JUNE 1966




JUrJ 19 6 
THE L~BB.AR Y 
A Monthly Summary of B1isiness and Economic Conditions in Texas 
B U R EAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH: THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW VOL. XL, N 0. 6 , JUNE 1966 
Editor: Stanley A. Arbingast I Associate Editor: Robert H. Ryan I Managing Editor: Robert H. Drenner 
Editorial Board: Stanley A. Arbingast, Chairman; John R. Stockton, Francis B. May, Robert H. Ryan, Robert H. Drenner 

CONTENTS 

153:  THE BUSINESS May  SITUATION  IN  TEXAS  by  Francis B.  
156:  THE NEW TEXAS UNIFORM Jack W. Ledbetter  COMMERCIAL  CODE  by  
161:  TEXAS BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED by Stanley A. Arbingast  IN APRIL  
163:  SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS: FIRST FISCAL 1965-1966 by Ernest w. Walker  HALF,  

CHARTS AND TABLES 
153: TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY 

154: 
SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS 


154: 
LEADING OIL-PRODUCING STATES, FIRST-QUARTER 1966 

154: 	
CRUDE-OIL PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 



155: 	
ESTIMATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES IN TEXAS 

155: 	
BUSINESS ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 TEXAS CITIES 



161: 	
INDEXES OF CONSUMER PRICES, U. S. AND HOUSTON, TEXAS 

161: 	
BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 

161: 	
RESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 



162: 	
NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 


162: 	
ESTIMATED VALUES OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 


163: 	
SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS, 1960-1966 

163: 	
SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS 


164: 	LOCAL BUSINESS CONDITIONS 

Published monthly by the Bureau of Businees Research, Graduate Seeond-clas61 poetaire paid at Austin, Texas. Content of this publication is 
BUSINESS RESEARCH COUNCIL 
John Arch White, Dean of the College of Business Ad.min· istration (ex officio); John R. Stockton, Jessamon Dawe, Thomas E. Gossett, James R. Kay, Stephen L. McDonald, Kenneth W. Olm, and W. T. Tucker 
BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH 
Director: John R. Stockton 
Associate Director and Resources Specialist: Stanley A. Arbingast Assistant to the Director: Florence Escott Consulting Statistician: Francis B. May Administrative Assistant: Cynthia Bettinger Research Associate: Charles 0. Bettinger, Charles T. 
Clark, Robert H. Drenner, Otis D. Horton, Jr., Ida M. Lambeth, Robert M. Lockwood, Charles A. Pieper, Dennis 
W. Richardson, Donald E. Robertson, Robert H. Ryan, Elizabeth R. Turpin, Kornelis J. Walraven, Joyzelle Wilke, Robert B. Williamson, James E. Willis 
Research Assistant: Howard D. Brecht, Robin Driggs, Hans Dieter Kurz, Robert E. Matlock, Jr., John E. Specht, Jr., Robert D. Spellings 
Administrative Secretary: Margaret F. Smith 
Senior Clerk Typist: Lois Conrad, Carolyn Harris, Sharon Wheat Cartographer: Mary Helen Parks, Mary Paxton Library Assistant: Merle Danz Statistical Assistant: Mildred Anderson, Constance 
Cooledge, Jo Neman Statistical Technician: Doris Dismuke, Mary Gorham Clerical Assistant: Peggy Bobo, Berge Garabedian, Rob­
ert Jenkins, Ross Kammlah Offset Press Operator: Robert Dorsett, Daniel P. Rosas 
The Bureau of Business Research is a member of the Associated University Bureaus of Business and Economic Research. 
School of Business, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas, 78712. not copyrighted and may be reproduced freely. The views expressed bJ 

authors are not necessarily those of the Bureau of Business Research. Acknowleditment of source will be appreciated. Subscription, $3.00 a year: individual copies, 25 cents. 


THE BUSINESS SITUATION IN TEXAS by Francis B. May 



TEXAS BUSINESS ACTIVITY 

INDEX-ADJUSTED FOR SEASONAL VARIATION-1957-1959·100 
250 ~ ~ ~~ ! ~~ ~ 
~~ ~ . ~ ~~ 
200~~~§~~-t-~-t-~t--~~~-+~-t--?15, J~~
~-t-~t---ir---+~-t-~~200 >~~'\ &~ ~ ~ ....Af' 
1so~~~~~~ -;-~-+-~+--7e~~-+-~-;-~~
%~V )~>~+-~+----ir-ri,.,.,,,,·J::;.._V"~'~-115o ~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~--~l('J" ­

0 ~~J~ ~ I ~ :
"""""'"""--'-~-'-~__..____,.""""""'..._-'-~--"'--~.:.&::>o:'---'-~~1--~-'-~--L.~~1--___Jo
1954 '55 '56 '57 '58 '59 '60 '61 '62 '63 '64 '65 1966 
NOTE: Shaded areas indicate periods of decline of total business activity in the United States. SOURCE: Based on bank debits report.ed by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and adjusted for seasonal variation and changes in the price level by the Bureau of Business Research, 
Aft.er rising strongly during the first quart.er of the year, reaching a new peak of 175.1% of the 1957-59 monthly average in March, the seasonally adjusted index of Texas business activity declined 1% in April. At 173.8% of its base-period average, the April index value was 3.3% above April 1965. This was the highest April value of the index during the post-World War II period. It was the second highest value in the history of the index. 
During the first quart.er the index averaged 9% above the comparable 1965 period. This upsurge was part of a vigorous first-quart.er increase in business activity in the national economy. Gross national product rose 2.5% over the final quart.er of 1965 to a peak of $714.1 billion. Aft.er allowance for an increase in the prices of goods and services comprising gross national product, the real product increased 1.5%. Comparison with the first quart.er of 1965 shows that gross national product, ex­pressed in market prices, rose 8.6% this year. If the data are adjusted for price changes, the increase of the first quart.er over the like 1965 period was 6.0o/o. This represents a very subtantial increase in real product. With a value of goods and services produced nearing the three-quarter-trillion mark, the American people are enjoying a level of prosperity unequalled in human history. The fabled riches of ancient empires never air proached anything like this. 
Comparison of the Texas index of business activity for the January-April period with the first four months of 1965 shows an 8% increase. Despit:e the small March­April decline, the stat.e's economy is at a very high level. 
The seasonally adjusted index of crude-oil production 

JUNE 1966 
SELECTED BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS (Indexes-Adjusted for seasonal variation-1957-59=100) 
P ercent cha nge  
Index  Apr 1966  Year-to­dare Year-to­average date Apr 1966 1966 Mar average from from 1966 1966 Ma r 1966 1965  

Texas business activity ... 173.8 175.1 171.5  +  8  
Crude-oil production 98.o• 99.4• 98.8  +  6  
Crude-oil runs to stills ... 115.2 113.7 114.8  +  1  +  2  
Total electric power use . . . 196.8* 182.0• 186.8  +  8  +  13  
Industrial electric power use..... 185.0• 169.9• 176.1  +  9  +  14  
Bank debits .. 183.4 1S4.6 180.4  +  13  
Miscellaneous freight carloadings in S.W. district .. 83.7 83.4 81.7  ••  +  
Ordinary life insurance sales . . . . 170.2 182.6 171.9  - 7  +  10  
Total retail sales ....... 131.1 • 139.3*  - 6  +  s  
Durable-goods sales ...........156.5* 178.4•  - 12  +  5  
Nondurable-goods sales ..... 118.0* 119.2*  - 1  +  2  
Building construction authorized .. 145.3 160.8 145.9  - 4  +  20  
New residential 96.5 119.0 111.6  - 19  +  10  
New non residential ........224.1 199.3 200.3  +  12  +  43  
Total industrial production ...... 144.0* 142.8* 142.6 Total nonfarm employmentt ..... 122.1 * 121.4• 121.4  + +  1 1  + +  9 4  
Manufacturing employmentt .... 123 .3* 122.4* 122.5  +  +  6  
Total unemploymentt 75.2 73.1 77.1  +  - 20  
Insured unemploymentt 51.5 57.8 58.0  - 11  - 32  
Average weekly earnings­ 
manufacturingt ....... ....... 126.1 * 124.1 * 124 .3  +  2  +  4  
Average weekly hours­manufacturingt . . . . . . . 103.0* 102.7* 102.5  ••  ••  

*Preliminary. 
rfu!vised. 
**Change is less than one-half of 1%. 
tWage and salary workers only. 

declined 1 % in April. At 98.9% of average monthly production during the 1957-59 base period, the index was 5.5% above April 1965. 
During the first four months of the year, the index of crude-oil ,production rose 5% above the comparable 1965 period. The strong increase in crude production in the state is a reflection of a high level of national prosperity. After the long period of production in the range of 92%-96% of average 1957-59 output, this is a welcome change. 
The recent high level of demand has revealed a prob­lem of underproduction in the industry. During the first quarter, underproduction by the approximately 210,000 oil wells in the state amounted to 14.7% of total al­lowable. Many of the wells are strippers which cannot produce as much as they are allowed. This condition points up a need for a stepped-up exploration and drilling rate to find and produce more oil. 
Total Texas crude-oil production during the first quar­ter of the year amounted to 265.7 million barrels, up 6.9% from the first quarter of 1965, according to data reported in the May issue of World Oil. An analysis of total first-quarter production by Railroad Commission districts shows that increases ranged from a maximum of 22.8% in the East Central to 1.8% in the North Central. Seven of the ten districts increased output. Three (Upper Gulf, North, and Panhandle) had decreases. These ranged from a 0.1 % decline in the ninth (North) district to a 2.7% in the tenth (Panhandle). The follow­ing table shows the relative positions of the six largest oil-producing states at the end of the first quarter. 
LEADING OIL-PRODUCING STATES, FIRST QUARTER 1966 
J anuary-M.a.rch Percentage change production from Stare (Thousands of barrels) first quarrer 1965 
California  82,005  + 8.5  
Louisiana  ......160,968  +10.9  
N ew  Mexico  . . . . . . . . . .  31,785  + 6.1  
Oklahoma  53,196  + 6.1  
Texas  ...... . ..... . . .. .... 265,740  + 6.9  
Wyoming  31,778  -11.0  
United  States  ......740,163  + 5.2  

Source: W orld Oil, May 1966. 
These six states produced 84.5% of total United States 
production  during  this  period.  Texas  produced  35.9%  
of the total.  
The  troubled  state  of  world  politics emphasizes the  

importance of an ample domestic crude-oil supply. Do­mestic reserves of crude declined in seven of the nine years of the 1956-64 period. Between 1961 and 1965 the nation's reserves declined 460 million barrels-from 31.76 billion to 31.30 billion barrels. Large new additions to reserves are urgently required. The probability that technological breakthroughs will occur in conversion of oil shale and coal into hydrocarbon compounds that can be refined into motor fuel and other needed petroleum products is not a sufficient cause for complacency with regard to crude-oil reserves. Our present refining tech­nology is oriented toward crude oil as a feedstock. Our pipelines run from existing oil fields to refineries. A whole new technology oriented toward coal and oil shale deposits will take years to create. In the meantime, the problems of the domestic petroleum producers must be solved. Added incentives to drill new exploratory wells are needed. The long decline in drilling emphasizes this fact. Larger allowables for new discoveries, more dis­covery allowables per new field, and higher prices for crude oil are all possible remedies. Some combination of these remedies must be applied. 
Seasonally adjusted crude-oil runs to stills rose 1% in April. At 115.2% of average monthly runs during the 1957-59 base period, the index was 1.3% above April 1965. For the first four months of the year, the index averaged 2% above the same period last year. April runs were the highest on record for that month. 
Nationally, crude runs to stills averaged 9,338,000 barrels per day during the first quarter, a record level of activity and a 4.7% increase over the first quarter 
CRUDE-OIL PRODUCTION IN TEXAS 


of 1965. Runs continued at a level of 9,000,000 barrels a day or more during the first three weeks of April, according to reports from the American Petroleum In­stitute. This placed the operating level of the nation's refineries at 86.5% of capacity in the weeks ending April 8 and 22 and at 90.9% during the week ending April 15. 
Total electric power use rose 8% in April after seasonal factors were taken into account. At 196.8% of the 1957-59 average, the index was 14.5% above April 1965. A 9% increase in industrial electric power use was primarily responsible for the rise in the index. Domestic and commercial power consumption contributed less to the rise. 
Industrial electric power use is closely related to in­dustrial production. This index rose 9% in April after seasonal adjustment to a level 16.4% above April 1965. The index averaged 14% above the first four months of last year during the January-April period. 
ESTIMATES ·OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES IN TEXAS 
(Millions of dollars) 

Percent change  
Type of store  1966  J an-Apr 1966  Apr 1966 from Mar 1966  Jan-Apr 1966 Apr 1966 from from Jan-Apr Apr 1965 1965  
Total . . . $1.160.7 Durable goods• . 495.9 Nondurable goods 664.8  $4,573.8 1,909.8 2,664.0  -6 -12 -2  •• •• ••  + 3 + 5 + 2  

*Contains automotive stores, furniture stores, and lumber, building material, an<i hardware stores. 
••Change is less than one-half of 1o/o. 

Despite a 7% decline from an unusually high level in March, seasonally adjusted sales of ordinary life in­surance were at a rate exceeding any other April in the history of the index. They were 7.3% above April 1965. During the first four months of the year, this index averaged 10% above the same period of 1965. 
Rising sales CYf ordinary life insurance are attributable to a considerable degree to rising income in the state. The U. S. Department of Commerce reports that total personal income in the state rose to a record $24.75 bil­lion in 1965. This was a 7.2% increase over the $23.08 billion earned by Texans in 1964. Total United States per­sonal income increased by the same percentage to $527.9 billion in 1965. 
Per capita personal income in Texas rose 5.6% in 1965 to $2,346. The slower rise in per capita income than in total personal income is due to growth in the state's population. National per capita income rose 5.8% to $2,724. The ' fact that per capita income rose by al­most identical percentages in both the state and the nation is due to the fact that total income and population of the state are growing at rates very close to national growth rates. In former years, Texas population growth was faster than the national rate. 
At $2,346 per capita, personal income in the state amounted to 86.1 % of the national per capita income. The di1ference in the two figures was $378. If Texas could raise its per capita income to the national level, this 
would mean an additional total income of more than $3.9 billion a year. 
Texas retail sales declined 6% in April after seasonal adjustment. Declines in sales of both durable and non­durable consumer goods caused the drop in the total. During the January-April period, sales of consumer dur­ables averaged 5% above the comparable 1965 period. Nondurables averaged 2% above January-April 1965. Total sales averaged 3% higher. 
Nationally, retail sales declined 1.4% in April after seasonal adjustment. A substantial drop in automobile sales was the principal cause of the decline. The decline has aroused some fear that our spectacular sixty-three­month boom is on the verge of a decline. During this upswing, there have been other declines in retail sales. The pressures of fighting a war are most likely to con­tinue business at a high level. 
Urban building permits issued in March declined after seasonal adjustment. A 19o/c decline in residential permits more than offset a 12o/c rise in nonresidential permits. During the January-April period, both residential and nonresidential permits averaged well above the like 1965 period. Total permits averaged 20% above January-April 1965. 
Examination of the seasonally adjusted indexes of 

business activity for twenty Texas cities shows that there 
were eleven declines, eight increases, and one index un­
changed from the previous month. Of the state's large 
cities, Dallas had a 1% increase, Fort Worth a 5% 
decline, Houston a 7% increase, and San Antonio a 4% 
decline. Average activity in the January-April period 
was above the like 1965 period in nineteen of the twenty 
cities. El Paso had the only decline. Business activity is 
continuing at high levels compared to last year. 
BUSINESS ACTIVITY INDEXES FOR 20 SELECTED TEXAS CITIES 
(Adjusted for seasonal variation-1957-59=100) 

Percent change  
Index  Apr 1966  Mar 1966  Year-to­date average 1966  Apr 1966 from Mar 1966  Year-to­date average 1966 from 1965  

Abilene  . 146.1  151.9  142.9  4  + 4  
Amarillo  ...... 171.0  173.8  174.5  2  + 9  
Austin  .... 171.5  183.1  175.7  6  + 3  
Beaumont  ..... ... 183.8  176.8  174.0  + 4  + 11  
Corpus Christi  .142.1  133.8  135.3  + 6  + 4  
Corsicana  ..... 137.5  138.8  138.1  + 6  
Dallas  ... 193.4  190.8  190.2  +  + 10  
El  P aso  ........ . . 120.8  124.8  119.5  4  
Fort  Worth  . ..... 130.3  136.9  131.0  5  + 5  
Galveston  ...... . . 120.2  108.0  113.4  + 11  + 3  
Houston  .........196.2  184.0  184.5  + 7  + 9  
Laredo ....... .. . .164.7 Lubbock . 155.7  169.3 156.3  167.0 167.1  - 3 ••  + 9 + 4  
Port  Arthur  .115.7  121.7  113.0  + 8  
San  Angelo  139.1  141.8  141.7  2  + 11  
San  Antonio  .. 162.7  170.0  162.8  4  + 9  
Texarkana  .. 177.9  171.6  172.5  + 4  + 13  
Tyler  · ··· ·· · . .... 145.6  142.2  145.1  + 2  + 3  
Waco  . . . . ..  .166.6  153.8  154.6  + 8  + 9  
Wichita  Falls  ...133.7  152.0  143.2  -12  + 9  

••Change is less than one-half of 1o/o. 

Source: Based on bank debits reported by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas and adjusted for seasonal variation and changes in the price level by the Bureau of Business Research. 
JUNE 1966 


THE NEW TEXAS UNIFORM COMl\ffiRCIAL CODE 
Jack W. Ledbetter• 

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 
The idea for a comprehensive code of commercial law was seriously advanced for the first time by the Mer­chants Association of New York City in 1938. This proposal was taken under study by the National Con­ference of Commissioners on Uniform State Law in 1940, and in 1942 the American Law Institute, a non­profit organization supported by the American Bar As­sociation, joined in the project. Between 1945 and 1952 a great number of drafts and redrafts of parts of the proposed Code were prepared and studied by various mem­bers of these organizations. In 1952 the official "Uniform Commercial Code" was published and was enacted into law in the State of Pennsylvania. From 1952 until 1962 the Code received practical use in Pennsylvania, and later in Massachusetts, while simultaneously undergoing severe theoretical analysis and critical review in New York and other states. As a result of this combination of practical experience and theoretical examination, the "1962 Revised Uniform Commercial Code" was published. This was adopted by the State of New York in 1964, and subsequently by a total of 47 states. Today only a few states remain outside its coverage, and there seems to be little doubt that all the other states will adopt the Code as soon as their legislatures can give it proper consideration. Texas adopted the Code in the last session of its legislature in 1965 to be effective July 1, 1966. 
COVERAGE 
The Code is divided into ten Articles. A brief descrip­tion of these will indicate the areas of law covered by each. 
Article I-General Provisions: 
The principal purpose of Article I is to state general principles applicable throughout the Code, certain general rules of construction, and uniform definitions of the terms used throughout the Code. Article I also provides a gen­eral framework for resolving problems involving trans­actions crossing state lines and thereby involving the laws of two or more states. It is in this area that the Code may well accomplish its greatest purpose in avoid­ing disputes and costly litigation where the courts of these states in the past have interpreted a given trans­action in a different way based on variations in local laws. 
A key provision in Article I is the preservation of free­dom of contract. Although this Article imposes a strict and unbending obligation of good faith, diligence, rea­sonableness,. and care, which may not be disclaimed by agreement, it does expressly recognize and authorize the parties to establish and agree upon standards ·of perform­ance and the terms and other important aspects of the transaction-so long as good faith, diligence, reasonable­
•Aaaociate Professor of Buainesa Law, The University of Texas. 
ness, and care are maintained. In other words, the parties to a commercial transaction will now have greater free­dom in describing the rights ~d duties of their agre&­ment. 
Article II-Sales: 
Article II is in a large part a revision of the Unifonn Sales Act. Since this Act was never adopted in the State of Texas, it is not necessary to consider in detail changes from the old Act to the new Code. One should, however, become cognizant of the many requirements set forth in Article II governing all aspects of the sales contract. ~n general, Article II clarifies and puts into form~lized language many of the terms and legal prin­ciples 'freviously left to interpretation and development by th:)_ourts. For example, such terms as F.O.B., F.A.S., and C.I.F., which had fairly well defined commercial meanings, were always subject to question by a court because they were not defined in the law. Under the Code these terms are specifically defined by use of commercial standards, and the courts will be bound thereby. This should result in a reduction in the long, fine print explanatory contracts one commonly sees today. 
Perhaps the greatest change in the Code with respect to sales transactions is a de-emphasis of the concept of "title" and "shift in title." Under the old Uniform Sales Act and the comparable common law principles governing such transactions in Texas, the remedies avail­able to a buyer or seller and the risk of loss when goods were destroyed were made to turn on who had "title" to the goods. The decision in many of the older law suits hinged on the question of who had "title" at the time a given event occurred. The Code does contain provisions as to title for use where it is appropriate, but the reme­dies of the parties and the division Qf risks between them are spelled out in terms of performance of the sales contract without regard to the technical location of title. Thus, the law has been made to more clearly conform to business practices and responsibilities as agreed upon by the parties without regard to the technical distinctions in the passage of title. This was a major defect in the earlier Uniform Sales Act. 
Article III-Commercial Paper: 
Article III of the Code deals with commercial paper and basically revises the Uniform Negotiable Instrument Law in effect for many years in the State of Texas and throughout the United States. In most respects the law simply restates and clarifies the existing law. It does, however, update many of the technical requirements of the law and recognizes the greatly increased use of checks, drafts, and trade acceptances in modern business practices. It makes no substantial change in the law in Texas except to clarify questionable areas and to stream· line the process for handling negotiable documents. 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Article IV-Bank Deposits and Collections: 
This Article is basically a recodification of the Bank Collection Code in effect in Texas today. Because the existing Texas law on the subject was fairly well pre­pared and precise, it is anticipated that this particular Article will effect no great changes in modern banking practices. It is, of course, of limited concern to other businessmen. One note, however, is of interest. This Article increases the effective period for stop payment orders from the present 60 days to six months. 
Article V-Letters of Credit: 
This Article sets forth in statutory form a number of the commercial practices in banking institutions with respect to letters of credit. It will have no particular effect upon local business transactions and is of interest more specifically to the banking industry. 
Article VI-Bulk Transfers: 
Every state in the United States, including Texas, has some type of bulk sales statute. These statutes deal with two common types of commercial fraud associated with the sale by a merchant of his stock of goods not in the ordinary course of trade. In one type, the sale is a sham, and the merchant comes back into business after settling with his creditors; in the other, he simply disappears with the proceeds without paying his creditors. All of these statutes provide for advance notice to creditors; some also require the buyer to see that the proceeds are paid to the seller's creditors. The Texas Bulk Sales Law is similar to other laws in this area but does not impose on the buyer duties beyond requiring an affidavit that all creditors have been paid or the listing of creditors. Most of the bulk sales statutes in the United States were enacted a number of years ago. They are far from uniform and have given rise to a great deal of un­certainty and litigation. Article VI of the Code is a codification of the better rules. It will make no major changes in the Texas law of bulk transfers except to im­pose upon the purchaser a duty of seeing to it that the proceeds of the bulk sales transfer are paid to existing creditors and to establish a time limit for unpaid cred­itors to make their claims against the goods. 
Article VII-Documents of Title: 
Article VII governs all transactions involving Ware­house Receipts and Bills of Lading. The law is basically a codification and updating of existing laws on the sub­ject and should make no substantial changes in re­sponsible current business practices in Texas. 
Article VIII-Investment Securities : 
This Article revises and clarifies the Uniform Stock Transfer Act which is in effect in the State of Texas. It includes and governs all transactions involving stocks, bonds, and other securities and long-term investments. A major feature of Article VIII is to streamline the process by which such securities are transferred and negotiated from one person to another. It should have no immediate 
JUNE 1966 
substantial effect upon merchants in Texas, but as Texas develops as a commercial state, it is probable that this Article will have increasing influence upon security transactions in the state. 
Article IX-Secured Transactions, Sales of Accounts, Contract Rights, and Chattel Paper: 
Article IX is clearly the most far reaching, and prob­ably the most important, Article of the Code. It covers the entire range of transactions in which debts are se­cured by personal property such as chattel mortgages, pledges, conditional sales contracts, trust receipts, as­signments of accounts receivable, factors' liens, field ware­housing, and the like. This area, more than any other, has been the subject of great confusion, litigation, and variation among the various states, so that one could not say with any degree of certainty that a conditional sales contract in Texas was in any way similar to a conditional sales contract in Oklahoma. In fact, there is even serious concern within any given state as to the exact interpretation to be given to a document which is named a "conditional sales contract" but which in fact has terms within it which indicate that it is not a normal or standard conditional sales contract. The problem is less complex in Texas than in many other states because of the former Article 5489 of the Texas Statutes which stated that all conditional sales contracts would be treated as chattel mortgages, regardless of their terms. As a result; there has been a fair degree of uniformity of in­terpretation of such security contracts by the courts of Texas, even though the merchants using such contracts did not always appreciate or understand the uniform 
situation that did exist. 
In any event, the Code has attempted to remove all artificial distinctions between the various named trans­actions and to clarify and eliminate confusion by adopt­ing a new vocabulary and a new procedure for the han­dling of all such secured transactions. 
The basic theme of this Article is to remove the artificialities between the names of the transaction and to treat all transactions alike. Thus, the scheme of the Article is to state rules of law applicable to all such transactions generally without regard to the type of security device used by the parties. The Code distin­guishes instead between different types of property used as the security; for example, crop and farm products used in farming operations; consumer goods, used by consumers (such as the family automobile, refrigerator, and television set); business equipment and inventory; and intangible property, such as accounts receivable; and the Code states special rules where necessary to regulate the problems which arise in each different situation. 
This approach of the Code has many advantages. One 

is that it makes possible a radical simplification of public 
filing or recording whereby the same type of notice is 
given to other creditors and to the public at large of 
these different types of security interests. As to most 
security transactions involving business enterprises, in­
terested parties under the Code are able to determine a 
borrower's financial position simply by consulting a single 
set of public records, usually to be found in the Office 
of the Secretary of State. Prior to the Code such parties would have had to examine and search in both state and local offices, and some of the most important types of security interests would not have been disclosed at all. 
Under the pre-Code law, the different types of security devices such as chattel mortages, conditional sales, and the lik~, depended for their validity on formalities which would vary from one device to another for no apparent reason except the historical one that each device was developed at a different time by a different person. Under the Code the formal requirements are the same for all and they are very simple. In addition, much of the law of chattel mortgages and conditional sales was not even covered by statutes, but their validity and interpretation was left to judicial interpretation by the courts. The new Code eliminates much of the uncertainty that has developed by the creation of fairly definite and unified rules not dependent upon artificial differences in the chattel mortgage or conditional sales agreement. 
Article X-Effective Date and Repealer: 
This Article shnply establishes the effective date of the Uniform Commercial Code in Texas--July 1, 1966-and sets forth certain procedural requirements pertaining to those laws to be repealed and the effect of the new law on prior transactions. 
TEXAS CHANGES 
Space does not permit more than a brief discussion of the more important changes to be made in the law as it applies specifically to business practices in Texas. A few, however, will be mentioned as follows: 
1. 
Ef!ec~ive Date: The effective date of the Uniform Commerciai'I Code is July 1, 1966. The new law applies only to events occurring after that date. Any transac­tions validly entered into before July 1, 1966, and the rights, duties, and interests flowing from them, continue to remain valid after July 1, 1966, and they may be terminated, completed, consummated, or enforced in the same manner as required or permitted by any statute or other law amended or repealed by the Code just as though such repeal or amendment had not occurred. (A recent case, however, indicates that Code court procedures will apply to a law suit where the trial occurs after the effective date of the Act.) 

2. 
New Rules for Formation and Construction of Con­tracts : The new Code makes a number of clarifying changes in the law of contracts. Most of these simply put into statutory form what was formerly left to com­mon law development by the courts. A few changes, how­ever, are unique and may affect current business prac­tices. The more important ones are as follows: 


a. The Code has liberalized the legal requirements for definiteness with respect to contracts for the sale of goods. A debtor will find it more difficult now to defeat a creditor by showing a technical defect in the description of the goods (such as erroneous serial or identification number) or failure to fix the price ex­actly. The test now is "commercial reasonableness." This, of course, will not be an excuse for careless sales practices or contract preparation, but will permit some good faith leeway in the contract description and terms. 
b. The Code puts special obligations on persons classified as "merchants." These persons are defined as those . holding themselves out as dealers or experts in the particular goods involved in the ordinary course of trade. For example, a furniture dealer is a merchant in transactions involving the sale or purchase of fur­niture and household goods. He would not be classi­fied as a merchant, however, while purchasing a de­livery truck. A merchant is charged with a unique higher standard of good faith conduct in his business transactions, and in some 15 instances he has a special duty. For example, a merchant impliedly warrants that the goods shall be delivered free of any rightful claims of any third party; if he gives a written option to hold an offer open for a buyer, he will be bound to that promise for a reasonable time, not to exceed 3 months, even though the buyer has paid nothing for such right or option; where he sells goods, risk of loss and responsibility remain with the merchant until he makes physical delivery, unless he is required to 
ship by carrier (the merchant can no longer shift the responsibility to his buyer by simply notifying the buyer that the goods are ready to be picked up) ; if he is dealing with another merchant (such as a retailer contracting with his wholesaler), proposed mod­ification to a contract becomes part of the contract unless expressly rejected by the opposite merchant. This is to avoid the so-called "battle of the forms" so common today where each party has his own sales or purchase form different from the supplier's or cus­tomer's forms. The particular Code section involved, Section 2-207, is subject to some question and confµSion· concerning its exact interpretation. Until there is fur­ther clarification, each person must exercise great care in using the so-called "standard forms." If there is any objectionable provision in the purchase voucher, sales slip, or order form, a prompt objection must be made in writing to the opposite party to avoid an in­advertent legal entanglement. 
c. The Code requires that all contracts for the sale of goods for a price of $500.00 or more be in writing to be enforceable. This applies to all transactions, but where the parties are both merchants, a writing by one will be sufficient even though the other does not give a written acceptance. This is new in Texas law, but it should not cause great concern, since most responsible merchants do not sell goods for such sums without some form of written agreement simply as a matter of good business practice. 
3. Warranty Obligations (Products Liability): There have been no material changes with respect to express warranties except the imposition of the good faith standard on merchants. Similarly, there have been no material changes in the law of implied warranties ex­cept clarification in the statutory language, and the gen· eral area has been expanded slightly. This should cause no undue concern to responsible merchants. In the area of disclaimers, however, the law is much more strict. To avoid responsibility under an implied warranty a merchant must be specific, and the disclaimer's provisions must ;,:· in writing and "conspicuous"; that is, the wordi must be larger than the rest of the contract or in a .· contrasting color, etc. A general statement, "No 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

warranties are nlade," will probably be worthless! 
4. 
"Sale or Return" or "Consignment Sales": In the sale and return, sale on approval, and consignment sale transactions, the new Code makes extensive changes to clarify the status of the transaction to protect the sup­plier or seller against claims of other creditors of the buyer. 

5. 
Statute of Limitations: The new Code makes an important change in the statutes of limitations in Texas. The limit is set by the Code at four years for all con­tracts, verbal or written, unless reduced by the contract. The present Texas law provides a two-year period for verbal transactions and a four-year period for written ones. Although it is not clear yet that it will do so, this change in the law would seem to permit suit on an open account up to four years after it comes due--a valuable extension of time. 

6. 
Bulk Transfers: Under the existing laws of Texas, the seller of goods out of the ordinary course of busi­ness (such as where one purchases all of the stock of a distressed business) is required to furnish the purchaser with a list of his creditors. The purchaser must then see to it that notification is sent to each creditor with an interest in the proposed transaction and that general notice is made to others that might be affected. Under the Uniform Code the purchaser is required to go further and see to it that the money is actually paid to the creditors if they present their claims. An escrow pro­cedure may be established for this purpose. Any creditor not so notified, however, must sue to assert his claim on the goods within a six-month period or be forever barred. This imposes a new six-month statute of limita­tions in such cases to protect an innocent buyer from a sudden claim long after he considers the matter closed. 

7. 
Secured Transactions: The most important and extensive changes are in the area of secured transactions, such as mortgages and liens. The Code provides a comprehensive scheme for the regulation of all security interests in personal property and fixtures. It supersedes all existing laws dealing with chattel mortgages, condi­tional sales contracts, trust receipts, factor's liens, and assignments of accounts receivable. The first step to un­derstanding this law is familiarization with a new vo­cabulary. To avoid further confusion and dispute with the myriad of existing terms and their widely varied in­terpretations throughout the United States, the authors of the Code have created a new series of terms to de-­scribe the elements of the transaction. 


a. 
The "Security Agreement": This is the contract itself. It replaces such terms as chattel mortgage, con­ditional sales contract, and trust receipt. 

b. 
The "Security Interest": This is the claim or right created by the security agreement. It includes such former terms as a "lien," a conditional sales con­tract "retained title," a "chattel mortgage," a "trust receipt," and all other similar lien, title, or mortgage terms. 

c. 
The "Debtor": This is the term for the person giving the security interest. It includes such former terms as the "borrower," the "debtor," the "mortgagor," the "trustee," and the "conditional vendee or buyer." 


d. The 'Secured Party" : This term describes the 
party holding the security interest. It includes such 
former terms as the "creditor," the "mortgagee," the 
"conditional seller or vendor," and the "entruster." 
e. 
The "Collateral": This is the specific object in­volved in the security transaction. It replaces such former terms as the "mortgaged goods." 

f. 
The "Financing Statement": This is a new docu­ment. It is a very brief form to be filed in the public records to give notice to all of the claimed "Security Interest" in the "Collateral." It is an official form pre­pared by the Secretary of State, although it will be printed and sold by private printing companies through­out the state. It eliminates the need for filing the se­curity agreement. If a third party wishes to know the details of the security transaction, he will have to contact the secured party to see the agreement. 



The basic document in the entire secured transaction is the security agreement. It need not have any particu­lar wording and most of the present conditional sales contracts and chattel mortgages can continue to be used. For clarification, of course, most merchants will probably find it desirable to retitle forms to "security agreement" when a new printing run is made. Some merchants have been concerned about changing the title of their forms for fear that customers might misunderstand or confuse the situation. To avoid this possibility, until the term "security agreement" becomes more commonly known, these merchants have given their documents a dual title such as "Conditional Sales Contract (Security Agree-­ment) ." This, of course, is entirely acceptable. 
Although it is clear that existi.ng contract or mortgage forms can continue to be used if they are otherwise valid, the Code does make certain requirements for these in­struments, and each merchant should review his own form with his attorney to be sure these requirements are met. Until a corrected form can be prepared, it may be necessary to type in special paragraphs or information to avoid confusion. In addition, the Uniform Commercial Code imposes certain standards and requirements, regard­less of the terms in the document. With respect to these, it is important that the merchant recognize their exist­ence so that he is not caught unaware when it later turns out that a particular provision cannot be enforced. Most of these requirements relate to the disclaimer or war­ranty discussed previously and to the rights and obliga­tions of the parties upon default. 
To be an effective security agreement, the contract, 

regardless of its name, must satisfy the following 
requirements : 
a. 
It must be written, unless the goods are to be retained by the secured party. 

b. 
It requires only the signature of the debtor. It should also contain the debtor's address. (For reasons to be explained later, it is desirable that the agree-­ment also have the signature and address of the se-­cured party, if convenient.) 

c. 
It must describe the collateral involved. (If land is involved, such as where fixtures are attached to real property, it should also be described for protec­tion against real estate mortgagors.) 

d. 
It may have an "After-Acquired" clause to in­clude subsequently acquired property. The so-called 



JUNE 1966 
"Floating Lien" is fully recognized under the Code. 
e. 
It should contain all of the material terms of the agreement, including default provisions and authoriza­tion to add costs and attorney's fees. Otherwise, such costs and fees cannot be recovered. 

f. 
It must be noted, however, that the statutory "Fi­nancing Statement" is not sufficient as a "Security Agreement." It is too brief for this purpose. 



To perfect a security interest against other claimants, it is necessary for notice to be given to such third parties. The requirements for such notice depend upon the type of transaction and the goods involved. For this purpose the Code has adopted a new system of functional classi­fication of goods and filing procedures as follows: 
1. 
Equipment: Goods used or purchased for use pri­marily in business or governmental activity. This term also includes any goods not otherwise classified as inventory, farm products, or consumer goods. Motor vehicles are not included. Public filing is made with the Secretary of State in Austin, Texas. 

2. 
Farm Equipment: Goods used or purchased for use primarily in the farming business or operation. Public notice is not required if the security interest arises out of a purchase money transaction with the purchase price not in excess of $2,500.00. If public notice is de­sired (such as for protection against bona fide pur­chasers, or where the price exceeds $2,500.00), the proper filing office is the county clerk of the debtor's residence. 

3. 
Farm Products: Crops or livestock or suppliesused or produced in farming operations, or products of crops in their unmanufactured state (such as milk, ginned cotton, and eggs) and if they are in the pos­session of a debtor engaged in farming operations.Public notice is given by filing in the county of the debtor's residence, and in the county where the crops are growing or will be grown. 

4. 
Consumer Goods: Goods used or purchased for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. Motor vehicles are not included. Public notice is not required if the security interest arises out of a pur­chase money transaction; but this will be ineffective against a subsequent bona fide purchaser from the debtor for his personal or family use unless public filing is made in the county where the debtor resides. 

5. 
Inventory: Goods held by a person for sale or lease or to be furnished under contract for service. This would include new motor vehicles as part of a dealer's inventory before the certificate title is issued on "first sale." Public notice is given by filing with the Secretary of State in Austin, Texas. 

6. 
Fixtures: Personal property to be attached to real estate so as to become a part, such as a central air­conditioning unit. Public notice is given by filing in the county office where the real estate recordation is m~de. (If in doubt concerning whe~her or not a givenobJect will be a fixture, such as with a large window air~conditioning unit, the secured party should record twice; once as a fixture and once as equipment con­sumer goods or otherwise as the use dictates.) ' 

7. 
Accessions: Goods to be installed in or affixed to other goods. Public notice is given by filing in the placewhere the other goods are to be filed. ?· Other Intangible Interests: Includes such securityinterests as Chattel Paper, Negotiable Instruments Se­curit~es, Bills of Lading1 Warehouse Receipts, Acc~unts Receivable, Contract Rights, and General Intangible. In most of these cases, the secured party takes pos­ses~ion. of th~ document or instru~ent and no public noti~e is r~qmred. In some cases, this may be ineffective or impossible, such as where Accounts Receivable fi­nancin~ is i?volved, and public notice is given by cen­tral filmg with the Secretary of State in Austin, Texas. 


County filing is required where farm products are in­volved in the transaction. 

In this connection, it should be noted that the secured party may file either his security agreement or the new form, the "Financing Statement." If he files his agree­ment, however, the filing fees are doubled, and the agreement must meet the requirements of a Financing Statement; that is, it must contain the signature and address of both the secured party and the debtor. (Places are provided on the official State Financing Statement Form for this information.) 
The filed instrument must also contain a statement indicating the types of collateral involved; i.e., consumer goods, crops and farm products, inventory, equipment, or intangible collateral. (The Financing Statement Fonn contains a space for this information.) 
Length of F-iling Term: A filing under the above requirements is effective notice for a period of 5 years plus 60 days, or to the maturity date of the obligation plus 60 days if less than 5 years. A simple procedure will extend the filing period. The filing fee is $1.00 if the State-approved financing statement is used. Otherwise, the fee is $2.00. 
Rights on Default: The Code does not define "default." This must be set out in the Security Agreement. Upon default, the secured party may repossess without court action if such right is given in the contract and if it can be accomplished without violence. Otherwise, regular court proceedings for foreclosure must be taken. After repossession, except where consumer goods are involved, the secured party may keep the goods if he gives written notice to the debtor and the other secured creditors. He must sell the goods, however, if an objection is made within 30 days. If the goods are kept, however, the se­cured party has no further rights against the debtor and the obligation is cancelled. If the goods are consumer goods, such as household furniture, and if more than 60% of the purchase price has been paid, the secured party cannot keep the goods unless the debtor after de­fault expressly consents in writing. Otherwise, they must be posted for public or private sale under the procedures set out in the Code. 
If the secured party decides to sell the repossessed goods, he must give written notice to the debtor and to other secured parties known to him concerning the date of such proposed sale unless there is a recognized market for such used goods or an emergency exists. This is a new requirement in the laws of Texas. 
The secured party can recover attorney fees and other expenses of sale if they are expressly authorized by the Security Agreement. Otherwise, they cannot be claimed. 
If a secured party repossesses his goods, and does not comply with these notice and sale requirements, he is subject to penalties for any damages he has caused the debtor. In the case of consumer goods, an automatic pen­alty is imposed. This is established as the amount of the credit service charge phis 10% of the amount of the debt, or the time price differential plus 10% of the cash price. 
CONCLUSION 

The Uniform Commercial Code represents a careful and concise review and revision of the many complex and 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

confusing laws governing commercial transactions. It has been the subject of great confusion, criticism, and anal­ysis, but experience in states such as Pennsylvania and Massachusetts has made it clear that the Code is not a mysterious hodge-podge of rules to trap the unwary. In most instances, it will require no substantial changes in the operation of a well-organized and well-operated business since most of its provisions are based upon current sound business practices. It does, however, co­ordinate many legal concepts that were heretofore un­related and ambiguous, and it provides a cohesive pro­cedure for all commercial transactions without regard to their technical distinctions. In accomplishing this last, it has been necessary for the Code to modify many minor details of each transaction, and until familiarity develops the responsible businessman will naturally feel his way with caution and frequent consultation with his 
attorney. 
There is, however, nothing to fear in the Code, and 

one who conducts his business fairly, using clearly defined 
relationships and written agreements with his customers 
and suppliers, will have no trouble, and should find the 
Code to be both beneficial and advantageous when com­
pared to prior rules and ambiguities. 
For those desiring a more complete discussion and 

analysis, several manuals have been prepared by various 
associations, such as the Texas Bankers Association, for 
use by their members. These are generally available 
through the associations or their members. In addition, 
an excellent general purpose monograph covering the se­
cured transaction (Article IX of the Uniform Commercial 
Code), entitled Texas Uniform Commercial Code, Prac­
tical Aspects on Secured Transactions, by Professor Gay­
lord A. Jentz of The University of Texas, has been 
published by the Bureau of Business Research at The 
University of Texas, Austin, Texas. This publication is 
available from the publishers at $1.25 per copy. 
INDEXES OF CONSUMER PRICES, U. S. AND HOUSTON, TEXAS 
(Adjusted for seasonal variation-1957-59=100) 
Percent change 
Apr Apr 1966 from 1966 Jan 1966 Apr 1965 
All items  
United  States  .112.5  + 1  +  8  
Houston,  Texas  .....110.9  + 1  +  s  
Food  
United  States  ... ll4.0  + 2  +  6  
Houston,  Texas  .114.8  + 1  +  8  
Housing  
United  States  ......108.7  + 1  +  2  
Houston,  Texas  ..........106.5  + 1  +  1  
Apparel and upkeep  
United  States  ............110.3  +  +  2  
Houston,  Texas  ....108.4  + 1  +  
Transportation  
United States Houston, Texas  .. 112.0 .108.9  + 1 ••  + +  1 1  
Health and recreation  
United States Houston, Texas  ....118.1 . . 118.1  + 1 ••  + +  2 3  

••Change is less than one-half of 1o/o. 
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor. 

JUNE 1966 

TEXAS BUILDING CONSTRUCTION 
AUTHORIZED IN APRIL 

by Stanley A. Arbingast 

The index of total construction in permit-issuing mu­nicipalities in Texas during the first four months of 1966 averaged 20% above the January-through-April index for 1965. Residential construction authorized was up only 10% in value, but nonresidential authorizations for the four-month period were up 44% from the preced­ing year. After adjustment for seasonal variation, the April index of total construction authorized was 8% above the index for the same month in 1965, although it was 4% below the index for this March. 
Residential construction authorized during April was below 100 on the seasonally adjusted scale for the first time since February 1965, but the corresponding index of nonresidential construction for April was at the highest point on record except for November 1964, August 1965, and December 1965. It should be emphasized that indexes 
G CO STR CTIO ' AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 
INDEX -ADJUSTED FOJ. SEASONAL V.UIATION-1951-1 959 · 100 
250 250 
200 
150 
"'· , 63.........,'64,6-=s..c1"'9'""670 

'55 • 56 's 1 ·sa • s 9 '60 6'"'1.........,·-=-62=--'--:-:"'::-:-'-;--;6 

NOTE: Sh.af!ed areat indicate period• o! dee.line o! total b-.nir.eu activity fo the U:i.1.ted. Statet. 
of nonresidential construction fluctuate greatly from 
month to month. Authorization of just one large office 
building project in Texas can cause the index to move 
upward sharply. However, no exceptionally large non­
residential permits were issued during April. 
Most dynamic of the various nonresidential reporting 
categories during April were commercial garages, hos­
pitals, and public works and utilities buildings. Permits 
for new and expanded hospital facilities totaled well over 
$15 million. The value of permits authorized for hospital 
and nursing-home construction can be expected to remain 
high because of the enactment of Medicare. Sizable con­
struction permits in the hospital category were issued 
RESIDE1 TIAL B ILDI NG A THORIZED IN TEXAS* 
IOO


NONRESIDE TIAL BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS* 
-


.• Exdudu additions, alteration•, and repain. 
NOTE: Shaded area• indiu.te puiod• of decline o! total bulinell activity in the United Statet, 


in Abilene, Amarillo, Baytown, Denton, and Paris. The largest such permit was in Amarillo, where expenditure of slightly over $5 million was authorized for the High Plains Hospital Association. 
Although residential authorizations were down from March to April, estimates of value of residential permits issued for the January-through-April period of 1966 were well ahead of the same period for 1965. Value of one­family dwellings was up 6%, and multiple-family dwell­ings were up 30%. Apartment buildings accounted for the major increase in the latter category. Standard metro­politan statistical reporting areas where apartment con­struction has shown a sharp increase from the first three months of 1965 include Amarillo, Austin, Fort Worth, Lubbock, San Antonio, and Wichita Falls. However, the Dallas and Houston metropolitan areas were far out in front in the total number of new units authorized. Apart­ment building permits were issued in Dallas from Jan­uary through March for 1,678 units, and Houston au­thorized the construction of 1,673 units. Other metro­politan areas in which new apartment units authorized exceeded 300 in number included Austin (820), Lub­bock (567), San Antonio (394), and Fort Worth (362) . The rate of apartment construction is likely to remain high in Austin and Lubbock, partly because institutions of higher education with ever-increasing enrollments are located in both cities. Even with sizable dormitory con­
struction projects planned or under way, neither The 
University of Texas nor Texas Technological College 
can hope to house all of the students who apply for ad­
mission, not only those who are single but those who are 
married. 
Money for financing new construction is in short supply. Savings and loan associations in Texas, normally a major source of funds for loans on residential and commercial construction, are receiving many more ap­plications for loans than they can grant. This means that loans are being made on a much more selective basis than in the past. Because of the tight money supply and the fact that demand for loans is high, interest rates on loans are increasing. This situation may cause a de­crease in the number of housing starts, because some applications for loans will be denied, and some families will delay construction plans for homes and wait until mortgage money at lower interest rates is available. 
Employment in contract construction in Texas during April as estimated by the Texas Employment Commission was 190,100. This was 400 below April 1965 but 1,200 above March of this year. The monthly average for 1965 was estimated to be 188,300. Employment in con­tract construction includes individuals working on high­ways and streets and on projects located outside the boundaries of permit-issuing municipalities, but the esti­mate does not include data for firms employing less than four persons. 
Contract construction is big business in Texas. An article in Engineering News Record for May 19 reveals that 22 of the 400 major construction contracting finns in the United States were headquartered in Texas. Such firms not only contract for projects all over the nation but all over the world. For example, Brown and Root, Inc., of Houston, in second place among the 400 largest firms, was involved in $508 million worth of construction projects in 1965; $140 million of this amount was in foreign construction. Second to Brown and Root in Texas was the H. B. Zachry Company of San Antonio, which had $103 million in contracts of which $72.7 million was classified as foreign. 
ESTIMATED VALUES OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED IN TEXAS 
Percent change 
Jan-AprApr Jan-Apr 1966 1966 1966 Apr 1966 from 

from Jan-Apr Classification (thousands of dollars) Mar 1966 1965 
ALL  PERMITS  ..........152,935  609,880  -10  + 20  
New  construction  .135,526  543,823  -10  + 24  
Residential  
(housekeeping)  61,470  278,319  -24  + 10  
One-family  dwellings .  47,755  217,824  -27  + 6  
Multiple-family  
dwellings  13,715  60,495  -14  + 30  
Nonresidential  
buildings  74,056  265,504  + 8  + 44  
Nonhousekeeping  
buildings  
(residential)  l,333  7,643  -61  -19  
Amusement  buildings.  1,596  14,229  -86  +368  
Churches  3, 7 43  13,365  -28  + 9  
Industrial  buildings  ll.591  35,938  + 65  + 82  
Garages  (commercial  
and private) Service stations  706 1,348  3,287 6,136  + 24 -27  + 50 + 21  
Hospitals and institutions  15,274  23,376  +728  +128  
Office-bank  buildings .  6,952  40,783  + 78  + 23  
Works  and  utilities .  2,519  6,274  +225  -11  
Educational  buildings .  15,095  62,549  -26  + 38  
Stores and mercantile  
buildings  11,590  42,975  + 13  + 32  
Other buildings and  
structures  2,309  8,949  + 37  + 94  
Additions,  alterations,  
and  repairs  17,409  66,057  -11  - 7  
METROPOLITAN vs.  
NONMETROPOLITANt  
Total metropolitan Central cities  ..... .l24, 784 92,053  510,094 390,086  -8 -10  + 22 + 23  
Outside  central  cities  32,731  120,008  - l  + 22  
Total  nonmetropolitan  28,151  99,786  -17  + 8  
10,000 to 50,000  
population  17,921  57,990  -12  + 15  
Less t han 10,000  
population  10,230  41,796  -25  - l  

t As defined in the 1960 Census. 
••Change is less than one-half of 1% . 
Source: Bureau of Business Research in cooperation with the Bureau of t he Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS 
First Half, Fiscal 1965-1966 

by Ernest W. Walker• 

It was pointed out in the January 1966 issue of the Te:zas Business Review that the total volume of securities registered for the first time during the first quarter of the current fiscal year declined slightly when compared to the fourth quarter of fiscal 1965. It was also noted that while securities registered by "Other Companies" increased substantially during this same period when compared to the preceding quarter, securities registered by "Texas Companies" suffered a major decline. An analysis of the data of the volume of securities registered during the second quarter indicates a completely different picture; that is, the total value of original applications which were approved was 77.3% higher than the amount approved in the first quarter. Following their first-quarter decline, the volume of securities registered by "Texas Companies" recovered during the second quarter, increas­ing 3.4%. Conversely, while the volume of securities registered by "Other Companies" increased substantially during the first quarter when compared to the fourth quarter of 1965, they fell some 69% in the second quarter. 
Comparing the data for the first half of fiscal 1966 with the first half of 1965, securities ·registered by "Mutual Investment Companies" and "Other Companies" experienced an increase of 98.0% and 36.5%, respectively. There seems no reason to believe that this rate of growth will not continue during the last half of 1966. Unfor­tunately, the same conclusion cannot be made about "Texas Companies." For these firms to reverse the decline experienced during the first half of the current year would require a tremendous acceleration in their activity. 
While it is extremely difficult to isolate the cause or causes for the dimunition in the volume of securities 
"Profeaaor of Finance, The Univenity of Texas. 

registered by "Texas Companies," one explanation may be that these companies are usually much smaller than the firms in the "Other Companies" category and there­fore find it "cheaper" to obtain funds from internal rather than external sources. Another reason may be that smaller firms find it somewhat difficult to enter an unstable market. 
The volume of renewals, unlike original registrations, tends to move inversely with an active market. While renewals increased relatively in the first quarter when 
SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS, 1960-1966 
BY FISCAL YEARS BY QUARTERS 
Million'S of clolla.r• Million:s of d.oUau 
350 
.. 
;_·
2"°'1--_,,_··-~~~~~~~-+-i' 

2CO 
--
l ·~. ... 
... 
••l ··.. .
•
1--~~~~~~-.~/'--~~~100 
l-----c~·~-·~·
""· ·...,-~~~;~~~--1~ 
_......>'--• '•,,,"o'HO-,._,.,,,./ 
1W63 19641~ ~,~--,"""~,-:--3~-:---7'::--~,~s:--;2"~.,
,.,~~•::---~::---.~0 
1s;o...c-1~ 1Si65-1~ 
· ... •Odg· aJ rlt'gistn lions Re rwal re;::SUatio:u 

compared to the fourth quarter of 1965, they declined in importance in the second quarter. This, of course, re­flects the upward movement of the market. Comparing the volume of renewals in the first half of fiscal 1966 with the like period in 1965 as well as with the last half of fiscal 1965, it appears that they were relatively more important, e.g., they amounted to 30% of all ap­plications during the first half of fiscal 1966 but only 28% and 25% in the first and last half of 1965, respec­tively. The evidence suggests that renewals will be relatively more important in 1966 than in 1965, primarily because of the unstable market which prevailed during the first half of fiscal 1966 and which will probably continue throughout the remainder of the current fiscal year. 
SECURITIES REGISTRATIONS IN TEXAS (F iscal years 1960-1965--Millions of dollars} 
1965-66 First quarter  1965-66 Second quarter  First half 1964-65  First half 1965-66  Last hal.f 1964-65  Last hal.f 1965-66  
Securities registrations:  No.  Amount  No.  Amount  No.  Amount  No.  Amount  No.  Amount  No.  Amount  

Original applications:  
Mutual investment companies...  26  $ 30.9  30  $ 97.2  44  $ 64.7  56  $128.l  63  $ 86.2  56  $128.l  
All other corporate securities:  
Texas  companies  . . . . . . . . . . .  12  6.5  10  6.7  30  45.9  22  13.l  33  29.6  22  13.1  
Other companies  . . . . . . . . . . . .  58  25.8  39  8.1  68  24.9  97  34.0  100  32.0  97  34.0  
Total:  Original applications. . . . 96  63.l  79  112.0  142  135.5  175  175.2  196  147.8  !75  175.2  
Registrations renewed :  
Mutual investment companies...  47  35.5  35  35.8  77  52.3  82  71.3  81  40.7  82  71.3  
All other corporate securities:  
Texas companies . . . . . . . . . . . .  6  2.0  .3  7  2.4  6  2.3  11  4.3  6  2.3  
Other  companies  . . . . . . . . . . .  1  2.0  6  1.5  2.0  .6  5  2.0  
Total:  Renewals  ..... . . . ......  58  37.6  40  38.l  89  93  75.6  96  45.6  93  75.6  
Grand  total  ....... . . ........ . .. 149  100.8  119  150.l  231  201.7  268  2'i0.B  292  183.4  268  2.50.8  

•.Amounta to only $14,000. 

JUNE 1966 163 



LOCAL BUSINES S CONDITIONS 



Indicators of business conditions in Texas cities pub­lished in this table include statistics on banking, build­ing permits, employment, postal receipts, and retail trade. An individual city is listed when a minimum of three indicators is available. 
The cities have been grouped according to Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas. In Texas all 21 SMSA's are defined by county lines ; the counties included are listed under each SMSA. The populations shown for the SMSA's are estimates for April 1, 1965, prepared by the Population Research Center, Department of Sociology, The University of Texas-the fact designated by footnote 
(1) . Cities are listed under their appropriate SMSA's; all other cities are listed alphabetically. The population shown after the city name is the 1960 Census figure, with the exceptions of those marked (r), which are estimates officially recognized by the Texas Highway De­partment, and that given for Pleasanton, which is a com­bination of the 1960 Census figures for Pleasanton and North Pleasanton. Since the SMSA and city population estimates have different sources, it is not surprising that they are sometimes inconsistent, as is the case here with the Odessa SMSA (Ector County) and Odessa. 
I 
"""' 
Retail sales data are reported here only when a min­

imum of five stores report in the given retail area sales 
category. The first column shows an average percent 
change from the preceding month, indicated by (t). 
This is the normal statewide seasonal change in sales 
by that kind of business-except in the cases of Dallas, 
Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio, where the dag­
ger is omitted because the normal seasonal changes given 
are for each of these cities individually. The second col­
umn shows the percent change in actual sales reported 
for the month, and the third column shows the percent 
change in actual sales from the same month a year ago. 
A large variation between the normal seasonal change 
and the reported change indicates an abnormal sales 
month. 
Additional symbols used in this table include: 
( *) Indicates cash received during the four-week postal 

accounting period ended April 22, 1966. 
(:j:) Money on deposit in individual demand deposit 

accounts on the last day of the month. 
(§) Data for Texarkana, Texas, only. 
(**) Change is less than one-half of 1%. 
( 11 ) Annual rate basis. 

Percent change 	P ercent change 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 	Apr 1966 Apr 1966 
Apr from from 	Apr from from City and item 
1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 	1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
ANDREWS (pop. 11,135) ABILENE SMSA 
Postal receipts• . . . $ 8,987 + 11 + 29 
(Jones and Taylor; pop. 124,3571) 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 23,100 +351 -50 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,883,748 +105 + 77 Bank debits (thousands) ......... . ...$ 6,420 9 + 1 Bank debits (thousands) II ...........$ 1,879.044 -4 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 6,678 -8 Nonfarm employment (area) 36,400 •• + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 11.5 + 12 
Manufacturing employment (area) 3.970 2 •• Percent unemployed (area) . 

3.7 	+ 9 -18 AMARILLO SMSA (Potter and Randall; pop. 169,9421) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 7,465,375 + 190 +!70 ABILENE (pop. 110,049r) Bank debits (thousands) 11 -.... . .. . . $ 4,386,264 2 + 15 Retail sales Nonfarm employment (area) . 57,300 + 2 + 5
········· · · ••t -12 -7 

Apparel stores .... 	Manufacturing employment (area) . 7,170 + 2 + 9
+ 18t -3 -7 

Automotive stores 	Percent unemployed (area) . . . . 2.4 -27 -SS
lt -28 -14 

General merchandise stores . 
+ 3t -12 

Lumber, building material, AMARILLO (pop. 155,205r) and hardware stores + llt + 16 + 24 Retail sales ••t + 4 + 9 Postal receipts• ...... $ 131,624 -10 8 Apparel stores + 18t + 6 -6
+ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2.,883. 748 +106 Automotive stores -lt + + 10
+ 82 Bank debits (thousands) . .... .. $ 133.458 9 + 6 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 281,657 + 2 + 6 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 73,505 	Building permits, less federal contracts $ 7,092.600 +227 +168
+ 4 + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover...... 22.3 9 Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 348,323 4 +IS 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 128,584 2 -1 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 32.2 + 13 
ALPINE (pop. 4,740) Canyon (pop. 6,755r) 
Postal receipts• . . . ... .... . . $ 5.429 

-17 + 12 Postal receipts• .. . $ 11,215 + 44 + 59
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 

14,000 +155 	+2Sl
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 872,775 -8Bank debits (thousands) . . .....$ 3.740 7 

+ 8 Bank debits (thousands) ... . $ 8,841 -18 + 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4.761 
1 

•• End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 7,377 -7
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.4 3 	+ ' 
+ 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 18.9 -12 + 8 
164 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Percent change P ercent change
Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
Groves (pop. 17,304) ANGLETON: see HOUSTON SMSA 

Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . ....$ 10,S91 + 29 + 24 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 47,947 -79 -58 ARANSAS PASS: see CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 7,467 -2 + 26 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 4,15S •• 17 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. .. . . 21.6 •• + 51 
ATHENS (pop. 7,086) 
Postal receipts• .. $ 16,515 + 10 + 
Nederland (pop. 15,274r) 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 130,200 + 51 + 8 
Postal receipts• .... . ... : ............$ 11,017 -4

+

Bank debits (thousands) . . $ 12,084 4 + 6 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 152,591 -74
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 8,876 + 5 1 -51 
Bank debits (thousands) ........... .. $ 7,052 + 11 + 9

Annual rate of deposit turnover.. ... . 16.7 5 + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,75S s •• Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . 17.5 + 14 + 
AUSTIN SMSA Orange (pop. 25,605) (Travis; pop. 245,5421) 

Retail sales . ... . + 16 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 4,905,5()4 -33 + 21 Postal receipts• .... ..... ... ........ . $ S0,90S + 17 + 9 
Bank debits (thousands) 11 ...... . .. .. $ 4,331,364 + + 16 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 25S,194 + 11 + 52 
Nonfarm employment (area) . . . 101,200 + + 5 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. .$ S5,06S 8 + 6 
Manufacturing employment (area) . 6,980 + + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. $ 27,S63 + s + 11 
Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 + -25 Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . . 15.6 4 2 
Nonfarm placements 147 7 -2S 

AUSTIN (pop. 212,000r) Port Arthur (pop. 66,676) 
Retail sales ... ..t -7 + 6 Retail sales 9 + lS Apparel st.ores + 18t -5 + Lumber, building material, Automotive atorea . 1t -17 + 5 and hardware stores.. . + llt 8 + 15 Drugst.ores 4t -10 + 6 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 59,25S 1 + 16 Eating and drinking places . 4t Building permits, less federal contracts $ 972,970 + 17 -4S Furniture and household Bank debits (thousands) . . . . ....$ 77,795 10 + 10 
appliance atorea 2t 4 + 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 44,3S3 + 9 + s General merchandise at.ores. + St + 5 + Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . . 21.9 11 + 11 Lumber, building material, 
and hardware stores. . . . + 11t -n + 16 Port Neches (pop. 8,696) Postal receipts• ......$ 627,535 + 10 + 5 Postal receipts• .................$ 9,442 -2 + 22 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 4,905,504 -S2 + 2S Building permits, less federal contracts $ 86,773 + 14 -8S Bank debits (thousands) . .. ... . ......$ 343,477 6 + 10 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ ll,74S 2 ­
21 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 178,655 8 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 6,487 8 -s Annual rate of deposit turnover . 22.2 + 8 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 20.8 + 2 -23 

BAY CITY (pop. 11,656) BEEVILLE (pop. 13,811) 
Postal receipts• ... .$ 14,949 + 12

Postal receipts• .... . . .. $ 15,670 + 1 + 10 + Building permits, less federal contracts $ 66,000 -57 Building permits, less federal contracts $ lS0,790 + 66 +S44 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . $ 19,7Sl + 11 
Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 11,288 6 -2 


End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 25,721 + 4 + 4 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 15,100 2 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover. 9.0 Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... . 8.9 4 -s Nonfarm placements 105 + 59 -2S Nonfarm placements 123 9 + 10 
+ s + 6 
BELTON (pop. 8,163) BEAUMONT-PORT ARTHUR-ORANGE SMSA 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . . $ 10,618 -46 -Sl 

(Jefferson and Orange; pop. 312,7991) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 72,650 -63 -S2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,485,247 -2S -38 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 8,8S9 -5 -4 Bank debits (thousands) 11-.. . .$ 5,S4S,552 + + 12 Nonfarm employment (area) . llS,000 + + 1 BIG SPRING (pop. 31,230) 
Manufacturing employment (area) . S4,100 + •• Retail sales ......... ... . -14 + 15 Percent unemployed (area) . 3.9 5 -26 Lumber, building material, and hardware stores .... . + llt -8 -17 Postal receipts• ..... ... . .....$ S2,785 -7 + 12
BEAUMONT (pop. 127,500r) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 782,819 +521 +111 Retail sales 
••t -8 + 9 Bank debits (thousands) . . ........ .$ 4S,086 2 + 22 

Apparel stores 

+ 18t + Sl + s End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 27,000 s + 10 Automotive stores 
1t -15 + 15 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . . 18.9 + 2 + 9 Eating and drinking places . •t •• + s Nonfarm placements .... ........ ... . 207 + -10 
Food stores 
St •• + 12 
General merchandise stores. . . . 


+ St + 2 •• BISHOP: see CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA 
Postal receipts• ................ ..... $ 150,400 -2 + 2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 968,Sl7 -45 -3S Bank debits (thousands) . . . . $ 289,547 2 + lS End-of-month deposits (thouaanda)t. . $ US.828 + + s Annual rate of deposit turnover.. .. . . S0.6 + + 14 
For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. 
BONHAM (pop. 7,357) 
Postal receipts• .$ 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 
Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . $ 
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t..$ 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 

7,785 
127,500 8,S78 8,270 
12.1 
+ 
+ 45 4 2 s 
-7 -81 
+ 1 
+ 7 
2 
JUNE 1966 

Percent change Percent change
Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions 

Apr 1.966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from 
1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965
City and item 
Port Isabel (pop. 3,575) BORGER (pop. 20,911) 

18,525 -7 •• Postal receipts• ..... .$ 2,970 -21 + 26
Postal receipts• .....$ 

-42 -63 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 5,680 +373 -29Building permits, less federal contracts $ 7 5,500 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 1,889 + 24
Nonfarm placements 168 + 66 -23 + 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 1,367 4 + 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . 16.2 + 9 + 6 BRADY (pop. 5,338) 
Postal receipts• ... $ 7,930 + 43 + 35 
San Benito (pop. 16,422) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 62,100 -38 + 43 Postal receipts• ...... $ 9,068 + 10 + 14Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 8,170 + 6 + 33 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 4,455 -85 -84
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 7,595 + 2 Bank debits (thousands) . . . .$ 6,432

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.9 + + 28 •• + 10 
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 6,029 -4 + 6 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.5 •• + 
BRENHAM (pop. 7,740) 

Postal receipts• .. $ 11,4U + 6 + 22 
BROWNWOOD (pop. 16,974) 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 182,580 -26 + 43 
Postal receipts• .. ... .$ 27,512 -14 -9

Bank debits (thousands) . . ... .. .... .$ 14,805 + 7 + 17 Building permits. less federal contracts $ 34,200 -85 -92

End-of-month deposits (thousandsJi. . $ 14,601 5 + 3 
Bank debits (thousands) . . . ........ .$ 22,778 + 3 + 12

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 11.9 + 8 + 12 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 13,856 + I 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 19.1 + + 5 
BROWNFIELD (pop. 10,286) Nonfarm placements 1.27 + -17 
Postal receipts• .$ 13,2M + 14 + 20 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 13,680 -88 + 13 

BRYAN (pop. 27,542) 
Bank debits (thousands) .. . ... ..... .. $ 17,965 7 -37 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 15,754 + 7 Postal receipts• . ......$ 33,135 + 5 + 17 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 322,628 -75 +133 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . .. ... .$ 41,667 + + 25 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 23,246 + + 7 

BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN BENITO SMSA Annual rate of deposit turnover . 21.6 + 6 + 17 
(Cameron; pop. 141,6711) Nonfarm placements . .. 365 + 16 + 15 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 750,121 + 5 +181 
Bank debits (thousands) 11-.........$ 1,444,596 3 + 15 

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.6 -39 
CALDWELL (pop. 2,202r) 
Nonfarm employment (area) . 37,350 •• + 4 Postal receipts• . . $ 4,129 + 37 + 32Manufacturing employment (area) . 5,960 -2 + 14 
Bank debits (thousands) .......... . .. $ 3,503 + 13 + 84

Percent unemployed (area) . 6.8 + 10 -20 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,536 -2 + 14 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 9.2 + 14 + 18 

BROWNSVILLE (pop. 48,040) Ret.ail sales ••t •• + 16 CAMERON (pop. 5,640) Automotive stores -1t 7 + 26 Postal receipts• ..... . ....... . . ..... .$ 11,089 + 37 + 7 
Postal receipts• .........$ 41,136 7 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1.3.000 + s +122 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 631,206 + 18 +340 Bank debits (thousands) . . . .$ 6,225 + 6 + so Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 41,452 2 + 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 5,741 + + IO 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 21,976 + 4 + Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.2 + 20
+ 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 23.1 2 + 15 
Nonfarm placements 509 + -14 

CANYON: see AMARILLO SMSA 

Harlingen (pop. 41,207) CARROLLTON: see DALLAS SMSA 
Retail sales ..t -16 + 15 
Automotive stores ........ . 

-lt -30 + 17 CISCO (pop. 4,499) 
Postal receipts• .. ....... .$ 39,882 + 2 + 8 

Postal receipts• . . . . . ............ . . $ 5,025 + 2 +

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 89,300 . -35 + 21 Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. .$ 4,109 -13 +
Bank debits (thousands) . . ... ....$ 42,238 9 + 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 3,854 -1 + 10 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 21,734 4 + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. .... 12.7 -11 -7 

Annual rate of deposit turnover. 22.8 5 + 3 
Nonfarm placements 3

517 + 14 
CLEBURNE: see FORT WORTH SMSA 
La Feria (pop. 3,047) CLUTE: see HOUSTON SMSA 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 2,616 
-1 + 25 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 9,480 +690 -31 
COLLEGE STATION (pop. 11,396) 
Bank debits (thousands) .. ....... .. .. $ 2,123 + 6 + 12 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 1,652 

Postal receipts• .. . . $ 25,741 + 2 + 28+ + 11 

Annual rate of deposit turnover .. .. + Building permits, less federal contracts $ 412,216 + 44 + so
15.5 + 12 

Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. .$ 7,803 + 10 + 46 End-of-month deposits (thousandalt..$ 5,121. + 7 + 84 Los Fresnos (pop. 1,289) Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . . 18.9 + + 15 
Postal receipts* .$ 
·· ··· ···· · 1,655 + 3 + 53 
Bank debits (thousands) . . . ... . ..... . $ 1,207 7 


+ COLORADO CITY (pop. 6,457) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 1,259 4

+ + Postal receipts• . $ 6,792 + 13 + 28 
Annual rate of deposit turnover...... 11.7 6 
4

+ Bank debits (thousands) . . . .$ 5,711 -22 + 15 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 7,273 -8 + 20 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover. 9.3 -18 -s 
166 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
Percent changePercent change

Local Business Conditions 	Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 	Apr 1966 Apr 1966 
Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
CONROE: see HOUSTON SMSA 	CRYSTAL CITY (pop. 9,1 01) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 40,S61 -57 15 COPPERAS COVE (pop. 4,567) Bank debits (thousands) . . . .$ 4,109 -15 + 31 Postal receipts• ....$ 5,064 + + 19 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 3,161 5 + 6 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 26,525 -46 -94 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . .. . 15.2 -14 + 23 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 1,546 2 -Z4 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 1,295 2 -36 
DALLAS SMSA 

Annual rate of deposit turnover.. 14.2 + 2 + 19 (Collin, Dallas, Denton, and Ellis; pop. 1,261,7871 ) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $27,448,080 + 2 -21
CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA 

Bank debits (thousands) II. . ... $60,814,140 + 2 + 14 (Nueces and San Patricio; pop. 268,7021 ) Nonfarm employment (area) ..... .... 56S,700 + + 6 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,293,534 -35 -48 Manufacturing employment (area) . 1S2,250 + 10
+ 
Bank debits (thousands) II ...........$ 3,749,376 + 3 + 4 

P ercent unemployed (area) 2.4 4 -27 
Nonfarm employment (area) . . . 82,300 •• + 
Manufacturing employment (area) . 10,390 •• •• 

Carrollton (pop. 9,832r)

Percent unemployed (area) . 3.6 -3 -27 Postal receipts• .. .$ 10,911 + + 20 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 494,000 -41 Bank debits (thousands) ... .......... $ 8,202 4 + 27 
Aransas Pass (pop. 6,956) 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. S S,615 + 20
Postal receipts• ......... . ... .$ 5,898 + 10 	s 

+ 	Annual rate of deposit turnover. 26.8 •• + 11
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 61,265 + + 82 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 6,130 + 26 + 38 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 5,010 -9 + DALLAS (pop. 679,684) Annual rate of deposit turnover . 14.0 + 27 + S2 Retail sales ... -s -2 5 
Apparel stores ... + 6 + 25 5 Automotive stores -10 16 -25 

Bishop (pop. 3,825r) Drugstores ... •• + 2 + 10 Postal receipts• . . ......$ 2,701 -18 -11 Eating and drinking places....... . + 2 + s -4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 49,500 -68 + 24 Florists .......... .. ... . + + Z4 + 19 Bank debits (thousands) . . .... .$ 2,lSO + 10 Furniture and household
+ 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 2,281 + 1 + 19 appliance stores . . + 6 -20 9 
Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . . ll.2 + 8 	Gasoline and service stations. . . . . . . S s + 2 General merchandise stores. . .. + 21 s Lumber, building material, 
CORPUS CHRISTI (pop. 184,163r) 
and hardware stores....... . + 2 -11 7 


Retail sales 7••t -7 + Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 3,505,Sl4 + 2 +
Automotive stores ... lt -12 + 10 	-4S
Building permits, less federal contracts $10,S47,402 -10 
Drugstores .. . . 	-4t 6 + 

4 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 4,6S5,275 -6 2 General merchandise stores... + St + 1
+ s End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 1,395,006 •• + 2 
Postal receipts• . . $ 2S6,086 + 6 + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 39.8 -6 4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ l,938,5S4 -34 -S8 Bank debits (thousands) . . ....$ 276,952 + 4 + s 
Denton (pop. 26,844) 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 135,214 •• + 4 
Postal receipts• ...... . ... . .. ........$ 50,565 5

Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . 24.6 + 4 + 9 	+ 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,197,SOO 4 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . $ S5,622 7 + 16 Robstown (pop. 10,266) End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 24,017 7 + 8 Postal receipts• ..... ... . .. . . 9,756 -2 + 9 Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . . . 17.2 4 + 4 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 
26.800 -64 -16 Nonfarm placements . ....... .. . .... . 145 -21 17 

Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 11,414 + 15 + 14 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 9,258 -2 + 4 

Ennis (pop. 10,250r) 

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 14.7 + 17 + 10 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . $ lS,460 + 37 -4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 14,880 -96 -88 
Sinton (pop. 6,008) Bank debits (thousands) . . ... ....... .$ 8,241 1 + 3 Postal receipts• . . ... .. $ 5,979 -27 -27 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 7,21.5 3 + 2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 22,800 -68 -64 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. ... . 13.5 + + Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 4,8S7 + 7 + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 4,816 3 
Garland (pop. 50,622r) 

Annual rate of deposit turnover. 11.9 + 12 + 10 
Retail sales . ••t -17 Automotive stores ........ ....... . -lt -19 + 2 CORSICANA (pop. 20,344) Postal receipts• ... .................. $ 60,143 + 11 + 10 Retail sales ..... 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,206,314 -48 -42
+ 3 

Lumber, building material, 	Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . .$ 39,454 -9 + 4 
and hardware stores. . . . . . . . . . . . . + 11t + 8 1 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 20,022 + 1 + 2 Postal receipts• .... .. $ 24,69S Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . . 23.8 -10 2
•• + 9 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,557,989 +651 +sis 
Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 22,234 .4 + 8 Grand Prairie (pop. 40,150r) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands>i. . $ 21,222 -5 

+ 
Postal receipts• ........... .... ... . . . $ 34,676 + 2 + 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.2 + 1 

+ 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,846,551 +208 + 224 Nonfarm placements 251 


+ 20 + 11 Bank debits (thousands) . . ... .. . $ 20,972 + 5 + 10 
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t..$ 12,888 + 2 + 14 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . 19.7 + 6 -s 
JUNE 1966 
Percent change 	Percent change
Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions 

Apr 1966 Apr 1966 ·, Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
DEER PARK: see HOUSTON SMSAIrving (pop. 60,136r) 
Postal receipts• ....$ 48,579 -21 + 14 
DEL RIO (pop. 18,612) 
Iluilding permits, less federal contracts $ 3,155,043 + 34 + 35 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 43,947 

2 + 5 Postal receipts• . . . . . .. . . . $ 20,825 + 14 + 19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 22,597 4 + 25 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 387,131 +264 + 61 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 22.9 -18 	Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 14,794 s + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 17,404 + 1 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 10.2 s -4
Justin (pop. 622) 
Postal receipts• .. $ +777 -11 + 39 
DENISON (pop. 25,766r)
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 
Postal receipts• 	. . $ 25,625 -1 + 8Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . .. $ 1,076 -20 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 137,987 -25 -10End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 768 -4 7 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 19,420

Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . . 16.5 -14 + 8 	•• + 2 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 16,648 -2 + 8 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.9 •• -5
McKinney (pop. 13,763) 
Nonfarm placements 	162 -27 -15 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 19,210 + 13 + 67 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 98,875 -68 -7 
DENTON: see DALLAS SMSA

Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. . . . . $ 11,489 + -14 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 9,397 -4 -17 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 14.4 + 1 + 1 DONNA: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA Nonfarm placements 127 + 10 -16 
DUMAS (pop. 10,547r) 
Postal receipts• .. .$ 8,868 + 11 -2

Mesquite (pop. 27,526) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 148,000 -63 -58

Postal receipts• .. ...... .. ... . . . $ 21,742 8 + 42 
Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . . .. .. .. $ 12,586 + 7 + 10

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 424,340 4 -52 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 12,281 2 + 4

Bank debits (thousands) . . ....$ 12,496 + 6 + 30 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 12.2 + 7 -\

End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 7,166 4 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover . 20.5 + 11 + 23 
EAGLE PASS (pop. 12,094) 
Postal receipts• .. .. $ 11,664 + 19 + 28
Midlothia.n (pop. 1,521) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 32,400 -86 -81 Building t>ermits, less federal contracts $ 47,300 + 23 +117 Bank debits (thousands) .. ..... . . . $ 7,144 + + 14
Ilank debits (thousands) ............ .$ 1,126 -4 + 10 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. $ 5,053 2 + 10End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 1,426 -5 + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 16.8 + 8 + 8 

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.2 •• + 6 EDINBURG: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA 
Pilot Point (pop. 1,254) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 20,000 -9 -88 EDNA (pop. 5,038) Ba nk debits (thousands) . . ... . . . $ 1,391 -15 + 13 Postal receipts• . . $ 6,620 + 26
+ 25 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 1,765 -5 + 12 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 47,000 -57 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.2 -11 •• Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 5,996 + + 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 6,795 4 + 

Plano (pop. 10,102r) Annual rate of deposit turnover . 10.4 + 8 
Postal receipts• .$ 10,988 •• + 43 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 162,903 -72 -79 EL PASO SMSA 
Bank debits (thousands) .... .........$ 4,085 -9 -7 

(El Paso; pop. 339,9491 ) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 3,015 -30 + 12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,760,746 -45 -39 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 15.4 -38 -20 
Bank debits (thousands) 11 .... ....... $ 4,810,500 2 + 3 Nonfarm employment (area) 100,400 + 1 + 7 

Richardson (pop. 34,390r) Manufacturing employment (area) . 18,350 + 2 + 10 Postal receipts• .........$ 49,085 -7 + 18 Percent unemployed (area) . 4.4 2 -24 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,949,249 +150 +108 Ba nk debits (thousands) . . . .. $ 27,428 + + 5 EL PASO (pop. 276,687) End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 12,902 1 + 8 Retail sales ••t + 4 + Annual rate of deposit turnover. 25.4 + 3 2 Apparel stores + 18t + 27 
Automotive stores 	1t -2 + 

Seagoville (pop. 3,745) Drugstores -4 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 7,156 + 35 + 24 Food stores -st •• Building permits, less federal contracts $ 79 Postal receipts• .... .. $ 372,935 + + 4 
-8 + 15

Ba nk debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 4,157 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3, 760,746 -45 -39 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. $ 2,048 -11 + 3 Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . . . ... .. .$ 384,910 -15 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... . 23.0 -7 + End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. $ 202,944 + 2 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . 23.0 -12 •• 
Waxahachie (pop. 12,749) Postal receipts• . . . . ....... .$ 31,966 + 17 + 28 ENNIS: see DALLAS SMSA Building permits, less federal contracts $ 85,734 +150 + 61. Bank debits (thousands) .$ 12,844 •• + 9 EULESS: see FORT WORTH SMSA End-of-month deposits (thousands) i .. $ 10,650 + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 14.4 + 2 + 1 FORT STOCKTON (pop. 6,373) Nonfarm placements . 103 Postal receipts• ... . .. . .. . . . . . .. $ 7,238 + 1 + 10
+ + 26 

-DAYTON: see HOUSTON SMSA Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 7,212 + 14 •• End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 7,710 -2 + E For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover . 11.1 + 14 -8 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 25,750 -36 88 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Percent change 	Percent change 
Local Business Conditions 	Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
FRIONA (pop. 3,049r) FORT WORTH SMSA 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 7,200 -93 -96
(Johnson and Tarrant; 611,2931 ) 

Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 7,444 -2 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 5,276 -12 Bank debits (thousands) II ....... .... $13,782..864 •• + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . . 15.8 + 5 + 15 Nonfarm employment (area) .. .. . . .. 248,700 + 1 Building permits, less federal contracts $14, 142, 731 + 13 + 33 
+ 

Manufacturing employment (area) . 69,875 + 2 + 14 
GALVESTON-TEXAS CITY SMSA 

Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . 2.3 -15 -36 
(Galveston; pop. 153,9931) Building permits, less federal contracts S 2,980,584 + 188 + 126 Cleburne (pop. 15,381) Bank debits (thousands) 11-..........$ 1,956,180 + 2 -3 Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 21,679 + 16 + 22 Nonf.arm employment (area) . . . . . . . . . 53,900 •• -2 
Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ 109,250 -74 -50 Manufacturing employment (area) . 10,110 •• •• Bank debits (thousands) . . . .$ 14,649 Percent unemployed (area).......... 4.8 + 4 -6
+ 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ l2,684 + 2 + 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. .. . . . 14.0 5 
+ GALVESTON (pop. 67,175) 
Retail 	sales •• 9 + 13 Automotive stores ... ....... ..... . -1 19 + 15
Euless (pop. 10,500r) 

Food stores ... ........ ........ ... . -3 + + 14 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ 7,271 -4 + 3 

Postal receipts• . ...... ..............$ 112,241 12 6 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 151,590 -13 -59 

Building perm.its, less federal contracts S 1,250,302 +131 + 177 
Bank debits (thousands) ........ .....$ 8,808 -3 + 47 

Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 112,043 + 5 + s 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 3,690 + 57

+ 	End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 58,230 +Annual rate of deposit turnover . 29.3 •• -5 
Annual rat~ of deposit turnover.. 22.9 + 4 + 5 
La Marque (pop. 13,969) FORT WORTH (pop. 356,268) 

Postal receipts• ............... ..... .$ 13,570 + 9 + ZS

Retail sales .. . ......... . -1 + 1 -2 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 6t,244 -34 -54Apparel stores .. . ... .. ... . .. .. .. . . + + 11 -12 
Bank debits (thousands) .. ..... ......$ 9,957 2 -2
Automotive stores 	-12 -17 -12 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ 7,212 + 3 + 19
Eating and drinking places. 2 -5 + 5 
Annual rate of deposit turnover.. ... . 16.8 3 -22
Food stores . .. 	+ 3 + 6 + 6 
Gasoline and service stations . 2 •• + 11 
Lumber, building material, 	Texas City (pop. 32,065) 
and hardware stores. . . . . . . + 6 + 6 + 14 Postal receipts• .................... $ 27,792 -7 -6 

Postal receipts• ........ . .. .$ 1,045,349 + 11 + 5 Building perm.its, less federal contracts $ 1,669,038 +316 + 128 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 7,750,242 + 95 + 78 Bank debits (thousands) ............ .$ 25,874 -35 

Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 983,784 -8 + 7 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 15,<l27 + -4 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 418,502 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover...... 20.6 7 -21 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . . . 28.2 -7 
+ 

GARLAND: see DALLAS SMSA 
Grapevine (pop. 4,659r) 

Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ 5,508 -10 + 8 GATESVILLE (pop. 4,626) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 35,800 -70 -31 Postal receipts• .....................$ 6,933 + 34 + 19 

Bank debits (thousands) . . .. . . . . .. . . . S 5,031 + 20 Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 5,997 + 1 + 3 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 3,921 7 End-of-mont h deposits (thousands) t .. $ 6,206 3 
Annual rate of deposit turnove.r .. ... . 14.8 	Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 11.4 + 3 + 8 + 16 
+ 

GEORGETOWN (pop. 5,218) North Richland Hills (pop. 8,662) 
Postal receipts• . ......... . ..........$ 7,735 + 2 + 17 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 381,500 -+179 $

61 Building permits, less federal contract! 30,400 -<l2 -54 
Bank debits (thousands) .. $ 9,970 -l2 

+ 
ZS Bank debits (thousands) ......... .. ..$ 5,937 + 3 + 5 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 5,213 -6 

+ 
11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 6,237 3 + 2 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . 22.2 



-10 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 11.3 + 8 
GIDDll GS (pop. 2,821) White Settlement (pop. 11,513) 
Postal receipts• ................. ....$ 4,256 -4 -21

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 63,094 -21 -25 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 16,000 -87 -33Bank debits (thousands) .. ... .. . . . .. .$ 2,244 •• + 35 
Bank debits (thousands) ............ .$ 4,087 5 + 18

End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 1,591 + + 37 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i ..$ 4,595 2 + 13Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . . . 17 .3 -1 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 10.5 4 
+ 

FREDERICKSBURG (pop. 4,629) 	GLADEWATER (pop. 5,742) 
Postal receipts• .... . ... . . .. .........$ 7,942 + 24 Postal receipts• .................... . 8,764 -11 -10

+ 5 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 104,170 	Building permits, less federal contracts $ 87,100 + 6 +259
-67 + 95 

Bank debits (thousands) ............ . $ 10,ZSl 	Bank debits (thonsands) ... ...... ....$ 5,368 + 9 + 17

5 + 8 

End-of-month deposits (thousandsH.. $ 9,426 + 2 + 8 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,523 -10 + 2 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 13.2 5 -1 An.nual rate of deposit turnover.. ... . 13.5 + 13 + 11 Nonfarm employment (area) ........ . 32,900 •• 
+ 

Manufacturing employment (area) . 8,230 + 1 
+ 11 

For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. 	Percent unemployed (area) ....... .. . 3.0 -25 -29 

JUNE 1966 
P ercent change 	Percent change
Local Business Conditions 	Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from 
City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 	City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,383) 	Clute (pop. 4,501) 
Postal receipts• ... . $ 2,749 9 -16 Postal receipts• ......$ 3,341 -3 + 23 Bank debits (thousands) . .. .. . $ 4,579 + 9 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 95,250 + 189 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 5,957 + 1 + 2 Bank debits (thousands) . . ....$ 2,258 + Annual rate of deposit turnover. 9.3 + 8 + 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 1,662 + 2 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 16.5 
+ + 

GRAHAM (pop. 8,505) Conroe (pop. 9,192) 
Postal receipts• .. . $ 10,772 + 4 + 40 Postal receipts• ........ ... ..........$
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 43,753 + 12 -49 21,982 + 12 + 10 (thousands) . .$ 11,136 + 2 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 131,800 + 77 -24
Bank debits 9,913 + 1 Bank debits (thousands) . . ........$ 16,889 + 2 + 4
End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t. . $ 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 13,479
Annual rate of dep'lsit turnover . 13.1 + + + 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 14.9 + -8 
GRANBURY (pop. 2,227) Dayton (pop. 3,367) 
Postal receipts• ...... . $ 4,123 -10 •• Postal receipts• . . ...... .$ 3,333 -1 + 
1 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 60,000 + 88 +147 Bank debits (thousands) .. .$ 2,002 + 4 + 13 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. . $ 2,436 1 + 13 
Bank debits (thousands) ............. $ 4,421 -4

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.8 + 3 + 2 	+ 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 3,503 •• + 13 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 15.1 -3 + 14 GRAND PRAIRIE: see DALLAS SMSA 
Deer Park (pop. 4,865) 

GRAPEVINE: see FORT WORTH SMSA 	Postal receipts• .............. .......$ 9,567 + 12 + 81 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 332,207 + 67 +219 Bank debits (thousands) ............ .$ 5,382 6
GREENVILLE (pop. 22,134r) 	+ 9 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 2,644 2 
+

Retail sales 	••t -16 -10 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 24.l
Automotive stores -lt -25 -11 Postal receipts• ... $ 32,041 -14 + 4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 243,950 -37 -13 HOUSTON (pop. 938,219) Bank debits (thousands) . .. . $ 20,712 6 19
+ + Retail sales -4 -4 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 

15,975 + 4 + Apparel stores + 7 + 14 +Annual rate of deposit turnover . 15.9 + 14 -­
+ Automotive stores 11 18 
Nonfarm placements 

-···· ..... 255 + 78 +148 	Eating and drinking places . 3 + 3 •• Food stores 3 -18 -11 General merchandise stores. + 2 + 15 ••
HARLINGEN: see BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN 
Liquor stores 	3 + 9 + 14

BENITO SMSA 
Lumber, building material, 

and hardware stores. 6 -27 -22 
HENDERSON (pop. 9,666) Postal receipts• ......$ 2,603,205 -1 + 10 
Postal receipts• .....$ 12,266 + 3 -7 Building permits, less federal contracts $23,456,768 -28 -9 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 24,605 -77 -80 Bank debits (thousands) ........ .... .$ 4,826,317 •• + 16 

-

Bank debits (thousands) . . . ........ $ 8,863 6 + 6 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ l,696,543 •• •• 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 20,076 •• + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 34.1 •• + 15 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 5.3 -7 

Humble (pop. 1,711) HOUSTON SMSA 

Postal receipfs• . . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 5,217 + 5 + 24 (Brazoria, Fort Bend, Harris, Liberty and Montgomery; Building permits, less federal contracts $ 14,450 -42 -65 pop. 1,613,9571) Bank debits (thousands) ........ .....$ 4,242 4 + Building permits, less federal contracts $31,026,756 -19 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 3,769 3 +
+ 

Annual rate of deposit t urnover . 13.3 
Bank debits (thousands) 11 -. . . .... $ 64,346,028 
+ 10 + 20 

Nonfarm employment (area) . 671,700 
•• + 2 
Manufacturing employment (area) . 121,500 

•• + 3 Katy (pop. 1,569)
Percent unemployed (area) . 2.4 
+ 4 -17 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 13,500 -82 -69 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . .....$ 2,781 -11 + 28 
Angleton (pop. 9,131) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 2,532 2 -15 
Postal receipts• ...... ... ........ .. .. $ 9,421 -12 + 5 Annual rate of deposit turnover..... 13.l -7 + 44 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 58,400 -47 -87 
Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 12,066 

+ 6 8 La Porte (pop. 7,250r) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 12,570 + 9 
+ 6 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 98,000 	+ 15Annual rate of deposit turnover . 
12.0 + 4 

Bank debits (thousands) . . .$ 4,683 + 17 + 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 3,299 + 19 + 26
Bellaire (pop. 21,182r) 

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 18.5 + 19 -2
Postal receipts• . . . . $ 51,942 •• + 17
Building permits, less federal contract~ $ 

187,550 +266 
Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ +312 Liberty (pop. 6,127) 

27,679 + 7 + 24 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 17,017 	Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 8,750 + 4 + 87
+ 6 + 26 

Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . . . . 20.1 	Building permits, less federal contracts $ 64,283 -60 + 4
+ 4 + 2 

Bank debits (thousands) . . ...........$ 11,716 -3 + 30 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .$ 10,201 -5 + 9 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.4 •• + 19 
170 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
Percent change Percent change
Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
Pasadena (pop. 58,737) KILGORE (pop. 10,092) 
Postal receipts• ... $ 59,445 + 10 + 4 Postal receipts• ..... ...... .. ........$ 16,342 + 9 9 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 4,404,805 + 167 +560 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 50, 00 -85 7 Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 70,024 + 1 
Bank debits (thousands) ............ $ 13,432 2 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. S 33,376 + 2 + 3 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..S -2
12,977 6 + 

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 25.5 2 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . . .. 12.1 + 3 + 7 Nonfarm employment (area) ......... 32,900 •• + 5 Richmond (pop. 3,668) Manufacturing employment (area) . 8,230 + 11 
Postal receipts• .... . $ 3,550 -22 -l 
Percent unemployed (area) ......... . 3.0 -25 -29 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 60,725 -60 -77 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 7,483 + 25 + 54 
KILLEEN (pop. 23,377) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 9,394 + 4 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover... 9.7 + 24 + 39 Postal receipts• . -. . . . . . . . . . . ........$ 44,448 •• -12 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 246,057 -85 -69 Bank debits (thousands) .......... ...S 19,178 + 7 -6
Rosenberg (pop. 9,698) 

End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 12,20 -10 -23 
Postal receipts• .. .................. $ 10,061 -6 •• 

Annual rate of deposit turnover...... 17.9 13 + 15 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 605,695 +263 +441 
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 9,870 -3 + 7 
KIKGSVILLE (pop. 25,297) 
South Houston (pop. 7,253) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......$ 19,752 -8 + 21 
Postal receipts• .. . s 9,867 + + 19 

Building permits, less federal contracts S 202,120 -65 -69 
Building permits, less federal contracts s 100,638 -26 + 7 Bank debits (thousands) ......$ 13,783 -12 + 12 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 9,069 4 15 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 16,6 0 + + 6
+ 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 5,806 + 3 + 11 

Annual rate of deposit turnover... 10.2 -9 + 10 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 19.l + 9 
KIRBYVILLE (pop. 2,021r) 
Tomball (pop. 2,025r) 

Postal receipts• ...... ..... .$ 4,363 -2 15 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 18,000 -84 -56 
Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 2.,358 -27 -28 

Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 8,101 + 5 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4.,298 •• + 18 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t..$ 5,934 -8 7
+ Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 6.6 -27 -40 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 15.7 + 45 •• 

BROW~SVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN

HUMBLE: see HOUSTON SMSA 
HUNTSVILLE (pop. 11,999) GALVEST01 -TEXAS CITY SMSA 
Postal receipts• .......... .... . . .. $ 19,276 + 25 + 61 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 22,000 -90 -75 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ U,601 + 12 + 17 LAMESA (pop. 12,438) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . . $ 11,132 •• + 19 Postal receipts• .. . . . .. . ........ . ....$ 11,447 -14 6 Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... 12.5 + 17 •• Building permits, less federal contracts S 40.100 -51 4 
Bank debits (thousands) .. . . . .... . .. .$ 15,099 7 + 9 IOWA PARK: see WICHITA FALLS SMSA 17,794 + 14
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . .. . 10.0 4 Nonfarm placements ..... 89 + 11 10
IRVING: see DALLAS SMSA 
JACKSONVILLE (pop. 10,509r) LAMPASAS (pop. 5,670r) 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . ... .$ 23,672 + 1 + 24 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...$ 6,799 + 22 + 25 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 95,000 +179 + 55 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 9,000 -83 -89 Bank debits (thousands) .... ..... .... $ 16,416 + 12 + 16 Bank debits (thousands) ... .......... $ 8,676 + 13 + 12 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t. .$ 11,924 3 + 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 7,439 + 8 + 8 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 16.3 + ~2 + 3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . . . 14.5 + 7 + 
JASPER (pop. 5,120r) 
LA PORTE: see HOUSTON SMSA 
Postal receipts• .....$ 10,907 + 19 + 36 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 56,030 -89 + 78 
Bank debits (thousands) ... ......... . $ 12,512 + 13 + 11 LAREDO SMSA 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 8,187 -2 2 (Webb; pop. 71,7381) 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. . .. . . 18.2 + 14 + 14 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 

303,345 + ios +131 Bank debits (thousands) II .. .........$ 522,048 7 + 
JUSTIN: see DALLAS SMSA Nonfarm employment (area) .. . ... .. . 21,450 -1 + 5 Manufacturing employment (area) . 1,280 + 2 4 Percent unemployed (area) . 8.8 -23 -18
KATY: see HOUSTON SMSA 
l({NGSLAND (pop. 150) LAREDO (pop. 60,678) 
Postal receipts• . . . . . . l,177 -2 Postal receipts• ............ .........$ 48,543 + 3 + 9

+ 22 

Bank debits (thousands) . . . .........$ 2,465 -13 +115 Building perm.its, less federal contracts $ 303,345 +105 +131 End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 1,126 + 1 + 27 Bank debits (thousands) . .. . . ..... . ..$ 47,670 -1 + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover. . . . 26.4 -21 + 50 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 28,968 -3 + 3 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. .... . 19.5 •• + 2 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Nonfarm placements ........ . ...... . 521 -2 -20 
JUNE 1966 
Percent change Percent change
Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from 
Mar 1966 City and item 1966 Mar 1966
City and item 1966 Apr 1965 Apr 1965 
McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA Postal receipts• . . . . S 10,231 + 11 + 10 (Hidalgo; pop. 178,343) Iluilding permits, less federal contracts S 48,380 -84 -68 
LEVELLAND (pop. 12,117r) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ \,529,926 + 98 -81 Ilank debits (thousands) . . ... .$ 14,922 -14 Nonfarm employment (area) . 42,700 •• + 4 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. S 11.250 -12 + Manufacturing employment (area) 3,050 + 4 18
-
Annual rate of deposit turnover.. 14.9 -9 Percent unemployed (area) . 5.5 -18 -19 
LIBERTY: see HOUSTON SMSA Donna (pop. 7,522) 

Postal receipts• .$ 4,128 -10 + l LLA 0 (pop. 2,656) Iluilding permits, less federal contracts $ 23,175 + 44 +489 Postal receipts• ...$ 3,685 + 16 + 20 Bank debits (thousands) . . ....$ 2,837 -10 + 16 Building permits, less federal contracts S 0 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,344 + 4 + 22 Bank debits (thousands) ....$ 3,518 + 3 + 7 Annual rate of deposit turnover... 8.0 -12 -2 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. S 4,550 + 1 + 10 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 9.3 + 2 -2 Edinburg (pop. 18,706) 

Postal receipts• ..... .$ 15, 761 -2 + 19 
LOCKHART (pop. 6,084) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 346,235 +103 -2 
Postal receipts• ........$ 4,812 -7 + 13 Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 19,895 •• + 21 
Building permits. less federal contracts $ 9,050 -72 -82 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ U.979 -2 + 18 
Bank debits (thousands) . . ...$ 6,152 + 3 + 15 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 19.7 + 8 + 8 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 5,912 4 + 11 Nonfarm placements 210 -10 + 46 
Annual rate of deposit turnover .. 12.2 + + 2 

Elsa (pop. 3,847) 
LO GVIEW (pop. 40,050) Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,250 -86 
Bank debits (thousands) ........... . . $ 2,487 -5

Retail sales ... ••t -22 -16 
Automotive stores 1t -27 -21 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 1,523 + 18 
Lumber. building material, Annual rate of deposit turnover . 19.4 + 2 -16 
and hardware stores + 11 t -17 + 
Postal receipts• ...$ 63,685 -4 + 10 McALLEN (pop. 35,411r) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,217,000 + 38 + 41 Retail sales ••t -3 + 
Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 70,470 4 + 13 Apparel stores 18t + 17 + 16 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 43,317 -3 Postal receipts• .. $ 37,648 -4 •• 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 19.3 -3 + 12 Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ 984,800 +171 -40 
Nonfarm employment (area) .. 32.900 •• + Bank debits (thousands) . . . .$ 42,725 3 + 15 
Manufacturing employment (area) . 8,230 + + 11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 25,792 4 + 12 
Percent unemployed (area) . 3.0 -25 -29 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 19.4 2 -1 
Nonfarm placements .. ............. . 731 + +us 
LOS FRES OS: see BROW SVILLE-HARLINGEN­

Mercedes (pop. 10,943) SAN BENITO SMSA 
Postal receipts• .$ 6,256 -4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 27,440 -18
LUBBOCK SMSA 
Bank debits (thousands) . . .. .$ 6,436 +
(Lubbock; pop. 177 ,1401) 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,141 6 + 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,499,835 

-19 -35 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 18.l + 2 
Bank debits (thousands) 11-.. . .. $ 3,585.360 + 5 + 3 
Nonfarm employment (area) . 60,900 •• + 

4 Mission (pop. 14,081) 
Manufacturing employment (area) . 7,340 + 12 + Postal receipts• ...$ 9,818 -3 + 6 Percent unemployed (area) . 3.7 •• 20

-
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 37,078 -87 + 96 

Bank debits (thousands) . . . $ 11,827 -14 + 8 LUBBOCK (pop. 155,200r) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 9,099 -8 + 16 Retail sales ••t -11 1 Annual rate of deposit turnover. . 15.4 -10 -6 
Automotive stores -1t -13 2 
General merchandise stores. + 3t -8 4 Pharr (pop. 15,279r) 
Postal receipts• . . 253,237 

+ 11 + 19 Postal receipts• .. .$ 7,707 -11 + 7 Building permits. less federal contracts $ 3,377,785 -20 -37 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 42,158 + 29 -18 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 256,260 -9 
Bank debits (thousands) . . $ 5,354 -2 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 136,293 -10 
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t.. $ 5,119 -12 + 10 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 21.4 

-6 4 Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . . 11.7 -9 -6 
Slaton (pop. 6,568) San Juan (pop. 4,371) Postal receipts• .$ 4,588 + 23 + 12 Postal receipts• ......... .. .$ 2.898 -7 + 20 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 122,050 +250 Building permits, Jess federal contncta $ 13,000 -64 +128
+446 

Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 4,100 -16 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 2,642 8 + 86 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 4,197 -2 + 9 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 2,494 + 8 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 11.6 -11 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 12.9 2 + 24
+ 

LUFKI (pop. 17,641) Weslaco (pop. 15,649) 
Postal receipts• .. .. ... . ........$ 35,665 + 9 + 22 Postal receipts• .......... . .. $ 11,767 -2 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 
316,750 -63 -2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 50,540 -12 -41 Nonfarm placements 
56 -18 -32 Ilank debits (thousands) .. .... . . . ....$ 10,428 + 1 + 16 Encl-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 9,127 + 1 + 16 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover. 13.8 + s + 2 
172 TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Percent change 	Percent change
Local Business Conditions 	Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
MISSION: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA :.\10 :\TT PLEASAXT (pop. 8,027) 
Postal receipts• . . . ........ ... . . . ... .$ 11,331 + 11 + 18

McCAMEY (pop. 3,350r) 
Building permits, less federal contracta S ,JOO -30 -23 Postal receipts• ........... $ 2,575 -30 + 4 
Bank debits (thousands) ............. S 12,313 + 5 + 8 Bank debits (thousands) . $ l,928 -l + 10 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. $ ,681 + 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t $ 1,921 + 18 + 23 

Annu~J rate of deposit turnover 16.6 + 5 +
Annual rate of deposit turnover.. 13.l -6 •• 

M ENSTER (pop. 1,190) McGREGOR: see WACO SMSA 
Postal receipts• ...... ...............$ 2,361 -19 + 45 
Building permits, less federal contracts S 4,000 -95 + 33 
McKINNEY: see DALLAS SMSA Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 2,485 3 8 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 2,070 6 
Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 14.3 4 8

MARSHALL (pop. 25,715r) 
Retail sales 	..t 7
········ · · + 12 + Postal receipts• ....... . .. .$ 31,028 -2 + 9 NACOGDOCHES (pop. 15,450r) Building permits, less federal contracta $ 182,712 -61 +132 
Postal receipts• .. ..... .. .. .. ....... .$ 21,856 -28 + 12 

Bank debits (thousands) ..... .$ 18,971 -8 -7 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 	149,611 -97 -67 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. . $ 23,979 l 9
+ + Bank debits (thousands) ............ .$ 24,333 + 3 + 11 

Annual rate of deposit turnover . ... 9.5 -10 -13 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .$ 20,634 •• + 8 
Nonfarm placements ············· 325 + 3 + 87
·· 	Annual rate of deposit turnover.. ... . 14.2 + + 6 Nonfarm placements ........ . .. .. . . . 171 + 36 + 68 
MERCEDES: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA NEDERLAND: see BEAUMON'l'-PORT ARTHUR­
MESQUITE: see DALLAS SMSA 
ORANGE SMSA 

MEXIA (pop. 7,621r) 
Postal receipts• .. . . . . . ..... .. .......$ 7,546 + 7 + 36 

NEW BRAU FELS (pop. 15,631) 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 5,000 -51 -71 
Postal receipts• ..................$ 18,532 -11 -3

Bank debits (thousands) . . $ 5,847 + 11 + 20 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 	741,622 +362 +700End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 5,294 -l + 6 
Bank debits (thousands) . . .... . . . . .. . S 13,854 -13 + 3Annual rate of deposit turnover. 13.2 + 12 + 14 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. $ 14,518 -l + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 11.4 -13 -10 
MIDLAND SMSA 
(Midland ; pop. 64,7041) 


NORTH RICHLA D HILLS: see FORT WORTH SMSA 
Building permits, less federal contracts S 780,100 -38 -81 Bank debits (thousands) 11-..$ 1,608,636 + -8 Nonfarm employment (area) . 57,700 + + 8 ODESSA SMSA 
Manufacturing employment (area) . 	4,890 + l + 16 
(Ector ; pop. 85,7271) 

Percent unemployed (area) . . . . 3.1 + 7 -28 
Building permits, less federal contracts S l,649,635 + 17 + 47 
·Bank debits (thousands) 11-......... .$ 1,186,140 18 + 13

MIDLAND (pop. 62,625) Nonfarm employment (area) ...... ... 57,700 + + 3 
Postal receipts . . ... .$ 109,235 -13 -8 Manufacturing employment (area) . 4,890 + l + 16 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 780,100 -38 -Sl Percent unemployed (area) . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 + 7 -28 

Bank debits (thousands) . . ..... $ 132,753 + 4 -11 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 110,926 -2 •• Annual rate of deposit turnover.. . . 14.2 + 4 -10 ODESSA (pop. 86,937r) Nonfarm placements 927 + 13 + 14 
Retail sales .. . ..... .. ......... . + 8 Furniture and household appliance stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -2 4
MIDLOTHIAN: see DALLAS SMSA 	+ 7 
Postal receipts• .................... . $ 98,343 + 3 + 9 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ l,649,635 + 17 + 47 
MINERAL WELLS (pop. 11,053) Bank debits (thousands) .. ...........$ 101,303 -21 + 9 
Postal receipts• .$ 20,331 + 14 + 2 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 92,354 •• + 51 
Building permits, less federal contracts S 333,750 -26 +102 Annual rate of deposit turnover...... 13.l -30 -28 
Bank debits (thousands) . . ......$ 17,488 + 3 + 31 Nonfarm placements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 477 + 19 -3 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) .. $ 12,535 8 + 7 
Annual rate of deposit turnover.... . . 16.0 + 2 + 21 
Nonfarm placements . . ... .......... . 146 5 + 40 ORANGE: see BEAUMONT-PORT ARTHUR­

ORANGE SMSA MONAHANS (pop. :9,252r) Postal receipts• . S 9,926 -14 + 2 
PALESTINE (pop. 13,974) 
Building permits, less federal contracta $ 42,000 -86 -86 
Bank debits (thousands) .............$ 9,989 -11 4 Postal receipts• .....................$ 18,195 + u + 16 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 7,561 ·6 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracta $ 98,000 -50 -72 
Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 15.4 -8 8 Bank debits (thousands) .. ...........S 14,383 •• + 15 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 16,927 •• + 10 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover... .. . 10.2 -+ + 6 
JUNE 1966 	173 
Percent change 	Percent change
Local Business Conditions Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965
City and item 1966 
RAYMONDVILLE (pop. 9,385)PAMPA (pop. 24,664) 
Postal receipts• ... ...... ..... $ 7,353 +

..t -11 	•• 8Retail sales 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 13,300 -31 + 55
-lt -18 9Automotive stores 
Bank debits (thousands) . .......... .. $ 6,603 + s +

Postal receipts• ...$ 28,102 -3 + 2 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 7,050 -2 1

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 217 ,600 + 65 +278 	­
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 11.1 + 6 + 7
Bank debits (thousands) . ..... . s 28,546 5 + 3 
Nonfarm placements 	43 + 10 -14

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 18,571 6 -3 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 17.9 1 + 8 Nonfarm placements RICHARDSON: see DALLAS SMSA 
125 7 -25 
RICHMOND: see HOUSTON SMSA 
PARIS (pop. 20,977) 
Retail sales ••t 4 + 

ROBSTOWN: see CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA 
Postal receipts• .. . ....$ 27,990 + 6 + 11 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,913,465 +460 

Nonfarm placements 165 + 50 + 15 	ROCKDALE (pop. 4,481) Postal receipts• ..... . ............ . $ 5,731 -7 -1 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 95,900 +859 +217 
PASADENA: see HOUSTON SMSA 	Bank debits (thousands) . ........... . $ 5,279 + 12 + 15 End-of-month deposits · (thousands) t. $ 7,314 + + s Annual rate of deposit turnover. 8.7 + 10 + 10
PECOS (pop. 12,728) Postal receipts• . .. $ 12,682 + 12 •• Building permits, less federal contracts $ 113,200 -52 ROSENBERG: see HOUSTON SMSA Bank debits (thousands) . .. . . $ 16,266 4 •• End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. . $ 10,614 2 -5 
SAN ANGELO SMSA 
Annual rate of deposit turnover. 18.2 2 + s 
(Tom Green; pop. 70,8761 )

Nonfarm placements ........ ... ... . . 65 + -10 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 761.002 + \9 + 34 Bank debits (thousands) JJ . . .. .. $ 923,100 + 17 PHARR: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA Nonfarm employment (area) . 21,900 + + 7 Manufacturing employment (area) . 3,530 + + 14 Percent unemployed (area) . 3.4 + 13 -21
PILOT POINT: see DALLAS SMSA SAN ANGELO (pop. 58,815)PLAINVIEW (pop. 18,731r) 
Postal receipts• .. .. $ 109,368 + 17 + 21Postal receipts• . . $ 31,481 -3 + 19 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 761,002 + 19 + 34Building permits, less federal contracts $ 361.250 + 9 -65 
Bank debits (thousands) . ... ........ . $ 73,717 2 + 13

Bank debits (thousands) . ............$ 44,724 -10 + 5 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 54,411 + +
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 31,553 -9 + 3 
Annual rate of deposit turnover . 16.3 +

Annual rate of deposit turnover . 16.2 -9 •• 
Nonfarm placements 263 •• -8 
SAN ANTONIO SMSA 
(Bexar and Guadalupe; pop. 800,9681 )

PLANO: see DALLAS SMSA 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 9,416,710 -52 + 28 

Bank debits (thousands) II. . . $11,494,080 -5 + 14 PLEASANTON (pop. 5,053r) Nonfarm employment (area) . 239,700 + 1 + 4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 38,500 + 46 +756 Manufacturing employment (area) . 27,650 •• -1 Bank debits (thousands) . . ... .$ 4,451 + 18 + 35 Percent unemployed (area) . 4.0 -5 -so End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,051 -3 + 11 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 13.0 + 23
+ 20 

SAN ANTONIO (pop. 655,006r) Retail saleB -6 •• + 10 PORT ARTHUR: see BEAUMONT-PORT ARTHUR­
Apparel stores -4 + 11 + 8 Automotive stores -17 -15 +
ORANGE SMSA 

Eating and drinking places . + + Furniture and household PORT ISABEL: see BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN­appliance stores + SS + 58 Gasoline and service stations . 7 1 ••
SAN BENITO SMSA 	+ 
General merchandise stores . + 9 + 9 Lumber, building material, PORT NECHES: see BEAUMONT-PORT ARTHUR­and hardware stores 2 + 
32 ORANGE SMSA Postal receipts• ..... .. .$ 984,6\7 •• + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 8,803,379 -53 
+ 36 

+ 10 QUANAH (pop. 4,564) End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 467,715 2 + 5 Postal receipts• . . . .......$ 5,233 + 17 + 12 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 23.9' 7 + 4 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 0 
Bank debits (thousands) . . . . .. .. .. .$ 5,900 

Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 945,197 7 
+ 6 + 33 
Schertz (pop. 2,281) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 4,955 9 
Annual rate of deposit turnover ... . . 13.7 

Postal receipts• ....... . ............ .$ 1,767 -6

+ 14 + so 

Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 680 + 1 + 13 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 1,050 8 -6 For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. Annual rate of deposit turnover . 7 .6 + + 19 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Local Business Conditions  Percent change  Local Business Conditions  Percent change  
City and item  Apr 1966  Apr 1966 from Mar 1966  Apr 1966 from Apr 1965  City and item  Apr 1966  Apr 1966 from Mar 1966  Apr 1966 from Apr 1965  
Seguin (pop. 14,299)  S 'YDER (pop. 13,850)  
Postal receipts•  . . .  . . $  15,731  + 17  + 28  Postal receipts  ......................S  14,922  +  +  
Building permits. less federal contracts  $ 99,770  + 31  -77  Building permits, less federal contracts  $  7 2,000  
Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . . . . . S End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$  15,396 16,397  - 5 ••  2 + 9  Bank debits (thousands) .......... . . $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 13,623 15,289  -12 -22  + 18 -18  
Annual rate of deposit turnover.  11.3  - 6  8  Annual  rate of deposit turnover.... . .  9.4  +  2  + 2'7  
SAN BENITO:  see  BROWNSVILLE-HARLINGEN-SAN  SOUTH HOUSTON:  see  HO  STON  SMSA  
BE TITO SMSA  
SAN JUAN: see  McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA  SULPHUR SPRI Postal receipts•  GS (pop. 9,160) . . . . . . . . . . . . S 18,717  -23  + 13  
Building permits, less federal contracts  $ 144,700  -75  -43  
SAN MARCOS (pop. 12,713) Postal receipts• . . . . . . . . . . . . S Building permits, less federal contracts $ 17, 125 200,100  + 8 -73  + 46 + 6-0  Bank debits (thousands) .............$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . S Annual rate of deposit turnover..... .  1 ,042 14,535 15.0  + + 1 + 7  + 28 + 8 + 17  
Bank debits  (thousands) .  . . $  13,988  + 3  + 31  
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover .  14,563 11.3  4 + 6  + 21 + 10  STEPHENVILLE (pop. 7,359)  
Postal receipts• ............ . ........$ 10,923  -24  
SAN SABA (pop. 2,728) Postal receipts• . . . . . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) . .$ 2,880 750 6,109  -27 -97 + 28  + + 32  Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ...... ...... .$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover..... . 921.100 9,633 9,732 11.6  + 7 •• 4 + 2  +75 + 22 + 8 + 10  
End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t .. S  4.795  + 3  + 14  
Annual  rate of deposit turnover.....  15.5  + 27  + 17  STRATFORD (pop. 1,380)  
Postal receipts• ............ . ........$  2,216  -15  + 6  
SCHERTZ:  see SAN ANTONIO SMSA  Building permits, less fe<leral contracts  $ 90.200  +475  + '7  
Bank debits  (thousands) ...... . .....  $ 7,609  -29  + 25  
SEAGOVILLE: see DALLAS SMSA  End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover..... .  6,430 14.4  + 2 -33  + 17 + 10  
SEGUIN: see SAN ANTONIO SMSA  
SWEETWATER (pop. 13,914)  
SHERMAN (pop. 30,660r)  Postal receipts• .. . ........... ... ....$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 13,753 22,100  -2 -66  + 28 -47  
Retail sales  . .  ••t  - 9  3  Bank debits  (thousands) ...... . ......$  13,313  5  + 19  
Automotive stores  .  - H  -19  7  End-of-month deposits (thousands)!  S  10,010  - 3  + 4  
Building permits, less federal contracts  $ 363,252  -42  + 53  Annual  rate of deposit tu.rnover.... . .  15.7  - 4  + 15  
Bank debits  (thousands)  .$  37.884  2  + 10  Nonfarm placements  ............... .  185  + 10  -88  
End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t .. $  24,616  - 2  + 10  
Annual  rate of deposit turnover..... .  18.3  - 1  
Nonfarm placements  141  - 24  -16  TAYLOR (pop. 9,434)  
Postal receipts• ............ . ........$  11,958  + io  + 26  
SILSBEE (pop. 6,277)  Building permits, less federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) .............$  31,015 10,016  -64 + 2  -63 + 21  
Postal  receipts•  ..... $ 10,564  + 4  End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t ..S  15.409  - 3  + 2  
Building permits. less federal contracts  $ 15,809  -84  Annual  rate of deposit turnover..... .  7.7  +  + 17  
Bank debits  (thousands) .............$  4,819  -12  +  Nonfarm placements  ............... .  23  -55  -21  
End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t ..$  5,920  - 2  +  
Annual  rate of deposit turnover..... .  9.7  - 11  4  
TEMPLE (pop. 34,730r)  
SINTON: see CORPUS CHRISTI SMSA  Relail  sales  .............. .  + 2  + 2  
Furniture and household  
appliance  stores  ... . .. . ........ .  2t  + 31  + 17  
SLATON: see LUBBOCK SMSA  Postal  receipts•  ..... .. ..............$  51.797  + 8  
Building permits, less federal contracts  S  337,500  + 4  -26  
Bank debits  (thousands) ... . . . ... . . . . $  36,756  + 1  6  
SMITHVILLE (pop. 2,933)  Nonfarm placements  ....... ... ....•.  266  + 25  + 7  
Postal receipts•  . . . . . . . . . .  . . $  1,722  -29  -25  
Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ............ .$ 14,000 1,549  + 7  + 17  TERRELL (pop. 13,803)  
End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t ..$  2.523  + 2  + 5  Postal receipts•  ........ .. .......... . $  10,656  + 22  - s  
Annual  rate of deposit turnover . ... . .  7.4  +  6  + 12  Building permits, less federal contracts  $ 149,074  + 11  + 36  
Bank debits  (thousands) ........ .. ...$  11,922  + 10  + 21  
End-of-month deposits  (thousands>* .. $ 9.818  + l  + 10  
For an  explanation of symbols, please see p. 164.  Annual  rate of deposit turnover.. . .. .  14.6  + 12  + 7  

JUNE 1966 
Percent change 	Percent change 
Local Business Conditions 	Local Business Conditions 
Apr 1966 Ap:t' 1966 Apr 1966 Apr 1966 Apr from from Apr from from City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 City and item 1966 Mar 1966 Apr 1965 
TEXARKANA SMSA WACO SMSA 
(Bowie, excluding Miller, Ark.; pop. 66,7431) (McLennan; pop. 152,6301) 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,077,317 +322 +1591 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,337,049 4 4
-+ 

Bank debits (thousands) II ..... . $ 1,088,376 + + 25 Bank debits (thousands) 11 . . ... .$ 2,239,944 + 10 + 20 Nonfarm employment (area) 34.150 + + 6 Nonfarm employment (area) 53,700 •• + Manufacturing employment (area) 7,510 + + 15 Manufacturing employment (area) . 11,440 •• Percent unemployed (area) . 4.1 •• -37 Percent unemployed (area) 4.5 •• + + 10 
TEXARKANA (pop. 50,006r) McGregor (pop. 4,642) Retail sales ••t -2 + 8 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 112,000 +327 Postal receipts• .. . $ 70,030 -1 + 9 Bank debits (thousands) . $ 5,568 -11
+ 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 2,961,487 +825 End-of-month deposits (thousands) i. $ 6,817 •• + 4 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . $ 78,682 + + 26 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.8 + -16 End-of-month deposits (thousands) n $ 24,511 + 5 + 18 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 20.6 2 + 
WACO (pop. 103,462) 
Retail salestt . . . . . . . . .. . ••t -12 -18 


TEXAS CITY: see GALVESTON-TEXAS CITY SMSA 	Apparel stores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. + 18t + 5 -7 Automotive storestt 1t -19 -18 Furniture and household 
TOMBALL: see HOUSTON SMSA appliance storestt 2t -8 1 General merchandise stores. + 3t •• 8 Postal receipts• .....$ 216,615 7 + TYLER SMSA Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,160,449 + 4 Bank debits (thousands) . . . . $ 171,099 + 8 + 21
(Smith; pop. 95,4121) 

End.of-month deposits (thousands) t. .$ 88,363 •• 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 797,067 16 -25 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 22.7 + + 18 
Bank debits (thousands) 11. . ........ $ 1,599,192 + 14

+ 
Nonfarm employment (area) . 33,850 
+ + 4 

Manufacturing employment (area) . 9,260 + + 11 WAXAHACHIE: see DALLAS SMSA 
Percent unemployed (area) . . . 8.2 -18 

WEATHERFORD (pop. 9,759) TYLER (pop. 51,230) Postal receipts• ........ .............$ 12,256 + 9 -6 Retai1 sales Building permits, less federal contracts $ 26,000 -87 -83
••t -17 -1 

Postal receipts ..........$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 14,755 -2 + 6 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 738,567 -22 ­124,718 -7 + 10 
28 
Bank debits (thousands) . . . .. $ 126,085 

•• + 11 

End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 78,880 + 5 + 4 WESLACO: see McALLEN-PHARR-EDINBURG SMSA Annual rate of deposit turnover . 19.7 ­
1 + 10 
Nonfarm placements 	918 

+ 43 + 52 WHITE SETTLEMENT: see FORT WORTH SMSA 
UVALDE (pop. 10,293) 
Postal receipts• $ 10,116 ­
5 -32 
WICHIT A FALLS SMSA 

Building permits, less federal contracts $ 42,100 -59 -81 
Bank debits (thousands) . . . . . $ 15,671 -2 + (Archer and Wichita; pop. 129,3531)

5 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .$ 9,137 1


-3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,836,893 +301 +143 Annual rate of deposit turnover. 20.5 
•• + 4 Bank debits (thousands) 11. . .. $ 2,066,208 -11 + 16 Nonfarm employment (area) 51,400 + 8 + 11 Manufacturing employment (area) . 4,210 +
VERNON (pop. 12,141) 	-1 
Percent unemployed (area) 2.6 -80 
Postal receipts• ............... $ 13,879 

+ 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 10,200 -84 •• 
Bank debits (thousallds) .. . ... .... . . . $ 


16,612 4 + 9 Iowa Park (pop. 5,152r) 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . .$ 20,225 -1 + Building permits, less federal contracts $ 10,075 -76 -69 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 9.8 

-4 + 4 Bank debits (thousands) . . .. $ 3,647 4 + 8 Nonfarm placements . . . . ... . . . ..... . 
78 -21 + 1 	End-of-month deposits (thousands) i . .$ 4,044 2 -8 Annual rate of deposit turnover . 10.7 + 14 
VICTORIA (pop. 33,047) 
Retail sales 


••t -14 -1 	WICHITA FALLS (pop. 101,724) 
Automotive stores 

-lt -23 + 1 Retail sales 	••t -6 -2Postal receipts• ... .$ 49,491 
-2 + 12 Automotive stores 	-1t -18 -2 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 355,840 -58 + 3 Postal receipts* .... .$ 139,416 + 7 + 18Bank debits (thousands) . $ 81,820 8 
+ 5 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 3,80!,068 +472 +149 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t $ 93,356 -1 + 10 Bank debits (thousands) . . ...... .$ 150,808 -14 + 11 
Annual rate of tleposit turnover . 10.4 

-9 -4 End-Gf-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ 97,578 -2 + l 
Nonfarm placements ............. . 


510 -14 -19 Annual rate of deposit turnover . . . . 18.3 -18 + 9 
For an explanation of symbols, please see p. 164. 
ttReported in cooperation with the Baylor Bureau of Business Research. 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 






BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS 

All figures are for Texas unless otherwise indicated. All indexes are based on the average months for 195i-59, except where indi· cated; all are adjusted for seasonal variation, except annual indexes. Employment estimates are Texas Employment Commission data in cooperation with the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U. S. Department of Labor. Employment data marked (t) cover wage and salary workers only. The index of Texas business activity is based on bank debits in 20 cities, adjusted for price level. An asterisk 1•) indicates preliminary data subject to revision. Revised data are marked (r) . Data marked (§) are dollar totals for the fiscal vear to date. 
Year-UH!Ate average  
Apr  Mar  Apr  
1966  1966  1965  1966 1965  

GENERAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY  
Texas business  activity, index .  . ......... . . .  173.8  175.l  161.8  171.5  158.3  
Miscellaneous freight carloadings in SW  District, index ... . .. . .. . .. . .  83.7  83.4  81.5  81.7  77.6  
Wholesale prices in U. S.,  unadjusted  index . . .... . .  . .. .. . . . .  105.5  105.4  101.7  105.2  101.3  
Consumers' prices in Houston, unadjusted index . . . . . . . .  . ......... .  110.9  
Consumers' prices in U. S., unadjusted index .  112.5  11 2.0  109.3  111 .8  109.0  
Income payments to individuals justed annual rate)  in  U. S. (billions, at ... ........ .  seasonally  ad·  563.l .  s  561.4•  520.5r  558.6  517.2  
Business  failures  (number) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  . ........ .  46  54  71  50  68  
Business failures  (liabilities,  thousands)  .... .... .  s 14,235  s 8,558  8,782  5,851  
Newspaper linage,  index . .  . . ............... .. .  11 3.7  116.8  113.8  11 6.7  112.0  
Ordinary life insurance sales,  index . ... .... .. . ... ... . . . . . . . . .... . . .  170.2  182.6  158.6  171.9  156.l  
TRADE  
Total retail  sales,  index . . . . . . . . . . . .  . ..... . .... . . .. . . . . ..... . .  131.1•  139.3r  131.0r  
Durable-goods sales,  index .  . . ............. .  156.5"  l 78.4r  156.lr  
Nondurable-goods sales, index ... . . . . . . . . . . . .  . ........ .  11 8.0•  I 19.2r  11 8.0r  
Ratio of credit sales to net sales i_n  department and apparel stores ...  64.6•  68.0°  66.8r  66.3  67.0  
Ratio of collections to outstandings in department and apparel stores.  29.3 °  31.0•  30.lr  30.1  30.2  
PRODUCTION  
Total electric power use, index . .  196.8°  182.0"  171.9r  186.8  165.8  
Industrial electric power use, index .  185.0•  169.9°  159.0r  176.l  155.l  
Crude oil  production,  index .... .. ... .  98.9°  99.4•  93.7r  98.8  94.2  
Average daily production per oil well  (bbl.)  14.l  14.2  13.2  14.2  13.3  
Crude oil runs to stills, index  115.2  11 3.7  11 3.7  11 4.8  11 2.6  
Industrial production in  U. S., index ... . .  153.4•  153.0•  140.9r  152.l  139.9  
Texas industrial  production-total,  index .... . ... .. ... . .  144.0•  142.8"  130.5r  142.6  130.4  
Texas industrial production-manufactures, index ..  170.6•  170.4°  156.5r  169.6  154.l  
Texas industrial production-durable manufactures, index ........ . . . .  172.9•  172.5 "  156.5r  172.0  153.0  
Texas industrial production-nondurable manufactures, index ....... .  169.0•  168.9°  156.5r  168.l  154.9  
Texas industrial production-mining,  index ... . ... . .  109.o•  106.7°  102.2r  107.2  100.8  
Building construction authorized, index .  . ..... . . .......... .. ... .  145.3  150.8  134.3  145.9  121.1  
New residential building authorized, index . . ....... . . . .. .. ... . . .. .  96.5  119.0  104.2  111 .6  101.2  
New nonresidential building authorized, index ..... .. .. .. . .. ... . . . .  224.l  199.3  172.5  200.3  139.7  
AGRICULTURE  
Prices received by farmers, unadjusted index, 1910-14=100.... ... . . .  271  272  246  267  240  
Prices paid by farmers in U. S., unadjusted index, 1910-14=100 .  333  331  320  330  31 8  
Ratio of Texas farm prices received to U. S. prices paid by farmers . ..  81  82  77  81  76  
FINANCE  
Bank debits,  index . . . .  . . ... ........ .  183.4  184.6  164.5  180.4  160.3  
Bank debits,  U. S., index .  . . . . . . . . . .  . .. . .  206.6  202.3  178.0  199.0  172.5  
Reporting member banks, Dallas Federal Reserve  District:  
Loans  (millions)  ...... . ..... . . ...... .  s 4,855  4,808  s 4,508  s 4,746  s 4,441  
Loans and investments (millions) .. . Adjusted demand deposits (millions) .  s 7,037 s 2,832  6,975 s 2,861  s 6,580 2,873  6,929 s 2,806  s 6,526 s 2,833  
Reve~~e receipts of the State Comptroller  (thousands) .  . ......... .  221 ,300  $156,026  201,395  174,197  170,011  
Secunues registrations: Original applications:  
Mutual investment companies All other corporate securities:  (thousands)  . . .... . .. .. . .. .  s 19,885  22,591  s 11 ,829  s 95,132§  $170,600§  
Texas companies (thousands) . . .. . ... .. .. . . . . .. . .. . ..... .. . Other companies (thousands) . . .......... . ...... . ... . . . ... . Securities registrations: Renewals:  7.231 s 13,598  s 6,254 s 3.617  s 12,150 10,235  s 60,1 63§ s 40,293§  s 26,632§ s 51,165§  
Mutual investment companies (thousands) ..... . . . .. . . . . .. .. . . . Other corporate securities (thousands) ...... .. ....... . ........ .  s 8,2()1) s 2,749  s 1,900 s 1,710  5,11 8 s 1,898  s 59,759§ 7.225§  s 81 ,440§ s 8,738§  
LABOR  
Manufacturing employment in Texas, indext .. .. ... .. . .. .. . .. ..... .  123.3•  122.4•  l 17.2r  122.5  115.7  
Total nonagricultural employment  in  Texas,  indext ............... .  122.l •  121.4°  117.6  121.4  11 6.4  
Average  weekly  hours-manufacturing,  indext ........ . . .... . ..... . .  103.0•  102.7°  102.3r  102.5  102 .0  
Average weekly earnings-manufacturing, indext ... ... .. .. ..... . .. . .  126.1 •  124.1°  120.3r  124.3  119.2  
Total nonagricultural employment (thousands) t ....... . ... .... . .. . Total manufacturing employment (thousands) t ... . ... . ....... .  3,014.5• 596.o•  2,978.8• 592.7"  2,902.4r 566.7r  2,976.6 591.3  2,853.7 558.2  
Durable-goods employment (thousands) t ................ . . Nondurable-goods employment (thousands) t .. ..... .. .  310.7• 285.3°  307.2• 285.5•  289.5r 277.2r  307.l 284.2  282.3 275.8  
Total nonagricultµraJ· Iabor force in selected labor market areas  
(thousands) ~ . . .. . .......... ..... . .. .... . .. . .... . .. . . . ... . ... . Employment in selected labor market areas (thousands) ... . . Manufacturing employment in selected labor market areas  2,894.5 2,713.2  2,864.3 2,692.5  2,817 .6 2,614.0  2,864.8 2,689.0  2,793.0 2.588.6  
(thousands) . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. ·.. . .......... . .. . . ... . Total unemployment in selected labor market areas (thousands) .. Percent of labor force unemployed in selected labor market  509.0 90.2  504.2 91.8  477.9 115.6  502.6 95.9  472.5 121 .7  
areas  .... ... . .... . ... .  3.1  3.2  4.1  - 3.4  4.3  

~ >,] c :ii z r;J  >c rn >,].... .z ~  >,] :i:: t.'l c z .... ~  t:dc:: ~ t<:l >c::  
.0 c t.'l rn §  ~ rn ...::i 00 ...::i """~  rn .... ~ 0 "" ~  0 ~ t:d c:: l'.'/.l...... z  
~  t<:l  
rn  l'.'/.ll'.'/.l  
~  
t<:l  
l'.'/.lt<:l  
>  
~  
0  
::i::  



NEW PUBLICATIONS 
TEXAS UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE: Practical Aspects on Secured Transactions. By Gaylord A. Jentz. $1.25 
SELECTED TRADE AND PROFESSIONAL AS­SOCIATIONS OF TEXAS, 1966. By Merle Danz. 50¢ 
BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH 
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS 
AUSTIN, TEXAS 78712 
(Texas residents add 2% sales tax.)