Texas Almanac, 1952-1953 Page: 337
[674] p. : ill. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
LEGISLATIVE DISTRICTS.
Texas was redistrict-
ed for representation
in the Lower House of
Legislature by the
Fifty-second Legisla-
ture, 1951. The re- 94
districting was
based on the fed-
eral census of popula-
tion in 1950. (See also
redistricting for Senate
in another table.) Al-
though the State Con-
stitution provides that
Legislature redistrict
after each decennial
census, Legislature did
not do so after the
censuses of 1930 and
1940. Until 1951 there
had been no redistrict-
05 . o4Texas State Representatives'
Districts, Population, 1950
(As redistricted in 1951.)ing for the Senate and Lower House 34
since the session of the Thirty-seventh
Legislature in 1921. which redistricted 69 35
on basis of the 1920 census.
In redistricting for the Lower House
in 1951, Legislature retained the maxi- 3
mum number of Representatives, which 80
is 150. (See Art. III, Sec. 2, of the
State Constitution, printed in another part of 37F
this volume.) However, the number of districts 70
was cut down from 127 to 105, because of the
large increase in urban population and the 4F
greater number of districts with more than one
member. This tendency would have been even 3
more evident except for the constitutional pro-
vision restricting representation in counties with large population. (Sec Art. II, Sec. 26-a, in
State Constitution. See index for page number reference to State Constitution.) Under the
1951 redistricting, sixteen multimember districts have a total of sixty-one members.
Table below shows counties in each Representative district as they were reapportioned by
the Fifty-second Legislature on basis of the 1950 census of population.
Note.-An "f" following the number of a district indicates that it is a flotorial district.
Population for each of the counties in a flotorial district is given, but this population is
duplicated, in whole or in part, in another county or counties. Examples: Gregg and Smith
(Districts 13 and 14) each have more than enough population for one Representative, but not
enough for two. Hence the two counties are thrown together in District 15f. A slightly
different situation is found in Districts 36 and 37f. Nueces (District 36) has more than enough
population for three Representatives, but not enough for four, and is combined with the less
populous counties of Kleberg and Kenedy to form District 37f.
Note.-A figure in parentheses indicates that a district has that many Representatives.
For example, "Bowie (2)" indicates that the district constituting Bowie County has two
Representatives.Dist. Counties- Population. 1950.
1. Bowie (21 .......................... . 61,966
2. Cass. Marion,. Morris................ 46,337
3. Red River, Titus. Camp .............. 47,893
4. Harrison ............................ 47,715
5. Panola, Shelby ..................... 42.729
6. Nacogdoches, San Augustine. Sabine. 47.7:1
7. Tyler, Jasper. Newto ................ 42,173
8. Orange 4.. ....... .. .......... 40,567
9. Jefferson 4) ...................... 195.083
10. Lamar ...........................43,0.;3
11. Delta. Hopkins, Franklin............. 38.711
12. Wood. Upshur ..................... 42.13 I
13. Gregg ............................61,258
14. Smith ............................. 74,701
15f.Smith, Gregg .......................135.959
16. Rusk ............................... 42.348S
17. Cherokee ........................... 38,694
18. Trinity. Angelina .................. 46,072
19. Polk. Hardin. San Jacinto ............ 42.901Dist. Counties Populat ion. 1950.
20. Liberty, Chambers .................. 34.600
21. Galveston (2 ....................... 113,066
22. H arris (Si ..........................806.701
23. B raizoria ............................ 46. 549
24. Fannin ................................ 31,253
25. 1lunt ............................... .1 2,731
26. Van Zandtl, lendlersmn, tains. ........ 50,264
27. A nderson ........................... 31.875
28. Iouston, W alker .................... 42988
29. Grimes, Montgomery ................ 39.639
30. W aller, Fort Bend .................... 43,017
31. W harton ............................ 36,077
32. Jackson, Matagarda ................. 34.475
33. Victoria, Calhoun ................... 40,463
34. De W itt, Goliad ...................... 29,192
35. San Patricio, Aransas, Refugi ....... 50,207
36. N ueces (3) ......................... 165,471
37f. Kleberg. Kenedy, Nueces.............188,094
(Cint inued on Next Page. )
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas Almanac, 1952-1953, book, 1951; Dallas, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth117137/m1/339/: accessed May 14, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Texas State Historical Association.