 + 11 + 15 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores........................................... •• + 21 + 14 Postal receipts·--­----­--------­-----------­-----------------­-----------­---­$ Building permits, less federal contracts___________________ $ 28,349 109,375 + - 45 3 + - 8 7 $ $ 235,353 1,778,381 $ $ 219,201 1,606,625 + + 7 11 Bank debits (thousands) -----­-·---------------­----------------­..... $ 16,240 + 13 + 12 $ 171,498 $ 160,605 + 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ------------------------· $ Annual rate of deposit turnover_______ _________ 16,280 12 .4 + + 7 1() + + 6 $ 15,149 11.3 $ 14,637 11.0 + + 3 3 HARLINGEN (pop. 30,038r) Retail sales·----­-----­----------­------­---------­-----------­------­-----------· Automotive stores.... -----------­---------------­----------­------­ + 10 + 27 + 7 Postal receipts­-----------­-----­--------­-­----------­------­---------------­$ 44,474 + 36 + 33 $ 410,198 $ 369,018 + 11 Building permits, less federal contracts.------------------· $ 318,275 + 68 + 44 $ 4,014 ,108 $ 3,950,748 + 2 Bank debits (thousands) -----­-------­------------­---------­-------­s 37,269 + 14 + 9 $ 471,302 $ 461,498 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ------­---------­-­-----· S 27,592 - 1 + 16 $ 26,477 $ 28,742 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover·-------------------------------­ 16.1 + 17 - 6 17.8 18.8 - 6 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 HENDERSON (pop. 11,606) Retail sales...................................................................... . Apparel stores........................................................ . Automotive stores................................................. . + + + 39 83 58 + + + 1 8 12 -- 13 •• 16 Food stores...................................... ·-······················ + 8 + + 2 Furniture and household appliance stores ................................ . + 42 + 17 - 16 Lumber, building material, and h ardware stores............................................ . - 21 - 21 - 9 Postal receipts................................................................ S 11,109 + 14 + 30 $ 117,424 $ 104,733 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts .......... $ 28,000 - 78 + 2 $ 979,920 $ 843,496 + 16 HEREFORD (pop. 8,500) P ostal receipts.............................................................. $ 15,644 + 86 +126 Building permits, less federal contracts ......... $ 124,050 + 23 + 76 $ 831,450 $ 1,101,185 - 24 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................. $ 12,178 - 19 -10 $ 136,129 $ 123,993 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) .............. $ 11,273 + 1 + 2 $ 10,525 $ 10,404 + 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover................................. 13.0 - 18 -16 12.9 11.9 + 8 HOUSTON (pop. 700,508u) Retail sales1! ................................................................... . + 36 + 3 - 5 Apparel stor es1! .................................................... . + 95 + 9 - 1 Automotive stores1! ............................................. . + 28 + 4 - 20 Drug stores'll .......................................................... . Eating and drinking places1) ............................. . + + 38 15 + + 26 2 + 6 •• Filling stations1! .................................................. . + 26 + 16 + Food stores1! .......................................................... . + 9 + 2 + 2 Furniture and household appliance stores'll ·········································­ + 21 5 - 14 Other retail stor es1! .............................................. . + 53 3 - 11 General merchandise stores1! ............................. . + 68 + 5 2 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores1! .......................................... . + 6 - 12 4 Postal receipts................................................................ $ 1,697,095 + 23 + 16 $ 16,532,138 $ 15,336,647 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 18,905,496 - 3 + 46 $233,189,347 $219,387,498 + 6 Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 2,802,442 + 31 + $ 27,750,385 $ 28,058,919 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... Annual rate of deposit turnover...................... $ 1,320,492 25.9 + + 4 25 + + 6 5 $ 1,209,302 23.0 $ 1,221,448 22.9 1 •• Employment (area)..................................................... Manufacturing emp loyment (area)................. 449,600 88,875 + 2 •• + 6 433,308 90,067 430,925 94,017 + - 1 4 Percent unemployed (area) ....................................... 5.6 5 + 30 6.4 3.6 + 78 IRVING (pop. 40,065r) Postal receipts................................................................ $ 23,847 + 26 + 13 $ 205,327 $ 177,539 + 16 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ Employment (area) .................................................... . Manufacturing employment (area) 505,471 353,200 85,200 -+ 64 1 •• -+ 23 1 4 $ 12,330,004 344,450 86,306 $ 11,209,406 343,454 89,637 + - 10 •• 4 Percent unemployed (area) ................... . 3.5 - 3 + 9 4.3 2.8 + 54 JASPER (pop. 4,403) Retail sales...................................................................... . Automotive stores................................................. . + 66 -13 -19 General merchandise stores................................. . +103 + 45 + 3 Postal receipts................................................................ $ 6,512 + 6 + 21 $ 72,736 $ 64,162 + 13 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................. $ 6,895 + 13 + 2 $ 76,185 $ 73,327 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ 7,616 + 10 + 23 $ 6,844 $ 6,765 + 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover................................ . 11.4 + 9 -9 11.2 10.9 + 3 KILGORE (pop. 9,638) Postal receipts................................................................ $ 15,441 + 15 + 9 $ 162,929 $ 149,568 + 9 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 27,208 -82 -53 $ 1,177,573 $ 1,761,537 -33 Employment (area) ..................................................... . 26,250 + •• 25,667 25,873 -1 Manufacturing employment (area) ................. . 4,860 + 5 -5 4,635 6,032 -8 Percent unemployed (area) ................... . 4.6 4 + 31 5.6 3.9 + 44 KILLEEN (pop. 21,076r) Postal receipts....................................... . ................. $ 32,475 + 31 + 31 $ 314,089 $ 277,976 + 13 Building permits, less federal contracts................... $ 72,019 -73 + 44 $ 3,047,956 $ 624,365 +388 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................. $ 8,810 + 17 + 12 $ 95,659 $ 81,516 + 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ........................ $ 6,986 + 6 + 10 $ 6,655 $ 6,496 + 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover........... . 15.5 + 13 + 5 14.4 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. FEBRUARY 1959 Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from N ov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 LAMESA (pop. 10,704 ) Retail sales.... ­--· ·--···--­-­·---··------------­-------·-·····-···-·-·······-·· Automotive stores.................. -·--·--········--··--·-········ P ostal receipts..... ---­--· -···---· -·······················-················-·· $ 14,823 + 37 •• + 31 •• $ 142,161 $ 122,591 -9 + 16 Building permits, less federal contracts ... $ 187,150 + 62 + 25 $ 3,177,836 $ 1,468,3 18 +116 Bank debits (thousands) ................................. $ 22,541 - 3 + 6 $ 178,266 $ 151,209 + 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands) $ 19,562 + 3 + 18 $ 15,125 $ 13,093 + 16 Annual rate of deposit turnover......................... 14.0 - 10 16 11.7 11.6 + LAMPASAS (pop. 4,869) Postal receipts.......... ---····--················-·······-··-·······--·-·· -­$ 5,431 + 41 + 40 $ 53,870 $ 47,228 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts ................... $ 60,400 - 22 $ 501,140 $ 252,335 + 99 Bank debits (thousands ) ······································ $ 6,145 + 12 + 36 $ 65,382 $ 57,515 + 14 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ......................... $ 6,776 + 3 + 7 $ 6,351 $ 6,283 + 1 Annua l rate of deposit turnover.. -----························· 11.0 + 11 + 26 10.3 9.1 + 13 LAREDO (pop. 59,350r) Postal receipts................................. --···························-s 34,467 + 20 + 15 $ 360,250 $ 336,376 + 7 Building permits, Jess federal contracts............ _____ __ S Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 46,350 28,959 -+ 28 20 + + 70 9 $ $ 1,298,724 291,519 $ $ 3,946,499 292 ,092 - 67 •• End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ 22,331 + + 5 $ 21,699 $ 20,059 + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. ····················-·-··-··-­ 15.6 + 19 + 3 14.4 14.6 - 1 LOCKHART (pop. 5,573) Postal receipts............ ----·--············································ s 4,535 + 56 + 2 $ 41,272 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 9,425 + 39 - 61 $ 379,210 s 235,702 + 61 Bank debits (thousands) .............................. $ 3,308 2 $ 41,923 $ 42,327 End-of-month dep osits (thousands) ......................... $ 4,165 7 5 $ 4,322 $ 4,550 Annual rate of deposit turnover............................ 9.2 + 6 + 9.7 9.3 + LONGVIEW (pop. 34,328r) Postal receipts ······························································­$ 45,030 + 13 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 2,0 28,100 +126 + 383 $ 12,922,065 $ 6,430,054 +101 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................. $ 39,040 + 8 - 3 $ 443,130 $ 462,798 - 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) .......................... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover................................. Employment (area) ··············-······································ 38,992 12.6 26,250 + 11 •• + 1 - 2 •• •• 25,667 25,873 - 1 Manufacturing employment (area) -----·-······-··­ 4,860 + 5 - 5 4,635 5,032 - 8 Percent unemployed (area) --······························ 4.6 4 + 31 5.6 3.9 + 44 LUBBOCK (pop. 134,156r) Retail sales.... --------·-··---·-·······-·-··················-···-················ + 47 + 23 + Apparel stores....................................................... + 60 + 21 + 4 Automotive stores___ ___ ---·········-···--···· + 2 + 36 -11 Furniture and household appliance stores ________ ____ ___ __ -----·-····-··--··· + 69 + 30 + 6 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores.................. -·-··········-····· + 84 + 49 + 30 Postal receipts--­·························----········-·-··················· $ 159,615 + 16 + 20 $ 1,681,164 $ l ,378,702 + 15 Building permits, less federa l contracts $ 2,909,113 -32 + 306 g 43,068,049 $ 29,343,081 + 47 Bank debits (th ousands) ............... _ ............................. $ 228,904 + 8 + 21 $ 2,030,762 $ 1,793,517 + 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ..... $ 132,713 + 16 + 11 $ 107,497 $ 100,902 + Annual rate of deposit turnover·------------------·-· ·-···-·-··· Employment (area) .................... ----------------------------­-­·· Manufacturing employment (area ) ........ Percent unemployed (area) ....................................... 22.2 47 ,350 4,620 4.4 + + 3 •• + 7 + 4 + 3 8 18.9 45,404 4,460 5.0 17.7 44 ,408 4,411 5.0 + + + •• LUFKIN (pop. 20,846r) Retail sales............ ·--··-··--·-······-·· Food stores.. ·····-···--·-·-·····-··-­Postal receipts...... ·-·-·················· ---­$ Building permits, Jess federal contracts ....... -­$ Bank debits (thousands) .. ···················­--·····-·············· $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) ---···-·-·····--········ $ Annual rate of deposit turnover.................... 24,511 243 ,798 25 ,753 25,577 12.4 + 12 + 26 +167 + 29 + 6 + 23 + S9 + 20 + 150 + 1 + 16 -11 $ $ $ $ 233,153 2,477,680 277,1 70 24,109 11.6 $ $ $ $ 207,361 3,950,994 272,425 21,547 + + -+ + 24 12 37 2 12 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW P ercent cha nge P er cent cha n g e City a nd item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 f rom 1957 McALLEN (pop. 25,326r) Retail sales____ ___ ··­-··-···-························ Apparel stores___ _____ _______ _____ ___ ___ ____ __ ______ ___ + 98 + 9 + 5 Automotive s tores__ _____ ________________ + 49 + 16 + 1 Postal receipts -­----­--······-----····-········ Building permits, less federal contracts -----------------­ $ 189,800 - 77 +610 $ 4,731,335 $ $ 283,815 3,136,777 + 51 Bank debits (thousands) --------------­--------­-----------------$ End-of-month deposits (thousa nds) --­---­-----------­-----­$ Annual rate of deposit turnover.......... 26,628 21 ,197 15.9 + + + 34 11 28 + 20 + 2 + 18 $ $ 276,688 20,034 13.9 $ $ 239 ,175 19,315 12 .4 + + + 16 4 12 MARSHALL (pop. 25,479r) Retail sales ....·--·----·---...-........................... Apparel stores -­·····--·-· ------­ + 88 - 4 + 1 P ost a l receipts ----­--------·----............. ____ __ ____ __ ___ ___ ____ ________ __ $ 47,107 + 122 Building permits, less federal con t ra cts_______ ______ __ ___ _ $ Bank debits (thousands) ________ ____ ________ ---­------------­s 136,000 17,252 + 46 + 8 + 155 + 12 $ $ 1,862,795 180,903 $ $ 2,376,036 178,588 -+ 22 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ___ ___ --------­$ Annual rate of deposit turnover.......... ...................... 20,598 10.2 + 3 + + + 1 12 $ 20,260 9.0 $ 19,795 9.0 + 2 •• MONAHANS (pop. 6,311) Postal r eecip ts _ ____ _ __ __ ----·········-··-----­-----..--. ­-­-----­-----­-$ 8,555 + 23 + 10 $ 87,991 $ 75,104 + 17 Building permits, less federa l con t r acts _ -­s 24 7,350 + 161 + 364 $ 2,258,885 $ 1,250,942 + 81 Bank debits (thousand•l ­---­-------­·--------------­---------­----­ s 11,750 + 29 + 17 $ 113,132 $ 109,588 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ___ ---­ $ 8,760 + 6 - 4 $ 7,681 $ 8,5 63 - 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 16.6 + 19 + 17 14.7 12.8 + 15 NACOGDOCHES (pop. 12,327) Postal receip ts__ _____ ___ __ ,,__................................._.._________ ___ $ 16,088 + 42 + 38 $ 147,751 Building permits, less federal contracts ______ Bank debits (thousands ) __ ____ ___________ ___ _______ _ __ ..__ _______ ., $ 23,332 14,089 -+ 52 6 -+ 21 19 $ $ 1,986,759 155,694 $ $ 766,264 146,915 + 159 + End-of-month deposits (thousa nds ) --·--­$ 15,748 2 + 8 $ 15,095 $ 14,535 + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover................. 10.6 + 6 + 9 10.3 10.1 + 2 NEW BRAUNFELS (pop. 12,210) P ostal receipts..... ----········-······-···-··---­ ---­$ 24,784 + 53 + 20 $ 210,685 $ 199,899 + 5 Buildin g permits, less federal contracts__ ___ $ 50,600 - 36 - 50 $ 1,482,375 $ 901,415 + 64 Bank debits (thousands) ..._.._________ _____ ______ _ $ 11,269 + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ·------· $ 9,578 - 16 $ 10,054 Annual rate of deposit turnover__ _ 12.9 + 24 ORANGE (pop. 21,174) Postal receipts____ ____ ----------·-·­·--------------------.....__________ ___ __ $ 28,994 + 25 + 27 $ 268,263 $ 226,763 + 18 Bu ilding permits, less federal contracts __ _________________ $ Bank debits ( thousands) __ ____ __ __ ____ ___ ______ ____________ ___ ,,_____$ 299, 307 21 ,922 + 66 + 12 + - 66 18 $ $ 4,291,039 244,51 6 $ $ 4,497,028 265,772 -- 5 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ----------------­------­$ 20 ,793 - 2 - 8 $ 21,042 $ 23,810 - 12 Annua l r a te of deposit turnover............... 12.5 + 12 + 69 11.6 10.5 + 10 PALESTINE (pop. 15,063r) Postal receipts................................................................ $ 18,919 + 77 - 2 $ 146,050 $ 136,828 + 7 Building permits, less federa l contract• -------------------­$ 48,370 - 62 + 44 $ 939,561 $ 1,166,053 - 19 Bank debits ( thousands) -------------------­------­------­-­-----­--.. $ End-of-mon th deposita (thousands) ______ __ __ __ ..... $ 9,909 14,104 + - 13 2 $ $ 103,650 13,498 Annual ra te of deposit turnover......______ ···················· 8.3 + 12 PARIS (pop. 24,551r) Retail sa les.............____ ______ ______ ___ ..................... + 14 -10 - 6 Apparel stores_ ______ ......................_____ ____ __ + 50 5 - 1 Automotive stores........................ -­-----········--·­---·­- + 5 - 8 - 14 Lumber , building material, and hardware stores.............................................. Postal receipts____ __ _____________ ..___ _____ .._________________________ ___ __ __ $ 22,951 -+ 14 36 + 27 + 24 $ 212,750 + 16 Building permits, less federal contracts___________ __ ..__ __ $ Bank debits ( thousa nds) ______ ..__ ...._____ _..___ ..______________ ..__ $ 210,977 16,386 + 83 •• + 64 + $ $ 2,044,390 178,899 $ $ 1,861,654 174,809 + + 10 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ___ __________________ ..... $ 14,224 + 2 -20 $ 13,767 $ 15,33 6 - 10 Annual ra­te of deposit turnover...........·-·-·-­--------------­ 13.9 - 2 + 19 12.9 11.5 + 12 For explana tion of symbols, see page 31. FEBRUARY 1959 Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from N ov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 PASADENA (pop. 22,483) Postal receipts.......... ---··· $ 40,917 + 43 + 36 $ 352,274 $ 336,461 + Building permits, less federal contracts .................... $ 2,154,378 +182 +316 $ 17,163,533 $ 9,497,947 + 81 E m ployment (area) ...................................................... Manufacturing employment (area) 449,600 88,875 + 2 •• + - 1 6 433,308 90,067 430,925 94,017 + - 1 4 Percent unemployed (area) ... ---······························-­ 5.6 - 5 + 30 6.4 3.6 + 78 PHARR (pop. 8,690) Postal receipts................................................................. $ 7,658 + 72 + 28 $ 70,317 $ 58,720 + 20 Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 4,674 + 15 + 36 $ 50,337 $ 42,350 + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) .......................... $ 4,773 + 14 + 34 $ 4,297 $ 3,530 + 22 Annual rate of deposit turnover................................. 12.5 + 9 + 6 11.9 12.0 - 1 PLAINVIEW (pop. 14,044) Retail sales....................................................................... + 46 + 53 + 7 Apparel stores.... ---·-·-­-·······························-------···· + 80 + 21 + 11 Automotive sto·res.................................................. + 69 +156 + Postal receipts.................. --------------­-----------··········--·-···-·­$ 22,293 + 38 + 9 $ 210,060 $ 184,698 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts............. ······ $ 169,700 - 44 +335 $ 2,188,375 $ 2,374,550 - 8 PORT ARTHUR (pop. 82,150u) Retail sales....................................................................... + 18 - 13 -14 Apparel stores -----------------------------------------------------­ + no + 9 + 4 Automotive stores.................................................. + 2 - 26 -28 Eating and drinking places.................................. + 8 + 4 + 2 Food stores............................................................. _ + 12 + 2 + 1 Furniture and household appliance stores.............................................. + 41 - 20 -12 General merchandise stores................................. + 53 8 3 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores.............................................. -39 8 4 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 344,273 -28 + 10 $ 8,776,175 $ 5,335,132 + 64 Bank debits (thousands) .............................................. $ 65,727 + 7 7 $ 778,609 $ 785,070 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ 47,949 + 4. + 4. $ 45,952 $ 44,627 + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover.............. ·-············-··· Employment (area) ....................................... _ .............. Manufacturing employment (area) .................. 16.8 85,400 26,490 + 5 •••• 8 4. 8 17.0 85,417 27,307 17.6 87,396 29,397 3 7 Percent unemployed (area) ...................................... _ 9.5 - 7 + 86 9.6 4.8 +100 ROCKDALE (pop. 4,550r) P ostal receipts.·--···-··················-···········-······-················· $ 5,398 + 74 + 7 $ 46,910 $ 46,752 •• Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 3,850 +381 -29 $ 309,200 $ 327,445 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ 5,185 -1 -5 $ 4.,994 $ 5,368 ­ SAN ANGELO (pop. 62,359r) Retail sales....................................................... -... Lumber, building material, and hardware stores.............................................. - 10 + 14 - 5 Postal receipts................................................................ $ 66,571 - 4 - 9 $ 755,183 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 199,709 - 38 - 31 $ 4.,556,997 $ 8,999,660 - 49 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................ $ 53,497 + 13 $ 591,721 $ 573,016 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ 43,999 + 3 + 3 $ 4.1,679 $ 43,474 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover...... ·-···---------·--­----­--· Employment (area) ------··········----·------··-······················· Manufacturing employment (area) .................. 14.8 22,450 2,790 + 11 •• 2 5 3 3 14.2 22,254. 2,872 13.2 23,148 2,885 + 8 4 •• Percent unemployed (area) ... -------·-·--·········--------------­ 6.6 + 5 7.8 5.2 + 50 SAN MARCOS (pop. 9,980) Postal receipts................................................................ $ 12,982 + 30 + 14 $ 120,314 $ 113,103 + Building permits, less federal contracts................... $ 19,850 -95 +253 $ 1,979,488 $ 1,254,468 + 58 Bank debits (thousands) ............................................. $ 7,570 + -6 $ 87,644 $ 82,951 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands} .......................... $ 8,529 3 + 11 $ 8,229 $ 7,736 + Annual rate of deposit turnover................................ . 10.5 + 1 -17 10.8 10.8 •• For explanation of symbols, see page 31. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 SEGUIN (pop. 14,000r) Postal receipts·---------------------------------· ········-··· ·········· ·----·· $ Building permits, less federal contracts__________________ _ $ 11,772 101,043 + + 45 97 + 6 +302 s 1,395,783 $ 554,549 +152 Bank debits (thousands)-------------­------------------------------­$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) ---­---------­--­--------$ Annual rate of deposit turnover___________ __ ____ _______ 9,766 15,957 7.3 + -+ 13 1 12 $ $ 102,843 15,129 SANANTONIO (pop. 555,000r) Retail sales.............................................................________ _ Apparel stores____________________ ---------------­-­------­--­--­---­ + 31 + 58 + 10 •• 4 3 Automotive stores--····--·-···-······-­-················--· + 53 + 31 4 Drug stores.............................. ---------------­---­-­----­--­ + 35 + 2 + 5 Eating and drinking places --­·····-·­··--···-· + 6 + 4 + 2 Filling stations..________________________________ __ ______ + 19 + 14 + 5 Food stores·---------··--···-·-······· ··························--······· - 6 - 9 - 20 Furniture and household appliance stores ----------·····-···----­------­---·­· + 31 + 23 + 7 Jewelry stores.·--·········----·-----···------·-·-----·­----­-·­ +153 + 6 1 General merchandise stores......... + 34 + 18 + 3 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores............ ----·····-··············· + 3 3 3 Postal receipts------·---·---····­·······-·­-------·---­----------·--------·-·­$ 746,939 + 25 Building permits, less federal contracts-·····-·--·-----·---$ 2,893,638 -37 - 19 $ 58,640,630 $ 50,407,451 + 16 Bank debits (thousands) ------·-·---·-···-·········-··-------·-----·­$ 632,248 + 24 + 14 $ 6,498,530 $ 6,145,961 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ---------·····-·········· $­ 398,485 + 2 + 13 $ 372,589 $ 341,300 + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover·---·-··-···----··-·------·----·­ 19.2 + 23 + 1 17.6 18.0 2 Employment (a real ----··-····­-··--·-------------­----·--····-·········· Manufacturing employment (area) .......... 200,000 23,325 + 1 •• + + 6 7 193,783 22,602 187,275 22,777 + 3 Percent unemployed (areal----·--··--·----------------···-····­-·­ 2.9 - 19 - 12 4.1 4.4 7 SHERMAN (pop. 25,855r) Retail sales­--------···----·-----------··-----····­-···--···-­ + 40 - 4 - 2 Apparel stores--··--········--······--------------­-·­··············­ + 62 + 7 - 1 Automotive stores................................. + 27 - 30 - 17 Furniture and household appliance stores ---­-···-·····-···· + 17 + 5 + 4 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores·-·---·-·---····--···· ······················ - + 8 + 47 + 30 Postal receipts --------···············-········-······························ $ 38,807 + 42 + 22 $ 340,741 $ 304,559 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts ------­-$ 203,351 - 71 + 73 $ 3,525,938 $ 3,626,492 - 3 SLATON (pop. 5,036) P ostal receipts........................ ·--···­···--···-······················· $ 5,113 + 43 + 30 $ 43,633 Building permits, less federal contracts ------·---­--­---·· $ 75,400 +1911 + 56 $ 487,185 $ 367,110 + 33 Bank debits (thousands) ----­---­--$ 4,634 + 26 + 16 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ---­-­----­--·­ $ 5,342 + 17 + 19 Annual rate of deposit turnover....... 11.2 + 12 3 Employment (area) ____________________ ··--··-·························· 47,350 + 1 + 4 45,404 44,408 + 2 Manufacturing employment (area) .... Percent unemployed (area) ______ --··········-·········· 4,62() 4.4 + ** + 8 4,460 5.0 4,411 5.0 + 1 •• SNYDER (pop. 14,lllr) Postal receipts -----·········--···­····-······­··· ----­ $ 14,470 + 28 Building permits, less federal contracts. $ 24,748 - 9 + 60 $ 3,869,593 $ 2,568,041 + 51 Bank debits (thousands)---·--····· End-of-month deposits (thousands) Annual rate of deposit turnover___ ____ __ ____ $ $ 17,274 19,934 10.4 + + 17 •• 13 + + 7 •• $ s 172,792 17,700 9.8 $ $ 176,297 17,114 + 2 SULPHUR SPRINGS (pop. 9,890r) Postal receipt s­---···-····­-··--·------------­-­------------­----­-----­Building permits, less federal contr acts______ $ $ 9,559 11,650 + 16 + - 7 67 $ 99,863 $ 82,862 + 21 Bank debits (thousands) -­---------­-------­End-of-month deposits (thousands ) _______ Annual rate of deposit turnover. $ $ 9,950 12,460 9.6 + + ** + + + 10 4 4 $ $ 106,978 12,043 8.9 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. FEBRUARY 1959 Percent change Percent change City and Item Dec 1968 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 SWEETWATER (pop.13,619) Postal receipts............................................................... $ 12,763 Building permits, less federal contracts... $ 27,300 Bank debits (thousands) ................... $ 14,625 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ..... ... $ 12,320 Annual rate of deposit turnover_. 14.5 + 8 + 8 $ 176,152 $ 158,036 + 11 -81 + 57 $ 2,037,722 $ 1,700,190 + 20 + 12 + 16 $ 132,961 $ 123,223 + 8 + 4 + $ 11,440 $ 11,913 + 8 + 15 11.6 10.3 + TAYLOR (pop. 9,071) Retail sales ......................................... ............................ . Automotive stores................................................. . + 83 - 7 -15 Postal receipts............................................................... $ 10,747 + 47 + 26 $ 103,966 $ 96,896 + 7 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... S 51,587 -56 + 475 $ 798,404 $ 904,297 -12 Bank debits (thousands ) .............................................. S 7,595 + 9 + 8 $ 86,686 $ 83,499 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) .......................... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover......... . 14,057 6.6 + 5 + 8 + 8•• $ 12,091 7.2 $ 10,840 7.7 + 12 -6 TEMPLE (pop. 33,912r) Retail sales ............... ..................................................... . + 42 Apparel stores...................................................... . + 83 Drug stores............................... . + 55 Furniture and household appliance stores .......... . + 59 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ......... . •• Postal receipts..................... . ....................... $ 37,299 + 31 Building permits, less federal contracts .................. $ 178,468 -48 Bank debits (thousands) .......................... $ 20,754 + 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands). . .... S 30,587 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover................ . 8.6 + + 10 + 12 + + 6 + 6 + •• + 10 + 16 -26 + 24 -3 + 32 $ $ $ $ 383,692 3,570,260 237,415 28,941 8.2 $ $ $ $ 339,740 2,210,605 215,699 28,140 7.7 + 34 + 13 + 62 + 10 + 3 + 6 TEXARKANA (pop. 31,0Slr) Retail sales..................................................... . Apparel stores........................ . AutomotiTe stores ---------------------------------·-·············· Food stores.............................................................. . Postal receipts§ .............................................................. $ Building permits, less federal contracts... $ Bank debits (thousands) § ........................................... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) § ...................... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover§................ . Employment (area)§............. . Manufacturing employment (area) § .. Percent unemployed (area) .................................... . 58,206 230,028 47,232 17,194 15.4 32,050 4,240 7.0 + 34 + 93 + + 54 + 22 -30 + 12 + 3 + 8 + -3 -7 -5 -28 + 43 + 16 + 13 + 14 + 1 + 12 + 1 + 4 -32 $ 608,552 $ 2,858,146 $ 499,823 $ 16,437 14.3 31,104 4,129 9.7 $ 570,656 $ 1,540,979 $ 480,266 $ 16,193 14.5 32,311 4,585 10.3 + 11 + 7 + 85 + 4 + 2 -.1 - -10 -6 TEXAS CITY (pop. 23,000r) Retail sales ........................................................... . Lumber, building material, and hardware stores............................................. . Postal receipts............................................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts................... $ Bank debits (thousands ) ............................................. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) ......................... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover................................ . Employment (area) ..................................................... . Manufacturing employment (area) ................. . Percent unemployed (area) .... . .................... . 25,397 520,226 22,515 12,490 22.3 48,300 10,890 7.0 -6 + 42 + 79 + 25 + 6 + 20 + + + 33 + 16 + 43 -36 -65 + 58 -3 -5 + 17 $ 236,570 $ 6,674,0 16 $ 253,674 $ 14,122 17.3 47,664 11,040 7.5 $ 5,660,475 $ 328,158 $ 27,261 12.2 49,371 11,672 5.8 + 4 + 16 -23 -48 + 42 -3 -5 + 29 TYLER (pop. 49,443) Retail sales.............................................................. . Automotive stores................................................ . + 20 - 4 - 18 Postal receipts................................................................ $ 139,639• + 94 $ 954,639* Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ Bank debits (thousands) ............................................. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) ............... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover............. .................. . 651,660 93,999 65,577 17.8 + 22 + 16 + 7 + 11 + 91 + 11•• + 10 $ 11,877 ,383 $ 980,982 $ 61,453 15.6 $ $ $ 9,176,273 979,840 61 ,347 16.0 + - 29 •••• 2 For explanation of symbols, see page 31. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Percent change Percent change City and item Dec 1958 Dec 1958 from Nov 1958 Dec 1958 from Dec 1957 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 VERNON (pop. 12,651) Postal receipts................ ---­-----­--­------------·-····················· $ 13,504 + 30 + $ 131,630 $ 117,785 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts______ __ ____________ $ 48,250 +141 + 61 $ 735,810 $ 403,635 + 82 Bank debits (thousands) ___ -----------···············---------· $ 14,366 10 + 17 End-of-month deposits (thousands l ---····-----------------­ $ 21,864 + 3 + 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover__ ________ -···· ················· 8.0 13 - 2 VICTORIA (pop. 49,164r) Retail sales...............................·----··-····-··-············-·-··-······ Automotive stores.................................................. + + 28 36 - 1 •• 7 14 Filling stations........................................................ + 16 4 + 1 Food stores................................................... ............_ + 13 + 4 + 8 Furniture and household appliance stores.............................................. + 34 - 12 3 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores............................................._ Postal receipts·---···-·­·····················································­$ 37,021 + + 5 28 - 11 •• $ 376,425 - 23 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 348,429 + 50 - 27 $ 4,386,526 $ 6,434,838 - 32 WACO (pop. 101,824r) Retail sales·-··-··-·--------­ -----------­-----­-------------· + 56 + 19 - 1 Apparel stores.................................. ---··-------··-····-·· Florists.. ------------·-····································· + 75 +111 -7 + 13 - 7 •• General merchandise stores·-···········-·--·------·····-·· + 89 + 15 + 2 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 1,316,930 + ll2 +190 $ 14,656,578 $ 13,550,565 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) -·······-·-··········-····---·--·-···--·-···· $ 106,764 + 12 + 11 $ l,153,363 $ 1,109,361 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) ·········-··········-··--$ Annual rate of deposit turnover·-··-·-··-······---·--·-----·---­Employment (area) ----------·······-·--····-···-·····················-· Manufacturing employment (area) .................. 75,481 17.6 48,300 9,040 + 8 + 7 + 2 •• + 12 + 1 •• 3 $ 66,667 17.2 46,363 8,923 $ 64,365 17.2 48,188 9,775 + -- 4.. 4 9 Percent unemployed (area) ........................................ 5.0 + 4 - 4 5.9 4.3 + 37 WICIDTA FALLS (pop. 103,152r) Retail sales.. -····-----·····-··-­---------------------·-····-···--··--·-········· Automotive stores..·-·······································-···-· Furniture and household-------·-···-···--··---·····--·······­ + 16 •• + + 6 7 -- 6 10 appliance stores.............................................. + 39 + + 5 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores---·------···············-········-··········­ + 71 + + 6 Postal receipts...........·-·············-----···-····-······-··---···-······-· · $ 122,729 + 30 + 16 $ 1,163,642 Building permits, less federal contracts.................... $ 475,725 - 38 - 29 $ 9,776,070 $ 12,097,201 - 19 Bank debits (thousands) ---------------------·-·----·----·-·-···-·-·· $ 122,828 + 21 + 15 $ l,238,028 $ 1,196,132 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) ·-···········-­·-·--····· $ 121,176 + 10 + 8 $ 107,121 $ 104,027 + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover................................. 12.7 + 13 + 7 ll.6 11.5 + Employment (area) ----·--·················----------··· Manufacturing employment (area ) .................. 39,000 3,610 + 2 •• + 1 1 37,675 3,633 38,213 3,657 1 Percent unemployed (area) ·-········---------­ 4.4 + 2 - 10 5.9 4.1 + 44 'II Reported by Bureau of Business and Economic Research, University of H ouston, for Harris County. §Figures include Texarkana, Arkansas (pop. 19,733) and Texarkana, Texas (pop. 31,051). r Revised for use by the Texas Highway Department. u 1950 Urbanized Census. •• Change is less than one-half of one percent. BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS Year-to-date avera&'e Nov Oct Nov 1958 1958 1957 1958 1957 GENERAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY tTexas business activity, index ................................................................................ ­Miscellaneous freight carloadings in SW District, index ................................. .. Ordinary life insurance sales, index .................................................................... .. Wholesale prices in U. S., unadjusted index ...................................................... .. iconsumers' prices in Houston, unadjusted index .............................................. .. Consumers' prices in U. S., unadjusted index.. .................................................. .. 211 75 413 119.2 123.7 193 78 392 119.2 124.2 123.9 188 78 379 118.5 121.6 197 77 379 119.2 123.6 123.5 195 83 356 117.6 121.5 120.2 Income payments to individuals in U.S. (billions, at seasonally adjusted annual rate) .................................................................................... .. s 359.3 s 360.4 $ 348.4 s 353.5 s 346.7 Business failures (number) ................................................................................ -.. 51 41 33 38 TRADE Total retail sales, index ............................................................................. ---------­ 216* 187* 184 Durable·goods stores ........................................................ ---------------------------­Nondurable-goods stores ................................................................................ .. Ratio of credit sales to net sales in department and apparel stores .................. Ratio of collections to outstandings in department and apparel stores .. ........ 168* 241* 67.3* 37.5* 146* 208* 69.1* 36.0* 171 188 66.9 34.7 68.3* 37.5* 68.0 37.4 PRODUCTION Total electric power consumption, index ........................................................ ...... . 330* 331* 325 337• 341 Industrial electric power consumption, index ..................................................... .. Crude oil production, index .................................................................................... 338* 124* 335• 117* 350 us 329* 111• 360 129 Crude oil runs to stills, index ................................................................................ .. 142 144 137 136 144 Gasoline consumption, index ........................................ ......................................... . 182 160 171 Natural gas production, index ................................................................................ . 182 185 Industrial production in U.S., index ..................................................................... .. 142 141 135 134 14'3 Southern pine production, index .......................................................................... .. 143 104 89 105 Cottonseed crushed, index ...................................................................................... _ 143 129 126 151 114 Construction authorized, index .... ........................................................................ .. 247 239 180 236 200 Residential building ....................................................................................... . 313 285 211 272 196 Nonresidential building .. ............ .................................................................... 183 181 142 200 205 AGRICULTURE Farm cash income, unadjusted index .................................................................. .. 194 98 Prices received by farmers, unadjusted index, 1909-14=100.......................... .. 283 284 265 279 266 P rices paid by farmers in U. S., unadjusted index, 1909-14=100.................. .. Ratio of Texas farm prices received to U. S. prices paid by farmers ............... . 308 92 308 92 '299 89 305 91 296 90 FINANCE Bank debits, index ................................................................................................... .. 251 230 223 234 229 Bank debi ts, U.S., index. ............................................................................ ............ . 216 192 199 207 200 Reporting member banks, Dallas Reserve District: §Leans (millions) ............................................................................................. . 2,835 $ 2,696 $ 2,567 s 2,602 $ 2,433 §Loans and inv~tments (millions) .............................................................. .. s 4,620 $ 4,518 s 4,055 4,285 s 3,930 Adjusted demand deposits (millions) ....................................................... _ s 2,899 s 2,697 2,652 s 2,680 s 2,639 Revenue receipts of the State Comptroller (thousands) .................................... . $104,388 $ 80,462 s 67,422 $ 87,462 s 83,186 Federal Internal Revenue collections (thousands) .......................................... .. 97,673 $216,'295 105,305 223,535 $224,381 LABOR Total nonagricultural employment (thousands) U.............................................. Total manufacturing employment (thousands) U........................................ 2,524.4 460.9 2,483.8 461.2 2,516.0 473.5 2,457.3 460.7 2,472.3 483.8 Durable-goods employment (thousands) IF.............................................. Nondurable-goods employment (thousands) U.. .. .................................... 216.0 244.9 216.5 244.7 229.4 244.1 217.1 243.5 '239.0 244.8 Employment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) .................................. .. Manufacturing employment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) 1,854.6 354.8 1,829.3 355.3 1,831.3 365.8 1,802.6 355.9 1,796.8 374.9 Total unemployment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) ........ .. 99.2 101.7 87.9 115.2 79.8 Cement shipments, index ..................................................................................... ... 4.9 5.1 Cement production, index ............................................................................ -.... .. 197 188 165 184 158 Cement consumption, index ................................ .................................................. .. 182 208 136 185 160 Percent of labor force unemployed in 17 labor market areas ........... 191 184 159 179 152 All figures are for Texas unless otherwise indicated. All indexes are based on the average months for 1947-49, except where indicated; all are adjusted for seasonal variation, except annual Indexes. Employment estimates have been adjusted to first quarter 1957 benchmarks. t Based on bank debits in 20 cities, adjusted for price leTel. t Index computed for February, May, August, and November only. § Exclusive of loans to banks after deduction of valuation reserves. 'I Figures are for wage and salary workers only. Other labor figures include proprietors, firm members, self-employed, independent contractors, unpaid family and private household workers. • P reliminary. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW