TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

Bureau of Business Research 
The University of Texas 

Vol. XI, No. 4 :\lay 28. 193 :­
N0.6. INOl.X ·Of· SE.A$0NAL ·VARIATION· OP · AGRICULTURAL ·CASM ·I NCOM!. t>UR.U.U Of t>US1Nt55 R.l:':> f.AR.CH I ~ ,,. "' "",,,, ,.,. "''' "'' "'°" "' 0­~ ""'"><><>,,.. ~ "' ·­-·-D I 5T °2 ~ : "" ""lD<> '"' • ~ •,_ •-01 5 T .!:> ..-:· 0 1 ::O T 0 •: I • IN·TE.XAS-1927-~6 · 'fo 17> "",,, >00 ,,. '"° ,,. <00 ,, •"" --,, • --• • •• • • • • • 
• • 
0 n ~ ~ ~"' r,: I= -IIii111·­' "" » : ,. 0 Ol " T · l·N 015T. I ·!> ~ '"' : •••-" : 100 "" •<00 -"' _,_ () D I S T !> ~ ~ i>OO ii> ~ ;: "" ""' -Ii'"' I ~ -­~ '"' ""».. 0 1 ~T b I ·· ~­,_ ,_ -I' 0 1 ~T Q UN IVtR:':>ITY O f Tl XA5 --,_ -. ,. -,_ D I 5 T 7 •• -I­Dl!>T 10  

NOTE: See map, page 12, showing crop reporting districts. 
TEN CENTS PER COPY O~E DOLLAR PER YEAR 
Ti=XAS BUSINESS Ri=v1i=w 
A Monthly Summary of Business and Economic Conditions in Texas and the Southwest 
Bureau of Business Research, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas 
Entered a11 .oiecond clus matter on May 7, 1928, at the po 11t office at Austin, Texu, under Act of Aue:ust 24, 1912 

CONTENTS 
PAGE Announcements ____ . _____ -------------------____ _______
____
_____________ 14 Business Review and Prospect, F. A. Buechel _ 
_ _______ -----------------------------3 Clothing Manufacturing in Texas, Clara H. Lewis --·-·---·----------------------10 
Cotton, A. B. Cox __ ________ _ ____ ________ ----· ___________ ----------------6 Financial, ]. C. Dolley _______ -·--____________ _____________ ___ -----------------------5 The Outlook for Texas, Elmer H. Johnson .. ___________ .. _ _ ___ ______ __ 
----------------7 
LIST OF CHARTS 

Indexes of Business Activity in Texas 	4 
LIST OF TABLES Banking Statistics ______ __ ______________________ ____ ________ ··-____ ----15 Building Permits _____ ____ ____ ----· -----------------··____________ ____ _________________________ 13 Carload Movement of Poultry and Eggs _____ ---------------------·-----------_ _·------· __ 14 
Charters . ____ __ _·---__ __ ________ ___ .. __________ __ __ __ 
___ __ ___ ________ 14 Commercial Failures . _________ __________ _________ 14 Commodity Prices __ __ _ __ ________ __ _____ ___ 15 Consumption of Electric Power_ __ _ __ _ ___ ____ _ 
_ _
____ __ ___ ___ ________ __ 15 Cotton Balance Sheet _________________ ____ ___
_____________ ------------------------------______ ________ 15 Credit Ratios in Texas Retail Stores _______________ ________________ --------------------------13 Employment and Pay Rolls Classified by Cities and Employment Groups ___ ____ 16 Lumber ___ __ __________________________..._
_______________ ____-----------------------------------------------------------14 Pctroleu m ____________ _________________ __ ____________ -----------------------------------------------------------------14 Postal Receipts _____. ____ _____ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 
Retail Sales of Independent Stores ____ __ ______
_____ ___ _____ __ 
---·--________ ll, 12 Shipments of Live Stock Converted to a Rail-Car Basis _________ 12 Stock Prices _ _ ___________ ___ ____ ___________ __ _ 15 
Partial Liat of Publication• Issued by the Bureau of Business Research PRICE 
What Place Has the Advertising Agency in Market Research ______ __________ ____ ___ $1.00 William J. Reilly Methods for the Study of Retail Relationships____---------------------------------------------1.00 William J. Reilly A System of Accounting Procedure for livestock Ranches______________________________ 1.50 Frederick W. Woodbridge The Natural Regions of Texas ____ ______ ____ _________________ _____________________________ 1.00 Elmer H. Johnson The Basis of the Commercial and Industrial Development of Texas________________ 2.00 Elmer H. Johnson Eight Years of livestock Shipments in Texas _ _____ __ ____ ____ ___ ____ ____ ___ ___ _______ 1.00 
F. A. Buechel Directory of Texas Manufacturers as of January 1,1936 ______ ___ ___ ____ ____ __ ___ __ ___ 1.00 
F. A. Buechel and Clara H. Lewis 

Recent 	Mimeographed Studies Studies of Employment Problems Ui Texas _
______________________________________________ ________ 1.00 
A. B. Cox Possibilities of Industrial Expansion in Texas_______
_________________________________________ 
1.00 
Elmer H. Johnson Dairy Manufacturing in Texas____---------------------------------------------------------------------1.00 
F. A. Buechel Farm Cash Income in Texas, 1927-1936_______ -----------------------------------------------1.00 
F. A. Buechel 


Business Review and Prospect 

Industry and trade for the Nation as a whole suffered a set-back from March to April, Barron's monthly index having dropped from 86.6 to 83.4. The weekly index of 
86.9 shown in the May 17 issue of Barron's indicates, however, that the loss has now been fully cancelled. Comparing the April, 1936, index, 74.4, with that of April in the current year, 83.4, there has been an im­provement of nearly 17 per cent over last year. To bring the index up to the normal trend line will require an increase of 15 per cent. An improvement of more than 30 per cent from present levels is still required, however, to bring industry and trade for the Nation up to the 1929 level if the trend in per capita production and the increase in population are taken as the basis of comparison, which should be done. 
The principal deterrent to full emergence from the depression is the continued subnormal activity in the building industry. Recent statistics indicate that public and private construction combined is still only about half that of 1928, although there has been a material increase in population since that year, and during much of the intervening period construction has been almost at a standstill. It is probable that the recent sharp rise in building costs will tend still further adversely to affect the building industry and may result in less favor­able year to year comparisons than have prevailed so far this year. 
Texas Business 

Texas business continued through April the definite improvement which with but few interruptions has char­acterized industry and trade in the State for almost two years. The Bureau's composite index of business activ­ity is now, in fact, only 8 points lower than it was in April, 1930, and in no intervening April since then has the index been as high as it was last month. It should be pointed out, however, that this index takes into ac­count neither the increase in population of the State since 1930 (approximately 400,000) nor the long-time trend in per capita production, both of which factors if considered would tend to make the comparison with 1930 somewhat less favorable than the index actually shows. 
The composite index rose from 96.4 (revised) in March to 97.l (preliminary) in April. The indexes of employment, pay rolls, and electric power consumption increased from March to April while those of depart· ment store sales, runs of crude oil to stills, and freight car loadings decreased. The most significant increase was that of pay rolls. Compared with April, 1936, the composite index rose from 84.5 to 97.l, an increase of 
12.6 points or nearly 15 per cent. 
Farm Cash In come 

Farm cash income in Texas c:ontinur:-to make fayor­able year to year comparisons. Since the major portion of this improYement comes from liw :-tock and liwstock products, and these commoditie~ are quite broad!'" dis· tributed over the State. the index of all hut one of the crop reporting districts {district .S 1 :-hows an improYe­ment over ApriL 1936. 
Index of Agricuhural Cub lncome 

Dist rict  April 1937  ~larch 1937  April 1936  
1- ---·-----------62.2  112.6  50.9  
1-S --·---------· 172.5 2 __________________111.8  133.4 119.3  80.9 71.1  
3 --·-···-··----------118.14 ______________153.1  180.l 131.3  81.5 113.2  
5 ·-----------·-----1.>5.6  113.1  1432  
6  ···-----·------------90.0  %.6  68.4  
7  --------·------·  116.1  142.6  58.3  
8 -·---­79.5 9 _____________126.9  119.3 121.1  76.0 95.0  
10  -------·------·--156.6 10-A *________123.0  227.2 250.7  83.6 81.6  
State  __________________105.2  136.5  67.6  

*Included in district 10. 
Non: See maps, pages 5 and 6 of the issue of March 27, 1937, showing the crop reporting districts. 
The computed farm cash income for Texas during April, excluding government benefit payments, totalled $27,4 75,000 compared with a comparable figure of :3 l 7,­G48,000 during April last year. an increase of more than .S8 per cent. The districts in which sheep. 1rnol. and cattle constitute the major sources of income made rela­tiYeh· the most farnrable sho11·ing. The lower Rio Grande Valley continues to maintain a wide margin of improYernent over last year but the gain wa::: not ;;o great in April as it was in March. 
Barring abnormal weather conditions during the re­mainder of the current crop season. present indications point to further improYement in T exa:-farm cash income during corning months. Because of the high degree of specialization which prevails in the various natural regions of the State, howewr. these distincti1·e regions will not share equally in such gains as are expected to occur. Regions in which li1·e stock and liYestock prod­ucts constitute the most important sources of income are expected on the whole to continue thr fa\'Orable show­ing of recent months. The specialized wheat areas of the State will benefit both from larger production and higher prices than ha1·e prevailed for se1·eral wars. 
F. A. BncHEL. 

For Other Texa.s Data, See StatiJtical Tables at the End of This Publication 
INOE.XE.~ OF BUSINE.~S ACTIVITY IN TE. x AS 

AVE.IZ.AGE MONTM Of 1930•100~ 
TEXAS BUSI;\ESS REYIE\\'  ·=>  
. .. .. ­-··-­-· -----··---­. ­ -· ·--­ -
 -
­ . -----­----· ---. ---­----­-···­-· -·  --·  
Financial  

On May 1 the last half of the increase in member bank reserve requirements became effective. It will be recalled that on January 30 the Federal Reserve Board ordered a general increase of 33 1/ 3 per cent in such requirements, one-half of which was to go into effect on March 1 and the remainder on !\fay l. \Vith this last increase the recently granted power of the Board to raise resen e ratios has been exhausted, these ratios having been increased the full 100 per cent allo"·ed by law since August 1 of last year. Unless further author­ity in this direction is granted by Congress, this par­ticular check on bank credit expansion is no longer available. 
Despite the doubling of reserve requirements within 
a period of nine months, member bank excess reserve 
balances continue to be huge. Such excess reserves on 
April 28 were estimated at Sl ,640,000,000, having in­
creased by some $340,000,000 since March 1 largely as 
a result of Treasury expenditures and some open market 
buying by the Federal Reserve Banks. After giving 
effect to the May 1 increase in reserve requirements, 
excess reserve balances of the member banks approxi­
mated $850,000,000, a figure sufficiently high to guar­
antee easy money market conditions for some time to 
come. 
Most member banks found their reserve balances suffi­ciently high to cover easily the May 1 increase in reserve requirements. A considerable number, however, located chiefly in New York and Chicago, were compelled to build up their balances in order to comply with the law. Such readjustment was accomplished for the most part through sales of government obligations, although there was some selling of "other securities" and a slight increase in borrowing from the Federal Reserve Banks. For the period January 6 to April 21, the holdings of government obligations of the reporting member banks declined approximately S860,000,000, and it \ms this selling which was largely responsihle for the weakness in the government bond market during early April. 
The general trends in commercial hanking with re­
spect to deposit growth and loan expansion have con­
tinued unchanged. Adjusted demand deposits of the 
reporting member banks aggregated SJ S,349,000,000 on 
May 5, an increase of Sl82,000,000 since April 7 and 
of $1,089,000,000 since May 6, 1936. Major factors re­
sponsible for this continuing expansion of deposits in­
clude further Treasury deficit financing, a substantial 
increase in commercial lending, and, until last Decem­
ber, gold imports. Since the adoption of the Treasury's 
"inactive gold fund" policy in December, gold importa­
tions have been sterilized and have had no effect either 
on deposits or excess reserve balances. Had this polic~­
not been adopted, both of these latter two accounts 
would stand some S650,000,000 higher than present 
levels. 
L'tilization of loanable funds by commercial banks .continues to improve. The reporting member banks' aggregate of "other loans... rr prc-cnting-lar,!:!eh 11"rki11;c capital financing, rrnched a lnel (•f .;; 1..1-;-:z.110Q.1111u ,,11 :\Iav 5, an increasf of :36.'J.000.00() since .-\pril -;-and ,.f S963,000.000 during the preceding t1, eh c month5. The rate of expansion. which has tapered off somc\1·hat in recent \\·eeks, is expected to gain momfntum \1·ith the autumn seasonal pick-up in general business ac-ti1·itv. Some further increase in the use nf bank credit to finance securit~· speculation can be noted. The reportin;r mem­ber banks' total of loam collateraled h\· stocks and bonds has increased slighth· during tl;e mrJ11th as compared \rith a Year ago. reaching a le\ cl of S3..39.'i.­090,000 on May 5. Similarh . brokers loan;,; bv \'c\1· \ ork City member banks show an expansion of S 12.­000,000 during April and of .Sl10.000.000 during the past year. 
Mone\ market interest rates and b()nd prices firmed 
somewhat during the latter part of _-\pril following 
member bank readjustment to the higher legal resen·e 
ratios. The discount rate on 90 daY bankers' acceptances 
declined during the first week of :\Jay from 9 16 to 1 2 
per cent, other short term market rates remainin!:! un­
changed. Bond prices reco\·ered somewhat fron\ the 
se\·ere decline of :\larch and early _-\pril: the Do\1·-J ones 
average of 40 high grade bond prices rising from 100.-;-9 
on April 28 to 101.19 on :\la\ 7. Treasury bond prices 
ha\·e shown similar improYement and apparently with­
out much artificial support from Treasun trust funds. 
The stock market has continued to decline durin(Y the 
month on a relati\·ely moderate trading Yolurne. "' The 
Dow-Jones average of 10 stock prices dr(Jpprd from 
66.95 on :\larch 20 to 63.40 on :\Jay 8. the lowest lew l of the Year, the greatest decline;: being in the indu;;trial list. The \1·eakness of stock prices in -Yie1
· ,,f the ratlwr general improvement in sales Yolume durin'." the fir:;t quarter of the year is somewhat nwstihing. ' 01w pos­sible explanation has been adrnnced !:)\· the \ ati•mal Cit\· Bank of :\'ew York in its monthh· .re1·iew <Jf busi­ness conditions. · 
According to this publication. the profit margin (•f many manufacturing companies is beginning to narrow because of rising operatinp-UJst;:. chir·fh-raw rnatPria];: and wage:;. During ]935 and l 93G. incr~a-inf! ropPrnt in !:! costs were offset bY rapidh expanding c1utput \1hich dis'­tributed fixed nYerhead expe11:;es r1 \ er a greatrr H•IUrnf of prnductinn and lo1rerPd ;;uch cost;; per unit (Jf <1ut­put. Th.is process. of cour;;e. can lw c·•mtinurd onh· up to the l1m1t of present plant in•tallatir,n. aftn 11 hich ~cw plants mu,;t be crm;:tructed 11 ith a c·"nsequent sharp rncrea;;e rn o\·erhead expense". Tlicrr' are "•JJllC ind i­
. cations that th~ expansicm ,,f pr(Jduc:ti1-.n \·.,Iume is 11 " longer keeping pai·p \\·ith the rise in ''Jl"ratinu cn-t~. Should ihi• ;;ituation de1·elop. th" inc-reased pr..:ducti1 1!l costs pt·r unit of output must either be pa;;sed 011 trJ the public in the form of higher pri r:es or f"lse restdt in narro11·ing corporate profit margins. 
J. c. D OLLEY. 

---------··--·-----------··· 


Cotton 
The cotton situation is approaching another important stage in its development. In 1929 the Farm Board sought unsuccessfully to solve the cotton problem by a holding movement. The accumulated collo11 resulting from that program, plus the depression, created an emer­gency situation that called for even more drastic action which resulted in the passage of the A.A.A. in 1933, the Bankhead Act in 193'1, and finally the Soil Conserva­tion Act in L9;)5. The primary object of the three acts just named was to raise the farmers' income by raising cotton prices by restricting supply, and by making rent­als and benefit payJl!ents. 
As a result of the cotton production restriction pro­gram and increased consumption because of improving business conditions, the supply of cotton in the United States has been reduced from au all-time high for any May from 11,742,000 bales in May, 1933, to G,921,000 bales on May l this year, or a reduction of 1,821,000 bales. In other words, to the extent that reduction of supply was the objective of the above program, it has had a measure of success. The long run cost of the program is another matter. Oilicial estimates indicate the Government kept out of production a little over 18,000,000 bales of American cotton during the four years of its operation, and, that plus increased world consumption as the result of improving business condi­tions, secured a net reduction of supplies in the United Stales of only 1,821,000 bales of cotton. Why has the net reduction Leen relatively so small? 
According lo figures published by the United States 

Department of Agriculture, foreign cotton-growing coun­
tries have increased their production during the same 
four years to 18;1,70,000 bales, based on the 1932-33 
production. The net result has Leen that at the begin­
ning of this cotton year the world supply of all cotton, 
counting carryover plus this year's production, exceeded 
the preceding all-time high Ly over a half million bales, 
or a world's supply of over !J,3,000,000 bales. The net 
result has been that our rcdut:Lions were offset by in­
creased production abroad; but more important to us 
than thal is the fact that foreign producers now have 
near! y GO per cent of world production of, and mar­
kets for, cotton. 
Jn 19:12 the cotto.n growers had finally to face a large 

crop plus Lite unw1cldly carryover accumulated by the 
Goven1111enl as a result of the Farn1 Board policy. The 
policies adopl1:d in 19:3:{ lo meet that emergency have 
helped lo create another polenlial emergency in 1937-38. 
This time the pending emergency is a product not of 
accumulated supplies in Lhc United Slates hul of vastly 
stimulated produdion abroad which is robbing us of 
our foreign markl'ls. Are not the polcntial c:olton prob­
l1 ~111s far more cu111plic:alcd now Lhan in 1929, or even 
i11 19:-ii), hcca u"t' of the drnsli(; dccl i ne i11 the rel a ti vc 
importance of Olli" production and changed economic re­
lations"( Tim~ i11 19:)7, a year following the greatest 
world production 0 11 record, and when the~e same for­
eign countries an' increasing acreage, cotton "Towers in 
the U11it1·d Slate~ fcc•l impelled to in(;rease th1?ir ac:rea"e 
al~o al1out l .'i per n :nt. This means fir~L of all th~t 
American c-ollon gro1rcrs arc not willing Lo give up for­
c·ign market~ e1 c·n al present prices, hecau~c the great 
mass of them have not as yet discovered an adequate substitute Lo replace cotton in their farm production pro­grams. In the second place, it means that the cotton growers probably face relatively lower prices if they persist in their efforts to regain these markets. Unfavor. able weather in the United States and abroad and/ or still greater world cotton consumption may postpone the day of reckoning until next year or the year after, but sooner or later cotton growers will be confronted with an un­usually large world production and a relatively lower price. When that time arrives, some momentous cotton problems will have to be met. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that the fundamental cotton problem, the loss of markets, is a result of our national and national. istic policies and that the Nation itself must pay the price of its solution. Whether it shall be done wisely as a result of a comprehensive, sympathetic understand­ing of the significance of the cotton industry in our national economic life, especially in relation to the sig· nificance of cotton production in our system of special· ized regional production of agricultural products or not, remains to be seen. Unfortunately, the Nation as a whole lacks fundamental information to enable it to understand the full import of the impending situation and for the formulation of a comprehensive program to 
meet it.  A. B. Cox.  
COTTON  Total supplies of cotton in the United  
BALANCE  States May 1 were 6,921,000 bales as com·  
SHEET  pared  with  7,841,000  bales  last  year,  
9,305,000 bales two years ago, and an all·  

time high of 11,742,000 bales in May, 1933. The total decrease in supplies of cotton in the United States and of American cotton in European ports and afloat to Europe during the past twelve months was 930,000 bales. 
Calculated changes in the index price of cotton based on these changes in supply indicate an advance in the index price of middling % -inch in New Orleans of 154 points from the price at this time last year. The index price last year May 14 was 14.59 cents; this year it was 
14.67 cents. When changes in the Bureau of Labor Sta· tistics wholesale index is taken into account the calcu· lated price for middling %-inch spot cotton at New Orleans becomes 14.19 cents. When the price is cal· culated on the basis of average percentage changes in supply and price it is 14.67 cents. 
The major reasons for the actual price being lower t~an the calculated price are the large supplies of for· c1gn growths of cotton, most of which are now relatively cheaper than American, and the potential increase in production for 1937-38. 
SPINNERS Spinners ratio margins widened during MAHGIN April to 194 compared with 182 in March 
and 163 in April last year. . Tlw P.ence margin in Manchester averaged 7.lld dur· rng Apnl compared with 6.4,5d in March and only 4.16d in April last year. 
The above margins indicate an exceptional demand for cotton in England. To the extent it represents de· mand for war materials in England it may not be typical of world conditions. 
--------·---=-=--=--=--=------==-=------_
-_-_-_--------­

The Outlook for Texas 

Perhaps but few will question the significance in its boader scope of the query: What is the outlook for Texas? Perhaps, however, some would question the ad­visability of the query: What's the matter with Texas? There can be, however, no doubt that the current prob­lems and the im;nense possibilities and potentialities of Texas present a challenge to the citizenship of the State which merits the open-minded consideration of all con­cerned. So close are the commonplace details of life and work in a large and rapidly changing region, such as Texas is, that the inhabitants find it difficult to grasp in the larger perspective the most distinctive aspects of such a region. 
Perhaps that more or less intangible but none the less very distinctive characteristic of Texas-the "spirit of Tcxas"-is most readily grasped by observing people from outside the State, or, even better, by visitors from Europe who express in no uncertain terms the dis­tinctive impressions they get of the land and the people that comprise Texas. One may find in New York City or Boston those who have a keener appreciation of the promise of Texas than has become vocal generally with­in our own State. The writer recalls the statement of the late Dr. Marbut that: "From the standpoint of nat­ural resources, Texas is, undoubtedly, the richest State in the Union." 
But what does Texas mean to you? Obviously, answers would be highly diverse; but the query is important if it can serve to crystallize the necessity for observing and studying Texas from the point of view of wider inter­ests. It is also obvious that close attention must be given to the nature and direction of those broader trends and probabilities which are dominant in deter­mining the character of the sum-total of the specific circumstances which will comprise the Texas of to­morrow. 
Obviously economic aspects of life or "economic fac­tors in civilization" do not constitute the whole of life and civilization, and yet the very fabric of the various world cultures is an inter-weaving of the varied fibers of the population, the material environment, and of the technologic development of the period. 
And it is in the larger picture of the inter-relationships of peoples, of natural environment and earth resources, and of technologic advances that the larger setting of Texas is inexorably placed; and the trends determining the future of Texas will inevitably be laid out on the basis of these fundamental relationships. 
The Economic Development of Texas 

The economic devolpment of Texas, like that of the United States as a whole, has proceeded through a series of dramatic, wave-like movements-movements of peo­ples, movements of economic actiYities such as farming and ranch occupations, the oil industry, and more re­cently the manufacturing industry. 
The characteristic feature of Texas production, again like that of the Nation as a whole, is large production in the various lines of economic activity, whether of cotton or live stock, oil or natural gas, or oil refining. or in the substantial beginnings that haYe already been made in the chemical industry in Texas. 
Another characteristic of Texas economic deYelopment concerns the dynamic features which are readily illus­trated by the vast sweep of the rnrious regional shifts­shifts which have reflected the distinctiYeness of the different regions as they \\"ere occupied. Historically, these shifts of primary concern to l exas are best seen in the geographic extension of l:Otlon gro\\·ing, of liYe· stock production, and of the oil industry. lhe current shifts centering primarily in the migration of industrie~ into the South and Soutlrn-est, and particularly into Texas may well become as significant to Texas in the future as were the shifts in raw materials production in cotton and live stock and oil, \rhil:h Jiaye charader­ized the economic development of Texas in the past. 
Through the mobility of progressiYe economic adjust· ments involved in these shifts is expressed the factors and forces of interdependence of regions and of indus­tries-as, for instance, each economic enterprise, each industrial plant, becomes a more or less widely diversi­fied market for the products of other industries and of other regions. Texas and the Southwest haYe been con­sidered almost entirely as a surplus producing region; but as the varied economic activities have expanded, as population has grown, there has come the gradual crystallization of the importance of Texas and the South­west as a major consuming section of the l\ation. Cn­questionably the economic importance of the Southwest as a consuming region-comprising as it does more than 10 per cent of the population of the l!nited States-will command increased attention in the future alignment of industries and economic activities, not only from the standpoint of Texas but of the i\ation as \\·ell. 
The Setting of Texas in the f\"ational Picture 

The dominant position of the l ·nited States, at once the leading world producing and comuming unit, is a function of the interdependence of the rnrious major regions and of the quantity and variety of natural re­sources characteristic of these regions. Of primary im­portance is the fact that the potentials of production in the united States as a whole are as yet but dimly realized. 
Each of these major regions of the i\ation is char­acterized by large production in one or more lines of commodity groups-which ine\'itably means that eco­nomically each of these sections is characterized by a regional surplus or surpluses-surpluses \\·hich reflect the distinctive features of the consequences of regional specialization. Furthermore, each of these major regiom is a deficit region for a wide line of commodities. Regions, like individuals, specialize in production; but regions, al~o like individuals, consume a wide diYersit\ of commodities. · 
The l"nited States comprises the "·idest assemblao-e of distinctiYely different producing regions of any co~ntn in the world; these regions each characterized b\· it.s distincti,·e types of specialization, each characterize.d b\· its distinctive regional surpluses, are tied together by trade activities, and as a consequence the United States comprises a vast internal market unhampered by tariff walls, which is at once the object of wonder and per­haps of envy of observers from other countries. 
The central fact in the phenomenal growth of the United States has been the economic development of these major regions, each one of which is distinctive, owing to its em·ironment and natural resources; in this development there has grown up an interdependence of regions which in its breadth and depth is not to be found elsewhere in the world today. 
The central problem in the future of the United States in an economic sense is how to make possible and ef­fective the production of goods in the areas which possess the best facilities for the production of those commodities that are in demand-which inevitably means the continued enlargement of local and regional specialization. 
During the past l 00 years Texas economic devolp­ment has been dependent upon the production of sur­pluses of commodities which have by and large had a ready sale in outside markets. The leading position of Texas as a raw materials producing Stale has become commonplace knowledge. Historically, the economic growth of Texas has been characterized not only by the progressive enlargement of raw materials output, but also by the continuous widening of the lines of raw material production, of agricultural and range out­put, of timber products, of oil and natural gas, and more recently of the large-scale utilization of the non­metallics. 
The position Texas has attained in mineral produc­
tion in the Nation is reflected in the rank and volume 
of the value of Texas mineral products during 1932 and 
19:)3; in 1933, the last year for which comparative data 
are available from the Bureau of Mines, Texas ranked 
second only to Pennsylvania in the value of mineral 
products. The official figures for 1933 give to Texas 
mineral production a value of slightly less than three 
hundred sixty-six million dollars-an amount consider­
ably in excess of that of any other high ranking mineral. 
producing State. excepting Pennsylvania. 
The preliminary official figures of the value of min­
eral production in Texas for 193.5 are slightly more 
than four hundred forty-four million dollars while un­
official estimates place the sum of excess of five hundred 
million dollar~. The value of products of the petroleum 
refining industn in Texas in l 93.') amounted to nearly 
four hundred thirty-eight million dollars; this industry 
paid out in wages (nol including salari1·rl officr~rs and 
employees I in that year the sum of nearly twenty-four 
million dollar:-, the co,ls of materials, containers, fuel 
and electric enc~rgy amounted to more than three hun­
dred fift\·nine million dollars, while the value added by 
manufacture 11as nearly seventy-nine million dollars. 
Ruic Mate rials Problems 

It is quite apparent to students of the situation that Texas occupies a key position in the progressively en­larging demands of the modern world for larger and larger supplies of raw materials of diverse types and kinds. 
From either a national or a world point of view the problem of raw materials has become one of the basic questions of the modern world. The wide significance 
of raw materials became crystallized during the World War, and it is no exaggeration to say that the raw materials problem almost broke the back of the world in 1914. 
Important though raw materials had become durina the first decade of the twentieth century the proble~ was one of relative simplicity as contrasted with the complexities of economic structure at the present time. For the twentieth century has been marked by the de­velopment of a whole series of new industries and by the more or less complete transformation of most of the old ones. 
The raw materials problems of the nineteenth century had centered about the enlargement of production of such foodstuffs as wheat and livestock products, of the heavy metal industries dependent upon coal and iron and, less so, of copper, and of the industrial fibers of cotton and wool. 
The transformations wrought in the twentieth century have centered particularly about the chemical industry, the large development of the electrical industry, the rise of oil as a new source of power, and the consequent re· actions of these upon the economic structure as a whole, not only upon the United States but upon the entire commercial world. The result has been by and large the enlargement of the scope of economic activity and an accentuation of demand for a whole new series of commodities, and which consequently has brought into large commercial production a vast assemblage of raw materials which were practically unused or wholly un· known at the turn of the century. 
It is not necessary to catalog the various "new" indus· tries that are literally a product of the twentieth cen· tury. The aluminum industry, however, is one, and most of the raw material of the aluminum industry­bauxite-mined in the United States is supplied by Arkansas from its deposits near Little Rock. Hydro­genation successfully applied to vegetable oils during the past three decades has created new demands for vegetable oil raw materials. 
Although the United States is a large importer of vegetable oils, yet in Texas and the rest of the Cotton Belt the great significance, actual and potential, of cot· tonseed oil is too little appreciated. The Cotton Belt, as well as the United States as a whole, has taken too much for granted in regard to the possibilities and importance of vegetable oils. The Eureopean situation with respect to this group of commodities serves to bring out in perspective their economic and strategic significance; for Europe as a whole, and particularly Western Europe, is a deficit fats and oils producing territory. Dependent upon imports, the fats and oils situation ip Germany particularly has come to a head more than once since the war period when it first ap· peared as a strategic factor of critical importance. l\1ilitary strategists are of the opinion that if outside sources of fats and oils were shut off entirely in case of a war involving western European countries, that those nations would be brought to their knees within a few months from their lack of fats and oils alone. 
Of still other new sources of raw materials that have been characteristic of the present century is that of sul­phur from salt dome accumulations of the Gulf Coa~l country of Texas and Louisiana ; of chemical industrit•,; which are being developed to utilize the tremendous salt reserves of these domes, and of the potash reserves which have been found in southern portions of the Permian Basin in western Texas and southeastern New Mexico. 
Still another trend in the utilization of raw materials is the progressive growth in the use of cellulose as a chemical raw material, and the resultant new industries it is creating, comparable to those based on coal tar products during the latter part of the last century. 
National Integration of Industry 

American economic growth has been marked by an integration of industries and economic aetivities--and particularly by the integration of the economic activities of the various major regions comprising the United States. This integration, however, has not been charac­terized by a full degree of mobility in regard to the basic factors concerned. The migration of peoples westward, and, of manufacturing industries south and west, has been due to the strong pull of the inherent economic advantages possessed by the western and south­ern regions rather than to the deliberate pushing out of established enterprises characterizing the older sections of the country. 
Cotton growing moved into the Southwest not through 
any deliberations of the cotton growing industry of the 
Southeast, or the old Cotton Belt, but because the 
prairies and the arable plains of the Southwest offcreJ, 
with the extension of railways and the availability of 
agricultural machinery, such opportunities for collon 
growing as the world had never before or since wit­
nessed; in consequence, obstacles were overcome and 
the Southwest became the premier cotton growing section 
of the Cotton Belt. In the same manner the range live­
stock industry in the Western Plains rose to a position 
second to no other region in this phase of the livestock 
industry. 
The centering in the Southwest of petroleum produc­
tion and of natural gas and of the industries directly 
associated with these resources is but another illustra­
tion of the pull of inherent forces based upon the 
natural conditions and advantages of a major region. 
The recent migration of the Kraft paper industry into 
the Southwest and into eastern areas of the f orestcd 
portions of the humid Southwest apparently constitutes 
the advance movement of a much broader trend which 
embraces not only white paper but also chemicals, vege­
table oils, and besides a host of industries using natural 
gas as a preferred fuel. 
What all this means is that industrial production is 
inevitably becoming more widely diffused geographically, 
and furthermore, since this dispersion of plants has to 
overcome or counteract strong obstacles of various 
sorts, it means that this dispersion movement is due 
mainly to the powerful pull of the inherent economic 
advantages possessed by the new locations. 
Furthen11on·. l'lllllllllllli.1 ('l)Jl>'l'illll~IH'o'o' or llll' IH'f'd for lo('al i11du:-lri<·" j,, lwg.i1111i11g Ill n1~1alli1.1 · 1hr1111gh­out T1·xa~ a11d th,· :-ill11ll111!':'l. Thi" a11ak1'11i11!! r-.1n"1·i"u"­11c;;~ refkf'ls a "it11ati"11 11lii..!1 i,-I H'l'll 111i11~ g<·m·ralh recognized througl1ll11t llll' \alillll 1Ji,1t runlwr ('('lll'llllli1· expansion i ~·. po:-"iliJ,. u11h through thl' rurtlwr l1uildi11g up of industrial l'llli:rpri•(·:-. 
Another trend ol' ha,oi,· i1npurl,llllT i11 tlw l'ii°edin' furthering of ind11stry di,opcr:'io11 is llut uf the del'lric indu,,trv. lnter-corn1ecciu11 11f po1»l'J' C'\ ~tem" and central stations sen·e lo di1 cr,i!1 Llie di5lributiun uf electric current and t!ierdJ\ JH01 ide thruuglwl!t large region$ those advantages of electric 1w11Tr "liid1 formcrh· \\ere available only to r·om1rnct metropolita11 di$trid~. Ju~t as the industrial n1ap uf 190() 11a" mr1,tl: orientc·d by tlw steam engine, with ll1c im~\ ilalil1· 1·01isr·qucm·e 11i. in<lu,-­trial concentration, thl' in<lu,oirial rnap of lomorro11 11 ill be oriented by the \1idening spread of a1ailalile electric energy and the c<; 11~i:quenl rl'adio11" upon tlic \\ i<k­spreaci movement of the decc11tralizatiun (Jr i11du,..lr '-. 
One of the many ciear-r·:•t exwii ple•, of' lh1· ,:tlcti111.nenl,; of what in Texas arc usually regarded as loC'al indus­tries, is that of the manufactGre of foods u:id kindred products. In 1935 the Yalue of Lhese products (exclud­ing all plants whose annual produclion \\'3$ less than SS,000) totalled nearh t1rn hundred ei~.d1t,·-11,·o million dollars; and in that y·~:ar these inrh1$lri'r, .exprndPd for materials, containers, fuel, and purcha,ecl 1•1wrg\· thr sum of two hundred se1en million dollar5 and paid out in wages (not including salaried officers nnd empl(JYees I a sum of nearly eighteen million dollars. 
Natural Gas and the Key to the Future of Texas lndusin· 
Historically, the pcriuds of large expansion in the economic development ,,f Texas han~ '"'nlered ahoul, and have thus been cktcrmincJ IJy, tlw rCJpid ;rro1rth t" large proportions of particular lines uf 1·11lnpri~1·~. 111 the two decades follu11 ing I U(J.') it 11 a~ Llw npan"i"n of the cattle industry that rdlected the pa('c of Tl'xa~ growth. Beginning in the !8ilffs \\ilh ill<' r ·xte11~i11n of railways into and through the Black Prairie~ cotton growing became the ~pearhead of adnincc. :: .. d ~Li .­geographic spread of '"'llon l'Ontinut>d ci111rn tu 1929: by that time hut little of' arnldt• land." of' Tcxa~ ~uilahle for cotton remainf'd 1rntoudwd IJ\ the pl1m. In fact, owing in part to the ac('dnati,J11 "f agricultuud «rlnmce engendered by the \\/<tr, Lolli cotton and wheat growing had ad\·anccd in nw111 a1Ta.• i11tn land~ not adaplt•d naturally lo aralJlr· ""<'>. !111l \\hil'li ;:hould lia1 c lw1•11 left to 1:('111ai11 in 11ati\c !!J'aS;<(''· 
Since 1900 the l<'111po ;,r T1·:;a,o f'('()JJ"111il' rl<"1·l'l11pme11t 

has largely lie1·11 .•l'l liy tl11· µ1(111 Iii and l'Xl<"JJ~i()JJ "f tlw 
oil industry: during llw pa~t dr1·w!<·. 1·.•pr·('ial!1. 11 11· 
nation-1,ic!P att<'11lio11 "r til(' oil i11d11-ll'I ha,-illnll'd m11 n· 
and more to Te.xa~ oil produdio11. '(hi,-Jllll\<'ltll'Jlt ha• 
been Cllf.'Cndn<'d JHtr!irnlarh In Lil<' high P•'''!ii1111 o!" 
Tcxa;: in oil n•;:t·r\f'• a P"~ition \\ !iid1 '-la11dc ()t!I i11 
sharp r·()ntra,-t lo liir· ,itual ion 11 r"' '!lit l1y t!w rapid 
depldi"n ,,r· oil l'f'"Pr»<·;. i11 ollwr ;:r"ti 11 n" of t!w \'ation. 
But ''hen• due;: Tcx:1;; go from li1.'1»: Te:"1;. vuten­

tialilies for the f!!'Ol'.illf.' of colt"n anrl crillomee;l. for 
the dfocti1e productinn of din·r~P li"·~to1·k products. fur 
fruits and vegctalJle;;;, for the gro11 ing of timber prod­ucls, and fur wheal production insure the continued pro­duction of a wide range of raw maleriab of these types. Within the coming de('ade oil activities in varinus purls of Texas will be still more highly concenlraled and it is apparent thal vast sums will lw spenl in exploration and production of oil in the Stale. 
It has been often slated that further large expansion in economic activities in Texas will necessarily be in the field of industrialization, and particularly in the manu­facture of those raw materials which the natural re­so11 rces of the Stale affurd or can yield in abundant quanl1lles. There is unquestionably a widespread tendency for raw materials of many sorls tu he proc­essed al locations near their production; this rnovcment in itself though important is of limited applicalion be­cause of the combinations of raw materials that are re­quired in modern industry. To a considerable degree, Texas has the advantage of having available a wide com­
hinalion of various types of raw malerials. 
Furthermore, owing lo the advantages of the Gulf of 
Mexico for transportation and Lhe ready access lo the 
vast markets of the Atlantic Seaboard, it is a reasonable 
expectation that enterprises usually classed as market. oriented industries can be developed in a substantial manner along the Gulf Coast, and such industries would in addition have the advantages o{ proximity to Texas raw materials. The operation of this factor is illustra­tive of the determining influence of transportation facili­ties upon the development of modern industry. Further consideration of the reaction of modern industry Lo mod­ern transportation would involve discussion of the neces­sity of interior portions of Texas being allowed such adj uslments of transportation rates as are in accordance with the capacity of these areas for the production and consumption of goods. 
Neither of these groups of factors-of raw materials and available transportation-can or will function in full without adequate fuel and power supplies. Happily, Texas has vast supplies of fuel resources in the form of natural gas; and it is apparent that the future ex­pansion of industrial manufacturing in Texas is de­pendent more upon natural gas and its conservation than upon any other factor. 
ELMER H. JOHNSON. 

Clothing Manufacturing in Texas 
(Contirnwd from March, 1937, issue) 
Clothing manufacturing in the United Stales has made suhslantial increases in all branches of the industry since 1932. The increased production is evident throughout Ll11c! country in general, although production in clothing as well as in nearly all other industries is still below normal when measured by the trend lines established µrior lo ] 930. It is reported that in the 14 Southern sl;1tes, however, that the $8,000,000,000 worth of manu­factured goods produced by all fac.:torics during 1936, reµresents more physical product than Lhe $H,700,000,000 w1Hlh of goods produced by the same group of stales in 1929. 
Of eighteen in<lustries studied by the National Indus­trial Conference Board, only four had a grcaler output pPr capita of population in the first nine months of 1936 th;:n in ] 929. a('rnrding lo their report. Of this group the hool and "hoe industry showed an increase of 6.1 prr cenl over the 1929 per capital produdion. 
Tlw UniLPd Stales Cen~us of Manufa('Lurers for 1929 lit'l1·d nine plants in Texas manufacturing leather boots and shoes. The Lota! wage earners at that lime num­]H'red 151, and value of products amounted lo S67(>,650. Of a total of l.:HI shoe factories in the UniLPd Stales, ,l:·:<>were lo!'atcd in Massachusclls and employed 55,093 wage eanH'rs. Fourteen firms reported the manufacture of hoots and shol'S in T1·xas during 193(>. These fac­tories wen· Pngagcd in Llw production of men's bools and shoe, . In mosl instances, the plants arc small, pro­du('ing n1stom-mad1• produ«Ls for clislrihution locally or lhroughout thl' Soutlml'sl. The 1935 Census report in­dical<'S !hat four plan!' in Texas manufacturing boots and shoes produ"P ;roods valued at ~5,000 or more an­nually. The total 1111111ber or shoe manufacturers for 1935. was l .02 l and the total value of products amounted to 8643,872,470. 
Six factories reported the manufacture of leather belts in Texas during 1935 and about the same number manufactured leather sports jackets. Census reports state that the manufacture of miscellaneous leather goods of all types in the United States for 1935 amounted to $26,385,352, which exceeded the 1933 value by 43.2 per cent. The production of leather belts num­bered 43,935,618 in 1935, and were valued at $9,129,­
936. Ten plants reported tanning of leather in Texas du ring 1935 and more than fifty firms produced articles manufactured from leather, including clothing, such as belts, jackets and gloves. 
Among the smaller industries in Texas producing men's furnishings are nine plants manufacturing ties, which employ from 18 to 45 workers in each plant. Two of these plants produce their own materials on hand looms using original designs and patterns. Five fac­tories produce men's and women's handkerchiefs, and employ from 20 to 50 wage earners each. A total of 12 plants report the manufacture of men's and boys' hats ai1d caps. One manufacturer of straw hats employs an average of 175 wage earners and distributes its products nationally. Men's hats manufactured in Texas during ]935 were valued at $890,887 according to the report of the Bureau. 
Wage increases in practically all branches of the tex· Lile and clothing industry, particularly in the larger establishments, have been announced since April first of this year. It is claimed that the piece work basis as paid by Texas manufacturers is no lower than that paid hy Eastern manufacturers. The following weekly wages were in effect during December, 1936, in the larger manu­
facturing centers of the country, but do not include in· creases which have gone into effect recently: 
Average Weekly Earnings 
Hats, fur-felt -----------------------------------------------------$26.18 Knit Goods ______________ -------------------------------------------18.01 Wearing Apparel _----------------------------------------------17.91 

~:w;~er~u~-~-~~~~-i-~~~:::::::::=:::=::::~~::::=:::::::::::::::::::: i~:i~ 
Shirts and Collars ______________________________________________ 13.79 

Source: Business Week. 
As a fo<.:tor in solving the problems of distribution, as well as of production, for many industries located in the North and East, branch plants of several large industries are being established in the Southwest. These branch factories are located at points where transportation facili­ties make them convenient to their marketing territories, where proximity to sources of the raw materials lowers production costs, or where other favorable conditions exist. Abundant water supply, economical power rates, suitable climatic conditions, and the availability of labor supply nre all determining factors in choosing factory sites. The establishment of branch plants in Texas not only lowers the cost of products manufactured and dis­tributed, but also increases employment and adds to the income of the State. The development of a greater number of manufacturing plants of a like type is grad­ually resulting in an adequate supply of skilled labor, and, consequently, greater productivity per worker. 
The clothing manufacturing industry in Texas i~ firm I y established; and, although a large part of the industrr produces more or lf:'ss specifically for 5outhwest trade, the distribution territories for Texas-made products are expanding rapidly. The steady inl'rease in consunwr demand for all types of ready -made clothing ofTer~ en ­couragement for the enlargement of present producing factories and for the establishment of new plants. Greater demand for all types of clothing continued dur­ing 1936, and although prices have adrnnced, increased income of the manufacturer is due rather to the greater number of units sold. 
The use of more cotton and mixed fabrics in the manu­facture of women's and children's wash clothing is re­flected in an increased consumption of cotlon materials. The amount of Texas manufactured textiles in the cloth­ing factories of the State is limited by the 'ariety of goods produced by Texas textile mills. Constant changes in types and styles of clothing, and the general ac­ceptance of products from factories of the Southwest on their own merits are important in the building and expansion of the c:lothing industry in Texas. 
CLARA H. LEWIS. 

RETAIL SALES OF INDEPENDENT STORES IN EW MEXICO, OKLAHOMA, A D TEXAS 
Apdl 1937 Year-to-date 1937 
~ 

Number Percentage Change Number Percentage of in Dollar Sale!. of Change in Firms from from Firms Dollar Sales Re-April March Re-from Year·tO• portinc Do11ar Sales 1936 1937 porting Do11ar Sales Date 1936 
TOTAL (New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Texas Combined ) ... 1,088 17,363,372 + 9.9 3.9 928 57,760,123 + 7.7
NEW MEXICO ____________________________________________________ 

61 63,569 + 17.3 + 1.6 53 2,224,900 + 13.2 OKLA HOMA .... -----------------------------------------------------247 2,475,172 + 5.1 2.9 210 7,901,943 + 1.3 TEXAS ...... ·-----------------------------------------------------------780 14,224,631 + 10.5 4.4 665 47,633,280 + 8.6 
TEXAS STORES GROUPED BY LINE OF GOODS 
CARRIED : 

APPAREL______________ ___________________________________________ 

107 2,087,273 + 5.2 -4.9 96 6,893,920 + 15.6 Family Clothing Stores·------------------------------------· 27 363,518 2.1 -6.7 24 1,085,616 + 7.5 Men's and Boys' Clothing Stores.------------------------------· 41 730,952 + 3.5 + 7.7 38 2,497,945 + 15.5 
-10.4 9.4

Shoe Stores .... ---------------------------------------------------------14 133,030 3.5 11 414,894 + Women's Specialty Shops·----------------------------·------------· 25 859,773 + 11.7 -12.z 23 2,895,4-05 + 20.l 
AUTOMOTIVE_______________________________________________________ 

111 3,786,418 + 10.l -15.5 97 12,883,842 + 0.7 Filling Stations.·-------------------------------------------------26 113,820 +20.8 + 2.5 22 345,683 + 14.4 
Motor Vehicle Dealers ______________________________________________ 

85 3,672,598 + 9.8 -16.0 75 12,538,159 + 0.4 COUNTRY GENERAL AND FARMERS' SUPPLIES... 87 587,117 + 21.4 + 2.2 82 1,989,048 + 15.3 
DEPARTMENT STORES_______________________________ 

47 4,709,420 + 9.7 1.2 46 16,623,827 + 11.4 
DRUG STORES______________________________________________ 

145 458,018 + 4.3 1.3 134 1,665,356 + 4.1 FOOD.·------------------------------------------------------------­
121 795,974 + 12.7 0.1 110 2,839,211 + 8.9 Grocery Stores ... -----------------------------------------------­
34 187,311 + 13.6 1.7 30 659,951 + 9.1 Grocery and Meat Stores ... ---------------------------------------87 608,663 + 12.4 + 0.4 80 2,179,260 + 8.9 
FURNITURE AND HOUSEHOLD _________________________ 35 653,382 + 7.3 + 11.5 28 1,602,310 + 5.0 

Furniture Stores.----------------------------------------------------26 551,073 + 6.9 + 11.0 19 1,276,069 + 4.8 
Household Appliance Stores ..·----------------------------·-· 4 72,728 +25.0 + 48.4 4 191,175 + 8.9 

Other Home Furnishjngs Stores _____________________________ 5 29,581 -15.6 -27.1 5 135,066 + 1.4 JEWELRY________ ---------------------------------------------------------53 176,653 + 34.1 + 20.4 8 189,119 + 23.0 
LUMBER, BUILDING, AND HARDWARE... ________________ 51 851,860 +25.7 + 14.3 44 2,505,566 + 16.7 Hardware Stores -----------------------------------------------------· 25 337,308 + 23.3 + 9.3 21 1,159,892 + 18.9 
Lumber and Bujlcling Material Dealers ... ___________________ 26 514,552 + 27.3 + 17.7 23 1,345,674 + 14.9 
RESTAURANTS ....... -----------------------------------------· 16 70,464 + 12.0 5.8 14 262,281 + 5.3 
ALL OTHER STORES----------------------------------------7 48,052 + 0.6 + 8.4 6 178,800 + 7.3 
TEXAS STORES GROUPED ACCORDING TO POPU­LATIO OF CITY: 
All Stores in Cities of-

OVER 100,000 POPULATION_____________________________ 

189 8,137,875 + 8.3 5.2 159 27,959,734 + 10.4 50,000-100,000 POPULATIO ---------------------63 1,157,307 +10.3 + 1.4 58 3,728,273 + 11.2 2,500-50,000 POPULATION--------------------------------350 3,795,463 + 13.3 5.7 291 12,374,257 + 5.3 
LESS TI-IAN 2,500 POPULATION_______________________ 178 1,133,986 + 17.5 + 1.1 157 3,571,016 + 4.3 
NOT£: Prepared from reports from independent retail stores to the Bureau of Business Research, coOperatine with the United States Department of Commerce. 


APRIL RETAIL SALES OF INDEPENDENT STORES IN TEXAS 
Total Total Number Percentage Change Number Percentage Changeof of in Dollar Salce
in Dollar Sales Finns Apr. 1937 Apr. 1937 Firms Apr. 1937 Apr. 1937 
Re­from from 	Re· from 
from 

porting Apr. 1936 Mar. 1937 	Apr. 1936
porling Mar, 1937 TOTAL TEXAS _________ -------------780 + 10.5 -4.4 Brownwood 4 + 15.8 -23.7 
TEXAS STORES GROUPED 	All Others -----------------------------10 + 3.5 5.3
4_____________________________

BY PRODUCING AREAS: DISTRICT 193 + 6.3 -6.0 DISTRICT 1-N ----------------------40 + 24..9 1.9 Cleburne ------------------------------8 + 0.3· -1.9 Amarillo ____ -------------------------10 + 18.7 4.1 -----------------------------12.0
Corsicana 10 +10.0 Pampa ________ -------------------------3 +31.9 1.9 Dallas ----------------------------------50 + 8.5 4.9 Denison 4 + 12.0 ­
Plainview -----------------------7 	+ 30.9 2.7 --------------------------------9.7 
All Others_____________________________ 20 	+26.2 + 3.3 Fort WOrth_____________ -------------26 + 0.7 -7.7 +48.3 6.0 -----------------------------5.5
DISTRICT 1-S____________ __ ___ _______ 21 Greenville 3 + 8.6 ­Big Spring --------------------------5 +41.1 8.4 ------------------------------------+37.2 -17.8
Paris 4 Lu.bbock __ ----------------------------9 +52.9 3.6 -----------------------------6.2
Sherman 6 	+23.7 + 
Taylor

All Others -----------------------7 +42:.4 	-14.1 ---------------------------------10 + LO -24.9 -Temple 8 4.. 1
DISTRICT 2 ----------------------------72 +13.4 7.1 	---·-----------------------------+ 1.6 
-Waco 	3..6
Abilene _ ------------------------------9 + 4.2 0.2. -------------------------------------· 14 + + 2.2 Vernon _ -------------------------5 + 1.3 + 5.8 All Others ------------------------------50 + 1.7 6.l
5_____________________________

Wichita Falls .-------------------­7 +18.2 -15.7 DISTRICT 80 + 0.3 -0.2 All Others -------------------------51 + 16.2 -6.8 Bryan ---------------------------··--------9 + 9.6 -5.2 01 STRICT 3 _______ ----------------18 + 7.4 -11.7 Longview 5 -17.1 + 1.7 
Breckenridge -----------------------4 + 3.2 + 1.6 	Marshall ----------··---------------------5 + 4.5 + 19.1 Nacogdoches 5 + 12.6 + 12.3 Tyler 10 ­
-
6________________ __ ___________
DISTRICT 	43 +18.9 3.l 
El Paso --------------------------------30 	+ 18.0 3.0
Others___________________________
All 13 +27.1 4.1 7____________________________
DISTRICT 	29 + 8.7 0.7
Angelo_______ ___________________
San 18 + 8.5 2.1 All Others---------------------------11 + 10.2 + 6.9 8_____ _______________________
DISTRICT 124 + 10.2 -3.8 Austin --------------------------------16 + 11.0 + 3.9 Corpus Christi ----------------------8 +23.7 -15.6 Lockhart 5 -9.l
-----------------------------4.5
Antonio_______________________
San 34 + 11.5 2.8 All Others ---------------------------61 + 4.0 6.3 
9______________ _______ ________
DISTRICT 107 + 7.7 4.8 Beaumont ---------------------------8 + 6.9 5.5 Galveston 
-----------------------------13 + 4.6 + 2.9 
Houston 49 + 6.2 6.9 Port Arthur__________________________ 
12 +30.7 + 1.2 
All Others________________ _____________ 

25 + 7.2 + 4.3 10_____ __________ _________
_
DISTRICT 53 +43.8 + 7.5 Brownsville ---------------------------16 +20.8 +12.7 Harlingen -------------------------11 +31.9 + 7.l
Others____ ___________ ________ _____
All 26 	+61.6 + 5.6 

NoTE: Prepared from reports from independent retail stores to the Bureau of Business Research, cooperating with the United States Department of Commerce. 
APRIL SHIPMENTS OF LIVE TOCK CONVERTED TO A RAIL-CAR BASIS§ 
Cattle Calves 

Hogs Sheep Total1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936

Total Interstate Plus Fort Wortl1fi______________________ 
9,003 7,434 663 586 
835 775 1,520 574 12,021 9,369

Total Intrastate Omitting Fort Worth________________ 
884 534 162 134 6E 45 42 29 1,156 742
TOTAL SHIPMENTS______________________________________ 
9,887 7,968 825 720 903 
820 1,562 603 13,177 10,111 

TEXAS CAR-LOT§ SHIPMENTS OF LIVE STOCK, JANUARY 1 TO MAY 1 
Cattle Calves Hogs 
Sheep Total1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 1936 1936

1937 1937

Total Interstate Plus Fort Wort!JU___ ---------------18,252 16,2'60 2,406 2,165 3,,272 2,886 2,666 1,202 26,596 22,513
Total Intrastate Omitting Fort Worth 	________ 
2,284 2,440 575 48() 237 
ms 189 96 3·,285 3,121

TOTAL SHIPMENTS __ 
--------------------------20,536 18,700 2,981 2,645 3,509 2,991 2,855 1,298 29,881 25,634 
§Rail-car Basis: Cattle, 30 head per car; calves, 60; hogs, 80i and sheep, 250. 
~Fort Worth shipments are combined with interstate forwardings in order that the bulk of market disnppcarance for the month may be shown. 

NoTE: These data are furnished the United States Bureau of Agricuhural Economics by milway officials through more than 1,500 station agents, repretentin&: 
every livestock shipping point in the State. 	The data are compiled by the Bureau of Business Research. 
APRIL CREDIT RATIOS IN TEXAS RETAIL STORES (Expressed in Per Cent) 
Ratio of Ratio of Ratio of 
Number of Credit Sales Collections to Credit Salarjea Stores to Net Salee Outstandings to Credit Sales Reporting 1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 

All Stores·---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------63 65.5 63.8 38.7 38.9 1.2 1.2 Stor~ Grouped by Cities: · 
Abilene_._________________________________________________________________________________________ 3 
60.4 61.1 34.7 35.4 1.7 1.6 Austin____ ·----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 59.3 58.9 45.3 42.1 1.0 1.0 Dallas _____ -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------10 71.9 69.7 41.3 40.8 1.2 1.2 Fort Worth·---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------· 6 60.3 59.3 32.2 35.0 1.1 1.3
Galveston______________________________________________________________________________ 3 
71.0 73.6 41.9 43.6 2.4 1.3 Houston _ -------------·-· ----------------------------------------------------------------------8 65.6 63.2 43.5 42.2 1.4 1.5
San Antonio __________________________________________________________________________________________ 5 
61.9 59.6 :n.2. 34.9 0.8 0.8 Waco --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4 62.3 61.9 37.4 37.5 1.3 1.1 All Others·--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------20 58.7 57.5 40.5 37.5 1.5 1.6 
Stores Grouped According to Type of Store: 
Department Stores (Annual Volume Over $500,000) ________________________ 17 65.6 63.4 38.6 39.7 1.1 1.2
Department Stores (Annual Volume Under $500,000') ________________________ 14 
58.7 58.2 36.7 35.6 1.8 1.7 Dry Goods-Apparel Stores-------------------------------------------------------------------5 59.8 60.4 33.2 32.0 2.3 1.9 Women's Specialty Shops.-----------------------------------------------------------------11 67.2 67.1 39.5 37.4 1.0 1.0 Men's Clothing Stores·-------------------------------------------------------------------· 16 67.4 65.2 40.0 39.4 1.8 1.5 
Stores Grouped According to Volume of Net Sales During 1936: 
Over $2,500,000________________________________________________________________________________________ 9 
67.3 65.3 43.5 42.9 1.0 1.0 

$2,500,000 down to $1,000,000__________________________________________________________ 9 
60.6 59.4 37.7 38.5 1.1 1.2 Sl,000,000 down to $300,000 __ ---------------------------------------------------------· 16 59.0 5S.4 40.7 42.4 1.6 1.6 
Less than $300,000______________________________________________________________________ 2.9 
59.4 61.8 39.2 42.1 2.1 2.0 

Non:: The ratios shown for each year, in the order in which they appear from left to right, arc obtained by the fo1Jowing computations: (1) Credit sales divided 
by net sales. (2) Coilections during the month divided by the total accounts unpaid on the first of the month. (3) Salaries of the credit department divided by 
credit sales. The data are reported to the Bureau of Business Research by Texas retail 'tores. 
BUILDING PERMITS POSTAL RECEIPTS 
April April March April April March 1937 1936 1937 1937 1936 1937 
_________________$ ________________ $
Abilene 92,372 $ 92,985 $ 29,300 Abilene 17,650 $ 16,219 $ 16,857 Amarillo ---------------109,445 144,471 59,957 Amarillo ------------------28,438 26,044 29,953 Austin -----------------653,946 342,107 290,292 Austin -----------------------54,750 4-2,805 66,80·1 
Beaumont 97,543 69,663 181,039 Beaum.ont 24,152 22,085 24,S74 
Big Spring_____________ 13,685 11,870 22,360 Big Spring_______________ 
5,809 4,850 5,892 Brownsville ----------45,S4·5 14,630 1,275 Brownsville 5,607 5,713 8,211 Brownwood 5,925 350 2,465 Brownwood --------------6,028 5,514 5,151 Corpus Christi ___ 346,575tt 161,005 200,560 Corpus Christi 20,507 15,309 21,241 
Corsicana ---24,165 14,897 14,010 Dallas -----------------------356,236 327,961 385,263
Rio_____________________ __

Dallas ----------l,:no,267 1,494,861 1,501,058 Del 5,057 4,686 4,283
Rio ______

Del 23,980 7,690 5,065 Denison -------------------4,765 4,698 4,777
Paso____________________

Denison --6,785 750 3,033 El 43,511 40,420 47,224
Worth_______________

El Paso _ --119,682 117,370 78,774 Fort 135,635 124,732 157,22S Fort Worth --1,232,191 5S4,610 1,64.2,244 Galveston -----------------25,238 25,982 ZS,542 Galveston 111,147 69,805 77,65In Graham --------------------2,230 1,939 2,124 Graham 10,600 4,920 25,275 Harlingen ---------------5,045 41820 5,SS3 Harlingen --l3,742tt 4,570 55,245 Houston ---------------------227,982 207,882 235,555 Houston 1,410,055 1,240,205 1,628,865 Jacksonville 4,197 3-,879 3,182 Jacksonville -·-------17,798 3,600 7,325 Longview -----------------10,044 9,560 9,729 Laredo -----· -·---------3,900 22,080 29,450 Lubbock -------------------14,103 12,196 13,857 Lubbock ------------122,094 19,6S6 91,602 McAllen ------------------4,329 4,105 4,857 McAllen 28,900 49,850 32,650 Marshall ---------------5,805 5,352 5,248 Marshall ---------------44,212 13,143 33,126 Palestine ------------------4,493 4,850 4,873 Palestine 25,448 18,313 22,133 Pampa ---------------------6,946 6,510 5,912 Pampa -----------------13,400tt 18,450 19,850 6,312
Paris 5,133 6,023
-----------------~---­

Paris 8,290 8,905 10,440 Plainview ---------------3,913 3,198 4,056 
Arthur______________

Plainview -----------5,014 4,300 15,720 Port 12,775 9,911 11,519 Port Arthur__________ 129,2S4 78,847 107,093 San Angelo --------------11,059 10,113 10,938 San Angelo _________ 11,336 5,530 30,890 San Antonio _______________ 
117,043 109,651 125,953San Antonio... ____ 267,868 299,951 507,4,97 

Sherman -------------------7,205 6,779 7,303
Sherman 16,120 18,502 10,777 
Snyder ----------------------l,1S6 l,22S 1,377Snyder -------------------2,500 
Sweetwater 4,780 4,458 4,807
38,160 6,210 23,025 ---------------­Tyler 225,843 100,011 98,752 Tyler ---·--·----------------·--16,513 16,152 17,072 
Sweetwater -----------­
-------·------· -­

Waco 146,725 31,269 113,420 Waco ------· ---------------31,356 30,323 34,468 Wichita Falls ------51,665 53,020 lS,734 Wichi_ta Falls ---------20,493 19,507 21,565 TOTAL ----------_____$6,786,507 $5,208,426 $6,999,032 TOTAL __________________ $1,250,013 
$1,145,454 $1,342,887 

'i!Does not include public works. 
NOTE: Compiled from reports from Texas chambers of commerce to the Bureau Non: Compiled from reports from Texas chambers of commerce to the Bureau of Business Research. of Bueiness Research. 

PETROLEUMAPRIL CARLOAD MOVEMENT OF POULTRY 

A D EGGS Daily Average Production 
Cara of Poultry (In Barrels)Live Dressed Cara of Egi;e April April 
March
Chickens Turkeys Chickens Turkeys 
1937 1936t 19371937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 1937 1936 

East Central Texas_____________ 116,650 50,000 119,71()Shipments from Texas Stations East Texas -----------------4..58,000 446,270 451.,310 
TOTAL -· _ 12 7 87 65 3 1 96 91 Gulf Coastrr______________________ __ 199,100 244,820 206,9·10 
z 48 32 North Texas ----------------·-------70,700 59,040 67,84{) [nterstate _ 8 5 87 65 3 1 48 59 Panhandle _·-----------------------75,800 61,930 76,380 Southwest Texas.----------------·---22.S,750 77,870 228,070 
[ntrastate ---·------4 
Interstate Shipments Classified 

West Central Texas __________ ---·----33,,060 25,050 32,550New York 1 2 28 15 2 West Texas -----------------------______ 199,400 179,800 206,120Illinois .. 5 4 5 1 1 18 13 STATE _________________________________ l,378,450 
1,144,780 1,391,920Massachusetts 1 1 10 8 1 UNITED STATES_______________ .... 3,471,250 

New Jersey ___ ____ 1 20 7 1 1 2,910,060 3,394,690 Pennsylvania _____ 17 14 2 Imports ------------------------------·----177,821 155,286 168,972 Louisiana 10 22 
tReviscd. 
Connecitcu.t _______ 2 6 
1!Jncludcs Conroe. 
Missouri -----· 2 NoTE: From American Petroleum Institute. 
See accompanying map showing the oil producing districts of Texas. 

Georgia _·-­1 1 4 Michigan 1 Gasoline sales as indicated by truces collected by the State California .. _ 1 5 5 Comptroller were: March 1937, 94,771,000 gallons; March 1936, Alabama _ 3 87,233,000 gallons; February 1937, 84,611,000 gallons. Florida ------_____ 2 1 5 Rhode Island__ ____ 1 3 Tennessee ________ 1 3 1 
Maryland --------___ _ 3 
Oklahoma _______ 1 2 
D. of Columbia 2 3 1 
N. Carolina .. __ 1 
Nebraska 4 

Receipts at Texas Stations TOTAL 45 52 [n trasta te __ 30 28 lnterstate 15 24 
NoTE: These data are furnished the U. S. Department of Agriculture, Division 
of Crop and Livcetock Estimat es, by railway officials through agents at all stations 
which originate and receive carload shipments of poultry and eggs. The data are 
compiled by the Bureau of Business Research. 

A NOU CEMENTS Convention dates have been announced for the follow­ing organizations: Texas State Manufacturers Association, June 16, San Antonio. Southwestern Association of Nurserymen, June 16, San Antonio. 
TEXAS COMMERCIAL FAILURES 

April April March TEXAS CHARTERS 1937 1936t 1937 
April April March 

Number __ ----------· ____ 17 15 7 1937 1936 1937 Liabilitie --· __________ -·--· ___________$364 $449 $101 Domestic Corporations:
Assetsll ----------__ ________ $147 $296 $ 32 Capitalization II --------------._____ $2',297 $1,357 $2,048 Average Liabilities per Failu.rell---$ 21 $ 30 $ 14 Number --------------------------------141 140 143 Classification of new 
tReviscd. 
ll Jn thousands. 

corporations: i\oTE: From Dun and Bradstreet, Inc. Banking-Finance ---------------4 4 9 Manufacturing -----------------24 16 12 
LUMBER 

Merchandising -----------------36 36 33 (In Board Feet) Oil ·---------------------·-------------31 26 36 
Public Service__________________ _ 

1 5 April April March Real Estate-Building__________ 11 19 15 
1937 1936 1937 
Transportation -----------------3 7 2

Sou.them Pine Mills: 
All Others_______________________ 32 31
31

Average Weekly Production Number capitalized at less per Unil ___ -------343,315 310,990 324,536 
than $5,000. ________ ·--------------60 60 51

Average Weekly Shipments 
per Unit______________________________ 316,309 N u m be r capitalized at
344,635 308,977 $100,000 or more____ ----------5 2 4Average Unfilled Orders per Foreign corporations (number) 43 29 '%lUnit, End of Month______________ 785,130 792,500 834,970 

IJin thousands. 
Non : From Southern Pine Association. 
NoTE: CompHed from records of the Secretary of State. 
STOCK PRICES 
COM'.MODITY PRICES 
April April March 1937 1936 1937 
April April March 

Standard Indexes of the Securities 
1937 1936 1937 WHOLESALE PRICES: 
Market : 
U.S. Bureau of Labor 419 Stocks Combined.. __ --···-···· 124.5 108.9 129.9 Statistics (1926 = 100) ······-··· 88.0 79.7 87.8 347 Industrials -···-···-···--·-···· 146.5 125.3 152.6 
144.4 12.>.8 143.5 32 Rails ····-·······-··-··---·--···· 60.1 48.9 62.8
The Annalist (1913 =100) ····-··· { 85.3U 7HU 84.8U 40 Utilities ···-·-···· .. -···--·-·· 100.7 101.5 105.7 
FARM PRICES: 
10TE : From Standard Statistics Co., Inc. 
U. S. Department of Agricul­
ture (1910--14 =100)____________ CO SUMPTIO OF ELECTRIC POWER IN TEXAS
130.0 105.0 128.0 
Power Consumed Percentage Change

U. S. Bureau of Labor 
(In Thousands of K.W.H.) April 1937 Apdl 1937

Statistics (1926 =100) .......... . 92.2 76.9 94.1 April April March 

from from 
1937 1936 1937 April 1936 ~larch 1937

RETAIL PRICES: 
Commercial 37,461 31,854 36.190 + 17.6 + 3.5
Food\U~~Bureauof Labor 
Statistics, 1923-25 =100) 85.6 79.7 85.4 Industrial ... . 99,802 86,231 90,939 +15.7 + 9.7 Department Stares (Fairchild's 
Residential -···· 28,022 23,904 26,935 +17.2 + 4.0 
Publications, Jan. 1931 ~Based on old <Old dollar.  =100)  95.2  88.l  94.5  All Other.. ____ 24,221 TOTAL ______189,506  23,135 165,124  22,753 176,817  + 4.7 ..J.. 14.S.  + 6.5 + 7.2  
OTE:  Prepared from  reports  from  18  electric  power  companies  to  the  Bureau  
of  Business  Research.  
COTTON BALANCE SHEET I  THE U  ITED STATES AS OF MAY 1  
(In Thousands of Bales)  
Final Gin·  
Carryover Aug. I§  Imports to May l~  nings Report March 20  Total  Consumption to May 1§  Export! to May I §  Total  Balance May 1  

1929-1930 ... ·-···-····-····-····-···········-···-···-····-2,313 311 14,548 17,172 4,848 6,121 10,969 6,203 1930--1931... -..··-···-····-··-······-·-····-····-··-·-4,530 69 13,756 18,355 3,893 5,910 9,803 8,552 1931-1932 .... ·-··········-······-··-···-·····-··············--· 6,369 82 16,629 23,080 3,932 7,397 11,329 11,751 1932-1933 ... _ ..... ····-·····-··-···-····-···-···-······-9,682 96 12,710 24,488 4,219 6,521 10.740 13,748 1933-1934 .... ·-····-······-·····-·-······-··-----·-······· 8,176 112 12,664 20,952 4.458 6.485 10,943 10,009 1934-1935 .... ·-····-···-·····-····-···-····-····-····-······-7,746 83 9,472 17,301 4,116 3,986 8,102 9,199 1935-1936 ........... _ .......... -······-·-····-··················· 7,138 102 10,417 17,657 4,658 5,167 9.825 7.832 1936-1937 ... ----····--·-····-···--··-·····-···-····-5,397 167 12,130 17,694 6,011 4,762 10,773 6.921 
The cotton year begins August 1. ~In 500-pound bales. §In running bales, counting round bales as half bales. 
NoTE: The figures have been revised in accordance with the revisions made by the United States Bureau of the Census. 

BANKING STATISTICS 
(In Millions of Dollars) 
April 1937 April 1936 March 1937 
Dal1as United Dallas United Dal1as. United District States District States District States 

DEBITS to individual accounts ···········-·· ·-··-···-···-··--·· ···-··-·····-····--····-···-········ 798 36,927 637 33,865 808 39,754 
Condition of reporting member banks on-April 28, 1937 April 29, 1936 March 31, 1937 ASSETS: Loans and investments-total ........ ·-·················-·········-····-···--·-····-····-···--------482 22,202 442 21,795 490 22,273 Loans to brokers and dealers: 
In New York City ____ ····-···-···--··-···--·-···-···-·····-···-··-····-···-····-··--·-____ 1,075 1,032 1,064 
Outside New York City .. ·-···-·····-··-·-·····----···-----------------· 3 222 2 209 3 241 Loans on securities to others (except banksl ---··-···-····--·-··-···------····--· 43 2,040 41 2,063 43 2,051 Acceptances and commercial paper bought .... ----···---···------------····-··-1 393 2 346 2 410 Loans on real estate ... ---··-~·-···-----·····---··--------··--··-··---·-····--·--· 22 1,156 22 1,141 23 1,157 Loans to banks.. ·-········· _····-····-·-···-··--·-···-···--·-··--··----··-··-···-····-· 84 1 67 81 Other loans ... ---········-··········-···--·-------···----······-----------·-··--··-····--·· 145 4,458 123 3,485 146 4,362 
U.S. Government direct obligations ______________ ····-····--··-····--·-····-··--------186 8,370 167 8,802 185 8,396 Obligations fully guaranteed by U. S. Government.... ·········-···-················-···--··-27 1,175 37 1,281 30 1,199 Other securities ... +·····-······-·-···----···-····-·-··-··-····--··--····-··----·-55 3,229 47 3,369 58 3,312 Reserve with Federal Reserve Banks_·-···-···-··-···-····--·-···-··-···--··---····· 104 5,425 83 4,416 103 5,173 Cash in vau!L.---···-······-··------·····--·-·····-··-·-·---···------······ 11 354 10 382 9 346 Due from domestic banks .... -------····-··-·········-···--··-·--·-···-------160 1,964 170 2,252 154 1,886 Other assets-net..·-····-··-···------··-·-···-····-···-····--·-··-·--··-····-········ 2.8 1,345 27 1,393 29 1,350 
LIABILITIES:

Demand deposits-adjusted______________________________________________________________ 389 
15,388 337 14,258 392 15,126 Time deposits ... -------··-····--·-··---·--··········--··-···-·-·····------·-··-···-·--120 5,158 118 5,047 120 5,144 
U.S. Government deposits ..·-·--··-···-·---·-··-·-··-··-·····--------······-·-----9 272. 27 752 12 353 
Inter-bank deposits: Domestic banks .. ·-···--··---·-··--··-·-·······-·-···-··-·······----···---· 179 5,437 169 5,431 176 5,462 Foreign banks .... ------·-··-···---------·-····-····------····-····--·-···--·-1 507 353 453 
Borrowings ... ----··-··-··-·---··------···-·-··-··-·-------······-··--·-· 1 3 6 Other liabilities_····--·-·--··------------·-·-··---····--·---------7 944 4 865 6 903 Capital accounL·--·······-·-·-----···-···-··-···--··-·-·-··-·-·-·-·----79 3,581 77 3,532 79 3,581 
I\"oTE: From Federal Reserve Board. 
Pay Rolls Ending Nearest Fifteenth of Month 
Workers Pay Roll ,-----"-------, 
No. of Number Percentage Change Dollars Percentage Change Average Weekly Wage ERtab-from from from from per Worker lish-April Apri l Mar. April April Mar. April April Mar. ments 1937 1936 1937 1937 1936 1937 1937 1936 1937 Abilene_____________________ 
17 237 + 10.2 + 2.6 $ 4,722 +11.l + 0.5 
Amarillo_________________________ 
43 701 + 6.1 2.8 17,695 + 15.9 + 1.7 
Austin.·--·--·----·---------------· 

22 659 + 2.6 + 3.8 13,819 -4.9 + 7.6 
Beaumont ---···-----------·---·--------------35 3,136 -3.3 0.8 88,119 + 18.8 + 10.0 

Cm:pus Christi 6 288 + 29.1 + 1.4 4,199 + 44.7 + 8.1 
Dallas______________________________ 

190 11,230 + 6.8 2.0 246,533 + 13.6 0.0 
Denison·-·---·-------------------·---··----­

9 934 + 5.9 1.1 13,992 + 2.2 + 2.5 
El Paso_··-·-·-·-··-·---------·----------------­76 2,032 + 13.1 + 1.7 + 15.0 + 1.1

4.2,108 
Fort Worth.·----·------------------------··-------6,590 + 10.8 2.9 + 26.6 2.2

100 + 150,282 + 
Galveston______ -·------------·-----------·-------·-----20 743 + 20.8 + 2.8 19,118 + 21.3 + 2.7 
Houston____·-------·-----·--------·-·-----------166 11,343 + 16.0 + 0.4 269,621 + 20.0 + 2.6 
Laredo ... ·-··--···-----····-------·----------·--·-· 12 204· + 19.3 + 3.6 2,829 + 9.8 + 3.9 

Longview 5 122 + 40.2 -10.3 3,307 + 61.8 + 10.1 
Lubbcfck 7 322 + 21.l + J0.3 4,633 + 52.8 + 14.7 
Port Arthur --·-·-··------------··---------·-· 

9 7,988 + 4·.2 + 2.5 245,0ll + 29.1 +13.2 
San Angelo 8 143 -2.1 + 2.1 2,268 + 4.5 -1.9 
130 4.,576 + 6.7 + 0.4 98,962 +13.2 + 2.6

San Antonio _--····--·-----·------·--·--·------------­Sherman _______ -·--------·-----------------·----------15 74,] + 9.3 + 6.3 13,411 + 21.9 + 14.9 
Waco . ····---------·---·-····-···-·---··-··--------­
40 1,922 + 15.2 + 2.6 32,672 + 21.0 + 1.2 
Wichita Falls __ -------· --------------------&3 886 + 12.3 + 8.0 20,785 + 26.8 + 13.7 
All Other Cities__ ·--·------------··-·-·-·---·····-·-691 3 1,140 + 9.1 + 1.3 839,973 + 20.2 + 2.7 

STATE ...----·--··-·-------·----------------·--1,634 85,9317 + 9.0 + 1.0 2,134,059 + 20.0 + 3.9 $24.83 $22.56 $24.14 BUILDING MATERIALS________--·------101 8,918 + 16.2 + 4.2 176,563 + 21.7 + 8.6 19.80 18.89 18.99 
Brick, Tile, Terra Cotta..______________ 10 44'1 + 2.8 +ll.6 5,644 -2.4 + 20.6 12.80 13.48 11.85 Cement ----------·----------------8 1,544 + 29.4. + 6.9 26,769 + 9.2 + 5.8 17.34 20.54 17.51 
Foundries, Machine Shops____ _
_______________ 29 2,239 + 30.3 + 7.2 60,283 + 24.7 + 10.1 26.92 
28.13 26.21

Millwork________________________________ 16 + 33.0 3.3 + 31.9 1.9
6J6 -11,967 -19.43 19.60 19.15 Saw Mill~------------------------16 3,222 + 3.1 + 0.1 51 ,0]9 + 21.1 + 3.9 15.83 13.49 15.25 Structural Iron Works ------· __________ ---·--10 745 + 16.8 +11.5 18,301 + 39.5 + 28.9 24.57 20.56 21.25 Al l Other Building Materials _ 12 111 -1.8 + 3.7 2,580 + 23.0 + 11.8 23·.24 18.57 21.56 
CHEMICALSU ---------------------------30 709 + 13.4 5.5 14,779 + 23.0 + 2.5 20.84 19.22 19.23
CLOTHING AND TEXTILES___________________ 36 4.,517 + 23.0 + 3.5 58,909 + 43.5 + 5.3 13.04 11.19 12.82
Cotton Textile Mills______________________ 7 2,43,2 + 30.3 + 8.1 33,704 + 57.6 + 8.6 13.86 11.46 13.80 Men's Work Clothing Manufacturing __ .. 14 1,459 + 6.4. -3.2 16,435 + 20.7 
0.5 11.26 9.93 10.96 

Women's Clothing Manufactming __ 5 129 + 16.2 -11.7 1,553 + 16.9 7.3 12.04 11.96 11.47 
Other Clothing and Textile Manufacturing __ 10 4,97 + 54.3 
+ 7.6 7,217 + 52.4 + 7.8 14.52 14.71 14.49 

COTTON 36 1,121 + 1.3 -J8.6 
18,680 + 2.6 -17.1 16.66 16.44 16.36 
Co tton Compresses 6 717 +12.4 -3.9 12,715 + 11.7 -5.3 17.n 17.85 18.00 

C.otton O il Mills .~O 40'4 -13.9 -36.0 5,965 -12.5 -34.5 14.76 14.53 14.43 DISTRIBUTION -------·-----------------------------557 16,814· + 7.3 + 0.8 378,421 + 11.8 + 0.8 22.51 21.60 22.51 Retail Trade ---------------------------------316 11,078 + 7.0 + 0.7 225,903 + 11.1 + 1.8 20.39 19.65 20.17 Wholesale Trade ----·------------------------24·l 5.736 + 7.9 + 1.1 152,518 +13. 
0 -0.6 26.59 25.40 27.04 FOOD PR0 DUCTS ·-------------------------·-------· l l l 7,W2 + 9.8 -2.4 155,975 + 27.4 -0.9 21.96 18.94 21.63 Bakeries ·-·--------------·----------·-----------23 722 +14-.l + 2.8 14,334 + 23.1 + 1.5 ]9.85 18.40 20.12 Beverages____ ---------------------------l 3 211 + 3.9 +Jl.6 4,868 + 12.2 + 10.9 23.07 21.38 23.23
C.onfectionerics _ _____ _____ ____ 9 235 -4·.9 -7.1 3,169 + 2.6 5.0 13.49 12.51 13.19

F1our Mills ___________ -----------------8 

568 + 7.2 -1.2 12,407 + 26.5 + 7.0 21.84 18.51 20.17
Tee Cream Factories 6 302 + 17.1 +15.3 5,709 + 11.4 + 8.1 18.90 19.87 20.16
Meat Packing, Slauglitering____________________ 10 3,4-39 + 11.9 1.9 89,231 
+ 37.5 0.0 25.95 21.13 25.45

All Other Food Products_______________________ 42 1,625 6.7
+ 9.1 26,257 + 11.5 -10.6 16.16 15.46 16.43
FOREST PRODUCTS _____ --------------21 876 + 4.3 
+ o.z 15,547 + 17.6 + 4.0 17.75 15.73 17.10

FURNITURE MANUFACTURING ______________ 7 4.77 + 6.7 
4.0 9,131 + 17.4 -4.6 19.14 17.39 19.25 

PETROLEUM _ _ --------------------------60 22,458 + 8.9 739,213 + 8.5 27.57
+ 1.1 +30.0 32.92 30.69 

Crude Petroleum Producing ·--------------------26 5,116 + 6.5 + 1.1 181,664. + 15.8 -0.6 
35.51 32.65 36.10 

Petroleum Refining ---------------------34 17,342 + 9.6 + 1.1 557,549 + 35.4 
+11.7 32.15 26.02 29.10

PRINTI G AND PUBLISHING __ . ---·------·· 54 1,759 + 7.0 + 0.6 57,136 +10.2 0.3 32.48 31.53 32.77 
Commercial Printing -------------·--·----------36 591 + 6.7 2.2. 
14,960 + 10.9 4.1 25.3J. 24.36 25.83 

Newspaper Publishing --------------------------l8 1,168 + 7.2 + 2.0 
4·2,176 + 10.0 + 1.1 36.11 35.18 36.43

PUBLIC UTILITIES __ __ _ ------------·----373 12,668 + 7.1 + 1.6 
34·2,809 + 11.5 1.4 27.06 26.00 27.90 

Powei and Light ----·----------------------291 7,292 +10.1 + 1.6 203·176 + 14.9 2.4· 2,7.86 26.69 29.00Steam Railroad Car Shops __ ------------l9 2,582 -1.9 
+ 3.1 n :156 + 2.0 + 5.5 27.56 26.52 26.93

A11 Other Puhli r Utilitif<s 63 2,794 + 8.5 + 0.4 68,477 + 12.4 
5.2 24.51 23.65 25.96

QUARRYI~G &NON-METALLIC MTNING 30 l ,n7 -14.o + 1.8 49,357 -3.2 
+ 16.2 28.42 25.24 24.89
SERVICE _ ___ ___ _________ 121 4.,584 + 8.4 + 2.3 

68,591 + 13.6 + 4.3 14.96 1429 14.68

Business and Perso nal Service. --· ------·-__ 22 4·18 + 21.2 + 8.0 
10,268 +30.0 + 6.3 24.56 22.89 24.95

Hotels __ ---------·---------28 2,420 + 13.0 
+ 0.8 30,957 + 17.7 + 2.7 12.79 12.29 12.56 

-----------·---680 + 0.4 + 6.6
Ice _ 46 12.,573 + 4.6 +11.8 18.49 17.75 17.62
Laundries, Dyeinp; and Cleaning -·---·-----____ 25 1,066 + 0.2 + 0.9 14,793 + 4.4 + 0.5 13.88 13.32 13.94o 
ALL OTHER INDUSTRIES ____ --------------97 2,197 + 12.0 
+ 3.4 48,948 + 22.4 + 5.2 22.28 20.40 21.90 

'ChcmiC"al and Allied Industries not elsewhere classified. Stati~t~:.= Preparl"d from r"pons from Texas industrial establishments to the Bureau of Buaiocea Research, coOperatine with the United States Bureau of Laltof