Newspapers / The University of North … / Jan. 22, 1919, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The University of North Carolina News Letter (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
i The news in this publica tion is released for the press on receipt. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA NEWS LETTER Published weekly by the University of North Carolina for its Bureau of Ejitension. JANUARY 22, 1919 CHAPEL HHX, N. C. VOL. V, NO. 9 «dUori«l Board . B. C. Branson, .T. G. deB. Hamilton, L. K. Wilson, D. D Carroll, G. M. McKie Batered as secondKilass matter November 14,1914, .It the iPostoffloe at Chapel H1U,N.C., under the act of August 24,1912, COUNTY AFFAIRS IN CAROLINA THE NEW CLUB YEAR-BOOK County Government and County Affairs in North Carolina is the title of the new 200-]iage Year-Book of the North Carolina Chill at the University. It will be ready for tlie mails in a few days. The people ■of the state can liave it free of charge, upon post card request. There is no gen- •eral mailing list, ft will go post-paid to ■to the people in other states for 75 cents ■a copy. It is a i)rand new contribution to a neglected field of political science. Tliere is no end of books about federal, state, and municipal government, but strange to say only three books have been pub lished so far on county government—Gil bertson’s The County, Fairlie’s Local Gov ernment in Counties, Towns, and Villages, and now the 5’ear-Book of the North Car olina Club. A hundred million people in the United States live under county gov ernment, and yet Goodnow in his Princi ples of Administrative Law devotes only 30 pages to the County and Hart gives only 11 pages to this subject in his vol ume on Actual Government. So far as we know, not a college or university in the ■country ofl’ers courses on county govern- anent. The members of the North Caro lina Club have therefore been obliged to blaze a trail of their own into an almost ■unexplored wilderness. Their year-book gives to the public the studies and discussions of the club during the last college year. The tw'enty-six •chapters are as follows: 1. The Jungle of County Government. —E. C. Branson, University of North Carolina. 2. The Origin, Place, and Functions ■of County Government in North Caro lina.—J. G. deR. Hamilton, University of North Carolina. 3. The County Government System in North Carolina.—A. C. McIntosh, Uni- wersity of North Carolina. 4. County Oflices in North Carolina. —Judge Gibert T. Stephenson, Winston- fSalem. 5. Forms of County Government.—H. 41. Gilbertson, Secretary National Short Ballot Organization. 6. Local Self-Government for Rural ■Communities.—Dr. Clarence Poe, Ral- ■eiglb 7. The County Tax List and its Equali zation.—C. L. Raper, University of North Carolina. 8. A Township Tax List Study.—E. C. Branson, University of North Caro lina. 6. The Fee and Salary Systems in North Carolina.-E. C. Branson, Univer sity of North Carolina. 10. County Accounting and Budgets. —George G. Scott, Chairman State Board of Accountancy. 11. County Finances in North Caro lina.—M. S. Willard, formerly Chairman New Hanover County Commissioners. 12. Supervision of Rural Schools in Carolina Counties.-L. 0. Brogdeu, State Agent of Rural Schools. 13 Evolution of County Health Work in North Carolina.-Dr. W. S. Rankin, ■Secretary, State Health Board. 14. County Health Work in North Carolina.—Dr. B. E. Washburn, State Director of County Plealth Work. 15. Public Heath Nursing in North Carolina—Dr. L. B. McBrayer, Super intendent State Sanatorium. 17. The County-Wide School System. —Washington Catlett, Superintendent New Hanover Schools. 17. The County High School.—N. W. Walker, State Director of Public High .•Schaols, University of North Carolina. 18. The County Library System.—1.. E. Wi.Ison, University of North Carolina. 19. Farm Demonstration Work in Noi-t]*.Carolina.—E. S. Millsaps, District Agent, .Statesville. 20. Home Demonstration Work in North Carolina.-Mrs. J. S. McKimmon, State Agent Home Demonstration Work. 21. P.ridge Building in North Caro lina.—W. S. Eallis, State Highway En gineer. 22. County Responsibility for Public Welfare.-E. 0. Branson, University of North Carolina. 23. County Homes and Outside Re- lief.—R. F. Beasley, Secretary State JBoard Public Welfare. 24. County Care of Children.—Dr. Hastings H. Hart, Director Child Help ing Department, Russell Sage Founda tion. 25. Our Feebleminded, Epileptic and Insane.—Dr. Albert Anderson, Superin tendent Central Hospital for the Insane. 26. Reference Library on County Gov ernment and County AflTairs.—E. C. B. UNIVERSITY RECOGNITION American Ideals, a book of 326 pages, published in 1917 by Houghton, Mifflin & Co., and recently revised and enlarged i by the editors, Dra. Norman Foerster and ! IV. W. Pierson, Jr., of the faculty of | the University of North Carolina, has re- j cently been signally recognized by the i French Government through a request THE MEN WHO BUILD Walter H. Page Washington was a farmer and glor ied in it; Jefferson was a farmer and cared more for agriculture than for statesmanship. Moat of the great men who build things live close to the earth. Your civilization depends on this— whether tlie man behind the plow be a clod-hopper, or a sympathetic schol ar of the soil.—Raleigh address, 1903. branch line railroad three thousand miles away. For, according to an appreciative editorial on Dr. McNider’s work, in a re cent issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, two army surgeons, Messrs. ICeith and Thompson, reported to the British INIedical Research Commit^ by it for permission to translate the book , from a base hospital in France that a into the French language. “The desire of the French Government in the matter is to disseminate the political ideals of America as formulated by Americans themselves. ’ ’ Permission has been given by the pub lishers and editors for the translation, and it will soon be issued in French. It is interesting to note that the first edition was reprinted several times, and that a new edition considerably enlarged is now coming from the press.—The Tar Pleel. ■ treatment of nephritis based on McNi- ! er’s work has been given an extensive trial. In one group of cases this treat ment completely re-established the kid ney’s functions; in the other group—the more severe cases—it is of distinct service in improving them. It probably took more inventions and discoveries than dollars to whip the Hun. The above is only another instance of the driety oi this state’s contributions to the great struggle now closing.—J. M. Booker. J. HENRY JOHNSTON In the death of J. Henry Johnston, As sociate Professor of Education in the University of North Carolina, this institu tion loses the first member of its faculty in service overseas and suffers a distinct loss in its teaching staff. The following ed itorial note taken from the Raleigh Times of Novembei 12th happily estimates the value of his fine young life : In the death of Lieutenant Henry Johnston, killed in action October 15th, North Carolina loses another of her fine, clean young men and the State Universi ty a member of its faculty who showed great promise. Not yet thirty. Associate Prc>fessor of Education Johnston had begun to make his presence felt in education in his na tive State when the call came tor him to go into training for the purpose of ham mering home some of the vital truths of civilization into the head of the Hun Henry Johnston was one of the first to apply for admittance to the ofiicers train ing camp at Fort Oglethorpe. There he made good—a habit of his this making good—although he was ever quiet about it. Modest always, even to diflfdence if no principle were involved, and then as inflexible as steel, he was not of the sort to attract attention in a crowd; but those whose business it is to know would never overlook him any where. Particulars concerning his, death are lacking, but none who knew him need be told that he died as he had lived by the faith that was in him, the faith of man full grown.—The N. C. Alumni Review. WHY NOT? In its editorial on December 19 on the teacher famine, the New A'ork Tribune makes a point that walks right down the middle of the road with its tail up, Y’ou can’t miss it.; What moved the Tribune was a state ment by the United States Bureau of Ed ucation that thousands of schools across the country are closed for lack of teach ers. This statement, the Tribune agrees, holds for rural New York. But in the metropolis itself conditions are strikingly otherwise. Nearly 2,000 teachers have started work, and still 440 eligibles are waiting for jobs. No dearth tliere. Why? The Tribune knows why. In the cross-roads and village Schools of New York State tlie salaries range from $250 to $500; in New Y"ork City the min imum is $820 (including the war prices bonus), with life-long employment, auto matic salary increase each year, and a generous pension. Same old story, after all.—J. M. Book er. DR. McNIDER’S RESEARCHES The variety of the problems of modern war-making, together with the urgency of its call for all of a nation’s abilities, is strikingly illustrated by the fact that the results of experiments conducted in Chapel Hill laboratory have found their way into base-hospitals in France. Without any tliought of war—in fact before the war opened—Dr. W. deB. Me Nider, Kenan Professor of Pharmacolo gy in the Medical School of the State University, began his now widely recog nized work on the kidney. His results have already become a part of the latest method of treating the kidney—the meth od, for instance, used in such an institu tion as the Jolms Hopkins Hospital. On ly one of Dr. McNider’s results concern us liere. In the course of his researches he discovered a means of protecting the kidney against the acute inflammiition known as nephritis. Now, it happens that war conditions breed an unusually large number of ne phritis cases among the troops in active service. In the same account of this condition at the front is recorded the mitigation of the evil through the work of a modest doctor in a little town on a North Carolina democracy in war times has lived the heroic life, for the cause of the nation and her Allies. Can she not in peace times live at least a high and noble life for her own cause? Our soldier boys, when they come back to us from the camps and especially from overseas, will refuse to be really our com rades unless we can in times of peace gen erously spend our dollars for the aid and development of others. They have been eager to spend their richest blood for such a cause. 7. In time of war North Carolina democracy has used her dollars to bring fair dealings to men throughout Europe —to make the world a place of just rela tionship as between men and men. Will she not in time of peace put forth her greatest effort to bring fair dealings be tween her own citizens as they pay^ their taxes to the state and its local units of government? Our national government lias created, within a few months, a system of taxation for war purposes which in its yield of revenue has astonished the world. And there is in it much of fairness as to the burden which it places upon the differ ent tax-payers. Will democracy in Nortli Carolina ever again be satisfied .with her system of taxation for state and local purposes—a system contradictory to the principle of fair dealings ? In war times North Carolina democracy has used tier richest blood and her dol lars to stamp out unfair dealings as be tween a government and the citizens of another nation. Will she not in peace times put her full strength of mind and body to the task of stamping out the un fair dealings which go on year after year in her own system of public revenue? During the war North Carolina dem ocracy ha,s worked earnestly and heroic ally for a more just life among other peo ples. Will she, now that the war is ov er, be content to go back to the old sys tem of taxing one of her citizens only 10 percent of his capacity to pay taxes and another citizen 50 percent or even a 100 percent of his capacity to pay taxes to his government?—Charles L. Raper. STATE UNIVERSITY STUDIES Two cents per hundred dollars of as- DEMOCRACY AND DOLLARS 6. The democracy of the people of North Carolina people has caused them in war times and for war purposes to use their dollars generously. While some of the citizens of North Carolina have failed to rise to the high level of really great patriotism in the use of their dollars, the record for North Carolina as a whole is a notably good one. The nation, in order to overthrow the enemy, has called for loans—in the form of Liberty Bonds and Thrift Stamps—and democracy in North Carolina has prompt ly made the loans. The Bed Cross and other organizations of war relief have called to the people of North Carolina, and the call has been answered with en thusiastic generosity. Active participa tion in the drive for the Red Cross sec ond war fund, in the north-eastern quar ter of North Carolina, revealed to me a willingness to use dollars for the aid of others that I had never dreamed we pos sessed. The people of many places sub scribed to three, four, five times their quotas! The war is over and the intense call to fight a cruel and masterful enemy comes to us no longer. lYill North Carolina democracy use her dollars for her own fu ture general interest and welfare so en thusiastically and generously as she has used them to conquer the German? Will North Carolina democracy so gladly use her dollars to educate her citi zens to the point of greatest efficiency Will she so earnestly use them to elimin ate much of the disease which takes needlessly large toll from our life and its values? Will she so enthusiastically use them for the construction of highways of commerce and of social intercourse be tween all the communities within her borders? sessed property values represents the bur den laid by the University of North Car olina on the tax-payers of the state in 1917. The rate was more in 30 states of the union. It was 14 cents per hundred in Nevada and 10 cents in Nebraska and Il linois . It was larger in nine southern states— Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Tennessee, Kentucky, Flor ida, and Georgia. It was smaller in only four southern states—South Carolina, Alabama, Mis sissippi, and Virginia. • State support of the University of North Carolina in 1917 was $186,531. The state support fund for the univer sity was larger in 24 states; it was more than a half million dollars in seven states, more than one million dollars in live states, more than two million dollars in Illinois, and more than three million dol lars in California. It was larger in five southern states— Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, Kentucky, and Georgia. Who Bears the Tax Burden? The fund expended by the state for any public purpose is important; but even more important is the matter of who pays the taxes that furnish the fund. Who bears the burden of university support? I\’e do not have facts for the state at large, but we do have the facts for Chapel Hill township in which the University is located. They are as fol lows: Nearly exactly Jialf of the property tax payers in 1917 paid for university sup port $22.83 all told, in amounts ranging from one to ten cents each. More than three-fifths of all the property taxpayers paid altogether $52.24 for university sup port. The richest taxpayer in the town ship paid $100 or nearly exactly twice as much as 858 taxpayers all put together. The 73 taxpayers who have $5,000 or more on the tax list paid altogether $258. 97 or $33.11 more than all the rest of the property taxpayers of the township—1312 in number. The University tax for the entire township was $480. And we dare to say that the distribution of the University tax burden in this typ ical township is approximately true of the state at large. More than half of the general property tax for any purpose falls upon six tax payers in the hundred, Here’s a simple fact that the people of North Carolina do not seem to be able to see clearly. But it is fundamental and far reaching in its significance. Around six per cent of the property taxpayers own more than half of all the taxables of the state, and therefore pay more than half of all the taxes to support the civil establishment, the uni versity and other state institutions of higher learning, the hospitals for the in sane, the schools for the deaf and blind, the feebleminded and wayward, and ev ery other state institution and enterprise. Nearly half of all our property taxpay ers have less than $500 on the tax list. And they pay less than one-twentieth of the taxes. The full analysis of the Chapel Hill tax list will be found in the University Extension Bulletin No. 25, Local Study Clubs: Essays at Citizenship, which goes free of charge to any North Carolinian who writes for it. Forthcoming Studies The State University studies this fall have been made by Mr. H. M. Hopkins an alumnus of the Ohio Wesleyan Uni versity, who is now doing graduate work in the University of North Carolina. His six studies cover (1) the support of state universities in 1916-17, per thousand dol lars of assessed property values, (2) uni versity support per inhabitant, (3) the share of state universities in state school funds, (4) the value of university plants, (5) state appropriations for universities, and (6) university expenditures per stu dent. The first of these studies appears in this issue. The others will foUow week by week.—E. C. B. STATE UNIVERSITY SUPPORT IN 1916-17 Per thousand dollars of assessed property values. Based on (1) the Federal Education Bureau Bulletin No. 55, 1917, and (2) Federal Bureau of Census—the Financial Statistics of States, 1917. H. M. HOPKINS, University of North Carolina, 1918-19. the Rank State University Per $1000 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 11. 13. 14. 15. 16. 16. 18. 19. 19. Nevada $1.48 Illinois 1.03 Nebraska 1.02 Minnesota 88 Washington 72 Iowa 68 Wyoming 64 Arizona 53 Oregon 49 Michigan 47 Wisconsin 44 North Dakota 44 Montana 36 Missouri 33 Idaho 32 Utah 31 West Virginia 31 Oklahoma 30 Arkansas 29 Maine 29 Rank State University Per $1000 21. 21. 23. 24. 25. 25. 27. 27. 27. 27. 31. 31. 33. 34. 35. 36. 36. 38. 38. 38. Louisiana $0.28 Texas 28 Indiana 27 Colorado 24 New Mexico 22 Tennessee 22 Kansas 21 Kentucky .21 Florida 21 Georgia .. 21 North Carolina 20 Ohio 20 South Carolina 18 Vermont .15 R. I. State College 13 South Dakota 10 Mississippi 10 Alabama 07 New York—Cornell 07 Virginia, 07 California, Pennsylvania State College, and Delaware State College are omitted because general property in these states is not assessed for state taxes. Connecticut, Maryland, Massachusetts, and New Hamiishire are omitted be cause they have no nuiverai ties .^supported by the state.
The University of North Carolina News Letter (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Jan. 22, 1919, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75