1X: 
Entered as second-class matter on May 7, 1928, at the post office at Au~1 iu,
Volume fl.', :'.\furnber 3 April 29, 1935 
Texas. under the Act of August 24, 1912. 
Business Review and Prospect 

poLITICAL uncertainties continue to dominate the eco­
nomic situation. Although business statistics are more favorable than otherwise and business sentiment has begun to show signs of improvement, no strong upward trend in business is expected until the legislative outlook becomes clearer than it is at present. 
Conditions exist which could now and which ultimately doubtless will give a powerful impulse to business expansion. This potential business expansion is depend­ent primarily on two developments: first, an outlook for profitable operations in the industries which produce capital goods and durable consumption goods; and second, the complete restoration of international trade. It is more than likely that many months may elapse before definite and sustained improvement will occur in either Cir both these directions. In the meantime, some impetus may be given business through the work relief program and cheap money tendencies. Other temporary stimuli will probably appear from time to time as a result of the inflationary implications of certain governmental policies especially those relating to silver and gold. 
An illustration of the potential demand for capital goods is found in the recent report of the Machinery and Allied Products Institute. The deferred demand for capital equipment goods, according to this authority, is placed at the equivalent of 18 billion dollars, sufficient to absorb every unemployed worker in the machinery building industries into full time employment for the next two years. 
"It is a measure of what those in charge of American manufacturing plants know should be done to bring their properties sufficiently up to date to insure profitable operations at going price levels." 
Matching this deferred demand for capital equipment goods is a pent up supply of private investment funds seeking profitable outlets. It therefore appears that normal recovery forces which are becoming increasingly more powerful will ultimately triumph over the obstacles which now stand in the way. 
Such favorable outcome appears to be forecast also by a more enlightened public opinion concerning the "reform" legislation pending in Washington. There is ground for belief that public interest in constructive measures relating to industry and trade is growing stronger and the apparent demand for punitive measures for alleged past offenses of industry and trade seems to be growing decidedly weaker. There is a growing recognition that "property rights" and "human rights" are mutually supplementary and not mutually exclusive, and that the greatest measure of human well being will result from a broad partic;pation in the private owner­ship of property. 
Fulfillment of the second requirement mentioned above for bringing about a strong upward trend in business­complete restoration of international trade-seems more remote than the first. It is possible, however, that the growing instability of foreign exchange may force a solution of this problem or compel the alternative course of even more extreme nationalism than exists among the commercial nations of the world today. 
For the development of an enlightened public opinion on this problem, Peter Molyneaux, publisher of the Texas Weekly and a close student of international rela­tions, recommends a book entitled, "Economic Planning and the Tariff" by James Gerald Smith. In the Weekly of April 20 he quotes from this book as follows: 
"The principal responsibility for our present dilemma is the colossal blunder of our tariff policy in the face of the fact that we are the greatest creditor nation in the world.... 
"What the world needs in order to extricate itself from the vicious circle of trade restriction and mercantilism is unilateral leadership. One of the chief reasons for the great expansion of world trade during the Nineteenth Century was the economic and financial leadership towards the principles of the freedom of markets exer­cised by Great Britain and the London money market. Today that power of leadership has largely passed from Great Britain to the United States. When this country recognizes and accepts its responsibility as an economic and financial leader of nations, there will be some hope of real tariff reform." 
No other state stands to gain so much as Texas from a broad constructive program of expansion and to lose so much from one of restriction. This situation is true whether we view it from the standpoint of a market for our raw materials, which market is world-wide in scope; or from the standpoint of industrial development within 

From the monetary viewpoint, the most important Washington developments of the month included the final enactment of the Work Relief Act, the presidential proclamation boosting the price of domestic silver, the passage of the Patman Bonus Bill by, the House, and the slow progress of the several Administration sponsored bills through the congressional mill. In the realm of banking the more significant recent developments have been a further expansion of deposits, continued huge excess reserves, some slight expansion of commercial loans, and a further easing of short term money rates. 
The Work Relief Act carrying the gigantic appropria­tion of $4,800,000,000, the largest single peace-time government appropriation in history, was finally enacted early in April. Details as to the administration and spending of this fund have not yet been made public. It is generally admitted, however, that this spending will get under way slowly and that business cannot expect to benefit materially from increased government expenditures before the third quarter, if then. 
The major monetary significance of the Work Relief Act is found in that it guarantees for another year the continuation of huge government operating deficits. From December 1930, to April 1935, a period of 41Jt years, the direct debt of the federal government has increased by $12,791,000,000, or by approximately $100 per capita of population. It has repeatedly been pointed out that price inflation proceeds, slowly but steadily at first, from unbalanced central government budgets. The Work Relief Act assures that this process will be continued for at least another 18 months. 
On April 10, President Roosevelt by executive proc­
lamation raised the price at which the Treasury will 
purchase newly mined American silver from 64.64c an 
ounce to 71.llc an ounce. It will be recalled that this 
particular subsidy to the silver interests was initiated 
by the President on December 21, 1933, at which time 
the world marked price of silver was in the neighborhood 
of 42c an ounce. As a result of continued Treasury 
purchases of silver in the world markets under the Silver 
Purchase Act of 1934, the world price of the metal has 
steadily risen until, on April 9, it reached a level of 
64%c. At this price, the fixed Treasury buying price 
of 64.64c offered but little advantage to the American 
silver producer. Accordingly, the President raised the 
price to 71.llc and, by implication at least, promised to 
raise it again as the world price approached the new 
buying level. 
The silver purchase program of the Administration 
assuredly guarantees a rising world market for the white 
metal and it is a foregone conclusion that the President 

will raise his buying price for American silver again The velocity of deposit circulation, however, ; and again, the next raise probably coming within a few shown little tendency to rise since the first of the yei: 
1 The Dow-Jones figures for March show a deposit turn­over in New York City at the rate of 26.3 times per 
a	year, as compared with a rate of 25 times for February and 30.7 times for March, 1934: For 140 cities other than New York, the comparable figures were 22.2, 21.9, and 23.l respectively. 
Commercial lending of the reporting member banks has shown some tendency to expand since January 2, J"other loans" incr~asing from $~,144,000,000 to $3,­I 223,000,000 on Apnl 10, a net gam of $79;000,000. As ~yet, the improvement in this respect is too slight to be ~significant. During recent weeks, excess reserve balances ~of all member banks, have fluctuated between $1,750,­·~1000,000 and $2,000,000,000. As national bank notes are 1&retired during the next several months, these excess .reserves can be expected to decline, but they will rebound
llf 
sharply in July and August when the Treasury pays off its consol and Panama Canal bonds. The huge over­supply of loanable funds continues to make itself felt in lower high grade bond yields and easier short term money rates. Recently the New York call loan renewal rate was lowered to %'/( , the lowest rate in the history of the market. 
Strangely enough, the quantity of money in circula­tion has shown a pronounced tendency to rise since the end of the past year. Since December 19, the quantity of money in circulation adjusted for seasonal variation has increased by approximately $230,000,000. This expansion, which has been quite steady, is difficult to explain, either on the basis of increasing business needs for cash or of a renewal of currency hoarding. 
J. c. DOLLEY• 

,Ii. 
Jib. 	Petroleum, A Basic Texas Resource 
~· 
ilt Today the American nation is dominantly an industrial ~ountry. Agricultural products, like other raw materials, ~!!are transformed into articles of consumption largely by \nanufacturing industries using power machinery; and ~~he markets for these products of our commercial agri­
~ulture are largely the industrial regions. m& Modern industry and world-wide industrialization is Pl\10ased primarily upon the utilization not of agricultural 
,OO
:lut of mineral resources. The primary minerals are prb.he fuel and power resources, the machine metals, and eln.he minerals basic to the chemical industry. Mineral ~nl i:esources because of their essential nature play a pre­o~oonderant part in the modern economic life of peoples ;~,,nd of nations. On account of their geological nature r~iininerals are very irregularly distributed on the face of leoilhe earth; moreover, minerals are exhaustible resources, helmd thereby demand special consideration. Taking con­ideration of reserves of all mineral resources and of the 
nL<llignificance of technical advancement, the world has a 
·pnrufficient supply of mineral resources for generations to 
\ rome. In Texas, in spite of the vastness and fundamental im­\portance of its mineral resources, has not become 11jllineral-conscious. In the same sense it may be said that J exas is not resource-conscious. In a number of natu~al oir·esources, including oil and natural gas, sulphur and ~ ,alt, in limestone and in certain clays, in soils and ~~Fazing lands, Texas is one of the richest, in some \ef :ases by far the richest, of any state in the nation. More­~ 1ver, dominant economic centers in the modern world ~lire determined by the possession of a wide combination r,it,f resources and advantages rather than by a single !ltesource. ~~~ Texas has been and still is mainly a raw material iroiiroducing state; its large surpluses of raw materials are 
mainly sent elsewhere to be manufactured into articles for consumption. While some manufacturing of agri­cultural products occurs in Texas, it is in the mineral industries that most advance and growth have taken place. 
Texas in the future will look to the processing of more of its raw materials at home. The material welfare of its people will come to depend more and more upon in­dustrial development within the State. Located as the State is with reference to the Gulf of Mexico, the future of the economic destiny of Texas or of any of its sections is very largely determined by its accessibility to water transportation and thereby to the great markets of the eastern seaboard and to the rest of the world. 
In the future as in the recent past, abundant fuel and energy resources will be the commanding elements of the dominant phases of economic .life whether in Texas or Pennsylvania, in England or in Germany. Today, nations with coal and oil command. In the future the oil and natural gas resources will dominate the basic features of Texas economic life. Upon wise policies for the effective utilization of these resources, perhaps more than upon any other factor, the economic destiny of Texas depends. Because of the vast reserves of oil and natural gas, of chemical raw materials and of the rich agricultural and range resources, Texas needs to become resource-conscious. This need will be strengthened as the opportunities for future development of Texas resources, and especially of the manufacture of raw materials within Texas, come to be more and more associated with and dependent upon water transportation which gives access to the world's markets. 
ELMER H. JoHNSON. 


jgf 	Cotton
re~ 
in(!! 
nd C~tton presents a medley of complications. The crop to the very low level of 9,469,000 bales. This pre­lrought coupled with the Federal Government's land­sented a very bullish supply situation. On August 1, the rer,easing program reduced the 1934-1935 U. S. cotton indicated supply for the United States was only 16,­
:1ie1 
941,000 bales, a reduction from the previous year of 3,549,000 bales. Cotton prices moved up to over 13 cents. 
Yet in the face . of this most bullish situation the Federal Government saw fit to 'put on a 12-cent loan in such a way as to start a holding movement which accumulated a supply in this country that made the 12-cent loan a maximum price. Eventually the accumu­lated supply was the big factor which recently broke the peg price and thus there was given another demonstra­tion that even Uncle Sam with all his millions cannot for long peg the price of cotton by a holding movement. It is another demonstration that such a holding move­ment is another way of storing up trouble. The decrease in supply of over 31h million bales of American cotton August 1 has now been reduced to a measley 800,000 bales. It is quite possible that the carry-over of cotton in the United States will be reduced very little this year in spite of the very short crop if the American peg price continues to be above the world price. Most of this cotton will be essentially Government cotton and the Government will be converted from a benevolent lender into the cotton growers' greatest compet:tor. Will our Government eventually destroy the cotton, force the farmers to further cut down production so it can sell, or put the cotton on the market and thus force a lower price? Have we not had sufficient examples both in this country and abroad during the past five years to demon­strate clearly that any Government scheme to hold cotton to raise prices carries in it the elements of its own destruction? Good merchants have learned long ago that the best way to raise the price of a commodity is to push the surplus into consumption rather than to hold it. Is it not obvious that if the Government had spent even half the money in pushing cotton into con­sumption that it has in trying to create scarcity by hold­ing, we would have got rid of the surplus and had a higher price not only now but in the process of con­sumption as well? 
Supplies of American cotton abroad have been reduced this year more than supplies in the United States. In other words, European port stocks and afloat to Europe are now only 908,000 bales compared with 1,805,000 on April 1 last year. Europe is eating heavily into its 
stocks of Am~rican cotton. · ()~ the oth~r hand, E~~~~4, is substituting foreign-grown cotton for American, in.,: very striking manner. According to Garside in the N ' York Cotton Exchange Service, "foreign mills are · sp! ~ ning cotton at a record high rate, and they are using fl! less American staple and much more foreign staple,than usual." Normally American constitutes about 45 ~· cent foreign consumption. This year it will be o . ·• about 30 per cent. ,4 Big "ifs" in the cotton situation now are: How far wilt the squeeze in the old crop months go, and will it bring foreign cotton into consumption in this country? Can prices be forced high enough to release Government· controlled cotton for consumption, or will such a squeeu merely reduce consumption and pile up carryover? How much will foreign cotton acreage be increased? What will the American crop be.? And finally, will the process· ing tax be repealed? ,~i 
SPINNERS The spinners margins widened duriiiJ MARGIN March to put them in the best position fol. 
. some months. The ratio margin rose fro~ 155 in February to 162 for March. The ratio marg~ was 162 in March last year. The pence margin averag~ 
4.09 d during March compared with 3.90 d for Febru~ and 4.07 d for March last year. Both cotton and yarn declined during March, but cotton declined relative)) more than yarn. ~~ 
BALANCE Total supplies of cotton in the Unit '.' SHEET States April 1 were 10,082,000 bales co •. 
· pared with 10,895,000 bales a year ~ The decrease in supplies of cotton in the United Sta(i and of American in European ports and afloat to Euroj during the past year was 1,710,000 bales. ,;; 
Calculated changes in the index price of cotton base'd on these changes in supply indicate an advance of 352 points in. the index price over April last year. Wh changes in the index number and the spinners mar 
" are put into the calculation, the calculated price 'o middling % -inch spot cotton in New Orleans is abo ' 
16.25 cents. The price calculations based on averl)' supply-price changes indicate a price of about 13. 0 cents. 
A. B. Cox.<.; 



Livestock Shipments 

Shipments of Texas livestock during March 
LIVE­
were only slightly lower than during theSTOCK 

similar month last year. Total forwardings to Fort Worth and interstate points were 3,215 cars against 3,308 cars in March 1934. Year-to-year com­parisons of carload shipments of the different classes of livestock were as follows: cattle, 2,104 versus 2,166; calves, 539 versus 419; hogs, 412 versus 400; and sheep 140 versus 323. Aggregate shipments during the first three months of the current year were 10,495 cars aga;nst 10,490 cars during the corresponding period last year. 
With the exception of Fort Worth, shipments of cattle to the large markets decreased materially in comparison 
with last year. For example, less than half as manf Texas cattle went to Los Angeles and only one-seve . as many to Kansas City as were forwarded to th · markets in March 1934. On the other hand, shipme~ to the grazing areas of California and Arizona showed;. phenomenal increase over a year ago. This was probahff due to the unfavorable condition of ranges in West Tex&I and the excellent range conditions in the Pacific Sop~ west. · ~ 
The customary annual migration of Texas cattle to. Flint Hills of Kansas and the Osage country of O~f' homa began in March. Shipments to Oklahoma w ' 
. . , 
. ·1/ ! 

TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
I 
itwice those of March .last year while those to Kansas lwere less than half as large. These variations probably \reflect the relative condition of ranges in these states lduring March. :1 Sections of the -state from which shipments exceeded ~those of March last year were the Trans-Pecos country 11and South Texas, while substantial declines occurred in 
forwardings from the High Plains and Low Plains areas '1of Northwest Texas.
ii ' 
POULTRY Total rail shipments of poultry and eggs AND EGGS from Texas to interstate points during 
March were only about half those of March 1934. Reports from all shipping stations in the State from which forwardings originate give a total of 76 cars against 148 cars last year. Of the shipments during March of the current year, 54 cars were poultry and 22 cars were eggs, while last year the comparable figures were 96 and 52 cars respectively. 
Ill ' 

Retail Trade and Credit 
~  
r~  GENERAL  RETAILING  
!I  
A  National Retail Or!!anization. -The big­ 

inshots in retailing have organized the American Retail 
Federation to represent all 1,500,000 retail stores in the 1.lunited States. Certainly, general retailing needs a single, ~potent organization to look after its interests in a national Wway, but retailing is still far from a happy, unified 'rlfamily. The differences of groups within the field of lf'J-etailing are as great as if they were external conflicting F&jndustries. 
~· Says Business Week: RecalEng old differences 1' 1which have been accentuated recently, prominent inde­
pendent retailers question whether the federation in the 1elform now announced will get cooperation and support ,a!ifrom that vast army of independent and small merchants 1athat still accounts for the bulk of our retail business. l!llifhey·point ciut that, with department and chain stores in 1ohl.OO per cent control of the executive' committee, the less 
articulate independents will feel that they can't make tt~fhemselves heard. cti They suggest that, having elected a chain store man as ar.1>resident, representation on the executive committee 
~hould be on the basis of sales volume done by the
1
:rs ·various types of retail outlets; that, otherwise, it will be 
~nl federation in name only and open to the suspicion 51that it is a smoke screen for hiding the propaganda of n~he big fellows. 
ioul L e g a I i z e d Retail Price-Maintenance bills 
'.lave never passed the National houses, but they are R~pringing up in the States. California started the idea, md Oregon and Washington joined her to make the Pacific Coast complete. Then it jumped to New Jersey in the east, and recently 17 other states have considered mch bills. 
·~ The main idea is that a manufacturer may require the 0e-1etailer, by contract, to resell only at a stated p~ice. Offering goods for sale at any other price is a violation
11
~f the contract and is considered as unfair competition 
'and is actionable at the suit of any person damaged ~}hereby. ~i It is too big a subject to be discussed in detail, but 1fllin general it can be said that small stores like it because oc it forces the large and small stores to sell at the same 
price; that wholesalers like it because it relieves them ~~rom pressure of lowering prices to meet retailer 1P.emands; that manufacturers of branded goods like it,0 be·ause it keeps their goods from becoming price foot­Ollballs as loss-leaders; that chains and department stores dislike it because it prevents their cashing in on the lower prices which volume permits; that consumers dislike it because it tends to increase prices. 
There is by no means any unity of opinion regarding this type of legislation and what it will do. "Certain groups such as the manufacturers of drugs, cosmetics, foods, and other highly competitive consumer goods­manufacturers of standard trade-marked lines--contend that the California Fair Trade Act has enabled them to obtain more efficient and more economical distribution of their products without resulting in any increase in retail prices."-Business Week. 
On the other hand, the N.R.D.G.A. says, "We are informed that in California, where a state price-fixing act was passed four years ago, its provisions have been practically inoperative, and that the question of its constitutionality, is now pending before the Supreme Court of that state."-N.R.D.G.A. Bulletin. 
In general, it can be said that probably no such bill could be drawn which would satisfy everyone; that such bills are difficult to enforce and that such b'lls run coun­ter to the common economic philosophy which allows the efficient, low-cost operator to prosper at the expense of his efficient competitor. It seems evident that if a national bill were passed, some manufacturers would adopt the chance to hold their commodities to a stated price, and others would allow sales of their products at any price. The effect would probably be something of a chaotic stand-off. 
Texas Retailing, 1933: 
Census of Distribution 
Towns Stores Population

30,000 and over______ ___________ 
_
_________ 
43.2o/o 
31.1o/o 24.6o/o 10,000 to 30,000 -----------.. ·---------------10.9o/o 9.0o/o 7.0o/o
5,000 to 10,0()()_______________________ _
___ 10.3o/o 
9.3o/o 5.7o/o Under 5,000 -----------------------------------35.6o/o 50.6o/o 62.7o/o 
100.0% 100.0o/o 100.0o/o 

It is significant that over a third of the retail business in Texas is still carried on in the hundreds of small towns under 5,000 population. 
~·ales Indexes for March are not of much value because of the late Easter. Department stores, --8 per cent for March, 1935, compared with March, 1934; variety stores, -21/z per cent; rural merchandise, +2 per cent. 
Rackets.-The retailer always has been and always will be a favorite mark for swindlers. New rackets are always cropping up. Crooks are just as smart as you are. 
Don't be casual. Report anything which looks dubious to your local credit bureau, better business bureau or the state association office. When attacked, buffalos used to put the females and the young in the center and form a circle around them, heads out. It's hard to beat a gang cooperating like that. The lone wolf is the animal most vulnerable to attack. Information and preparedness are your best weapons of defense, for a burglar doesn't have much chance if you are waiting for him. 
N.R.A.-Expires June 15 and it may be renewed, changed or scrapped. If it is scrapped Standard Statis­tics indicates that certain price changes can be expected, including somewhat lower prices for retailing. Watch the progress of the N.R.A. bill with that in mind. 
Retailers should show profit under the stimulus of the new government spending. I wonder if it would be a good plan to set up extra reserves for taxation against the day when you will have to pay the bill? 
Penney's.-Sales were 18 per cent greater in 1934 than in 1933 and net profit 13 per cent higher. Penney now has 1,474 stores. The writer was in Oklahoma City recently and noted that the Penney store there has one of the most efficient store fronts that he has yet seen. Successful organizations are worth watching. 
Trade-lns.-Retailers are inviting trouble in extend­ing the trade-in type of sale. All they have to do is to talk to the automobile retailers to know how bad that situat!on can get. New articles offered on a trade-in basis include: washing machines, vacuum cleaners, radios, furniture, shoes, suits, shirts, eyeglasses, rugs, etc. Take it easy. 
Sales Peaks.-What can be done to flatten out the sales by weeks of the months? The tendency of con­sumers to buy heavily the first two weeks of the month is increasing. Just one more problem for the perplexed retailer to deal with. What do you think? 
Wrong Direction. -Retailing is moving in the wrong direction when it supports this sort of thing. 
"The Board of Directors of the N.R.D.G.A. opposed HR 5735 which provides for the labeling, marking, and tagging of all boots and shoes to show the seven princi­pal component materials." 
Chains in Europe.-Denmark-no retail company is allowed more than one shop in a parish or munici­pality. 
France-multiple shops are especially taxed. 

Germany-The 5 and 10 cent store chains have been given 3 months to sell out and fold up. Special tax is imposed on chain stores. Woolworth is prohibited from opening any new units. 
Norway-Trading license permits trading in only one fixed place. Switzerland-Extension of stores to open new depart­ments or more uniform price stores is prohibited.­
Domestic Commerce. 
Labor.-The Gimbel strike in Milwaukee was settled on April 6 with a few general concessions all around. The store was picketed quite regularly by 125-150 people during the Easter selling period, but the whole thing was quite peaceful. Delivery, elevator, and tele­phone service were not affected, much to the relief of the store. It is significant that only 35 strikers interfered with the operation of a store with a personnel of over 1,000 employees! Improve your relations with your staff! 
GENERAL CREDIT 

Credit Trends. -Study the March report of the Bureau in the tables at the back of the Review. Credit sales are definitely expanding. For March, 1935, women's specialty shops have increased the proportion of credit sales 3.6 per cent over March of last year and men's clothing stores 5.6 per cent. 
This is all very well, but look at the collection ratios! Men's clothing shops are down 2 per cent and women's specialty shops are 4.0 per cent below last year. Not so good! 
Letters of Credit.-Lit Bros. report in Retailing the following scheme: People who have sound credit but lack ready cash are, after investigation, given a letter of credit signed by the treasurer of the store extending a specified amount of credit-$25, $50, $100, or more. This letter must be presented at the time of each purchase, and the salesperson enters the amount directly on the letter. A slight charge is made for this budget service. It is a dignified method of making a deferred payment purchase. 
Posting.-Note the article in the April Bulletin of 

N.R.D.G.A. Results of a survey of 107 stores carry this information : 
Average number of monthly bills per biller. 
Average number of monthly postings per biller. 
Average weekly salary per biller. 
Bonus or penalty system used. 
COLLECTIONS 

Consumer Debt Study.-The Department of Com· merce study discovered that accounts receivable were delinquent six months or more in the following propor· tions: 
Department stores --------------------------------------------------------------11.0% 
Women's clothing stores_______
____________________________ __
________ 13.3% Landlords -------------------------------------------------------------------------15.7% Men's clothing --------------------------------------------------------------18.1% 
~~~¥'.~~=~~~~~~~~-~:~~~i 


The last three indicate that necessity and good business do not mix very well. In spite of the humanity of the case, it is obvious that those who do pay, support those who do not, and perhaps this condition prevents the general lowering of prices for such services. 
Of the stores, all credit is due to the department store group for their good collection showing. The grocers certainly need help! No wonder so many of them shift to a cash business or go bankrupt. 
Good Article.-There is a good article in the Jan· uary Bulletin of N.R.D.G.A. on the collection system used by Kresge Department Store of Newark, N. J. At one point in the article the credit manager refers to the 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
"50 per cent of charge customers who had been paying their bills from 60 to 90 days after they were rendered!" 
INSTALLMENTS 

Alexander Kaylen's study of installment selling in Retailing had this question: " Were your losses from installment sales excessive after the 1929 crash?" 
Answers: 
Department Stores-Yes, 13; No, 55., 
Furniture Stores-Yes, 23; No, 24 


Kaylen's conclusion: That the 1929 situation would repeat itself if another financial debacle wer.e to be visited upon this country. 
LARGE STORES 
Lay-Aways.-Dizitz Department Store in Binning­

ham, Alabama, reports its lay-away experience: Volume: 7 per cent of total sales: Departments (in order of lay-away use): 
Women's Ready-to-Wear 
Toys and Gifts 
Piece Goods 
Linens 
Silks 
House Furnishings 
Furniture 
Men's Clothing 

Basement: accounts for about one-third of lay-aways. 

Seasonality: 
Lay-Away Sa/,es 

January -----------------------------------------------------$11,100 5.0% February --------------------------------------------------18,000 8.0% March ------------------------------------------------------24,800 ll.O<fo April -------------------------------------------------------------10,600 4.7% May ------------------------------------------------------------9,500 4.2% June --------------------------------------------------------------12,300 5.5% July ------------------------------------------------------------15,000 6.7% August --···-----------------------------------------------------31,000 13.8% September ---------------------------------------------------22,200 10.0% October ---------------------------------------------------28,000 12.4% November --------------------------·------------------------22,000 9.7% December ----------------------------------------------------20,000 9.0% 
$224,500 100.0% 
Best Months: February and March-Spring dresses. August, September, and October-Fall dresses. November, December-Gifts. · Cost of operation: The Lay-Away department has 

seven employees and costs about $400.00 a month. Profit: Store estimated 10% on these sales. Store Cooling.-Begin to look into the question of 
cooling your store. You will have to do it eventually -why not do it early and get some credit for it? 
Shopping News.-Chicago newspapers have been gunning for the free newspapers carrying department store ads for about two years. Lately, they won a skirmish when a judge issued an injunction forcing the free papers to deliver the papers in person or to fasten them to a doorknob "to avoid cluttering up back porches and hallways." There are many ways to skin a cat. I 
venture to predict that free advertising papers will con­tinue to be with us. One Executive.-Took a walk through his store and this is what he saw: 
"Hosiery displays that were flat and uninteresting; a jewelry counter with pieces lying carelessly grouped on a neutral background that dulled their luster; rows of handbags lying at the same angle to each other in a monotonous array, far from enticing. 
"Display cards with no more news on them than 'Chiffon hose-$1.10,' and 'Pure silk slips-Sl.69'; cards with words misspelled; card holders so high they seemed not even remotely connected with the merchan­dise. 
"In one department, much too crowded, a rough table had been pressed into service to display very fine hand­made linens. 
"A table of rayon underwear in the same place it had been week after week. "Clearance shoes shown with the new spring hosiery shades. "A salesgirl with soiled hands selling a line of skin creams. 
"A rack of 50c ties on a case of $2.25 shirts. 

"An electric kitchen mixer demonstration with the porcelain juice extractor conspicuously nicked. 
"A table end with Cellophane-packed handkerchiefs piled above the side-wall so that they were constantly sliding (they do slip) on to the floor under customers' 
feet."-Dry Goods Economist. 
If someone else had told him these things, he would not have believed him! 
Alterations.-A movement is on foot in New York City to charge fqr men's clothing alterations. A good idea. Can it be done? 
SMALL STORES 

The P. 0. Department. -Small stores can use direct mail and house-to-house delivery of handbills with success when they cannot afford newspaper space because of the waste in coverage. But newspapers and magazines have been screaming; therefore the Post Office Department says that there will be no more unaddressed mailings after July 1-meaning delivery of advertising matter to every address in a city or in any mail route. The newspapers say these mailings cut down their revenues and threaten the freedom of the press. We will probably agree with Business Week that this is a pretty silly argument. This is a group government and the newspapers have scored one for their side in this case. 
TAXATION 

The Supreme Court Again.-This is worth read­ing through. (The state of Kentucky sales tax was a graduated volume tax requiring all retailers to pay 1/ 20 of one per cent on the first $400,000 and up to one per cent on all sales over $1,000,000.) 
Regarding this type of tax, the court said in part: "The tax is not confined to a particular method of merchan­dising. All retailers, individuals and corporate, selling every description of commodities, in whatever form their enterprises are conducted, make up the taxable class. And the excise is laid in respect to the same activity of each of them-the making of sale. Although no dif­ference is suggested, so far as concerns the transaction whic;h is the occasion of the tax, between the taxpayer's first sale of the year and his thousandth, different rates may apply to them. 
"The operation of the statute is unjustifiably unequal, whimsical and arbitrary, as much so as would be a tax on tangible personal property, say cattle, stepped up in rate on each additional animal owned by the taxpayer, or a tax on land similarly graduated according to the number of parcels owned. 
"The gross sales of a merchant do not bear a constant relation to his net profits; net profits vary from year to year in the same enterprise; diverse kinds of mer­chandise yield differing ratios of profit; gross and net profits vary with the character of the business as well as its volume. Expert witnesses endeavored to establish that net profits or net worth grow with increased sales. But their testimony not only indicated great variations within each class selected for comparison, but also showed that in some of the classes, representing the greater amount of sales, the net profit or addifon to net worth is smaller than in a class having less aggregate sales. 
"In several recent cases we sustained the classification of chain stores for taxation at rates higher than those applicable to single stores, and graduated upward on each store as the total number of units in one ownership increased. We found this classification reasonable be­cause of advantages incident to the conduct of multiple stores and obvious differences in chain methods of merchandising as contrasted with those practiced in the operation of one store. The instant case presents a classification of quite another kind. The Kentucky statute ignores the form of organization and the method of conducting business. The taxable class is retail merchants, whether individuals, partnerships or corpora­tions; those who sell in one store or many; those who offer but one sort of goods and those who through departments deal in many lines of merchandise. The law arbitrarily classifies these vendors for the imposition of a varying rate of taxation, solely by refernce to the volume of the=r transactions, disregarding the absence of any reasonable relation between the chosen criterion of classification and the privilege the enjoyment of which is said to be the subject taxed. It exacts from two persons different amounts for the privilege of doing exactly similar acts because the one has performed the act oftener than the other. We hold the act unconstitu­tional and reverse the judgment." 
Department stores should h eave a sigh of relief! 

The Michigan Supreme Court upheld the state chain store tax law of $10 to $250 a store on from 2 to 25 stores with a flat rate of $250 on all above 25. The case will probably go to the Supreme Court of the United States. 
The Dallas News Says: "It becomes evident that in any case of chain store taxation, frequently obnoxious, especially so when the taxation is a palpable effort not to tax but to destroy legitimate enterprise, care must he exercised in defining the meaning of a chain store. 
"In Texas, for instance, there are many industrial en• terprises with duplicated plants in the North and South, intended to serve different areas without undue cost in freight rates. In an undefined chain-store tax bill, such enterprises might be subject to unusual hardships never intended." 
Colorado Saies Tax.-lnteresting features of this particular state law which calls for a 2 per cent sales tax on all sales over 9 cents, except bread and milk, where the exemption is 14 cents, are: 
l. The retailer is allowed 5 per cent to cover col­lection costs. 
· 2. Hotel sellers, all persons who sell at retail from other than a regular, established store, must post a $500 bond forfeitable if they do not report regularly to the state treasurer. 
3. House-to·house canvassers must put up a bond of $500 each and make the same reports. Such a law begins to make sense. 
Other Sales Taxes.-Arizona, South Dakota, and Washington have also adopted a 2 per cent sales tax. Texas has not acted on revenue measures yet. 
CONSUMER COOPERATIVES 

In England.-About 7,000,000 people belong to retail cooperative societies representing about 60 per cent of the families in Great Britain . . Cooperative sales increased 6.7 per cent in 1934. A national promotion to carry Consumer Cooperatives to the rural areas has been undertaken by the wholesaler society in behalf of its retail members. 
In the United States.-6,600 Consumer cooperative societies with 1,800,000 men:bers. Increase in member­ship, 40 per cent in 6 years. Sales, $365,000,000 in 1934. 
The Cooperative League. 

To Think About.-The Cloquet Cooperative Society of Cloquet, Minnesota, operates four general merchan· dise stores, one filling station, and a coal department: 
Sales first six months of 1934·---------------------·----.$344,879 
~~~~~5:ar:i~...::::::::::::=::::::::::::::=~_::::::~~:===:::::::::: ~t~ 

Stock-Turn (times per year) --·-----·-·--------·--··-·--··--12.29 There is plenty to think about in these figures. 
E. G. SMITH. 
CREDIT RATIOS 

Greater liberality in credit extension as compared with a year ago is shown by the March credit ratios in more than 60 Texas stores. The average ratio of credit sales to net sales in this group of stores was 61.3 per cent in March against 57.8 per cent in the similar month last year, an increase of 3.5 per cent. The ratio of collections to outstanding accounts, however, at 36.l per cent was more than 1 per cent below that of a year ago. 
There is considerable variation in these ratios as be­tween the different cities. In Abilene, for example, the ratio of credit sales to net sales during March was 56.3 per cent while, for Dallas it was 64.3 per cent; and the ratios of collectiOns · to outstaiidings for the two cities different types of stores. The large and small department were ·25.9 per cent and 35. per cent respectively. It stores showed about the same percentage of credit sales appears therefore that Dallas has both a more liberal to net sales during March, but the large ones had much credit . policy and a more rapid turnover of credit better success in collections. The two sets of ratios in accounts than Abilene. the other three types of stores, dry goods-apparel stores, 
There is also considerable variation in the liberality of women's specialty shops and men's clothing stores, credit extensions and in the ratio of collections in the increased in the order in which the stores are given. 
MARCH CREDIT RATIOS IN TEXAS RETAIL STORES 
(Expressed in Per Cent) 
Number of Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of Store• Credit Sales Collections to Credit Salaries Reporting to Net Sales Outslaodincs to Credit Sales 1935 1934 1935 1934 1935 1934 1935 1934 

All Stores 37.2 1.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------62 61 61.3 57.8 36.l 1.4 Stores Grouped by Cities: 
Abilene -----------------------------------------------------------------------------5 4 56.3 57.5 25.9 29.6 1.9 1.6 
Austin 59.3 42.0 42.6 1.1 1.2
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 3 59.5 Beawnont ------------------------------------------·--··----------------------------------3 3 61.9 56.9 36.9 35.0 1.7 1.9 Dallas --------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 8 68.2 64.3 35.0 38.6 1.3 1.4 
Fort Worth 6 6 57.3 55.7 32.1 32.8 1.6 1.5 Houston 7 7 57.9 54.1 41.3 37.1 1.6 1.3 San Antonio ----------------------------------------------------------------·---3 3 60.7 55.5 39.6 44.5 0.9 1.1 Waco ---·-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 4 62.0 60.0 34.8 32.7 1.5 1.2 
All Others -----------------------------------------------------------------------------· 23 23 57.1 54.4 34.9 36.0 2.0 1.8 
Stores Grouped According to Type of Store: Department Stores (Annual Volume Over $500,000) --------------18 18 59.9 56.4 37.2 37.5 1.4 1.4 Department Stores (Annual Volwne Under $500,000) ----·······-19 19 60.8 58.3 29.8 31.5 2.0 1.8 Dry Good&--Apparel Stores ········-··········-··-···-·······--···-·······-·-·····-··· 4 4 60.7 59.4 30.9 33.1 2.0 2.2 Women's Specialty Shops -----·········-·····-··············--·················-···· 12 11 66.5 62.9 35.3 39.3 1.1 1.0 Men's Clothing Stores .... ----···········-·······-··········-··-··········-·······-··· 9 9 67.2 61.6 38.2 40.2 2.0 1.9 
Stores grouped according to Volume of Net Sales during 1934: $3,500,000 down to $2,000,000 ··--···············-···-·-···-··················-··· 7 7 59.9 58.1 39.4 E-9.7 1.1 1.3 $2,000,000 down to $1,000,000 ........................................... ·-·········-9 9 59.2 59.l 34.2 36.9 1.5 1.2 $1,000;000 down to $300,000 --·--·····-·········-·····-···-····-····-···-···-17 17 52.5 52.0 43.4 45.5 2.0 1.6 Less than $300,000_____ ~····················-···········-······-·:-·-·-·-··-··· 29 28 61.6 56.8 34.7 39.0 2.3 2.4 
NoT&: The ratios shown for each year, jn the order in which they appear from left to right, are obtained by the following computations: (1) Credit aale1 tiivided by net ealea. (2) Collections during the month divided by the total of accounts unpaid on the first of the month. (3) Salaries of the credit department ,/ivided by credit aales. 
The data are reported to the Bureau of Busineea Re1earch by Texas retail atorl'la. 
Subscription to the 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
$1.00 per year 

TEXAS COMMERCIAL FAILURES 
Mar. Feb. Mar. First Quarter 1935* 1935 1934* 1935 1934 
TEXAS RETAIL SALES* 
Percentage Chance in Number Dollar Salea of Year-to-date Store1 Mar., 1935 Mar., 1935 1935 from Report· from from Year~to·date in& Feb., 1935 Mar., 1934 1934 
Abilene ···-··············-·············-5 + 37.0 -15.3 5.9 Austin ···-------············-············ 8 + 33.8 0.7 + 4.7 Beaumont ·········-············-··-···· 5 + 30.7 1.4 + 4.1 Corsicana ··-----·-·············-···--3 + 24.0 8.0 0.8 

Number ················­Average Weekly  29  19  21  72  79  Dallas -----···············-······-···-·10 El Paso ---······-·····-···-··········· 3  + 17.9 + 39.0  + 3.9 3.8  + 8.4 1.4  
Nwnber  ·······---····  6  5  4  6  6  Fort Wroth  ··········-···············­ 6  +24.4  7.7  0.6  
Liabilities  ·······-····· $404,000 $184,000 $435,000 $967,000 $1,206,000  Houston  ·-········-··-·-···············--­ 9  + 26.2  -14.8  5.0  
Assets  ·····--·-···-··-··· $183,000 $ 68,000 $321,000 $405,000 $  682,000  Lubbock  ·-·--··················----­-·  3  + 39.2  -19.1  -15.5  
Average Liabilities per Failure ........$ 13,931 $  9,684 $ 20,714 $ 13,431 $  15,266  Port Arthur San Antonio  ···-······················ 3 ···-····..-··········-···· 4  + 18.4 + 29.7  -25.3 0.6  -17.5 + 5.4  
*Five week1. ~OTE: From Dun  &  Bradstrl'et,  Inc.  Temple ··-··-···-·····-·­·············-· 3 Tyler ····---------------------­--·····­3 Waco ·-----······-··-··········-·-········ 4  + 32.3 + 25.8 + 30.7  -- 7.7 2.8 9.5  +  7.6 0.3 3.0  
COTTON MANUFACTURING IN TEXAS  Wichita  Falls  ·····--------···········  3  + 35.9  - 7.8  3.6  
Mar. 1935  Feb. 1935  Mar. 1934  First Quarter 1935 1934  All Others ··-···-···-·········--------18 STATE ····-·············--·········-­--90  + 35.6 + 26.5  -13.7 5.4  4.7 + 1.0  
Bales of Cotton Used ·-----------------­Yards of Cloth: Produced* -------­ 3,947 4,954  3,365 4,849  6,274 6,355  11,379 13,341  17,424 17,410  Department Stores (Annual Volwne over $500,000) ____ l 9 Department Stores (Annual Volume under $500,000). 32  + 29.5 + 34.1  3.5 -13.3  +  1.7 7.3  
Sold* -----··~---­--­-· 4,364 Unfilled Orders• 8,478 Active Spindles ..._133,400 Spindle Hours• .... 27,461  3,177 9,007 136,369 29,147  4,657 11,355 165,413 51,494  12,902 89,119  19,075 147,429  Dry Goods-Apparel Stores .10 Women's Specialty Shops _ .. 16 Men's Clothing Stores.._. ___ .__ 13 '"The classification by towns include! all  + 27.3 + 16.0 + 4.8 -14.0 -4.2 -5.7 of the stores reportinc  7.6 + 4.4 + 9.5 as indicat~d  
•Jn thousnnde.  in the classification by types of stores.  

I\orE: Hepurted to the Bureau of Busine!! Research by 17 Texas cotton mills. :\"oTE: Reported to the Bureau of Business Rese<:arch by Texas retail stores. 
STOCK PRICES 

Mar. Feb. Mar. 1935 1935 1934 Standard Indexes of the Securities Markets: ~l Stocks Combined -------------------63.9 67.8 77.1 351 Industrials ---·---·-----------------------75.4 80.0 84.9 33 Rails ----------------------------------------27.8 31.8 48.7 37 Utilities ------·-------------------------·-53.2 54.5 75.3 
NoTE: From Standard Statistics Co.• Inc. 
COMMODITY PRICES 
Mar. Feb. Mar. 1935 1935 1934 

Wholesale Prices: 
U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (19'26 =100) --·----·----79.4 79.5 n.7 
124.3 108.2
The Annalist 0913 =100) ________ { 1~~:r. 
74.0* 64.5* Dun's ---·--------------------------------------_$172.46 $176.81 $163.~
Bradstreet's ___ ___ _______________ _______ __ __ $ 9.66 

$ 9.80 $ 9.17 
Farm Prices: 

U. S. Department of Agricul­ture (1910-1914 =100) 108.0 111.0 84.ot 

U.S. 	Bureau of Labor Statistics (1926 = 100) ------------78.3 79.1 61.3 Retail Prices: Food <U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1913 = 100) -----------121.7 122.0 108.5 
Department 	Stores (Fairchild's Publications, Jan. 1931 =1()()) -------------------------------86.3 86.6 89.6t 
•On gold basis based on exchange quot&tions for France, Switzerland, Holland; 

Belgium 	included to March 12. 
+Revised. 

PETROLEUM 
Daily Average Production 
(In Barrels) 
Mar. 'Feb. Mar. 1935 1935 1934 
Panhandle ------------------------------63,650 61,650 55,300 
North Texas ---------------------------57,550 57,150 55,400 

West Central Texas___ 
_____________ 25,750 25,750 26,750 West Texas ------------------------------152,900 150,200 135,850 
East Central Texas__
______ ________ 52,150 51,650 43,650 East Texas --------------------------------444,850 435,000 432,250 Conroe -------------------------------------47,400 47,450 48,400 Southwest Texas ------···------------60,050 59,100 46,050 Coastal Texas ------·---------------------133,000 128,250 111,850 STATE -------------------------------------1,037,300 1,016,200 955,500 UNITED STATES ___ __ _________ _____2,574,550 
2,522,200 2,351,650 Imports ------------·---·-----·--------------130,964 125,536 108,143 

NoT&: From American Petroleum Institute. 
New Development in Texas 
Mar. Feb. Mar. First Quarter 1935 1935 19H 1935* 1934• Permits for new wells ___ __ ____ l,122 9'24 678 3,283 2,278 Wells comleted --------------------974 788 688 2,735 2,021 
Oil wells -------·--·-----------·----·---757 587 510 2,059 1,394 Gas wells -----------·-·--------·------31 16 18 73 67 Initial Production (In 
Thousands of Barrels) ....2,899 2,488 2,098 7,971 6,435 

•).1 Wf:f•ks. 
NOTE: From The Oil IPeekly. 
Gasoline sales as indicated by taxes collected by the State Comptroller were: February, 1935, 66,593,000 gallons; January, 1935, 71,947,000 gallons; February, 1934, 58,631,000 gallons. 
TEXAS CHARTERS 
Mar. Feb. Mar. .First Quarter 1935 1935• 1934 1935 1934 __
___ ___$1,900
Capitalizationt $1,679 Sl,264 $6,607 $5,13.5 
Number ----------------------415

162 147 139 495 
Classification of new corporations: Oil --------------------------38 40 36 122 101 
Public Service 1 1 4
--------	5 
Manufacturing 21 3l 21 84 57 Banking-Finance 10 7 6 26 20 Real Estate-
Building 16 8 7 34 32 Transportation 1 3 3 7 8 Merchandising 47 33 36 131 IM General --------------------28 24 30 87 88 
Foreign Permits 30 23 29 86 96 Number-capitalized at $5,000.__ __ 

less than 57 54 62 179 178 Number-capitalized at $100,000 or more.____ 1 1 1 11 8* 
•R cviseJ. 
t in 1hc.usands. 
i\on : Compil<"d from recorc.Js of thf' Secr~1ary o f Sra1r . 

BANKING STATISTICS 
On Millions of Dollars) 
Mar. Feb. Mar. 
1935 1935 1934 
Dallae United DaHas United Dallae United 

Diatrict State1 District Stale5 District Statet 

Debits to indi­vidual accounts $735* $39,779* $576 $27,420 $491 $28,043 Condi1ion of reportinc Apr. 3, Feb. 27, Mar. 28. member bank• on 1935 1935 1934 Loans and Invest-ments-total __
_ ~7 18,509 413 18,321 407 17,472 Loans on Securi­ties-total 48 2,974 49 2,9')5 64 3,514 To Brokers and Dealers: In New York _ 5 720 5 726 
t t 

Outside New York --------------1 170 1 166 t t To Others ~ 2,084 43 2,103 t t 
Acceptances and Commercial Paper ----------------3 436 3 440 t t 
Loans on Real Estate ---------------25 966 23 965 t t
Other Loans _____ __ 111 3,233 112 3,198 t t 
U. S. Government Direct Obliga­tions ---------·-------163 7,280 161 7,22.7 t t 
Obligations Fully Guaranteed by 
U. S. Gov't __ _ 
36 

702 24 660 t t Other Securities .. 41 2,918 41 2,836 
t t 

Reserve with Fed­eral Reserve Banks ----------------70 3,047 86 3,454 79 2,572
Cash in Vault __
__ 
9 
270 9 286 9 24:Z 

Net Demand De­posits ---·---·--------317 14,087 312 14,175 279 11,794Time Deposits __ __ 122 4,476 
124 4,449 122 4,419

Government De­posits ----·--·--------52 1,016 52 1,019 58 1,413Due from Banks._ 149 1,732 163 1,850 125 1,519Due to Banks.._.__ _ 
141 
4,285 149 4,462 134 3,447

Borrowings from Federal Re­serve Banks __ _
_ ___ _ 1 9 
*.; we«ks. 
t>()1 a"ailable. 
D(·b~ts for the DaJlas Fcderal Reserve District du'ring the first ·quarter of 1935 


wen· ~l.86~.000,000 as compared with 81.502,000,000 during the same period of lQ."-U. Dcblti; for all Federal Reser\'e Districts during the 6rst quarter of 1935 :;rr93s4~.606.000,000 as compare-d with SS0,953.000,000 during the tame perl.od 
:\oT£: From Federal Reserv~ Board. 

LUMBER 	CEMENT 
On Board Feet) 	(In Thousands of Barrels) 
Mar. Feb . Mar. Mar. Feb. Mar. Fint Quartt"f 1935 1935 1934 1935 1935 1934 1935 1934 
Southern Pine Mills: 
Texas Plants 
Average Weekly Production 
Production 278 221 433 793 908 per Unit. ---------------------------------------229,478 229,216 215,471 Shipments 327 229 246 796 883 
Average Weekly Shipments 
Stocks ------------669 717 579 

per Unit ----------------------------------------241,421 229,564 203,190 United States
Average Unfilled Orders per 	Production --4,299 3,053 5,257 10,554 13,204
Unit, End of Month.__________________582,271 

540,845 782,866 	Shipments -··· 4,877 2,952 4,618 10,675 11,348 Stocks _________ .21,319 21,897" 21,422*
NOTS: From Southern Pine AHociation. 
Capacity BUILDING PERMITS Operated _18.9% 14.9% 23.0% 
•Revis~d
Mar. Feb. Mar. First Quarter NOTE: From U. S. Department of Interior. Bureau of Mines.
1935 1935 1934 1935 1934 

Abilene $ 1,944 s 6,170 $ 970 $ 26,389 s 42,045 MARCH CARLOAD MOVEMENT OF POULTRY AND EGGS
Amarillo 28,773 10,307 8,378 60,384 76,315Austin 221,254 176,590 85,406 2,133,647 145,494 Shipments from Texas Stations Beaumont 37,350 14,269 17,690 100,484 38,575 Can of PoultryBrownsville 20,310 17,135 21,285 44,863 Live Dreued Can of Ecc• 
Brownwood 3,100 	Chicken• Turkey• Chicken• Tnrkey•
115 325 4,990 1,655 
1935 1934 1935 1934 1935 	1934 1935 1934 1935 1934

Cleburne 2,515 9,350 18,815 4,450 Corpus Christi 54,437 23,487 13,215 114,005 89,474 43 78 2 47 93
TOTAL _____________ 12 26 1 Corsicana 6,000 8,870 27,450 
21,895 44,800 Intrastate ----------4 2 25 41 Dallas 341,549 309,179 347,551 1,095,048 856,642 Interstate ---·----------8 24 1 43 78 2 22 52 
Del Rio 2,835 4,125 26,430 9,795 29,153 Interstate Shipments ClassifiedDenison 200 6,410 12,500 7,470 14,700 New York 2 18 1 14 33 8 9EI Paso 19,712 42,390 11,525 77,659 73,566 Illinois ----------------___ _ 4 8 5 4Fon Worth 88,150 49,400 78,600 517,039 171,020 Massachusetts _ I 4 10 1Galveston 27,307 208,968 36,624 261,448 93,774 
New Jersey __________ _ 	5 2 15Harlingen 7,225 5,840 5,600 17,492 22,130 Pennsylvania __ ___ _ 8 9 IHouston 318,768 443,179 301,840 1,283,447 714,760 

Louisiana 2 	4 5Jacksonville 17,100 5,320 2,000 22,545 14,375 Connecticut ________ 5 5Laredo 4,135 2,150 1,200 9,035 1,900 Missouri ----·--___ 1Longview 154,600 486,000 39,000 1,008,600 95,320 

Georgia ____________ _ 
1 1 2

Lubbock 5,213 16,505 7,706 31,281 19,794 California _____ 3 4 4 3 3 4McAllen 4,825 2,400 550 69,110 2,875 
Alabama ___________ 	2Marshall 6,750 4,712 7,725 13,472 11,150 

Palestine 	Florida -------------­2
24,947 5,375 14,336 65,170 31.210 
Rhode Island __ 1 2 3Pampa 20,727 16,200 6,250 62,627 17:425 

Tennessee _
_________ _ 1 	1Paris 5,670 5,130 10,094 18,845 14,394 

Maryland 1 	IPlainview 7,600 9,200 7,600 22,400 

Nebraska -----------__ 
_ 	IPort Arthur 24,403 31,247 11,406 80,278 34,209 

Iowa _
____ ·----------__ 
_ 	1Ranger 7,000 San Angelo 11,900 10,967 16,750 31,497 22,711 

Oklahoma 2 North Carolina 3

San Antonio 244,378 45,241 66,281 503,805 204,718San Benito 6,325 238 7,575 25,289 Receipts at Texas Stations 
Sherman 3,975 4,949 3,868 11,214 20,381 TOTAL 	29 33 
Snyder 	2,650 
Intrastate 	26 33Sweetwater 6,630 2,795 1,000 10,125 4,670 
Interstate 	3Tyler 76,152 70,831 55,074 268,358 123,408 Interstate Receipts Classified
Waoo 61,927 13,834 15,067 105,015 50,121 Wichita Falls 41,289 69,859 4,995 120,699 30,480 Kansas 3 TOTAL $1,883,340 $2,138,799 Sl,263,979 $8,225,143 $3,212,896 
:\nTE: Th<>se da1a are furnished the U. S . Department of Agriculture. Di..-ieioe or <:rop and Livestock Eatimales. by railway cfficials through agenta at all etationa NoTE: Reported to the Bureau of Business Research by Texas chambers of com· which f>riginate and receive carload shipments of poultry and ec&t. The date 
mcrce. 
er.. •·ompiled bv the Bureau o( Busineaa Reerarch. 
MARCH SHIPMENTS OF UVESTOCK CONVERTED TO A RAIL-CAR BASIS:!: 
Cattle Calv" Hogs Sheep Total 1935 1934 1935 1934 193; 1934 1935 1934 1935 1934 
Total Interstate Plus Fort Wortht .. -------------·· 2,104 2,166 559 419 412 400 140 323 3,215 3,308
Total Intrastate Omitting Fort Worth________ 672 497 182 156 14 3 24 97 892 753 

TOTAL SHIPMENTS --------------------2,776 2,663 741 575 426 403 164 420 4,107 4,061 
TEXAS CAR-LOT:!: SHIPMENTS OF LIVESTOCK JANUARY 1 TO APRIL 1 
Cattle Calve• Hog1 Sheep Total 1935 1934 193) 1934 1935 1934 1935 1934 193) 1934 
'l'otal Interstate Plus Fon Wortht_________________ 

7,107 6,489 1,683 1,721 1,209 991 436 1,289 10,435 10,490 Total Intrastate Omitting Fort Worth_______ 2,488 1,153 539 549 64 21 112 296 3,203 2,019 
TOTAL SHIPMENTS---------------------9,595 7,642. 2,222 2,270 1,273 1,012 548 1,585 13,638 12,509 
fFon Worth abipment• are combined with interstate forwarding• in order that the bulk of market diNppearance for the month may be 1howu. 
?-Rail-Car Buie: Cattle. 30 head per car: eabes, 60; hoes, 80; and ,beep, 250. 
Non: These data are furnished the United StatH Bureau of Agricultural Economics by railway oOicials tbrouch more than 1.500 •t.ation •&"en.ta, repreeentin& nery 

liweetock ahippina point in the State. The data are compiled by the Bureau of Busineu RC9eareh. 
COITON BALANCE SHEET FOR THE UNITED STATES 
AS OF APRIL 1 
(In Thousands of Running Bales Except as Noted) 

Final Ginnings Carryover Imports Report Consumption Exports Balance Au1. l to Apr. I• March 20t Total to Apr. I to Apr. 1 Total Apr. 1 
6,311

1927-1928 --------------------------------------------3,762 267 12,783 16,812 4,782. 5,719 10,501 1928-1929 ----------------------------------2,536 283 14,297 17,116 4,674 6,746 11,420 5,696 1929-1930 -------------------------------------2,313 244 14,548 17,105 4,316 5,771 10,087 7,018 1930--1931 -----------------------------------4,530 51 B,756 18,337 3,384 5,518 8,902 9,425 
3,570 6,854 10,424 12,6061931-1932 --------------------------------------------6,369 66 16,595 23,030 3,749 6,085 9,834 12,6391932-1933 ----------------------------------------9,682 88 12,703 22,473 6,098 10,043 10,8951933-1934 ---------------------------------------8,176 102 12,660 20,938 3,945 3,573 7).07 10,0821934-1935 ---------------·-------------------------------7,746 74 9,469 17,289 3,634 

The cotton year berin1 Auguat 1. *In 500-pound bales. tGin run ba.}es, counting round bales as half balee. 
APRIL EMPLOYMENT AND P AYROLLS IN TEXAS CLASSIFIED BY CITIES AND EMPLOYMENT GROUPS 
No. of Workers Percentage Change Average Weekly Wage Estab-from from per Worker lish· Apr. Ma r. Apr. Mar. Ave. Apr. Mar. Apr. men ts 1935 1935 1934 1935 1934 1935 1935 1934 
Abilene 26 1).89 1).89 1,260 0.0 + 2.3 
----------------------------~-----------------------------------------­
-

Amarillo ------------------------------------------------------------------29 662 645 665 + 2.6 0.5 
Austin --------------------------------------------------------------------------18 650 641 577 + 1.4 + 12.7 

4,_3

Beaumont -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------4..5 4,637 4,614 4·,446 + 0.5 + 
Dallas 233 12,601 12,343 13,038 + 2.1 -3.4
--------------------------------------------------·-------------------------------
Denison ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------9 620 614 + 1.0

723. -14. 
3 
El Paso -------------------------------------------------------------------------------78 1,%7 1,923 

2,113 + 2.3 6.9 
Fort Worth -----------------------------------------------------------------------------105 4°,982 41812 4,971 + 3.5 + 0.2 
Galveston --------------------------------------------------------------------------19 

926 93-1 972 0.5 4·.7 
Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------162 13,594 13.510 13,659 + 0.6 0.5 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------·

Laredo 11 195 204 182 4.4 + 7.1 
Port Arthur ·------------------------------------------------------------------·-------13 7,228 7,155 6,911 + 1.0 + 4.6 
San Angelo -------------------------------------------------------------------------------27 212 213 208 0.5 + 1.9 

-

San Antonio -----·-------·------------------------------------------------------------------14..5 5,009 4,916 5,096 + 1.9 1.8 
Sherman -----------------------------------------------·-----------------------------------22. 773 769 + 0.5 -16.5
926 
Waco -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------35 1,209 1,250 1,215 3.3 0.5 

Wichita Falls ----------------------------------------------------------------48 994 960 1,011 + 3.5 1.7 Miscellaneous ---------------------------------------------------------------------500 13,680 14,106 14,585 3.0 6.2 STATE -------------------------------------------------------------------------1,525 71,228 70,895 72,560 + 0.5 1.8 Bakeries ----------------------------------------------------------------20 1,172 1).21 1,192 4.0 1.7 $16.03 $17.32 $16.83 
Beverages -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7 169 132 144 +28.0 + 17.4 20.62 22.59 22.54 
Brick, Tile, Terra Cotta___ 8 222 259 266 -14.3 -16.6 10.41 9.70 11.07 
Cement Plants ------------------------------------------------------------------------9 886 816 881 + 8.6 + 0.6 19.08 20.18 15.58 Commercial Printing..........-------------------------------------------------29 543 525 551 + 3.4 -1.5 23.63 23.09 22.69 Confectioneries -------------------------------------------------------------------15 409 395 432 + 3.5 -5.3 11.56 13.48 11.51 Cotton Compresses -----------------------------------------------------------------5 630 615 621 + 2.4 + 1.4 16.64 16.08 15.00 Cotton Oil Mills --------------------------------------------------------------------· 13 359 484 470 -25.8 -23.6 14.55 14.60 10.80 Cotton Textile Mills ---------------------------------------------------------------6 1,344 1,490 1,78~ 9.8 -24.6 11.76 11.25 13.32
Producing________________ ___ ___

Crude Petroleum 5 6,295 6,598 6,523 4.6 3.5 32.01 33.79 30.99 Electric Railway Car Shops·-----------------------------------------------------9 288 2.75 268 + 4.7 + 7.5 24.60 24.84 23.88 Electric Railway Maintenance and Operation 6 1,690 1,697 1,669 0.4 + 1.3 25.74 25.20 24.75 Flour Mills ·---------------------..·--------------------------------------------------8 50'5 503 457 + 0.4 + 0.5 17.92 18.23 18.07 Foundries, Machine Shops···---------------------------------------------33 4046 4,036 3,74..5 + 0.2 + 8.0 22.72 22.77 23.71 Furniture Manufacturing -------------------------------------------------------5 '431 475 :::82 9.3 + 12.8 15.93 15.98 13.48 Hotels -----·-------------------·------------------------------------------------------------34 2,4..55 2,4{)8 2,307 + 2.0 + 6.4 12.85 13.25 12.31 
Ice Cream Factories__________________ -------------------------------------------------9 364 323 381 + 12.7 4.5 19.91 19.74 20.74 Ice Factories ------------------------------------------------------·---------------------------56 948 809 901 + 17.2 + 5.2 19.70 21.41 20.0'Z Laundries, Dry O eaning ....---------------------------------------------------------· 21 1,085 1,062 1,054 + 2.2 + 2.9 13.22. 13.18 13.88 Meat Packing, Slaughtering....-----------------------------,--------------·-8 1.889 1,903 1,803 0.7 + 4.8 2:1.33 20.98 18.13 Men's Oothing Manufacturing ·----------------------------------------------20 1,622 1,731 1,824 6.3 -11.1 11.36 11.70 11.74 Millwork -----------------------------------------------------------·--·------------------------14 414 407 332 + 1.7 +24.7 18.03 18.76 15.54 Newspaper Publishing --------------------·---------------------------------------17 1,860 1,858 2,099 + 0.1 -11.4 29.78 30.39 29.86
Manufacturing________ __________________________ ________________________

Paper Box 7 249 2.68 225 7.1 +10.7 17.41 16.63 15.53 
Petroleum Refining ------·-----------------------------------------·---------------26 12,854 12,749 13,282 + 0.8 -3.2 26.10 26.27 24.77 Power and Light Companies·----------------------------------------------------326 5,988 5,977 6,135 + 0.2 -2.4 28.69 28.25 27.51 Quarrying ··-----·-----------------------·------------------------------------------------15 790 647 1,329 +22.1 -40.6 22.38 20.28 18.21 Railroad Car Shops..---------------------------------------------------------------17 1,836 1,835 2,094 + 0.1 -12.3 27.45 25.94 24.76 Real Estate -------------------------------------------------------·-----------------------5 56 4,9 48 + 14.3 + 16.7 13.20 14.24 14.94 Retail Stores --·-----------------------·-------------------------------------------------371 9,440 9,006 9,054 + 4.8 + 4.3 18.10 18.31 17.95 Saw Mills -------------------------------------------------------------------------6 712 683 931 + 4.2 -23.5 14.2.1 13.88 10.83 Structural Iron Works·-------------------------------------------------------9 309 325 347 5.2 -11.0 19.39 19.00 18.31 Wholesale Stores ---·-----·-·--·----------------------------··---------------------· 188 4,465 4,387 4,143 + 1.8 + 7.8 25.06 25.06 24.11
Manufacturing____ _________________________________ __ 


Women's Clothing 7 400 380 596 + 5.3 -32.9 14.47 13.05 12.24 Miscellaneous ---------------------------------------------------------------·-191 4,503 4,566 4,291 1.4 + 4.9 20.33 19.28 20.53 STATE --------·---------------------------------------------------1,525 71,228 70,895 72,560 + 0.5 1.8 $22.75 $22.89 $21.92 TOTAL WEEKLY PAYROLL*--------------------------------------$1,620 $1,623 $1,591 0.2 + 1.8 
• Jn thousandE'. 
NOTE: Hrportc<l to 1he Bureau of Business Ree;carch, coOperating with the U ~ i ted S1a1es Bureau of Labor Statistics.