'TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

A. Monthly Summary of Business and Economic Conditions in Texas 
BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS 
VOL. XXXIV, NO. 4 TWENTY CENTS A COPY-TWO DOLLARS A YEAR APRIL 1960 

The Business Situation in Texas 
By JOHN R. STOCK.TON 
The downturn in Texas business barometers that occur­red in January was reversed with a vigorous rise in most of the series in February. This strength in the major in­dexes of business furnishes strong support for the thesis that the decline in January was a temporary, erratic varia­tion, with the outlook for 1960 still favorable. Further evidence indicates that this conclusion is still sound, al­though the extent of the rise may not be as large as was considered likely a few months ago. 
The index of business activity in Texas rose sharply in February; after adjustment for seasonal variation it was 9% higher than in January and 11 % above February 1959. At 238% of the 1947~9 base period, the index for February set an all-time record. The previous high for the index was 226 in July 1959. This index is based on the charges to checking accounts in the banks in twenty large Texas cities. Adjustment is made for the changes in the price level, with the result that the index may be considered a reliable barometer of the changing volume of business transactions in the state. Its strong rise in February is an encouraging sign that business in Texas is still good. 
Although the level of total business activity in the state 
rose during February, the different segments of the econ­
omy show varying rates of change. In evaluating the pros­
pects for business in the coming months it is important to 
determine which phases of the economy are showing the 
greatest promise for improvement. 
Consumer spending in Texas, as represented by the esti· 
mates of retail sales by the Bureau of Business Research, 
declined for the second consecutive month. The decline from January to February was 4% after adjustment for seasonal variation, compared with a decline of 2% be· tween December and January. The declines in both months were in nondurable goods stores, with durable goods stores registering increases in both months. Sales by durable goods stores in February increased 6% over January, while sales by nondurable goods stores declined 7%. 
Since consumer spending is the largest portion of the state's total business, these two months of decline appear to raise serious questions with respect to the course of busi· ness activity. 1£ the decline does continue it will indicate that a recession in business is under way, but there is rea· son to believe that this downward trend will not persist through the spring. The rise in sales by durable goods stores represents primarily the improved automobile business, although automobile sales have not been quite as good as the early forecasts indicated they would he. The substan· tial decline in sales by nondurable goods stores may repre­sent the influence of the late spring. The sale of many kinds of merchandise is influenced by the weather, and Feb­ruary was unusually cold and wet. It is not impossible that March sales of nondurable goods stores will fail to improve significantly due to the late date of Easter this year. Clothing sales are influenced by the date of Easter, to such an extent that some statistical agencies make an adjustment in the reported figures to reflect the date of Easter. 
The basic factors that influence consumer spending do not warrant the conclusion that this phase of the economy has turned into a recession. Total nonagricultural employ· 

Texas Business Activity 


TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

ment in Texas increased from 2,474,800 in January to 2,476,800 in February. The February total for this year was well above the 2,420,300 employed a year earlier. There are no monthly data available for personal income in Texas, but for the country as a whole February showed a small increase from January. A small rise in labor income was partially offset by a decline in farm income, with other major sources of income remaining virtually unchanged. There is no reason to believe that personal income in Texas deviated significantly from the national pattern, so it does not appear that the decline in retail sales resulted from a curtailment in consumer buying power. This supports the hypothesis that the decline in retail sales during the first two months of 1960 will not continue. 
Texas lldustrlal Production 

So.,itt• feduol Rtittvt &on\ ol 00Uc11. 

Another important factor in the business situation is the prospect that business spending for capital goods during 1960 will increase substantially. The survey of business expenditure plans made by the Department of Commerce and the Securities and Exchange Commission in January and February anticipates rising outlays in the United States during 1960, exceeding 1959 by 14%. Total expected in­vestment of slightly over $37 billion exceeds in dollar volume the previous high reached in 1957. These estimates are expressed in current dollars each year; if adjustments were made for the change in the price level, the anticipated expenditures for 1960 would be slightly below the 1957 level. 
Data for Texas comparable to the anticipated expendi­tures for the United States are not available, but the ex­pansion in Texas has been at a somewhat greater rate than for the country as a whole. This would indicate that capital expenditures of business in Texas during 1960 will offer substantial support to business activity. If these plans for expansion are carried out, it will result in increased ex­penditures for materials and equipment. The increased employment would add to purchasing power and furnish support to all types of economic activity, as well as provide an expanded base for the state's growth. 
The anticipated expenditures in the United States for new plant and equipment are 25% greater than for 1959, substantially more than for any nonmanufacturing cate­gory. Durable goods manufacturers expect to increase their capital outlays 33% while nondurable goods manufacturers expect only a 10% increase. Airlines will continue ex­panding their jet fleets, resulting in an increase of 6% in the spending of transportation companies other than rail­roads. Commercial firms and others expect to increase s~ending 7%, indicating a continued expansion of shop­pmg centers. 

The rate of increase in capital spending is expected to rise throughout 1960. The first quarter is expected to be at the annual rate of $35.32 billion, up 5% from the last quarter of 1959. The second quarter annual rate is esti­mated as $36.91 billion, but the second half of 1960 is expected to rise enough to bring the total for the year to $37.02 billion. It is important to understand that these anticipated expenditure rates may not actually be realized. However, in periods of rising investment the trend has been to understate rather than to overstate the rate of expendi­ture. All of these factors lead to the conclusion that Texas business in 1960 should be good, even in spite of some of the less encouraging trends that are present in some sectors. 
A third important segment of the economy of Texas is the building industry. Spending for new construction is similar in its effect to business investment in plant and equipment, and business buildings are actually a part of the capital spending of business concerns. 
The level of new construction during February in Texas remained practically unchanged from January, but the first two months of 1960 were 15% below the level of the same period in 1959. Residential building, however, reg­istered a different trend, with a decline from January to February of 3%. The first two months of 1960 were 24% below the same months last year. The year 1959 was a very good one for building, both in Texas and in the remainder of the country, so even with some decline in volume the industry could be considered to be performing well during the first two months of 1960. Some evidence exists that 
mortgage loans may be a little easier to secure, although it probably is not likely that any substantial reduction in interest rates will occur soon. Residential building prob­ably will not contribute much to an expansion of business activity, although there appears to be no immediate danger that it will make any major contribution to a decline. Non­residential building appears to be capable of offering some support to an increase in business. 
Manufacturing activity in Texas and in the nation showed a slight decline during February. The index of in-
SELECTED BAROMETER OF T EXAS BUSINESS 
(1947-40 = 100) 
Percent change  
I ndex  Feb. 1960  Jan. 1960  Feb. 1960 Feb. 1960 Feb. from from 1969 Jan. 1969 Feb.1969  


Texas Business Activity ............  238  219  216  +  9  + 11  
Miscellaneous freight  
carloadings in S.W. district..  80  82  74  2  + 8  
Crude petroleum production .... Crude oil runs to stills ............  124• 148  117r 148  122 162  + 6 ••  + 2 -8  
Total electric power  
con su mption  ····················-·····-·  394•  376r  347r  + 5  + 14  
Industrial electric power  
consumption  ............................  416•  386r  S61r  + 8  + 15  
Bank  debits  -····--···--·--········---··--·­ 284  261  267  +  9  + 11  
Ordinary life insurance sales ..  423  387  401  +  9  + 6  
Total retail sales ........................  216•  224r  213r  4  + 1  
Du rable-goods sales ................ Nondurable-goods sales ........  161• 243•  152r 262r  165r 248r  + 6 7  + 4 ••  
Urban building perm its issued  210  200r  236  +  5  -11  
Residential  --··-·······--················  220  226r  279  3  -21  
Non residential  ........................  204  167r  179  + 22  + 14  
Total  industrial  production....  173•  172  167  +  1  + 4  

Adjusted for seasonal variation, except annual averages and farm cash incom e. 
• Preliminary. 
r Revised. 
•• Change is less than one-half of one percent. 


dustrial production compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas showed total manufactures declining from 213% of the 1947-49 base to 210. Mining, however, showed enough of an increase to push the total index of industrial production up one point to 173. The index of industrial production for the United States, compiled by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, declined from 168 to 167. The manufacturing component also de­clined from 168 to 167, while the mining component de­clined two points and utilities rose three points. This index has recently been revised to include the output of utilities, as well the older manufacturing and mining components. 
Some industrial production since the end of the steel strike has gone into building up depleted inventories. Dur­ing both December and January inventories increased by one billion dollars, bringing the January 31, 1960 level slightly above that of July 31, 1959. Assuming that busi­nessmen will not want to continue this accumulation of inventories, it seems likely that production may not show any substantial increase until consumption increases. 
There is little indication that the Texas oil industry will 
lend any increased support to business, with the April 

allowable set at nine days. The index of petroleum pro-
Crude Petroleum Production In Texas 
Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation • 1947-1949·100 
200 
50 
00 
duction in February, adjusted for seasonal variation, in­
creased 6%, and was 2% above last February. Crude runs 
to stills remained unchanged in February but were 3% 
below the level of a year ago. 
The prospects for agriculture in 1960 remain somewhat 
uncertain. Prices received by Texas farmers declined 2% 
in February, a continuation of the trend of many months. 
Rain and cold weather have put field work behind schedule, 
but with moisture conditions good there is a chance that 
crops will be satisfactory if wet weather does not delay 

planting too long. However, there appears to be no im· 
mediate prospect of a reversal in the downward price trend. 
The index of consumers' prices rose in February to the 
all-time peak of 125.6 reached last November, and Depart­

ment of Labor officials offered little hope that this trend 
would be reversed in the immediate future. The rise, how­
ever, has been concentrated in services rather than in the 
price of commodities. The index of wholesale commodity 
prices rose slightly in February, but has shown very little 
change for the past two years. The decline in farm products 
has approximately offset the rise in industrial commodities. 
There is some possibility that the inflationary trend has 
slowed down, and it has even been suggested that the recent 
weakness in the stock market may result from a lessening of 
interest in hedging against inflation by the buying of com· 
mon stocks. 
4 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 


Editor_____________________________________ _______________John R. Stockton 
Managing Editor__ __ _____________________ _
____ Robert H. Drenner 
CONTENTS 
The Business Situation in Texas ----------------------------------2 
Texas Commercial Banking ----------------------------------------5 
Industrial Production ------------------------------------------------9 
Retail Trade ----------------------------------------------------------------12 
Agriculture ------------------------------------------------------------------14 
Building Construction ------------------------------------------------15 
Local Business Conditions ------------------------------------------17 
Barometers of Texas Business ------------------------------------24 
BUSINESS RESEARCH COUNCIL 
John Arch White, Acting Dean of the College of Buslnet1s Adminis­tration (e:c officio); John R. Stockton; W. H. Baughn; L. G. Blackstock; E . W . Cundiff; J. Neff; G. H. Newlove. 
BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH 
John R. Stockton Stanley A. Arbingaat Florence Elaeott 
Director Aasiatant Direotcw Aemtiint to theDir•otor ResOMrCH Specilllist
Francis B. May Charlet1 O. Bettinger
Statietician Alfred G. Dale J,.,,;or Stats.tician Research Aasociate
Robert H. Drenner Marie Fletcher Research Associat• Fredolin J. Kaderli Research Associate Reeearch Associats
Aileen Donovan Ida M. Lambeth 
Research Aesociate Marjorie T. Cornwell Research Auociat• 
Administrative Clerk 

Roberta SteeleAnna Merle Danz 
Eva A. Ariaa CartographerStatistical TecMvician
Librar11 Aaaistant 
Mildred Anderson Candler P. Caas Statistical Asaistant Josephine J . Knippa Statistical AHilt..nt 
Senicw Clerk T11pist
Barbara Warden Mary Hau 
Senior Secretary Barbara Scaief Ssnior Secr•taf'!I 
Senior Clerk T71pist
Marilyn White. Margene Parr 
Vernell P rather Cleric T11pistSenior Cleric Typist Publications Aseista1't 
Robert Donett Daniel P . Roeae Offset Pros• Operator Of!•et Pre•• Operator 
Cooperating Faculty Charles T. Clark Robert H. Ryan Stella Traweek 
Aseista,.t Profeseor l netntotor in ABBietant Profe1Bor of Busineas Statietics Bueiness Writing of BusineBB Statietic• 
Francis R. Cella 
Vi.<iiting Professor of Bueiness Statistic• 
Assistants 
Freddie O. Boecker, James C. Cline, Harry G. Costis, Keith K. Cox, Ronald M. Farris, George B. Pearson, and Elizabeth R. Turpin. 
Published monthly by the Bureau of Business Research, College of Business Administration, The University of Texas, Austin 12. Entered aa eecond ciaos matter May 7, 1928 at the poet office at Austin, Texas, under the act of August 24, 1912. Content of thil publi­cation is not copyrighted and may be reproduced freely. Acknowledge­ment of 1ource will be appreciated. Subscription, $2.00 a year; individual copies, 20 cents. 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
•

Commercial Banking zn Texas 

By WILLIAM HUBERT BAUGHN* and DAVID TOWNSEND** 
Two recent Bureau of Business Research publications in the Banking and Finance Series are Changes in the Struc­ture of Texas Commercial Banking 1946-1956, and Con­dition and Income of Texas Commercial Banks: The Ef­fects of Size and Location, 1956 and 1958. These two volumes provide: (1) a brief history of the development of commercial hanking in Texas; (2) a detailed statistical comparison of the structure of commercial hanking in Texas with the hanking structure in adjacent states and the United States for the years 1946 through 1956; and 
(3) a statistical presentation of the effects of hank size and geographic location on the condition and income of Texas commercial banks in 1956 and 1958. The following ex­cerpts have been selected from these hanking studies in an effort to present some of their textual highlights. The limi­tation of space prevents a similar sampling of the statistical tables which comprise the chief contribution of the two publications. 
Commercial Banks. Despite the growth of other financial institutions in the modern industrial society such as life insurance companies, savings hanks, and specialists in installment loans, the relatively ancient commercial hank remains the paramount financial firm. When the "bigness" yardstick is applied, commercial bank assets still have the greatest money value, although the relative size of the commercial hanking industry itself is declining. Apart from their sheer size, the unique position of commercial banks as part of the nation's monetary system provides a sufficient explanation of the continuing significance of their current financial condition. 
A commercial hank may he defined as a privately owned business controlled jointly by private management and government agencies. Most of the funds for commercial banks are secured from creditors, with usually only 5% to 10% of the funds secured from owners. Most of the credi­tors' claims include the obligation to pay legal tender money at the request of the creditors or to the party desig­nated by the creditors. These creditor claims are known as demand deposits. The funds are invested in legal tender money, in debt instruments which may he quickly con­verted into legal tender with almost no risk of loss, and in higher earning debt instruments which are not so easily converted to legal tender. In modern societies, demand de­posits are customarily used to perform the functions of money. Therefore, when commercial hanks increase or decrease their outstanding debt, they change the monetary stock of the national economy in which they are located. This money-issuing function of modern commercial hanks explains the inclusion of these hanks in the national mone­tary system and the control over them exercised by gov­ernment agencies. 
Commercial hank demand deposits are the most com­~only used means of payment, and the active participants m the economy-whether they he individuals or firms­
• Professor of Finance, The University of Texas. 
••Associate Professor of Finance, The University of Texas. 


have no practical alternative hut to invest part of their assets in commercial hanks. The counterpart of their de­pository function is the leading role of commercial hanks in providing loans to firms, households, and governments. Commercial hanks are the largest source of short-term loans to business firms and households; they are also the most important institutional source of loan funds, regard­less of maturity, to governments at all levels-federal, state, and local. 
Texas Commercial Banking Prior to 1946. There was little commercial hanking in Texas prior to the Na­tional Bank Act of 1863. The State Constitution of 1845 had specifically prohibited the chartering of hanks and the issuance of paper currency. Except for one hank (which closed in 1859) chartered by Mexico and recognized by the Republic of Texas, the first real hanks in Texas were national hanks. In 1870 there were only four national hanks in Texas, but this number gradually increased to a total of 223 by 1892. From 1906 to 1924 the number of national banks fluctuated between 500 and 535. Substantial charter­ing activity in the period 1924-1926 increased the number of national hanks to 613, an all-time high for the state of Texas. Gradual declines in the number of national hanks in the 1920's, followed by sharp decreases in the early 1930's, reduced the number of national banks in Texas to 445hy 1939. 
A constitutional amendment of 1904 and state legisla­tion in 1905 restored the state hanking system, after which the number of state hanks in operation increased rapidly from 29 in 1905 to a total of 1,022 in 1921. By 1939, how­ever, only 395 hanks with state charters remained in operation. The period of World War 11-1939 to 1946­recorded a further decrease of 3.2% in the number of active hanks in the nation. However, both Texas and states adjacent (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Okla­homa) recorded a slight increase in the number of hanks for the same period. 
The total resources of national hanks in Texas increased slowly prior to 1880 and in that year amounted to about $5 million. Sharp increases in national bank resources be­tween 1880 and 1892 raised the total to approximately $79 million. By 1905, when the state hanking system was re­established, the total resources of national hanks in the state amounted to approximately $190 million. The nearest that state hanks have come to catching up with the national hanks in total resources was in 1920, when resources of state hanks amounted to $412 million and the resources of national hanks totaled $432 million. In the second half of the 1930-1940 decade national hanks had total resources approximately five times those of state hanks. Since 1933 hank assets in Texas have expanded much more rapidly than have total hank assets for the United States. From 1933 to 1939 Texas bank resources increased 73.2% as compared with 43.5% for the United States; the wartime period, 1939-1946, recorded an increase of 255.4% in Texas hank resources as compared with only 130.3% for the nation. 
Comparison of Commercial Banking in Texas with Adjacent States and United States, 1946-1956. In the period from 1946 to 1956 the structure of the com· mercial banking industry in Texas changed in many ways. In general this was a period in which commercial banks in the state made considerable progress in consolidating the gains originated by the expansion period of World War II. These 11 years represented the longest single period of uninterrupted prosperity that Texas banks had enjoyed. 
The number of chartered banks in Texas expanded 10% during the period, as contrasted with an increase of 7% in adjacent states and an actual decline of 3% in the na­tion as a whole. 
During the period Texas bank resources almost doubled. The expansion of 90% in bank resources in the state was twice the national rate of increase, 45%. On a per capita basis, bank resources in Texas increased from $820 to $1,265, a gain of 54%. Average bank resources per capita in the nation increased only 25% during the period but remained above the Texas figure throughout the period. In 1946 the average total bank resources per capita in the state had amounted to 68% of the national average; in 1956 that proportion had increased to 84%, representing a significant gain within a relatively short period of time. Bank resources per person in Texas were well above the average for neighboring states. 
The structure of Texas bank assets tended to become more like the national pattern during the decade; how­ever, there remained some major differences in the use of bank assets. Throughout the period Texas banks tended to hold a higher proportion of total assets in cash and due from banks than the national average. Banks in adjacent states and in the nation have tended to hold a larger pro­portion of assets in government bonds than have Texas banks. In addition, municipal bonds did not make up as large a proportion of Texas bank portfolios as they did in adjacent states and in the nation. 
The total volume of loans and discounts by Texas banks increased an average of over 20% in each year during the period. The over-all increase of 208% in the volume of loans and discounts was above the national rate but below the rate for adjacent states. During the period Texas banks did not expand loans and discounts as a percentage of total assets as much as did banks in the nation. 
Between 1946 and 1956 deposits held by Texas banks expanded 87%, a rate more than twice the national aver­age of 43 %and considerably above that in adjacent states, 68%. In 1946 Texas banks held 4.0% of the nation's bank deposits; in 1956 that proportion had grown to 5.2%. 
The balance between time and demand deposits is very different in Texas from the national picture. Demand de· posits in Texas banks made up 91 % of all deposits in 1946 and 86% in 1956. In the nation these proportions were 75% and 73%, respectively. 
Interbank deposits of Texas banks expanded 100% dur­ing the period; in adjacent states the increase was only 55% and in the nation only 40%. Interbank deposits in· creased in relative importance in the structure of Texas bank deposits from 13.2% of the total to 14.8%. In ad· jacent states these deposits in 1956 made up only 9.9% of total deposits; in the nation the proportion was even lower, only 8.8%. In 1946 Texas banks had held 5.9% of the nation's total interbank deposits; by 1956 that propor· tion had increased to 8.8%. 
The total capital fund of Texas banks increased each year during the period, resulting in an over-all increase of 157% between 1946 and 1956. That rate of growth compared favorably with the national increase of 72% and the increase in neighboring states of 132%. How· ever, the ratios of capital funds to total assets and total deposits in Texas were below the national average through· out the entire period. In 1946 capital funds were 5.5% of total deposits among Texas banks; for the nation the pro· portion was 6.8%. In 1956 Texas banks had expanded capital funds to a level of 7.6% of total deposits; the ex· pansion in the nation was to a level of 8.2%. 
Current operating earnings, the gross income of banks from operation, increased more among Texas banks than in adjacent states or in the nation. An over-all increase of 

BUREAU OF BUSINESS RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS 


Changes in the Structure of 
Texas Commercial Banking, 1946-1956 

Studies in B'anking and Finance No. 2 
By WILLIAM HUBERT BAUGHN, Professor of Finance 

three dollars 
* * * * * * * * 

Condition and Income of Texas Commercial Banks: 
The Effects of of Size and Location, 1956 and 1958 
Studies in Banking and Finance No. 3 
By WILLIAM HUBERT BAUGHN, Professor of Finance and DAVID TOWNSEND, Associate Professor of Finance 
two dollars 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

206% in these earnings by Texas banks compared with an increase of 171 % in the nation and 153% in neighboring states. 
Current operating expenses among Texas hanks during the period went up faster than did current operating earn· ings. This situation was not true for hanks in the nation as a whole. An increase of 222% in operating expenses among Texas banks can be compared with an increase of 153% for banks in the nation and 186% for banks in ad­jacent states. 
Interest on time deposits as an expense of commercial banks expanded rapidly during the period. In 1946 Texas banks had paid only $3.4 million in interest on time de­posits. By 1960 that amount had expanded 559% to a level of $22.4 million. Interest payments had accounted for only 5% of bank expenses in 1946; by 1956 that proportion was 11 %. Interest payments on time depostits in adjacent states continued to account for a larger proportion of total expenses than in Texas banks. In the nation, payments on time deposits increased 200% or from 14% to 18% of total bank expenses. 
There was an uninterrupted increase in the net current earnings of Texas banks, resulting in an over-all gain dur­ing the period of 182% in these earnings. That rate can be compared with the expansion in the nation of 152% and in adjacent states of 154%. Net current earnings, as a ratio of gross income, among Texas banks dropped from 41% in 1946 to 38% in 1956. In the nation the operating ratio (ratio of expenses to gross income) continued to be about 62% throughout the period and did not show the increase recorded by Texas banks. 
Effect of Bank Size on the Condition and Income of Texas Commercial Banks in 1956-1958. The method of dividing banks by size, and the relative import­ance of each size classification, is revealed in Table 1. 

The relative importance of owners and creditors as sources of bank funds is a significant relationship which varies considerably from one size of bank to another. The 1958 all-bank ratio of 8% ($1 of capital for every $12.50 of deposits) obscures a range which extends from 7.1 % for bank size V (deposits from $50,001,000 to $100,· 000,000) to 11.9% for size I (deposits of $2,000,000 and under) . An interesting inverse relationship between the size of the capital-deposit ratio and the bank size has been found to exist. Only bank size VI (deposits of $100,001,· 000 and over) fails to fall into the pattern since the reli­ance on capital by the largest banks is similar to the banks in the class with deposits of $2,001,000 to $10,000,000. (sizes II and III) . 
In both years, demand deposits of individuals, partner­ships, and corporations (referred to as demand deposits) were the most important classification of deposits for each bank size; however, the variation within the entire group was extreme. The bank size pattern for demand deposits descends without interruption from a high of over 70% of assets for bank size I to less than 50% of assets for size 
VI. In both years loans and discounts were the most im­portant use of funds for all bank sizes, and all size group­ings enjoyed substantial increases in the dollar volume of this chief earning asset between the two year-end dates. The largest banks (size VI) experienced a loan increase of 6.5%, while the loan increase for bank size V was 11.3%. 
The gain in loans by the remaining sizes fell between these two extremes. 
APRIL 1960 
TABLE 1 
BANKS BY SIZE GROUPS 
P ercent of  
Bank size  Number of banks  total assets  
(deposits in thousands  
of dollars)  1956  1958  1956  1958  

I  2,000 and under  327  287  3.6  2.9  
II  2,001 to 5,000 ............................  297  314  9.3  9.1  
III  5,001 to10,000 ..........................  171  193  11.3  11.6  
IV  10,001 to 50,000  ..........................  109  128  19.4  21.0  
v  50,001 to100,000  ........................  19  19  11.9  11.2  
VI  100,001 and over  ..........................  13  14  44.4  44 .2  
All banks ......................................  936  955  100.0  100.0  


Loans were least important for banks in size II. The 314 banks in this category had less than 32% of their assets invested in loans on the 1956 date; the proportion had increased to 34% two years later. At the other extreme were the 14 banks (deposits of $100,001,000 and over) which, as of December 31, 1958, supplied almost 43% of their assets to customers via loans and discounts. 
Security investments are the most important for small banks, and successively less important for each larger bank size after size II. This inverse relationship between bank size and the importance of securities is matched by the di­rect relationship between bank size and the importance of loans. Specifically, security investments declined from a high of 40% of assets in the case of bank size II to less than 25 % of assets for bank size VI. 
The operating ratio is the most widely used indicator of operational efficiency. This key efficiency ratio is deter· mined by expressing current operating expenses as a per· centage of current operating earnings. A low percentage or ratio indicates either large earnings per dollar of expend­itures or low expenses per dollar of earnings. Among similarly situated firms, a relatively low operating ratio is one indication or measure of superior managerial efficiency. 
The average operating ratios of bank sizes I through V were remarkably similar in both years, as they clustered around 66 % in 1956 and 70% in 1958. The increases in the operating ratios of banks in sizes I through V were caused by increases in current operating expenses which, in percentage terms, were larger than the increases in cur­rent operating earnings. Interest on time deposits was the expense item which contributed the most to the increase in total current operating expenses, reflecting the nationwide increase in time deposits and the higher rates of interest paid by banks on these deposits. 
The average operating ratio of the 14 hanks in size VI places these banks in a unique position from the stand­point of operating efficiency. Their typical operating ratio of 56.4% in 1958 contrasts sharply with the ratios for the other five groups, which range from 12% to 16% higher. Economies which accompany large-scale operations seem to explain for these very large hanks their low ratio of ex· penses to earnings. 
Current operating earnings minus current operating ex­penses equal net current earnings. Although current operat­ing earnings were higher in 1958 than in 1956 for all size groups, the absolute increases in current operating ex· penses were even greater for the four smallest bank sizes 
(I, II, III, and IV) . The greater increases in expenses than in earnings resulted in decreases in net current earnings with the decline ranging from 1.3% for bank size III to measured by this profitability ratio the two smallest sizes 

6.8 %in the case of bank size II. 	were the least profitable, while the most profitable group 
The income item entitled "Profits on Securities" meas­was size VI. The profit ratio ranged in 1958 from 11% ures realized gains from the sale of securities at prices for bank size I to 17.7% for bank size VI. above the purchase prices. Among the diffierent sizes of The examination of condition statements revealed that banks the variation in the relative importance of this bank sizes I and VI secure a larger proportion of their total source of profit is large. funds from owners than is obtained by the other four size 
The relative insignificance of profits on securities in groups. For bank size I the relatively large investment by 1956 is explained by downward pressure on the market owners tends to explain the low ratio of net current earnings prices of debt securities resulting from tightening money to total capital. On the other hand, a high profitability market conditions. On the other hand, the decline in in­ratio plus a relatively large equity position combine to terest rates accompanied by increases in the prices of in­justify an earlier impression concerning the banks in size termediate and long-term debt securities in the first half VI-that their current operations were markedly superior of 1958 provided an opportunity for portfolio managers to to the other five groups. This idea was indicated by the realize handsome capital gains. The data indicate that up very low operating ratio which the average size VI bank to, hut not including, size VI the larger the bank the enjoyed. Clearly, if volume is small, a high level of operat­greater the likelihood that hank managers took advantage ing efficiency does not insure large net current earnings; of this cyclical opportunity for profit. A somewhat lower however, a low operating ratio plus a high rate of profit, importance of profits on securities to banks in size VI is despite a relatively large equity investment, will add up to not surprising since this small handful of banking giants efficiency and volume--an unbeatable combination. allocates a considerably lower fraction of their assets to Effect of Geographic Location on the Condition securities than that allotted by the five smaller groups. and Income of Texas Commercial Banks in 1956 
Perhaps the most significant of the profitability ratios and 1958. A comparison of the financial position of an is the ratio of net current earnings to total capital. As individual bank with a hypothetical average Texas bank, or with a typical Texas bank of a particular size, fails to 
CHANGES IN CONDITION OF WEEKLY REPORTING MEMBER 
consider the great diversity in economic activity which
BANKS IN THE DALLAS FEDERAL RESERVE DISTRICT 
characterizes different sections of the state. That hank 
Source: Board of Governors of the Federal REServe System 
managers would welcome the opportunity to appraise their own position in relation to other banks of similar size and 
Percent change• 
in a similar economic environment is the assumption which 
Feb 1960 Feb 1960 Feb 1959 
justifies the regional analysis of bank statements. 

from from from Account J an 1960 Feb l!f59 J an 1959 Table 2 and the accompanying map below provide a TOTAL ASSETS •• -1 •• description of the eight regions, including the number of 
Loans and investments, less loans to banks and valuation r eservee ·------·-··· •• REVENUE RECEIPTS OF THE STATE COMPTROLLER 
Loans, less loans to banks 
and valuation reserves ___ _ Source: State Comptroller of Public Accounta

+ 4 •• 
Commercial, industrial, and agricultural loanst ................. . 2 + 2 •• September 1-February 29 

Loans for purchasing or carrying securities ................... . •• + 8 3 Percent
Account 	1959-60

Real estate loans ............................. . •• 5 1 1958-59 ch&n&'• Other loans ....................................... . + 1 + 11 + I!. TOTAL .................................... $559,188.884 $493,209,764 + 18 Total U.S. GoYernment Ad valorem, inheritance and securities ............................. . •• -12 I!. poll taxes 37,641,686 31,274,051 + 20
.................................... Treasury bills ................................... . + 18 -51 + 25 Natural and casinghead gas Treasury certificatES of production taxes --------·--··--·----25,()18,973 22,639,884 + 11
indebtedness ............................... . -52 -85 8 Gas severance beneficiary tax ___ _ 118,755 0 Treasury notes and bonds ............. . + 1 -1 4 Crude oil production truces ....... . 62,624,867 68,159,421 -8 + + Other gross receipts and
Other securities ........................... . -1 5 4, 
Loans to banks ......................... . + 38 -54 +151 production taxes ....................... . 12,429,239 

10,913,008 + 14Reserves with Federal 

Insurance companies and other 
Reserve banks ....................... . -2 1 -7 

occupation taxes ·------··--·········-··· 787,991 893,348 -12­

Cash in vaults ........................... . -4 8 •• Motor fuel taxes (net) .... 90,694,139 87,401,529 + 

4

Balances with domestic banks + 11 + 1 + 5 Cigarette tax and licenses 39,92(),926 24,803,606 + 61Other net assets ....................... . -4 + 18 7
-Alcoholic beverage taxes and 
TOTAL LIABILITIES ..... . 2

•• 	•• licenses ······-----·······------·-······--------18,450,615 16,2.65,708 + 13 
Total adjusted deposits ............... . 


7 + 2 Automobile and other sales taxes 16,910,297 10,346,504 + 63 Demand deposits ................................ 9 + 8 
All other licenses and fees ........... . 21,456,468 19,854,339 + 8 Time deposits ------·---------------------········ 1 + 
Franchise taxes -------·········------·····--· 13,741,402 2,187.747 +528 
U.S. Government deposits ............. . 4 -29 + 4 


Mineral leases, land sales, Total interbank deposits ........... . 1 + 5 6 rentals, and bonuses ............... . 12,687,817 12,736,359 •• Domestic banks ................................. . 2 5
+ 6 Oil and gas royalties ................... . 14,765,369 15,498,654 -5 
Foreign banks ................................... . + 36 + 19 •• Interest earned ............................. . 14,879,183 13,264.742 + 12 

Borrowings ................................... . + 44 +488 -54 	..................... . 

Unclassified receipts 5,969,763 5,581,068 + 7 Other liabilities ........................... . + 1 + 42 -2 
Other miscellaneous revenue ..... . 5,769,474 6,010,845 -4 CAPITAL ACCOUNTS... . + 1 + 5 
•• 	Federal aid for highways ........... . 83,250,841 64,496,62() + 29 Federal aid for public welfare ... . 60,978,183 70,451.497 -13*Percentage changes are based on the week nearest the end of the 
Other federal aid ......................... . 20,949,660 10,164,470 +106

month. 
Donations and grants ................. . 143,236 266,864 -46

••Change is less than one-half of one percent. 
tincludes loan1 to nonbank financial Institutions. 

••change is less than one-half of one percent. 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 



TABLE 2 Industrial Production: 
STATISTICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE EIGHT REGIONS 

Number of banks  Percent of total assets  
Number  Region  1956  1958  1956  1958  

1  High P lains ..................  91  92  8.1  8.2  
2  North Central Plains ....................  127  128  6.0  6.0  
3  Black and Green Prairies ............  213  213  35.'1  35.0  
4  East Texas Timbered Plains ........  154  157  5.7  5.6  
5  Trans Pecos & Edwards Plateau  72  74  5.1  5.3  
6  South Central Prairies ········--······  124  126  11 .3  11.7  
7  Gulf Coastal Prairies ....................  106  114  26.2  25.8  
8  South Texas Plains ........................  49  51  2.2  2.4  
Total ..............................................  936  955  100.0  100.0  


A NEW INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 
By ALFRED G. DALE 

Within the state of Texas a handful of firms are quietly initiating an industrial revolution, the consequences of which may eventually he as far-reaching as the first in­dustrial revolution that, two hundred years ago, trans­formed existing processes of industrial production and organization. This new revolution involves the application of complex mathematical analysis to a wide variety of problems confronting management, and the use of large, high-speed computers as an aid in finding solutions to the complex mathematics involved. 
Until quite recently the process of decision-making in large organizations relied entirely upon the evaluation of relevant information within the framework of managerial hanks in each region and the percent of the state's banking assets accounted for by the banks in each region. Since the limitation of space prohibits an explanation of the differ­ences in the financial positions of each size group in the eight regional divisions, a microscopic sampling of these differences must suffice. 
One example of the almost endless regional differences which are of interest to particular commercial bankers is the difference in the relative importance of service changes as a source of current operating earnings to banks in size 
I. In 1958, earnings from this source varied from 4.1 % of current operating earnings for size I banks in region 1 to 10.6% of current operating earnings of the size I group in region 8. Another striking difference was the variation in the relative importance of deposits of governments. At the end of 1958 the average size IV bank in the state re­ceived 9.4% of its funds from government deposits; yet the typical size IV bank in region 5 received 13.3% from this source, and the comparable proportion for region 8 was 14.9%. At the other extreme, only 5.4% of the funds available to size IV banks in region 2 were deposited by governments. 
REGIONAL DIVISION OF TEXAS 
REGIONS 1 High l'loil'ls 2 NorthC1ntrolJ>loin1 3 llock ond Groncl Prairies 
4 Eo1IT1•cnTirnb1rtclPkiiti1 5 Tro11H'1co1 ond Edwo rd t Piai.ou 6 Scwlh C1ntrol Proirin ] Gulf Coollol Proitie1 8 Sovth THo• P1o in. 
Industrial Electric Power Use In Texas 
Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation • 1947-1949·100 
500 400 
AOO 
300 200 
300 200 100 


intuition and experience. As companies have grown larger and more complex, the difficulties of making good top­level decisions have enormously increased, and the penal­ties for making bad decisions have increased also. In many organizations it is quite impossible for any single indi­vidual to simultaneously take into account all the factors that should be considered in making a major policy change, or all the consequences that might flow from a given policy action. Very often the analysis of facts on which a decision is to be based, and the evaluation of its consequences, must be highly simplified and restricted to what are thought to be the most important elements of the problem. Large areas of relevance often must be ignored in arriving at decisions, so that commitments are frequently made with varying, but often large, degrees of uncertainty regarding the effects they will have beyond the areas explicitly considered when 
Crude Oil Rus to Stills 11 Texas 
Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation • 1947-1 949-100 

200 

200 
150 
1 

100 
100 
50 
50 
0 
190 A8 ~9 50 51 52 53 ~ 55 ~ 57 58 59 60 

PRODUCTION OF HYDROCARBON LIQUIDS FROM GASOLINE AND RECYCLING PLANTS (Figures in barrels) 
Source: Oil and Gas Division, Railroad Commission of Texas 
P ercent  
change  
1959  
Product  July 1959  Aug 1959  Sept 1959  Oct 1959  N ov 1959  Dec 1959  January-December 1959 1958  from 1958  

TOTAL  PRODUCTION ................. .  15,245,661  15,225,762  14,917,167  15,508,196  15,329,501  16,148,821  185,416,008  172,157,105  + 8  
Condensat e-crude ....................................... .  1,321,122  1,409,047  1,397,922  1,458,050  1,678,018  1,687,758  17,060,513  13,370,247  + 28  
Gasoline  ....................................................... .  7,951,553  7,913,378  7,659,719  7,837,764  7,534,377  7,959,893  94,256,013  90,4 61 ,754  + 4  
Butane-propane  ......................................... .  5,726,854  5,718,163  5,631,684  5,959,769  5,860,414  6,232,419  71,295,367  65,715,811  + 8  
Other products ........................................... .  246,132  190,174  227,842  252,613  256,692  278,751  2,804,115  2,609,293  + 7  
TOTAL GAS PROCESSED• ......... .  472,494  473,910  462,112  487,302  512,829  535,71 4  5,802,705  5,248,825  + 11  
Yield per Mcf in gallons ......................... .  1.36  1.35  1.36  1.34  1.26  1.27  1.34  1.38  -3  

• Millions of cubic feet. 
the decision was taken. Under these conditions it is clear that it may become very difficult to decide which of a number of alternative courses of action may, in the long run, turn out to be the best, as well as very difficult to determine what the total effects of a particular course of action may be. 
Problems of this kind were of great concern to the mili­tary during World War II and afterwards, and it was in connection with military problems that new techniques of decision-making were first applied on a large scale. Both strategic and tactical operations planning resorted to math­ematical problem solving in attempts, for example, to in­crease the probability of submarine location by mathemat­ically determining desirable air search patterns, or to maxi­mize the effectiveness of air strikes by determining the best combinations of weapons delivery, targets, and attack routes. In an age of intercontinental missiles and jet bomb­ers the air defense problem is not only inherently complex: the reaction time is enormously compressed. Tactical dis­positions during an attack cannot be made on the basis of intuition and limited information. Consequently, the air defense decision process largely involves a prior mathe­matical (or logical) simulation of attack potentials and defense capabilities, so that in practice, computer-origin­ated information will indicate the best dispositions to meet any combination of circumstances that may occur, and in fact, may itself issue orders (i.e., make decisions) without human intervention. 
Taking a lead from the military, private industry has become increasingly interested in the application of new approaches to corporate decision making during the past ten years. Their efforts may be classified as follows: 
Suboptimizing procedures: In the jargon of the new discipline, suboptimizing refers to the process of finding the best way of operating a particular segment of a corpo-
Texas Industrial Production 
Total Manufactures 

seasonal variation • 1947-1949·100 
2.50 200 
1.50 100 
19.0 -48 .49 .50 51 52535"55 56 57 58 59 60 

rate system-e.g., a production line, or one refinery, or one warehousing operation. The type of problem may be how to schedule machines so as to get maximum use from them, or how to control purchasing and production so as to mini· mize inventory costs, or how to vary product mixes so as to maximize profits. Perhaps the most widely used ana­lytical technique for solving problems of this kind is linear programming. This involves specifying how a system works, or how factors are related in a system, in terms of rather simple mathematical equations. The problem then becomes one of solving the equations, and of finding the particular solution that best fits the requirements that are to be met. 
Solutions to these partial problems represent the biggest area in which the new techniques are being applied. In Texas they are being used by many of the oil companies in connection with optimizing individual refinery operations, by at least one major electric utility company in scheduling power generation from its turbo-generator units to meet changes in system load most economically, and by a few of the larger metal fabrication, electronics, and aircraft manu· facturers, in connection with diverse production and trans­portation problems. Natural gas transmission companies are also making use of linear programming and related techniques. 
Corporate simulation: Very recently, with the ad­vent of very large high speed computers, the possibility of defining an entire corporate operation and its external environment in an equation system has been proposed. This would be a complex undertaking, but supposing that it could be accomplished it would permit management not only to review the complete consequences of major de­cisions, but to experiment, within the mathematical model, with different courses of action, and to evaluate the out· come of different proposals. Thus, a company could evalu­ate the outcome of a marketing decision (e.g., a price 
Texas Industrial Production, Minerals 
Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation , 1947-1949-100 


change) not only with respect to changes on the demand side, but in relation to what this would imply on the supply side also. Several Texas companies are actively considering setting up complete or partial corporate models of this type. They include companies engaged in electronics production, metal fabrication, and natural gas transmission. 
Operational gaming. Rather than creating a com· pletely realistic mathematical simulation of a company or an industry, it is possible to define a much simpler model that contains elements of reality and with which it is pos· sible to evaluate the outcome of decisions in a realistic manner. Just as the military have played war games with deadly seriousness for training purposes, it is now possible for businessmen to play operational business games in order to gain insights into how real decisions should be made. There are currently a number of games generally available and in fairly wide use in executive training pro­grams and in colleges of business. A number of these games utilize computers and are played on a competitive basis between groups of participants acting as manage­ment teams of different companies. Use of the computer makes it possible to simulate quite complex patterns of competitive interaction, and most participants in games of this kind comment on the realistic nature of the problems they must solve and of the gaming situations that arise dur­ing the course of play. The Bureau of Business Research is currently developing a fairly complex computerized game to simulate small business operational and competitive problems for the Small Business Administration. It is be­lieved that a game of this type may he very useful in small business management training and counseling programs. 
The full impact of new managerial techniques of the type described in this brief review will not he felt for many years. However, it is clear that they will introduce a new dimension in the way in which businesses are operated. Wider use of computers in decision making processes will eventually force significant changes not only in the way decisions are made, but in the way corporations organize themselves to do business. The possibilities are so great that almost any company that expects to continue success­ful operations beyond the next ten years or so can hardly avoid asking itself now how these new techniques may be most advantageously applied to its own problems. 
REFINERY STOCKS• 
(in thousands of barrels) 
Source : The Oil and Gas Journal, 

P ercent change  '  
Area and product  Feb 1960  J a n 1960  Feb 1959  F eb 1960 from J an 1960  F eb 1960 from Feb 1959  

UNITED STATES  
Gasoline  -------·-------···----­- 176,147  175,857  168,476  ••  + 5  
Distillate ........................  181,646  174,169  166,414  + 4  + 9  
Residual  ··················-·····  58,050  69 ,524  67,680  2  -14  
Kerosene ........................  33,035  32,231  32,374  + 2  + 2  
TEXAS  
Gasoline ..........................  27,882  27,290  28,976  + 2  4  
Distillate ........................  22,665  21,940  21 ,118  + 8  + 7  
Residual  -----------------------­ 8,711  8,774  10,213  1  -15  
Kerosene ············----------··  8,860  3,790  8,871  + 2  1  

• Figures shown for week ending nearest last day of the month. •• Change is le•s than one-half of one percent. 

HOURS AND EARNINGS IN TEXASt 
Source: Texa• Employment Commission in cooperation with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor. 

Average weekly earnings Average weekly hours A verage hourly earningsFeb• Jan F eb Feb• J an Feb Feb* J an FebIndustry 1960 1960 1959 1960 1960 1959 1960 1960 1959 
MANUFACTURING TOTAL ...........  $ 91.57  $ 89.67  $ 87.14  42.2  42.1  41.3  $2.17  $2 .18  $2.11  
Durable goods ................................................  90.95  90.30  87.57  42.7  43.0  41.7  2.13  2.10  2.10  
Nondurable goods ·····················-··················  92.16  88.80  86.50  41.7  41.3  40.8  2.21  2.15  2.12  
Primary metals ..........................................  96.64  97.53  104.64  40.1  41.5  40.4  2.41  2.35  2.59  
Machinery (except electrical) ................  96.82  97.90  87.95  48.3  43.9  41.1  2.24  2.23  2.14  
Oil field machinery................................  102.97  108.42  95.06  42.2  44.8  40.8  2.44  2.42  2.83  
Transvortation equipment ....................  112.34  109.48  104.01  41.3  40.7  39.7  2.72  2.69  2.62  
Fabricated metal products ......................  93.73  90.27  87.36  43.8  43.4  42.0  2.14  2.08  2.08  
Lumber and wood products ....................  61.96  60.78  58.18  47.3  46.4  45.1  1.31  1.81  1.29  
Furniture and fixtures.............................  71.18  70.04  72.11  43.4  43.5  48.7  1.64  1.61  1.65  
Stone, clay and gla"8 .................................  74.93  78.06  70.39  41.4  44.1  41.9  1.81  1.77  1.68  
Textile mill products ................................  58.38  58.48  56.23  42.0  43.0  42.6  1.39  1.36  1.82  
Broad woven goods ···············-··············  57.55  69.60  55.94  41.4  43.5  42.7  1.89  1.37  1.81  
Apparel and fabric products ..................  47.50  50.15  47.00  37.7  89.8  87.9  1.26  1.26  1.24  
Food .............................................................  81.62  77.71  76.36  44.6  42.7  42.9  1.88  1.82  1.78  
Meat packing .........................................  102.78  91.20  88.43  44.3  40.0  89.3  2.82  2.28  2.25·  
Paper and allied products .......................  105.08  99.39  100.32  45.1  43.4  44.0  2.33  2.29  2.28  
Printing ......................................................  95.62  93.41  94.62  38.4  88.6  38.0  2.49  2.42  2.49  
Chemical and allied products ..................  127.74  119.81  114.54  42.3  41.6  41.2  3.02  2.88  2.78  
Petroleum and coal products ..................  123.73  120.77  114.45  40.7  40.8  40.3  8.04  2.96  2.84  
Leather .... ----················---------·-·------------------·  52.03  54.67  48.28  37.7  40.2  37.1  1.38  1.86  1.30  
NONMANUFACTURING  
Mining ···················································-········ Crude petroleum ...................................  108.97 110.42  110.56 111.54  106.68 108.38  42.9 42.8  43.7 43.4  42.5 42.5  2.54 2.58  2.63 2.67  2.61 2.55  
Sulvhur ·······························-··················  111.11  118.28  105.74  39.4  4.5  39.9  2.82  2.85  2.65  
Public utilities ................................................  87.67  88.70  88.18  40.4  40.5  39.8  2.17  2.19  2.09  
Retail trade ...................................................  62.16  63.03  61.30  42.0  42.3  41.7  1.48  1.49  1.47  
Wholesale trade ..............................................  93.78  95.48  92.02  42.8  48.4  42.6  2.19  2.20  2.16  

• Preliminary subject to revision upon receipt of additional reports. 
t Figures cover only production workers in manufacturing and mining industries, and only nonsupervisory employees in other industry divisions. 

Earnings 	averages include premium pay for overtime, holidays, and for late-shift work. Figuna do not cover proprietors, firm members, other principal executives, or unpaid household workers. 
APRIL 1960 
Bureau of Business Research Publications 
Texas Industrial Expansion 
April 1960 
by 
Stanley A . Arbingast, Assistant Director 
Robert H. Drenner, Research Associate 

A monthly supplement to the Directory of Texas Manufacturers. Industrial construction projects an­nounced during April 1960 are listed with data on cost, products, and number of employees. Twenty­fiv e cents each. 
POSTAL 11.E CEIPT !I 
Percent change 
F eb 6, Feb 6, 1960-1960­Mar4, Mar4, 1960 1960 
from from 
J an 9, Feb 7, Feb 6, •so Jan 9, '60 Feb 7, '59 1960-1959­to to to Feb 5, Mar6, City Mar 4, '60 Feb 5, '60 Mar 6, '59 1960 1959 
Alice ---------------···----------$15,162 $14,712 $14,866 + 3 + 2 Borger .......................... 18,897 13,585 17,259 2 19
+ -
Brownfield ---··------------· 7,439 7,528 7,852 -1 -5 Cameron ...................... 5,876 4,863 7,473 + 21 -21 Childress --------------------5,217 4,618 4,651 + 13 + 12 Coleman ...................... 5,582 5,111 5,085 + 3 + 10 Crystal City ................ 8,067 4,056 2,921 -24 5 Cuero ............................ 5,250 5,396 5,593 3 6 Eagle Pass ---····-----··-· 6,840 6,089 5,814 + 4 + 9 Edna ............................ 4,962 4,597 6,469 8 -9 
+ 
+ 
E l Campo .................... 9,299 9,558 9,099 -3 2 Gainesville 13,362 12,325 12,947 
+ 
------------------+ 8 + 8 
Gatesville .................... 8,639 5,965 8,554 -39 2

+ 
Graham --·····-·------------· 7,560 7,296 9,984 + 4 -24 Granbury .................... 2,112 4,375 3,299 -59 -36 Hale Center ................ 1,490 1,441 1,256 + 3 + 19 Hillsboro ----------------------5,877 6,888 6,092 -3 -4 Huntsville .................. 10,389 9,350 7,583 + 11 + 37 Jasper ·······-------------------6,852 5,988 5,742 + 14 + 19 Kenedy ........................ 3,178 3,439 3,016 -8 5
+ Kermit ·········-······---···-· 6,744 6,780 7,177 -1 -6 Kerrville ...................... 10,660 9,857 10,403 8 2
+ + 
Kingsville --·····----···------14,337 12,323 13,628 + 16 + 5 Kirbyville ----·············--· 2,866 2,197 2,055 + 80 + 39 La Grange ---··------·-··· 5,436 8,820 5,728 + 42 -5 Levelland ···············-···· 7,926 6,999 7,147 + 13 + 11 
Littlefield .................... 5,854 6,191 5,458 -5 7

+ 
McCamey --·····-·--···-···-· 2,376 2,822 2,825 -16 -16 Marlin 6,539 6,196 6,137 
··············-·······-·· + 6 + 7 Mesquite ·····-···-············ 7,873 7,897 5,026 •• + 57 Mission --···--·-····--····-·-·· 7,672 8,657 8,034 -11 -5 Navasota ·············-··-··· 3,972 4,623 5,091 -12 -22 Pecos --------···-··············--9,042 10,911 9,808 -17 -8 
Raymondville -···--······ 6,018 5,248 4,812 + 15 + 25 Sinton ·············---·····----· 5,069 9,215 5,083 -46 • Taft 2,345 3,159 2,786 -26
·····-························ -16 Terrell --···---·--············-7,317 7,324 7,616 •• -4 Waxahachie ··-----··---···· 15,871 11,825 11,332 + 34 + 40 Weatherford ·-···--·-···--9,572 10,266 9,357 -7 + 2 Yoakum ·-----·············-·· 8,775 7,987 9,530 + 10 -8 
•• Change is less than one-half of one percent. 

Retail Trade: 
FEBRUARY RETAIL VOLUME HIGH DESPITE WEATHER 
By ROBERT H. DRENNER 
Unsettled weather in Texas through most of February was instrumental in pushing February retail sales below what the evidence suggests might otherwise have been an extremely good February for Texas merchants. Total retail volume for the month £ell 4% below the January level. The over-all decline, however, was the result of an 8% drop from the preceding month in sales of nondurable goods. Durable goods volume rose an encouraging 9%. 
ESTIMATES OF TOTAL RETAIL SALES 
(Unadjusted for seasonal variation) 
Percent change 
Jan-Feb 1960 Feb 1960 Feb 1960 from Feb Jan-Feb from from Jan-Feb Type of store 1960 1960 J an 1960 Feb 1959 1959 
Millions of dollars 
Total .............................. 1019.7 2082.2 4 + 1 
Durable goods* ............ 274.0 525.9 + 9 + 4 
Nondurable goods ...... 745.7 1556.3 8 •• 

• Contains automotive store!!, furniture stores, and lumber, buildinr material, and hardware stores. 
•• Change is less than one-half of one per cent. 
Dollar retail sales in February are ordinarily substan· 
tially below January purchases, in part because of the 
stimulus to January volume given by post-Christmas sales 
and in part because January, compared with February, in­
cludes an additional shopping weekend. These two factors 
have much more influence on the level of nondurable goods 
sales than on durables volume. Sales of nondurables, for 
example, normally fall about 6% from January. February 
sales of durables, on the other hand, usually hold up well; 
automobile volume tends to move slightly upward, as do 
sales of farm implements and building materials. Even 
with the shorter month, February sales of durables conse· 
quently normally show virtually no change from January. 
The slightly greater decline in sales of nondurables from 
January than was seasonally indicated was characteristic 
of most nondurables categories. Sales by apparel stores, 
which normally fall about 18% from the preceding month, 
were down 19%. Food store volume, which usually shows 
a 5% seasonal decline, this February was down 6% from 
January. Department store sales were off 13%, compared 
with a customary seasonal fall of about 10%. Sales by 
restaurants and other eating and drinking establishments, 
down 6%, compared with an expected 5% seasonal decline 
from the one month to the other. Prolonged bad weather 
tended to discourage automobile travel in February, and 
sales by gasoline and service stations fell 10% from the 
preceding month (compared with a normal 4% drop). 
Mild exceptions to the dominant nondurables sales trend in 
February, on the other hand, were recorded by drug stores 
(with volume down 2% from January in contrast to a 
normal 4% decline) and by miscellaneous retail establish· 
ments (including, for the most part, florists, liquor stores, 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

and jewelry stores). The latter inclusive category regis­tered a 2% sales gain from January in the face of an ex­pected 5% seasonal decline. 
The strength shown by the general durables category in February was shared by every major durables classifica­tion. Statistically most important was an 11 % rise from January in purchases of automobiles (which normally make up the major portion of dollar sales of durables, and thus heavily influence the showing of the general durables category). February volume of furniture and household appliance stores ordinarily falls about 9% from the preced­ing month; the actual fall this February was only 2%. Lumber, building material, and hardware store sales (in­cluding sales by farm implement dealers) customarily decline 1% from January, hut February sales this year rose a strong 9%, chiefly because of a 20% improvement by farm implement dealers and a 9% gain by lumber and building material dealers. Sales by hardware stores rose 4%. 
Total retail sales in Texas for the January-February 

period were 3% under sales in the same two-month term 
a year ago, the result of a 2% decline in cumulative sales 
of nondurahles and a 6% fall in durables volume. The un­
favorable cumulative comparison follows from weakness 
shown by January retail trade-when dollar sales of both 
durables and nondurahles were off from the same month 
a year earlier-and especially by sharply lower sales of 
automobiles and building materials. February, however, 
recorded a more favorable showing from February 1959; 
volume of nondurable goods was about the same, and sales 
of durables were 4% higher. It is expected that succeeding 
months will gradually strengthen cumulative retail trade 
in 1960 in comparison with 1959. 
Texas department and apparel stores reported total Feb­
ruary sales 16% lower than in January and 1 % below 
RETAIL SALES TRENDS BY KINDS OF BUSINESS 
Source: Bureau of Buoinees Research In cooperation with the Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce 
Percent change 
Normal seasonal• Number of --­reporting Feb establish-from 
Kind of business m ents Jan 

DURABLE GOODS  
Automotive stores ------­--­259  ••  
Furniture & household  
appliance stores ---------­165  - 9  
Lumber, building ma.  
terial, and hardware  
stores••  ------------------······  296  - 1  
NONDURABLE GOODS  
Apparel stores ---·-··········· 213  - 18  
Drug stores --------····--········ 253  4  
Eating and drinking  
places  ····--·······-··········-·-·  67  5  
Food stores --······-------------­343  5  
Gasoline and service  
stations ··········-·········-----­860  4  
General merchandise  
stores ----­-----·-·······------···-­184  - 10  
Other retail stores ·--····· 615  - 5  

Actual 
J an-Feb 1960 Feb 1960 Feb 1960 from from from Jan-Feb Jan 1960 Feb 1959 1959 
+ 11  + 5  6  
- 2  + 2  2  
+ 9  8  -14  
-19 2  + + 11  2 + 7  
6 6  - 4 ••  5 8  
-10  2  + 3  
-12 + 2  8 + 4  8 + 1  

•Average seuonal change from preceding month to current month. •• Totals include kinds of b11Biness other than classifications listed. CREDIT RATIOS IN DEPARTMENT AND APPAREL STORES 
Number of reporting Classification stores 
ALL STORES 58

·········-··-·-···-·-··· BY CITIES Austin 4
-·----·-······························---· Cleburne ······-·-·-·· -----------------------· 3 Dallas 4
-------······························ E l Paso ·--··---··-··----·--·--· -3 Fort Worth __ 3 
Galveston ----------·-·········--·-···------···· 4 Houston 4
------·-····························--·· San Antonio --·-·-···-·-·-·----···-·--------5 Waco ··---·-------------------------------------­
BY TYPE OF STORE Department stores (over $1 million) .................. 2() Department stores 
(under $1 million) ................ 16 Dry goods and apparel stores 4 Women's specialty shops ........ 11 Men'e clothing stores ----------------7 
BY VOLUME OF NET SALES Over $1.500,000 ---------------·--·-··--·· 23 $500,000 to $1,500,000 ------·---··----13 $250,000 to $500,00() 1()
-···--···-··-·-· 
Less than $250,000 12

···················· 
Credit Collection ratios* ratios** 
F eb Feb F eb Feb 1960 1959 1960 1959 
69.9 69.6 35.8 35.7 
63.8 63.5 46.7 46.2 
43.0 42.8 42.3 40»0 
82.9 83.0 40.3 40.9 
57.5 57.6 27.9 28.3 
68.1 67.6 31.3 30.1 
65.3 66.5 40.0 40.1 
75.5 76.6 44.8 43.5 
66.6 64.6 28.3 29.7 
59.2 59.0 39.5 4().6 
70.3 70.1 35.3 35.0 
48.3 51.0 37.2 88.2 
72.4 73.8 55.9 54 .4 
71.9 70.2 36.8 37.2 
69.3 68.2 40.8 41.0 
71.0 70.6 35.7 85.6 
58.8 58.9 38.5 39.3 
50.7 51.6 39.1 4().6 
49.9 51.9 34.9 35.0 
*Credit sales divided by net sales. 

**Collections during the month divided by accounts unpaid at the first of the month. 
February 1959. For the January-February period sales were 2% below the same period a year earlier. 
Of the 37 Texas cities which reported department and apparel store sales from enough establishments to permit individual city listings, 11 cities reported sales gains from February 1959; nine recorded gains from January-Febru­ary 1959. Gains from February a year ago ranged from 1 % reported by Austin and Gainesville to 14% by Edin­burg, McAllen, and Texas City. The latter three cities also reported the largest sales improvement from January­Fehruary 1959 (+13%, +12%, and +14%, respec­tively). 
A sufficiently large number of retail establishment re­ports were received from 29 Texas cities in February to permit individual city comparisons for total retail sales. Eighteen cities reported February total retail volume above the same 1959 month; the gains reported ranged from 1 % to 14% (with the exception of McAllen, which reported an unusually strong 39% gain). Only five cities, however, registered total sales gains from January-February 1959. 
Newspaper Advertislng linage 

250  Index , Adjusted for seosonol voriotion  , 19-47.19-49·100  250  
200  200  
150  I ~1.-J""l'"\I\ '"' '  /11  150  
,..,  ,. .AJ\./ ~~~  ~  
..,_./'100  - 100  
50  
0  1947  "-48  ·49  50  51  52  53  54  ·55  "56  ·57  '58  ·59  "60  0  

Agriculture: 
OATS: FOURTH LARGEST GRAIN CROP IN TEXAS 
By JOE CARROLL RUST 
From the Panhandle to the Magic Valley, from the Big Bend to Texarkana, Texas oats, ranked fourth in the na· tion in harvested acreage, constitute one of the state's most widely grown crops. They are an important cash crop es­pecially in Central and North Central Texas. The only other grain crops grown on a larger acreage in Texas each year are corn, wheat, and grain sorghum. Also, oats contribute to farm income throughout the state in constituting a good winter pasture crop and providing hay and silage. Most of the increase in Texas oat production over the past dee· ade has been due primarily to increased use for winter grazing. Also, oats are a high-yielding green manure c.rop and used as cover to cut down wind and water eros10n. 
Texas production of oats for 1959 is estimated by t~e Crop Reporting Board of the U. S. Department of Agn· culture at some 26.5 million bushels, approximately one· half the 1958 harvest (fourth largest crop of oats in Texas history, and the largest since the 61.4-million-bushel crop of 1931). This will probably drop Texas to thirteenth in national oat production, while the 53.1-million-bushel har· vest of 1958 placed the state ninth. An unfavorable plant· ing season for both fall and spring-sown oats, due to an unusually cold winter in 1958-59 and drouth in the spring of 1959, resulted in skimpy stands and reduced yields. A large portion of the harvest, therefore, was baled for hay rather than used as grain (the majority of grain hay is oats and is used primarily by dairy farmers). Sowing of spring oats was under way in the Blacklands Prairie and West Cross Timbers in February, but USDA estimates on 1960 production will not be available until early summer. 
Oats in Texas are grown under a wide range of soil and climatic conditions. They grow best in deep, fertile, well. drained loam and clay soil. Growing of oats for grain is centralized primarily from the Waco area northward through the Dallas·Fort Worth region to the Oklahoma border. Oats for forage are grown throughout East Texas, extending as far south as Brooks County in the Rio Grande Valley and as far west as Pecos County. Winter or fall oats (the majority of the oats grown in the state are fall oats) have true winter resistance in uniform cold. Thus, even though the principal growing area is chiefly a cold weather region, it is unsuited to oat growing in some respects be-
Prices Received by Farmers in Texas 

CARLOAD SHIPMENTS OF FRUIT AND VEGETABLES 
Source · Compiled from reports received from ~cultural lllarketinir · Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture 
J a nuary 1-February 29 
Percent Commodity 1960 t959 chanir• 
TOTAL SHIPMENTS ------··---­ 8,660  3,888  + t 26  
VEGETABLES ------------·--­-·-·-·--------·­Beets --·--------·------·------------·-----·-----­-·-·------·­ 8,031 2  8,495 2  +tao ••  
Broccoli  ----·----·-------------·-·-----·--·-------------·---·­ 85  22  + 59  
Cabbage --·---------·-----·----·-----·----·--·-·----·--·-·--· Carrots ....................................................... .  t ,5t8 t ,690  459 6t0  +2s1 +t77  
Cauliflower  ............................................... .  322  117  + 175  
Endives and Escarole ......................... .  6  7  -U  
Greens ..................................................... .  70  66  + 6  
Lettuce ------------·--·-·----·---·-·-·--·---­----------·--·-·-­ t,085  96  +t,030  
Spinach  ..................................................... .  707  770  - 8  
Turnips and Rutabagas ---------·------·---·­ 4  9  -56  
Mixed  Vegetables  .................................. ..  2,588  t,337  + 94  
Onions  --······-·····­------·--···­············---······-······  4  0  
FRU IT  ........................................... .  629  343  +  83  
Grapefruit ------------------·--·­-------·------·-·--·--· Oranges ................................................. .  848 27  t 74 43  + 100 -37  
Mixed Citrus -----·--·--------­---------------·-----·-­ 252  t 26  + t oo  
Tanger in es --··-······----------------·················-·  2  0  

••Change is less than one-half of one percent. 
cause of the fluctuation of temperatures. Winter-killing oc­occurs approximately one in four years in this growing area, ranging from minor leaf injury to complete destruc· tion of the crop. Although some oats ~re grown .on the High Plains, wheat is more profita~le ii:i that reg1.on. In the Lower Plains oats are grown pnmanly for gram, but most fields are grazed until the stems start jointing. The Edwards Plateau is sown for both grain and grazing and large acreages are raised in this region if rainfall is ampl~. Oats in the Mountain and Basin Region are grown pn· marily for winter pasture and most fields are grazed until the plants are three to four inches high. 
Some four-fifths of the nation's oat crop is produced in a 12-state area in the north central United States, primarily the Ohio-Iowa-Wisconsin area. The estimated 1959 crop of 1,074 million bushels was the smallest since 1939, with the national harvested acreage falling to 28.5 million acres, the smallest since 1892. U. S. production in 1958 was some 1,416 million bushels. The drop in production was due chiefly to unfavorable conditions at seeding time in many areas, while the removal of corn acreage allotments caused many farmers to replace oats with corn. . 
Texas oats are sown primarily for feed and seed, with some three-fifths of the harvest used as feed and seed on the farms where grown. More than 30.8 million bushels of the 1958 harvest stayed on the farms where raised, wh~e some 22.3 million bushels were sold. Almost all oat gram sold in Texas eventually winds up in livestock feed (about 95 % to feed, 5% to industrial use). Perhaps 10% of the grain produced goes into planting seed. Oats are one of the best balanced and most desirable feeds for young live­stock and breeding herds. Oat pasture produces a succulent high protein feed during the winter when permanent pas· tures are dormant. Some goes into mixed feed for poult~. 
Seeding time for Texas oats (fall) ranges from mtd· September in North Texas to early November along the Gulf Coast and from January 1 in Central Texas to March 1 in North Texas (spring). Spring oats are not recom· mended on the Gulf Coast because of the relatively high 
TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 

temperatures there. Normal growing time is from five to six months. Oats usually follow cotton or corn in rotation and often are sown with sweet clover. Oats usually are not sown following oats or other small grains, as volunteer seed mix with new seed and increase disease and insect damage. Oat grain is harvested with a combine that moves through the fields clipping off the heads and then separat­ing the grain. 
Types and varieties of oats grown in Texas are deter­mined by winter temperature, disease resistance, and use. Numerous varieties have been developed to meet the spe­cial needs of various sections--cold resistant varieties for North and Central Texas and disease-resistant strains for South Texas. Winter varieties such as the Red Rustproof strains usually produce high yields when sown in the fall. The Red Rustproof strains of New Nortex (20% of crop) and the winter-hardy variety, Mustang, account for most of the oat acreage sown in Texas. Red Rustproof strains, however, are late maturing and are susceptible to crown rust, the most destructive disease of oats in Texas, and stem rust fungus. Mustang is early maturing but also sus­ceptible to stem rust. Research to develop new rust resistant varieties resulted in Alamo, a new spring variety which is 
adaptable to fall sowing in South Texas, and which has proven effective against the types of rusts now prevalent in Texas. However, Alamo is susceptible to sporium blight, a seedborne or soilborne fungus which rots roots and blackens stems. Other varieties are affected by loose smut, which destroys the grain cluster, or covered smut, a parasitic fungus ruining the oat kernels. 
Oat growers in Texas also are troubled by a variety of insects, chiefly aphids, grubworms, cutworms, and army­worms. Another nuisance is wild oats or escaped cultivated types which steal into the fields from the roadside and 

invite disease. 
As with a number of other crops in Texas, experiments, carried on chiefly by the Texas A & M College Extension Service, have proven that higher yields of oats can he ob­tained by controlled irrigation, proper plant spacings, and use of fertilizer, primarily nitrogen, phosporous, and pot­ash. Also, as with other experiments of this type, the cost is high and some growers question their use as opposed to less expensive, but lower yielding, practices they use today. 
FEDERAL INTERNAL REVENUE COLLECTIONS 
Source: Internal Revenue Service, U, S. Treasury Department 
July 1-February 29 
Percent District 1959-1960 1958-1959 change 
TEXAS ............................... $1,748,331,999 $1,609',225,928 9

+ 

Income ............................................ 649,573,681 598,910,664 8 
Employment .................................. 18,975,884 20,079,862 -5 
Withholding .................................. 919,122,495 834,854,926 + 10 
Other ............................. 160,659,939 155,380,476 + 3 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT .... 896,521,579 818,599,141 + 10 Income ............................................ 317 ,498,214 294,131, 784 8 
+ 
+ 

Employment .................................. 5,931,892 5,814,214 2 
Withholding .................................. 474,847,415 425,517,609 + 12 
Other .............................................. 98,244.058 93,135,534 5 

+ 
+ 
NORTHERN DISTRICT.... 851,810,420 790,626,787 	+ 8 +

Income ............................................ 332,075,467 304,778,880 9 
Employment .................................. 13,043,992, 14,265,648 -9 
Withholding .................................. 444,275,080 409,337 ,317 + 9 
Other .............................................. 62,415,881 62,244,942 •• 

**Change is less than one-half of one percent. 

Building Construction: 
NONRESIDENTIAL GAINS BALANCE SMALL RESIDENTIAL DECLINE IN FEBRUARY 
By ROBERT H. DRENNER 

Urban building construction authorized in Texas in Feb­ruary was valued at an estimated $87,039,000, an amount 1% below the preceding month and 11 % below February a year ago. The small decrease from January, however, was less than the usual seasonal decline, and the seasonally adjusted building index rose moderately to 210 from 200 in January. The fall from February 1959 combined with an even sharper drop in January from the same month a year earlier to make authorizations for the J anuary-Febru­ary period 13% below in the same two-month term last year. 
Building Construction In Texas• 
Index • Adjusted for seasonal variation • 1947-1949·100 

•value of building construction authorized. 

RESIDENTIAL 
February residential authorizations were again the drag on total building authorized. Permits were issued for an estimated $48,279,000 in new residential construction. This amount was 3% below the January figure and 21% under February 1959. There is normally little change in Texas from January to February in new residential authoriza­tions, and the seasonally adjusted monthly index of such permits dropped to 220 from January's 226. The February index was near the lowest level since 1957. January authorizations also were disappointingly low. 
New residential authorizations in March usually show a seasonal climb of approximately 20%. The gain should be somewhat larger this year because of the exceptionally unfavorable building weather that generally characterized both January and February. In spite of the fact that build­ing activity over the nation is at its lowest level in more than two years, there are signs of gradual improvement (in addition to the normal seasonal rise) in the months immediately ahead. Even the more pessimistic forecasters see no significant falling off in the present building rate: for example, the most pessimistic public forecast of Texas residential building in 1960, based on selected interviews with leading builders in the state's cities by a national busi­ness journal, is for housing starts about 15% below the 1959 level. It is to be noted that this predicted decline is very close to the actual permit drop for January-February. 
There seem to he a number of important economic trends, however, which promise a significant improvement for homebuilding as the year progresses. Most important, in­terest rates have been slowly weakening as business and industrial demands on the money market ease; most eco­nomic indicators point to a continuance of the trend. Already there is evidence that the major institutions, which for a time were investing a major portion of their funds elsewhere at a higher return than home mortgages af­forded, are returning to residential mortgage investment. Though Texas has not had the shortage of available mort· gage money that other states have had and still have­lending institutions in some states, for example, invested very heavily last year in exceptionally attractive Treasury offerings-interest rates have generally followed the na­tional pattern and a downward trend in the latter is being reflected, at least in the larger Texas cities, in less builder difficulty in securing loan commitments. 
Housing demand is strong in Texas. Builders, however, seem to be concentrating even more than hitherto on homes in the middle price ranges. In addition to the fact that property values have risen so much in recent years that the $10,000-$12,000 house has become difficult to build at a profit, homes in the higher price ranges have the additional advantage of appealing to families many of whom already have equity in an older, smaller home and thus have in effect a considerable downpayment on a new, more expensive dwelling. Such families also tend to accept higher interest rates more readily, although high interest rates appear to be a less important consideration now to most homebuyers than was the case a year ago: the general feeling, evidently, is that relatively high interest rates are here to stay and that it is probably unrealistic to postpone a home purchase until money rates drop substantially. Even so, there is still considerable reluctance to accept motgage rates above the 5%% permitted on FHA-insured loans, and these are still being widely discounted by 2% to 3 % (and even higher in some sections of the country) . 
Authorizations for multiple-family dwellings (duplexes, apartments) in Texas in February were 14% above the January rate, but for the first two months were 19% below the figure for the comparable period a year ago. In spite of the unfavorable comparison with 1959 (the record year in Texas for such construction, incidentally), apartment and duplex building in the state this year is expected to increase to very nearly the 1959 rate. 
NONRESIDENTIAL New nonresidential building with an estimated value of $30,566,000 was authorized in Texas in February, an amount 7% above the January figure and 14% greater than in February 1959. The January-to-February dollar gain was counterseasonal; nonresidential permits ordi­narily fall between the two months. The seasonally ad­justed monthly index of such permits consequently rose from January's 167 to 204. Growing strength in the cate­gory has been expected, but, as has been previously pointed out, monthly nonresidential permits in Texas are from a statistical point of view so small that they are sub­ject to sharp nonsignificant month-to-month variations. The category in February accounted for only 35% of total building authorized, a proportion which indicates how overshadowed total nonresidential building construc­tion is by the residential category in the over-all Texas building picture. Within the inclusive nonresidential category, January­to-February showings varied widely, as did the compari­
sons with January-February 1959. Improvements from January included permits for howling alleys, theaters, and other amusement buildings ( + 159%), office-hank build­ings ( + 135% ) , works and utilities (+20%), churches (+9%), and private garages ( +8%) ; commercial garage authorizations, because of large new projects in San An· tonio and Longview, rose a remarkable 18,950%. Declines from January were recorded in permits for tourist courts ( -68%), factories ( -3%), service stations ( -18%), hospitals and institutional buildings ( -73% ) , and schools ( -4%). Comparison of each category with January· February 1959 is, of course, much more significant. Over­all nonresidential authorizations show a 7% rise from the 1959 two-month period. Gains were also recorded by churches ( +32%), service stations ( +35%), office-bank buildings ( +25%), works and utilities ( +533%), and schools ( +36%) . For the period there were comparative declines in authorizations for hotels ( -99%), tourist courts ( -9%), factories ( -34%), private garages 
( -4%), hospitals ( -59%), and stores and other mer­cantile buildings ( -3% ) . 
ESTIMATED VALUE OF BUILDING AUTHORIZED 
Source: Bureau of Bueiness Reeearch in cooperation with the Bureau of the Censue, U. S. Department of Commerce 
P ercent change  
Classification  F eb 1960  Jan 1960  F eb 1959  Jan-Feb 1960 from J an-Feb 1959  

Thousand• of dollars  
CON STRUCTION CL ASS  
ALL PERMITS ---------------­ 87,039  174,986  202,102  -13  
N ew construction ..................... .  78,846  157,306  184,820  -15  
Residential  (housekeeping)  48,279  98,049  129,235  -24  
One-family dwellings ----···­ 32,944  89,924  119,214  -25  
Multiple-family dwellings  4,335  8,125  10,021  -19  
Nonresidential buildings..... .  30,566  59,256  55,585  + 7  
Nonhousekeepin g build­ 
ings  (residential)  ....... .  606  1,915  3,107  -88  
Amusement  buildings  ... .  450  624  1,875  -67  
Churches ............................. .  3,300  6,832  4,810  + 32  
Factories a nd workshops  2,463  4,990  7,617  -84  
Garages (commercial a nd  
private) ----·-·----··----·--···--­Service stations ·-··------······  1,059 700  1,337 1,565  651 1,162  + 105 + 85  
Institutional buildings ... .  291  l ,387  8,355  -59  
Office-bank buildings• ..... .  5,536  7,892  6,301  + 25  
Works and ut ilit ies ....... .  2,120  8,892  615  +533  
Educational buildings ... .  7,493  15,264  11.200  + 86  
Stores and  
mercantile buildings ....  5,515  12,229  12,656  - 3  
Other buildings  
and  structurest  ··-··-----·­ 1,033  1,829  2,236  -18  
Additions, alterations, and  
repairs§  ···---···-···--···-·-··----··­ 8,194  17,681  17,282  + 2  
METROPOLITAN vs.  
N ON-METROPOL ITAN t  
Total metropolitan -----··-···---···--­ 66,066  133,162  145,798  9  
Central cities ....................... .  54,679  107,906  124,726  -13  
Outside central cities ---··--···  11 ,387  25,256  21,072  + 20  
Total  nonmetropolitan  -·---·---­ 20,973  41,824  56,305  -26  
10,000 to 50,000 population  14,406  26,809  42,202  -36  
Lesa t han 10,00-0 population  6,567  15,015  14,103  + 6  

• Includes public (nonfederal) administrative buildings beginninir J uly 1957. t Includes government (nonfederal) service buildings beginning July 1957. § Includes additions and alter ations to public buildings beginninir July 
1957. t As defined in 1950· census. 
rEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 






Local Business Conditions 

Percent Change  Percent Change  
Feb  Feb 1960 from  Feb 1960 from  F eb  Feb 1960 from  Feb 1960 from  
City and item  1960  Jan 1960  Feb 1959  City and item  1960  Jan 1960  Feb 1959  
ABILENE (pop. 62,500r) Retail sales ------­------­-------­-------­-------­------­---- - 4t  ••  + 12  BAY CITY (pop. 14,042r) Retail sales  
Apparel stores -------------------------­------­----­-­Drug stores ----­--­----­------------­-­---­--­------­--­-General merchandise stores ----­--------­-­-­Postal receipts• ----------------­--­-----­----­-----------$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) --­---------------------$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ----$ -lSt -4t -lOt 98,564 1,910,489 93,314 62,586  -18 -4 -27 + 5 + 59 6 3  -15 + 19 -1 -8 -25 •• 2  Drug stores -------------------------------­-------------­Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ---­--­-------------------­------­Postal receipts• --------------------------------­-------$ Bank debits (thousands) -----------------------­$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ---­f Annual rate of deposit turnover -------­--­-4t 1 10,783 11,714 20,055 6.9  3 + 7 + 3 -25 -3 -22  + 4 1 + 12 + 14 •• + 15  
Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­Employment (area) -------------------------------­Manufacturing employment (area) __ _ 
Percent unemployed (area) ----­--------------­ 17.6 82,300 8,210 6.2  5 •• + 5  + 1 + 1 5 + 13  BAYTOWN (pop. 28,945r) Postal receipts• ---------------­-------------------------­$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ 21,845 731,886  -1 +134  + 1 +292  
Bank debits  (thousands)  -----------------------­$ 22,438  + 4  + 5  
ALPINE (pop. 5,261) Postal receipts• ------­--­----------------­_______ ____ __ 
$ Building permits, Iese federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ----------­---------­---$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ----$­ 3,834 9,075 2,570 3,582  -15 + 71 1 5  4 + 7 + 8 9  End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ----$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ___________ _ Employment (area) --------------------­---------­--­Manufacturing employment (area) __ _ 
Percent unemployed (area) -----------­-------­ 23,624 11.3 489,700 94,475 4.7  + 4 •• -2 ••  8 2 + 5 + 2 -20  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ------­----­AMARILW (pop. 147,949r) Retail ealee --------------------------------------------­-----Appnrel stores --------------------------­--------­--­-Automotive stores ---------------------------------­Drug stores --­----------------------­-------------------­Eating and drinking places --­---­--­-----­Food stores --­---­---­--------­---------­---------------­ -- 8.4 4t 1st ••t 4t 5t 5t  + 2 -13 -24 -11 1 8 8  + 18 -18 -15 -25 3 + 7 2  BEAUMONT (pop. 122,485r) Retail sales --­-------------------------------------------­----­Apparel stores -------­-----­-----­-------------------­Automotive stores -----------------------------­---­Eating and drinking places ---------------­Food stores -­-------------------------­------------­----­Furniture a nd household appliance stores --··----------------·-·············· General merchandise stores ·····-···------­ -4t -lSt ••t 5t 5t 9t -lOt  -2 -12 -2 -20 + 3 -11 -7  + 10 + 4 + 12 1 + 2 -25 + 4  
Furniture and household appliance stores ---­-----------------------------­ 9t  -27  -87  Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ---------------------------------­ - lt  + 22  + 34  
Gasoline and service stations ----­-------­-Liquor stores ----------------------­-----------------­ 4t  - 7 6  + 18 -20  Postal receipts• ------------------------------------------$ Building permits, leas federal contracts $  109,271 699,211  -1 + 45  + 5 -49  
Lumber, building material, and hardware stores -------­------­------­-----------­-1t Postal receipts• --------­-------­-------------------­----­$ 176,523 Building permits, leas federal contracts$ 2,751,034 Bank debits (thousands) -------­---­------------$ 214,542 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ----$ 113,768 Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­22.2 Employment (area) -----------­-------------------­51,800 Manufacturing employment (area) ____ 5,930 Percent unemployed (area) -----------­-----­5.6  + 17 2 8 1 3 + 2 •• + + 10  -88 + 7 + 24 + 10 -1 + 12 + 3 + 4 + 22  Bank debits (thousands) ------------­-----------$ End-of-month deposits (thousanda) t ----S Annual rate of deposit turnover ---------­-­Employment (area) ------­--------­---------------­Manufacturing employment (area) ___ _ Percent unemployed (area) -------------------­BEEVILLE (pop. 15,l05r) Reta il sales Lumber, bui1ding material, and  161,156 98,143 19.3 103,100 32,530 9.7  + -4 + 7 •• + + 2  + 13 -9 + 21 •• + 16 -18  
ARLINGTON (pop. 45,340r) Postal receipts• ---------------­-----­------------------$ Building permits, lees federal contracts $ Employment (area) --­------------------------------· Manufacturing employment (area) ___ _ 37,447 1,257,099 206,800 53,375  + 1 + 83••••  + 18 + 45 + 3 -5  hardware stores -------···-----·-··----··········· Postal receipts• ------­------------­----------------------$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) --­-------------------­--­$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ----S Annual rate of deposit turnover --------­--­-lt 10,987 210,453 8,853 13,591 7.9  + 1 + 10 +342 9 + 1 8  + 10 + 16 +325 2 + 1 + 1  
Percent unemployed (area)  ---·---------------­ 5.5  +  4  -14  
AUSTIN (pop. 197,000r)  BIG SPRING (pop. 30,433r) Retail sales -------------------------------------------------­ - 4t  -16  + 2  
Retail sales --------·------------------­---------------------­Apparel stores ---------­---------­-----------­-------· Automotive stores ----------------------­-­----­---­ -4t -lSt ••t  -2 -14 6  -1 + 5 -10  Apparel stores ---------------------------------------­Drug stores ----------­----------------------------------­Lumber, building material, and  -lSt 4t  -20 -8  +  7 ••  
Drug stores ----------------------­----------------------­Furniture and household  4t  3  + 15  hardware stores ·············-·-----·-··--·-·-···­Post al r eceipts• ---------­-----------­-­------------------$  lt 28,519  -18 -11  -10 + 19  
appliance stores ---------------------------------­General merchandise stores ---------------­ 9t -mt  6 9  + 15  Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ----------------­-------$  121,075 37,745  - 19 7  + 18 + 5  
Lumber, building material, and  End-of-month  deposits  (thousands ) t  $ 28,629  4  7  
hardware stores ---------------------------------­ - 1t  + 27  5  Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­ 15.5  7  3  
Postal receipts• ·--­-------­---­----------­--------------­$ 352,240 Building permits, leas federal contracts $ 8,225,843 Bank debits (thousands) --­---------------­----­$ 214,392  -2 + 16 6  + 6 -37 + 14  BRADY (pop. 5,944) Postal r eceipts• -----------­ __________ __$  5,633  + 52  + 47  
End-of-month deposits (thousanda) t -­-­S Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­Employment (area) -------------------------­-------­Manufacturing employment (area) ____ Percent unemployment (area) ----­----·  143,745 18.2 74,000 6,090 4.0  + 3 + 2 + + 2  -6 + 21 + 4 + 11 -2  Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ------------------------$ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t ----$ Annual rate of deposit turnover -----------­ 22,600 4,047 6,728 7.1  9 3 7  +143 + 3 8 7  
For explanation of symbols, see page 28.  

APRIL 1960 
Percent Change Percent Change 
City and item  F eb 1960  Feb 1960 from J an 1960  Feb 1960 from Feb 1959  City and item  F eb 1960  Feb 1960 from Jan 1960  Feb 1960 from Feb 1969  
BRENHAM (pop. 6,941) Postal receipts* .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands H ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  7,202 14,085 8,044 12,245 7.7  + 12 -62 -11 4 -7  + -54 + 15 -5 + 20  CORSICANA (pop. 25,262r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contr acts$ Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit t urnover ........... .  12,804 400,752 15,90·1 19,384 9.7  -28 + 878 -17 -3 -14  -26 +642 + 6 -10 + 13  
BROWNSVILLE (pop. 36,066) Retail sales ................................................. . Automotive stores -·-············--·-············-··  4t ••t  +  9  +  5 6  DALLAS (pop. 641,000r) Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stores ....................................... .  -- 4t 20t  + 6 -26  - .. 4  
Lumber, building material, and  Austomotive stores  -·-·····-···············-·······  + 4t  + 22  + 13  
and harware stores ........................... .  - lt  + 29  + 8  Eating and drinking places ............... .  - Gt  5  - 6  
P ostal receipts• .......................................... $ Building p ermits, less f ederal contracts$  26,521 593,295  -5 +156  -12 +323  F lorists ..................................................... . Food stores ............................................. .  • • t 8t  + 4 4  + ••  
Furniture and household  
BROWNWOOD (pop. 20,181) Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stores -············--·--············-·-······· Furniture and housthold appliance stores ..... ---­·········--------····· Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 4t -1s t -9t 24,070 406,970 12,897 12,722 12.0  + -10 -I> + 19 +557 2 3 +  + 4 •• 4 + 7 +4,605 + 5 2 +  appliance stores ................................. . Jewelery stores ·····-····---------····-·········-···· Liquor stores ·· ···-··----················--·········-­· Lumber, building material, and 9t hardware stores .................................. + 4t Office, store, and school supply dealers .................................... 4t Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 2,153,196 Building permits, less f edera l contracts $10,922,193 Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 2,653,559 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ 1,183,179  + 4 3 + 12 + + 5 -14 ••  -9 -17 -8 -24 + 1 + 6 -22 + 16 -1  
BRYAN (pop. 23,883r) Retail sales ..................................................  4t  + 1  + 12  Annua l rate of deposit t urnover ........ Employmen t (area) .................................. Manufacturing em polyment (area ) ..  28.1 431,000 93,475  - 9 ••••  + 17 + 9 + 12  
Food  stores  ..............................................  5t  -10  + 3  P ercent unemployed (area)  ....................  4.1  - 2  - 5  
Furniture a nd household  
appliance stores ----------·······----------·-··· Lumber, building material, and hard ware stores ---------············--···-······· Postal r eceipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less f ederal contracts $  9t 1t 23,821 97,8 00  + 14 + 16 + 17 -18  -13 + 7 + 23 -49  DEL RIO (pop.14, 292r) Postal r eceipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ...................... ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  11 ,604 9,296 12,849 8.9  •• 5  -11  
CALDWELL (pop. 2,098r) Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  1,858 3,77 9 5.8  -31 -4 -25  -4 -11 + 7  DENISON (pop. 17 ,504) Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stor es ....................................... . Automotive stores ·----·--·--·--·--···--······-·····  -4t -l St ••t  --- 9 36 2  -11 -9 -16  
CISCO (pop. 5,230) Postal receipts• .......................................... $  4,210  + 24  +  Dr ug stores ............................................. . Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $  -4t 17,562 442,415  -1 -20 +277  + 12 + 7 +268  
Building permits, less federal contracts$  8,202  + 3  + 22  
Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ............  4,142 9.4  + 2 +  + 8 + 13  DENTON (pop. 29,479r) Retail sales ................................................. .  
CLEBURNE (pop. 12,905) Retail sales  Drug stores ··-········-················--·····-·····--··­Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building p ermits, less foderal contracts $  -4t 27 ,519 175,800  + 4 -8 -24  + 12 + + 17  
Apparel stores ....................................... . Postal receipts• .......................................... $  -l St 13,265  -38 + 19  -4 + 28  Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $  16,432 18,832  + 1 -2  
Building permits, less federal contracts $  342,428  +463  +497  
EL PASO (pop. 244,000r)  
CORPUS CHRISTI (pop.180,000r)  Retail  sales  ................................................. .  - 4t  + 5  +  
Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stores ....................................... . Automotive stores -·-······················--···---·  -4t -l St ••t  + 14 -9 + 34  + 14 + 19 + 19  Apparel stores ....................................... . Automotive stores ................................. . Food stores ............................................. .  -l St ••t -5t  -25 + 36 2  + +  
General merchandise stores ··-··-··--········  -lOt  + 2  - 8  General  merchandise stores  ............... .  -lOt  2  
Lumber, building material, and  Lumber, building  material, and  
hardware stores ·····--·--······················-­Postal receipts• .......................................... $  -lt 158,897  + 24 ••  + 32 + 6  hardware stores .................................. Postal receipts• ..........................................$  -1t 260,101  + 12 -2  + 11 + 12  
Building p ermits, less federal contracts$  993,008  -23  -41  Building permits, less federal contract s $ 3,447 ,04 8  + 70  -28  
Ba nk debits  (thousands )  ........................ $  179,176  -12  + 3  Bank debits  (thousands )  ........................ $  338,304  3  +  
End-of-month  deposits  (thousandst  ..$  110-,262  - 1  8  End-of -month deposits  (thousands)t .. $  178,113  + 4  +  
Annual r ate of deposit turnover ........... . Employments (area) ............................... . Manufacturing employment (area )  19.4 64,600 8,440  - 9 ••••  + 7 2 + 4  Annual rate of deposit tu rnover ............ Employment (area ) .............................. Percent unem ployed (area ) ....................  23.8 89,800 6.9  -+  5 •• 11  + + + 26  
Percent unemployed  (area)  ................. .  7.9  +  8  6  
For explanat ion of symbols, see page 28.  

TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
Percent Change Percent Change 
Feb l!tGO  Feb 19GO  Feb 19GO  Feb 19GO  
F eb  from  from  Feb  from  from  
City and item  19GO  Jan 19GO  Feb 1959  City and item  19GO  J an 19GO  Feb 1959  
EDINBURG (pop.15,993r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 11,032 121,855 12,G49 9,775 15.9 FORT WORTH (pop. 373,000r) Retail sales ................................................ . Apparel stores ....................................... . 5t -22t  + 12 -27 -21 + 5 -25 -4 -2G  + G + 90 + 17 + 18 + 8 -9 -10  GLADEWATER (pop. 6,281r) Postal r eceipts• ......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover .......... .. Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (a rea) .. Percent unemployed (area) ................... . 5,G47 400 2,9G7 3,91G 9.0 28,100 5,030 4.1  + 17 -82 -13 -2 -9 •• -1 ••  + 12 -98 -8 -12 + 3 + 8 + 8 -15  
Automotive stores ................................. .  + 7t  + 13  - 8  
Drug stores ............................................. . Eating and drinking places ............... . Food stores .............................................. Furniture and household appliance stores .................................. Gasoline and service stations ............  Gt Gt Gt 7t 4t  -1 -11 5 4 -23  + 4 -25 -9 + 11 -lG  GOLDTHWAITE (pop. 1,566) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 1,458 Bank debita (thousands) ........................ $ 2,33G End-of-month deposits (thousands )t ..$ 3,485 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 7 .9  -lG -15 -4  -24 -25 + 3 -28  
General merchandise stores  ................  9t  -lG  - 7  
Lumber, building material, and hardware stores .................................. 4t Postal receipts• .......................................... $ GG8,494 Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ 3,474,843 Bank debits (thousanda) ........................ $ 737,008 End-of-months deposits (thousands) t .. $ 3G4,817 Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 24.4 Employment (area) .................................. 20G,800 Manufacturing employment (area) .. 53,375 Percent unemployed (area) .................. 5.5  + 8 5 + G 7 + 1 5 •••• + 4  + 28 + 1 -20 + 3 2 + 7 + 3 5 -14  GRAND PRAffiIE (pop. 35,000r) Postal receipts• ........... .............................. $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area) .. P ercent unemployed (area) ................... . 21,588 354,320 431.000 93,475 4.1 GREENVILLE (pop. 20,034r) Retail sales ................................................. . -4t  + 12 + 51 •••• -2 + 13  2 5 + 12 + 9 5 + 9  
FREDERICKSBURG (pop. 4,341r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 4,345 Building permits, less federal contracts$ 47,790 Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 5,552 End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 8,170 Annual rate of deposit turonver ............ 8.0  -1 -19 -23 -4 -29  -8 +128 + 3 + Gl -31  Apparel stores ... Drug stores ···--------·-­-----------···-················· Food stores ............................................. . Postal receipts• ......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$  -18t -4t -St 19,562 121,182 14,708 16,039  -26 1 -9 + 9 -50 -14 -1  5 + 5 -18 -4 -32 + 5 + 8  
GALVESTON (pop. 71,590r) Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stores ....................................... . Automotive stores ................................. . Food stores ............................................. . Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ................................. . Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ -4t -18t ••t 5t lt 8G,255 175,550  -9 -21 + 3 + 1 + 21 + G + 97  + G + lG + 6 -12 + 4 -25  Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . HARLINGEN (pop. 31,799r) Postal r eceipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  11.0 35,3GO 480,395 3G,223 26,013 16.G  -12 + 4, + 28 8 1 5  3 + 9 + GO + 16 •• + 15  
Bank debits (thousanda) ........ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t ..$ Annual rate of devoeit turnover ........... . Employment (area) .................... . Manufacturing employment (area) ..  91,589 G5,419 lG.7 51,100 10,9GO  + -- 1 1 ••••  + 14 + 5 + 11 + 4••  HENDERSON (pop. 11,606) Retail sales ................................................. . Apparel stores ....................................... . Food stores ............................................. .  --- 4t 18t 5t  -G -19 -16  + 10 + 4  
Percent employed (area)  ....................... .  G.l  - 2  -19  General m erchandise stores  ............... .  -lOt  - 8  + 5  
GARLAND (pop. 28,151r) Pootal receipts• .......................................... $  24,501  - G  - 2  Postal r eceipts* .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $  8,890 193,400 G,97G  -3 + 388 6  1 +588 2  
Building permits, less federal contracts $ Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area) ..  450,G73 431,000 93,475  -76 ••••  -57 + 12 + 9  End-of-month deposits (thousandslt ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  15,237 5.4  2 4  4 + 2  
Percent unemployed (area)  ............ .  4.1  - 2  - 5  HEREFORD (pop. 7 ,500r)  
GIDDINGS (pop. 2,532) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $  3,G53 14,272 2,15G 8,733  + 10 -91 -11 2  + 37 +G49 + 11••  Postal recei pts• ..........................................$ Building permits, Jess federal contracts S Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousanda) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  7,2G9 99,750 9,137 11,245 9.G  -3 + 47 -28 -3 -2G  -22 -25 -4 •• -3  
Annual rate of deposit turnover  G.8  - 8  + 10  
GILMER (pop. 4,096) Retail sales General merchandise stores ............... . Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ............................... . Postal receipts• .......................................... $  -lOt -lt 4,G59  -14 -14 + 15  -6 -84 + 20  ffiVING (pop. 40,065r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Employment (area) ................................. . Manufacturing employment (area ) .. Percent unemployed (area) ................... .  20,488 l,175,405 481,000 93,475 4.1  -3 + 37 •••• -2  + 9 -27 + 12 + 9 -5  
Building permits, Jess federal contracts $  17,000  + 89  -48  
For explanation of symbols, see page 28.  

APRIL 1960 
Percent Change Percent Change 
City and item  Feb 1960  Feb 1960 from Jan 1960  Feb 1960 from Feb 1959  City and item  Feb 1960  Feb 1960 from Jan 1960  Feb 1960 from Feb 1969  
HOUSTON (pop. 700,508u) Retail sales~ -----------------------------------------------­Apparel storesU -------------------------------------­Automotive storesU -----------­-------------------­Drug storesU -------------------------------------------­Eating and drinking placesU -----------­ -4t -18t + 2t Gt St  -s -13 9 + 1 8  + + 2 + 8 + 21 5  LLANO (pop. 2,957r) Postal receipts• ·····························-···········-$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ·-·······-·······-·--··-$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ·-···-··---·  2,036 2,408 3,60() 7.8  -16 •• 6 + 5  -8 + 10 + 4 +  
Food storesU ----------------------------------------­--­ 2t  6  7  
Furniture and household appliance storesU -------------------------------· Gasoline and service stationsff ........... . General merchandise storesU ·········-···· Liquor storesU ··················--······-·-·--·---·--· Lumber, building material, and 1 t St 7t + 5t hardware storesU ·········-·····-·-·····-·-·----· 4t Other retail stores ................................ St Postal r eceipts• ··----···········-························$ 1,510,612 Building permits, less federal contracts $16,410,992 Bank debits (thousands) ········--··--······-··­$ 2,530,976  + 47 -10 9 + 6 + 10 + 1 -4 ••  + 5 2 + + -12 + 18 + 4 + 10 + 9  LOCKHART (pop. 7,067r) Retail sales Apparel stores ·-··--·-··--·---·--··----·-····-···----· Automotive stores -----------------------··---··---· Food stores ···-----------··-----------·-··--·--··--··---· Postal r eceipts• --------··----····---·--···--·---·­-··----$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) __ ___ ___________________$ End-of-months deposits (thousands)+ --$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  -18t ••t -5t 3,468 159,200 8,902 5,277 8.7  -81 -6 -2 -10 -15 -3 -10  -11 + 20 +u •• +1,163 2 + 4 5  
End-of-month deposits (thousands )+  ..$ 1,265,097  - 2  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ·---·--·--·· Employment (area) ···-···-····················-··· Manufacturing employment (area) .. P ercent unemployed (area) ············-····-··  28.8 489,700 94,475 4.7  + 2 •• -2 ••  + 8 + 5 + 2 -20  LONGVIEW (pop. 46,688r) Retail sales ···············-···················-····-·-···-··· Food stores --··----····-······-·--·····-··­··-··········· Furniture and household  -1() -6  -11 -4  
JACKSONVILLE (pop. 8,607)  appliance stores .................................. Lumber, building material, and  9  -19  + 16  
Postal receipts•  ----·-··--·····-·-·······················-$  16,768  + 88  + 9  hardware stores ·-·--------­--------------------­ 1t  -13  -43  
Building permits, less federal contracts $  81,00()  +179  + 63  Postal receipts•  ···-······--·······-··-------··-··--------$  89,757  + 1  + 60  
Bank debits  (thousands )  ··············-·-···----$  9,718  -10  Building permits, Jess federal contracts $  l,<>24,130  +115  + 44  
End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $  8,559  2  Bank debits  (thousands )  ........................ $  89,396  -12  + 4  
Annual rate of deposit turnoTer ····­------·  13.5  - 7  End-of-months deposits (thousands) t ..$  36,002  + 3  -2  
KILGORE (pop. 12,373r) Postal r eceipts• _______ ----------················-···----$ Building permits, less federal contracts $  11,912 84,000  + 8  -10 -47  Annual rate of deposit turnover ·-··­-··--·· Employment (area) ·············-··--··-·-·-···--·­Manufacturing employment (area) .. Percent unemployment (area) ···-········  13.3 28,100 5,03(} 4.1  -- 8 •• 1 ••  + 3 + 8 -16  
Bank debits (thousands) ··-·············--······$ End-of-month deposits (thousands H ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . Employment (area ) ················--·--·--··----·--· Manufacturing employment (area) .. Percent unemployed (area) ·-------------···­ 11,783 14,981 9.4 28,100 5,030 4.1  -19 -2 -18 •• -1 ••  -19 + 1 -20 + 3 + 8 -15  LUBBOCK (pop. 152,776•) Retail sales ········------··········­·-·--··---·----------···· Automotive stores ---·-···················--··-·---· Furniture and household appliance stores ························-·--·----·  -- 4t ••t 9t  -18 -20 -10  -U -22 + 11  
KILLEEN (pop. 26,646r)  Postal receipts* -·---·--------------·-··-···-···-······---$ 134,547 Building permits, less federal contracts $ S,843,592  -11 -18  + 1 -49  
Retail sales  Bank debits  (thousands)  --··---·------------­---$  215,204  -28  + 28  
Apparel stores ·-·--··-··························---·-·  - 18t  - 3  + 11  End-of-months deposits (thousands)+ --$  120,7Sl  - 7  - 1  
Postal receipts• ··············-·-· -----------···········-$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ---··---··-··---··-·····$  25,458 179,928 9,375  -4 -23 5  -16 -28 + 17  Annual rate of deposit turnoTer ............ Employment (area) ········--··-·········------···· Manufacturing employment (area) ·­ 20.5 53,70() 5,550  -24 ••••  + 28 + 8 + 7  
End-of-month deposits  (thousandsH -­$  7,3S7  +  6  + 3  Percent unemployed (area)  ····-···-···---··-··  8.5  +  18  -22  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ··--··-·····  15.8  8  + 16  
LAMESA (pop. 13,813r) Retail sales Automotive stores --··--·-·················--···---­Postal receipts• ······-············-··--·----············-$ Building permits, less federal contracts $  ••t 1(},975 84,90()  -2 -8 -71  -13 + 6 -76  LUFKIN (pop. 20,846•) Postal receipts* -·-------------·-·················-····---$ Bank debits (thousands) ··-···-···-··········-··$ End-of-months deposits (thousands H ._$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ·········-··  21,715 22,717 23,17() 11.5  + 24 6 4  + 14 + 17 -11 + 24  
Bank debits (thousands ) ----···-···············-$  14,088  -45  1  
End-of-month deposits (thousandst) .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . LAMPASAS (pop. 4,869)  18,2.60 8.8  -10 -44,  +  6 4  McALLEN (pop. 25,326r) Retail sales ········-----------·-··············-·-·-·--···--· Automotive stores --·--·-·········-·········-······· Postal receipts• ··------------··--··-·············­···----$  -4t ••t 26,69()  + 18 + 20 + 2  + 89 + 50 + 8  
Postal r eceipts• ··········-·-·····--··----···-·-·········-$  4,169  + 1  + 2  Building permits, less federal contracts $  838,020  -24  -22  
Building permits, less federal contracts $  148,500  +242  +4,529  Bank debits  (thousands)  ·--····················-$  27,099  - 9  + 21  
Bank debits  (thousands)  ------------···-········$  5,166  -20  8  End-of-month deposita  (thousands)+ .. $  21,950  + 13  + 8  
E nd-of-months deposits (thousands )+ .. $  6,20()  - 4  7  Annual rate of deposit turnover ······-··--·  15.7  - 9  + 18  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ·-·---·-·--­ 9.8  - 17  2  
LAREDO (pop. 59,350r)  McKINNEY (pop. 16,653r)  
Postal receipts• ····················--·······-·---·······­$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ········---·---··-------$ End-of-month deposits (thousands )+ .-$ 28,172 162,140 27,319 23,318  -6 +124 -11 + 3  -7 -44 + 11 + 9  Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ···-··-··-·-·---··------$ End-of-month deposits (thousands)+ -$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ····---·····  69,970 9,146 12,699 8.6  -54 -12 -1 -11  -4 + 16 + 3 + 18  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ··---------­ 14.3  -lZ  +  4  
For explanation of symbols, see page 23.  

TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
Percent Change Percent Change 
Feb 1960  Feb 1960  Feb 1960  Feb 1960  
Feb  from  from  F eb  from  from  
City and Item  1960  Jan 1960  Feb 1959  City and item  1960  Jan 1960  Feb 1959  
MARSHALL (pop. 28,444r)  PALESTINE (pop. 15,063r) Postal receipts* .......................................... $  10,002  -15  + 7  
Retail oales Apparel stores .... ---------·························­General merchandise stores . Postal receipts• -·-············-··---·--··-········· ..... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $  -18t -lOt 21,507 138,774  -26 -2() -9 ••  -10 -8 + 4 +288  Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  62,355 8,959 14,664 7.8  -- 7 •• 6  -23 + 2 + 7 9  
Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-months deposits (thousands lt ..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ....  16,405 21,512 9.6  -13 + 11 -15  + 4 + 2 + 3  PAMPA (pop. 26,720r) R etail sales Automotive stores ·---···--·--··············  ••t  -20  -15  
MERCEDES (pop. 10,081) Postal receipts• .................... . ..... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $  4,761 23,642 7,825  + 3 + 17 +  + 9 + 72 + 32  Postal receipts• ........................................$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover  23,913 318,372 21,666 24,276 10.7  + 9 + 79 -10 + 2 -8  + 11 -78  
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  4,150 19.6  -14 + 8  -28 + 51  PARIS (pop. 24,55lr)  
MIDLAND (pop. 54,288r)  Retail sales ...................................... . Apparel stores ....................................... . Automotive stores ······-···-·-------------------·  -- 4t 18t ..t  + 13 -20 + 28  + 10 •• + 21  
Postal receipts• ........................................ $  79,859  + 1()  + 5  Lumber, building material,  
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,926,200  + 15  -54  and  hardware  stores  ....................... .  - lt  + 24  -28  
Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)• .. $  100,971 89,513  -10 2  + 22 ••  Postal receipts• ....................................... $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $  19,606 15,284  +  9  + 11 + 9  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ....  13.4  - 6  + 2()  End-of-month depoeits (thousands ) t ....$  13,791  2  +  4  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  13.1  9  +  4  
MONAHANS (pop.10,183r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  7,567 172,200 9,592 7,991 14.2  + -30 2 2 1  + 11 -10 1 4 + 4  PASADENA (pop. 58,928r) Postal receipts• ........................................ $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Employment (area) ............................... . Manufacturing employment (area) ... . Percent unemployed (area) ................. .  32,816 721,526 489,700 94,475 4.7  + - •• 2 ••  + -81 + + 2 -20  
NACOGDOCHES (pop.14,770r) Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands ) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands)t ..$ 13,464 22,18() 14,074 14,847  + 4 -70 + 5 9  + 4 -70 + 18 -1  PHARR (pop. 8,690) Postal receipts• ........................................$ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover _______ _  6,604 4,664 4,648 11.9  -- 3 •• 6 3  -6 + 14 + 13 + 10  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  11.2  + 7  + 12  PLAINVIEW (pop. 21,106r)  
Retail  sales  .............................................. .  - 4t  - 4  -17  
NEW BRAUNFELS {pop. 12,210) Retail sales Automotive stores ................................ . Postal receipts• .......................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ ••t 16,696 138,985  •• + 16 -62  -5 + 2 + 18  Apparel stores ................................. . Automotive stores .............................. . General merchandise stores ---------------­Postal receipts• ........................................$ Building permits, less federal contracts $  -18t ••t -lOt 17,533 366,900  -41 + 10 -28 -10 + 60  -6 -17 -84 + 11 +226  
Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $" End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$  10,114 10,917  -15 1  + 5 7  PORT ARTIIUR (pop. 82,150u)  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ..... .  11.1  - 9  + 9  R etail sales ................................................ . Automotive stores .............................. .  4t ••t  -+  6 9  -4 -18  
ODESSA (pop. 87,52lr)  Food stores ........................................... . Furniture and household  5t  -11  2  
Retail sales  appliance stores ··············-··········---····  9t  7  +  
Furniture and household  Lumber, building material,  
appliance stores ................................. .  - 9t  -25  -24  and hardware stores  ....................... .  lt  + 27  
Postal  receipts•  ................  . .......... $  65,106  - 4  - 4  Postal  receipts*  ................. $  50,936  + 7  + 9  
Building permits, less federal contracts $  1,442,631  +  - 17  Building permits, less federal contracts $ 1,648,116  + 89  +186  
Bank debits  (thousands)  ........................ $  64,196  -18  4  Bank debits  (thousands)  ........................ $  69,414  -11  + 10  
End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t ....$  58,325  -23  6  End-of-month deposits  (thousands) t ....$  43,648  - 2  - 2  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  11.5  -12  9  Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... . Emplayment (area) ............................... .  16.1 103,100  - 9 ••  + 13 ••  
ORANGE (pop. 31,556r)  Manufacturing employment (area ) ... . P ercent unemployed (area) ................. .  32,630 9.7  + +  2  + 16 -18  
Postal receipts• ......................... . .... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... . EmploYment (area) ............................... . Manufacturing employment (area) ... . Percent unemployed (area) ................. .  20,548 247,774 22,060 20,899 12.8 108,100 32,580 9.7  5 8 4 8 •• + 1 + 2  -29 + 27 + 12 -4 + 14 •• + 16 -18  ROCKDALE (pop. 6,400r) Postal receipts• ........................................ $ Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  3,421 46,000 3,846 5,458 8.4  -6 -63 + 6 2 +  + 14 + 915 + 19 + 3 + 17  
For 8XJ)l&nation of symbols, see PlllrB 23.  

APRIL 1960 
Percent Change  Percent Change  
City and item  F eb 19SO  Feb 19SO from Jan 19SO  Feb 19SO from Feb 1959  City and item  Feb 19SO  Feb 1960 from J an 1960  Feb 1960 from Feb 1969  
SAN ANGELO (pop. 62,359r) Retail sales ............................................... . Jewelry stores ....................................... .  - 4t  •• + 21  + 2 + 33  SLATON (pop. 6,35lr) P ostal receipts• ...................................... . $ Building permits, less federal contracts $  3,18S 30,775  + -S5  + 8 -16  
P ostal  receipts•  ...................... .................. $  S4 ,274  + 7  + 8  Bank debits  (thousands)  ........................$  3,297  -35  8  
Building permits, less federal contracts $  577,921  + 8  + 89  End-of-month  deposits  (thousands) t .. $  4,888  -10  
Bank debits (thousands ) ........................$ E nd-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . Employment (area) ............................... .  50,58S 4S,833 13.1 22,950  - 4 •• 4 ••  + s + 2 + 4 1  Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... . Employment (a.r eal ................................ Manufacturing emplayment (area) .. Percent unemployed (area) ................. .  7.7 53,700 5,550 8.5  -+  84 •• •• 13  + '+ 8 + 7 -22  
Manufacturing employment  (area) ..  3,220  + 1  + 5  
Percent unemployed  (area)  ................. .  5.8  +  4  -13  SNYDER (pop. 16,324r)  
SAN ANfONIO (pop. 555,000r) Reta il sales ................................................ Apparel stor es ..................................... . Automotive stores ............................... . Drug stores ............................................. . 5t -llt + lt 1t  -8 -15 + 4 -3  •• + 4 + + 4  Postal r eceipts• ....................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  11,598 188,950 14,212 18,381 9.0  -7 -79 -18 -7 -25  -10 -83 + 1 9 + 8  
Eating and drinking places ................. .  61]  +  4  2  
Florists ................................................... . Food stores Furniture and household appliance stores -------··--·······-·······-·--­Gasoline and service stations -----------­General merchandise stores ............... . Lumber, building material,  St St St -IOt  + 23 -1 + 11 -1 -16  + 21 9 + 9 + ••  SULPHUR SPRINGS (pop. 9,890r) Postal r eceipts• ..........................................$ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover .......... 7,989 131,250 8,382 12,576 8.0  + 11 + 179 -11 -9  + 8 +264 +  
and hardware stores ......................... . P ostal receipts• .......................................$  -7t S25 ,545  + 15 +  + s + 8  SWEETWATER (pop. 16,283r)  
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 5,1S5,SSS  + 69  + 11  Retail sales  
Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t....$  578,727 3SS,016  - 4 ••  + 11 6  Automotive stores ................................. . Furniture and household  ••t  +  11  +  40  
Annual rate of depos it t urnover ........... . Employment (area ) ............................... . Manufacturing employment (area) .. P ercent unemployed (area) ................... .  19.0 205,000 25,025 3.2  8 + 1 + 1 s  + 17 + 3 + 5 -18  appliance stores ...................... . Postal receipts• ........................................ $ Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $  -9t 11,008 99,800 11,070  -22 -20 -8 -22  -27 -16 -62 +  
SAN MARCOS (pop. 14,300r) Postal receipts• ..........................................$  9,271  + 7  - 3  End-of-month deposits (thousands) t .. $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ....  11,176 12.0  + 1 -19  +  
Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $  3S,900 S,722  +414 + 5  -S4 -11  TAYLOR (pop. 9,071)  
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$  8,284  3  8  Retail sales  
Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  9.S  +  7  - 6  Automotive  stores  ..t  + 45  + 49  
Postal  receipts•  ....................................... $  7,551  - 4  -9  
SAN SABA (pop. 3,400) Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t . $ Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... .  3,375 4,251 9.4  -21 -4 -15  + 13 -3 + 18  Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t..$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  27,880 7,101 12,881 S.4  + 33 -17 -5 -12  + 9 + 10 1 + 8  
SEGUIN (pop. 14,000r) P ostal r eceipts• ........................................ $  9,945  -11  - 4  TEMPLE (pop. 33,912•) Retail sales  
Building permits, less federal contracts $ Bank debits (thousands) ............. $ End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$  50,S23 8,211 14,022  + 10 -15 -1  +139 -2 -10  Apparel stores ........................ . Drug stores ............................. . Furniture and household  -ISt 4t  5 5  -9 + 17  
Annual rate of deposit  turnover ......... .  7.0  - 14  + 9  appliance  stores  ............. .  9t  + 15  +  
SHERMAN (pop. 3l,269r) Retail sales ................................................. .  - 4t  - 3  + 5  Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ....... . P ostal receipts• ......................................... $  I t 34,879  + + 14  + 82 + 18  
Apparel  stores  ..................................... .  -1st  -38  -16  Building permits, less federal contracts $  12S,185  -86  -66  
Automotive  stores  ............................... .  ..t  + 13  + 5  Bank debits  (thousands )  ........................$  20,9S4  -11  + 14  
Furniture and household  
appliance stores ............................... . Lumber, building material, and hardware stores ....................... .  9t It  -7 -18  + 13 ••  TEXARKANA (pop. 50,784r) Retail sales  
P ostal  receipts•  ........................................ $  29,257  + 17  + 9  Apparel  stor es  -1s t  +  -10  
Building permits, less federal contracts $  453,92S  +312  +ioo  Furniture and household  
Bank debits  (thousands)  ........................$  23 ,lSl  -18  appliance stores ................. .  - 9t  -14  -U  
E nd-of-month deposits (thousands) t ....$ Annual rate of deposit turnover ......... .  19,S44 14.3  + 2 -15  P ostal receipts•§ ...................................... $ Building permits, less federal contracts§$  46,007 175,796  -19 +182  -2 + 80  
Bank debits  (thousands)  ........................ $  42,806  -12  + 8  
SMITHVILLE (pop. 3,373r) Postal r eceipt s• ........................................ $ Building permits, less federal contracts $  1,958 8,000  + 14 -Sl  + 54  End-of-month deposits (thousands) t§ $ Annual r ate of deposit turnover ........... . Employment (area) ............................. .  lS,333 15.0 29,250  -2 -10 ••  + +  
Bank debits  (thousands)  ........................ $  1,084  -15  + 27  Manufacturing employment (area )  ..  3,S40  +  +  
End-of-month  deposits  (thousands) t ..$  2,30S  - 1  - 6  P ercent unemployed (area)  ....................  8.8  +  2  
Annual  rate of deposit  turnover  ....... .  5.S  - 14  + 33  
For explanation of symbols, see pa.ire 28.  

TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW 
Percent Change Percent Change 
Feb 1960 Feb 1960 Feb 1960 Feb 1960 Feb from from F eb from from City and item 1960 J an 1960 Feb 1959 City and item 1960 Jan 1960 Feb 1959 
TEXAS CITY (pop. 30,000r ) WACO (pop. 101,824-r) 
Retail sales R etail sales .............................................. . -4t -18 -8 
Apparel stores ....................................... . -18t -22 + 14 Apparel stores ...................................... .. -18t -40 -12 
Lumber, building m aterial, and Florists .................................................... .. + 23 + 17 

hardware stores . --····-············· -1 t -8 -24 Furniture and household Postal receipts• ......................................... $ 21,046 + 1 + 5 appliance stores .............................. .. -15 25
-9t + 
Building permits, less federal contracts $ 755,897 +236 +241 General merchandise stores .............. .. -lOt -15 4 Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 19,760 -5 Lumber, building material, and End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t ..$ 12,403 + 2 + 2. 
hardware stores --·--·-------·-······· .. ········---l t -1 Annual rate of deposit turno-.er .......... .. 19.3 -10 2 Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 147,457 + 11 Employment (area) .............................. .. 51,100 •• + 4 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 797,582 -50 -18 
Manufacturing (area) ....................... . 10,960 •• •• Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 100,746 9 + 7 
Percent unemployed (area) ................... . 6.1 -2. -19 

End-of-months deposits (thousands) t ..$ 67,211 -1 -5 Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 17.9 -6 + 13TYLER (pop. 56,725r ) Employment (area) ............................... .. 47,850 •• + 2 
Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 87,009 + 10 •• Manufacturing employment (a rea) .. 10,120 3

+ + 
Buildinir permits, less federal oontracts $ 507,252 + 40 -38 Percent unemployed (area ) .................. .. 6.0 •• + 2 
Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 82,029 5 + 
End-of-month deposits (thou&and) t . $ 58,927 3 2 

WESLACO (pop. 16,300")
Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 16.4 2 + 4 

Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 9,647 + 16 + 18 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 47,143 -73 -74
VERNON (pop. 12,684-r ) 
Bank debits (thousands) ........................$ 6,820 -29 + 30 

Postal receipts• ..... .............................. $ 10,092 -5 + 9 

End-of-month deposits (thousands ) t ..$ 5,070 + + 13 Building permits, Jess federal contracts $ 67,500 -54 -53 
Annual rate of deposit turnover ............ 16.2 -28 + 17 

Bank debits (thousands) ........................ $ 11,833 -16 3 
End-of-month deposits (thousands) t ..$ 18,777 -1 9 
Annual rate of deposit turonver ............ 7.5 -13 + 7 WICHITA FALLS (pop. 1 03,152r) 

Retail sales VICTORIA (pop. 44,188r ) Automotive stores ------·----·-----··--···-·····-··· + 4 + 22 Retail sales 4t + 6 + 8 Furniture and household
-···--------··························--··--···--· ­-------------··········· ·········· + 23 + 9

Automotive stores ..t appliance stores ---------------·-----············· -9t -24 8 
Eating and drinking places 5t + 7 7 Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 108,084 + 3 + 2. 

······-········ 
Food stores Building permits, less federal contracts $ 884,177 -47 + 2
··············-······-··--·--················· 5t 3 + 5 Furniture and household Bank debits (thousands ............................$ 111,406 -12 + 7 
appliance stores End-of-months deposits (thousands)! ..$ 101,0·28 4 5
------------············-········· 9t + 8 + 43 Lumber, building material, and Annual rate of deposit turnover ........... . 13.0 3 + 13 
Employment (area) ............................. .. 40,550 2

hardware stores ··-···-------------·-············· 1 t -12 -8 + + Postal receipts• .......................................... $ 27,866 -7 -8 Manufacturing employment (area) 8,690 + 3 Building permits, less federal contracts $ 91,500 69 36 Present unemployment (area) .......... .. 6.4 + 10
-
-
bp)Ofma\ wtlmata han Ileen adjuated to first quart.r 1959 henchniarka. 
t Normal ~alchanire from December to .Janual')'. 
• For the period Febl'U&17 8-:March '· 
flteported 117 the Bureau of Bualneu and Economic Research, University of Houston, for Harrla County. 
i lloney on depoalt at the end of the month, but excludes deposits to the credit of banks. 
P Revlaed for -by the Tau Highway Department. 
• 1960 Urbanhied Censua • 
.. Cbaqe bl -than on•half of one percnt. 
f Plau-are for Texarkana, Texas (pop. 81,061) only. 

APltIL 1960 
BAROMETERS OF TEXAS BUSINESS 

Year-to-date averageFeb Jan Feb 1960 1960 1969 1960 
GENERAL BUSINESS ACTIVITY  
tTexas business activity, index .................. ............................................................. .. Miscellaneous freight carloadings in SW District, index ................................. .. Ordinary life insurance sales, index ..................................................................... .. Wholesale prices in U.S., unadjusted index ........................................................ . iconsumers' prices in Houston, unadjusted index .............................................. .. .. Consumers' prices in U.S., unadjusted index ...................................................... .  238 80 423 119.4 125.6 125.6  219 82 387 119.3 125.4  215 74 401 119.5 124.1 123.7  229 81 405 119.4 125.6 125.5  213 77 403 119.5 124.1 123.8  
Income payments to individuals in U.S. (billions, at seasonally adjusted annual rate ) ...................................................................................... . Business failures (number) ....................................................... ........................... . Newspaper advertising, index ................................................................................ .  s  393.o• 41 176.6  s  392.8r 39 177.1  s  371.0 37 173.0  s 392.9 40 176.9  s 370.0 36 172.3  
TRADE  
Total retail sales, index ............... .......................................................................... .. Durable-goods stores ....................................................................................... .. Nondurable-goods stores ................................................................................ . Ratio of credit sales to net sales in department and apparel stores ................ . Ratio of collections to outstandings in department and apparel stores .......... .  215• 161° 243• 69.9. 35.8•  224r 152r 262r 66.2• 31.0•  213r 155r 243r 69.6r 35.7r  68.1• 36.4.  66.9r 37.3r  
PRODUCTION  
Total electric power consumption, index ....................... ..................................... . Industrial electric power consumption, index .................................................... . Crude oil production, index .................................................................................. . Crude oil runs to stills, index ................................................................................ . Gasoline consumption, index ..................................... .......................................... .. Total industrial production, index ........................................................................ . Total manufactures, index .............................. ................................ ........................ .  394• 416. 124• 148 173 210  375r 385r 117r 148 176 172 213  347r 36lr 122 152 183 167 198  385. 401• 121 148 173 212  348 359 124 150 187 169 200  
Durable manufactures, index ........................... .................................... ........ ..  247  249  237  248  236  
Nondurable manufactures, index ................................................................. . .  194  196  180  195  183  
Mineral production, index ...................................................... ............................. . Industrial production in U.S., index .....................................................................  137 167°  133 168  137 155r  135 168.  140 154r  
Southern pine production, index ......................................................... ....................  76  74  76  
Cottonseed crushed, index ...................................................................................... ..  153  154  150  
Construction authorized, index ........................................................................... ..  210  200r  235  205  237  
Residential building ........................................................... ............................ ..  220  226r  279  223  294  
Nonresidential building ........................... ....................................................... .  204  167r  179  186  173  
Cement shipments, index ........................................................................................ .  1'51  141  181  146  195  
Cement production, index .......................................................................................  121  158  187  140  176  
Cement consumption, index .................................................................................. .  147  135  180  141  192  
Average daily production per oil well (bbls. ) ............................................... .  14.4  13.8  15.1  14.1  15.2  
AGRICULTURE  
Prices received by farmers, unadjusted index, 1909-14=100 .......................... .  255  261  279  258  280  
P rices paid by farmers in U.S., unadjusted index, 1904-14 =  100 ................... ..  299  299  297  299  298  
Ratio of Texas farm prices received to U.S. prices paid by farmers ............ ...... .  85  87  94  86  94  
FINANCE  
Bank debits, index ........ ......................................................................................... ..  284  261  257  273  254  
Bank debits, U.S., index ....................................................................................... ..  251  228  221  239  221  
Reporting member banks, Dallas Reserve District:  
§Loans (millions) ................................................................... .......................... ..  $ 2,833  s 2,859  s 2,728  s 2,846  s 2,730  
§Loans and investments (millions) ................................................................ . Adjusted demand deposits (millions) .......................................................... . Revenue receipts of the State Comptroller (thousands) ................................. .. Federal Internal Revenue collections (thousands) .............................................  s 4,429 s 2,631 s 91,265 $350,929  s 4,463 $ 2,647 s 93,719 $219,972  s 4,479 s 2,879 s 72,764 $327,479  s 4,446 s 2,639 $ 92,492 $285,451  $ 4,489 s 2,838 s 81,481 $282,610  
LABOR  
Total nonagricultural employment (thousands) .. .............................................. . Total manufacturing employment (thousands) ........................................ .  2,476.8• 488.4.  2,474.8r 488.4r  2,420.3r 477.2r  2,475.8• 488.4.  2,423.0r 478.lr  
Durable-goods employment (thousands) ..... ........................................  232.3.  232.5r  230.6r  232.4.  229.3r  
Nondurable-goods employment (thousands) ..................................... ..  256.1 •  255.9r  246.6r  256.o•  248.8r  
Total civilian labor force in 17 labor market areas (thousands) ....................... . Employment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) ......... , ........................ . Manufacturing employment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) .  2,197.8 2,021.6 379.0  2,192.4 2,017.5 379.7  2,072.5 1,893.5 356.4  2,195.1 2,019.6 379.4  2,071.7 7,895.9 357.9  
Total unemployment in 17 labor market areas (thousands) .................... .  112.5  110.8  117.6  11 1.7  117.0  
Percent of labor force unemployed in 17 labor market areas .......... .  5.1  5.1  5.7  5.1  5.7  

All figures are for Texas unless otherwise indicated. All indexes are based on the average months for 1947-49, except where indicated; all ara adjusted for seasonal variation, except annual indexes. Employment estimates have been adjusted to first quarter 1956 benchmarks. 
• P reliminary. 
t Based on bank debits in 20 cities, adjusted for price level. 
t Index computed for February, May, August, and November only. 
§ Exclusive of loans to banko after deduction of valuation reserves. 
r Revised. 

TEXAS BUSINESS REVIEW