BUSINESS REVIEW A Monthly Summary of Business and Economic Conditions in Texas BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS VOL. XXXIII, NO. 4 TWENTY CENTS A COPY-TWO DOLLARS A YEAR APRIL 1959 Texas Wheat Production, 1958 lEGEND (In bushels} V:::::::;:::::::j Less than 20,000 p-~ri 20,ooa-100,oou [ ~ !fi100,000·-soo,ooo tii~R soo,000 -1,000,000 111_1,000,000-3,000,000 ..Over 3,000,000 The above map shows the more important wheat producing counties in Texas in 1958 (the unshaded counties together produced less than I°lo of the total). A report on the 1958 crop begins on page 13. Part II (conclusion) of a special stud'y of the Texas soft drink bottling industry begins on page 7. The Business Situation in Texas ByFRANCIS B. MAY After yielding a fraction of a point in January the sea­sonally adjusted Index of Texas Business Activity rose 2% in February from its January value. At 215% of the 194.7­49 average rate of activity the index was at an all-time high. For the past two years the index has shown an absence of strong growth characteristics of the kind exhibited during the 1954-1956 period. It has fluctuated around an average value of 195% in 1957 and 197% in 1958. These averages show an annual growth factor of only 1 % from 1957 to 1958. With a population growing at an annual rate of more than 2%, the state cannot long tolerate such a slowing down in economic growth without a decline in the standard of living. It is good to note that we are at the beginning of another strong upward growth phase. The February index value was 11 % above February of last year. Last February was a low point of the recession. The Index of Texas Business Activity is a measure of total activity, including oil and gas production, mining, agricultural production, utilities, manufacturing, construe· tion, wholesale and retail trade, the supplying of services of all kinds, and transactions of a purely financial nature. Such a broad measure is not easily affected by a recession restricted to a part of the state's economy. Only factors broadly affecting the state will influence this business indi­cator. Crude petroleum production in February was 2% below January, allowing for seasonal influences. The Railroad Commission reduced the number of producing days to 11 in February from 12 in January because of the shortness of the month and the approaching end of the winter heating oil season. Unusually cold weather kept demand for heating oils .and for crude from which to refine them at a high level during the major part of the cold season. The March allowable is 12 days. April has been cut back to 11 producing days. This April reduction in the number of producing days allowed may cause considerable surprise because of the recent Presidential order ending the system of voluntary oil import quotas and substituting a system of mandatory controls. The order reduced the permitted level of imports of petroleum, unfinished oils, finished products, and resi· dual fuel oil by more than 14% to an average 968,100 barrels a day from the 1,113,500 barrels a day under the old program. The reduction in the level of imports plus an anticipated level of demand in 1959 four to five per­cent above 1958 should eventually lead to higher allow­ables in this state. That it did not do so at once is due to the fact that inventories are at levels about 10 million barrels above the best working level of about 250 million barrels. Oil industry requests at the Commission hearing_ were generally for holding production down. If the mandatory imports control program had not been put into effect, the allowable would have been reduced more than it was. High inventories and imports have created a price weakness in the domestic crude market that the cut in the allowable is expected to cure. While the restriction of the level of imports was welcome to hard-pressed nonimporting companies, the order which set up the system of quotas has a price-control feature Texas Business Activity Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation • 1947-1949..100 250 250 200 200 150 150 100 100 50 50 0 ° 1946 '47 '48 '49 '50 '51 '52 '53 '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59 that could easily result in a utility-type control of the domestic petroleum industry. This is an outcome which the industry had hoped to avoid. The President ordered the Office of Civilian and Defense Mobilization to monitor prices of crude and its products or derivatives on a continuing basis. The implication is that if domestic prices rise too much, restrictions on im· portation of cheaper crude and products will be loosened. This will place the industry in the position of having to justify every significant price increase to a Federal agency. lldustrial Electric Power Use in Texas Index • Ad justed for seasonal va riation • 1947-1949-100 With current fears of a resumption of long-term price in· Ration echoing in Congressional speeches and investiga· tions, it may be difficult to obtain a sympathetic hearing. Consumer groups will protest. Recent experience with the protests of consumer groups against increases in the well· head price of natural gas affords some evidence of the pressures against price increases that will be exerted. Under the new regulations import quotas of established importing firms have been reduced by about 20% to make quotas available to newcomers. So far, about 76 new com· panies have been granted import quotas. Among them are such familiar Texas names as Cosden Petroleum Corpora· tion, Delhi-Taylor Oil Company, EI Paso Natural Gas Company, La Gloria Oil and Gas Company, and Shamrock Oil and Gas Corporation. Crude oil runs to stills in February were up 3% from January, after allowing for seasonal influences. At 152% of the 1947-49 average of runs the index was 20% above February of last year. This is the highest level of operations for the refining industry in the state since January of 1957. The all-time high for the index was in June of 1956, when it reached a value of 155. February was 3% colder than February of 1958. This fact plus a 5.1 % increase in gaso· line demand in February helped to keep refineries operat· ingat high levels. From February to May of each year there is a seasonal decline in petroleum and products demand. Refinery ac· tivity should be reduced in the coming months in order to avoid excessive inventories and price wars. Total electric power consumption in February was 4% above January, after adjustment for seasonal variation. February is the second successive month in which this index has shown a substantial rise. At its present level of 346% of the 1947-49 average rate of consumption the index is 8% above February of 1958. The improvement is due to increases in commercial and domestic consumption as well as in industrial power consumption. Industrial electric power consumption showed an even stronger month·to·month gain than total power consump· tion, rising 7% above January after seasonal adjustment. The February index was 8% above February of last year. Increases in industrial power consumption reflect an in· creased rate of industrial activity. However, the long-term growth trend of power consumption is greater than the trend of industrial production because of increasing use of electric machinery in industrial operations including control devices and automated production processes. Ordinary life insurance sales dropped 1 % in February, after allowance for seasonal factors. They were still 11% above February of last year. Life insurance sales were gen· erally good throughout the recession. With returning pros­perity, they should be even better in 1959 than they were in 1958. The trend toward larger families has meant larger life insurance programs for heads of families. Total retail sales in February dropped 1% below Jan· uary after seasonal adjustment. They were 7% above Feb­ruary of last year. Easter sales will raise this index, which gave such a good account of itself in December and Jan· uary. Nationally, retail sales in February maintained the January level. January sales were slightly below December sales. Personal income in February rose to a new annual high of $364.5 billion for the nation. Retail sales generally follow the course of personal income with minor varia· tions of a random nature. Record personal income will raise the level of sales. After taking the 1% drop into account, total retail sales were 7% above February of last year, which was a reces· sion month. Durable goods sales in February dropped 3%, after seasonable adjustment. This drop was the cause of the de· cline in the index of total sales. February sales of durables were 14% above February of 1958. Automotive, furniture, and hardware dealers showed the greatest decline in Feb­ruary. Lumber and building materials dealers suffered no decline in sales. Sales of nondurable goods in February held at the same level as January, after seasonal adjustment. They were SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS Percent chanir• Index Feb 1959 Jan 1959 Feb 1958 Feb 1959 from J an 1959 Feb 1959 from Feb 1958 T exas Business Activity ............ 215 210 193 + 2 + 11 Miscellan eous freigh t carloadings in s.w. district 74 79 76 6 - 3 Crude petroleum production .... 122• 125r 127 2 - 4 Crude oil runs to stills ·-····-···-· 152 147 127 + 8 + 20 T otal electric power consumption ··-·--···········-·······--· 346* 832* 321 + 4. + 8 Industrial electric power consumption -·--·····--···-·····-·-·-··· 365* 341* 339 + 7 + 8 Bank debits ··----············-······--··-···· 257 251 230 + 2 + 12 Ordinary life insurance sales .. 401 404 860 1 + 11 Total r etail sales _... -....... _ .......__ ,_ 192* 194* + 7 Durable-goods sales ......____ ,,,_.. Nondurable-goods sales ··-···-· 158* 210• 163* 210• s •• + 14 + 4 Urban building permits issued.. 235* 239* 187 2 + 26 Residential _... -..... _,, ____ , .... -... -.... ­ 279 • 308• 203 - 9 + 37 Nonresidential -····-··········--······ 179* 167• 165 + 7 + 8 Adjusted for seasonal variation, except annual average and farm caab income. • Preliminary. r Revised. • • Change is less than one-half of one percent. 4% above February of last year. Apparel stores showed declines in February from January, as did department stores. Urban building permits issued in February were 2% below January, after allowing for seasonal factors. They were 26% above February of 1958. Residential permits were responsible for the month-to-month decline, dropping 9% below January. At this lower level of issuance, resi­dential permits were 37% above February of last year. Nationally, housing starts in February were down for the second consecutive month. At an annual rate of l,· 320,000 units, seasonally adjusted private housing starts were 7.7% below the December high of 1,430,000 units. Housing starts lag a month to six weeks behind the issuance of permits. Since residential permits issued in Texas in January declined from December, the rate of private hous· ing starts in the state undoubtedly declined in February. Applications for FHA commitments turned upward sea­sonally in February. Nonresidential permits in February rose 7% on a sea­sonally adjusted basis. They were 8% above February of last year. This means a revival in commercial building in preparation for increases in commercial activity, ex­pected as a result in the current cyclical upswing which is still in its formative stages. A glance at the table of economic barometers shows that while pluses and minuses for February changes from Jan­uary are about evenly balanced, the comparison with Feb­ruary of last year shows sizable gains for all categories except rail carloadings and crude petroleum production. The railroads are still losing business to the truckers and bargemen. Oil production should begin to show some im­provement now that mandatory import quotas are in effect. Texas should receive its share of the rising market for crude. REVENUE RE CEIPTS OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER Source: State Comptroller of Public Accounts September 1-February 28 Percent Account 1958-59 1957-58 change TOTAL ..........................................$499,812,335 $461,409,798 + 8 Ad valorem, inheritance, and poll taxes .......................................... 31,274,051 34,481,776 9 Natural and casinghead gas production taxes ............................ 22,639,884 20,744,718 + 9 Crude oil production taxes ................ 68,159,421 69,255,070 2 Other gross receipts and production taxes .............................. 10,913,008 10,990,020 Insurance companies and other occupation taxes .............................. 893,348 533,73(} + 67 Motor fuel taxes (net) ........................ 87,401,529 83,561,424-+ 5 Cigarette taxes and licenses ............ 24,803,606 23,239,152. + 7 Alcoholic beverage taxes and licenses ...................................... 16,265,708 16,328,689 •• Automobile and other sales taxes ... 10,346,504 11,144,099 -7 Licenses and fees ................................ 19,795,583 18,243,399 + 9 Franchise taxes .................................... 2,187,747 2,759,286 -21 Mineral leases, land sales, rentals, and bonuses ·····--··-··----------·········· 12,736,359 6,052,809 +no Oil and gas royalties .......................... 15,498,654 14,788,023 + 5 Interest earned .................................... 13,264,742 15,035,899 -12 Unclassified receipts .......................... 12,242,395 8,645,449 + 42 Other misceUaneous revenue ............ 6,010,345 5,244,204 + 15 Federal aid for highways ................ 64,496,620 49,364,938 + 31 Federal aid for public welfare ........ 70,451,497 61,654,480 + 14 Other federal aid ................................ 10,164,470 8,899,205 + 14 Donations and grants ........................ 266,864 493,433 -46 •• Change is less than one-half of one percent. TEXAS BUSIN ESS REVIEW Editor......................................................John R. Stockton Managing Editor................................Robert H. Drenner CONTENTS The Business Situation in Texas.................................... 2 Retaii Trade -------------------·--------------------------------------·--·-· 5 The Texas Soft Drink Bottling Industry (conclusion) -----·--·----------------------------·------·-------------7 Industrial Production ---·------------------------------------------·---9 Fina nee ____________________ .......____ ..........__ __ ___ __ -------------...._ 11 Agriculture ---------------------------------------------·----·------------·--13 Building Construction ---··-·--------·------·-------------------------16 Local Business Conditions ------------------------------------------18 Barometers of Texas Business ------------------------------··----24 BUSINESS RESEARCH COUNCIL John 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. Nett ; G. H. Newlove. BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH Director Aasistant Director Administrative Assistant Reaources Specialist John R. Stockton Stanley A. Arbingast Florence Escott Francis M. May Statistician Alfred G. Dale Robert H. Drenner Research Associate Deirdre C. Handy Research Associate Charles 0. Bettinger Research Associate Research Aasociate Jacquie LeRoy Research Associate Arvid A. Anderson Tina Piedrahita Research Aaaociatt Ida M. Lambeth Research Associate: Marjorie T. Cornwell Administrative Clerk Candler P. Cass Research Associate Mildred Anderson Statiatical As•istant Roberta Steele Cartographer Marie F letcher Statistical Assistant Eva A. Arias Senior Secretar11 Crescencia M. Stanley Senior Secretary Marilyn Whites Publications Assistant Statiatical T echniciClln J osephin e J. Knippa Senior Clerk Typist Gail McElroy Clerk Typiat Anna Merle Danz Libra111 Asaistant Dorothy W. Smith Clerk Barbara Warden Robert Dorsett Daniel P. Rosas Clerk T11pist 0 ffset Press Operator Offset Presa Operator Assistants Robert B. Gentry, Walter Gray, Richard B. McGregor, Marie Payne, Jamtls H . Scott, and Chru:les J. Turner. Publl~hed montJ:>l~ by _the Bureau of Business Research, Coller< o! Busmess Admml8trat1on, The University of Texas Austin 12. Ente~ed as eecond class matter May 7, 1928 at the post office at Austm, Texas, und~r the act of August 24, 1912. Content of this publi· cation 18 not copyrig hted and may be reproduced freely Acknowledi.. !Dent. of eou~ce will be appreciated, Subscription ·$2 00 year: individual copies, 20 Mnta. ' · a Retail Trade: FEBRUARY ALSO SHOWS YEAR-TO-YEAR SALES GAIN By TINA PIEDRAHITA Dollar sales. Estimated February 1959 retail sales in Texas ($872.3 million) fell 10% from January 1959 but were i% above February 1959. Sales for January-February 1959, estimated at $1,844.6 million, were 6% above sales in the same 1958 period. Both durable goods sales ($246.7 million) and nondura­ble goods sales ($615.6 million) trailed behind January 1959 by 10%. In comparison with sales in February 1958, durable goods sales showed an encouraging 14% increase; nondurable goods stores reported a 4% increase. For the first two months, durable goods sales were up 14% from the same period in 1958 and nondurable goods sales were up 4%. E T IM ATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES (Unadjusted fer 8Casona1 varlntion) Percent change Type of store F eb 1959 Jan-Feb 1959 Feb 1959 Feb 1959 J an-Feb 1959 from from from Jan 1969 Feb 1958 J an-Feb 1958 Millions of dollars TOTAL ................ 872.3 1,844.6 -10 + 7 + 6 Durable goods ........... 256.7 643.0 -10 + 14 + 14 Nondurable goods .... 615.6 1,301.6 -10 + 4 + 4 February indexes. The preliminary index of total re· tail sales in Texas (1947-49= 100 and adjusted for sea­sonal variation) was 192, or 2 points (1 % ) below the pre­liminary January index, but equal to the average month of 1958. The durable goods index ( 158) fell 5 points from the January 1959 index and was 2 points below the average for 1958, while the nondurable index (210) remained un­changed from January 1959 and topped the average month from 1958 by 2 points. Deflated for price changes, the pre­liminary February index of total retail sales was 163, as compared with 164 reported for January and 165 reported for December. Retail Sales in Texas Index • Adiusted for seasonal variation , 1947-1949·100 250 200 if\~ A ,../ 'A 1xi 150 ·vi ~ .,,,.~ ~.... ifV.A 1()() 100 .,.,,..,..,­ ,_ so 50 0 ·"· 19-46 o ·48 ·~9 ·,;; ·51 ·52 ·53 ·~ ·55 56 ·57 sa ·59 Sales by store types. Increases in February 1959 over the preceding month in sales by durable and nondurable goods stores were reported by only jewelry stores and flor· ists (each +2%). Sales by lumber and building material dealers remained unchanged, while decreases for the month ranged from -38% reported by men's and boys' clothing stores to --4% reported by farm implement dealers. RETAIL SALES TRENDS IJY KINDS OF 1:us1XESS S9Urt'e: Bureau of Dusiness Research in coopcrntlon with the Burc:rn of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce Number of Feb 1959 Feb 1959 Jan-Feb 1959 reporting f r01n from from K ind of Business establishments J a n 1969 Feb 1958 J an-Feb 1958 DURABLE GOODS Automotive stores ·---­----­ 292 - 11 + 16 + 16 Furniture a nd household appliance stores ---­-----­ 161 - 11 + 6 + 7 Lumber, building materia l, and hardware stores -------­ 279 - 2 + 16 + 13 NONDURABLE GOODS Apparel stores ------­--------­ 214 - 20 + s + 4 Drug stores ························· 10 6 - 7 + 3 + 6 Food stores ----­--­---­---------­ 303 - 12 + 1 Gasoline and ser vice stations ---·-­ 283 - 5 + 7 + 6 General merchandise stores --­·····­-·····-·····-··-----­ 158 - 13 + 9 + 8 Ot her reta il stores .......... 262 - 4 + 8 + 7 All retailers except groceries with meats (-1% ) and country general stores (--6%) reported increases in sales over February 1958 ranging from 1 % to 19%. Among durable goods stores, best showings were made by farm implement dealers (+ 19%), motor vehicle dealers and lumber and building material dealers (each + 17%), and hardware stores ( +9%). For January-February 1959, the leaders were motor vehicle dealers ( +17%), lumber and building material dealers ( +13% ) , and hardware stores (+12%). In the nondurable goods tabulation, best increases over the same month last year were made by jewelry stores ( + 14%), women's ready-to-wear stores and office, store, and school supply dealers (each + 12%), unclassified ap­parel stores and department stores (each +9%), and shoe stores and liquor stores (each +8%). For January-Febru­ary 1959, increases over the same period a year ago ranged from 1% to 10%. Highest increases were reported by jewelry stores (+ 13%), office, store, and school supply dealers (+10%), women's ready-to-wear stores and de: partment stores (each +8%), shoe stores (+7%), and drug stores, gasoline and service stations, and liquor stores (each +6%). Volume of department and apparel stores. Sales of 272 Texas department and apparel stores fell 17% from January 1959, but were 8% above February 1958. For the first two months sales were 6% above the same period a year ago. Department and apparel store sales in all of the 32 re­porting cities trailed January 1959, with decreases ranging from 1 % to 45%. Poorest showings were made by such stores in Bryan and Greenville (each -45%), Big Spring and Corpus Christi (each -37%), Cleburne and Plain­view (each -35% ), McAllen (-32%), Temple (-28%), Lockhart (-27%), and Abilene (-26%). Of the 28 cities reporting increases over February 1958, best showings were made by Lubbock (+44%), Greenville (+33%), Plainview (+29% ), San Angelo (+28%), Amarillo (+26%), Big Spring (+22%), Brownwood (+19%), and Marshall, Sherman, and Waco (each + 18%). Decreases from February 1958 were reported by El Paso (-9%) , Bryan (-4%), and Edinburg and Edna (each -1% ) . Of the 25 cities reporting increases over the first two months a year ago, best gains were recorded by Lubbock (+22%), Plainview (+19%), San Angelo ( + 18%), Marshall ( + 17%), and Greenville and Temple (each + 16%), while decreases ranged from -5% re­ported by Bryan to -9% reported by Paris. Sales in Texas cities. 0£ the 27 Texas cities reporting enough retailers to permit individual city listings, one city reported a total sales increase over January 1959, 18 cities bettered February 1958, and 22 cities topped the first two months of 1958. Harlingen (+2%) was the only city with a retail sales increase over January 1959, while decreases ranged from -2% reported by both Amarillo and Texarkana to -23% reported by Abilene. Gains over February 1958 were made by Texarkana (+46%), Lubbock (+33%), Amarillo (+28%), Brownsville (+27%), Abilene (+22%), Waco (+19%), Austin, Greenville, and Wichita Falls (each +18%), McAllen (+17%), Corpus Christi (+15%), Harlingen (+12%), Fort Worth and San Antonio (each +9%), Houston ( +8%), and Dallas ( +4%). Leaders in the first two months of 1959 over January­February 1958 were Texarkana (+34%) , Abilene (+27%), Brownsville ( +26%), Lubbock ( +21 % ) , Mc­Allen (+20%), Waco (+18%), and Amarillo and Green­ville (each +17%). Sales declines for the same period were registered by Brownwood (-16%), Port Arthur (-13%), Beaumont (-8%), and Henderson (-1%); sales in Victoria remained unchanged. Credit and collection ratios. The February ratio of credit sales to total net sales in 62 Texas department and apparel stores was 71.1 %, or 3.5 points above January 1959 and 1.5 points above February 1958. By cities, highest ratios were made by Dallas (77.9%), Houston (77.3%), San Antonio (75.6%), and Fort Worth ( 67.6%). By type of store, highest ratios were made by CREDIT RATIOS IN DEPARTMENT Al'iD APPAREi. STORES Credit Collection ratios• ratios•• Number of reporting Feb F eb Feb F eb Classification stores 1959 1958 1959 1958 ---· ­ ALL STORES .................... 62 71.1 69.6 36.9 36.8 Austin ········------·······---·----············· 63.8 45.7 5 63.9 48.1 Bryan 63 .2 54.4 54.2 51.7 Cleburne ...................................... 3 42 .8 40 .2 40.0 36.5 Dallas 7 77.9 77.0 38.9 37.4 -----·-··-·································· ·························---------·--······· -------·-······-········-··············· El Paso 3 57.6 59.6 28.3 28.3 Fort Worth 3 67.6 68.3 30.1 32.0 Galveston 3 58.9 58.9 29.9 31.6 ·································· ·······················--·-··-···· Houston ····--·--------···---·-················-77.3 43.5 3 71.0 42.3 San Antonio 75.6 69.1 39.0 41.2 BY TYPES OF STORE Department stores (over $1 million) 18 72.0 71.4 36.1 35.5 ·············-···--·----·····-·· -·-----·-········· Department stores (under $1 million) 17 53.9 49.8 36.7 36.5 ·····--·····---­Dry goods and apparel stores.. 5 73.4 70.9 53.8 53.3 Women 's specialty shops 13 69.8 64.8 38.3 40.1 Men's clothing stores ................ 9 70.9 68.2 42.0 45.3 DY VOLUME OF NET SALES Over $1,500,000 .......................... 22 72.2 70.8 36.8 36.6 $500,000 to $1,500,000 .............. 13 60.7 59.0 39.3 40.8 $250,000 to $500,000 --··--··-·-··--··· 13 58.7 53.0 40.6 39.8 ·--····· Less than $250,000 14 51.5 50.2 36.0 35.6 -··-···---···-······ • Credit sales as a percent of net saleti. •• ColJections during the month as a percent of nccou11t.s 1ui paid un the first of the month. dry goods and apparel stores (73.4%) and department stores with sales over Sl million (72.0%). The ratio of collections during the month of February to outstandings at the first of the month was 36.9%, or 2.0 points below January 1959 and 0.1 points above Febru­ary 1958. Collection ratios were highest in Bryan (54.2%), Austin (45.7%), Houston (43.5%), and Cleburne ( 40.0%) . By type of store, highest collection ratios were reported by dry goods and apparel stores (53.8 % ) and men's clothing stores (42.0%) . Bryan, Cleburne, Dallas, Houston, and Waco improved their collections over Febru­ary 1958. By type of store, department stores and dry goods and apparel stores reported improvements over their 1958 collections. Secondary trade indicators. Advertising linage in 25 Texas newspapers was 2% above January 7959 and top­ped February 1958 by 7%. Nine newspapers were ahead of January 1959 and eight bettered February 1958. POSTAL RECEIPTI Percent change Feb 6­ Feb 6­ March 6 March 6 1959 1959 from f rom J an 9­ Feb 7­ F eb 6­ J an 9­ F eb 7­ Feb 6 March 7 March 6 F eb 6 March 7 1959 1958 City 1959 1959 1958 Bor ger -··-­ 17,259 14,320 19,812 + 21 -13 Brady --·--···············-··· 3,824 3,962 3,134 - 3 + 22 Brownfield 7,852 8,806 7,754 -11 + 1 Cameron 7,473 6,342 6,788 + 18 + 10 Childress -----­·­·········· 4,651 4,814 3,572 - 8 + 80 Cleburne .................... 10,401 12,960 9,541 -20 + 9 Coleman ············---····­ 5,085 5,763 4,409 -12 + 15 Cu ero ············--------·-···· 5,593 5,722 3,673 - 2 + 52 Del Rio ·-----·--·-·---------­ 13,097 12,535 9,77() + 4 + 34 Eagle Pass ············-­-­ 5,814 6,103 5,064 - 5 + 15 Edna -· EI Campo ············-····· 5,469 9,099 4,292 10,205 8,471 7,720 + 27 -11 + 58 + 18 Gainesville Gatesville --------·---··--·-Gilmer ····--------·······----­Graham ------·-······--------Granbury ····------···--··· H ale Center ··········---· Hillsboro ----·-····--····---· Huntsville -·--············-­J acksonville -·-···--···--· 12,947 3,554 3,876 9,984 S,299 1,256 6,092 7,583 15,343 13,907 3,883 3,585 6,458 3,200 1,468 6,395 9,840 10,864 2,797 4,013 6,276 2,620 1,045 5,073 5,760 15,317 -7 -8 + 8 + 55 + 3 -14 -5 -23 + 19 + 27 -8 + 69 + 26 + 20 + 20 + 82 •• Kenedy -·-············---···· Kermit ·-··-·--·············-Kerrville ---·-···--···-······ Kingsville ---·-----·······-· 8,016 7,177 10,403 13,628 3,640 7,130 10,883 13,982 2,624 5,214 8,297 -17 + 1 -4 -3 + 15 + 38 + 25 Kirbyville ------·····-·-·-­· 2,055 3,314 2,373 -38 -13 La Grange ----------------Levelland ----·--······-----Littlefield ·--···------······ Lockhart -----···-------·-··-Longview -----·--------···· McCamey ---···-··-····--­:Marlin ···---·-········---····­h1 ission ·····--········-·---·-Navasota ················--Pampa ---·--····-······----­ 5,728 7,157 5,458 3,478 24,885 2,825 6,137 8,034 5,091 21,470 4,291 7,081 6,688 3,804 36,233 2,584 6,263 8,825 4,142 22,984 3,110 5,349 4,315 3,103 30,533 2,492 5,155 6,558 3,484 16,891 + 33 + 1 -18 -9 -31 + 9 -2 -9 + 23 -7 + 84 + 34 + 26 + 12 -18 + 18 + 19 + 23 + 46 + 27 Pecos --·-·····--·-·········­ 9,808 9,483 7,884 + 8 + 24 Pittsburg ···········-­·---­ 2,960 3,287 2,431 -10 + 22 Raymondville ······-­-­ 4,812 4,993 4,291 - 4 + 12 s:nton ····----····-··········­ 5,083 9,519 3,923 -47 + 30 Taft ·········--·-· ----------·--· 2,786 2,278 1,685 + 22 + 65 Terrell ····---·-···------·· ··-­ 7,616 4,801 + 59 W axahachie -·······-····­ 11,332 9,954 9,853 + 14 + 15 Weatherford -·····--···-Yoakum ---··········------­ 9,357 9,530 9,176 7,047 6,445 + 4 + 33 + 48 THE TEXAS SOFT DRINK BOTTLING INDUSTRY Part II (conclusion) By J. CONRAD DUNAGAN* Rank and Economic Importance As of the 1954 census, Texas ranked first among the states in the number of persons employed in its soft drink industry ( 6,321, not counting owners). In the value of its production ($69,834,000) it ranked behind New York $83,696,000) and California ( $73,454,000), but this was largely due to the relatively higher wholesale prices pre­vailing in those states, for in the cost of materials used in manufacture, Texas ($31,016,000) was exceeded only slightly by New York ($33,919,000). Texas also had the largest number of bottling plants employing more than 20 persons, with 96 such plants vs. 73 for Pennsylvania and 70 for New York. The soft drink industry is, of course, classified as a food industry by the United States Bureau of the Census, the United States Department of Agriculture and by various state agencies. As a part of the food industry, it helped to make that category the dominant one among Texas manu­facturers at the time of the 1954 census.10 There is no way to determine just how much of the 31 million dollars expended for materials used in manufacture by Texas bottlers in 1954 was paid to other Texas manu­facturers, but in recent years an increasing proportion of the materials, supplies, and equipment used by the bottling industry in Texas is manufactured within the state. Syrups and flavors are produced in Dallas, Waco, San Antonio, and Houston. Sugar, both liquid and granulated, is pro­duced at Sugarland. Carbon dioxide or dry ice is produced in Fort Worth, Dallas and Corpus Christi. In addition to factories providing a sizeable proportion of this 31 million dollars worth of ingredient items, there are container manufacturers: glass bottle plants at Waco, Palestine and Corsicana; crowns (bottle caps) made in Dallas; wooden cases produced in Dallas, San Antonio, and Houston; and paperboard cartons manufactured in Fort Worth. Among the other principal supplies used by the industry are caustic and alkaline bottle washing compounds which are manu­factured by chemical plants on the Texas Gulf Coast. During the year covered by the 194 7 Census of Manu­ *President, Monahans Coca-Cola Bottling Co., and past Presi­dent, Texas State Bottlers' Association. 10 The food industry in Texas in 1954 had 1,922 establishments, followed by printing and publishing with 1,367 and lumber and wood products with 1,044. Foods also ranked first' in number of em­ployees, with 68,652, followed by transportation equipment (57,161), petroleum products (41,639), and chemical products (37,289). In an~ual val?e of pay!oll, food products were outranked by transpor­tation eqmpment; m value added by manufacture, by chemicals. Among all the food industries in Texas in 1954 bottled soft drinks ranked first in number of establishments and fi:.St in number of plants having over 20 employees. However, it ranked fourth in both number of employees and payroll, being exceeded in these respects by meat packing, bread and related products and fluid milk plants. ' In the 1954 U. S. Census Texas ranked eleventh in per capita consumption of bottled soft drinks, with 222 vs. 174 for the nation as a whole. Those ranking above it were all southern states. factures, Texas bottlers reported expenditures of $5,463,­000 for capital improvements, and in the 1954 census they reported $2,992,000 for this purpose.11 It is likely that investment in new plant and equipment in the bottling in­dustry in Texas approaches 5 million dollars annually. When it comes to the heavy machinery for the bottling plant (large automatic bottle washers, fillers, carbonators, etc.), Texas bottlers must still look to the North and the East. Although the trucks used by the bottling industry of Texas are assembled in the North, Texas bottlers can find manufacturers for their specialized truck bodies in the Texas cities of San Antonio and Houston, and a new fac­tory is now building at Brownwood. One factory located in Dallas produces mechanically refrigerated bottle drink coolers and coin-operated vendors. Other Texas manufac­turers who supply the bottling industry are sign manu­facturers in Dallas and wire display rack manufacturers in Shiner and Dallas. TEXAS SOFT DRINK BOTTLING PLANTS SELECTED STATISTICS Production Value of No. of Employees Total P er Employees Total Per Shipments Per Year Plants No. Plan t No. Plant Total Pla nt 1939 ...... 307 4,115 13.4 1,431 4.7 $24,459,000 $ 79,671 1947 ······ 387 5,627 14 .5 2, 753 7.1 1954 ...... 287 6,321 22.Q 2,746 9.6 $69,843,000 $243,355 Source : U. S. Census of Manufactures. Association Just as the interests of the industry on a national scale are the concern of the American Bottlers of Carbonated Beverages, so are the interests of all Texas bottlers the sole concern of the Texas Bottlers Association, an organization which.ha~ its beginning in 1903.t It is the purpose of this orgamzat10n to encourage bottlers to meet and consider their common problems, and to take such actions as are morally, legally and prudently indicated to raise the stand­ards. of the industry. The objectives of the organization are earned out through three channels: public, governmental, and bottler relations. Although soft drinks are served in practically every hospital in the state, and doctors and den­tists are am~ng th~ industry's best customers, occasionally an old ~nd d1scred1ted theory pops up-that soft drinks are responsible for tooth decay or that they are inimical to proper nutrition. Such notions are easily disproved by pub­ 11 The total investment in the Texas bottling industry has not ~een accurately determined, but the national investment is be­hevd to represent between 900 million dollars and one billion dol!ars. Since the bottling plants of Texas comprise 7% of the United States total, and since Texas plant's sales are somewhat larger than th.e average f?r the Unite~ States as a whole, it may be a~sumed that investment in the Texas industry represents something like 70 mill!on dollars, or an average of about $237,000 per plant. t And which recently changed its name from Texas State Bottlers' Association. lication of reports of the latest scientific research on the subject. However, in instances such as this, the industry faces a dilemma. To enter into a public debate on the issue is to give the false opinions publicity which may turn out to do more harm than the publication of the truth can do good. On the other horn, to ignore such public pronoun_ce­ments would seem to imply acceptance of these provoking claims, even if they have no demonstrable basis in scien­tific fact. There may have been a time in the early days of the industry when the public doubted whether bottles were sterilized or whether soft drinks were pure. Today most people r~alize that bottling plants must comply with all State Department of Health regulations and that most are subjected to rigid examination by inspect~rs or by trav:l­ing laboratories sent out by the nat10nal franchise concerns. The Texas Bottlers Association depends solely upon volunteer bottler efforts for its officers and directors, in­ cluding a part-time paid secretary who is also a bottler. It assesses and collects dues from each bottler member, rang­ ing from ten dollars up to several hundred, depending upon the rated capacity of each member's machinery. Dur­ ing the 56 years of its history, the Association has gro.wn in favor with bottlers to a point where 95% of the bottling plants in Texas are paid-up members. Prices In the transition from an industry made up mostly of very small plants to one of somewhat larger plants, there have been failures and heartaches for small bottlers who were unable to understand what was happening to them. In their lack of comprehension of the economic forces at work, they were apt to lash out at their larger and usually more successful rivals and seek to place the blame upon these competitors for their own failure to make progress during times of great general prosperity. Generally speak­ing, although not always, it is the bottler without a well es­tablished franchise12 who has the most trouble remaining competitive on a low volume of sales. Not only is the small plant likely to suffer from machinery which is not competi­tive with that of the larger plant, but if its product has a 12 The five largest soft drink franchise groups are: Approximate Approximate No. of No. of Firm Headquarters U.S.plants Texas plants• Coca-Cola Company Pepsi-Cola Company Atlanta, Georgia New York, New York 1,025 560 81 21 Seven-Up Company Nehi Corporation St. Louis, Missouri Columbus, Georgia 500 440 33 35 Dr. Pepper Company Dallas, Texas 400 59 • In instances where one Texas plant holds more than one leading franchise, it is included among the group having the larger in number of Texas franchised plants. Thus 79% of Texas plants have one or more major franchises. Although the typical Texas bottling plant shares many things in common with those of the nation as a whole, there are many inter­esting differences between its problems and opportunities and those of its counterparts in other sections of the country. For example, a Texas bottler may choose to bottle and sell only one product-a cola-flavored drink, for example, for in respect to flavor preference Texas most resembles the South, where industry surveys have indi­cated that from 61% to 88% of the people in these markets prefer a drink which "contains kola extract." In the 1954 census 57.7% of reported case production in the United States was cola-flavored. On the other hand, a Northeastern bottler might well find his leading product to be ginger ale, which accounts for 23% to 28% of bottled soft drink sales in New England markets (although the UNITED STATES SOFT DRINK BOTTLING PLANTS AND Number ol TOTAl CASE SALES Tolol Coa Svlu US Sortling Plont1 10,0(101 --------------· __ ---=eni'.ooo 9,000 ...I n'.8-00 8,000 ---+--l--l--+--+-+-+-,.J---t--r-"""""11'·600 7,000 · l--l--+--+-:-:-!-:-,.L....,....+----:-'--f/-f-li\1-+-,~-.-+1'·'00 Number ol U.S. borrl:n9 p~on:/ \ A I ~ / 0 6,oooH--+-+--·l--f-~---+/'-.l--1f.--l--""'"1-''<:/---t"~i'\..1--t-t1.200 1 5.ooof-1----l---f---i·-~--f--...,f:0--'::'.4---+--+-_,.t--"-l-fl.OOO I '..ooot+-+--t---lf---f----J--f-t---f---j---"ti'j\_..-j----j-j·BOO 3,000 --"--t---t---t-~~,/~-r---t---r---.--r---+-1000 l / Totolcoe1olu/ 2.ooot+-+--t---lf--lv-T---+--+--t---t--f+--t--H. •oo l.~.. ~~~;~·~;'.=f;i; . ;),~· ..·,~,;.~~--/ ,,.,,-,5o1;.,~ lower sales volume per capita, its distribution costs will also be quite high in relation to those of competitors. Whereas in 1939 not more than half of the bottlers in the United States had franchises, today more than 80% bottle one or more franchise products. In Texas, more than 95% have franchises of one kind or another. However, some of the smaller franchise bottlers apparently do not realize how many years it took the industry's leading products to attain their present degree of public acceptance. The inexorable upward spiral of costs has forced prac· tically all bottlers to increase their wholesale prices by at least 20% to 25% in the postwar era. (In several parts of the nation soft drink prices have doubled.) With higher prices almost solidly in existence throughout the country, there appears to be an increasing tendency in various sec· tions for bottlers to engage in activities known in the jar­gon of the trade as "wheeling and dealing," or giving dis· counts or kick-backs, either openly or secretly. The very wide variation in price structure and in bottle size, com­bined with the large number of independent owners, makes it extremely unlikely that there could ever be the slightest possibility of "price-fixing" agreements in the industry.18 cola-flavored drinks are in No. 1 position there with 26% to 29% of the market). The leading product among ginger ales in the United States today is "Canada Dry," which originated in the country of its name. It is a rare Texas bottler who attempts to manufacture and dis· tribute only a lemon-lime flavored drink, for ordinarily this flavor can be expected to account for only Z% or 3% of soft drink sales in a Texas market, as is the case throughout the South. However, to concentrate on a lemon-lime drink may often be good business for a bottler in the northeast, midwest or Pacific Coast regions, where lem.m-lime preference may vary from 9% to 14%, and in a few markets actually rivals or surpasses that of the cola-flavored drinks. In the 1954 U. S. Census lemon and lime were in second place with 8.4% of all case sales in the nation. Nationally, orange is in third place among all soft drink flavors, amounting to 5.4% of the total reported by the 1954 U. S. Census of Manufactures. However, this flavor probably accounts for a larger percentage of sales in Texas than in the nation, and, in this respect, Texas differs from the remainder of the South, where the percentage of orange sold is lower than in the country as a whole. 13 The casual observer is apt to wonder why the industry's leaders do not simply go to a 10¢ retail price and to a correspondingly higher wholesale price. Practically everyone knows that most prices have doubled since prewar days. It would superficially appear to be the quick and ea5y solution to diminishing profits. The solution is not that simple and easy. Bottled soft drinks have an almost uni· versa! appeal-to all ages and all income groups. It may make little difference to the man who is the head of the household whether he pays a nickel or a dime for a cold drink-be he business man or skilled worker-but to millions of children and budget· conscious housewives as well as to low-income wage earners it does make a difference in the portion of their limited incomes which TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Sometimes industry leaders have pointed out to bottlers that their greatest competitors may actually not be other bottlers, but other products-the pills, pellets, and powders which are used to make "punch"; bottled syrups, canned or frozen juices and ades; coffee, tea and flavored milk; even candy, chewing gum, ice cream, confections, water­melon-in fact, anything which the consumer puts in his mouth to satisfy thirst or to provide quick energy and re­freshment can be considered as a competitor to soft drinks. Future Developments in the soft drink industry in recent years have included new sizes in bottles (for leading products); soft drinks in cans, in nonreturnable bottles, in stainless steel tanks, and in automatic coin-operated vending ma­chines which mix the syrup and carbonated water and serve in a paper cup on the spot. Each of these methods of dis­tribution serves a special need in the soft drink business; each supplies a small percentage of total soft drink con­sumption, just as the soda fountains have done for many years (and the soda fountains were here before bottles). Industrial Production: TEXAS IRON AND STEEL By STANLEY A. ARBINGAST The nation's steel industry continued to maintain its world leadership in 1958; a record 147,633,670 net tons were produced. Capacity for production of ingots and steel for castings is now over 60% greater than at the close of World War II. Encouraging to Texans is the recent report by the American Iron and Steel Institute that expansion of the local steel industry has been at a faster rate than that for the nation. On January 1, 1949, Texas raw steel capacity was 598,­320 net tons; by January 1, 1959, capacity had been in­creased to 2,381,000 net tons. While Texas capacity was quadrupled, that for the nation increased by considerably less than half. During the ten-year period Texas bettered its ranking among the states by moving up from fifteenth to eleventh place. It surpassed Minnesota, Utah, Colorado, Crude Petroleum Production in Texas Bottlers in every locality have entered one or more of these new fields of packaging soft drinks, but all of them regard these methods as sidelines. All are conscious of the fact that no other method yet invented can approach the econ­omy or obtain the wide distribution of the returnable glass bottle-few believe that any other system will ever replace this time-tested method. American soft drinks were carried to the four corners of the earth by United States servicemen during World War II, and in the postwar era the leading franchise companies of this country expanded to every part of the world this side of the Iron Curtain, using the proven methods devel­oped in a century of operation. More than a thousand for­eign plants have been franchised by leading American companies. It can truly be said that carbonated soft drinks are modern America's most popular contribution to the diet of the people of the Earth. The young giant which is Texas has come out of the wars with new ideas and new visions to enter into a period of prosperity as he takes his place among the mature adults of our nation's economy. The bottling industry of this state, like a young man of hard-working parents who came into sudden riches as he neared maturity and who took his wealth for granted, has now faced up to the fires of free competition, and has found a way to fulfill his responsibilities in making a contribution toward a better life in Texas through better manufacturing methods, better distribution, and better management. It will be hard work from now on-no more windfalls ex­pected. He has not overcome all the obstacles-there will Index , Adjusted for seasonal va riation , 1947-1949-100 200 150 100 . and Kentucky, and there is considerable reason to believe that the state's output will increase substantially within the next decade. Jones and Laughlin, one of the nation's largest steel manufacturers, has purchased a site in Chambers County, just to the east of the Houston-Baytown-Texas City-Pasadena industrial complex. The Jones and Laughlin project has been in the plan­ning stage since 1956. At that time the company an­nounced plans to build a steel mill in the coastal area with a planned capacity of one million tons and at an estimated cost of $250-$300 million. This site is just across Cedar Bayou from Baytown and consists of well over 2,000 acres. Construction may be delayed for five years, but officials of the company seem certain that the mill will be built and in operation before 1969. Production will be oriented to the needs of the oil industry, but market conditions will affect Total Electric Power Use in Texas be some failures, some misunderstandings, and some heartaches-but he has his feet on the ground and his eye on the bottle (soft drink bottle, that is). He will get along. they are willing to allocate to soft drinks (approximately 50% of all soft drinks are now consumed at home). Soft drink sales are conse­quently extremely sensitive to price changes. In one early instance, two Texas bottling plants serving an isolated territory with popular franchise beverages raised their wholesale prices from 80¢ to Sl.20 in 1951. Retailers immediately raised the cold bottle price from 5¢ to 10¢. Within five years one plant had failed and the other's sales had fallen to 50% of its pre­raise volume, and, in spite of the higher price, the plant was making less profit than before the price increase. Index , Adjusted for seasonal variation , 1947 -1949-100 500 500 AOO 300 300 200 200 100 l00 0 O 1946 '47 '48 'A9 '50 '51 '52 '53' '54 '55 '56 '57 '58 ·y; REF I NERY STOCKS* (in thousands of barrels) Source : The Oil and Ga8 J ournal P er cent change Area and product.s F eb 1959 J a n 1959 F eb 1958 Feb 1959 f rom Jan 1959 F eb 1959 from Feb 1958 UNITED STATES Gasoline ................ 208,772 197,511 215,191 + 6 Distilla t e ................ 83,368 96,745 88 ,638 -14 6 R esidual 54,582 57 ,867 54,208 6 + 1 Kerosene ................ 19,828 20,910 17,167 + 16 TEXAS Gasoline ············---· 36,671 35,051 40,577 + 5 -10 Distillate 9,293 11.259 10,872 -17 -15 R esidua l ··········--·--· 7,619 8,398 6,993 - 9 + 9 K erosene ................ 2,134 1,960 1,896 + 9 + 13 *Figures shown are for the week ending nearest the last day of the month. the date of the beginning of construction. Significantly, approximately 1,000 acres adjoining the proposed site has been purchased by the Southern Pacific Railroad for de­velopment purposes. Texas already has two integrated mills-Lone Star Steel Company, headquartered in Dallas but with a plant in Morris County in Northeast Texas, and Sheffield Sted at Houston, a division of American Rolling Mills of Middle­town, Ohio. Output of both of these mills was adversely affected by the recent recession (particularly by a decline in oil activity), but production and employment have been increased recently at the two plants. Lone Star, which has produced in the main for oil in­dustry needs, plans to diversify its product output, thereby lessening its traditional dependence on the fortunes of oil in the Southwest. In the spring of 1958, Lone Star com­pleted an $8 million expansion program which included the installation of a rod mill and the construction of its fifth open hearth furnace; ingot capacity is now approxi­mately 800,000 tons. During the winter months the com­pany has added facilities for the production of black iron pipe for general use. Additional expansion is contemplated during the next decade. Sheffield, the first company to construct an integrated plant in Texas, recently bought additional land near its Houston plant for expansion purposes. A heat-treating plant, completed in 1957, has helped the company's Texas mill to become one of the nation's most versatile and a lead­ing source of high-strength alloy steels in the south-central portion of the United States. High-strength alloy steels are in considerable demand by manufacturers of oil industry equipment and of aircraft-both important industries in Texas and in the Southwest. El Paso papers recently published a news story of in· terest to the residents of West Texas and Eastern New Mexico. Executives of Southwestern Metals, Incorporated, announced plans for the construction of a $3 million semi· integrated mill at El Paso. Construction of the mill is ex· pected to be be completed in 1960. Capacity will be ap· proximately 36,000 tons a year; employment may reach 200 during the first year of operation. Most of the workers will be drawn from the local labor market. Company of. ficials stated that an El Paso site was chosen because steel consumption in the area was increasing, due largely to ex· pansion of needs of the oil industry and of federal govern· ment military installations in the vicinity. Output of the plant is to include reinforced bars, shapes, and miscellane· ous products to fill demand in the market area. Despite expansion projects, local mills now operating are able to fulfill only about one-third of the steel needs of the WELL COMPLETIONS Source: Th• Oil 11nd GIU Jou......Z January 1959• Reg ion Oil Gas Dry Total TEXAS 1,085 71 716 1,872 ·-···-························ Southwest 152 20 133 805 ---····---·---------··-·-----··· ·· Gulfcoast .................................... 80 17 88 186 East 62 1 46 109 ---------····································· North central 262 16 292 570 .... ·-···········-·······­West ----···-·-----436 6 134 576 Pa nhandle ----------------------93 11 23 127 •For four weeks ending September 27, 1958. state. At the time the 1954 Census of Manufactures was taken Texas ranked 10th in the nation in consumption of steel by metal fabricating plants. Texas, with its extensive highway construction program, will require tremendous amounts of steel during the next decade, and huge quantities will have to be purchased from eastern mills in addition to the amounts produced locally. Construction of office buildings, educational facilities, hos· pitals, apartments, and pipelines will necessitate additional large quantities; reports indicate that a record share of the nation's steel output is being purchased by the construe· tion industry. The oil industry, now recovering from its recent setback, will create additional demands. New metal fabricating plants under construction and expansion of those already in operation will help to increase the size of the local market. PRODUCTION OF HYDROCARBON LIQUIDS FROM GASOLINE AND RECYCLING PLANTS (thousands of barrels ) Source: Oil and Gas Division, Railroad Commission of Texu Percent change Product July 1958 Aug 1968 Sept 1968 Oct 1958 Nov 1958 Dec 1958 J a nuary-December 1958 1957 1958 from 1957 TOTAL PRODUCTION....................... Conde nsate-crude........................ ...................... Gasoline...................................... ·-·······--···-·--·--··· Butane-propane -----························· ·····-····· .. .... Other products ................................................. TOTAL GAS PROCESSED*................ Yield per M cf in gallons ................................ 14 ,386 1,122 7,713 5,335 216 424 ,325 1.42 14,865 1,027 8,034 5,590 214 433,517 1.44 14,573 1,025 7,799 5,583 167 424,117 1.44 15,029 1,118 7,917 5,777 217 449,347 1.40 14.856 1,130 7,712 5,805 209 452,340 1.38 15,657 1,289 8,031 6,113 224 494,938 1.33 172,157 13,370 90,462 65,716 2,609 6,248,825 1.38 175,187 12,707 91,426 67,820 3,233 5,197,313 1.38 + -19 + 1 -3 *Millions of cubic feet. Finance: CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN REAL ESTATE FINANCE By JACK W. CASIDN* Real estate finance is a topic with at least four facets which must all be discussed in order to obtain an adequate treatment of the subject. The level of construction, the sup­ply of savings, the demand for mortgag~ funds, and gov­ernment activity all influence the financmg of real estate. Construction activity in 1958 began slowly and cau­tiously, as did practically all areas of business, but en­joyed substantial improvement as the year progressed. To­tal housing starts in the United States in 1958 r~ach~d al­most 1.2 million units and broke a two-year declme m the number of houses built. The construction of single-family homes rose 10% over the 1957 figure and there was a 20% increase-a near record high-in the construction of apartment and other multiple family unit dwellings. In Texas the pattern roughly parallel~d develop~ents ~t the national level. Building construction authorized m the state in 1958 amounted to approximately $1.2 billion. During the first half of the year, construction in Texas showed little improvement over the comparable 1957 period, but increased at an accelerated pace during the second half and made a record year of 1958. By now the forecasts of U. S. construction activity for 1959 are already made, and practically all look for a bet­ter year. Few would consider .an estimate of less than ~50 billion during 1959 to be vahd and developments durmg the first two months of the year have substantiated this pre­diction. In Texas construction this year is running well ahead of the first'two months of 1958 and all indications are that this year's total construction figure will exceed last year's. The heights reached in the home building and financing business in 1958 were supported by an ample flow of funds into our savings institutions. In fact, the year wit­nessed the greatest annual expansion in selected savings of individuals since the wartime period of 1943-1945, when incomes were high but consumer goods were not plent~ful. The 1958 increase in savings held in the forms of savmgs accounts, U. S. Government bonds, and life insurance ~e­serves amounted to almost six cents from each average m­come dollar (after taxes) of the nation's 175 million in­dividuals. The comparable figure for 1957 was four and one-half cents. Rapid growth of total savings during 1958 was experi­enced by most of the institutions holding savings accounts. Accounts in savings and loan associations increase~ by more than S6 billion and represented 33% of the savmgs gains; savings accounts in mutual savings banks and com­mercial banks experienced a combined growth of over $8 billion, which represented 45% of the increase (time de­posits in commercial banks alone accounted for nearly 32% of the increase) . Reserves in life insurance compan­ies increased by slightly over S4 billion during the year and accounted for 23% of the increase. While the postal savings system experienced a loss during 1958 and the *Associate Professor of Finance and Real Estate, The University of Texas. amount of savings bonds outstanding decreased, in both in­stances the decrease was less than occurred during 1957. Total savings in the above-mentioned media totaled $280.8 billion dollars. The largest single item consisted of life insurance reserves. Time deposits of commercial banks ranked second and accounts in savings and loan associa­tions, for the first time, crept slightly ahead of U.S. saving bonds. INVESTMENT OF INDIVIDUALS IN SAVI NGS ACCOUNTS, U.S. SAVINGS BONDS, AND LIFE INSURANCE RESERVES (Dollars amounts in billions) Percentage Savings accounts Savings and loan associations ..............................$ 47.9 i 7.i Mutual savings banks .............................................. 34.0 i2.i Commercial banks .................................................... 59.6 21.2 Postal savings ............................... .......................... 1.2 0.4 Credit unions ---·--·····-····-···------··-···························---­3.9 1.4 Savings bonds ·················································-·········· 47.8 i7.0 Reserves, life insurance companies ········--------------·---·· 86.4 30.8 Total ....................................................................$280.8 ioo.o So far this year, the step-up in savings has continued. Texas savings and loan associations have enjoyed a net inflow of savings during both January and Febru~ry slightly in excess of the inflow a year ago. (.The net in­crease in January 1959 amounted to approximately $24 million, compared with $23 million during the same month inl958). Present indications are that the demand for mortgage funds needed to finance home purchases during 1959 will be greater than that of any year in the past. ~t the same time, repayments will be more than has previously been the case, and this will supply a substantial share of the funds needed. The amount of nonfarm residential mortgages recorded in the nation in 1959 will probably exceed $29 billion, which is approximately $1 billion above the previously established peak of 1955. To meet home financing demand of this magnitude, nearly $20 billion in new money will be needed this year. It is expected that the remaining $9­billion-plus requirement will be met through refinancing FEDERAL INTERNAL REVENUE COLLECTIONS Source: Internal Revenue Service, U. S. Treasury Department July i-February 28 District i958-i959 i957-1958 Percentchange TEXAS ........ . ...........$i,609.225,928t $i,603,274,222t •• Income .......................................... 598,9i0,664 605,320,283 Employment ................................ Withholding ................................ Other .................................... 20,079,86i 834,854,926 i55,380,477 20,83i.050 816,28i,841 i63,84i,04i 4 + s SOUTHERN DISTRICT.. 8i8,599,i4i 842,923,794t 3 Income ··-··-··············-···----····---······· 294,i3i,784 320,337,871 8 Employment ................................ Withholding ................................ Other ............................................ 5,8i4,2i5 425,5i7,609 93,135,533 5,892,649 4i7.io6,996 99,586,275 + 2 6 NORTHERN DISTRICT.. Income ......................................... . Employment ................................ Withholding ................................ Other ......................... . 790,626,788 304,778,880 14,265,647 409,337,3i7 62,244,944 760,350,427 284,982,4i2 i4,938,400 396,i 74,974 64,254,64i + 4 + 7 5 + 3 3 t Details do not add to totals due to rounding. •• Change is less than one-half of one percent. of old debt upon the sale of previously occupied homes. New funds required for the additional financing will be derived primarily from amortization payme11l"s on out­standing loans a11rl the 11rt inflow of savi11gs to financial institutions. As the size of the mortgage financing industry increases, the amount supplied by amortized payments inevitably in­creases. And usually even leaders who are not primarily investors in the mortgage field will reinvest payments re­ceived in the same media. The momentum of the residential construction boom which began in mid-1958 is expected to carry into 1959. The number of starts in the one-to four-family sector (to­taling close to a million dwellings in 1958, according to U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistis reports) will increase by approximately 50,000 dwellings in 1959, and homes fully completed and requiring permanent financing should be up even more. After declining slightly during 1958, the average pur­chase price of homes may again resume an upward move· ment. Market opinions note that last year's shift toward construction of less expensive housing apparently will be retarded, while the cost of materials and labor continue to increase. With higher construction costs and a greater ac· cent on high-percentage mortgages, increased loan amounts on homes can be expected. U. S. RESIDENTIAL FINANCING NEEDS PROJECTED THROUGH 1959 (Dollar amounts in billions) 1957 1958 1959 F inancing Needs : For permanent financing o'f new homes _______ $10.5 $10.3 $12.4 For financing of existing homes ................................. 13.7 16.8 17.1 Total for new and existing homes .................... 24.2 27.1 29.& Less-Refinancing of debt ............................................ 8.1 8.6 9.7 Additional financing requirements ................... 16.1 18.5 19.8 Requirement of debt: Amortization payments ............................................... $ 6.& $ 7.1 $ 7.8 Prepayments (including refinancing) ........................ 9.1 9.6 10.7 Total repayments . ........................................ 15.6 16.7 18.5 Less-Refinancing of debt ···················· ................. 8.1 8.6 9.7 Total retirement .............................. . ··············· 7.5 8.1 8.8 Projections indicate that $12.4 billion will be needed for the financing of new homes in 1959, a figure surpassed only in 1955 when the amount of financing on new homes was estimated at $13.3 billion. By way of comparison it is noted that the financing volume of new homes amounted to $10.3 billion in 1958, a year when high-percentage GI mortgages on new dwellings fell off. Both conventional mortgages and those underwritten by government agencies are expected to join in providing the expanded new home financing needs this year. New and existing homes together may require some $19.8 billion of increased mortgage investment, over and above old loans cancelled through refinancing. Outstand­ing home mortgage debt will expand by only an estimated $11.0 billion, because of an $8.8 billion return flow of mortgage money in amortizations and repayments ahead of schedule. Funds become available in this magnitude be­cause of the predominating loan plan wherein mortgage repayments are included with interest as part of borrowers' monthly remittances. The 1959 extension of the 1958 boom in home lending therefore will be more heavily supported by offsetting re· payments of loans made in prior years. As a result, the net home mortgage debt increase which must be financed through new funds should not be much greater than in 1958 and should continue below the previous boom level of 1955. The demand for mortgage funds has increased markedly in many parts of Texas during the past few months. While there does not seem to be a serious shortage of mortgage funds, there is a decided tightening in this market to the extent that no easing of pressure on interest rates can be expected in the immediate future. The fourth factor to be considered, government activity, while elusive, is one which must be examined in an ade­quate treatment of real estate finance during 1959. Over the years the demands for special treatment in the field of real estate finance, especially residential real estate finance, have been generously met. The inclination of Congress to follow policies designed to facilitate home ownership has CIIANGES IN CONDITION OF WEEKLY REPORTING MEMBER 11Al'OKS IN THE DALLAS FEDERAL RESEllVE DISTRICT Sotu-ce: Board of Governors of the Federal Jlescrve System Percent change• Feb 1959 Feb 1959 F eb 1958 from from from Account Jan 1959 Feb 1958 J a n 1958 >:< * TOTAL ASSETS + 11 •• L oan s and investments, less loans to banks and va luation reserves ... *':: + 14 + 1 Loans. less loans to banks and valuation reserves ---··-·· + 9 + 2 Cominercial, industrial, and agricultural loans ---················· *':' + 11 + 2 Loans for purchasing or carr ying securities .................. 3 + 7 + 4 Real estate loans ············--·---··········· + 7 + Other loans ·········-··------------············-··· + 2 + 4 + Total U. S. Governm ent securities ······ -------············ ······ - 2 + 24 Treasury bills .......... ·····---················· + 25 + 78 -21 Treasury certificates of indebtedness ·········--·-···-············· - 3 + 94 -33 Treasury notes ····-··-----·--·-·····---·--·----­ -10 + 42 + 1 Bonds -----··-·--· ------·-······­-­··--···--·········· Other securities ---···-·····-···-------·---­ -2 + 4 + 10 + 28 + 4 •• Loans to banks -------··········-·--­ + 151 + 194 + 52 Reserves with Federal Reserve banks ·-­------------··--­·-··--·-·······­ - 7 - 6 Cash in vaults ............................ Balance with domestic banks "* + 5 + 2 •• Other net assets ---·----· - 7 - 4 TOTAL LIABILITIES.... *'~ + 11 + Total adjusted deposits --····-· ·· Demand deposits --······--·-·-······-········· + 2 + 3 + 14 + 9 + •• Time deposits ------------·-·------·---·-······-·­ + 1 + 21 + 3 u. s. Government deposits -----------­ + 4 + 74 + 74 Total in terbank deposits -­·-·· 6 + 2 -5 Domestic banks ----------------------·-·······­ - 6 + 2 - 5 Foreign banks .................................... ** + 7 -21 Borrowings ---···-··----------·---······--­ -54 + u s - 8 Other liabilities .......................... CAPITAL ACCOUNTS.. - 2 •• -13 + 9 + 1 •• •Percentage changes are based on the week nearest the end of the month . **Change is less than one-half of one percent. been the motive for much legislation. The connection be· tween the level of building construction and ample financ· ing is a close one, and the effect of construction activity upon total economic activity is of such magnitude that it cannot be ignored. In fact, it can safely be said that re· gardless of the merits of such action, in the event of a seri­ous downturn in economic activity, steps will almost cer­tainly be taken to stimulate a flow of funds into the real estate financing field. There are several issues relating to real estate finance currently before Congress and the final disposition of these will greatly influence developments during the coming year. For example, Congress is currently examining the rates on G.I. and F.H.A. loans. Since the rate on these government­underwritten mortgages is controlled-and it is in spite of discount adjustments-these mortgages are not attractive investments to many real estate mortgage investors. There is nothing in an FHA or GI loan which makes it an in­herently undesirable investment for a savings association, for example, but the current rate is such that savings insti­tutions cannot afford to pay their current prices for money and lend at prevailing FHA or GI rates. One possibility, and a likely one, is that Congress will permit the rate al­lowed on government-underwritten mortgages to be in­creased. If this is done, it would attract into this area mort­gage investors who are currently not interested in these loans. Legislation pertaining to the Federal National Mortgage Corporation, the government-sponsored secondary market in the insured or guaranteed mortgage field, is currently being considered. While there may be little to justify such legislation, stepped-up activities here could result in a pumping of increased funds into this sector of the mort­gage market. Some legislative proposals currently being considered would go much farther toward putting the government in the mortgage lending business. For illustration, a proposal for a central bank in the mortgage loan field (in addition to the Federal Home Loan Bank System) and one which would be available to mortgage loan companies and mort­gage bankers has been proposed. But it is probably safe to assume that no drastic changes in government policy will, even if enacted, be implemented in time to influence this year's picture. CAltLOAD SHIPMENTS OF LIVESTOCK• Source: Bureau of Business Research In cooperation with Agricultural Marketing Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture Percent change Feb 1959 Feb 1959 F eb J an F eb from from Classification 1959 1959 1958 Jan 1959 Feb 1958 ----·--------------­ TOTAL 1,693 2,970 1,791 -43 -5 Cattle .................................... . 1,347 2,344 1,432 -43 -6 Calves ................................... . 146 362 247 -60 -41 Sheep ................................... . 200 264 112 -24 + 79 INTERSTATE ........... . 1,464 2,784 1,547 -47 -5 Cattle ................................ . 1,159 2,217 1,240 -4 -7 Calves .................................. . 106 304 196 -65 -46 Sheep ................................... . 199 263 111 -24 + 79 INTRASTATE ........... . 229 186 244 + 23 -6 Cattle ........ ........................... . 188 127 192 + 48 -2 Calves .......... ........................ . 40 58 61 -31 -22 Sheep ..................................... . 1 t *Rail-car basis: Cattle, 30 hear per car; calves, 60; and sh eep, 250. tChange is less than one-half of one percent. Agriculture: TEXAS WHEAT By ROBEHT L. PARKER Schoolboys laboring over geography books toward the end of the last century read in rococo lettering across the Texas Panhandle the words "Staked Plains." Their teach­ers described the area to them as being " ... a pitiless desert-a featureless plain devoid of landmarks, over which wagon trains find their way only by following stakes driven into the level plain." But by the 1920's this very region had become one of the major wheat-producing areas of the world. It has retained that position ever since. During the 1957 harvest season Texas produced 33,­669,000 bushels of wheat, some 3.7% of the national total of 950,662,000 bushels. About 90% of the 1957 Texas harvest came from the Panhandle and North Central Texas. (The included map shows other important wheat regions in the state.) The 1958 Texas crop amounted to an estimated 73,040,000 bushels out of an estimated na­tional total of 1,462,218,000 bushels, or 4.4% of the U.S. total. WHEAT GROWING AREAS A lfGHJD A. Porf.oncll• W._.a! Ar lNl 9, Ro5ng PkMrw .Ano C. Mofth C•ntral Tuo1 0. 'c•nlrol J.1101 £. Ea11 Teao1 F.So..tltlu.01 G.Soulhw.,1 Tucu Largely because of the abolishment of the Acreage Re­serve provision of the Soil Bank program (a provision which paid wheat farmers for growing cover crops rather than wheat on certain amounts of their land in an effort to cut down wheat surpluses while at the same time keep­ing the land in reserve for emergency needs), wheat was seeded in Texas in the fall of 1958 on 4,287,00 acres, 16% above the 3,696,000 acres seeded in the fall of 1957. But, this summer's harvest (winter wheat, which is the class grown in Texas, is ordinarily seeded during the latter part of September and harvested in June) is now expected to produce only 64,000,00 bushels, 12% less than last sum­mer's 73,000,000 (but still an exceptionally large amount as compared with other years). Late summer rains prompted early planting of dryland wheat in the High Bureau of Business Research Publications Women In Business: Equal Pay For Equal Work? br E. Lanham Associate Professor of Management Lola B. Dawkins Special Instructor in Secretarial Studies twenty-five cents Plains, and, at first, the crop seemed off to an unusually good start. Since early September, however, lack of mois­ture in this region has retarded secondary root develop­ment, limited grazing, and resulted in some deterioration. As a consequence of this dry weather, more acreage than usual is expected to be abandoned, and average yield per harvested acre will probably be much lower than that of the 1958 harvest. Texas crop farm cash income from wheat in recent years has been exceeded only by that from cotton and grain sor­ghum, the latter having become a more important income source only since 1950. In 1958 wheat brought an esti­mated $118,344,000 out of an estimated state total farm cash income from crops of Sl,187,705,000. That is, wheat accounted for more than 9% of total Texas agricultural in­come from crops. Total farm cash income, including live­stock, for 1958 was approximately $2,043,858,000. Wheat, as a commercial cash crop, is grown in four main areas of Texas-areas A, B, C, and D on the included map. Ordinarily about 68% of the state's wheat acreage is in Area A, 23% in B, and about 8% in C and D. The remain­ing 1 % of the state's wheat acreage is accounted for by areas E, F, and G, where wheat is raised primarily for winter pasture. Wheat will grow in any climate zone in the state, hut does better in the more arid parts. Area A has an average annual rainfall of from 16 to 22 inches, area B has 20 to 30, and C and D have only slightly more. Plant diseases are much less troublesome where the rainfall is light and the humidity low. Relatively mild winters combined with high humidity during the winter and early spring months pro. vide favorable conditions for the spread of airborne wheat diseases such as leaf rust, stem rust, spetoria leaf blotch 1 septoria glume blotch, powdery mildew, loose smut, black chaff, and basal glume rot. Insects are a more serious threat to wheat in the milder, more humid areas of the state also. Plant diseases and insects are threats to wheat even in the best climate zones, however, and wheat growers have TEXAS WHEAT PRODUCTION, 1958: SELECTED DISTRICTS Source: Preliminary Estimate, Agriculture Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture Acreage AcreageHarvested Production Harvested Production District and County Acres Bushels District and County Acres Bushels DISTRICT 1-N Hall ---------------------------------------------------------­5,400 108.000 Armstrong ----------------------------------------------56,000 1,333.000 Hardeman -----------------------------------------------­80,500 1,852,000 Briscoe ........................... -----····-··--·········· 34.000 816.000 Kent --------------------------------------------------­3,240 63.500 Carson ..................................................... . 128,000 2,944,000 King ---------------------------------------------------------­3,500 66,500 Castro -----------------·-----------------------------------­93,500 2,609,000 Motley -----------------------------------------------------­5,300 111,000 Dallam ---------------·------------------------·------------­41,500 790,000 Wheeler ---------------------------------------------------­15,000 815,000 Deaf Smith ----------------------------------·----------­146,000 3,665,000 Wichita ---------------------------------------------------­52,000 988, 000 Floyd -------------------------------------------------------­106,000 2.332.000 Wilbarger ---------------------------------------------·--80,500 1.771.000 Gray --·-------------------------------------------·----------­77,500 1,821.000 Other Counties -------------------------------------­760 15,000 Hale ---------------------------------------------------------­ 50,500 1.389,000 DISTRICT 11-S 201,000 4,422.000 Hansford ---------------------------------------·--·----­Baylor -----------------------------------------------------­61,000 1,220.000 Hartley ---------------·-----------------------------------­Coleman -------------------------------------------------­15.400 270,000 66.500 l,363,000 29,300 645.000 Hemphill -------------------------------------------------­Fisher -------------------·---------------------------------­19,100 382,000 57,500 1,346,000. Hutchinson --------·----------------------------------­Haskell ---------------------------------------------------­53,500 1,124,000 87,000 2,132,000 Lipscomb -----------------------------------·-----------­Jones -------------------------------------------------------­44,100 926.000 Moore --------------------·----------------------------------­Knox -------------------------------------------------------­49,400 1,037,000 120,000 2,772,000 210,000 5,040,000 Ochiltree --------··---------------------------------------­Mitchell ---------------------------------------------------­3,790 70,000 Oldham ---------------------------------------------------­662.000 Nolan -------------------·-----------------------------------­9,150 165,000 36,800 89,000 2,492,000 Parmer ······---··--·················------·····-·········· Runnels ------------·---------------------------·----------­26,000 455,000 Potter -------------·----------------------------------------28,400 659.000 Scurry -----------------------------------------------------­4,660 98,000 123.000 2.915,000 Randall ___ ----------------------------------------------Stonewall -------------------------------------·---------­10,500 210.000 Roberts ---------------·-----------------------------------­Taylor ------------------------------------------------------35,400 637.000 25,000 600,000 142,000 3,053.000 92,500 2.460,000 Sherman --------------------------------------·---·------­DISTRICT III Swisher ---------------------------------------·------------Archer ---------------·-----------------------··------------­25,500 434,000 DISTRICT 1-S Brown -----------------------------------------------------­11,400 211,000 8,200 221,000 Bailey ------------------·---·------------------------------­Callahan -------------------------------------·-----------­13,800 248,000 29,000 Cochran -----------------------------------------·---------­1.450 Clay ---------------------·-----------------------------------­27,300 464.000 Crosby ------------------------------------------·-----------33,400 735.000 Eastland -------------------------------------------------­2,510 42,700 Gaines ..................................................... . 1,370 24.600 Jack ---------------------------------------------·-----------­2.560 30.700 Lamb ---·-------------------·-----------------------------­Mills ---------------------------------------------------------­2,000 38,000 3,880 118.000 Lubbock ---------------------------------------·---·-----­2.970 83,000 Montague -----------·-----------------------------------­2,700 43,200 5,000 100,000 Terry --------------------------------------------------------Palo Pinto ----------------------------------------------2,870 34.400 Other Counties -------------------------------------­3,730 75,400 Shackelford --------------------------------------------13,900 250,000 DISTRICT 11-N Stephens -------------------------------------------------­8,550 137,000 Childress ---------------------------------------------·----30.400 714.000 Throckmorton ----·-----------------------------------25,100 477,000 Collingsworth ----------·--------·---------·----------16.200 373,000 Wise ---------------------------------------------------------­3,560 57 ,000 Cottle -------------------------------------------------------­17.500 868,000 Young ----------------------·-----------------------·-------41.400 662.000 Dickens ---------------------------------------------------­8,800 185,000 Other Counties --------------------·-----------------2,850 46,000 Donley -----------------------------------------------------­13,400 268,000 OTHRR DISTRICTS -------------------------­809,000 5,123,000 Foard ----------------·---------------------------------------59,500 1,309,000 STATE TOTAL ----------------------·------------· 78,040,000 3,320,000 to guard against them constantly. Crop rotation holds an Prices Received by Farmers in Texas important position in disease and insect prevention and control. Year-after-year growing of the same crop on the same land, although possible in most parts of the state, not only exhausts the nutrients in the soil, but also provides favorable conditions for the increase of plant diseases and insects. The number of cutworms, wireworms, and mites in­creases under continuous wheat production, as does inci­dence of soil-borne diseases such as mosaic and various 400 Index -· , Unadju ste d for seasona l va riation , 190 9-1914 ·100 '00 2 300 00 root rots. The Texas Agricultural Extension Service sug­gests, as an alternative to continuous wheat growing, sev­eral rotation programs include rotating wheat with grain 100 Farm Cash Income in Texas Index , Unadjusted for seasonal variation , 1947-1949-100 300 300 250 200 200 150 t50 t00 50 100 sorghum (in areas A, B, C, and D) , cotton (in areas B, C, and D) , and biennial sweetclover (in area B) . For areas C and D, they also suggest rotating wheat with sweetclover, corn, oats, cowpeas, and alfalfa. With some of the pro­grams the soil is left fallow every third year; with others, for less time. Wheat growing does not require large amounts of mois­ture, but the recent drouth seriously reduced production. During the drouth years the number of irrigated wheat farms in the state (particularly on the High Plains) in­creased rapidly. Today there are over 300,000 acres of wheat under irrigation in Texas. Irrigation is being prac­ticed more and more in the Panhandle, where natural gas supplies are available to power the big engines which pump water from the deep wells at an economically feasible cost. Yields of irrigated wheat have been extremely variable, however, and in favorable seasons dry land wheat has often yielded as much as irrigated wheat in nearby fields. Over 90% of the wheat acreage in Texas is planted in some variety of hard red winter wheat. Hard red winter wheats are used primarily in making bakery flours. As more people have turned to buying commercial bakery products in recent years, the demand for hard wheats such as Texas produces has risen. There are large flour mills in Dallas, Fort Worth, Sherman, Wichita Falls, Amarillo, Greenville, New Braunfels, and Hereford; many smaller ones are located in other towns in the state's wheat region. Since Texas is one of the leading wheat producers in the United States, the welfare of Texans in the wheat business depends directly on the national wheat situation. A sum­mary look at the current domestic wheat situation shows a pressing surplus problem. The 1958 national wheat crop, presently in the process of being officially tallied, is estimated to have been 1,462,­000,000 bushels. If this estimate proves to be reasonably close to the official total, as it almost certainly will, the 1958 crop will have been the largest in history, over 50% larger than last year's and 27% larger than the 1946-1957 average. The national wheat supply will probably run to the vi· cinity of 2,352,000,000 bushels in the Julyl, 1958-July 1, 1959 season. This record amount will be made up of the sum of a carryover on July 1, 1958 of 881,000,000 bushels, a record crop (estimated at 1,462,000,000 bushels), and imports of feeding-quality and seed wheat (estimated at 9,­000,000 bushels) . Domestic disappearance during 1958-59 is expected to amount to about 619,000,000 bushels; and export, 450,­000,000 bushels. National carryover, therefore, on July l, 1959 will be about 1,283,000,000 bushels (note that this is almost 50% larger than last July's 88 million), the largest in history-more than enough to satisfy anticipated domes­tic and foreign demands for next year even if next year's crop were to fail to produce a single bushel. This problem of continually increasing surpluses is caus­ing an increasingly audible rumble in Congress this ses· sion, the result of which could quite conceivably lead to a drastically revised wheat program some time in the near future. What happens will certainly be of vital interest to the many Texans whose financial welfare is closely linked to wheat growing. CARLOAD SHIPMENTS OF FUUIT AND VEGETABLES Source: Compiled from reports received from Agricultural Marketing Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture January 1-February 28 Percent Commodity 1959 1958 change TOTAL SHIPMENTS ·····-··· 3,838 6,499 -41 VEGETABLES ................................ 3,495 6,1 80 -43 Beets ···············-·····································--····· 2 7 -71 Broccoli ······················-······························· 22 87 -41 Cabbage ··········-······-················-·······-··········· 459 l,040 -56 Carrots ........................................................ 610 1,797 -76 Ca uliflower ····-···················-···-····-·······-····-· Endives & Escarole .................................. 117 7 359 7 - 67 •• Greens ........................................................ 66 70 - 6 Lettuce ........................................................ 96 113 - 15 Peppers ··-··-·····················-···········-·········-···· 1 -100 Radishes ········-····································· ········ 1 -100 Spinach ··········-··· ······························-········· 770 899 - 14 Turnips & Rutas ··························-···· ······· 9 3 + 200 Mixed Vegetables .................................... 1,337 1,846 -28 FRUITS ...... ····-··················­·-···········-· 84 3 319 + 8 Grapefruit -····················-··············-············· 174 124 + 40 Lemons __ _____ __ _-----------··---·--·······--· 15 -100 Oranges ······················-···--················· ········· 43 85 + 23 Mixed Citrus ························-···············-····· 126 145 - 13 •• Change is less than one-half of one percent. Building Con:-.truction: PERMITS DECLINE MODERATELY IN RECENT MONTHS By ROBERT H. DRENNER An estimated $97,386,000 in urban building construc­tion was authorized in Texas in February, an amount 7% below authorizations in the preceding month, but 26% above authorizations in February 1958. Permits issued during the first two months of this year were 25 % above those in the same 1958 period. New construction author· ized in February (excluding permits for additions, altera­tions, and repairs, which represented a total construction value of $9,302,000, up 17% from January) amounted to $88,084,000, down 9% from January, but, for the January-February period, 29% above a year ago. The January-to-February decline in the total dollar value of urban construction authorized was only slightly larger than the normal decline for this time of the year, and as a result the seasonally adjusted index of total build­ing authorized fell only nominally from its value in Janu­ary-from 239 to 235. But though the level of building authorizations is still high, and building construction re­mains one of the strongest segments of over-all economic activity in the state, it is noteworthy that the monthly index of new permits issued has been falling rather steadily, with only small reversals of direction in individual months, since its record high last July. Even if the extremely high July value is substantially discounted, building construc­tion activity in Texas in the past seven months, as repre­sented by permits issued, appears to have been in a gradual decline, although the rate is of course substantially higher than a year earlier. RESIDENTIAL New residential construction authorized in the state in February amounted to $61,293,000, or 63 % of all build­ing authorized in Texas during the month. The February total was 10% below the amount authorized in the pre· ceding month but more than 37% above the February 1958 figure. For the first two months of 1959 new resi· dential authorizations were 41 %higher than for the same period last year. . There is usually relatively little change m Texas from January to February in new residential permits issued, and the 10% dollar decline in this instance meant almost as great a decline in the monthly seasonally adjusted index of residential permits issued; the index went from 308 in January to 279. This index, on average, has also been fall­ing gradually since its record level last July, though the de· dine has been much more erratic from month to month than is the case with the over-all building index. In spite of the current high level of homebuilding activity, at any other time builders would be concerned with such a pat· tern of movement by the index, but the certainty that the present Congress will pass a bill of some sort to stimulate homebuilding no doubt alleviates in large measure the concern of those in the construction industry over the building outlook for the remainder of the year. But assum· ing that a bill will be passed soon, and that it will satisfy the expectations of the building industry, the effects of new credit and/ or easier mortgage terms (specific encourage· ments to the industry most prevalently expected of a bill) will not show up in a higher rate of permits and actual construction for perhaps six months. It remains to see what the trend will he in the interim, though a sharp decline is not expected. Multiple-family dwelling permits in February were con· trary to the trend in residential authorizations, providing further evidence that, despite some recent predictions that this building sector was becoming saturated and would probably fall off sharply soon. the apartment and duplex boom in Texas is not over. Total permits in this area in February were 10% above the January level, and, for the January-February period, were 61 % higher than a year earlier. Duplexes and apartments both showed gains from the preceding month, but in the comparison with last year the apartment category shows much greater strength. TEXAS BUILDING CONSTRUCT ION AUTHORIZED TWENTY-ONE MAJ OR CITIES Residential Nonresidential Jan-Feb '59 Jan-Feb '58 % Cha nge Jan-Feb'59 Jan-Feb '58 % Change Abilene ......................................................... . $3,724,538 $ 1,591,673 + 134 $ 397,319 $ 622,134 -34 Amarillo ......................................................... . 3,208,035 2,132,945 + 50 3,152,339 791,810 +298 Austin ······------·············-----············­ 6,928,800 3,204,500 +116 1,061,550 2,147,251 -51 Beaumont ····------··········-----·----·--······················· 1,182,742 947,968 + 25 1,208,610 549,310 + 120 Corpus Christi ........................ .................... . 1,321,600 1,846,550 -28 2,077,733 1,414,280 + 47 Dalla s ................................................ . 16,027,673 11,039,505 + 45 7,289,484 5,020,216 + 45 El Paso ........................................................... . 3,040,780 4,497,495 -32 1,945,194 2,964,177 -34 Fort Worth ................................................... . 5,175,472 3,715,046 + 39 1,391,918 3,845,702 -64 H a rlingen ...................................................... . 372,700 625,225 -40 155,675 128,790 + 21 Houst on .......................................................... . 22,296,581 18,324, 046 + 22 6,874,653 8,800,225 -22 Longview ....................................................... . Lubbock .......................................................... . Lufkin ............................................................ . Odessa ............................................................ . Port Arthur ................................................... . San Angelo ........................... ........................ . San Antonio .................................................. . Texarka na ..................................................... . Tyler ............................................................... . Waco ............................................................... . Wich ita Falls ............................................... . 1,513,800 5,043,279 181,511 2,752,900 575,722 478,000 6,366, 852 231,100 1,365,200 1,257,0 50 1,564,786 1,017,800 + 49 3,316,800 + 52 175,800 + 3 3,034,230 -9 352, 063 + 64 256,050 + 87 3,662,379 + 74 169,500 + 36 -(not complete)­1,167,064 + 8 516,600 +203 135,050 4,529,002 144,360 747,927 151,112 135,653 2,747 ,385 188,845 227,750 860,149 295,300 1,241,930 -89 2,140,276 + 112 65,700 + 120 1,568,173 -52 109,890 + 88 70,074 + 94 2,729,994 + 1 455,188 -59 -(not-complete)­175,961 +389 183,350 + 61 O 19J6 ·· 7 'lB 'A9 ·50 '51 '52 ··53 '54 '55 '.'.i6 '57 '58 '59 O ·value of building con~truc1lon avd1ori zed. NONRESIDENTIAL Total new urban nonresidential building authorized in Texas in February was an estimated $26,791,000, down 7% from the preceding January but 9% above February 1958, and, for the January-February period, 8% above a year ago. Despite the dollar decline from January, the nonresi­dential classification made a much better showing for the month than the residential category. A much sharper de­cline between the two months is ordinarily the case; the seasonally adjusted nonresidential index rose substantially from its January level-from 167 to 179, which is about where the index has stood for the past four months. This level, however, is about 9% below the average value of the index in 1958, and if nonresidential building in 1959 is to exceed or even match the 1958 showing, permits will soon have to move upward. National forecasts, however, tend to be conservative. Moderate declines from last year in both commercial and industrial building are widely predicted, though it is expected than an increase in public building will largely offset declines in these two categories. Small increases are also expected for hospitals and schools as well as for military construction. The next quarter will pro­vide data for more confident projections of 1959 building in all these areas, as well as for comparisons of activity in Texas with construction on the national scene. As usual, individual nonresidential classifications ex­hibited diverse showings in Texas in February. Month-to­month changes are quite erratic and should be handled cautiously. In the following list, percentage change from the preceding January is the first figure after each category and the comparative showing for the January-February period is the second: Residential nonhousekeeping build­ings (hotels and tourist courts, primarily), +53%, +35%; amusement buildings (bowling alleys, theaters etc.), -78%, +150%; churches, -3%, -3%; factor­ies, + 15%, +84%; service stations, -27%, -42% ; hospitals and other institutional buildings, -74%, + 104%; office-bank buildings, -35%, +83%; works and utilities, +14%, -70%; stores and mercantile buildings, +52%, +33%; and school~, -18/i·, -31%. U. S. CONSTRUCTION According to a preliminary report from the U. S. De­partments of Labor and Commerce, new construction ac­tivity in the nation in February declined seasonally. Work put in place, however, amounted to $3.5 billion, which was 12% above the previous February record (in 1958). For the first two months of this year, construction expenditures totaled more than $7.1 billion, also a new high for the January-February period. Private spending for the two-month period totaled $5.l billion, 9% greater than the record 1958 amount. Chiefly responsible for the increase was a 30% rise in outlays for new dwelling units. The high rate of rrsidential construc­tion (making up over 40% of private spending for con­struction in the two-month term), in addition to strength shown in several other categories of private building, off­set a 35% drop from 1958 in expenditures for new pri­vately-owned industrial plants. Activity in the latter sector is still feling the effects of the recent recession-in fact, expenditures for new industrial plants in January-February were at the lowest dollar level for any similar period in the past eight years. Public construction spending through the first two months was 16% above a year earlier and also was at a new high for the two months. Most of the increase was due to considerably increased activity on highways and hous­ing. ESTIMATED VALUE OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED Source: Bu reau of Business Research in cooperation wJth the Bureau oC Labor Stat istics, U. S. De portmen1 of Lobor Percent change ln59 F eb January~Fcbruary from Classification 1959 1959 1958 1958 Thousands of Dollars CONSTRUCTION CLASS ALL PERMITS .................. .... 97 ,386 202,102 161,259 + 25 New construction 88,084 184,820 143,142 + 29 Residen tial (housekeeping) 61,293 129,235 91,774 + 41 One·family dwellings ............ 56, 044 119,214 85,547 + 39 Multiple-fami ly dwell ings 5,249 10,021 6,228 + 61 Nonresidential buildings 26,791 55,585 51,369 + 8 Nonhousekceping buildings (residential) ........................ l,878 3,107 2,293 + 35 Amusemoot buildings . .......... 336 1,875 750 +150 Churches ...... .............................. 2,310 4,810 4,950 -3 Factories and workshops ...... 4,075 7,617 4,140 + 84 Garages (commercial and private ) ........................ 334 651 558 + 17 Service stations .................... 491 l,162 2,002 -42 Institutional buildings ............ 700 3,355 1,647 +104 Office-bank buildings• .......... 2,484 6,301 3,447 + 83 Works & utilities .................... 327 615 2,046 -70 Educational buildings ............ 5,055 11,200 16,239 -31 Stores & mercantile buildings ...... 7,624 12,656 9,484 + 33 Ot her buildings & structurest --···· 1,177 2,236 3,813 -41 Additions, alterations & repairs§ 9,302 17,282 18, 117 -5 METROPOLITAN vs. NON- METROPOLITANt Total metropolitan ... 71,011 145,798 117 ,123 + 24 Central cities ......... ...... 61,823 124,726 99,703 + 25 Outside central cities ..... .......... 9,188 21,072 17,420 + 21 Totnl no nmetropo!ita n 26,376 56,305 44,136 + 28 10.000 to 50,000 population ... 19,775 42,202 31,729 + 33 Less than 10,000 population . 6,601 14,103 12,407 + 14 •Includes public (nonfederal) administratic.n buildings beginning J uly 1957. tlncludes government (nonfederal) ser vice buildings beginning July 1957. §Includes additions and alterations to public buildings beginning July 1967. t Aa defined in 1950 census. Local Business Percent Chanll'e Percent Change Feb 1968 Feb 1969 Feb 1958 Feb 1959 F eb from from Feb from from City and item 1969 Jan 1969 Feb 1968 City and item 1959 Jan 1969 Feb 1958 ABILENE (pop. 62,500r) Retail sales ............................................ . Apparel stores ....................................... . General merchandise stores ................. . Postal receipts• ................ ......................... $ 102,095 Building permits, less federal contracts$ 2,541,374 Bank debits (thousands) ....................... $ 93,287 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 64,011 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area) .. Percent unemployed (area) ............ . 17.4 31,850 3,370 6.6 -23 -16 -27 + 10 + 6 •• + + 2 + 22 -11 + 17 + 34 +149 + 21 + 7 + 12 + 4 + 7 -10 AUSTIN (pop. 197,000'") Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stores ....................................... . Automotive stores ................................. . Drug stores --------------·---···········----------------­Eating and drinking places ............... . Food stores ................. Furniture and household appliance stores ·----­Gasoline and service stations -----------­Lumber, building material, and hardware stores -6 -26 + 3 -8 11 19 -15 + 13 + 18 + 23 + 23 -9 + 17 -3 + 10 + + 47 ALICE (pop. 22,945r) Retail sales Lumber, building material, and hardware stores -·-· Postal receipts• ......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 14,866 349,180 -2 + 10 +422 + 12 + 30 + 75 Postal receipts* .........................................$ 333,214 Building permits, less federal contracts$ 5,101,900 Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 188,724 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 152,658 Annual rate of deposit turnover 16.1 Employment (area) Manufacturing employment (area) .. 71,100 5.510 -1 + 20 4 + 3 6 •••• + 25 +117 + 14 + 23 + + ALPINE (pop. 5,261) Postal receipts* ....................................... $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 4,011 2,384 •• -26 + 25 + 3 Percent unemployed (area) ................... . BEAUMONT (pop. 122,485r) 4.1 + 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 3,936 - 3 2 Retail sales ................................................ . -12 - 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 7.1 - 16 + 6 Apparel stores ...................................... . -13 + 5 AMARILLO (pop. 125,049r) Retail sales ........................................... . 2 + 28 Automotive stores ________ ------------------------­Eating and drinking places ..... . Food stores ............................................ . -16 9 -10 -5 •• Apparel stores ............................... . 7 + 26 Furniture and household Automotive stores ................................ . Drug stores ...................................... . + 1 6 + 37 2 appliance stores --------------------------------­General merchandise stores -----------------­ 1 8 + 27 •• Eating and drinking places ............. . -10 + Lumber, building material, and Furniture and household appliance stores ................................. . + + 47 hardware stores -----------------­---------------­Postal receipts* ......................................... $ 103,604 -18 -8 + + 16 Gasoline and service stations .............. Liquor stores ······--··-·----------------···----· Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ........................... Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 164,543 10 6 + 7 5 + 21 + 18 + 38 + 31 Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ----­---·--­Employment (area) ......................... . 1,357,868 143,122 108,172 16.0 83,300 + 10 -12 + 2 -12 -6 + 45 + 1.. + 4 -10 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,216,626 Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 196,874 -78 -12 -13 + 20 Manufacturing employment (area) .. Percent unemployed (area) .................. 22,250 11.6 -18 + 7 -24 + 45 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 114,667 7 + 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover -------··-·· Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area) .. Percent unemployed (area) ................... . 19.8 50,100 6,680 4.6 + 8 •• •• + 9 + + 5 -45 BEEVILLE (pop. 15,l05r) Retail sales Automotive stores ------------------------------­--­ + 22 + 77 Lumber, building material, and ARLINGTON (pop. 45,340r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 31,772 - 3 + 21 hardware stores --·--········-····-···-·-···-----­Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 9,505 -26 -20 + 13 + 5 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 865,090 -30 + 15 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 49,490 -76 -44 Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area) .. 192,900 54,500 -30 •• + 16 •• Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 9,066 13,458 15 6 + 17 + 4 Percent unemployed (area) ................. . 6.2 - 2 - 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 7.8 13 + 8 BAY CITY (pop. 14,042r) Postal receipts• ......................................... $ Bank debits (thousands ) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t .$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 9,630 10,299 19,982 6.0 -15 -30 -6 -28 + 6 6 + 7 -13 BIG SPRING (pop. 30,433,.) Retail sales Apparel stores ..................................... . Lumber, building material, and hardware stores -----····-··-··----------------··· -43 -20 + 18 + 54 BAYTOWN (pop. 28,945r) Postal receipts• ......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 21.719 186,675 -2 + 36 + 17 + 27 Postal receipts• .......................................... $ BRENHAM (pop. 6,941) 23,913 -25 + 44 Bank debits (thousands) ..........................$ 21,448 2 + 6 Postal receipts• ........................................ $ 6,871 + l + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 25,590 + - 10 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 30,375 -39 - 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area) .. Percent unemployed (area) ................... . 11.6 467,100 93,000 5.9 + 7 •••• •• + 85 + 1 -3 •• Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . For explanation of symbols, see page 23. 6,982 12,865 6.4 -20 -2 -18 + 13 -6 + 12 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW Conditions Percent Change Percent Change Feb 1958 Feb 1959 Feb 1958 Feb 1959 Feb from from Feb from from City and item 1959 J an 1959 Feb 1968 City and item 1959 Jan 1959 Feb 1968 BROWNSVILLE (pop. 36,066) Retail sales .................................................. Automotive stores .................................. Lumber, building m aterial, and hardware stores .................................. Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 30,090 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 140,270 -8 -19 + 14 + 16 -86 + 27 + 34 + 4 + 33 -78 DALLAS (pop. 641,000r) Retail sales ................................ Apparel stores ........................................ Automotive stores .................................. Drug stores .............................................. Eating and drinking places ................ Florists ·-···························-······················ -10 -23 -11 + 3 11 + + 4 + 14 + 17 5.. BROWNWOOD (pop. 20,181) Retail sales .................................................. Apparel stores ........................................ Automotive stores .................................. Furniture and household appliance stores .................................. Building permits, less federal contracts g Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ E nd-of-month deposits (thousands)+ ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 8,660 12,298 12,972 11.2 -14 18 13 + 6 -34 + 1 3 + 4 -16 + 21 -33 -4 -96 + 26 + 8 + 14 Furniture and household appliance stores .......................... General merchandise stores ................ J ewelry stores .......................................... Liquor stores ······--·······-·······-·················­Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ..................... Office, store, and school supply dealers ...................................... Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 2,044,996 Building permits, less federal contracts $13,974,412 14 -19 + 8 15 + + 1 + 2 + 24 4 16 + 28 -4 + 16 + 18 + 54 BRYAN (pop. 23,883r) Retail sales ................................................ Apparel stores ........................................ -18 -45 - •• 4 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ Employment (area) .................................. 2,305,495 1,149,816 24.1 386,000 -16 + 11.. + 13 + 16 2 + Furniture and household Manufacturing employment (area ) .. 85,800 + 1 appliance stores ---······························· -17 + 22 Percent unemployed (area) .................. 4.3 - 2 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ········­··------------------­Postal receipts• ..........................................$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 18,923 190,674 -13 -2 + 100 + 6 + 20 +158 DENTON (pop. 29,479r) Retail sales Drug stores ............................................. - 4 - 2 CALDWELL (pop. 2,109) Dank debits (thousands) ........................$ 1,933 -10 + 37 Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) -·-···················• 160,500 16,344 -89 -16 + 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 4,264 6.4 - 1 8 + 6 + 29 EDINBURG (pop. 15,993r) OSCO (pop. 5,230) Postal receipts• ·······················-· ··········-·· S Bnnk debits (thousands) ........................$ 4,160 2,629 + 10 -10 + 21 + 18 P ostal receipts• ····-·········-···········-·············$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ·····················-·$ End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ ..$ 10,439 64,215 10,827 8,289 + -72 -26 -11 + 28 -69 -35 -3 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ ..$ 3,850 + 3 + 3 Annual rate of depooit turnover ............ 14.7 -19 + 27 Annual rnte of deposit turnover -·-··-······ 8.3 - 11 + 14 CLEBURNE (pop. 12,905) Retail sales Apparel stores ...................................... Postal receipts• ..........................................$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 10,401 67,356 -35 -20 + 9 + 3 + 9 +307 EL PASO (pop. 244,400r) Retail sales .................................................. Apparel stores ........................................ Automotive stores .................................. Drug stores .............................................. Food stores .............................................. -12 -26 -14 -8 -10 -3 -31 16 + 16 + 3 CORPUS CHRISTI (pop. 180,000r) Retail sales .................................................. Appnrel stores ··············-························ Automotive stores -----------··-·····-----········· Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ···········-----------········· Postal receipts• ···········-·····-······················$ Building permits, less fede.ral contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ···········-·-········$ End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ ..$ Annual rate or deposit turnover -------··-·· Employment (area) ................................ Manufacturing employment (area) 150,613 1,679,610 173,300 114,035 18.1 65 .800 8,100 -18 -37 -17 -30 -8 -16 -16 -1 -13 ••.. + 15 + 6 + 20 -30 + 17 -49 + 2 + 4 2 + 1 Furniture and household appliance stores ········-········--·-······-······ General merchandise stores .................. Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ···-·······-··-··············-·-­Postal receipts• ......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts$ Bank debits (thousands) ···········-···········$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ Employment (area) ................................ Manufacturing employment (area ) .. Percent unemployed (area) .................. 231,546 4,780,102 328,233 173,215 22.2 82,300 13,420 .47 8 10 -2 -5 + 8 -13 12. + •• 2 + 5 + + 14 + 16 + 21 + 12 + 5 + 4 + 2 20 Percent unemployed (area) .................. 8.3 + + 8 GARLAND (pop. 28,15lr) CORSICANA (pop. 25,262r) Postal receipts• ···························-·-·-·····$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ······-···--··-·$ End-of-month depooits (thousands) t ..$ 17,392 62,375 16,070 21,513 + 2 -27 -25 + 4 + 44 -69 + 12 •• P ostal receipts• ·································-·····-$ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Employment (area) ·······························-· Manufacturing employment (area) .. P ercent unemployed (aren) ................. 24,920 1,046,981 386,000 85,800 4.3 + 18 -26.. + 1 -2 + 78 + 1 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover ·-········· 8.6 -22 + 13 For explanation of symbols, see pall'e 23. APRIL 1959 LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS Percent Cha nge Percent Change Feb 1958 F eb 1959 Feb 1958 Feb 1969 Feb from from F eb from from City a nd item 1959 J a n 1959 F eb 1958 City and item 1959 J a n 1959 F eb 1968 FORT WORTH (pop. 373,000") R etail ·sales .... - 7 + 9 GREENVILLE (pop. 20,0341") Apparel stores ... ....................... . . Automotive stores Drug stores ·-----···-........................... . Eating a nd drinking places .......... . -16 -12 5 2 + 12 + 8 •• + 12 Retail sales ............................ . Apparel stores ................ . Drug stores ........................ . Food stores .................................. . -3 -45 -3 + 18 + 33 + 8 + Food stores ........... ................. . 12 + Lumber, building material, and F urnit ure and household hardware stores ·····-············ -13 7 appliance stores ... Ga~ol ine and service stations .... + 4 + 20 + 2 Posta l r eceipts" .................. .................. S Building permits, less federal co ntracts $ 20,299 177,1 25 + 13 -~G + 20 +112 General merchandise stores ...... . 13 + 13 Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ 14,044 14 + 13 Liquor stores H ay, g ra in & ------·······--·­-­--­-­feed ..... . 13 -14 + 10 + 4 End-of-month deposits ( thousands ) t Annual rate of deposit turnover . $ 14,797 11.3 2 10 + 2 + 13 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores .................... . P ostal r eceipts* ........................... . ....... $ 662,954 + 4 + 7 + 28 + 19 HARLINGEN (pop. 31,7991 ") Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) .... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover Employm ent (area ) . Ma nufacturing em ploym ent (area) P ercent unemployed (area) ............. 4,334,272 713,512 370,250 22.9 192,900 54,500 6.2 + 42 -13 + 2 11 •• -2 + 54 + 15 + 6 + 8 •• 2 -14 R eta il sales Automotive stores Postal receipts* ... Buildi ng permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands ) ....................... $ End-of-mont h deposits (thousa nds ) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ....... 32,431 299,700 31,275 25,902 14.4 + + 7 3 + 12 15 12 + 12 + 18 + 3 -39.. + 7 -9 GALVESTON (pop. 71,590r) Retail sales ................................................... . -22 3 HENDERSON (pop.11,606) Apparel stores ............. . Automotive stores . -10 -12 + 4 9 R eta il sales Apparel stores -21 -13 -5 + 6 F ood stor es ................. . 6 -10 Automotive stores -25 -11 Postal r eceipts• ....... . .............................. s Buildin g permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ....................... S 83,141 235,600 80,607 + 4 6 + 28 + 14 7 Food stores ----········­Furniture a nd household appliance stores -------········ -13 -8 + 3 + 41 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t . S Annual rate of deposit turnover .......... . Employment (area) Manufactul'ing employment (area) 62,052 15.1 49,200 10,930 .... + 9 •• 5 Lumber, building m at eria l, and hardware stores P ostal receipts• ............................ . S Bui ldi ng permits, less f ederal contracts $ 9,023 28,100 -95 + 17 + 6 -61 P ercent unemp loyed (area) .. 7.5 + + Bank debits (thousands ) ....................... S 7,137 + 10 End-of-mon th deposits ( thousands) t . $ 15,796 + 2 GIDDINGS (pop. 2,532) P ostal receipts• ........................................ . $ 2,666 + + 35 Ann ual rate of deposit turnover ... 5.3 + Ba nk debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month depos its (thousands ) t ... $ Annual rate of deposit turnover 1,940 3,716 6.2 - 16 13 + 26 + 9 + 15 HEREFORD (pop. 7,500) Posta l receipts• . .......................... $ Building permits, less f eder al con tracts S 9,314 132,400 + 21 -64 + 44 + 162 GILMER (pop. 4,096) R eta il sales Lumber , building m at trial, a nd Bank debits (thousands ) ....................... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ...... . 9,517 11,245 9.9 -24 -4 -24 + 7 + 6.. hardware stores ........................ . + + 20 Postal receipts• .............................. ........... $ Building p ermits, less f ederal contr acts $ 3,876 32,800 + 8 + 720 -3 + 74 HOUSTON (pop. 700,508u) Retail salesl] ....................... . + 8 GLADEWATER (pop. 5,305) Buildin g permits, less federal contracts $ 23,150 - 6 +2215 Apparel storesl] ......................... . Automotive storesl] .................... . 19 + 8 + 29 Bank debits (thousands) . ..................... $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) :j: . .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover .......... . Employment (area) ................................. . Ma nufacturing employm ent (area) .. Percent unemployed (area ) ............ 3,230 4,458 8.7 27,300 4,650 4.8 -28 -1 -24 •• 1 + 2 + 1 + + + 16 Drug stores11 ... ...................... . E ating and d r inking placesl] . Food stores1J ·····~ Furniture and household appliance storesi-J Gasoline and service stations General merchandise storesiI ___ _ 11 6 n + 49 1 13 + 6 + + + 10 + 16 GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,566) Postal receipts• ....................................... S l ,928 Bank debits ( thousands ) ............... $ 3,129 End-of-month deposits (t housands ) i . S 3,376 + 22 4 + 72 ·­27 -36 Lumber , building m aterial, and hnrdwa re stores Other reta il stores'lf ...... . P osta.l receipts• .......................................... $ 1.458,749 + 7 5 + 4 -9 + 3 + 26 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 10.9 6 -11 Building permits, less f ederal contracts $14 ,902,165 Bank debits (thousands ) ....................... $ 2,327,075 -21 10 -12 + 11 GRAND PRAIRIE (pop. 14,594) Postal r eceipts• ........................................ $ 22,053 Bu ilding permits, less federal contracts$ 372,050 Employment (area) ............ ........ ..... 386,000 Manufacturing em ployment (area) .. 85,800 -81 .. + 1 + 37 + 13 + 1 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands )t . S 1,283,063 Annual r ate of deposit turnover .......... 22.1 Employment (area) Manufacturing employment (area) P t•rcent unemployed (area) '.67,100 93,000 5.a + 3 8.. ** •• + 8 + + .. P ercent unemployed (area) 4.3 2 F or explanation of symbols, see page 23. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS Percen t Cha n ge P ercen t Change Feb 1958 F eb 1959 Feb 1958 F eb 1959 F eb from from F eb from from City and item 1959 J a n 1959 F eb 1958 Cit y a nd item 1959 J an 1959 Feb 1958 IRVING (pop. 40,065r) P ostal r eceipts• ..........................................$ 18,74 8 5 + 26 LUBBOCK (pop. 148,725r) R etail s ales ................................................. -11 + 33 Building perm its, less f eder a l contracts $ Employment (area) ................ Ma n ufacturing em ployment (ar ea) .. 1,618,579 386,000 85,800 + 60 •• + 1 +143 + 5 A p parel stores ·······························-······· Lumber , building m ater ia l, a nd hardware stores .......................... -25 -31 + 20 -2 Percent u nemployed ( a rea) .. ... 4.3 - 2 P osta l r eceipts• ..........................................$ 132,680 -10 + 29 JASPER (pop. 4,403) Retail sales .......................................... Automotive stores ...................... General m er ch adise stores ................. Postal r eceipts• .........................................$ 5,742 -7 -11 -5 + 36 + 7 + 8 Building p ermits, less federal con tracts $ 6,567,677 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 174,604 E n d-of-month dep osits (thousands )+....$ 122,01 3 Annual r ate of deposit t urnover ............ 16.7 Employm ent (area) ................................. Ma nufact uring em ploym ent (ar ea) 49,700 5 .200 + 86 -28 -5 -25 + •• + 77 + 15 + 17 + + Ba nk debits (t housa n ds ) ..........................$ End-of-month de posits ( t housan ds ) t .. 5,724 7,084 -22 3 •• P er cen t unem p loyed (area) ................ 4.5 + Annual rate of deposit turnover KILGORE (pop. 12,373r) Postal r eceipts• ................................ $ Building permits, less feder a l contr acts $ Bank debits (t housands ) ........................$ End-of-months d eposits (thousands ) l .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... E mployment (area) .................................. Ma n ufacturing employm ent (ar ea ) 9 .7 13 ,177 63,841 14,590 14,777 11 .8 27,300 4,650 -19 -1 + 25 -15 -1 •• 1 -11 + 37 + 36 + 8 5 + + 7 McALLEN (pop. 25,326r) R etail sales .................................................. Appa r el stores ....................................... Automotive stores --······················­---­P ostal r eceip ts• ..........................................$ B uilding permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousan ds ) ........................$ End-of -m on t h deposits ( thousands ) t....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 24 ,670 430,700 21,975 20,277 13. 1 -21 -39 -1 -3 -52 15 + 13 + 17 -2 + 32 + 161 + 9 -7 P ercent unem p loyed (ar ea) KILLEEN (pop. 26,646r) 4.8 + 2 -16 McKINNEY (pop. 16,653r) B uild ing p ermits, less federal contracts $ 72,825 -43 + 80 P ostal r eceipts• ..........................................$ Building perm its, less f ederal contracts $ Bank debits ( t housands) ........................$ End-of-mon t h deposits ( thousands ) t ..$ 20,251 25 0,970 8,039 7,096 -25 + 93 -8 •• + + 10 + Ban k debits (th ousands) ........................$ End-of-mon t h deposits ( thousands ) t....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover .... 7, 890 12,250 7.6 -11 + 12 + Annual rate of deposit turnover -···--··-··· 13.6 - 7 + MARSHALL (pop. 25,479r) LAMESA (pop. 10,704) R etail sales Automotive stores .................................. Postal r eceip ts• ........................................$ Bu ildin g permi ts, less feder a l con t racts $ 10,366 354,351 -9 -10 + + 28 + 31 + 146 Postal r eceipts• . .................$ Build ing p ermits, less f ederal con tracts $ Ban k debits ( thousan ds ) ........................$ End-of-month deposits ( t housands ) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ··---------­ 20,623 35,7 45 15,71 9 20,025 9.8 -- 7 79 12 2 11 62 + 16 2 + 16 Ban k debits (thousands ) ........................$ E nd-of-mon t h depos its ( t housands )+....$ Annual rate o l deposit turnover ............ 14.175 19,109 8.5 -35 -8 -35 + 8 + 24 -H MERCEDES (pop. 10,081) Posta l r eceipts • ..........................................$ 4,373 + 7 + LAMPASAS (pop. 4,869) P ostal r eceipts• ···························-···········$ 4,073 -11 + 15 B uild ing perm its, less federal contr acts $ Bank debits ( thousands ) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t ..$ 13,750 5,541 5,769 13 -5 + 30 + 193 -1 + 21 Building p ermits, less federal contracts $ 8,100 -94 -89 A nnual rate of deposit turnover ............ 18 .0 -16 Ba nk debits (thousa nds) ........................$ 5,611 -26 + 42 End-of-month dep osits (thousands )+....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 6,63 8 10.0 -2 -29 + 13 + 23 MIDLAND (pop. 54,288r) Postal receipts ···························-······· ....... $ 76,14 2 + 2 LAREDO (pop. 59,350r) P ostal rece ipts• ·················-·········-·····-·······$ Building p erm its, less federal con t racts $ 30,148 288,305 + 8 -17 + 22 + 174 Building permits, less f eder a l con t r acts S 4,156,650 Bank deb its ( t housands) ........................$ 82,810 End-of -m onth deposits (thousands H .. $ 98,557 -17 + 230 + 12 + 15 Ba nk debits ( thousands) ........................$ E nd-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ Annua l r ate of deposit t urnover ............ 24,641 21,464 137 9 + 4. + 3 MONAHANS (pop. 10,183r) Postal receipts• ..........................................$ Buildin g permits, less feder a l con t r act s $ 6,836 190,850 -15 -38 + 27 +166 LLANO (pop. 2,954) Postal r eceipts• ·····························-········· .$' Bank debits (thousands) .......................$ 2,091 2,184 + 4 -19 + 44 + 27 Ba nk deb it s ( t housands ) ········-··············$ End-of -mon t h d ep osits (thousandsl+ ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover .. 9,689 8,309 13.6 8 6 5 + 7 + 3 + 7 E nd-of-month depos its (thousands) L ..$ 3,448 - 6 + 14 Annual r ate of deposit t urnover ............ LONGVIEW (pop. 52,164r) 7.4 - 14 + 10 NACOGDOCHES (pop. 14,770r) Building permits, less f eder a l con tra cts $ 73,772 Bank debits (t housan ds ) ........................$ 12,429 + 57 -19 -49 Building permits, less federal contracts $ E m p loym en t (area) ..... ............................. Ma n ufacturing em p loymen t (area) .. 711 ,000 27,300 4, 650 -30 •• -57 + 3 + 7 End-of-mon t h deposits (th ousands ) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 14,453 10.0 -5 -16 P ercent unem p loyed (area ) .. LUFKIN (pop. 20,846r) P ostal rece ip ts• ······························-·····-····$ Building permits , less federal contracts $ Ba nk debits (t housan ds ) .......................... End-of-month dep osits (thousands)+....$ 4. 8 19,119 180,011 19,377 25,91 9 + 2 -1 -35 -15 + 7 16 + 31 + 26 -8 + 14 NEW BRAUNFELS (pop. 12,210) P ostal r eceipts• ···························-······--···$ 16,380 Building permits, Jess f eder a l contracts $ 117,850 Ba nk debits (thousands ) ···················-···$ 9,617 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ ..$ 11,783 A nnual rate of deposit t urnover ·····-····· 10.2 -6 -55 -14 + 8 -22 + 15 + 28 + 9 + 22 -8 Annual rate of deposit turnove r ···--·--·· 9.3 - 15 -16 F or explanat ion of symbols, see pag e 23. APRIL 1959 LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS Percent Chanl!'e Percent Chana"e Feb 1958 Feb 1959 Feb 1958 Feb 1959 F eb from from Feb from from City and item 1959 J an 1959 Feb 1958 City and item 1959 Jan 1959 Feb 1968 ODESSA (pop. 87,521") PORT ARTHUR (pop. 82,150u) Retail sales --------------­------------­---------------------­ - 5 Retail sales Furniture and h ousehold Apparel stores ----------------------------------­----­Automotive stores .................................. -26 + 10 appliance stores ------------------­---­Postal r eceipts• ----------­-------­-----------------------$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ______________________ __$ End-of-month deposits (t housands )+ __$ Annual r ate of deposit turnover -----------­67 ,491 1,732,638 66,721 61,924 10.2. -27 + 4 -7 -15 -5 -15 + 29 + 16 + 8 + 20 Furniture and household appliance stores --································ Lumber, buildinir material, and hardware stores .................................. Postal receipts• ___ ----------------------------------$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 50,489 578,440 -7 -28 + 70 -19 -23 + 37 + 93 Bank debits (thousands) ___________ ___ __________ $ 53,899 -21 -14 ORANGE (pop. 31,556") Bank debits (thousands ) ---------------------­--$ End-of-month deposits (thousands)+----$ Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­ 19,690 21,342 11.2 -12 + 2 -13 + 4 2 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) + --$ Annual rate of deposit turnover -------­---­Employment (area) -----­------------­-----------­Manufacturing employment (area) __ Percent unemployed (area) -----------------­ 44,761 14.8 83,300 22,250 11.6 --+ 3 18 18 -4 -9 -10 -24 + 46 PASADENA (pop. 58,928") Postal receipts• --------------------------------­---------$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ---------­---­----------$ End-of-month deposits (thousands )t __$ 9,327 81,350 8,833 13,640 -19 -25 + 17 + 35 + 16 + 3 SAN ANTONIO (pop. 555,000r) Retail sales -------------------------------------------------­Apparel stores -----­---­---­----­--­-----­-----------­Automotive stores .................................. Drug stores ---------------------------------------------­ -13 -17 -13 + + 9 + •+ so -2 PARIS (pop. 24,55lr) Eating and drinking places ---­------­--­Florists -----------­------­--------------­-------------------­ -+ 7 + 3 + 19 Retail sales -----­-----------------­--------­---------­--­---­ -21 - 5 Food stores ---------­-----------------------------------­ - 14 -13 Apparel stores ---------------------------------------­Automotive stores .................................. -14 -27 + -10 Furniture and household appliance stores .................................. - 2 + 24 Lumber , building material, and Gasoline and service stations ... -22 -2 hardware stores .................................. "' ~~ + 25 General merchandise stores .................. -14 + 13 Postal r eceipts• ----­-----------------------------------­-$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ------------------------$ End-of-month deposits (thousands ):; __$ 17,526 180,242 14,031 13,226 -2 + 7 -20 -3 + 47 +301 -1 -25 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores .................................. Postal r eceipts• ------­----------­--------------­---------$ 581,412 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 4,658,096 -10 -6 -2 + 7 + 21 + 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­ 12.6 -17 Bank debits (thousands ) -----------------------­$ 523,254 -11 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ --$ 390,031 + + 16 PASADENA (pop. 22,483) Postal receipts• -------­-----·­--------------------------­$ Building permits, Jes• federal contracts ~ Employment (area) ----------------------------­----­Manufacturing employment (area) Percent unemployed (area) ___ _____ 32,552 1,038,650 467,100 93,000 5.9 + 9 -42.. •• •• + 33 + 40 + 1 -3 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover ________ 16.2 E mployment (area) 198,300 Manufacturing employemnt (area) __ 23,850 Percent unemployed (area) 3.9 SAN MARCOS (pop. 14,300r) Postal receipts* ____ _______ __ __ _____ ______________ _______ _$ 9,583 -- 9 •• ••.. 4 2 + 3 + 4 -22 + 17 PHARR (pop. 8,690) Postal receipts• ----------------------­----------------­S Bank debits (thousands) __ _____ $ 5,844 4,103 + 15 -26 + 82 + 2 Building permits, less f ederal contracts $ 103,283 Bank debits (thousands ) _________ _____________ __$ 7,523 End-of-month deposits (t housands )t __$ 9,038 +262 + 1 + 3 +ns + 18 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands)+._ $ 4,037 -21 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........ 10.1 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover ....... 10.8 -19 8 PLAINVIEW (pop. 21,106r) Apparel stores -------------­-------------------------­Postal r eceipts• --------------------------------­---­----­$ 15,745 -41 -9 + 19 + 23 SAN SABA (pop. 3,400) Bank debits (thousands ) ····-···--········ -----$ 2,981 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t _ $ 4,388 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........ 8.0 -31 -5 -28 + 16 + 19 -6 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 109,350 -50 - 2 SAN ANGELO (pop. 62,359r) R etail sales Lumber, building m aterial, and SEGUIN (pop. 14,000r) Postal r eceipts• -------­---------------------­------------$ 10,32.7 Building permits, less federal cont racts $ 21,170 Bank debits (thousands) _______________________ _$ 8,420 + 8 -92 -13 -87 + 22 hardware stores ------------··········· Postal receipts• ------­---------------------------------­$ 59,536 -13 + 5 -22 + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) +----$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........ 15,563 6.4 -- 1 12 + 7 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts$ 305,754 -15 + 46 Bank debits (thousands ) ----­---­--------------.$ End-of-month deposits (thousands+____ $ 47,536 45,311 -12 •• + 12 + 11 SHERMAN (pop. 31,269r) Retail sales ··································-·-··-·········· - 19 + 1 Annual rate of devosit turnover ........ Employment (area) ----·----------------------------­ 12_6 23,100 -13 •• + + 1 2 A pparel stores ........................................ Automotive stores ·································· -22 -36 -32 -S2 Manufacturing employment (area) __ 3,060 + 3 + Postal r eceipts* ---------------­-------------------------­$ 26,841 + 6 + 30 Percent u nemployed (area) -----------------­ 6.7 - 1 19 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 22.7,442 -83 + 36 ROCKDALE (pop. 6,400r) Postal receipts• ------­--­--------------------------------$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ---­---·----------------$ 2.,997 4,434 3,220 -18 -45 -10 -7 -49 5 SULPHUR SPRINGS (pop. 9,890r) Postal r eceipts• -------------­---------------------------­$ 7,429 Bank debits (thousands) ------­------------------­$ 8,784 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t­--­$ 12,067 9 2 + 22 + 13 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t _ $ 5,318 - 3 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover ------­----­ 8.6 9 + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­ 7.2 - 11 For explanation of symbols, see page 23. TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS Percent Change Percent Change F eb 1958 Feb 1959 Feb 1958 F eb 1959 F eb from from Feb from f rom City and item 1959 J an 1959 Feb 1958 City and item 1959 J an 1959 Feb 1958 SLATON (pop. 6,35lr ) TEXAS CITY (pop. 30,000') Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 2,915 -15 + 13 Retail sales Building permits, less federal contracts $ 36,540 + 14 -27 Lumber, building material, Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 3,406 -27 + 28 and ha rdware stores -···············-·····-··· -15 + 26 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t....$ 5,084 -14 + 14 Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 20,051 + + 33 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 7.4 -26 + 7 Iluilding permits, less federal contracts $ 221,375 -70 -62 Employment (area) ................................ 49,700 •• + 4 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 19,902 12 -14 Manufacturing employment (area) .. 5,200 + 1 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ 12,176 + -46 Percent unemployed (area) .................... 4.5 + 2 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover ······--·-­19.7 11 + 76 Employment (area) ·························-······· 49,200 .. .. Ma nufacturing employment (area) .. 10,930 •• 5 SNYDER (pop. 16,324 r ) Percent unemployed (area) ···--·····---7.5 + + 4 Postal receipts• ····················---------------······ s 12,924 -19 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 283,250 +167 + 54 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 14,071 -16 + 9 VERNON (pop. 12,684r) End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t....$ 20,090 -2 2 Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 9,267 -5 + 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 8.3 -16 + Building permits, less federal contracts $ 144,300 + 53 + 323 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 12,167 -18 + 36 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 20,592 3 + 14 TAYLOR (pop. 9,071) Retail sales Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 7.0 -16 Automotive stores .................................. -12 + 28 Postal receipts• ·-·------········-··-------..............$ 8,265 + 10 + 32 VICTORIA (pop. 44,188r) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 25,600 30 31 . + -Retail sales .................................................. -10 Bank debits (thousands ) ·····----------..... $ 6,441 -24 + Apparel stores ........................................ -9 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands ) L ..$ 12,975 -2 + 10 -13 1 Automotive stores --··--·----··--------------··· Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 5.9 -21 •• Food stores .............................................. -4 + 5 Furniture and household TEMPLE (pop. 33,912• ) appliance stores ········-·····------------·-···· -18 Retail sales .................................................... -17 + 1 Lumber, building material,and Apparel stores -----------------······················· -28 + 4 hardware stores ·-·--·-················-·········· -14 -12 Drug stores ---··············---·······----------------··· + 4 Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 28,781 + 3 + 6 Furniture and household Building permits, less feder al contracts $ 143,490 -35 + 10 appliance stores ................................ -22 -39 Lumber, building material, wACO (pop. 101,824r) and hardware stores .......................... -4 + 14 Retail sales ·································-·········· -16 + 19 Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 30,851 -1 + 33 Apparel stores ·······················-··············· -31 9 Buliding permits, less federal contracts $ 361,634 + 60 + 94 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 18,457 -20 + 14 Florists ·······························-····················· + -1 Furniture and household End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ 26,899 -3 -11 appliance stores ······-·········----······-····-·· -13 -20 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 8.1 -15 + 27 General merchandise stores ··--············ -10 + 34 Building permits, less federal contracts S 972,129 -36 + 63TEXARKANA (pop. 50,78 4 r) Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 93,729 14 + 11Retail sales ···················-------------··----···----· 2 + 46 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t ..$ 70,484 1 + 11 13 Apparel stores ···-····--------------------···--·--··· + Annual rate of deposit turnover .......... 15.8 12 + 1 Automotive stores 2 + 60 ··---------------------·---------­ Employment (area ) .................................. 46,900 .. Furniture and household Manufacturing employment (area) .. 9,870 + --······-··---·--·------------· appliance stores + + 25 Percent unemployed (area) .................. 5.9 -16 -13 Postal receipts• ..........................................$ 46,060 -19 + 22 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 185,710 -67 + 158 Bank debits (thousands)§ .......$ 41,755 -11 + 18 WICIDTA FALLS (pop.103,152r) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ 17,237 -1 + 5 Retail sales ····································-············ -12 + 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 14.0 -8 + 11 Automotive stores ---------·-···················--·· -8 + 15 Employment (area) 28,950 . + 3 Furniture and household -----------------------------····· Manufacturing employment (area) .. 3,570 l + 4 appliance stores ·····-------················-· -37 + 41 Percent unemployed (area) 9.4 13 19 Lumber, building material, and ··-··--·-+ hardware stores ··-······--·········--··········· + 36 + 45 TYLER (pop. 49,443) Postal receipts• ·······-·····················-···-······$ 105,638 + 2 + 39 Retail sales + Building permits, less federal contracts $ 869,613 -29 72 ·············-···············-··················· Automotive stores + 7 Bank debits (thousands) -·-···················$ 103,895 13 + 19 ··-····-··-··············-····· Postal receipts 6.980 33 End-of-month deposits (thousands >t . $ 106,885 3 5 + + + Building permits, less federal contracts $ 824,760 7 -23 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........ 11.5 8 + 13 Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 80,970 -18 + 11 Employment (area) .................................. 39,750 + 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands) L ..$ 60,226 -3 •• Manufacturing employment (a rea) .. 3,590 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 15.8 -10 + 9 Percent unemployed (area) .................... 5. + 11 ··········································· s • For the period February 7-March 6. fBeported bJ the Bureau of Bualn-and Economic ._rch, UnlveraltJ of Hoa.ton, for Barria CountJ. i Money on deposit at the end of the month, but excludes deposits to the credit of banks. I Flirurea Include Texarkana, Arkan.au (pop. 19,733) and Texarkana, Texas (pop. 31,051). • Revlaed for UM by the Texas Hishway Department. • 1960 Urbanised Cenaua. ••Cbanse la 1-than one-half of one percent. APRIL 1959 BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS Year-to-date average Feb Jan Feb 1959 1959 1958 1959 1958 GENERAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY !Texas business activity, index ................... .... .. .................................... . Miscellaneous freight carloadings in SW District, index .............................. . Ordinary life insurance sales, index .................................................................. . Wholesale prices in U. S., unadjusted index .................................................. .. tConsumers' prices in Houston, unadjusted mdex ............................................... . Consumers' prices in U. S. unadjusted index ...................... . 215 74 401 119.5 124.l 123.7 210 79 404 119.5 123.8 193 76 360 119.0 122.3 122.5 213 77 403 119.5 123.8 198 77 374 119.0 122.4 Income payments to individuals in U.S. (billions, at seasonally adjusted annual rate) . .. .. .. ..................... ......... .. .. .. ..................................... $ 364.5* $ 363.0 $ 347.5 $ 363.8 $ 348.2 Business failures (number) ................................................. ... .. ...................... .. .. 37 34 38 36 36 TRADE Total retail sales, index ......................................................................... . 192* 194* Durable-goods stores ...... ....................... . .................................. ...... . Nondurable-goods stores ........................................................................... .. Ratio of credit sales to net sales in departmen t and apparel stores . Ratio of collections to outstandings in department and apparel stores .. 158* 210• 71.1* 36.9* 163* 210• 67.6* 38.9* 69.6r 36.8r 69.4* 37.9* 68.6 37.6 PRODUCTION Total electric power consumption, index ..... ................ Industrial electric power consumption, index .............. .. ......................... . ......................... . 346* 365* 332• 341* 321 339 339• 353• 326 346 Crude oil production, index ............................................................................... 122* 125* 118 124 119 Crude oil runs to stills, index .......... .. ................................................................ .. 152 147 127 150 131 Gasoline consumption, index ............ .. ....................... .................................... .. 190 167 174 Natural gas production, index ................................................. 196 184 184 Industrial production in U. S., index ............. .... .. .................. .. 144* 143 130 144 132 Southern pine production, index ............ .. ...... ................................... 78 82 84 80 94 Construction authorized, index .. .......................................................................... . 235• 239• 187 237• 189 Residential building ................. .. .. ............................... ................................... 279• 308* 203 294• 211 Nonresidential building ............................................................................... 179* 167* 165 173 * 158 Cement shipments, index ................................................ .................................. ... ... 180 203 151 192 156 Cement production, index ....................................................... ........................ .. .. 181 208 153 195 158 Cement consumption, index ............... ................................................................... . 187 165 157 171 153 AGRICULTURE Prices received by farmers, unadjusted index, 1909-14=100 . .. ..... Prices paid by farmers in U. S., unadjusted index, 1909-14= 100 .............. . 279 297 280 298 269 291 280 298 267 291 Ratio of Texas farm prices received to U.S. prices paid by farmers 94 94 92 94 92 FINANCE Bank debits, index ................................................................................................ . 257 251 230 254 2.16 Bank debits, U. S., index ................................. .................................................... . 221 220 205 221 200 Reporting member banks, Dallas Reserve District: §Loans (millions) ................... ........................................................................ .. §Loans and investments (millions) .............................................................. . Adjusted demand deposits (millions) ...................................................... . Revenue receipts of the State Comptroller (thousands) .................. Federal Internal Revenue collections (thousands) ......................................... $ 2,728 $ 4,479 $ 2,879 $ 73,844 $327,479 $ 2,732 $ 4,499 8 2,797 $ 83,978 $237,741 $ 2,513 $ 3,920 $ 2,637 $ 74,534 $305,989 $ 2,730 $ 4,489 $ 2,838 $ 78,911 $282,610 $ 2,488 $ 3,902 $ 2,6.36 s 75,737 $275,695 LABOR Total nonagricultural employment (thousands)rr ............................................. . Total manufacturing employment (thousands) U.......................... Durable-goods employment (thousands) U......................... 2,394.0* 472.9* 227.3* 2,405.8 476.l 225.9 2,373.2 484.7 233.2 2,399.0 474.5 226.6 2,382.0 4a5.8 234.4 Non durable-goods employment (thousands ) rr .................................... . 245.6* 250.2 251.5 247.9 251.4 Total civilian labor force in 17 labor market areas (thousands) ............... .. Employment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) ............ .. ..................... Manufacturin g: empln yment in L7 labor market areas (thousands) Total unemployment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) ................... P ercent of labor force unemployed in 17 labor market areas ....... .. 2,012.5• 1,893.7" 356.4" 117.6" 5.7" 2,070.8 1,898.3 359.4 116.4 5.6 :i: :i: :i: 118.4 2,071.7 1,896.0 357.9 117.0 5.7 i i i 112.4 All figures are for T exas unless otherwise indicated. All indexes are based on the average month1 for 1947-49, except where Indicated: all are adimted tar seasonal variation, except annual indexes. Employment estimates have been adjusted to first quarter 1958 benchmarks and recoded accordinll' to the 1957 Standard Industrial Classification Code. t Based on bank debits in 20 cities, adjusted for price le•el. I Exclusive of loane 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 lamily and private household workers. •Preliminary. r Revised. +Revised estimates based on the 1957 Standard Industrial Classification Code not yet available.