No. 4209 March 1, 1942 FAMILY MOBILITY IN DALLAS, TEXAS, 1923-1938 Carl M. Rosenquist and Walter Gordon Browder Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences With the Assistance of the Work Projects Administration Official Project No. 665-66-3-183 !f /f. 1T i"'U LI <.•· PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AUSTIN Additional copies of this publication may be procured free of charge from the University Publications, The University of Texas, Austin, Texas The University of Texas Publication No. 4209: March 1, 1942 FAMILY MOBILITY IN DALLAS, TEXAS, 1923--1938 Carl M. Rosenquist and Walter Gordon Browder Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences With the Auiatance of the Work Projects Administration Official Project No. 665-66-3-183 PUBLISHED BY THE UNIVERSITY FOUR TIMES A MONTH AND ENTERED AS •EC:OND•CLASS MATTER AT THE POST OFFICli AT AUSTIN, TEXAS, UNDER THE ACT OF AUGUST 24, 1912 The benefits of education and of useful knowledge, generally diffused through a community, are eaaential to the preservation of a free govern• ment, Sam Houston. Cultivated mind is the guardian genius of Democracy, and while guided and controlled by virtue, the noblest attribute of man. It is the only dictator that freemen acknowledge, and the only security which freemen desire. Mirabeau B. Lamar. TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Preface and Acknowledgments____________________________ __ ______________________________________________ 5 Introduction --------------···---------------------·-------------------------------·············-···············---···· 7 Socio-Economic Areas of Dallas .......................................................................... 12 Family Changes and Density .............................................................................. 19 Family Size .......................................................................................................... 20 Families Reporting Employment ........................................................................ 21 New Families in Dallas ····--·············-··········································-------···-··-·········· 22 Residence Changes-Inter-City Movement of Families .................................. 23 Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Movment of Families .................................. 24 Dwelling Units Owner-Occupied ........................................................................ 26 Occupied Dwelling Units .................................................................................... 27 Stability of Residence Within Tracts .................................................................. 28 Summary and Conclusions ··································-····---·······················-····-······--··· 28 FIGURES 1. Dallas County Census Tracts ------------------·····-·---------------------------------------------------····---------------·-· 11 2. Socio-Economic Areas of Dallas ·-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 TABLES 1. Number of Families per Square Mile for Selected Years, by Census Tracts................ 30 2. Changes in Number and Per Cent of Families for Selected Years, by Census Tracts.... 31 3. Number of Persons per Family Seventeen Years of Age and Older, for Selected Years, by Census Tracts ·-------------------------------···-----------------------------------------------------·---------------------32 4-A. Families Not Reporting Employment for Selected Years, by Number and Per cent, by Census Tracts --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------33 4-B. Families Reporting Employment for Selected Years, by Number and Per Cent, by Census Tracts -------------------------------------------------------------------·------------------------------------------------34 5. New Families as Per Cent of Total Families, for Selected Years, by Census Tracts.... 35 6. Residence Changes-Inter-City Movements of Families for Selected Years, by Census Tracts -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------·-----------·-··--····-----------------36 7. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Movement of Families for Selected Years, by Census Tracts ------------·---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------38 8. Dwelling Units Occupied by Owner, for Selected Years, by Census Tracts-------------------· 40 9. Vacant Dwelling Units for Selected Years, by Census Tracts -----------------------------------------· 41 10. Dwelling Units Occupied for Selected Years, by Number of Families, Number of Units, Families per Unit, and Units per Family, by Census Tracts ------------------------42 11. Occupied Dwelling Units for Selected Years, by Number and Per Cent of Total Occupied Units, and by Census Tracts ·-----------------------------·-------------------------------------------43 12. Stability of Residence Within Census Tracts, by Number and Per Cent of Families Remaining in Tract for Selected Years ----------·--·········-···----------·-----------------------·--····--··-44 MAPS PAGE 1. Number of Families per Square Mile, 1923 ........................................................................ 45 2. Number of Families per Square Mile, 1929 ........................................................................ 46 3. Number of Families per Square Mile, 1933-34 .................................................................. 47 4. Number of Families per Square Mile, 1938 ........................................................................ 48 5. Changes in Number of Families, 1923-24 ............................................................................ 49 6. Changes in Number of Families, 1929-30 ............................................................................ 50 7. Changes in Number of Families, 1933-35 ............................................................................ 51 8. Changes in Number of Families, 1937-38 ............................................................................ 52 9. Persons per Family 17 Years of Age and Older, 1923 ........................................................ 53 10. Persons per Family 17 Years of Age and Older, 1929 ........................................................ 54 11. Persons per Family 17 Years of Age and Older, 1933-34 .................................................. 55 12. Persons per Family 17 Years of Age and Older, 1938 ........................................................ 56 13. Families Reporting Employment, 1923 ................................................................................ 57 14. Families Reporting Employment, 1929 ................................................................................ 58 15. Families Reporting Employment, 1344--34 .......................................................................... 59 16. Families Reporting Employment, 1938 ................................................................................ 60 17. New Families as Per Cent of Total Families, 1923-24 ...................................................... 61 18. New Families as Per Cent of Total Families, 1929-30 ·······················-····························· 62 19. New Families as Per Cent of Total Families, 1933-35 ...................................................... 63 20. New Families as Per Cent of Total Families, 1937-38 ...................................................... 64 21. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves In, 1923-24 ............................................................ 65 22. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves In, 1929-30 ............................................................ 66 23. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves In, 1933-35 ............................................................ 67 24. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves In, 1937-38 ............................................................ 68 25. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves Out, 1923-24 .......................................................... 69 26. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves Out, 1929-30 .......................................................... 70 27. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves Out, 1933-35 .......................................................... 71 28. Residence Changes-Inter-City Moves Out, 1937-38 .......................................................... 72 29. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves Out, 1923-24 ........................................................ 73 30. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves Out, 1929-30 ........................................................ 74 31. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves Out, 1933-35 ........................................................ 75 32. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves Out, 1937-38 ........................................................ 76 33. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves In, 1923-24 .......................................................... 77 34. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves In, 1929-30 .......................................................... 78 35. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves In, 1933-35 .......................................................... 79 36. Residence Changes-Inter-Tract Moves In, 1937-38 .......................................................... 80 37. Owner-Occupied Dwelling Units, 1927 ................................................................................ 81 38. Owner-Occupied Dwelling Units, 1930 ................................................................................ 82 39. Owner-Occupied Dwelling Units, 1933-34 .......................................................................... 83 40. Owner-Occupied Dwelling Units, 1938 ................................................................................ 84 41. Number of Families per Occupied Dwelling Unit, 1923 .................................................... 85 42. Number of Families per Occupied Dwelling Unit, 1929 .................................................... 86 43. Number of Families per Occupied Dwelling Unit, 1933-34 .............................................. 87 44. Number of Families per Occupied Dwelling Unit, 1938 .................................................... 88 45. Occupied Residential Units, 1923 .......................................................................................... 89 46. Occupied Residential Units, 1929 .......................................................................................... 90 47. Occupied Residential Units, 1933-34 .................................................................................... 91 48. Occupied Residential Units, 1938 .......................................................................................... 92 49. Families Remaining in Tract in Successive Years, 1923-24 .............................................. 93 50. Families Remaining in Tract in Successive Years, 1929-30 .............................................. 94 51. Families Remaining in Tract in Successive Years, 1933-35 .............................................. 95 52. Families Remaining in Tract in Successive Years, 1937-38 .............................................. 96 PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The significance of demographic studies for social science is well estab­lished, and their importance for administrative and ameliorative planning is emerging with increasing sharpness. There has existed, however, an unfor­tunate lack of data upon which definitive studies of demographic processes can be based; at best, the gathering of relevant material is a long and tedious task. In their search for adequate materials and methods, students of popu­lation are coming to depend to an increasing extent upon the utilization of local sources, such as school censuses, records of public utility companies, etc. The perfection of statistical methods for the refinement of data of this kind is resulting in the release of much useful material. In an earlier study of this series (Population Mobility in Austin, Texas, 1929-1931) the use of city directories as sources of information regarding the mobility of urban populations was suggested, and a technique partially developed. In this study of family mobility in Dallas, 1923-1938, the pos­sibilities of the use of city directories are further explored, and the method is applied to a larger city over a longer period of time. The results of the study are presented in this publication. The study, which was begun in the Fall of 1938, is the second in the series of studies of Texas population, conducted by the Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences of The University of Texas. The study was made with the co-operation of the Work Projects Administration, which supplied clerical labor and project supervision. Many people have contributed their services in the course of the survey. Among these is Mr. Douglas W. Oberdorfer, formerly Technical Supervisor. Appreciation is due Mr. David G. Steinicke and Mr. Clyde Irion, who kindly permitted the use of materials gathered for their Master's theses at Southern Methodist University. Dr. Walter T. Watson, Professor of Sociology at Southern Methodist University, furnished useful information concerning the census tracts in Dallas. Mr. Richard D. McCrum gave invaluable assistance as project supervisor; he aided in working out many technical points in the study. Finally, grateful acknowledgment is extended to Dr. Warner E. Gettys, Director of the Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences, for his constant aid and encouragement throughout the course of the study. CARL M. RosENQUIS'f, WALTER GORDON BROWDER. Austin, Texas December 1941 FAMILY MOBILITY IN DALLAS, TEXAS, 1923-1938 INTRODUCTION This study of the mobility of the population of Dallas, Texas, is the second in a series of population studies of Texas cities conducted by the Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences of The University of Texas. The firs~ study in the series dealt with the mobility of the population in Austin durmg the period 1929-1931,1 and was designed primarily as a test of the potentialities of the city directory as a source of data for this general type of survey. The results obtained from the Austin study appeared significant enough to warrant the application of the technique employed to a wider range of data, and the methodology has subsequently been used in studies of population mobility in Dallas and Houston. These studies were set up and conducted as research projects with the assistance of the Work Projects Administration. A comprehensive description of the use of city directories as sources of data in the investigation of population mobility, consisting of a detailed presentation of the method followed both in the Austin study and the present study, has been prepared and published as a separate release by the Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences.2 Briefly stated, the method consists of the tracing of entries through a series of directories, noting changes which occur from year to year in address, number of persons in family, employ­ment, marital status, and other information given in the directory. New names appearing in directories later than the first of the series, and names disappearing from the series, were assumed respectively to indicate movement into and out of the city. Changes in addresses of families listed in the directories from year to year furnished information on intra-city mobility. In addition to the name file entries, a complete file of addresses was obtained from the directories, and changes in occupancy and usage noted. Through the use of a street index prepared especially for the survey, all addresses were related to a census tract basis. All transcriptions, sorting, and tabulating were done manually by W.P.A. workers; all tables, maps, and charts were prepared by W.P.A. labor. The survey was begun in the Fall of 1938 and was completed in early 1941. Prior to this survey, comparatively little research had been done on the mobility of population in Dallas. Impetus to general research on the popu­lation of the city had been given by the Department of Sociology at South­ern Methodist University; under the direction of Dr. Walter T. Watson, students in that institution have produced a number of studies of the social and economic characteristics of the city. Among these studies, those by tPopulation Mobilitr in Austin, Texas, 1929-1931. Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences, Austin, 1941. 2The Use of Citr Directories in the Studr of Urban Populations: A Methodological Note. Bureau of Research in the Social Sciences, Austin, The University of Texas, 1942. Steinicke8 and Irion4 are particularly valuable for information leading to an appraisal of the data collected in this study. With the exception of these two, however, little if any information concerning the population of Dallas is available. Of this dearth of information, Steinicke wrote: It is evident that Dallas is not without exact and comprehensive informa­tion about itself in terms of both its corporate limits and the larger metro­politan district. When, however, data are sought for smaller units in order to understand the composition of the population and to know the differential rates for various social phenomena, little if anything is available. Even the meager statistics that are obtainable do not apply to uniform areas but rather to makeshift districts which happen to suit the maker but whose relation­ship to any other distribution is nil or at best uncertain. Two definite needs are now evident. One is that we have data in terms of small units; the second and related to the first is that these small units be acceptable to and utilized by as many as possible of the fact-gathering and fact-furnishing agencies, both public and private, within the city.5 The first of these needs is met by the census tract, the unit of research used as a geographic basis of this study. Census tracts are small, homogene­ous areas within the city, possessing similar characteristics in terms of pop­ulation, land use, ethnic groups, general economic level, and other social and economic elements. Because the census tract does possess this homogeneous nature, it lends itself most conveniently to utilization as the basis of urban population research. Although the Bureau of the Census first conceived of the census tract both as an administrative and a research unit,6 emphasis has been placed subsequently upon its value in statistical research. The Bureau of the Census has recognized the significance of population and general social and economic data for the census tract by releasing, preliminary to the pub­lication of the complete census of 1940, population figures for the tract cities as well as certain related information by census tracts. The utility of the census tract has been further demonstrated by the increasing number of population studies based on this unit. In common with other large cities, Dallas has a census tract plan devel­oped by a local Census Tract Committee and approved by the Bureau of the Census. The present study of the mobility of the population in Dallas is in part an attempt to supply a body of data accumulated in terms of these small, standard areas, and which will have value not only in furnishing necessary and useful descriptive material, but also in presenting data useful for larger comparative studies of the city. That the second need suggested by Steinicke is being met to an ever­increasing extent is indicated by the number of separate investigations which asteinicke, David G., Population Characteristics of Dallas by Census Tracts, unpublished thesis, Southern Methodist University, 1938. 4lrion, Clyde, A Study of Neighboring in Dallas, unpublished thesis, Southern Methodist University, 1940. 5Steinicke, op. cit., pp. 7-8. 6See Green and Truesdell, Census Tracts in American Cities, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1937. have been conducted on a census tract basis since the inception of the study herein described. The welfare agencies in the city have shown considerable interest in the possibilities of the census tract for research and administra­tive purposes, while the public school authorities have co-operated in a study of student enrollment and attendance by census tracts. A study of mortality and natality has been made on the same basis, and the citv and The Univer­sity of Texas are jointly sponsoring a study of the mobility of occupational groups within the city. Less important perhaps than the establishment and description of small basic units of research, but nonetheless necess HY to an adequate interpre­tation of the data, is an understanding of the larger metropolitan area extending beyond the limits of the city . .It is a familiar fact that the population of the corporate city frequently gives a very inadequate idea of the population masses in and around the city, constituting the "greater city," as it is sometimes called; and that as regards large cities in few cases do the boundaries of the city limit the urban population which that city represents or of which it is the center. The suburbs are from many standpoints as much a part of the city as the area which is under the municipal government. . . . 1£ we are to have a cor­rect picture of the massing and concentration of population in extensive urban areas, and of the size and relative importance of the aggregation of urban population in different parts of the country, it is necessary to estab­lish metropolitan districts which will show the magnitude of each of the principal population centers taken as a whole, by including in a single total both the population of the central city itself and that of the suburbs or urbanized areas surrounding it. 7 With these facts in mind, both as regards the importance of the smaller units of research and the larger metropolitan district embracing them, a con­sideration of the development of Dallas and its ecology is presented. The city of Dallas, located on the Trinity River, is shaped roughly like an hour­glass, the river forming a narrow waist from which the city expands north and south. The business and industrial portions, and most of the choice residential sections, are located on the north bank of the river. The south­ern portion of the city is largely occupied by residential areas of low and medium-income families. The areas of high-income families are located in the northernmost tracts of the city. (See descripticn of Dallas census tracts below.) The development of Dallas has been largely due to the excellent trans­portation facilities centering in the city. Although it is an important indus­trial center, especially for automobile assembling, machine shop products, cotton-gin machinery, oil-well machinery, cement, furniture and fixtures, printing, saddlery, cotton goods, clothing, cottonseed products, and bever­ages, Dallas is primarily a distributing and financial center. It ranked as the sixteenth city in the country in 1935 in the amount of net sales in wholesale distribution;8 and it is one of the leading cities in the nation for 7Fifteenth Census of the United States, 1930, Metropolitan Districts, p. 5. 8See Census of Business, taken in 1935 by the United States Department of C~mmerce. all types of insurance. It is the financial center of Texas, having the Fed­eral Reserve Bank of the Eleventh District. Founded in 1842, Dallas has grown rapidly, reporting a population of almost 300,000 in 1940. The rate of growth, while great, has not been as large as the rate of other large Texas cities. The following table gives the population and per cent of increase for each decade since 1900: Year Population Per Cent of Increase 1900 42,638 1910 92,104 116.0 1920 158,976 72.6 1930 260,475 63.8 1940 293,306 12.6 The slowing down of the rate of growth of Dallas is no doubt caused in part by the fact that, as a financial and distributive center, it was harder hit during the depression years than other cities in the State which depend to a greater degree upon the extractive industries and exploitation of natural resources. Houston, for example, did not show a comparable decrease in rate of growth over the same period. While the prediction of future population trends is not within the province of this study, it may be suggested that with returning prosperity and the establishment of national defense industries, Dallas may well expect a sharper increase in population during the present decade than it had between 1930 and 1940. The areal expansion of Dallas has been north and south from the Trinity River, since the river bottoms are low and largely unfit for residential or industrial usage. Levees extending along either bank of the river tend to discourage development along the stream, and to direct all growth to the northern and southern portions of the city. The gross ecology of Dallas, therefore, is determined by the physical configuration of the city. Inspection of the map of Dallas suggests that any such schematic device as the series of concentric circles of urban growth hypothecated by Burgess0 needs con­siderable qualification before it could be applied. For this study, the sig­nificance of the shape and the pattern of expansion of the city lies in their effect on the movement of the population within the city. Even before data are collected on the mobility of the population, observation would suggest that the main stream of intra-city mobility in Dallas has followed the north­south line of expansion of the city, while smaller streams of intra-city move­ment have occurred within the two chief divisions, northern and southern. The significance of the larger metropolitan district, as suggested above, is recognized in this study. Thus the area under consideration here includes not only the fifty-eight census tracts within the limits of Dallas proper, but the tracts included within the adjacent cities of Highland Park and Univer­sity Park as well. In addition to this aggregate area, known as Greater Dallas, suburban tracts were laid out to include the remainder of the 9For a discussion of this scheme, see Park, Robert E., E. W . Burgess, and R. D. McKenzie, The City, University of Chicago Press, 1925. county in which Dallas is located. It is obvious that the city dominates a much more extensive area than is included even within the limits of Greater Dallas; the city directories contain many entries of persons residing in all parts of the county whose business or employment places them in close relation to the city. This study, then, while primarily devoted to the popu­lation of Dallas, embraces also the contiguous incorporated cities and the entire area of Dallas County.10 No claim, of course, is made for nearly as accurate and complete a coverage of the population of the county as for coverage of the population of Greater Dallas. The county lies in a fertile agricultural region, and it would not be expected that farmers, unless liv­ing within the city limits, would be listed in the city directory. 10See Fig. 1. Data for suburban tracts were tabulated in most instances, and are pre­sented in the tables, but are not presented in the maps. .,---·-- ­ . I ' I ' h I I I ~1 I ,... , GR .,HO ! t:? "' "' ~, I I L_________ ' EL LIS CO. DALLAS COUNTY CENSUS TRACTS FIGURE 1 Before the development of a tract plan in Dallas, Dr. Watson and his students had attempted to delimit cultural areas within the city for pur­poses of research. These first efforts resulted in the description and analysis of eight major ecological areas. In 1935, the Census Tract Committee, under the chairmanship of Dr. Watson, laid out the census tract plan of Dallas in essentially its present form. The Committee divided the city into fifty-seven tracts, which were approved by the Bureau of the Census. Later, a fifty-eighth tract, comprising a Negro colony just north of tract four, was added. At present these fifty-eight tracts include all the area within the city of Dallas proper. The Park Cities (Highland Park and University Park), independent cities adjoining but lying outside the city limits of Dallas, con­tain six tracts which were added later. For purposes of analysis and com­parison, these tracts are included in the area of Greater Dallas; except for the fact of separate municipal administrations, they are actually a part of the larger city. In this study, seven additional tracts are recognized, embrac­ing the area of Dallas County outside the limits of Greater Dallas, and considered as suburban tracts. Although all data for this survey were analyzed by census tracts, it is recognized that the census tract is a relatively new device, having little meaning for the average person. People tend to think of their cities in terms of neighborhoods and communities, which perhaps are not very meaningful statistically, because they are difficult of delimitation. In most cities, however, certain sections come to be generally recognized and accepted, and may be bounded quite accurately. In such cases, these sec­tions of the city may have considerable value, descriptively and analyti­cally, in bridging the gap between the small census tract, at one extreme, and the metropolitan district, at the other. The ecological areas of Dallas, described by Watson and his students and later revised by Irion,11 coincide closely with the generally accepted sections of the city. In order to simplify the interpretation of the data presented in this study, the census tracts are considered as units in the larger sections of the city, as well as entities within the city as a whole. The areas, nine in number, are named as follows: The Park Cities, Oak Lawn, North Dallas, East Dallas, Mount Auburn, South Dallas, the Downtown area, Oak Cliff, and Trinity Heights. Reference to Figure 2 will show the location of these sections within the city, and will indicate the census tracts which make up each section. For a more detailed description of the fifty-eight census tracts of Dallas, the reader is referred to the thesis of Steinicke.12 Soc10-EcoNOMlC AREAS OF DALLAS The Park Cities, Highland Park and University Park, are actually sepa­rate, incorporated cities, although they are contiguous to the northern bound­ary of Dallas. For purposes of research, the Park Cities may validly be 11Jrion, Clyde, A Study of Neighboring in Dallas. 12Steinicke, David G., Population Characteristics of Dallas by Census Tracts. considered as part of Dallas. In this study the six tracts lying within the Park Cities are identified by the letter "D" preceding the tract number; tracts D-1, D-2, and D-3 are located within University Park, and tracts D-4, D-5, and D-6 are located in Highland Park. SOCIO -ECONOM IC AREAS · CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. FIGURE 2 The Park Cities are almost completely residential in character, and con­tain some of the most exclusive residential areas in Greater Dallas--the so-called "Gold Coast" sections of the city. University Park, the more northerly of the Park Cities, is dominated to a large extent by Southern Methodist University, located in tract D-2. This helps to account for the fact that the Park Cities contain a larger percentage of persons listed in Who's Who and the Dallas Blue Book than any other sections of the city. Types of residences within the Park Cities range from small student apart­ments around the university to large and expensive residences in the restricted areas. Several small shopping centers, the largest of which is located near the university, have developed in University Park; and there is a rather extensive retail shopping center in Highland Park. An indica­tion of the higher-than-average economic status of the Park Cities is the absence of any unpaved strees in the section. Oak Lawn contains tracts 4, 5, 6, and 58. Extending in a northwesterly direction, and pushing the city limits into something of a gerrymander shape, this section presents some interesting contrasts. Tract 4 has devel­oped in comparatively recent years, and contains, in addition to semi-rural residences of families of low socio-economic status, Love Field, the munic­ipal airport; Bachman's Lake, a resort center; and a Federal Housing Project. Tract 58, which was originally a part of tract 4, is a Negro colony known locally as "Elm Thicket." Tract 5 is an area in transition from a once-fine residential section to an apartment house area. It now contains several hospitals, clinics, and many apartment houses and hotels, as well as several parks. It is classed by Irion as a deteriorating section. Tract 6 was earlier an exclusive, residential section which is now slowly deteriorat­ing, containing many well-built residences showing definite signs of phys­ical decay. Part of the tract still contains some rather fine residences. A rapidly expanding retail shopping center is developing within the tract. Nor th Dallas is coterminous with tract 7. It is an area of substantial frame dwellings, and contains a small Negro colony. A small apartment section is located in the tract, and there is a developing community shap­ing center. East Dallas is composed of tracts 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, and 15. The greater portion of the area is populated by substantial, upper middle­class families of moderate income. Tract 1 is a recently developed, some­what exclusive residential area. The northern part of tract 2 is a recent residential development. Most parts of tracts 2, 3, 10, and 11 are charac­terized by one-story brick dwellings. Tracts 10 and 11 contain apartment house areas, and Greenville A venue, which separates these two tracts, is a rapidly expanding retail shopping and community center. Tracts 8 and 9 contain rooming and apartment house areas. Tract 10 is known as Vickery Place, and is characterized by a monotonous sameness of housing and occupation of the residents. Tract 11 is known locally as Belmont Addition. Tracts 13, 14, and 15 are in the process of conversion from once exclusive Family Mobility in Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 residential areas to rooming and apartment house areas. Tract 14 is gener­ally known in the city as Munger Place, and residents of the area have been very influential in the life of the city. Many of the old "first families" of the city still remain here, and large residences and spacious lawns give evidence of the former period of wealth and influence. In tract 15, the process of converting old homes into rooming houses has gone further than in any other part of East Dallas. According to Steinicke, a spot map of stenographers' addresses indicated an exceptionally high proportion of that occupational group in tract 15. Mount Auburn contains tracts 12, 23, 24, 25, and 26. There is a small subdivision of upper middle-class homes, but the area as a whole is char­acterized by the homes of working men's families. The houses are prepon­derantly small frame structures, fronting on unpaved streets. Steinicke found that many of the structures in tract 23, originally built for one family, were accommodating two families. Tracts 23 and 25 contain small Negro settlements. South Dallas, composed of tracts 27, 28, 29, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, and 40, is a section of heterogeneous population elements. Both white and Negro families live in the area, and there are several parts of the area in which the inhabitants are almost exclusively Jewish. There are two Negro colonies in tract 27; the white families in the tract live in small, unattrac­tive frame dwellings. About half of tract 28 is taken up by Fair Park, the state fair grounds. The fair grounds are surrounded by small homes inter­spersed with rooming and boarding houses. Business establishments are rapidly encroaching on the area. Tract 29, although still predominantly a residential area, is marked by considerable business and industry. The tract is divided by a railroad, along which extends a slum section. Tract 34 con­tains a mixed population of Jewish, Slavic, and Negro families. Large cot­ton mills and warehouses are located within the tract. The principal Jewish settlements in the city are located in tracts 35 and 36. Tract 35 contains the residences of the wealthier Jewish families; the families in tract 36 belong to a considerably lower income group, in general, than those in tract 35. Steinicke found that the families in tract 36 evinced much pride in ownership of their homes, and considerable interest and co-operation in community affairs. Tract 37 contains two Negro colonies; there are few white families in the area. Tract 38, an area of predominantly white pop­ulation lying between two Negro tracts, is marked by racial and religious conflict, according to Steinicke. Tract 39 is an undeveloped, largely rural section. It contains a Negro settlement in which the homes of a few white families are found. There is a small, thickly populated Mexican colony in the northern portion of the tract. In 1938, this tract ranked first among all tracts in houses with no running water; first in houses with no indoor toilet; and .first in houses with no gas or electrictiy.13 Tract 40 is a white residential area now entering into a transitional stage. It is characterized lSSteinicke, op. cit., p. 181. by small, inexpensive cottages, many of them displaying "Room for Rent" signs. This tract ranked first in number of juvenile gangs in 1938.14 On the whole, South Dallas is one of the least attractive sections of the city, and it is among the least stable, socially and economically. Ethnic and cultural conflict, coupled with a population of families of low income, tend to make this section an area of social and economic pathology. The Downtown area of Dallas, comprising tracts 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 22, 30, 31, 32, and 33, contains the central business district of the city, and includes areas of intense social and personal disorganization. This section is marked by high land values, low rents in the residential areas, and slums, the results of the invasion of the central business and commercial district. Large colonies of Negroes, Mexicans, Italians, and other ethnic groups con­ tribute to the heterogeneous character of the population. It is an area of homeless men, vagrants, prostitutes, and homosexuals, these forming the human element in the principal vice area of the city. Tracts 16 and 17 have high proportions of Negro families in the popu­lations, and the population is extremely dense in these tracts. Tract 16 is the center of most of the Negro institutional life of the city, containing one of the two Negro high schools and the only Negro public library, Y.M.C.A., and Y.W.C.A. Tract 17 contains a small number of Mexican families. This tract ranked first in number of venereal disease cases and had the highest crude death rate in 1938.15 It is a tract of very low economic status. There is a considerable number of Mexican families in the southern part of tract 18. While parts of the tract are well-kept residential sections, it is in the process of invasion by Negro and Mexican families, as well as by business establishments. Tract 19 is known as "Little Mexico," and contains the largest Mexican settlement in the city. It was once the principal Jewish settlement, but the Jewish families have been almost completely succeeded by the Mexican population. Some degree of Mexican institutional culture now exists within the tract. It is the first place of residence for most Mexi­can families coming into the city; isolation, rather than assimilation, is the chief function of the colony. Some conception of the economic and social status of the tract may be obtained by noting that in 1938 it ranked first among all tracts in Dallas as to crude birth rate; it had the second highest crude death rate;16 it ranked first in overcrowded dwelling units; first in tuberculosis deaths; first in pellagra deaths; second in structures unfit for habitation; and second in the incidence of juvenile delinquency.11 Tract 21 is situated between Little Mexico and the central business dis­trict, and is encroached upon by both. Industrial and wholesale business activities have almost completely overrun the tract. A legalized vice area 14/bid., p. 185. 1ssteinicke, op. cit., p. 93. 16See A Study of Mortality and Natality in Dallas, Texas, 1916 through 1938. Sponsored by the Public Health Department of the City of Dallas, with the assistance of the Wark Projects Administration. Mimeographed. 1941. 11steinicke, op. cit., p. 101. ?nee flourished here; and Steinicke remarks that "although the legal status is removed, the vice remains." In 1938, tract 21 ranked first in structures ne~ding maj?r repairs; first in tenant-occupied units; first in proportion of relief cases m the population; first in number of illegitimate births; and second in tuberculosis and pellagra deaths.18 Tract 22 contains several ethnic colon~es. It is an ~rea of many rooming houses of the cheaper type. Baylor Hospital and Medical School are located in the tract; and the areas adjacent to these institutions are places of residence for a large number of medical students and nurses. The tract ranked first in number of syphilis deaths and second in juvenile delinquency in 1938.19 Tract 30 is classed as one of the blighted areas of the city. Mexican and Negro settlements, and the homes of low-income white families, are interspersed among many indus­trial plants. Vice and poverty are general characteristics of the tract. Tract 31 forms the central business district of Dallas. Few white people live in the tract outside of the hotels; it is an area of dense population during the day, and relatively sparse population at night. There is a considerable number of Negro, Chinese, and Japanese families in the tract. Tracts 32 and 33 have deteriorated from once-fashionable residental sections to areas of business and industry. Many small hotels and rooming houses are located in the tracts, and vice is prevalent. These tracts are probably the chief areas of prostitution, dope selling, and general delinquency in the city. A considerable portion of the population in these tracts are public welfare cases, or are receiving relief of some sort. The entire downtown area fol­lows closely the pattern generally accepted as typical of such areas: the central business district surrounded by interstitial and transitional sections of the city in the process of invasion by the central district, and the entire area marked by social pathology and d1sorganization. Oak Cliff, lying immediately on the south side of the Trinity River, con­tains tracts 20, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, and 53. It is a heterogeneous section of the city, in which are located a Negro colony, slum areas, a number of good residential areas, and several community shop­ping areas. Most of the traffic between the northern and southern portions of Dallas flows through tract 20, the northern part of which is largely river­bottom land, inhabited only by squatters living in miserable shacks. Tract 41 is the only Negro settlement in Oak Cliff, and most of the families belong to low economic groups. Tract 42 is the apartment house area of Oak Cliff. Tract 43 is part of a slum area known as West Dallas, a large portion of which lies outside the city limits. It is marked by squatters' shacks built of scrap material; in contrast, other parts of the tract have cheap but often attractive frame dwellings. Extension of the boundaries of tract 43 beyond the city limits would include one of the more lawless sec­tions of metropolitan Dallas-a fact which perhaps constitutes the chief reason why this section has not been incorporated into the territory of the city. Tract 44, adjoining the highly undesirable portion of West Dallas, is lBSteinicke, op. cit., p. 109. 19/bid., p. 113. the most fashionable and exclusive residential area in Oak Cliff; it contains many homes of well-to-do families. Tract 45 lies on the western edge of Oak Cliff, and is one of the newer residential developments. It is marked by newly opened subdivisions separated by undeveloped fields. Tract 46 was at one time an exclusive residential section, and families of consider­able means still live there, although the area has deteriorated somewhat. Tract 47 contains the largest business district in Oak Cliff; in expanding it encroaches upon the surrounding residential areas. Tract 48 is a residential area in which many large, old dwellings have been converted into board­ing houses and light-housekeeping apartments. Tract 50 contains a small but growing business district. Tracts 51 and 52 are areas of substantial and attractive residences of medium-income families. Tract )'.) is an area of small, one-family cottages, among which are a few larger dwellings. On the whole, it is an area of poverty. Trinity Heights, composed of tracts 49, 54, 55, 56, and 57, is the south­ernmost portion of Dallas. Projecting into the prairie farmland south of the city, it is characterized by more rural traits than any other section of the city. Tract 49 contains cheap frame structures, many of them badly in need of repair. A Negro settlement is invading the tract in the north. The majority of the dwellings in Trinity Heights are small, unattractive frame cottages, hurriedly built to accommodate families of low income. Only occasionally is an attractive, well-built structure to be found. Tract 54 con­tains an area of better-than-average dwellings. Tracts 55 and 56 are char­acterized by many small homes of families of very limited means. This area contains no well-developed retail shopping center, and is devoid of any solidarity in community life and interests. Tract 57, the southernmost por­tion of Trinity Heights and of Dallas, includes Lisbon, a sparsely settled subdivision inhabited to a large extent by families of rural background. Few homes in the tract possess the conveniences associated with an adequate level of living, and the residents can scarcely be classified as urban dwellers. Steinicke found that this tract ranked first in deaths from pellagra in 1938, a fact which might be expected in view of the rural-slum conditions under which many of the families live. It is recognized that this description of the various areas of Dallas is inadequate. The information upon the basis of which an exhaustive gen­eral description of the city could be written has not been gathered. Much research is needed to fill out the gaps in the existent knowledge regarding the city, both in its larger metropolitan aspect, and from the point of view of the small local units of investigation. It is a commonplace to say that a great number of elements must be studied before a full understanding can be gained of the factors which impinge upon the movement of large urban populations. But the need for this type of research can hardly be overemphasized; to the extent that the ecological and social and economic variables in the population are examined and analyzed, to that extent will t?e researche~ be able to predict and control the behavior of the popula­t~on. No claun can be made here for having presented more than an out­lt~e of the n~cessary information; but it is hoped that the facts given will atd at least slightly in the analysis of the data herein assembled. f AMILY CHANGES AND DENSITY The data here presented as the final results of the study are to a large extent self-explanatory. This section, therefore, merely points out and emphasizes certain facts about the population of Dallas which seem to be significant. Close inspection of the tables and maps will yield more infor­ mation that can be imparted through textual presentation. It should per­ haps again be stated that most of the data are in terms of families rather than individuals; and that all figures deal with persons above seventeen years of age, since the City Directory does not list younger persons. The number of families in Dallas increased from 88,693 in 1923 to 129,995 in 1938. The density, in terms of the number of families per square mile, increased from 1,816 to 2,661 during the same period. Actually, the increase in family density was not as great as these figures indicate, since the area of the city was calculated as of 1938. However, the figures for the individual tracts are correct, except for those on the peri­ phery. The census tracts have permanent boundaries; and extensions of the city limits to increase the area of the city involves only those tracts bounded by the city limits. Changes in the number of families and in family density in all other tracts are entirely accounted for by the mobility of the popu­ lation. Table 1 and Maps 1-4 show the changes in family density by tracts for four selected years in the fifteen-year period. Of the sixty-four tracts in Greater Dallas (which includes the independent cities of Highland Park and University Park), only eight had less families per square mile in 1938 than in 1923. Of these eight tracts, showing lower density in 1938, six were in the downtown area; and the tract showing the greatest decrease was tract 31, the business and financial center of the city. Tracts 28 and 40, which also showed a lower density in 1938, are located in the part of the city known as South Dallas. Tract 28 contains Fair Park, and is being slowly taken over by small businesses. Tract 40 is a poor resi­dential section in a transitional stage of development. As would be expected, the tracts showing the greatest increase in density of families are those located in rapidly developing residential areas on the edge of the city, particularly the Park Cities, tract 1, and Trinity Heights. Directly related to the change in family density is the change in number of families. While only eight tracts in Greater Dallas showed a net loss of families between 1923 and 1938, there was considerable variation from year to year. Table 2 and Maps 5-8 give the changes in number of fam­ilies for selected years, by census tracts. Between 1923 and 1924, twenty­two tracts showed a loss in number of families. The changes in 1923-24 ranged from a net loss of 25 per cent in tract D-1 (University Park), to a net gain of 353.8 per cent in tract 1. Since neither of these tracts was heavily populated in 1923, the range is exaggerated. During this period, the city gained only 0.6 per cent in number of families. Between 1929 and 1930, only five tracts showed a net loss in number of families, and the highest percentage loss was only 5.2 per cent. For the same period, the heaviest gain was 71.8 per cent, in tract 57. The city gain was 6.6 per cent. In 1933-1935 (two directories covered the three-year period), only two tracts lost families, and the greatest loss was only 1.1 per cent. The high­est gain for this period was 23.9 per cent in tract 58. The gain for Greater Dallas was 6.2 per cent. In contrast to the small number of tracts losing families in 1929-30 and 1933-35, the period 1937-38 was marked by losses in many tracts. In that period thirty-five tracts, or more than half the tracts in Greater Dallas, experienced net losses in number of families. Moreover, the number of families in the city was increased by only 0.7 per cent between 1937 and 1938. It thus appears that the period of greatest population growth for Dallas in the total period under consideration was between 1929 and 1936, and that the city as a whole showed a slight increase in the number of families. Notwithtsanding the large number of tracts which lost families, it is obvi­ous that many tracts must be gaining in population at the expense of others. This situation becomes clearer when inter-tract movement of families is con­sidered. Inspection of Table 2 will serve to indicate that tracts showing gains and those showing losses in 1937-38 are scattered fairly generally all over the city. Tract D-3, in University Park, one of the leading residential areas, and tract 16, the largest Negro colony in the city, showed the high­est gains. As indicated by Map 8, the tracts with the highest losses in number of families in 193 7-38 were concentrated largely in the central por­tion of the city. This map suggests that a definite decentralization of pop­ulation has set in since 1935; a comparison of Map 7 with Map 8 empha­sizes the changed pattern. In 1933-35 the central tracts of the city experi­enced the heaviest gains in number of families, while by 1937-38 a reversal of this trend had begun. FAMILY SIZE: NUMBER OF PERSONS SEVENTEEN YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER PER F AMIL y Since the Dallas directories report only persons who are seventeen years of age or older, the family units with which this survey is concerned are limited to those persons. The size of the family unit is, therefore, qualified by the coverage of the directory. Moreover, for purposes of tabulating mobility, and to avoid exaggerating the size of families where boarders or lodgers were listed, all unattached persons were counted as heads of fam­ilies, or one-person families. This further reduced the average size of the family although it enabled the mobility of these unattached persons to be determined with a much greater degree of accuracy. Table 3 and Maps 9-12 give the number of families, and the average number of persons per family, by tracts for selected years. Although the average size of the family of persons seventeen years and over showed lit­tle variation over the period from 1923 through 1938-it was 1.79 in 1923, 1.82 in 1929, 1.84 in 1933-34, and 1.78 in 1938-considerable variation occurred among the individual tracts. In each period the central business dis­trict of the city had the smallest families, and the area surrounding it had a consistently smaller average family size than other areas of the city. Tracts 21 and 31 contain much of the business and financial district; they had fewest persons per family during each of the four periods. The transitional nature of the immediately surrounding tracts, comprising an area of vice, poverty, and broken homes merging into areas of small hotels and rooming houses, accounts for the large number of unattached persons. Inasmuch as this area of smaller families contains a large Negro colony and the largest Mexican colony in the city (tract 19), it is interesting to conjecture what the picture would be if persons less than seventeen years of age were included in the family unit. It may be that the children break away from the family by the time they reach the age at which they would be eligible for enumeration by the directory. In this connection, it is interesting to note that tract 19, the Mexican colony, showed a high average size family both in 1933-34 and in 1938, in contrast to all other tracts in the central portion of the city. For each of the four periods under consideration, the larger families are found in areas near the periphery of the city. The residential areas of Mount Auburn, South Dallas, and the western part of Oak Cliff showed consistently large family units during each period; and in 1933-34 and 1938, Trinity Heights, an area of low-income homes and the portion of Dallas possessing more rural characteristics than any other area, also had the larg­est family groups. It is evident from an inspection of Table 3 that most of the tracts in Dallas are characterized by a large number of "single-person" families, since the average family size is less than two in the majority of the tracts. A comparison of Map 9 with Map 12 shows further that this situation has become intensified over the fifteen-year period. In 1923, twelve tracts had families (composed of persons seventeen years of age and over) averaging more than two members; in 1938, this was true only of two tracts. Either the average family size is decreasing in Dallas, or the number of unattached persons is becoming greater. Probably both observations are correct. FAMILIES REPORTING EMPLOYMENT As indicated in Tables 4-A and 4-B, the number and per cent of fam­ilies reporting one or more members employed has increased over the fifteen-year period covered by this study. The percentage of families report­ing no members unemployed in 1923 was twenty-four; in 1929, twenty­three; in 1933-34, twenty-eight; and in 1938, twenty-one. Variations in the percentage of unemployment were considerable among the individual tracts; and the pattern of the incidence of employment and unemployment changed a great deal during the period of the survey. Maps 13, 14, and 15 emphasize the concentration of unemployment in certain areas of the city, culminating in a general high proportion of unemploy­ment in 1933-34, a period probably representative of the worst years of the economic depression in Dallas. Map 16 indicates a leveling out of unemployment over the entire city, together with a generally higher per­centage of families reporting employment in most tracts. On this map, tract 19, the Mexican colony already mentioned; and tract 25, a rather highly industrialized area with a considerable Negro population, stand out as areas of unemployment. In tract 19, 45 per cent of the families reported no employment in 1923, and 39 per cent in 1938; a high of 60 per cent was reached in 1933-34. In tract 25, families reporting no employment increased from 32 per cent in 1923 to 38 per cent in 1938. The highest percentage of unemployment reported by any tract for the four selected periods covered by Tables 4-A and 4-B was 63 per cent in tract 58 in 1933-34. This small tract contains a Negro settlement of very low socio-economic status known as Elm Thicket, which has developed as an isolated Negro community appended to tract 4. Earlier tract maps of the city show it as a part of tract 4; but as the population increased, it was defined as a separate tract, the last one to be allocated to the city. It should be pointed out that the high percentage of unemployment indi­cated in tracts D-1 and D-2 is due to the location of Southern Methodist University in tract D-2, and the residence of many students in the two tracts. NEW FAMILIES IN DALLAS, 1923-1938 Studies of the birth rate differential in rural and urban areas have demon­strated fairly conclusively that the rate of natural reproduction is not high enough in most cities to offset the loss in population, hence, the popula­tions of the large urban centers are failing to replace themselves. Thus, any increase in population, or even the maintenance of a relatively stable population, must be accounted for in terms of migration-the movement of persons into the city from other areas. While it cannot be stated positively here that Dallas depends entirely upon migration of new families to the city to keep it growing, there is no reason to suppose that what is true of other large cities is any less true for Dallas. Table 5 presents the number of new families as a percentage of the total families, by tracts for four selected time spans. "New families" are fam­ilies which had not been listed in the city directory before the year under consideration, plus a small number of families which had been listed ID other directories, but which had disappeared from directory listing for at least three years.20 It is also possible that the number of new families ID 20see The Use of City Directories in the Study of Urban Populations. Of entries absent from directories for three years, less than 5 per cent returned to listing in a later directory. a given year may be swelled somewhat by the listing of families who, although previously resident in the city, had not been listed previously. The percentage of new families in Dallas fell from a high of 51 per cent in 1923-24 to a low of 45 per cent in 1933-35, and then rose again to 48 per cent in 1937-38. It should be borne in mind that these figures represent gross gains, and indicate the rapid turnover in number of fam­ilies rather than a necessarily large increase in population. Of more significance, perhaps, than the total number of new families in the city is the location of the areas in which these families appeared. Maps 17-20 show the distribution of new families in the city for four selected periods. In 1923-24, the most striking feature of this distribution was the heavy concentration of new families in the northern, southern, and west­ern tracts, with a still heavier concentration in the center of the city. The same feature is observed in 1929-30; although concentration in the peri­pheral tracts is still heavy, it is considerably less so than in the earlier period. In 1933-35, the period of smallest influx of new families, the con­centration appears in a reduced central area of the city, with relatively few new families settling in the outer tracts. By 1937-38 the trend had reversed, and the central area of concentration had expanded. During this period also, the three northernmost tracts, areas of high income families, again showed an increase. It is interesting to note that the tracts showing consistently large per­centages of new families are located in the central area of the city. It is possible that a high proportion of these families are in reality unattached individuals, transients who would naturally migrate to the center of the city and the surrounding transitional area. This appears especially likely in view of the high concentration in this area in 1933-35, a period of eco­nomic depression. The large percentage of new families in peripheral tracts, especially the northern tier of tracts, in 1923-24 is reflective of the rapid residential development of these tracts. The same thing is true of tract 57, on the southern edge of the city. Since 1923, this area has developed out of open farming country, and is still semi-rural in nature. RESIDENCE CHANGES-INTER-CITY MOVEMENT OF FAMILIES The relation between the movement of families into the city and move­ment of families out of the city over a period of time much more nearly reflects the true picture of the population gain or loss than does the inci­dence of new families. Moreover, a comparison, by tracts, of movement into and movement out of the city indicates the areas of heaviest net gain or loss. Table 6 presents the figures by tracts on inter-city movement for the four selected time spans. The pattern of distribution of inter-city moves into the city portrayed by Maps 21-24, resembles the pattern of concentration of new families. This similarity, of course, would be expected, since it has been pointed out that the ma1onty of new families in the city in a given year is composed of families moving into the city from areas outside. A comparison by tracts of the number and per cent of families moving in with those moving out indicates that only in the central area of the city do the two movements tend to approach each other in magnitude. The residential tracts near the edges of the city show a consistent net gain over the entire period, the gain being more pronounced in later years. The tracts in the center of the city possess a much more unstable population. When these two sets of maps are considered comparatively as a series, a graphic picture of the trends of population change in Dallas is obtained. In the earlier years covered by the survey, the rapid increase of population in the peripheral tracts is evident, the increase being counterbalanced to a large extent by an equally heavy movement of families from the central tracts out of the city. In later years, a larger number of tracts appears to have experienced a net gain caused in part by the slowing down of move­ment out of the city. This is particularly true of the period 1933-35, when the city as a whole showed 31 per cent inter-city moves in, 25 per cent moves out. By 1937-38 this gain had fallen to one per cent, although this latter period does not show the extremes of inter-city movement in any except a few central tracts. There were extensive variations among the different tracts, as shown in Table 6. Although many tracts showed a net loss through inter-city mobility at various times over the entire period, these losses were more than balanced by the more or less extensive gains made by other tracts. It has been pointed out that the city as a whole experienced a net gain over the fifteen-year period, the gain being greatest in the years 1933-35. Many of the variations among tracts, as well as fluctuations within individual tracts, may undoubtedly be explained by the shifting ecological factors operating in the city and by related social and economic factors which bear on the population. RESIDENCE CHANGES-INTER-TRACT MOVEMENT OF FAMILIES Of more interest to the student of social problems than movement into and out of the city are the patterns of mobility within the limits of the city itself. The intra-city movement of families and individuals is recog­nized as a phenomenon of major significance to social welfare agencies, public and private service institutions, and many other bodies interested in population problems. Intra-city mobility is perhaps a better index of pop­ulation stability or instability than any other phase of population movement and behavior. A high degree of intra-city mobility may be indicative, on the one hand, merely of a rapidly expanding city with developing residen­tial areas acting as a pull on population from other parts of the city. On the other hand, it may indicate areas of social disorganization within the city. The true nature of intra·city mobility must be determined by consider­ation of the social and economic elements at work within the areas involved. Intra-city movement in this survey is based on movement between census tracts, and Table 7 presents the data concerning inter-tract movement for selected years. For each time span considered, inter-tract movement "out" (families leaving tract of residence) equals inter-tract movement "in" (families moving into a given tract from other tracts) for the city. Thus the percentage of inter-tract mobility was 17 in 1923-24; 17 in 1929-30; 16 in 1933-35; and 15 in 1937-38. Examination of Table 8, however, reveals sharp differences in the rate of inter-tract mobility among the dif­ferent tracts. Although many tracts remained relatively stable, gaining in population from other tracts in about the same degree to which they lost population, others showed appreciable gains or losses thro·ugh inter-tract mobility. A comparison of Maps 29-32, Inter-Tract Moves Out, with Maps ~3-36, Inter-Tract Moves In, reveals an interesting trend in intra-city mobility. In the early years covered by the survey, through 1930, the rapidly develop­ing residential tracts on the periphery of the city gained population at the expense of the central areas of the city. In 1933-35, however, this trend was considerably less evident; although the central tracts still gave up families to the outlying areas, the gain was much less extensive. Of the tracts which experienced large net gains from inter-tract mobility in 1923-24 and 1933-35, only two tracts, in the University Park area, remained in the high­est "in-movement" brackets. As has been pointed out elsewhere, this area of the city is still in the process of rather rapid residential expansion. The consistent stability of the population in tract 19, a Mexican colony. is noteworthy. It has been stated that tract 19 is a socially pathological area, characterized by a high degree of poverty, vice, and disease, as well as by an unassimilated population. Apparently, however, few of the fam­ilies living in the area move to other parts of the city; and few families move to the tract from within the citv. If intra-tract moves were presented, a different situation would undoubtedly emerge. In the tabulation of family moves for the survey it was noted that within areas of segregated popu­lations such as Mexican and Negro colonies, families were often difficult to trace from year to year because of the freguency with which their addresses changed. Few of these moves took the families to other tracts; usually they would be found at different addresses within the same tract. The relationship of high mobility rates to pathological conditions is not removed; but when the geographic unit of study is coterminus with a racial or an ethnic colony, the extent of intra-city mobility is not apparent. It is evident from Table 7 and the accompanying maps that the cen­tral area of the city is much less affected by inter-tract mobility than are other areas. It would appear that, in Dallas at least, intra-city mobility is more closely related to the attractions of developing residential areas than to conditions engendered by slum areas and transitional zones. Apparently it is not the lowest socio-economic groups which move most frequently within the city. This point should be clarified with the publication of a survey of occupational classes now being conducted, and which will cover the same families and the same period of time as the present study. DWELLING UNITS OWNER-OCCUPIED As a related phase of population mobility in Dallas the changes in occu­pancy and development of residential units within the city is considered of significance. Hence this survey included a study of the address sections of the city directories for the same period for which the family mobility data were secured. All structures listed in the directories were classified according to use: residential, commercial, industrial, commercial and indus­trial, and mixed residential and other occupancy. For purposes of analysis, residential structures were broken down into units, a unit being considered as the space provided for one family, regardless of how many families actually resided there.21 Residential units were considered in terms of occupancy and vacancy, owner occupancy, number of families per unit, and number of units per structure. Table 8 presents owner-occupied dwell­ing units as the number and per cent of total dwelling units for selected years. Since the Dallas directory did not list home ownership before 1927, no figures can be given for an earlier year. The percentage of owner-.occupancy in the city fell sharply from 40 per cent in 1927 to 32 per cent in 1933-34, rising slightly to 33 per cent in 1938. That the decrease in owner-occupancy was found over the entire city is indicated by the fact that only one tract (tract 21) showed a higher percentage of owner-occupancy in 1938 than in 1923, and the increase was only one per cent. Differences in percentage of owner-occupancy among the tracts were very great for each year considered. In 1927 it ranged from two to 72 per cent; in 1930, from three to 67 per cent; in 1938 from one to 58 per cent. Maps 37-40 illustrate forcefully the decrease in owner-occupancy since 1927. As would be expected, the tracts in the central business area and the surrounding transitional areas show the lowest percentages of owner­occupancy for each period. The spread of tenancy from the central area was quite pronounced by 1930, and reached its peak in 1933-34, when no tracts fell within the highest bracket of owner-occupancy (66-75 per cent), and only two tracts fell within the next highest bracket ( 56 per cent to 65 per cent): This is in sharp contrast to the situation in 1927, when five and eighteen tracts, respectively, fell within these brackets. The slight increase (one per cent) in owner-occupancy in 1938 as com­pared with 1933-34 is probably the result of somewhat improved economic conditions, coupled with an active government-encouraged home building program. Table 9 presents the ratio of vacant to occupied dwelling units for the four selected years. Most significant is the large increase of vacant units from 3.9 per cent of the total in 1923 to 11.7 per cent in 1933-34. As much as any other factor, this increase in the percentage of vacant units 21See The Use of City Directories in the Study of Urban Populations, op. cit., p. 29. re.Beets the "doubling up" of families during the depression years. It is to be noted that this heavy increase in vacant dwelling units occurred during a period when the total number of families in the city increased almost 15 per cent, indicating not only that families coming into the city moved in with other families, but also that old families tended to "double up" dur­ing this period. Table 10 shows the number and per cent of occupied dwelling units, together with occupied units per family and the number of families per unit. It should be noted that the peripheral tracts which in 1923 exhibited a high incidence of overcrowding actually had little effect on the city aver­age for that year. Tracts D-1 and D-2, in University Park, showed a high ratio of families to occupied units because of the number of students at Southern Methodist University, many of whom were necessarily classified as one-person families. Tracts 43, 57, and 58, also with a high ratio in 1923, actually had very few families; the high city average was caused by high ratios in the central and adjacent areas. The tracts in the eastern and southern parts of the city, which showed a considerable increase in the ratio of families to occupied dwelling units from 1934 to 1938, are largely industrial and low-to medium-income resi­dential areas. The obvious conclusion appears to be that the number of families in these areas is growing at a faster rate than the number of dwelling units-a situation which is not true of the areas of higher income families in the northern part of the city. OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS Table 11 presents occupied dwelling units in the city as a percentage of all occupied units, residential, commercial, industrial, or mixed occupancy. The proportion of dwelling units to total units remained very stable throughout the entire fifteen-year period. Ninety per cent of all occupied units in 1923 and 1929 were occupied dwelling units, while 88 per cent were occupied dwelling units in 1933-34 and 1938. Maps 45-48 indicate the changes in percentage of occupied dwelling units which have taken place among the various tracts. The area of excep­tionally low percentage of occupied dwelling units is, as would be expected, in the center of the city. Here most of the units are devoted to commer­cial and industrial use. With the growth of the city, this area has expanded, with consequent effect on adjacent areas. The most notable period of change came between 1929 and 1934, when many of the tracts which had been in the highest bracket of residential occupancy fell to lower brackets, and the average of residential occupancy for the city decreased two per cent. The portion of this study devoted to the address sections of the direc­tories indicated to a considerable extent the proportions and direction of the development of non-residential areas. In the zones of the city adjacent to the central business district, many structures previously used as residen­tial units have been transformed into or replaced by structures utilized for business and industry. As the center of the city has expanded and devel­oped concomitantly with an increasing population, the number of such areas has increased. While inspection of the "transitional" zones immediately surrounding the center of the city reveals that the process of this type of invasion has proceeded further than in any other part of the city, several other tracts in Dallas have been subjected to the same process. Table 11 shows these tracts very clearly; the tracts which are characterized by a rela­tively low percentage of occupied dwelling units may be considered as con­taining high percentage of units devoted to commercial and industrial usage. STABILI1Y OF RESIDENCE WITHIN TRACTS Opposed to intra-city mobility as indicated by movement between tracts is residential stability, indicated by the number and per cent of families remaining in their tract of residence for successive years. As shown in Table 12, in 1923-24, 50 per cent of all families in the city in the first year of the time span were in the same tract in the second year. In 1929-30, the percentage remaining in the same tracts was 55 and in 1933-35, 59. In 1937-38 the percentage remaining in the same tract both years had fallen to 52 per cent. Apparently something more than 50 per cent of all families living in the city do not change their addresses each year; at least they do not move into other tracts. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS In summarizing the findings of this study of family mobility in Dallas, a number of points, significant for the consideration of present problems and future research and planning, may be emphasized. These points are partially presented in outline as follows: 1. The total population of Dallas has shown an increase with each census decade, but the rate of increase has steadily declined. The period of great­est increase was the decade 1900-1910, when a gain of 116 per cent was registered. Between 1930 and 1940, the increase was less than 13 per cent. It is therefore probable than in 1940 Dallas was approaching a stationary population. With the establishment of national defense industries in and near the city, however, considerable impetus has been given for further pop­ulation growth. 2. Dallas appears to be experiencing a definite deconcentration of pop­ulation. Especially since 1935, the outlying residential tracts have gained in population not only relatively much faster than the central tracts, but at the expense of areas situated near the central part of the city. 3. As would be expected, the depression years were marked by a signifi­cant rise in the proportion of families reporting no members employed. However, in the last year of the survey-1938-the percentage of families reporting no members employed was lower than at any other time during the period covered. Variations among tracts in percentage of families reporting unemployment were considerable over the entire period. Tracts containing large numbers of Negro and Mexican families, and tracts in and adjacent to the central area of the city, were characterized by a high inci­dence of unemployment. 4. Throughout the period under consideration, Dallas gained population through an excess of immigration over emigration. This gain in popula­tion is reflected most sharply in the developing peripheral residential tracts of the city. 5. Inter-tract movement of families remained about constant over the entire period, although the pattern of movement changed considerably. It appears that while in the earlier years of the study the heaviest movement was from the central area to the outlying residential tracts, in later years this trend was less evident, giving way to increased movement among peripheral tracts. 6. Owner occupany of residential units fell sharply during the period from 1927 to 1934, and then rose slightly from 1934 to 1938. The spread of increased tenant occupancy was outward from the center of the city, and affected even the areas of highest socio-economic status during the worst depression years. The results of this study indicate that considerable research is needed on various phases of population movements, composition, and distribution in Dallas. Such research would help to clarify many of the points suggested in this survey, and would provide a body of information helpful alike to students of population and to agencies and individuals interested in the processes of urban growth. The University of Texas Publication TABLE 1 NUMBER OF FAMILIES PER SQUARE MILE FoR SELECTED YEARS BY CENSUS TRACTS 1938 1933­1934 1929 1923 Census Area Number Families Number Families 1umber Families Number Families T rac l!I Sq. Mi. of Famili es Per Sq. Mi. of Families Per Sq. Mi. of Families Per Sq. Mi. of' -Families Per Sq. Mi. · Total 48.847 129,995 2.661 103,333 2,095 106,926 2,189 88,693 1,816 1 2.4 10 1,017 422 668 277 412 170 13 5 2 .992 1,077 1,086 718 723 559 562 36 36 3 .652 1,567 2,403 1,301 1,995 986 1,512 87 133 4 2.943 2,344 797 1,637 556 1,371 465 362 123 5 .603 1,989 3.299 1,643 2,724 1,861 3,086 1,332 2,209 6 1.380 4,358 3,158 3,768 2,730 3,611 2,616 2,123 1,538 7 .716 2,831 3,954 2,312 3,229 2,358 3,291 1,954 2,729 8 .577 1,702 2,950 1,309 2,2.68 1,431 2,480 1,285 2,227 9 .380 1,386 3,647 l ,OS2 2,768 926 2,435 685 1,804 10 11 .588 .861 2,749 3,668 4,675 4,260 2,582 3,172 4,391 . 3,684 2,514 2,757 4,275 3,202 1,568 1,514 2,667 1,758 12 1.409 2,356 1,672. 1,962 1,392 1,715 1,217 1,318 935 13 .805 4,017 4,990 3,375 4,192 3,506 4,355 3,161 3,927 14 .400 1,231 3,078 1,112 2,780 1,038 2,595 736 1,840 15 .913 5,971 6,540 4,798 5,255 5,373 5,884 4,752 5,205 16 17 .494 .634 4,421 5,603 8,950 8,838 2,976 3,776 6,024 5.~55 3,555 4,647 7,196 7,328 3,233 5, 0~8 6,545 7,931 18 .335 1,871 5,585 1,494 4,460 1,792 5,349 1,376 4,107 19 .904 1,439 1,592 1,288 1,425 1,315 1,442 1,704 1,885 20 1.422 2,359 1,639 1,850 1,222 2, 109 1,472 1,655 1,156 21 22 23 24 25 .388 .552 .373 .359 .738 1,574 4,017 2, 129 1,747 1,674 4,057 7,277 5,708 4,866 2,268 1,311 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,145 3,879 5,992 4,367 4,020 1,551 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,048 1,323 4,541 7,246 4,903 4,314 1,791 2,894 4,360 1,575 1,204 657 7,459 7,899 4,223 3,354 890 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 .455 1.056 .721 .359 .752 .560 .916 .711 .848 .258 .266 .611 .537 .926 .586 .503 .618 .447 899 2,321 1,927 867 3,100 1,345 2,012 2,326 2,600 1,152 1,319 2,620 1,380 2, 134 1,694 2,109 2,108 411 1,976 2,rn8 2,673 2,4 15 4, 122 2,402 2, 197 3,271 3,066 4,465 4,959 4,288 2,570 2,305 2,892 4,193 3,411 919 702 1,782 1,883 724 2,353 1,225 1,613 1,888 1,984 925 1,090 2,057 1,166 1,662 1,460 1,530 1,700 309 1,542 1,687 2,610 2, 017 3,129 2, 188 1,761 2,655 2,340 3,585 4,098 3,366 2,171 1,795 2,491 3,042 2,75 1 69 1 747 1,782 1,987 751 2,637 1,900 2,307 2,142 2,233 934 1,178 2,007 1,118 1,558 1,537 1,562 1,867 299 1,641 1,686 2,755 2,091 3,506 3,392 2,5 18 3,012 2,633 3,604 4,428 3,284 2,082 1,685 2,605 3,105 3,021 668 370 1,291 2,053 862 3,776 2,602 3,584 3,092 2,437 982 1,099 1,172 665 919 1,276 1,511 1,456 207 813 1,223 2,847 2,401 5,021 4,646 3,913 4,349 2,874 3,806 4,132 1,918 1,238 992 2,177 3,004 2,356 463 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Subtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C .884 1.203 .293 .378 .59 1 .715 .555 .648 .590 .748 1.083 .687 .698 1.389 .227 43.647 1. 006 .693 1.254 2.953 .459 .805 .983 2.247 1,904 893 1,421 2,378 2, 170 1,234 2,203 1,501 2,115 1,876 1,800 1,136 1,567 1,197 355 121,171 791 1,840 1,994 4,625 1,189 1,390 1,620 4,199 2,154 742 4,850 6,291 3,672 1,726 3,969 2,316 3,585 2,508 1,662 1,654 2,245 862 1,564 2,776 786 2,655 1,590 1,566 2,590 1,727 1,648 1,869 1,506 689 1,263 1,936 1,849 977 1,897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 1,320 808 251 97,223 406 1,268 926 2,600 1,084 1,381 1,045 3,510 1,704 573 4,311 5,121 3, 130 1,227 3,418 1,943 3,217 2, 166 1,260 1,314 1,891 582 l ,106 2,227 404 1,829 738 880 2,362 1,716 1,063 1,562 1,491 617 1,388 2,121 1,902 933 2,095 1,249 1,924 1,749 1,286 835 1,201 391 172 102, 198 202 1,061 338 1,601 1,058 1,436 633 3,127 1,686 513 4,737 5,611 3,218 1,305 3,775 1,927 3,261 2,334 1,187 1,215 1,721 281 758 2,341 201 1,53 1 270 542 2,305 1,784 64 4 1,392 711 55 1,174 2,048 1,802 420 1,574 807 1,475 590 455 313 635 60 2 86,087 116 376 20 51 2 811 1,187 96 2,094 804 46 4, 007 5,418 3, 049 587 2,836 1,245 2,500 789 420 456 910 43 9 1,972 115 543 16 173 1,778 1,575 98 932 A-Dallas; B-Univcrsity Park; C-Highland Park. Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 31 TABLE 2 CHANGES IN NUMBER OF FAMILIES FOR SELECTED YEARS BY NUM BER AND P ER CENT AND BY CENSUS T RACTS Ce nsus Tract No. of Fami lies ' 1937 1938 Change Num -P er her Cent No. of Families 1933-34 1934-35 Change Num-Per ber Cent o. of Families 1929 1930 Change Num-P er ber Cent No. of Familie.s 1923 1924 Change Num -P er ber Cent Total 137,339 138,269 930 .7 108,368 ll5,074 6,706 6.2 110,973 118,269 7,296 6.6 90,210 90, 793 583 .6 I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 .53 54 55 999 1,057 1,503 2, 178 2,090 4,474 2.785 1,710 1,299 2,749 3,723 2,380 4,208 1,248 5,971 4,136 5,538 1,979 1,589 2,431 1,811 4,215 2,17'1 I , 762 1,520 946 2,218 1,790 862 2,975 1,294 2,183 2,412 2,454 1,161 1,346 2,448 1,403 2,042 1,769 1,888 2,116 370 1,859 857 1,479 2,379 2,127 1,212 2,265 1,540 2,188 1,902 1,682 1,044 1,017 1,077 1,567 2,344 1,989 4,358 2,831 1,702 1,386 2,749 3,668 2,356 4,017 1,231 5,971 4,421 5,603 1,871 1,439 2,359 l ,574 4,017 2,129 1,747 1,67•1 899 2,321 1,927 867 3,100 1,345 2,012 2,326 2,600 1,152 1,319 2,620 1,380 2,134 1,694 2.109 2,108 411 1,904 893 l ,42I 2,378 2,170 1,234 2,203 1,501 2,115 l ,876 1,800 1,136 18 20 64 166 -101 -116 46 -8 87 -55 -24 -191 -17 285 65 -108 -I SO -72 -237 -198 -45 -15 154 -47 103 137 5 125 51 -171 -86 146 -9 -27 172 -23 92 -75 221 -8 41 45 36 -58 -I 43 22 -62 -39 -73 -26 118 92 1.8 1.9 4.3 7.6 -4.8 -2.6 1.7 -.5 6.7 -1.5 -1.0 -4.5 -1.4 6.9 1.2 -5.5 -9.4 -3.0 -13.1 -4.7 -2.1 -.9 IO.I -5.0 4.7 7.7 .6 4.2 3.9 -7.8 -3.6 6.0 -.8 -2.0 7.0 -1.6 4.5 -4.2 11.7 -.4 II.I 2.4 4.2 -3.9 2.0 1.8 -2.7 -2.5 -3.3 -1.4 7.0 8.8 668 718 1,301 1,637 1,643 3,768 2,312 1,309 1,052 2,582 3, 172 1,962 3,375 1,112 4,798 2,976 3,776 1,49•1 1,288 1,850 1,3 11 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,145 702 1,782 1,883 72•1 2,353 1,225 1,61 3 1,888 1,984 925 1,090 2,057 1,166 1,662 1,460 1,530 l ,700 309 1,506 689 1,263 1,936 1,849 977 1,897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 716 746 1,387 1,817 1,820 4,043 2,402 1,456 l,124 2,606 3,306 2,048 3,447 1,113 4,941 3,322 4,194 1,623 1,274 1,963 1,432 3,316 I, 780 1,591 1,318 793 1,938 1,935 790 2,523 1,302 1.907 2,000 2,!07 969 1,184 2. 139 1,211 1,764 1,539 1,660 1,807 308 1,593 740 I ,325 2,015 1,875 1,063 2,008 1,329 1,962 1,720 1,408 912 48 7.2 28 3.9 86 6.6 180 11.0 177 10.8 275 7.3 90 3.9 147 11.2 72 6.8 24 .9 134 4.2 86 4.4 72 2.1 1 .I 143 3.0 346 11.6 418 11.! 129 8.6 -14 -I.I 113 6.1 121 9.2 8 .2 151 9.3 148 10.3 173 15.1 91 13.0 156 8.7 52 2.8 66 9.1 170 7.2 77 6.3 294 18.2 112 5.9 123 6.2 44 4.8 9•1 8.6 82 4.0 45 3.9 102 6.1 79 5.4 130 8.5 107 6.3 -I -.3 87 5.8 51 7.4 62 4.9 79 4.1 26 1.4 86 8.8 Ill 5.9 70 5.6 64 3.4 100 6.2 43 3.1 9 1.0 412 559 986 1,371 1,861 3,611 2,358 1,431 926 2,514 2,757 1,715 3,506 1,038 5,373 3,555 4,647 1,792 1,315 2,109 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,548 1,323 747 l ,782 1,987 751 2,637 l ,900 2,307 2,142 2,233 934 l ,178 2,007 1,118 1,558 1,537 1,562 1,867 299 1,491 617 I ,388 2,121 1,902 933 2 ,095 1,249 1,924 1,749 1,286 835 504 615 1,140 1,588 1,972 3,9•17 2,480 1,475 1,054 2,665 2,972 1,869 3,650 1,082 5,763 3,577 4,638 1,820 1,350 2,218 1,742 4,101 l ,842 1,634 1,329 775 1,802 2,091 822 2,913 1,802 2,427 2,368 2,404 l ,062 1,214 2,211 1,199 1,647 1,638 1,637 1,970 338 1,510 66I I ,447 2,225 2,086 1,048 2,074 I ,352 2,043 1,878 1,414 865 92 56 154 217 Ill 336 122 44 128 151 215 154 144 44 390 22 -9 28 35 109 -20 IOI 13 86 6 28 20 104 71 276 -98 120 226 171 128 36 204 81 89 IOI 75 103 39 19 44 59 104 184 115 -21 103 119 129 128 30 22.3 13 10.0 36 15.6 87 15.8 362 6.0 1,332 9.3 2,123 5.2 1,954 3.1 1,285 13.8 685 6.0 1,568 7.8 1,514 9.0 1,318 4.1 3, 161 4.2 736 7.3 4,752 .6 3,233 -.2 5,028 1.6 1,376 2.7 1,704 5.2 1,655 -I.I 2,894 2.5 4,360 .7 1,575 5.6 1,204 .5 657 3.7 370 1.1 1,291 5.2 2,053 9.5 862 10.5 3,776 -5.2 2,602 5.2 3,584 10.5 3,092 7.7 2,437 13.7 982 3.1 1,099 10.2 1,172 7.3 665 5.7 919 6.6 1,276 4.8 1,511 5.5 1,456 13.0 207 1.3 711 7.1 55 4.3 1,174 4.9 2,048 9.7 1,802 12.3 420 -1.0 1,574 8.3 807 6.2 1,475 7.4 590 10.0 455 3.6 313 59 99 196 470 l ,429 2,318 2,059 1,21'1 710 1,829 1,775 1,325 2,929 870 4,685 3,167 4,441 1,504 1,59·1 1,733 2,799 3,800 1,592 1,303 669 451 1,353 2,0IO 833 3,231 2,205 3,435 2,535 2,306 977 1,117 1,223 713 1,068 1,326 1,438 1,560 220 844 89 1,243 2,029 1, 782 549 l ,727 874 1,701 686 624 381 46 63 109 108 97 195 105 -71 25 261 261 7 -232 134 -67 -66 -587 128 -110 78 -95 -560 17 99 12 81 62 -43 -29 -545 -397 -149 -557 -131 -5 18 51 48 149 50 -73 104 13 133 34 69 -19 -20 129 153 67 226 96 169 68 353.8 175.0 125.2 29.8 7.3 9.2 5.4 -5.5 3.7 16.7 17.2 .5 -7.3 18.2 -1.4 -2.0 -11.7 9.3 -6.5 4.7 -3.3 -12.8 1.1 8.2 1.8 21.9 4.8 -2.1 -3.4 -14.4 -15.2 -4.2 -18.0 -5.4 -.5 • J.6 4.3 7.2 16.2 3.9 -4.8 7.1 6.3 18.7 61.8 5.9 -.9 -I.I 30.7 9.7 8.3 )5.3 16.3 37.l 21.7 56 57 1,520 l ,106 I ,567 1,197 47 9I 3.1 8.2 1,320 808 1,356 852 36 44 2.7 5.4 l ,201 391 l ,312 672 Ill 281 9.2 71.8 635 60 817 105 182 45 28.7 75.0 58 351 355 4 1.1 251 311 60 23.9 172 196 24 I 4.0 2 3 1 50.0 Subtota l A 120, 717 D-1 703 121,171 79I 454 88 .4 12.5 97 ,223 406 I 03,I 30 432 5907 26 6.1 I 02,l98 6.4 202 108,130 303 5,932 IOI 5.8 86,087 50.0 116 86,024 87 -63 -29 -.I -25.0 D-2 D-3 1,924 I ,667 1,840 1,994 -84 327 - 4.4 I 9.6 1,268 926 1,355 990 87 64 6.9 6.9 1,061 338 1 ,287 491 226 153 21.2 45.3 376 20 553 59 177 39 47.0 195.0 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 4,294 1,271 1,566 1,476 4,625 l ,189 1,390 1,620 331 -82 -I76 144 7.7 -6.4 -11.2 9.8 2,600 1,084 1,381 1,0-15 2,777 1,165 1,413 1,070 177 8I. 32 25 6.8 7.5 2.3 2.4 l,601 1,058 1,436 633 2,081 1,127 1,467 826 480 69 31 193 30.0 512 6.5 811 2.2 1,187 30.5 96 699 848 1,262 97 187 37 75 I 36.5 4.6 6.3 1.0 Subt otal C S-1 4,313 984 4,199 I ,107 -114 123 - 2.6 12.5 3,510 647 3,648 698 138 51 3.9 11.9 ' 3,127 497 3,420 578 293 81 9.4 16.3 2,094 195 2,207 251 113 56 5.4 28.7 S-2 407 375 - 32 - 7.9 215 222 7 3.3 178 I90 12 6.7 82 73 -9 -11.0 S-3 936 910 - 26 - 2.8 520 617 97 18.7 291 441 150 51.5 83 105 22 26.5 S-4 637 593 - 44 - 6.9 287 317 30 10.5 162 199 37 22 .8 19 46 27 142.0 S-5 l ,082 1,236 154 14.2 528 574 46 8.7 318 378 60 18.9 81 112 31 38.3 S-6 2,474 2,550 76 3.1 1,855 1,984 129 7.0 1,669 1,792 123 7.4 714 • 843 129 18.1 S-7 I ,495 1,503 8 .5 983 I ,107 124 12.6 932 1,060 128 13.7 343 433 90 26. l Subtotn] D 8.015 8,274 259 3.2 5,035 5,519 484 9.6 4,047 4,638 591 14.6 1,517 I ,863 346 22 .7 A-Greater Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban Tracts. The University of Texas Publication TABLE 3 NUMBER OF PERSONS PER FAMILY SEVENTEEN YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER FOR SELECTED YEARS B Y CENSUS TRACTS 1938 1933­1934 1929 1923 Census Number Number Persons Number Number Persons Number Number Persons Number Number Persons Tracts of of Per of of Per of of Per of of Per Families P e rsons Family Fam ilies Persons Family Fam ilies Persons Family Families Persons Family Total 138,269 246,497 1.78 108,368 198,962 1.84 110,973 201,549 1.82 90,210 161,830 1.79 1,017 1,911 1.88 668 1,254 1.88 412 750 1.82 13 23 1.77 1,077 1,989 1.85 718 1,348 1.87 559 1,067 1.91 36 70 1.94 1,567 . 2,929 1.87 1,301 2,491 1.91 986 1,944 1.97 87 170 1.95 2,344 4,618 1.97 1,637 3,222 1.97 1,371 2,696 1.96 362 711 1.96 5 1,989 3,396 1.71 1,643 2,958 1.80 1.861 3,336 1.79 1,332 2,435 1.82 6 7 4,358 2,831 7,556 5,095 1.73 1.80 3,768 2,312 6,657 4,381 1.77 1.89 3,611 2,358 6,561 4,564 1.82 1.94 2,123 1,954 3,900 3,840 1.84 1.97 8 1,702 3,128 1.84 1,309 2,519 1.92 1,431 2,757 1.92 1,285 2,501 1.95 9 1,386 2,541 1.83 1,052 2,039 1.93 926 1,842 1.99 685 1,383 2.02 10 2,749 5,048 1.83 2,582 4,848 1.87 2,514 4,767 1.90 1,568 3,041 1.94 II 12 3,668 2,356 6,670 4,594 1.82 1.95 3,172 1,962 5,950 3,950 1.88 2.01 2,757 1,715 5,293 3,455 1.92 2.01 1,5 14 1,318 2,965 2,585 1.96 1.96 13 4,017 6,878 1.71 3,375 6,037 1.79 3,506 6,257 1.79 3,161 5,727 1.81 14 1,231 2,084 1.69 1,112 2,018 1.81 1,038 1,809 1.74 736 1,325 1.80 15 5,971 9,677 1.62 4,798 8,119 1.69 5,373 9,146 1.70 4,752 8,295 1.74 16 17 4,421 5,603 7,158 8,671 1.62 1.54 2,976 3,776 5,008 6,175 1.68 1.64 3,555 4,647 5,906 7,450 1.66 1.60 3,233 5,028 5,506 8,094 1.70 1.61 18 1,871 3,081 1.65 1,494 2,665 1.78 1,792 3,131 1.75 1,376 2,612 1.90 19 1,439 2,730 1.90 1,288 2,624 2.04 1,315 2,390 1.82 1,704 3,157 1.85 20 2,359 4,135 1.75 1,850 3,431 1.85 2,109 3,869 1.83 1,655 3,093 1.87 21 1,574 2,256 1.43 1,311 1,910 1.46 1,762 2,521 1.43 2,894 4,263 1.47 22 4,017 6,360 1.58 3,308 5,332 1.61 4,000 6,268 1.57 4,360 6,995 1.60 23 24 25 2,129 1,747 1,674 3,821 3,378 3,056 1.79 1.93 1.82 1,629 1,443 1,145 2,978 2,876 2,130 1.83 1.99 1.86 1,829 1,548 1,323 3,434 3,024 2,420 1.88 1.95 1.83 1,575 1,204 657 3,062 2,412 1,298 1.95 2.00 1.98 26 27 28 899 2,321 1,927 1,761 4,338 3,499 1.96 1.86 1.81 702 1,782 1,883 1,440 3,424 3,537 2.05 1.92 1.88 747 1,782 1,987 1,472 3,475 3,724 1.97 1.95 1.87 370 1,291 2,053 752 2,545 3,905 2.03 1.97 1.90 29 867 1,639 1.89 724 1,402 1.94 751 1,467 1.95 862 1,651 1.92 30 31 3,100 1,345 5,108 1,714 1.65 l.27 2,353 1,225 4,037 1,607 1.71 1.31 2,637 1,900 4,559 2,399 1.73 1.26 3,776 2,602 6,291 3,343 1.67 1.28 32 2,012 3,052 1.52 1,613 2,524 1.57 2,307 3,455 l.50 3,584 5,433 1.51 33 34 35 2,326 2,600 1,152 4,042 4,745 2,171 l.73 l.82 1.88 1,888 1,984 925 3,351 3,852 1,837 l.77 1.94 1.98 2,142 2,233 934 3,774 4,164 1,846 1.76 l.87 1.98 3,092 2,437 982 5,513 4,478 1,793 1.78 1.84 1.83 36 37 1,319 2,620 2,551 4,733 l.94 l.80 1,090 2,057 2,206 3,788 2.02 1.84 1,178 2,007 2,404 3,753 2.04 1.87 1,099 1,172 2,216 2,185 2.01 1.87 38 39 40 41 1,380 2,Ja4 1,694 2,109 2,679 3,970 3,300 3,731 1.94 1.86 1.95 1.77 1,166 1,662 1,460 1,530 2,318 3,115 2,896 2,864 1.99 1.87 1.98 1.87 1,118 1,558 1,537 1,562 2,235 2,972 3,011 2,853 2.00 1.91 1.96 1.82 665 919 1,276 1,511 1,322 1,742 2,546 2,806 1.99 1.90 2.00 1.86 42 2,108 3,751 1.78 1,700 3,110 1.83 1,867 3,396 l.82 1,456 2,662 1.83 43 411 809 1.97 309 600 1.94 299 607 2.03 207 419 2.02 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 1,904 893 1,421 2,378 2,170 1,234 2,203 1,501 2,115 1,876 1,800 1,136 1,567 1,197 3,666 1,726 2,625 4,241 3,881 2,408 4,201 2,913 4,266 3,708 3,560 2,243 3,086 2,437 l.93 1.93 1.85 1.78 l.79 1.95 1.91 1.94 2.02 1.98 1.98 1.98 1.97 2.04 1,506 689 1,263 1,936 1,849 977 1;897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 1,320 808 2,842 1,364 2,371 3,633 3,376 1,908 3,738 2,481 3,728 3,208 2,801 1,823 2,608 1,652 1.89 1.98 1.87 1.88 1.83 1.95 1.97 1.97 1.97 1.98 2.05 2.02 1.98 2.04 1,491 617 1,388 2,121 1,902 933 2,095 1,249 1,924 1,749 1,286 835 1,201 391 2,840 1,255 2,611 3,996 3,456 1,804 4,040 2,517 3,929 3,500 2,595 1,617 2,360 737 1.90 2.04 1.88 1.88 1.81 1.94 1.93 2.01 2.04 2.00 2.02 1.94 1.96 1.88 711 55 1,174 2,048 1,802 420 1,574 807 1,475 590 455 313 635 60 1,336 114 2,230 3,898 3,287 823 3,138 1,577 2,992 1,184 905 625 1,326 90 1.88 2.07 1.90 1.90 1.82 1.96 1.99 1.95 2.03 2.01 1.99 2.00 2.09 1.50 58 355 620 1.75 251 435 1.73 172 319 1.85 2 2 1.00 Subtotal A D-1 121,171 791 215,934 1,474 1.78 1.86 97,223 406 178,796 760 1.84 1.87 102,198 202 185,799 373 1.82 1.85 86,087 116 154,592 179 1.79 1.84 D-2 D-3 1,840 1,994 3,352 3,710 1.82 1.86 1,268 926 2,367 1,693 1.87 1.83 1,061 338 2,018 643 1.90 1.90 376 20 667 41 1.77 2.05 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C S-1 4,625 1,189 1,390 1,620 4,199 1,107 8,536 2,232 2,567 2,901 7,700 1,935 1.84 1.88 1.85 1.79 1.84 1.75 2,600 1,084 1,381 1,045 3,510 647 4,820 2,045 2,549 1,831 6,425 1,114 1.85 1.89 1.84 1.75 1.83 1.72 1,601 1,058 1,436 633 3,127 497 3,034 1,985 2,534 1,125 5,644 855 1.89 1.88 1.76 1.78 1.80 1.72 512 811 1,187 96 2,094 195 887 1,506 2,090 184 3,780 345 1.73 1.86 1.76 1.92 1.80 1.77 S-2 375 535 1.43 215 309 1.44 178 247 1.39 82 116 1.41 S-3 910 1,449 1.59 520 847 1.63 291 463 1.59 83 134 1.61 S-4 593 1,040 1.75 287 495 1.73 162 286 1.76 19 25 1.32 S-5 1,236 2,109 1.71 528 897 1.70 318 511 1.61 81 113 1.39 S-6 S-7 Subtotal D 2,550 1,503 8,274 4,749 2,510 14,327 1.86 1.67 1.73 1,855 983 5,035 3,512 1,747 8,921 1.89 1.78 1.79 1,669 932 4,047 3,090 1,620 7,072 1.85 1.74 1.75 714 343 1,517 1,278 560 2,571 1.79 1.63 . 1.70 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. F AMILIES NoT REPORTING E M PLOYMENT FOR S ELECTED YEARs BY NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FAMILIES NoT REPORTING AND B Y CENSUS T RACTS 1938 1933­1934 1929 1923 Families Families Families Families Not Reporting Employment Number Per Cent Not Reporting Employment Number Per Cent Not Reporting Em1>loyment Number Per Cent Not Reporting EmplO)'ment Number Per Cent Census Total of of Total of of Total of of Total of of Tracts Families Families Total Families Fam ilies Total Families Families Total Families Families Total Total 138,269 28,401 21 108,368 30,645 28 110,973 26,039 23 90,210 22,098 24 l 1,017 158 16 668 111 17 412 58 14 13 1 8 2 1,077 148 14 718 132 18 559 81 14 36 10 28 3 1,567 255 16 1,301 246 19 98.6 169 17 87 12 14 4 5 6 7 8 9 2,344 1,989 4,358 2,83 1 1,702 1,386 334 395 958 478 332 213 14 20 22 17 20 15 1,637 1,643 3,768 2,3 12 1,309 1,052 • 384 369 790 621 327 217 23 22 21 27 25 21 1,371 1,861 3,611 2,358 1,431 926 319 317 658 541 248 154 23 17 18 23 17 17 362 1,332 2,123 1,954 1,285 685 87 261 37 1 394 235 106 24 20 17 20 18 15 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2,749 3,668 2,356 4,017 1,231 5,971 4,421 5,603 1,871 1,439 2,359 1,574 4,017 2,129 1,747 1,674 899 599 521 369 740 204 1,225 524 1,354 444 569 534 370 1,142 387 290 649 158 22 14 16 19 16 21 12 24 24 39 22 23 29 18 17 39 17 2,582 3,172 1,962 3,375 1,112 4,798 2,976 3,776 l,4!M 1,288 1,850 1,311 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,145 702 460 556 406 717 228 1,169 884 1,358 344 772 455 513 l ,304 508 457 417 122 18 18 21 21 21 24 30 36 23 60 25 39 39 31 32 36 17 2,514 2,757 1,715 3,506 1,038 5,373 3,555 4,647 1,792 1,315 2,109 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,548 1,323 747 49 2 401 333 734 221 1,255 1,089 1,433 403 560 370 498 1,370 507 316 488 160 19 15 19 21 21 23 31 31 23 43 18 28 34 28 20 37 21 1,568 1,514 1,318 3,161 736 4,752 3,233 5,028 1,376 1,704 1,655 2,894 4,360 1,575 1,204 657 370 274 209 185 576 123 1,042 969 1,686 312 765 315 762 1,316 382 197 210 59 17 14 14 18 17 22 30 33 23 45 19 26 30 24 17 32 16 27 28 29 2,321 1,927 867 553 471 186 24 24 21 1,782 1,883 724 750 614 217 42 33 30 1,782 1,987 751 474 509 202 27 26 27 1,291 2,053 862 406 475 204 32 23 24 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 3,100 1,345 2,012 2,326 2,600 1,152 1,319 2,620 1,380 2,134 1,694 2,109 2,108 411 887 278 584 619 652 200 261 520 255 575 383 549 357 95 29 21 29 27 25 18 20 20 18 27 23 26 17 23 2,353 1,225 1,613 1,888 1,984 925 1,090 2,057 l,166 1,662 1,460 1,530 1,700 309 l ,159 307 659 807 745 206 292 712 331 855 318 698 412 118 49 25 41 43 38 22 27 35 28 52 22 46 24 38 2,637 1,900 2,307 2,142 2,233 934 1,178 2,007 1,118 1,558 1,537 l ,562 1,867 299 1,070 473 690 572 568 191 266 605 255 598 260 495 309 89 41 25 30 27 25 20 22 30 23 38 17 32 17 30 3,776 2,602 3,584 3,092 2,437 982 1,099 1,172. 665 919 1,276 1,511 1,456 207 1,426 739 966 738 511 161 226 488 163 425 240 584 294 65 38 28 27 24 21 16 21 42 25 46 19 39 20 31 44 45 1,904 893 337 171 18 19 1,506 689 331 165 22 24 1,491 617 252 95 17 15 711 55 140 7 20 13 46 47 48 49 1,421 2,378 2,170 1,234 298 413 433 310 21 17 20 25 1,263 1,936 1,849 977 320 476 483 287 25 25 26 29 1,388 2,121 1,902 933 219 409 456 199 16 19 24 21 1,174 2.,048 1,802 420 226 386 378 114 19 19 21 27 50 51 52 53 54 55 2,203 1,501 2,115 1,876 1,800 1,136 462 263 344 283 343 190 21 18 16 15 19 17 1,897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 409 267 410 340 308 206 22 21 22 21 23 23 2,095 1,249 1,924 1,749 1,286 835 343 202 329 296 205 145 16 16 17 17 16 17 1,574 807 1,475 590 455 313 246 145 281 91 92 45 16 18 19 15 20 14 56 57 1,567 1,197 314 300 20 25 1,320 808 406 251 31 31 1,201 391 236 58 20 15 635 60 87 1 14 2 58 355 99 28 251 158 63 172 103 60 2 0 Subtotal A D-1 121,171 791 25,335 129 21 16 97,223 406 27,884 96 29 24 102,198 202 24,348 46 24 23 86,087 116 21,209 71 25 61 D-2 1,840 380 21 1,268 340 27 1,061 280 26 376 146 39 D-3 1,994 335 17 926 194 21 338 45 13 20 3 15 Subtotal B D-4 4,625 1,189 844 222 18 19 2,600 1,084 630 251 24 23 1,601 1,058 371 173 23 16 512 811 220 131 43 16 D-5 1,390 268 19 1,381 278 20 1,436 249 17 1,187 153 13 D-6 Subtotal C S-1 1,620 4,199 1,107 271 761 319 17 18 29 1,045 3,510 647 198 727 278 19 21 43 633 3,127 497 83 505 164 13 16 83 96 2,094 195 4 288 63 4 14 32 S-2 375 2 1 215 15 7 178 4 2 82 15 18 S-3 910 29 3 520 52 10 291 19 7 83 9 11 S-4 593 69 12 287 40 14 162 16 10 19 1 5 S-5 S-6 S-7 1,236 2,550 1.503 132 702 208 11 28 14 528 1,855 988 69 707 243 13 38 25 318 1,669 932 19 441 152 6 26 16 81 714 343 2 242 49 2 34 14 Subtotal D 8,274 1,461 18 5,035 1,404 28 4,047 815 20 1,517 38 1 25 A-Dallas; B-Univcrsity Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. TABLE 4--B F AMILIES REPORTING EMPLOYMENT FOR SELECTED YEARS BY NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FAMILIES REPORTI NG AND BY CENSUS TRACTS 1938 1933­1934 1929 1923 Fam ilies Families Families Families Report ing Reporting Reporting Report ing E mplo)'ffiCnt Employment Employment Employment Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Number Per Cent Nu mber Per Cent Ce nsus Total of of Total of of Total of of Total of of Tracts Fami lies Families To 1al Fam ilies Families Total Families Families Total Fam ilies Families Toial Total 138,269 109,868 79 108,368 77,723 72 110,973 84,934 77 90,210 68,112 76 1 1,017 859 84 668 557 83 412 354 86 13 12 92 2 1,077 929 86 718 586 82 559 478 86 36 26 72 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 IO 11 12 13 14 1,567 2,344 1,989 4,358 2,831 1,702 1,386 2,749 3,668 2,356 4,017 1,231 1,31 2 2,010 1,594 3,400 2,353 1,370 1,173 2,150 3,147 1,987 3,277 1,027 84 86 80 78 83 80 85 78 86 84 81 84 1,301 1,637 1,643 3,768 2,312 1,309 1,052 2,582 3,172 1,962 3,375 1,112 1,055 1,253 1,274 2,978 '1,691 982 835 2,122 2,616 1,556 2,658 884 81 77 78 79 73 75 79 82 82 79 79 79 986 1,371 1,861 3,611 2,358 1,431 926 2,514 2,757 1,715 3,506 1,038 817 1,052 1,544 2,953 1,817 1,183 772 2,022 2,356 1,382 2,772 817 83 77 83 82 77 83 83 81 85 81 79 79 87 362 1,332 2,123 1,954 1,285 685 1,568 1,514 1,318 3,161 736 75 275 1,071 1,752 1,560 1,050 579 1,294 1,305 1,133 2,585 613 86 76 80 83 80 82 85 83 86 86 82 83 15 16 17 18 19 5,971 4,421 5,603 1,871 1,439 4,746 3,897 4,249 1,427 870 79 88 76 76 61 4,798 2,976 3,776 1,494 1,288 3,629 2,092 2,418 1,150 516 76 70 64 77 40 5,373 3,555 4,647 1,792 1,315 4,118 2,466 3,214 1,389 755 77 .69 69 77 57 4,752 3,233 5,028 1,376 1,704 3,710 2,264 3,342 1,064 939 78 70 67 77 55 20 21 22 23 24 2,359 1,574 4,017 2,129 1,747 1,825 1,204 2,875 1,742 1,457 78 77 71 82 83 1,850 1,311 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,395 798 2,004 1,121 986 75 61 61 69 68 2,109 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,548 1,739 1,264 2,630 1,322 1,232 82 72 66 72 80 1,655 2,894 4,360 1,575 1,204 1,340 2,132 3,044 1,193 1,007 81 74 70 76 83 25 26 1,674 899 1,025 741 61 83 1,145 702 728 580 64 83 1,323 747 835 587 63 79 657 370 447 311 68 84 27 28 29 2,321 1,927 867 1,768 1,456 681 76 76 79 1,782 1,883 724 1,032 1,269 507 58 67 70 1,782 1,987 751 1,308 1,478 549 73 74 73 1,291 2,053 862 885 1,578 658 68 77 76 30 31 3,100 1,345 2,213 1,067 71 79 2,353 1,225 1,194 918 51 75 2,637 1,900 1,567 1,427 59 75 3,776 2,602 2,350 1,863 62 72 32 2,012 1,428 71 1,613 954 59 2,307 1,617 70 3,584 2,618 73 33 34 35 2,326 2,600 1,152 1,707 1,948 952 73 75 82 l,888 1,984 925 1,081 1,239 719 57 62 78 2,142 2,233 934 1,570 1,665 743 73 75 80 3,092 2,437 982 2,354 1,926 821 76 79 84 36 1,319 1,058 80 1,090 798 73 1,178 912 78 1,099 873 79 37 2,620 2,100 80 2,057 1,345 65 2,007 1,402 70 1,172 684 58 38 1,3 0 1,125 82 1,166 835 72 1,118 863 77 665 502 75 39 2,134 1,559 73 1,662 807 48 1,558 960 62 919 494 54 40 41 1,694 2,109 1,311 1,560 77 74 1,460 1,530 1,142 832 78 54 1,537 1,562 1,277 1,067 83 68 1,276 1,511 1,036 927 81 61 42 2,108 1,751 83 1,700 1,288 76 1,867 1,558 83 1,456 1,162 80 43 411 316 77 309 191 62 299 210 70 207 142 69 44 1,904 1,567 82 1,506 1,175 78 1,491 1,239 83 711 571 80 45 893 722 81 689 524 76 617 522 85 55 48 87 46 1,421 1,123 79 1,263 943 75 1,388 1.169 84 1,174 948 81 47 2,378 1,965 83 1,936 1,460 75 2,121 1,712 81 2,048 1,662 81 48 2,170 1,737 80 1,849 1,366 74 1,902 1,446 76 1,802 1,424 79 49 1,234 924 75 977 690 71 933 734 79 420 306 73 50 2,203 1,741 79 1,897 1,488 78 2,095 1,752 84 1,574 1,328 84 51 52 1,501 2,115 1,238 1,771 82 84 1,259 1,898 992 1,488 79 78 1,249 1,924 1,047 1,595 84 83 807 1,475 662 1,194 82 81 53 54 1,876 1,800 1,593 1,457 85 81 1,620 1,365 1,280 1,057 79 77 1,749 1,286 1,453 1,081 83 84 590 455 499 363 85 80 55 1,136 946 83 903 697 77 835 690 83 313 268 86 56 57 1,567 1,197 1,253 897 80 75 1,320 808 914 557 69 69 1,201 391 965 333 80 85 635 60 548 59 86 98 58 355 256 72 251 93 37 172 69 40 2 2 100 Subtotal A 121,171 D-1 791 95,836 662 79 84 97,223 406 69,339 310 71 76 102,198 202 77,850 156 76 77 86,087 116 64 ,878 45 75 39 D-2 D-3 1,840 1,994 1,460 1,659 79 83 1,268 926 928 732 73 79 1,061 338 781 293 74 87 376 20 230 17 61 85 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 4,625 1,189 1,390 1,620 3,781 967 1,122 1,349 82 81 81 83 2,600 1,084 1,3 1 1,045 1,970 833 1,103 847 76 77 80 81 1,601 1,058 1,436 633 1,230 885 1,187 550 77 84 83 87 512 811 1,187 96 292 680 1,034 92 57 84 87 96 SubtotalC S-1 4,199 1,107 3,438 788 82 71 3,510 647 2,783 369 79 57 3,127 497 2,622 333 84 67 2,094 195 1,806 132 86 68 S-2 375 373 99 215 200 93 178 174 98 82 67 82 S-3 910 881 97 520 468 90 291 272 93 83 74 89 S-4 593 524 88 287 247 86 162 146 90 19 18 95 S-5 1,236 1,104 89 528 459 87 318 299 94 81 79 98 S-6 S-7 2,550 1,503 1,848 1,295 72 86 1,855 983 1,148 740 62 75 1,669 932 1,228 780 74 84 714 343 472 294 66 86 Subtotal D 8,274 6,813 82 5,035 3,631 72 4,047 . 3,232 80 1,517 1,136 75 A-Dallas; B-Uuiversit y Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 35 TABLE 5 NEW FAMILIES AS PER CENT OF TOTAL FAMILIES FoR SELECTED YEARs BY CENSUS TRACTS 1937-1938 1933­1935 1929­1930 1923-1924 Total Total Total Total Families Families Families Fam il ies Census End of New Families End of New Fam ilies End of New Fam ilies End of New Families Trac ts Peri od Number Per Cent Peri od Number Per Cent Period Number Per Cent Period Number Per Cent Total 138,269 66,325 48 115,074 51,412 45 118,269 57,601 49 90, 793 46,112 51 I 1,017 367 36 716 257 36 504 244 48 59 54 92 2 1,077 478 44 746 305 41 615 255 41 99 80 81 3 1,567 626 40 1,387 469 34 1,140 455 40 196 142 72 4 2,344 1,044 45 1,817 756 42 1,588 759 48 470 245 52 5 1,989 911 46 1,82 0 777 43 1,972 957 49 1,429 713 50 6 4,358 1,827 42 4,043 1,722 43 3,947 1,764 45 2,318 993 43 7 2,831 1,310 46 2,402 931 39 2,480 1,031 42 2,059 964 47 8 1,702 864 51 1,456 711 49 1,475 720 49 1,214 562 46 9 1,386 690 50 1,124 509 45 1,054 477 45 710 305 43 10 2,749 1,189 43 2,606 !198 38 2,665 1,123 42 1,829 806 44 11 3,668 1,451 40 3,306 1,235 37 2,972 1,245 42 1,775 751 42 12 2,356 968 41 2,048 738 36 1,869 739 40 1,325 501 38 13 4,017 1,943 48 3,447 1,505 44 3,650 1,665 46 2,929 1,26.2 43 14 1,231 540 44 1,113 417 37 1,082 419 39 870 410 47 15 5,971 3,254 54 4,941 2,494 50 5,763 3,151 55 4,685 2,460 53 16 4,421 2,477 56 3,322 1,716 52 3,577 1,858 52 3,167 1,663 53 17 5,603 3,259 58 4,194 2,225 53 4,638 2,609 56 4,441 2,301 52 18 1,871 1,038 56 1,623 802 49 1,820 972 53 1,504 824 55 19 1,439 790 55 1,274 575 45 1,350 758 56 1,594 888 56 20 2,359 1,228 52 1,963 1,011 52 2,218 1,204 54 1,733 933 54 21 1,574 1,066 68 1,432 969 68 1,742 1,164 67 2,799 1,919 6!1 22 4,017 2,322 58 3,316 1,828 55 4,101 2,439 59 3,800 2,180 57 23 2,129 1,102 52 1,780 844 47 1,842 855 46 1,592 759 48 24 1,747 790 45 1,591 703 44 1,634 719 44 1,303 609 47 25 1,674 847 51 1,318 593 45 1,329 620 47 669 306 46 26 899 371 41 793 328 41 775 297 38 451 214. 47 27 2,321 1,001 43 1,938 781 40 1,802 749 42 1,353 572 42 28 1,927 1,085 56 1,935 885 46 2,091 1,077 51 2,010 970 48 29 867 446 51 790 423 54 822 425 52· 833 455 55 30 3,100 1,635 53 2,523 1,281 51 2,913 1,578 54 3,231 l ,628 50 31 1,345 918 68 1,302 827 63 1,802 1,121 62 2,205 1,420 64 32 2.012 1,256 62 1,907 1,214 64 2,427 1,544 64 3,435 2,277 66 33 2,326 1,235 53 2,000 992 50 2,368 1,271 54 2,535 1,303 51 34 2,600 1,348 52 2,107 1,038 49 2,404 1,266 53 2,306 1,193 52 35 1,152 533 46 969 378 39 1,062 466 44 977 425 44 36 1,319 607 46 1,184 535 45 1,214 549 45 1,117 500 45 37 2,620 1,091 42 2,139 767 36 2,211 960 43 1,223 601 49 38 1,380 571 41 1,211 464 38 1,199 536 45 713 303 43 39 2,134 841 39 1,764 610 35 1,647 651 40 1,068 512 48 40 1,694 713 42 1,539 635 41 1,638 731 45 1,326 613 46 41 2,109 1,038 49 1,660 750 45 1,637 747 46 1,438 669 47 42 2,108 973 46 1,807 804 45 1,970 949 48 1,560 714 46 43 411 169 41 308 109 35 338 143 42 220 88 40 '\4 1,904 729 38 l,593 568 36 1,510 604 40 844 409 49 45 893 346 39 740 300 41 661 256 39 89 55 62 46 1,421 631 44 1,325 583 44 1.447 657 45 1,243 580 47 47 2,378 1,157 49 2,015 933 46 2,225 1,095 49 2,029 1,012 50 48 2,170 1,115 51 1.875 !121 49 2,086 1,089 52 1,782 914 51 49 1,234 591 48 1,063 491 46 1,048 509 49 549 300 55 50 2,203 949 43 2,008 843 42 2,074 876 42 1,727 861 50 51 1,501 595 40 1,32!) 523 39 1,352 630 47 874 398 46 52 2,115 840 40 1,962 749 38 2,043 845 41 l ,701 798 47 53 1,876 695 37 1,720 687 40 1,878 779 41 686 323 47 54 1,800 762 42 l ,408 516 37 1,414 614 43 624 331 53 55 1,136 516 45 912 404 44 865 393 45 381 171 45 56 1.567 571 37 1,356 523 39 1,312 576 44 817 412 50 57 1,197 489 41 852 328 39 672 454 68 105 75 71 58 355 141 40 311 116 37 196 73 37 3 3 100 Subtotal A 121,171 58,339 48 103,130 46,396 45 108,130 52,712 49 86,024 43,729 51 D-1 791 397 50 432 212 49 303 186 61 87 51 59 D-2 1,840 83 3 45 1,355 623 46 1,287 654 51 553 344 62 D-3 1,994 950 48 990 403 41 491 265 54 59 43 73 Subtotal B 4,625 2,180 47 2,777 1,238 45 2,081 1,105 53 699 438 63 D-4 1,189 440 37 1,165 439 38 1,127 427 38 848 323 38 D-5 1,390 466 34 1,413 480 34 1,467 517 35 1,262 514 41 D-6 1,620 694 43 1,070 404 38 826 440 53 97 43 44 Subtotal C 4,199 1,600 38 3,648 1,323 36 3,420 1,384 40 2,207 880 40 S-1 1,107 625 57 698 344 49 578 295 51 251 140 56 S-2 375 212 57 222 93 42 190 103 54 73 38 52 S-3 910 515 57 617 317 51 441 297 67 105 64 61 S-4 593 301 51 317 146 46 199 110 55 46 34 74 S-5 1,236 639 52 574 238 41 378 179 47 112 61 54 S-6 2,550 1,200 47 1,984 834 42 1,792 884 49 843 465 55 S-7 1,503 714 47 1,707 483 44 1,060 532 50 433 263 61 Subtotal D 8,274 4.206 51 5,519 2,455 45 4.638 2,400 52 1,863 l ,065 57 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban, R ESIDENCE CHANGES INTER-CITY MOVEMENT OF FAMILIES FoR SELECTED YEARS B Y N UMBER OF F AMILIES AND BY C E NSUS TRACTS 1937­1938 1933­1935 Total Total Totnl Total Fam ilies Families Families Families First Families Fam ilies Second First Families Families Second Census Tra c ts Year 1937 Moving Out Number Per Cent Moving In Number Per Cent Year 1938 Year Moving Out 1933-34 Number Per Cent Moving In Number Per Cent Yea r 1934--35 Total 137,339 44,572 32. 45 ,502 33 138,269 108,368 26,925 25 33,631 31 115,074 1 999 264 26 200 20 1,017 66 8 141 21 155 23 716 2 1,057 286 27 266 25 1,077 718 118 16 154 21 746 3 1,503 332 22 365 24 1,567 1,301 197 15 256 20 1,387 4 2,178 60:?. 28 621 29 2,344 1,637 344 21 496 30 1,817 5 6 7 8 9 2,090 4,474 2,785 1,710 1,299 636 1,281 810 487 313 30 29 29 28 24 607 1,215 868 521 377 29 27 31 30 29 1,989 4,358 2,831 l ,702 1,386 1,643 3,768 2,312 1,309 1,052 340 910 438 293 209 21 24 19 22 20 459 1,087 551 413 256 28 29 24 32 24 1,820 4,043 2,402 1,4 56 1,124 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 2,749 3,723 2,380 4,208 1,248 5,971 4,136 5,538 1,979 1,589 2,431 1,811 4,215 2,174 1,762 1,520 946 673 886 624 1,44:?. 373 2,156 1,662 2,582 795 837 832 1,035 1,898 792 500 495 269 24 24 26 34 30 36 40 47 40 53 34 57 45 36 28 33 28 708 815 584 1,262 344 2,252 1,941 2,71 8 738 71 5 786 893 1,879 779 501 654 223 26 22 25 30 28 38 47 49 37 45 32 49 44 36 28 43 24 2,749 3,668 2.,356 4,017 1,231 5,971 4,421 5,603 1,871 1,439 2,359 1,57 4 4,017 2,129 1,747 1,674 899 2,582 3,172 1,962 3,375 1,112 4,798 2,976 3,776 1,494 1,288 1,850 1,311 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,145 702 501 577 307 831 264 1,440 895 1,297 377 477 479 612 1,310 381 256 261 130 19 18 16 25 24 30 30 34 25 37 26 47 40 23 18 23 19 499 646 428 907 267 1,619 1,247 1,697 544 484 613 820 1,349 551 443 431 207 19 20 22 27 24 34 42 45 36 38 33 63 41 34 31 38 29 2,606 3,306 2,048 3,447 1,113 4,941 3,322 4,194 1,623 1,274 1,963 1,432 3,316 1,780 1,591 l,318 793 27 28 29 2,218 1,790 862 603 633 265 27 35 31 709 760 286 32. 42 33 2,321 1,927 867 1,782 1,883 724 388 506 194 22 27 27 513 611 267 29 32 37 1,93 8 1,93 5 790 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 2,975 1,294 2,183 2,412 2,454 1,161 1,346 2,448 1,403 2,042 1,769 1,888 2,116 370 1,154 720 1,119 917 777 359 31 8 623 341 516 460 588 581 82 39 56 51 40 32 31 24 25 24 25 26 31 27 22 1,329 732 1,043 980 955 348 356 789 331 622 434 808 592. 113 45 57 48 41 39 30 26 32 24 30 25 43 28 31 3, 100 1,345 2,012 2,326 2,600 1,152 1,319 2,620 1,380 2,134 1,694 2,109 2,108 411 2,353 1,225 1,613 1,888 1,984 925 1,090 2,057 1,166 1,662 1,460 1,5 30 1,7 00 309 785 550 667 578 558 199 207 439 198 358 300 434 393 66 33 45 41 31 28 22 19 21 17 22 21 28 23 21 l ,012 669 973 758 706 270 311 519 277 475 390 573 48:?. 73 43 55 60 40 36 29 29 25 24 29 27 37 28 24 2,523 1,302 1,907 2,000 2,107 969· 1,184 2,139 1,211 1,764 1,539 1,660 1,807 308 44 45 1,859 857 427 184 23 21 439 212 24 25 1,904 893 1,506 689 256 131 17 1!) 315 144 21 21 1,593 740 46 47 48 49 1,479 2,379 2,127 1,212 392 722 665 345 27 30 31 28 397 762 745 359 27 32 35 30 1,421 2,378 2,170 1,234 1,263 1,936 1,84 9 977 265 444 508 233 21 23 28 24 312 571 591 293 25 30 32 30 1,325 2,015 1,875 1,063 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 2,265 1,540 2,188 1,902 1,682 1,044 1,520 1,106 606 377 521 396 378 269 347 269 27 24 24 21 22 26 23 24 582 343 501 416 412 299 347 292 26 22 23 22 24 29 23 26 2,203 1,501 2,115 1,876 1,800 1,136 1,567 1,197 l,897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 1,320 808 353 209 353 302 237 174 289 150 19 17 19 19 17 19 22 19 456 266 4~5 372 249 214 290 186 24 21 22 23 18 24 22 23 2,008 1,329 1,962. 1,720 1,408 912 1,356 852 58 351 121 35 108 31 355 251 44 18 100 40 311 Subtotal A D-1 120,717 703 38,991 205 32 29 40 ,233 224 33 32 121,171 791 97,223 406 24,153 99 25 24 30,252 11 2 31 28 103,130 432 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtota l C S-1 S-2 1,924 1,667 4,294 1,271 1.566 1,476 4, 313 984 407 628 437 1,270 350 447 411 1,2 08 383 183 33 26 30 28 29 28 28 39 45 560 543 1,327 270 300 410 980 451 160 29 33 31 21 19 28 23 46 39 1,840 1,994 4,625 1,189 1,390 1,620 4,199 l ,107 375 1,268 926 2,600 1,084 1,381 1,045 3,510 647 215 348 224 671 229 295 254 778 188 69 27 24 26 21 21 24 22 29 32 373 226 711 280 324 272 87 6 247 67 29 24 27 26 23 26 25 38 31 1,355 990 2,777 1,165 1,413 1,070 3,648 698 222 S-3 936 442 47 360 38 910 520 133 26 217 42 617 S-4 637 270 42 168 26 593 287 67 23 98 34 317 S -5 S-6 S-7 Subtotal D 1,082 2, 474 1,495 8,015 381 903 541 3,103 35 36 36 39 394 938 491 2,962 36 38 33 37 1,236 2,550 1,503 8,274 528 1,855 983 5,035 130 506 230 1,323 25 27 23 26 159 674 330 1,792 30 36 34 36 574 1,984 1,107 5,519 A-Dallas ; B-University Park; C-Highland Parki D-Suburban. Family Mobility in Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 TABLE ~ontinued REsIDENCE CHANGES INTER-CITY MOVEMENT OF FAMILIES Foa SELECTED YEARs BY NUMBER OF FAMILIES AND BY CENSUS TRACTS 1929-1930 1923­19'24 Total Total Total Total Families Families Families Families First Families Families Second First Families Families Second Census Tracts Year 1929 Moving Out 1umber Per Cent Moving In Number Per Cent Year 1930 Year 1923 Moving Out Number Per Cent Moving In Number Per Cent Year 1924 Total 110,973 31,308 28 38,604 35 118,269 90,210 29,919 33 30,502 34 90,793 1 412 93 23 134 33 504 13 7 54 24 185 59 2 559 112 20 124 22 615 36 7 19 23 64 99 3 986 160 16 216 22 l,140 87 8 9 56 64 196 4 l,371 353 26 513 37 1,588 362 84 23 156 43 470 5 l,861 503 27 600 32 1,972 1,332 358 27 392 29 1,429 6 3,611 860 24 l,148 32 3,947 2,123 541 25 628 30 2,318 7 2,358 504 21 659 28 2,480 1,954 479 24 625 32 2,059 8 l,431 339 24 439 31 l,475 l,285 353 27 309 24 l,214 9 926 185 20 259 28 l,054 685 178 26 161 24 710 10 2,514 521 21 622 25 2,665 1,568 290 19 402 26 l,82 9 11 2,757 516 19 636 23 2,972 l,514 248 16 382 25 1,775 12 l ,715 313 18 379 22 1,869 1,318 268 20 289 22 1,325 13 3,506 863 25 1,040 30 3,650 3,161 948 30 800 25 2,929 14 l ,038 241 23 269 26 l,082 736 192 26 244 33 870 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 5,373 3,555 4,647 l,792 1,315 2,109 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,548 1,323 747 l,624 1,336 1,959 582 605 649 869 1,686 473 316 402 122 30 38 42 32 46 31 49 42 26 20 30 16 2,113 l,320 2,104 653 672 778 979 1,869 571 431 405 161 39 37 45 36 51 37 55 47 31 28 31 22 5,763 3,577 4,638 l ,820 1,350 2,218 1,742 4,101 1,842 1,634 1,329 775 4,752 3,233 5,028 l,376 1,704 1,655 2,894 4,360 1,575 1,204 657 370 1,543 l,212 2,142 392 785 471 1,498 1,866 423 274 179 81 32 38 43 29 46 28 52 43 27 23 27 22 l,568 1,143 l,734 492 729 560 1,576 1,596 487 322 185 101 33 35 35 36 43 34 54 37 31 27 28 27 4,685 3,167 4,441 1,504 1,594 1,733 2,799 3,800 1,592 1,303 669 451 27 28 29 1,782 1,987 751 430 586 293 24 30 27 518 754 307 29 38 41 1,802 2,091 822 1,291 2,053 862 332 577 299 26 28 35 391 613 311 30 30 36 1,353 2,010 833 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Subtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 Subtotal D 2,637 1,900 2,307 2,142 2,233 934 1,178 2,007 1,118 1,558 1,537 1,562 1,867 299 1,491 617 1,388 2,121 1,902 933 2,095 1,249 1,924 1,749 1,286 835 1,201 391 172 102,198 202 1,061 338 1,601 1,058 1,436 633 3,127 497 178 291 162 318 1,669 932 4,047 940 898 1,037 679 666 213 288 478 262 375 362 461 477 70 319 116 309 508 510 218 458 282 349 317 240 206 284 109 38 28,874 57 288 74 419 219 336 155 710 132 65 97 55 81 609 266 1,305 36 47 45 32 30 23 24 24 23 24 24 29 26 23 21 19 22 24 27 23 22 23 18 18 19 25 24 28 22 28 28 27 22 26 21 23 24 23 27 37 33 34 25 36 29 32 1,282 903 1,246 946 871 316 331 621 322 459 450 563 573 111 318 135 367 686 701 324 495 332 500 423 352 209 359 287 57 35,212 122 449 131 702 270 351 234 855 218 85 214 69 123 729 397 1,835 49 47 54 44 39 34 28 31 29 29 29 36 31 37 21 22 26 32 37 35 24 27 26 24 27 25 30 73 33 34 60 42 39 44 26 24 37 27 44 48 73 43 39 44 43 45 2,913 1,802 2,427 2,368 2,404 1,062 1,214 2,211 1,199 1,647 1,638 1,637 1,970 338 1,510 661 1,447 2,225 2,086 1,048 2,074 1,352 2,043 1,878 1,414 865 1,312 672 196 108,130 303 1,287 491 2,081 l,127 1,467 826 3,420 578 190 441 199 378 1,792 1,060 4,638 3,7_76 2,602 3,584 3,092 2,437 982 1,099 1,172 665 919 1,276 1,511 1,456 207 711 55 1,174 2,048 1,802 420 1,574 807 1,475 590 455 313 635 60 2 86,087 116 376 20 572 811 1,187 96 2,094 195 82 83 19 81 714 343 1,517 1,611 1,389 1,778 1,296 843 276 248 420 150 298 337 525 347 50 159 15 296 542 540 97 380 198 30 1 134 102 49 127 29 2 28,574 43 135 1 179 189 333 25 547 72 44 35 7 29 287 145 619 43 53 50 42 35 28 23 36 23 32 26 35 24 24 22 27 25 26 30 23 24 25 20 23 22 16 20 48 100 33 37 36 5 35 23 28 26 26 37 54 42 37 36 40 42 41 1,242 1,155 1,807 919 785 280 291 358 182 335 348 448 422 68 214 38 338 620 573 161 479 237 469 160 180 93 228 41 2 28,772 43 215 25 283 193 330 25 548 117 36 51 25 46 407 217 899 33 44 50 30 32 29 26 30 27 36 27 30 29 33 30 69 29 30 32 38 30 29 32 27 40 30 36 68 100 33 37 57 125 55 24 28 26 26 60 44 62 132 57 57 63 59 3,231 2,205 3,435 2,535 2,306 977 1,117 1,223 713 1,068 1,326 1,438 1,560 220 844 89 1,243 2,029 1,782 549 1,727 874 1,701 686 624 381 817 105 3 86,024 8, 553 59 699 848 1,262 97 2,207 251 73 105 46 112 843 433 1,863 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. RESIDENCE C HANGES INTER-TRACT MOVEMENT OF F AMILIES FoR SELECTED YEARs BY N UMBER OF FAMILIES AND BY CENSUS TRACTS 1937­1938 1933 1935 Total Total Totnl Total Families Families Families Fumilics First Families Families Second First Families Families Second Census Tracts Year 1937 Moving Out 'umber Per Cent Moving In Number Per Cent Year 1938 Year 1933-34 Moving Out 1umber Per Cent Moving In Number Per Cent Year 1934-35 Total 137,339 20,823 15 20,823 15 137,339 108,368 17'781 16 17 '781 16 108,368 l 999 85 9 167 17 1,081 668 68 10 102 15 702 2 1,057 172 16 212 20 1,097 718 159 22 151 21 710 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38. 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 Subtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 Subtotal D 1,503 2,178 2,090 4,474 2,785 1,710 1,299 2,749 3,723 2,380 4,208 1,248 5,971 4,136 5,538 1,979 1,589 2,431 1,811 4,215 2,174 1,762 1,520 946 2,218 1,790 862 2,975 1,294 2,183 2,412 2,454 1,161 1.346 2,448 1,403 2,042 1,769 1,888 2,116 370 1,859 857 1,479 2,379 2,127 1,212 2,265 1,540 2,188 1,902 1,682 1,044 1,520 1,106 351 120, 717 703 1,924 1,667 4,294 1,271 1,560 1,476 4,313 984 407 936 637 1,082 2,474 1,495 8,015 230 276 376 662 454 385 290 516 620 368 692 184 1,098 530 612 351 103 468 268 622 355 305 198 149 295 315 176 356 147 308 350 425 183 316 296 253 233 328 229 400 46 257 126 297 436 407 224 405 257 392 325 266 155 177 129 16 18,894 104 289 186 579 172 195 139 506 119 61 99 75 104 22 1 165 844 15 13 18 15 16 23 22 19 17 15 16 15 18 13 11 18 6 19 15 15 16 17 13 16 13 18 20 12 11 14 15 17 16 23 12 18 11 19 12 19 12 14 15 20 18 lf!.. 18 18 17 18 17 16 15 12 12 5 16 15 15 11 13 14 12 9 12 12 15 11 12 10 9 11 11 261 423 304 612 442 343 313 481 636 384 681 196 1,002 536 541 300 75 442 173 443 323 289 193 148 292 325 160 306 186 213 255 393 185 251 302 240 219 279 230 381 56 290 134 234 395 370 232 367 252. 339 279 350 217 224 197 33 18,106 173 273 407 853 170 166 284 620 174 52 155 133 245 262 223 1,244 17 19 15 14 16 20 24 18 17 16 16 16 17 13 10 15 5 18 10 11 15 16 13 16 13 18 19 10 14 10 11 16 16 19 12 17 11 16 12 18 15 16 16 16 17 17 19 16 16 15 15 21 21 15 18 9 15 25 14 24 20 13 11 19 14 18 13 17 21 23 11 15 16 1,534 2,325 2,018 4,424 2,773 1,668 1,322 2,714 3,739 2,396 4,197 1,260 5,875 4,142 5,467 1,928 1,561 2,405 1,716 4,036 2,142 1,746 1,515 945 2,215 1,800 846 2,925 1,333 2,088 2,317 2,422 1,163 1,281 2,454 1,390 2,028 1,720 1,889 2,097 380 1,892 865 1,416 2,338 2,090 1,220 2,227 1,535 2,135 1,856 1,766 1,106 1,567 1,174 368 119,929 772 1,908 1,888 4,568 1,269 1,537 1,621 4,427 1,039 398 992 695 1,223 2,515 1,553 8,415 1,301 1,637 1,643 3,768 2,312 1,309 1,052 2,582 3,172 1,962 3,375 1,112 4,798 2,976 3,776 1,494 1,288 1,850 1,311 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,145 702 1,782 1,883 724 2,353 1,225 1,613 1,888 1,984 925 1,090 2,057 1,166 1,662 1,460 1,530 1,700 309 1,506 689 1,263 1,936 1,849 977 1,897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 1,320 808 251 97,223 406 1,268 926 2,600 1,084 1,381 1,045 3,510 647 215 520 287 528 1,855 983 5,035 186 232 260 537 403 271 228 473 524 345 602. 152 911 475 510 296 112 419 236 510 312 299 159 107 237 327 163 326 200 253 302 357 135 234 246 221 150 256 186 304 44 225 118 256 410 387 172 379 244 332 285 236 221 198 134 12 16,336 87 188 115 390 129 153 125 407 105 17 87 49 62 199 129 648 14 14 16 14 17 21 22 18 17 18 18 14 19 16 14 20 9 23 18 15 l!1 21 14 15 13 17 23 14 16 16 16 18 15 21 12 19 9 18 12 18 14 15 17 20 21 21 18 20 19 17 18 17 25 15 17 5 17 21 15 12 16 12 11 12 12 16 8 17 17 12 11 13 13 213 260 318 625 380 298 253 499 589 310 598 150 875 469 528 258 91 398 149 479 293 260 162 121 268 274 156 269 158 241 234 332 108 224 248 187 135 245 177 322 36 253 156 271 362 330 198 387 257 324 315 267 190 233 142 16 16,144 100 250 177 527 159 156 132 447 97 26 100 48 79 160 153 663 16 16 19 17 16 23 24 19 19 16 18 14 18 16 14 17 7 22 11 14 18 18 14 17 15 15 22 11 13 15 12 17 12 21 l& 16 8 17 12 19 12 17 23 21 19 18 20 20 20 17 19 20 21 18 18 6 17 25 20 19 20 15 11 13 13 15 12 19 17 15 9 16 13 1,328 1,665 1,701 3,856 2,289 1,336 1,077 2,608 3,237 1,927 3,371 1,110 4,762 2,970 3,794 1,456 1,267 1,829 1,224 3,277 1,610 1,404 1,148 716 1,813 1,830 717 2,296 1.183 1,601 1,820 1,959 898 1,080 2,059 1,132 1,647 1,449 1,521 1,718 301 1,534 727 1,278 1,888 1,792 1,003 1,905 1,272 1,890 1,650 1,396 872 1,355 816 255 97,031 419 1,330 988 2,737 1,114 1,384 1,052 3,550 639 224 533 286 545 1,816 1,007 5,050 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. TABLE 7-Continued RESIDENCE CHANGES INTER-TRACT MOVEMENT OF F AMILIES FoR SELECTED YEARs BY NUMBER OF FAMILIES AND BY CENSUS TRACTS 1929-1930 1923­1924 Census Trac ts Total Families First Year 1929 Famili es Moving Out Number Per Cent Families Moving In Number Per Cent Total Famili es Second Y ea r 1930 Total Families First Families Year Moving Out 1923 Number Per Cent Fam i1i cs Moving In lumber Per Cent Total Families Second Year 1924 Total 110,973 18,997 17 18,997 17 110,973 90,210 15,610 17 15,610 17 90,210 1 412 59 14 110 27 463 13 1 8 30 231 42 2 559 87 16 131 23 603 36 10 28 57 158 83 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 986 1,371 1,861 3,611 2,358 1,431 926 2,514 2,757 1,715 3,506 1,038 5,373 3,555 4,647 l ,792 1,315 2,109 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,548 1,323 747 1,782 1,987 751 141 189 343 568 405 337 164 451 514 272 658 134 1,137 500 659 362 118 446 315 652 369 317 212 147 299 387 151 14 14 18 16 17 24 18 18 19 16 19 13 21 14 14 20 9 21 18 16 20 20 16 20 17 20 20 239 246 357 616 372 281 218 501 609 360 625 150 1,038 538 505 319 86 426 185 570 284 288 216 136 231 323 118 24 18 19 17 16 20 24 20 22 21 18 14 19 15 11 18 7 20 10 14 16 19 16 18 13 16 16 1,084 1,428 1,875 3,659 2,325 1,375 980 2,564 2,852 1,803 3,473 1,054 5,274 3,593 4,493 1,749 1,283 2,089 1,632 3,918 1,744 1,519 1,326 736 1,714 1,923 718 87 362 1,332 2,123 1,954 1,285 685 1,568 1,514 1,318 3,161 736 4,752 3,233 5,028 1,376 1,704 1,655 2,894 4,360 1,575 1,204 667 370 1,291 2,053 862 25 53 258 257 380 280 102 255 242 226 546 84 984 517 746 304 213 384 516 874 319 236 115 52 178 436 185 29 15 19 12 19 22 15 16 16 17 17 11 21 16 15 22 12 23 18 20 20 20 18 14 14 21 21 86 89 321 365 339 253 144 404 369 212 462 166 892 620 667 332 159 373 343 584 272 287 121 113 181 357 144 99 25 24 17 17 20 21 26 24 16 15 23 19 16 11 24 9 22 12 13 17 24 18 31 14 17 17 148 398 1,395 2,231 1,913 1,258 727 1,717 1,641 1,304 3,077 818 4,660 3,236 4,849 1,404 1,650 1,644 2,721 4,070 1,528 1,255 663 431 1,294 1,974 821 30 31 32 2,637 1,900 2,307 362 321 387 14 17 17 296 218 298 11 11 13 2,571 1,797 2,218 3,776 2,602 3,584 562 428 648 15 16 18 386 265 470 10 10 13 3,600 2,439 3,406 33 34 2,142 2,233 366 429 17 19 325 395 15 18 2,101 2,199 3,092 2,437 564 481 18 20 384 408 12 17 2,912 2,364 35 934 125 13 150 16 959 982 154 16 145 15 973 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 1,178 2,007 1,118 1,558 1,537 1,562 1,867 299 225 278 193 187 268 211 369 34 19 14 17 12 17 14 20 11 218 339 214 192 281 184 376 32 19 17 19 12 18 12 20 11 1,171 2,068 1,139 1,563 1,550 1,535 1,874 297 1,099 1,172 665 919 l ,276 1,511 1,456 207 234 130 105 65 226 217 263 25 21 11 16 7 18 14 18 12 209 243 121 177 266 22 1 292 20 19 21 18 19 21 15 20 10 1,074 1,285 681 1,031 1,315 1,616 1,485 202 44 45 1,491 617 266 96 18 16 286 121 19 20 1,511 642 711 65 117 6 16 11 195 17 27 31 789 66 46 47 48 49 1,388 2,121 1,902 933 289 483 395 176 21 23 21 19 290 409 388 185 21 19 20 20 1,389 2,047 1,895 942 1,174 2,048 1,802 420 215 489 394 74 18 24 22 18 242 393 341 139 21 19 19 33 1,201 1,952 1,749 485 50 2,095 439 21 381 18 2,037 1,574. 328 21 382 24 1,628 51 52 53 54 55 1,249 1,924 1,749 1,286 835 245 377 333 246 157 20 20 19 19 19 298 345 356 262 184 24 18 20 20 22 1,302 1,892 1,772 1,302 862 807 1,475 690 455 313 133 271 93 60 54 16 18 16 13 17 161 329 163 151 78 20 22 28 33 25 835 1,533 660 646 337 56 57 58 Subtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C S-1 1.201 391 172 102,198 202 1,061 338 1,601 1,058 1,436 633 3,127 497 181 64 11 17,906 28 140 38 206 139 150 92 381 82 15 16 6 18 14 13 11 13 13 10 15 12 16 217 167 16 17,500 64 206 134 403 157 166 206 529 77 18 43 9 17 32 19 40 25 15 12 33 17 15 1,237 494 177 101,792 238 1,126 434 1,798 1,076 1,452 747 3,275 492 635 60 2 86,087 116 376 20 512 811 1,187 96 2,094 195 103 1 15,218 37 32 3 72 97 106 17 220 12 16 2 18 32 9 16 14 12 9 18 11 6 184 33 1 14,957 8 127 20 156 130 184 18 332 23 29 55 50 17 7 34 100 30 16 16 19 16 12 716 92 3 85,826 87 471 37 595 844 1,265 97 2,206 206 S-2 178 26 15 18 10 170 82 3 4 2 2 81 S-3 291 50 17 83 28 324 83 7 8 13 16 89 S-4 162 18 11 41 25 185 19 9 47 28 S-5 318 38 12 56 18 336 81 1 1 15 19 95 S-6 S-7 1,669 932 152 138 9 15 155 135 9 14 l ,672 929 714 343 49 28 7 8 58 46 8 13 723 361 Subtotal D 4,047 504 12 665 14 4,108 1,517 100 7 166 11 1,583 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. The University of Texas Publication TABLE 8 D W ELLING UNITS OCCUPIED BY OWNER FoR SELECTED YEARS BY NUMBER AND PER CENT OF TOTAL UNITS AND BY CENSUS TRACTS 1938 1933­1934 1930 1927 Total Total Total Total Ce nsus Tra cts Dwelling Units Owner Occupied Number Per Cent Dwelling Units Owner Occupied Number Per Cent Dwelling Un its Owner Occupied Number Per Cent Dwelling Units Owner Occup ied Number Per Cent Total 83,3 43 27,716 33 77,680 24,606 32 74,963 26,852 36 68,260 27,431 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 829 854 1,155 1,703 1,190 3,260 1,996 1,147 971 1,974 2,797 1,692 2,399 771 3,231 2,139 2,554 928 800 1,525 327 2,010 1,329 1,150 1,078 623 1,591 1,058 572 484 392 643 583 369 808 556 340 348 779 1,012 889 720 364 709 384 342 166 60 360 27 273 390 506 32 7 280 546 315 154 58 46 56 34 31 25 28 30 36 39 36 52 30 47 22 18 13 18 8 24 8 14 29 44 30 45 34 30 27 536 576 996 1,234 1,165 3,152 1,804 1,065 785 1,939 2,550 1,550 2,336 827 3,175 2,110 2,560 984 842 1,448 408 2,122 1,356 1,122 1,058 559 1,523 1,290 578 274 256 554 583 383 774 576 322 287 770 947 699 672 359 721 332 382 197 78 323 25 219 381 465 267 209 515 324 150 51 44 56 47 33 25 32 30 37 40 37 45 29 43 23 16 15 20 9 22 6 10 28 41 25 37 34 25 26 387 451 846 1,190 1,146 2,971 1,766 1,017 711 1,875 2,274 1,409 2,228 798 3,160 2,119 2,549 957 900 1,437 501 2,161 1,353 1,099 1,028 55 1 1,488 1,312 568 243 256 567 594 393 882 622 365 311 803 904 707 71 3 360 792 489 395 211 116 356 29 280 430 494 351 235 638 406 164 63 57 67 50 34 30 35 36 44 43 40 50 32 45 25 23 15 22 13 25 6 13 32 45 34 43 43 31 29 198 316 517 901 1,057 2,371 1,670 941 584 1,638 1,907 1,186 2,038 746 3,033 1,981 2,517 952 967 1,378 622 2,237 1,298 1,081 907 526 1,394 1,347 577 121 229 370 520 451 949 651 406 336 933 1,060 686 811 387 856 523 465 248 117 394 46 318 443 542 397 317 705 423 160 61 72 71 58 43 40 39 43 58 57 56 58 40 52 28 26 18 26 12 29 7 14 34 50 44 60 50 31 28 30 31 1,818 123 184 1 10 1 1,924 153 210 4 11 3 2,041 192 258 5 13 3 2,121 297 263 5 12 2 32 33 34 35 752 1,358 1,650 835 56 166 304 269 7 12 18 32 917 1,460 1,642 791 67 188 385 30 1 7 13 23 38 1,046 1,520 1,654 769 77 217 435 309 7 14 26 40 1,196 1,528 1,600 742 81 256 445 296 7 17 28 40 36 927 260 28 919 292 32 886 315 36 848 330 39 37 38 1,769 94 1 664 417 38 44 1,705 876 737 357 43 41 1,675 819 845 408 50 50 1,431 681 763 377 53 55 39 40 41 42 43 1,551 1,188 1,221 1,292 272 749 362 317 423 103 48 30 26 33 38 1,463 1,148 1,239 1,232 235 725 403 297 416 96 50 35 24 34 41 1,378 1,125 1,262 1,190 224 768 436 352 44 8 119 56 39 28 38 53 1,263 1,124 1,234 1,111 174 713 467 417 493 96 56 41 34 44 55 44 45 1,369 670 650 367 47 55 1,196 561 561 246 47 44 1,112 523 583 313 52 60 959 332 514 232 54 70 46 928 284 31 915 314 34 905 350 39 869 393 45 47 48 49 1,539 1,329 930 401 290 329 26 22 35 1,522 1,269 847 321 287 246 21 23 29 1,516 1,243 846 438 329 304 29 26 36 1,496 1,217 770 473 377 445 32 31 58 50 51 1,499 1,075 487 503 32 47 1,450 998 518 403 36 40 1,448 963 591 490 41 51 1,429 845 685 481 48 57 52 53 54 55 1,433 1,504 1,307 816 651 595 631 360 45 40 48 44 1,406 1,451 1,072 696 648 489 491 294 46 34 46 42 1,408 1,424 1,011 654 748 745 538 307 53 52 53 47 1,336 1,257 880 568 887 775 530 322 66 62 60 57 56 57 1,171 896 608 502 52 56 1,064 632 488 335 46 53 1,032 525 576 284 56 54 924 131 597 84 65 64 58 278 111 40 228 115 50 186 88 47 84 44 52 Subtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C 76,094 651 1,369 1,738 3,758 904 1,271 1,316 3,491 24 ,170 281 492 916 1,689 474 626 757 1,857 32 43 36 53 45 52 49 57 53 72,661 317 939 738 1,994 862 1,261 902 3,025 22,278 119 313 350 782 508 629 409 1,546 31 38 33 47 39 59 50 45 51 70,829 190 750 394 1,334 842 1,258 700 2,800 24,782 89 284 22.0 593 473 635 369 1,477 35 47 38 56 44 56 50 53 53 65,334 39 531 153 723 785 1,180 238 2,203 25,705 18 273 98 389 538 656 143 1,337 39 46 51 64 54 69 56 60 61 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park. Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 TABLE 9 VACANT DWELLING UNITS FOR S ELECTED YEARS BY PER CENT AND BY CE NSUS T RACT 1938 1933­193'1 1929 1923 Ce nsus Tracts To tal Dwelling Units Per Cent Vaca nt Vaca nt To ial Dwelling Un it s Per Cent Vaca nt Vacant Total Dwelling Un its Per Cen t Vacant Va cant Dwelling Units Per Cent Total Vacant Vacant Total 83,343 5,594 6.7 77,6 0 9,098 11.7 72,947 6,115 8.4 50,834 1,996 3.9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 829 54 1,155 1,703 1,190 3,260 1,996 1,147 971 1,974 2,797 1,692 2,399 771 3,231 2,139 2,554 928 800 1,525 327 2,010 1,329 1,150 1,078 93 61 102 99 347 1 73 62 131 157 75 174 91 299 106 150 51 45 95 19 156 66 47 40 10.6 10.9 5.3 6.0 8.3 10.6 9.4 6.4 6.4 6.6 5.6 4.4 7.3 11.8 9.3 5.0 5.9 5.5 5.6 6.2 5.8 7.8 5.0 4.1 3.7 536 576 996 1,234 l , 165 3,152 1,804 1,065 785 1,939 2,550 1,550 2,336 827 3,175 2,110 2,560 984 842 1,448 408 2,122 1,356 1,122 1,058 43 63 67 78 149 494 206 128 63 139 237 108 336 90 519 280 309 190 71 223 45 351 175 114 143 8.0 10.9 6.7 6.3 12.8 15.7 11.4 12.0 8.0 7.2 9.3 7.0 14.4 10.9 16.3 13.3 12.1 19.3 8.4 15.4 11.0 16.5 12.9 10.2 13.5 309 410 762 1,093 1,115 2,783 1,737 900 657 1,815 2,133 1,339 2,1 89 796 3,131 2,049 2,565 962 913 1,423 544 2,1 82 1,347 1,097 984 27 13 34 111 77 239 95 59 34 128 88 79 168 75 241 142 202 95 128 112 70 249 90 33 74 8.7 3.2 4.5 10.1 6.9 8.6 5.5 6.0 5.2 7.0 4.1 5.9 7.7 9.4 7.7 6.9 7.9 9.9 14.0 7.9 12.9 11.4 6.7 3.0 7.5 14 27 69 296 825 1,427 1,337 807 464 1,188 1,156 942 1,659 524 2,462 1,750 2,230 762 927 1,089 714 1,996 1,066 846 469 3 1 10 9 27 97 84 65 14 103 46 19 47 17 96 32 47 12 27 53 11 68 37 32 23 21.4 3.7 14.5 3.0 3.3 6.8 6.3 8.1 3.0 8.7 4.0 2.0 2.8 3.2 3.9 1.8 2.1 1.6 2.9 4.9 1.5 3.4 3.5 3.8 4.9 26 623 14 2.2 559 41 7.3 540 32 5.9 268 15 5.6 27 28 29 1,591 1,058 572 77 56 35 4.8 5.3 6.1 1,523 1,290 578 193 154 72 12.7 11.9 12.5 1,479 1,327 567 131 102 53 8.9 7.7 9.4 970 1,218 514 38 59 8 3.9 4.9 1.6 30 31 1,818 123 l10 14 6.1 ll.4 1,924 153 246 31 12.8 20.2 2,071 238 354 52 17.1 21.8 2,110 427 53 9 2.5 2.1 32 33 34 35 752 1,35 1,650 35 81 lll i56 73 10.8 8.2 9.4 8.7 917 1,460 1,642 791 191 277 300 90 20.8 19.0 18.3 11.4 1,087 1,541 1,649 756 194 215 223 106 17.9 13.9 13.5 14.0 1,258 1,480 1,442 626 57 46 105 22 4.5 3.1 7.3 3.5 36 927 55 5.9 919 91 9.9 872 58 6.7 764 28 3.7 37 38 1,769 941 80 35 4.5 3.7 1,705 876 149 87 8.7 9.9 1,605 796 126 37 7.9 4.6 807 465 26 6 3.2 1.3 39 40 41 42 43 1,551 1,1 88 1,221 1,292 272 6 67 50 70 8 4.4 5.6 4.1 5.4 2.9 1,463 1,148 1,239 1,232 235 150 118 l10 135 13 10.3 10.3 8.9 10.9 5.5 1,353 1,118 1,251 1,161 221 152 74 146 63 23 11.2 6.6 11.7 5.4 10.4 694 840 989 918 85 18 36 33 55 2.6 4.3 3.3 6.0 0.0 44 45 1,369 670 59 28 4.3 4.2 1,196 561 96 62 8.0 11.0 1,062 494 40 38 3.8 7.7 528 42 30 4 5.7 9.5 46 928 6 7.3 915 94 10.3 899 35 3.9 737 25 3.4 47 48 49 1,539 1,329 930 93 122 42 6.0 9.2 4.5 1,522 1,269 847 176 145 112 11.6 11.4 13.2 1,512 1,237 823 115 92 120 7.6 7.4 14.6 1,327 1,025 293 52 41 11 3.9 4.0 3.8 50 51 52 53 54 55 1,499 1,075 1,433 1,504 1,307 816 64 52 50 60 50 23 4.3 4.8 3.5 4.0 3.8 2.8 1,450 998 1,406 1,451 1,072 696 141 92 99 178 95 54 9.7 9.2 7.0 12.3 8.9 7.8 1,489 921 1,365 1,390 975 643 82 39 46 66 43 38 5.5 4.2 3.4 4.7 4.4 5.9 1,054 532 1,028 454 345 24 1 30 26 53 18 8 8 2.8 4.9 5.2 4.0 2.3 3.3 56 57 58 Subtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C .1 ,171 896 278 76,094 651 1,369 1,738 3,758 904 1,271 1,316 3,491 42 41 16 4,785 49 110 193 352 86 237 134 457 3.6 4.6 5.8 6.3 7.5 8.0 11.1 9.4' 9.5 18.6 10.2 13.1 1,064 632 228 72,661 317 939 738 1,994 62 1,261 902 3,025 87 58 11 8,569 31 107 64 202 71 169 87 327 8.2 9.2 4.8 11.8 9.8 11.4 8.7 10.1 8.2 13.4 9.7 10.8 1,018 221 178 69,184 137 704 290 1,131 830 1,245 557 2,632 81 15 21 5,675 20 71 32 123 71 157 89 317 8.0 6.8 11.8 8.2 14.6 10.1 11.0 10.9 8.6 12.6 16.0 12.0 563 24 1 49,115 20 188 19 227 587 851 54 1,492 25 1,925 1 8 1 10 24 34 3 61 4.4 0.0 0.0 3.9 5.0 4.3 5.3 4.4 4.1 4.0 5.6 4.1 A-Dallas ; B-University Park; C-Highland Park. 42 The University of Texas Publication TABLE 10 DWELLING UNITS OccuPIED FoR SELECTED YEARS BY NUMBER OF F AMILIES, NUMBER OF UNITS, FAMILIES PER UNIT AND UNITS PER FAMILY AND B Y C ENSUS TRACTS 1938 1933-1935 1929 1923 Occu- Num- Occu­ 1um - Occu- Num- Occu- Num- p cd Dwell- her of F ami­lies Units P er p'ed Dw e ll- her of F nm i-lies Units P er p :ed Dwell­ ber of Fami­lies U ni ts P er p ·ed Dwe ll­ bcr of Fami­lies U nits P er Census Tracts ing nits Fa mi-lies P er Unit F am­ily ing Uni ls Fa mi-lies P er Unit F am­ily ing Units Fa mi-lies P er Unit Fam­jjy in g Units Fami· lies Per Unit Fam­ily Total 77, 749 129,995 1.67 .60 68,582 103,333 1.51 .66 66,832 106,926 1.60 .63 48,838 88,693 1.82 .55 l 741 l ,017 1.37 .73 493 668 1.35 .74 282 412 1.46 .69 ll 13 1.18 .85 2 761 l ,077 1.41 .71 513 718 1.40 .71 397 559 1.41 .il 26 36 1.39 .72 3 1.094 l ,567 1.43 .70 929 1,301 1.40 .71 728 986 1.36 .74 59 87 1.47 .68 4 1,601 2,344 l.46 .68 1,156 l ,637 l.42 .71 982 l ,371 1.40 .71 287 ~62 1.26 .79 5 1.091 l ,989 1.82 .55 l ,016 l ,643 1.62 .62 1.038 l ,861 1.80 .56 798 l,332 1.67 .60 6 2,913 4.358 1.50 .67 2,658 3,768 1.42 .70 2.544 3,611 1.42 .71 l ,330 2,123 1.60 .63 7 l ,808 2,831 1.57 .64 l ,598 2,312 1.45 .69 l ,G42 2,358 l .'13 .70 l ,253 1,954 1.56 .64 8 l,074 l,702 1.59 .63 937 l ,309 1.40 .71 931 1,431 1.54 .65 742 l ,285 1.73 .58 9 909 l ,386 1.52 .66 722 1,052 1.46 .69 623 926 1.49 .67 450 685 1.52 .66 10 l ,8-13 2,749 1.49 .67 l ,800 2,582 1.43 .70 1.687 2,514 1.49 .67 1.085 l ,568 1.44 .69 ll 2.640 3,668 1.39 .72 2.313 3.172 1.37 .73 2,045 2,757 l.35 .74 l ,llO l ,514 1.36 .74 12 1.617 2,356 1.46 .69 l,442 l,962 1.36 .74 l, 260 1.715 l.36 .74 923 l.318 1.43 .70 13 2,225 4,017 1.80 .56 2,000 3.375 1.69 .59 2,021 3,506 l.73 .58 l ,612 3,161 1.96 .51 l1 680 1,231 l.81 .55 737 l,112 1.51 .66 721 1,038 1.44 .69 507 736 1.45 .69 15 2,932 5,971 2.04 .'19 2,656 4,798 1.81 .55 2.890 5,373 1.86 .54 2,366 4.752 2.01 .50 16 2,033 4,421 2.1 8 .46 l ,830 2,976 1.63 .61 l ,907 3,555 1.86 .54 1,718 3,233 1,88 .53 17 2,404 5,603 2.33 .43 2,251 3,776 1.68 .60 2,363 4.647 l.96 .51 2. 183 5,028 2.30 .44 18 877 l ,871 2.14 .47 794 l,494 l.88 .53 867 l,792 2.07 .48 750 1.376 1.84 .54 19 755 1,439 1.90 .53 771 l ,288 1.67 .60 785 1,315 1.68 .60 900 1.704 l.89 .53 20 l ,430 2.359 1.65 .61 1,225 1.850 1.51 .66 l ,3ll 2,109 1.61 .62 l ,036 l ,655 1.60 .63 21 308 1,574 5.10 .20 363 l ,3ll 3.61 .28 474 l ,762 3.72 .27 703 2.894 4.12 .24 22 1,854 4,017 2.17 .46 1,771 3.308 1.87 .54 1.933 4,000 2.07 .48 l ,928 4,360 2,26 .44 23 1.263 2,129 1.68 .59 1,181 1,629 1.38 .73 1,257 l ,829 1.45 .69 1.029 l,575 1.53 ,65 24 1.1 03 l.747 l.58 .63 l ,008 1,443 l.43 .70 1,064 l ,548 1.45 .69 814 1. 204 1.48 .68 25 1,038 1:674 l.61 .62 915 1,1 45 l. 25 .80 910 1.323 l.46 .69 446 657 l.47 .68 26 609 899 1.48 .68 518 702 l.36 .74 508 747 l.47 .68 253 370 1.46 .69 27 !,SU 2,321 1.53 .65 1,330 1.782 1.34 .75 l ,348 l ,782 1.32 .76 932 l.291 1.39 .72 28 1,002 l ,927 1.92 .52 l ,136 1,883 1.66 .60 1,225 l,987 1.62 .62 1,159 2,053 l.77 .56 29 537 867 1.61 .62 506 724 l.43 .70 514 751 1.46 .69 506 862 1.70 .59 30 1,708 3.100 1.82 .55 l,678 2,353 1.40 .71 1.717 2.637 1.53 .65 2,057 3,776 1.84 .54 31 109 1,345 12.32 .08 122 1,225 10.04 .10 186 l,900 10.22 .10 418 2,602 6.22 .16 32 671 2,012 3.00 .33 726 l ,613 2.22 .45 893 2,307 2.59 .39 l ,201 3,584 2.98 .34 33 1,2<17 2.326 l.87 .53 l ,183 l ,BBB l.59 .63 l ,326 2,142 1.62 .62 l ,434 3,092 2.15 .46 34 l ,494 2.600 1.74 .57 1,342 l ,984 1.48 .68 l ,426 2,233 l.57 .64 l ,337 2,437 l.82 .55 35 762 l ,152 l.51 .66 701 925 1.32 .76 650 934 1.44 .69 604 982 1.63 .61 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 872 1.689 906 l ,483 l.121 1.171 1,222 26'1 l ,319 2,620 l ,380 2,134 l ,694 2,109 2,108 4ll l.51 1.55 1.52 l.44 1.51 1.80 1.73 1.56 .66 .64 .66 .69 .66 .56 .58 .64 828 l ,556 789 l.313 l ,030 l .129 1,097 222 l ,090 2,057 l ,166 1.662 l,460 l ,530 l ,700 309 1.32 1.32 1.48 1.27 l.42 1.36 1.55 l.39 .76 .76 .68 .79 .70 .74 .65 .72 814 1,479 759 1.201 1.044 1.105 l,098 198 1,178 2,007 1,ll8 1,558 l ,537 l,562 l ,867 299 1.45 l.36 1.47 1.30 1.47 l.41 1.70 1.51 .69 .74 .68 .77 .68 .71 .59 .66 736 781 459 676 804 956 863 85 1.099 1.172 665 919 l.276 1.5ll 1:456 207 1.49 1.50 1.45 1.36 1.59 1.58 1.69 2.46 .67 .67 .69 .74 .63 .63 .59 .41 44 45 1,310 642 1,904 893 1.45 l.39 .69 .72 l ,100 499 1,506 689 1.37 1.38 .73 .72 1,022 456 1,491 617 1.46 1.35 .69 .74 498 38 711 55 1.43 l.45 .70 .69 46 860 1,421 l.65 .61 821 l ,263 l.54 .65 861 1.388 1.61 .62 712 l.174 l.65 .61 47 1.446 2.378 1.64 .61 l ,346 l ,936 l.44 .69 1.397 2.121 1.52 .66 l ,275 2,048 l.61 .62 48 1,207 2:110 l.80 .56 1,124 1,849 l.64 .61 1.145 1:902 l.66 .60 984 l ,802 1.84 .54 49 888 1,234 1.39 .72 735 977 l.33 .75 703 933 l.33 .75 282 420 1.49 .67 50 51 52 1,435 1,023 l ,383 2,203 l ,501 2.11 5 1.54 1.47 1.53 .65 .68 .65 1,309 906 l.307 1.897 1,259 1,898 1.45 l.39 1.45 .69 .72 .69 1,407 882 1.319 2,095 1,249 1.924 1.49 l.41 l.46 .67 .71 .69 l ,024 506 975 l ,574 807 1.475 1.54 1.59 l.51 .65 .63 .66 53 5,1 55 l ,444 1,257 793 1:876 l ,800 1,136 l.30 1.43 1.43 .77 .70 .70 1:213 977 642 l,620 1,365 903 1.27 1.40 1.41 .79 .71 .71 1,324 932 605 1,749 l ,286 835 l.32 1.38 1.38 .76 .72 .72 436 337 233 590 455 313 1.35 1.35 1.34 .74 .74 .75 56 57 1,129 855 l ,567 l,197 l.39 1.40 .72 .71 977 574 l ,320 808 1.35 1.41 .74 .71 937 206 l ,201 391 1.28 l.90 .78 .53 538 24 635 60 1.18 2.50 .BS .40 58 262 355 l.36 .74 217 251 1.16 .86 157 172 1.10 .91 l 2 2.00 .50 ubtota l A 71.309 121,171 1.70 .59 64,092 97,223 1.52 .66 63,509 102,198 1.61 .62 47,190 86,087 l.82 .55 D-1 602 791 1.32 .76 286 406 1.42 .70 117 202 1.73 .58 19 116 6.10 .16 D-2 1,259 1,840 1.46 .68 832 l ,268 1.52 .66 633 l ,061 1.68 .60 180 376 2.09 .48 D-3 l.545 l ,994 1.29 .77 674 926 1.38 .73 258 338 1.31 .76 18 20 1.11 .90 Sub total 8 D-1 D-5 D-6 3,406 818 1,034 1,182 4,625 l,189 l ,390 l ,620 1.36 l.45 1.34 1.37 .74 .69 .75 .73 1,792 791 l,092 815 2,600 1. 084 l ,381 1,045 1.45 l.37 l.26 1.28 .69 .73 .79 .78 1,008 759 1,088 468 1,601 l ,058 1,436 633 1.59 l.39 1.32 1.35 .63 .72 .76 .74 217 563 817 51 512 811 l ,187 % 2.36 1.44 1.45 1.88 .42 .69 .69 .53 Sub total C 3,034 4,199 1.38 .72 2,698 3,510 1.30 .77 2,315 3,127 1.35 .74 l ,431 2,094 l.46 .68 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park. Family Mobility in Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 TABLE 11 OCCUPI ED D W ELLING UNI TS FoR SELECTED YEARs BY NuMBER AND PER CENT OF TOTAL OccuPIED UNITS AND BY CEN SUS TRACTS 1938 1933-1934 ·1929 1923 Occupied Occupied Occupied Occupied Total Dwelling Total Dwelling Total Dwelling Total DwellingCensus Occupied Units Occupied Units Occupied Units Occupied Units Tracts Units Number Per Cent Units Number Per Cent Units Number Per Cent Units Number Per Cent Total 87 ,944 77, 749 88 77,526 68,5 82 88 74,552 66,832 90 54 ,026 48,838 90 1 771 741 96 505 493 98 290 282 97 12 11 92 2 800 761 95 538 513 95 41 8 397 95 31 26 84 3 1,133 1,094 97 955 929 97 733 72.8 99 59 59 100 4 5 6 7 8 1,763 1,207 3.11 5 2,040 1,167 1,601 1,091 2,913 1,808 1,074 !H 91 94 89 92 1,268 1,133 2,82.0 1,807 993 1,156 1,016 2,658 1,598 937 91 90 94 88 94. 1,059 1,108 2,650 1,822 976 982 1,038 2,544 1,642 931 93 94 96 90 95 292 834 1,379 1,306 766 287 798 1,33 0 1,253 742 98 96 97 96 97 9 962 909 94 764 722 94 648 623 96 452 450 100 10 11 12 13 14 1,94 2 2, 733 1,697 2, 321 71 3 1,843 2,640 1,617 2,225 680 95 97 95 96 95 1,891 2,407 1,513 2,088 757 1,800 2,313 1,442. 2,000 737 95 96 95 96 97 1,756 2,11 2 1,299 2,090 741 1,687 2,045 1,260 2,021 721 96 97 97 97 97 1,107 1,151 929 1,675 509 1,085 1,110 923 1,612 507 98 96 99 96 99 15 16 17 18 3,3 10 2,345 2,868 1,002 2,932 2,033 2,4 04 877 89 87 84 87 2,988 2.078 2,668 899 2,656 1,830 2,251 794 89 88 84 88 3,185 2,110 2,736 944 2,890 1,907 2,363 867 91 90 87 92 2,523 1,834 2,400 781 2,366 1,71 8 2,183 750 94 94 91 96 19 . 989 755 76 972 771 79 946 785 83 1,027 900 88 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 1,553 1,069 2,198 1,403 1,232 1,110 644 1,430 308 1,854 1,263 1,103 1,038 609 92. 29 85 90 90 93 95 1,327 1,026 2,080 1,293 1,126 985 547 1,225 363 1,771 1,181 1,008 915 518 92 35 85 91 89 93 95 1,405 1,120 2,185 1,349 1,157 962 528 1,311 474 1,933 1,257 1,064 910 508 93 42 88 93 92 95 96 1,095 1,205 2,123 1,090 851 467 262 1,036 703 1,928 l ,029 814 446 253 95 58 91 94 96 96 97 27 28 29 1,630 1,175 621 1,514 1,002 537 93 85 86 1,421 1,325 583 1,330 1,136 506 94 86 87 1,415 1,382 588 1,34 8 1,225 514 95 89 87 966 1,301 555 932 1,159 506 96 89 91 30 31 32 33 34 35 2,146 2,124 959 1,449 1,667 791 1,7 08 109 671 1,247 1,494 762. 79 5 70 86 90 96 2,057 2,101 982 1,354 1,508 730 1,678 122 726 1,183 1,342 701 82 6 74 87 89 96 2,022 2,244 1,159 1,479 1,550 670 1,717 186 893 1,326 1,426 650 85 8 77 90 92. 97 2,272 2,296 1,403 1,558 1,419 617 2,057 41 8 1,201 1,434 1,337 604 91 18 86 92 94 98 36 939 87 2 93 889 828 93 863 814 94 759 736 97 37 38 1,77 2 965 1,689 906 95 94 1,618 838 1,556 789 96 94 1,519 787 1,479 759 97 £6 796 475 781 459 98 97 39 40 41 42 43 1,561 1,2] 5 1,228 1,292 309 l,483 1,121 1,171 1,222 264 95 92 95 95 85 1,3 66 1,115 1,181 1,156 247 1,313 1,030 1,129 1,097 222 96 92. 95 95 90 1,251 1,114 .1.145 1,154 227 1,201 1,044 l ,105 1,098 198 96 94 97 95 87 683 832 982 881 85 676 804 956 863 85 99 97 97 98 100 44 45 1,365 703 1,310 642 96 91 1,146 548 1,100 499 96 91 1,060 490 1,022 456 96 93 505 38 498 38 99 lQO 46 951 860 90 88 0 821 93 926 864. 93 758 712 94 47 48 49 1,708 1,4 19 935 1,446 1,207 888 85 85 95 1,584 1,331 761 1,346 1,124 73 5 85 84 97 1,570 1,323 726 1,397 1,145 703 89 87 97 1,391 1,122 289 1,275 984 282 92 88 98 50 51 52 53 54 55 l ,587 1,091 1,475 1,539 1,342 867 1,435 1,023 1,383 1,444 1,257 793 90 94 94 94 93 92 1,425 965 1,387 1,360 1,056 690 1,309 906 1,307 1,273 977 642 92. 94 94 94 93 93 1,501 925 1,375 1,393 983 637 1,407 882. 1,319 1,324. 932 605 94 95 96 95 95 95 1,068 528 1,002. 458 347 237 1,024 506 975 436 337 233 96 96 97 95 97 98 56 57 1,216 92 8 1,129 855 93 92 1,039 611 977 574 94 94 973 217 937 206 96 95 547 24 538 24 98 100 58 279 262 94 230 217 94 163 157 96 1 1 100 Subtotal A D-1 81,335 614 71.309 602 88 98 72,912 289 64 ,092 286 88 99 71 ,160 120 63,509 117 89 98 52,355 23 47,190 19 90 83 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 1,341 1,574 3,529 83 0 1,259 1,545 3,4 06 818 94 98 97 99 912 687 1,888 800 832 674 1,792 791 91 98 95 99 67 9 265 1,064 765 633 2.58 1,008 759 93 97 95 99 189 18 230 569 180 18 217 563 95 100 94 99 D-5 D-6 1,04 6 1,204 1,034 1,182 99 98 1,104 822 1,092 81 5 99 99 1,090 473 1,088 468 100 99 818 54 817 51 100 94 Subtotal C 3,080 3,034 98 2,726 2.,698 99 2,328 2,315 99 1,441 1,431 99 A-Dallas; B-University Park; C-Highland Park, The University of Texas Publication TABLE 12 STABILITY OF RESIDENCE WITHIN CENSUS TRACTS BY NUMBER AND PER CENT OF FAMILIES REMAINING IN TRACT FoR SELECTED YEARS 1937-1938 1933­1935 1929­1930 1923­1924 To tal Famili es in Tract l;otal Families in Tract Total Families in Tract Total Fnmil ies in Tract Census Families Both Years Families Both Years Families Both Years Families Bot!1 Y ears T racts 1937 Number Per Cent 1933 Number Per Cent 1929 Number Per Cent 1923 lumber Per Cent Total 137 ,339 71,944 52 108,368 63,662 59 110,973 60,668 55 90,210 44 ,681 50 1 999 650 65 668 459 69 412 260 63 13 5 38 2 1,057 599 57 718 44 1 61 559 360 64 36 19 53 3 1,503 941 63 1,301 918 70 986 685 69 87 54 62 4 5 6 7 8 9 2,178 2,090 4,474 2,785 1,710 1,299 1,300 1,078 2,531 1,521 838 696 60 52 57 55 49 54 1,637 1,643 3,768 2,312 1,309 1,052 1,061 1,043 2,321 1,471 745 615 65 64 62 64 57 58 1,371 1,861 3,611 2,358 1,431 926 829 1,0 15 2,183 1,449 755 577 60 55 61 61 53 62 362 1,332 2,123 1,954 1,285 685 225 716 1,325 1,095 652 405 62 54 62 56 51 59 JO 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 S ubtotal A D-1 D-2 D-3 Subtotal B D-4 D-5 D-6 Subtotal C S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 S-6 S-7 Subtotal D 2,749 3,723 2,380 4,208 1,248 5,971 4, 136 5,538 1,979 1,589 2.431 1,811 4,215 2,174 1,762 1,520 946 2,218 1,790 862 2,975 1,294 2,183 2,412 2,454 1,161 1,346 2,448 1,403 2.042 1,769 1,888 2,116 370 1,859• 857 1,479 2,379 2,127 1,212 2,265 1,540 2,188 1,902 1,682 1,04 4 1,520 1,106 351 120,717 703 1,924 1,667 4,294 1,27 1 1,566 1,476 4,313 984 407 936 637 1,082 2.474 1,495 8,015 1,560 2,217 1,388 2,074 691 2,717 1,944 2,344 833 649 1,131 508 1,695 1,027 957 827 528 1,320 842 421 1,465 427 756 1,091 1,252 619 712 1,529 809 1,293 981 1,071 1,1 35 242 1,175 547 790 1.221 1,055 643 1,254 906 1,275 1,181 1,038 620 996 708 214 62,832 394 1,007 1,044 2,4 45 749 924 926 2,599 482 163 395 292 597 1,350 789 4,068 57 59 58 49 55 45 47 42 42 41 47 28 40 47 54 54 56 60 47 49 49 33 35 45 51 53 53 62 58 63 56 57 54 65 63 64 53 51 50 53 55 59 58 62 62 59· 66 64 61 52 56 52 63 57 59 59 63 60 49 40 42 46 55 55 53 51 2,582 3,172 1,962 3,375 1,112 4,798 2,976 3,776 1,494 1,288 1,850 1,311 3,308 1,629 1,443 1,145 702 1,782 1,883 724 2,353 1,225 1,613 1,888 1,984 925 1,090 2,057 1,166 1,662 1,460 1,530 1,700 309 1,506 689 1,263 1,936 1,849 977 1,897 1,259 1,898 1,620 1,365 903 1,320 808 251 97,223 406 1,268 926 2,600 1,084 1,381 1,045 3,510 647 215 520 287 528 1,855 983 5,035 1,608 2,071 1,310 1,942 696 2,447 1,606 1,969 821 699 952 463 1,488 936 888 725 465 1,157 1,050 367 1,242 475 693 1,008 1,069 591 649 1,372 747 1,154 904 910 1,003 199 1,025 440 742 1,082 954 572 1,165 806 1,213 1,033 892 508 833 524 195 56,734 220 732 587 1,539 726 933 666 2,325 354 129 300 171 336 1,150 624 3,064 62 65 67 58 63 51 54 52 55 54 51 35 45 58 61 63 66 6!5 56 51 53 39 43 53 54 64 59 67 64 69 62 59 59 64 68 64 59 56 52 59 61 64 64 64 65 56 63 65 78 58 54 58 63 59 67 67 64 66 55 60 58 60 64 62 63 61 2,514 2,757 1,715 3,506 1,038 5,373 3,555 4,647 1,792 1,315 2,109 1,762 4,000 1,829 1,548 1,323 747 1,782 1,987 751 2,637 1,900 2,307 2,142 2,233 934 1,178 2,007 1,118 1,558 1,537 1,562 1,867 299 1,491 617 1,388 2.121 1,902 933 2,095 1,249 1,924 1,749' 1,286 835 1,201 391 172 102,198 202 1,061 338 1,601 1,058 1,436 633 3,127 497 178 291 162 318 1,669 932 4,047 1,542 1,727 1,130 1,985 663 2,612 1,719 2,029 848 592 1,014 578 1,662 987 915 709 478 1,053 1,014 397 1,335 681 883 1,097 1,138 596 665 1,251 663 996 907 890 1,021 195 906 405 790 1,130 997 539 1,198 722 1,198 1,099 800 472 736 218 123 55,418 117 633 226 976 700 950 386 2,036 283 87 144 89 199 908 528 2,238 61 63 66 57 64 49 48 44 47 45 48 33 42 54 59 54 64 59 51 53 51 36 38 51 51 64 57 62. 59 64 59 57 55 65 61 66 57 53 52 58 57 58 62 63 62 57 61 56 72 53 58 60 67 61 66 66 61 65 57 49 49 55 63 54 57 55 1,568 1,514 1,31 8 3,161 736 4,752 3,233 5,028 1,376 1,704 1,655 2,894 4,360 1,575 1,204 657 370 1,291 2,053 862 3,776 2,602 3,584 3,092 2,437 982 1.099 1,172 665 919 1,276 1,511 1,4 56 207 711 55 1.174 2,048 1,802 420 1,574 807 1,475 590 455 313 635 60 2 86,087 116 376 20 512 811 1,187 96 2,094 195 82 83 19 81 714 343 1,517 1,023 1,024 824 1,667 460 2,225 1,504 2,140 680 706 800 880 1,620 833 694 363 237 781 1,040 378 1,603 785 1,158 1,232 1,113 552 617 622 410 556 713 769 846 132 435 34 663 1,017 868 249 866 476 903 363 293 210 405 30 42,295 36 209 16 261 525 748 54 1,327 111 35 41 12 51 378 170 798 65 68 63 53 63 47 47 43 49 41 48 30 37 53 58 55 ' 64 60 51 44 43 30 32 40 46 56 56 53 62 61 56 51 58 64 61 62 56 50 48 59 55 59 61 62 64 67 64 50 49 31 56 80 51 65 63 56 63 57 43 49 63 63 53 50 53 A-Dallas; B-Universi ty Park; C-Highland Park; D-Suburban. Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 45 The University of Texas Publication 999 8 LESS ~ IOOO TO 1999 ITilJJl NUMBER OF FAMILIES PER SQUARE MILE 1923 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE I FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 1816 2000 TO 2999 3000 TO 3999 4000TO 4999 5000 8 OVER ~ • MAP 1 999 a LES S D IOOO TO 1999 ITIIIJJ CIT Y AVERAGE 2000 TO 2999 •~ 2189 PER SQUARE MILE 3000 TO 3999 19 29 CITY OF 4000TO 4999 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE I FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 5000 a OVER • MAP 2 999 a L ESS D 1000 TO 1999 [[DJ CITY AVERAGE 2000 TO 2999 NUMBER OF FAMILIES • ~ 2.095 PER m SQUARE MILE 3000 TO 3999 1933-34 CITY OF 4000 TO 4999 DALLAS, T EXAS. TABLE I FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 5000 S OVER MAP 3 The University of Texas Publication 999 8 LESS D 1000 TO 1999 m CITY AVERAGE 2000 TO 2999 NUMBER OF FAMILIES 2661 ~ PER SQUARE MILE 3000 TO 3999 • ~ 1938 CITY OF 4000 TO 4999 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE I FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 5000 8 OVER MAP 4 251 D o:ER INCREA SE 126 (MAX . 261) TO 250 [ill] 0 TO 125 ~ -·--·--·-­ CHANGES IN NUMBER OF FAMILIES TO1 m 125 DECREA SE 126 1923-24 CITY OF (MA X. 58 7) TO 250 TABLE .II DALLAS, TEXAS. 2 51 FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY a OVER MAP 5 251 D ov8ER INCREASE (MAX. 390) 126 TO 250 [[DJ 0 TO • 125 ~ CHANGES IN -------------­ I NUMBER OF FAMILIES TO • 1929-30 125 DECREASE CITY OF (MAX. 78) 126 TO DALLAS, TEXAS. 250 TABLE II: 251FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY a OVER MAP 6 IN CREASE (MA X. 4 IB) 251 D OV~R I 2 6 TO 250 mm CHANGES IN NUMBER OF FAMILIES 1933-35 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS . TABLE TI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY DE CREASE (MAX. 14) 0 TO 1 2 5 ~ ---­I TO 125 126 TO 250 25 1 6 OVER m MAP 7 The University of Texas Publication D INCREASE (MAX. 327) 126 TO 1. 250 ffi1JJ 0 D TO I 2 5 --------·----­ CHANGES IN NUMBER OF FAMILIES TO 12 5 1937-38 DECREASE CITY OF (MAX. 237) 126 TO DALLAS, TEXAS. 250 TABLE ll: 251 FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY a OVER MAP 8 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 1.00 TO 1.49 D 1.50 TO 1.69 [Ilil] CITY AVERAGE 1.70 TO 1.79 PERSONS PER FAMILY ~ 1.79 17 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER 1.80 TO 1.89 g 192 3 CITY OF 1.90 TO 1.99 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE III FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 2.00 8 OVER MAP 9 The University of Texas Publication CITY AVERAGE I. 82 l.OOTO 1.49 D 1.50 TO 1.69 ffiII] l,70TO L79 ~ I.BO TO 1.89 • PERSONS PER FAMILY 17 YRS. OF AGE a OLDER 1929 1.90 TO 1.99 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. 2.00 8 OVER FAMILY . MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 10 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 1.00 TO 1.49 D I.SO TO 1.69 [Ill]] CIT Y 1.70 TO 1.79 •~ 1.84 17 YEARS OF AGE AND OLDER I.SOTO 1.89 1933-34 CITY OF 1.90 TO 1.99 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE .m: 2.00 a OVER FAM ILY MOBILITY SURVEY M AP 11 The University of Texas Publication 1.00 TO 1.49 D 1.50 TO 1.69 DJII] CITY AVERAGE 1.70 TO 1.79 ~ PERSONS PER FAMILY I. 78 17 YEARS OF AGE AND I.BO TO 1.89 • OLDER 1938 CITY OF 1.90 TO 1.99 • DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JlI 2.00 a OVER • FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 1Z MAP 13 The University of Texas Publication 90 TO 100 85 TO 8 9 FAMILIES REPORTING EMPLOYMENT 19 2 9 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TA.BLE IlZ: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY CITY AVERAGE 77 % 80 TO 84 75 TO 7 9 70 TO 74 69 8 LESS MAP 14 59 Family Mobility zn Dallas, T exas, 1923-1938 90 TO 100 D 65 TO 69 ITIIill CITY AVERAGE 60 TO 64 ~ 72% FAMILIES REPORTING 75 TO 79 •m EMPLOYMENT 1933-34 70 TO 74 CITY OF DALL AS, TE XAS. TABLE :OZ: 69 El LESS FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 15 The University of Texas Publication PER 90 TO 100 D 85 TO 89 illIJ] CITY AVERAGE 80 TO 84 79% ~ FAMILIES REPORTING EMPLOYMENT 75 TO 79 •~ 19 3 8 CITY OF 70 TO 74 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE Ill: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 69 a LESS MAP 16 NEW FAMILIES AS PER CENT OF TOTAL FAMILIES 1923-24 CITY OF DALLAS, T EXAS. TABLE Y FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 17 35 8 LESS D 36 TO 40 illill C ITY AVERAGE 41 TO 4 5 •~ 51% 46 TO 50 51 TO 55 • 56 8 OVER • The University of Texas Publication NEW FAMILIES AS PER CENT OF TOTAL FAMILIES 1929-30 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE Y FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY CITY AVERAGE 49% PER CENT 35 8 LESS D 36 TO 40 []IIJ] 41 TO 45 •~ 46 TO 50 51 TO 55 •56 8 OVER MAP 18 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 63 CITY OF 51 TO 55 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JZ: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 56 8 OVER MAP 19 The University of Texas Publication PER 35 8 LESS D 36 TO 40 [I]]]] CITY NEW AVERAGE 41 TO 45 •~ 48% TOTAL FAMILIES AS PER CENT OF 46 TO 50 1937-38 CITY OF 51 TO 55 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE :SZ: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 56 8 OVER • • MAP 20 24 8 LESS D 25 TO 29 [Il]]] CI TY AVERAGE 30 TO 3 4 RESIDENCE CHANGES ~ 34% INTER-CITY MOVES IN 35 TO 39 1923-24 • CITY OF 40 TO 4 4 DALLAS, TE XAS. TABLE JlI • 45 a OVEfl FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY • MAP 21 The University of Texas Publication 24 8 LESS D 25 TO 2 9 [IJ]] CITY AVERAGE 30 TO 34 RE~DENCE CHANGES •~ 35% INTER-CITY MOVES IN 35 TO 39 1929-30 CITY OF 40 TO 44 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE ::izr. FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 45 8 OVER • MAP 22 D 25 TO 29 [I]]] CITY AVERAGE 30 TO 34 RESIDENCE CHANGES ~ 31% INTER-CITY MOVES IN 35 TO 3 9 1933-35 CITY OF 40 TO 44 • DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JZI: 45 8 OVER FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 23 The University of Texas Publication 24 S LES$ D 25 TO 29 []]] 30 TO 34 RESIDENCE CHANGES ~ INTER-CITY MOVES IN 35 TO 39 1937-38 CITY OF • 40 TO 44 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JlI. FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 45 S OVER MAP 2.4 24 8 LESS D 25 TO 29 [ill] CITY AVERAGE J O TO J 4 RESIDENCE CHANGES 33% ~ INTER-CITY MOVES 35 TO 39 OUT • 1923-24 CITY OF • 40 TO 4 4 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JIT. FAMILY MOBILITY SURVE Y 4580V(R MAP 25 The University of Texas Publication D 25 TO 29 mm CITY AVERAGE 30 TO 34 RESIDENCE CHANGES •~ 35% INTER-CITY MOVES OUT 35 TO 39 1929-30 CITY OF 40 TO 4 4 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JlI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 45 6 OVER • MAP 26 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 71 D 25 TO 2 9 illIID CITY AVERAGE 30 TO 34 RESIDENCE CHANGES 2 s''lo ~ INTER-CITY MOVES OUT 35 TO 39 1933-35 CITY OF • 40 TO 4 4 DALL AS, TEXAS. TAB LE 3lI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 4580VER MAP 27 24 0LESS D 25 TO 2 9 [Ill]] CITY AVERAGE 30 TO 34 ~ RE~DENCE CHANGES 32% INTER-CITY MOVES OUT 35 TO 39 • 1937-38 CITY OF 40 TO 44 DA LL AS, TEXAS. TABLE :lZI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 45 a OVER MAP 28 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 RESIDENCE CHANGES INTER-TRACT MOVES OUT 1923-24 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABL E JZlI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 29 9 8 LESS D 10 TO 12 [ill] CITY AVERAGE 13 TO 15 •~ 17% 16 TO 18 19 TO 21 22 8 OVER The University of Texas Publication RESIDENCE CHANGES INTER-TRACT MOVES OUT 1929-30 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JZ:rr: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY CITY AVERAGE 17% 9 S LESS D 10 TO 12 [ill] 13 TO 15 •~ 16 TO 18 19 TO 21 22 S OVER • MAP 30 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 9 8 LESS D 10 TO 12 []IlI] CI TY AVERAGE RESIDENCE CHANGES 13 TO 15 16% ~ INTER-TRACT MOVES OUT 16 TO 18 1933-35 Cl TY OF • 19 TO 21 DALLAS, TE XAS. TABLE ::srn: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVE Y 22 8 OVER MAP 31 The University of Texas Publication 22 S OVER MAP 32 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 9 a LESS D 10 T 0 12 mm CIT Y AVERAGE 13 TO 15 RESIDENCE CHANGE S ~ 17% INTER-TRACT MOVES IN 16 TO 18 1923-24 CITY OF • 19 TO 21 DALLAS, TE XAS . TABLE ::im: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 22 8 OVER MAP 33 The University of Texas Publication 9 8 LESS D 10 TO 12 ITlIIJ] CITY AVERAGE 13 TO 15 •~ 17% INTER-TRACT MOVES IN 16 TO 18 1929-30 CITY OF 19 TO 21 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE EI: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 22 8 OVER • MAP 34 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 9 8 LESS D 10 TO 12 [[]JI] CITY AVERAGE 13 TO 15 ~ 16% INTER-TRACT MOVES 16 TO 18 IN • 1933-35 Cl TY OF 19 . TO 21 DALL AS, TEXAS. TABLE ::irn: FAMILY MOBILliY SURVEY 22 8 OVER MAP 35 The University of TexQ,S Publication 9 6 LESS D I 0 TO 12 []]] Cl T Y AVERAG E 13 TO 15 RESIDENCE CHANGES ~ 15% INTER-TRACT MOVES 16 TO IB IN 1937-38 CITY OF 19 TO 21 • DA LL AS, TE XAS. TABL E Jm: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 2 2 B OYER M AP 36 OWNER OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 19 2 7 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE~ FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 37 PER CENT 66 TO 75 D 56 TO 65 []]]] Cll Y AVERAGE 46 TO 55 40% ~ 36 TO 45 m 26 TO 35 •m 25 8 LESS The University of Texas Publication PER CENT 66 TO 75 D 56 TO 65 ITIIIlJ CITY AVE RAGE 46 TO 55 36% ~ OWNER OCCUPIED DWELLING UNITS 36 TO 45 I 9 3 0 CITY OF • 26 TO 35 DA L L AS, TEXAS. TA BLE :l!IIL FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 25 8 LESS • MAP 38 66 TO 75 D 56 TO 65 mm CITY AVERAGE 46 TO 55 •~ 32% OWNER OCCUPIED 36 TO 45 DWELLING UNITS 1933-34 CITY OF 26 TO 35 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE ::izm: 25 8 LESSFAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 39 The University of T exa.s Publication OWNER OCCUPIED DWELLING UN ITS 19 3 8 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE ::izm:. FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 40 66 TO 75 D 56 TO 65 ITillJ) CITY 46 TO 55 AVERAGE ~ 33% 36 TO 45 • 26 TO 35 25 6 LESS • Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 1.00 TO 1.39 1.40 TO 1.54 NUMBER OF FAMILIES CITY AVERAGE 1.82 1.55 TO 1.69 PER OCCUPIED DWELLING UNIT 19 2 3 CIT Y OF DALLAS, TEXAS TABLE I FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 1.70 TO 1.84 1,85 TO 1.99 2.008 OVER • MAP 41 The University of Texas Publication 1.00 TO 1.39 1.40 TO 1. 54 NUMBER OF FAMILIES PER OCCUPIED DWELLING UNIT 1929 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS TABLE :X: FAMILY MOB ILITY SURVEY CITY AVERAGE 1. 60 1.55 TO 1.69 1.70 TO 1.84 l.85TO 1.99 2,00 8 OVER MAP 42. D [[ill] •~ 1.00 TO 1.39 D 1.40 TO 1.54 ITIIIIJ CITY AVERAGE 1.55 TO 1.69 ~ 1.51 NUMBER OF FAMILIES PER OCCUPIED 1.70 TO 1.84 • DWELLING UNIT 1933-34 1.85 TO 1.99 •CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS TABLE .:X:: 2.00 8 OVER • FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY MAP 43 The University of Texas Publication l.OOTO 1.39 D 1.40 TO 1.54 []]II] CITY AVERAGE 1.55TO 1.69 ~ NUMBER OF FAMILIES 1.67 PER OCCUPIED DWELLING UNIT 1.70TO 1.84 • 1938 CITY OF l.B5 TO 1.99 • DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE :X:: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 2.00 8 OVER • MAP 44 95 TO 100 D 90 TO 94 [IIJ] CITY AVERAGE 85 TO 89 OCCUPIED 90% ~ RESIDENTIAL UNITS 80 TO 84 1923 CITY OF • 50 TO 79 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABL-E :n: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 49 a LESS • MAP 45 The University of Texas Publication 95' TO 100 D 90 TO 94 [Il]] CIT Y AVERAGE B5 TO 89 ~ OCCUPIED 90% RESIDENTIAL UNITS 80 TO 84 • 1929 CITY OF 50 TO 79 .• DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE :xI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 49 8 LESS • MAP 46 95 TO 100 D 90 TO 94 illIIlJ CITY AVERAGE OCCUPIED 84 TO 89 ~ 88% RESIDENTIAL UNITS BO TO 84 • 1933-34 CITY OF 50 TO 79 • TABLE)([ FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 49 6 LESS DALLAS, TEXAS. MAP 47 The University of Texas Publication 95 TO 100 D 90 TO 94 CITY [[[]] AVERAGE 8 4 TO 89 OCCUPIED 88% ~ RE SIDENTIAL UNIT S 80 TO 84 1938 CITY OF • 50 TO 79 DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE JIT FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY • 49 8 LE SS MAP 48 Family Mobility zn Dallas, Texas, 1923-1938 REM AINING IN TRACT IN SUCCESSIVE YE ARS 19 23-24 CITY OF DA LL AS, TEXAS. TABLE J[[[ FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY CITY AVERAGE 50% PER CENT 67 TO 100 59 TO 6 6 51 TO 5B 43 TO 50 35 TO 4 2 34 S LESS D []]JI] •~ • MAP 49 REMAINING IN TRACT IN SUCCESSIVE YEARS 1929-30 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE :XU: FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 67 TO 100 D 59 TO 66 mm CITY AVERAGE 51 TO 58 55% ~ 43 TO 50 • 35 TO 42 3 4 8 LESS • • MAP 50 67 TO 100 59 TO 66 REMAINING IN TRACT IN SUCCESSIVE YEARS CITY AVERAGE 59% 51 43 TO TO 58 50 1933-35 CITY OF 35 TO 42 DALLAS, TEXAS. TA BLE :DI FAMILY MOBILITY SURVEY 34 a LESS MAP 51 The University of Texas Publication REMAINING IN TRACT IN SUCCESSIVE YEARS 1937-38 CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS. TABLE ::nI: FAMILY MOBI LlTY SURVEY PER CENT 67 TO 100 D 59 TO 66 illJI] CITY .AVERAGE 51 TO 58 52% ~ 43 TO 50 35 TO 42 • 34 6 LESS MAP 52