The news in this publi
cation is released for the
press on receipt.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
NEWS LETTER
Published Weekly by the
University of North Caro
lina for the University Ex
tension Division.
FEBRUARY 24, 1926
CHAPEL HILL, N C.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA PRESS
VOL. XII, NO. 15
I-Mitorlal Board; E. C. Branson, S. H. Hobbs, Jr., L. R. Wilson. E. W. Knisht. D. D. Carroll, J. B. Bullitt. H. W. Odum.
Entered as second-class matter November 14. 1914. at the Postoffice at Chapel Hill. N. C., under the act of August 24. 1912
LARGE DECREASE IN DAIRY COWS
FEWER DAIRY COWS
Seventy counties in North Carolina
had fewer dairy cows in 1925 than they
had in 1920. Only twenty-nine counties
had more dairy cows than they had five
years previously. The table which ap
pears elsewhere ranks the counties
according to increase or decrease in
dairy cows during the last five years.
The parallel column gives the number
of dairy cows in each county in 1925.
By dairy cows is meant cows and heifers
two years old and older being milked or
intended to become milk cows, as dis
tinguished from beef battle. Naturally
the classification is not absolute since
many cattle are dual-purpose stock and
may be repi-rted as beef cattle but later
milked in case the milk market is favor
able. However, this could not possibly
explain the large loss North Carolina
suffered in dairy cows during the last
five years. The census reports show that
there were 86 counties in the state with
fewer cattle in 1926, dairy and beef all
told, than they had in 1920. Only 16
counties reported more cattle all told in
1926 than in 1920.
The five-year decrease in dairy cows
was in round numbers from 354 thou
sand to 312 thousand. Yet during this
same period our farms increased by
nearly 14 thousand and our population
by approximately 130 thousand.
North Carolina Last
In 1920 North Carolina ranked last of
all the states in dairy cows per farm,
with an average of only 1.3 dairy-cows
per farm. The average for 1926 was 1.1
dairy cows per farm and most likely we
continue to rank last of all the states in
the production and consumption of milk
and butter, the best foods known to man.
Counting cows actually being milked the
state will not average one to the farm.
A large percent of milk cows are con
centrated on dairy farms, a dozen here,
two dozen there, and so on. The 1920
census reported one hundred thousand
farms in the state with no dairy cow,
and nearly a hundred thousand farms
with no cattle of any description. Prob
ably the number of such farms in 1926
was considerably in excess of 100 thou
sand.
- West vs. East
For the most part dairy cows are con
fined to the western half of the state.
The eastern half of the state, the cotton
and tobacco belt with large tenant and
negro population ratios, has the barest
minimum of milk cows. Edgecombe, a
great crop county with nearly four thou
sand farms, reports only 1,263 dairy
cows. Scotland county with 2,210 farms
reports 674 dairy cows. Wilson county
with 4,616 farms reports only 983
dairy cows. Pitt county averages less
than one dairy cow to every five
farms. And so on throughout the Coast
al Plains area. Probably four-fifths of
all farm families in this great crop-pro
ducing belt hardly know the taste of
milk and butter. We seriously doubt if
there is another farm area in America
that makes anything like as poor a show
ing in dairy cattle per farm as the cot-
ton-tobacco belt of North Carolina. All
of the Southern states, most of them with
larger negro and farm tenant ratios,
make a better showing in dairy cows
than North Carolina. Our Coastal Plains
counties, which bring up the rear in
North Carolina, make a miserable show
ing in this respect.
During the last three months the
writer ingoing to and from his extension
classes in the eastern part of thS state
has travelled over the same road, a main
state highway, for a distance of seventy-
five miles as many as thirty-two times.
Aside from a herd of dairy cows on the
edge of a small town along the route,
he has seen only one cow of any sort,
dairy or beef, on all the farms that lie
along this highway. On a similar drive
in any northern state one would see
thousands of dairy cows.
At the leading hotel in the greatest
agricultural county in the state the
writer and his companion could find
neither milk nor butter. The waiter
registered great surprise when milk
was called for, and, asked if we wanted
cow’s milk! He was able to locate some
“Northern” butter.
In spice of the efforts of agricultural
colleges, farm and home demonstration
a«,cj£itL., exhortations of health authori
ties, the boll weevill, and so on, we are
making no progress in the production of
milk and butter. We are actually losing
ground. For the most part we do with
out milk, and what butler we consume
we import largely from the North and
West. Both could and should be pro
duced right here in North Carolina.—
S. H. H., Jr.
SMALL TOWN GOVERNMENT
At the last regular meeting of the
North Carolina Club Mr. E. J. Wood-
house, J^ormerly mayor of Northamp
ton, Mass., and now teaching and en
gaged in research work at the Univer
sity, presented a paper on Small Town
Government in North Carolina. The
following is a brief review of his paper,
which will appear in full in the forth
coming Club Year-Book.
Government is the servant or agent
of society and law is the instrument
through which society and its agent
regulate human relations. They are as
good or as bad as the people make them.
If law and government often operate
against the interests of the people
composing a society or community, the
people themselves are to blame for tol
erating such attitudes and activities of
their representatives in public office.
Small town government is a subdivis
ion of municipal government, and this, in
its turn, is a subdivision pf local govern
ment, in the broader sense of that term.
Local government has been defined by
one authority as “the agencies and func
tions of government established for the
management of public affairs within an
area smaller than that'of the state.”
This same writer declared, “Not only
does this represent the a^ect of gov
ernment with which the average citizen
is in the most continuous and conscious
contact in the tivities of his everyday
life, but it is aiso, as has frequently been
pointed out, that phase of government
which is least subject to rapid change. ”
Neglected By Students
In view of the closeness of contact of
local government with the average citi
zen and of its slowness to change, -it is
remarkable that so little study has been
devoted to local government in the
United States. And even when it has
been studied, there has been a notable
failure to realize and describe the essen
tial unity of local government. Town
ship, village, borough, town, city, county
governments have been well treated in
their relations to State Government, but
very little and very poorly in their rela
tions to each other. Village, borough,
town, and city governments are as vi
tally connected with county government
as with state government. In fact, in
view of the economic and social relations
of all municipalities with the surround
ing rural territory, their political rela
tions must, in the long run, be even
more important than those between the
State and the municipalities.
LiKe the City
In being created at the request of
the people who are to live within their
boundaries, instead of, as generally in
the'case of counties and townships, at
the desire of state authorities; in being
established primarily for the exercise
of municipal functions; and in being
seldom used as an instrumentality of
State government, the incorporated vil
lage, borough and town are like the
city in legal statute.
Id the second place, they have gov
ernmental structures like that of the
city, with a chief executive in charge
of executive and administrative func
tions, and a clearly defined legislative
body.
Thirdly, they are like the cities in
performing the functions of police; en
actment and enforcement of local ordi
nances; determining rights, obligations
and conduct in civil and social relation
ships; fire protection; providing water,
light, waste and sewage disposal; pav
ing and,care of streets; preservation of
public health and safety; maintenance
of parks, libraries and playgrounds.
These functions are made necessary by
the gathering of numbers of people
into relatively compact communities,
that is, by the mere physical situation
created by comparatively dense popula
tion, while most county and township
functions are but slightly affected by
the population factor.
SAMPSON LEADS
With the awarding late last fall of
what has been termed the largest
rural school contract ever let, Samp
son county, regarded for years es u
backward community in school work*
became one of the first counties in
the state in this respect. During the
year 1925, 13 big consolidated high
school buildings were built or started.
Part of these are now in use, and
the remaining ones will be ready
for occupancy this spring.
The consolidation program, which
was under the direction of John L.
Hathcock, county superintendent,
has been in contemplation for sev
eral years, it was finally made pos
sible onacounty-wide basis last fall,
and now, when the buildings con
tracted for are completed, it will
provide a modern high school for
each of the 17 townships in the coun
ty. Modern educational facilities
will be available for each of the more
than 11,000 school children enrolled.
The county-wide plan was com
pleted in November, when a blanket
contract was let for seven buildings
necessary to cover the entire coun
ty. These and all others in the coun
ty are modern throughout, with
large auditoriums and modern heal
ing and sewerage plants.
Ijama, Tulane, Washington, Pennsyl
vania, Georgia, Yale, Ohio State, South
Carolina, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas,
! Texas, Harvard, Western Reserve and
others. ,
It is interesting to note that only one
other university press in the United
States has more books on the^list than
the University of North Carolina Press.
The University of Chicago Press^ has
three; Harvard, Yale, and Columbia
each has one.
But successful as these books have
been they have not surpassed certain
others, such as E. C. Branson's Farm
Life Abroad; Odum and Johnson’s
The Negro and His Songs; William Louis
Poteat’s Can a Man Be a Christian To-
Day? and others of the twenty books
published by The Press to date.
The selection of two of its books for
this list is only one of the many cases
of approval of the University Press
which have been shown since its institu
tion a little over a year ago. Another
recent recognition of the worth of the
books which it publishes is the purchase
by the Carnegie Koundation for Inter
national Conciliation of 110 copies of
Dr. E. C. Branson’s Farm Life Abroad
to place in the depository libraries which
receive from it books promoting inter
national understanding. Also, the Ameri
can News Company has purchased 175'
copies of Dean Pound’s Law and
Morals for use in Japan.
These small municipalities differ from
cities in having less population, less ex
tensive governmental structure with
fewer officers, and smaller power grant
ed by the state, especially as to bor
rowing and taxation. ^ ,
Will Show the Way
In conclusion, the speaker expressed
a conviction that, though the rural
parts of the United States had hitherto
made greater contributions to the real
ization of the ideals of democracy, the
great democratic advances of the fu
ture would come in this country from
the municipalities, large and smalj;
further, that, as the Saxon boroughs
had been the cradle of English liberty,
the 441 small cities and towns of North
Carolina would furnish much of the
driving force for promotion of equal
opportunity and of the general welfare
in this state during the next hundred
years. Municipal life has always been
the foundation of most of the liberty
and self-government and happiness
achieved by the human race. The cities
and towns of North Carolina must be
better organized in order that they
may the more effectively lead the gen
eral pr-ogress in which they have al
ready placed the state ahead of all
the other southern states. The coun
ties and townships should be allowed
and encouraged to acquire the powers
and possibilities of municipal organiza
tion. North Carolina is already on the
march, but she needs the active and in
telligent services of every citizen, and
especially of those who have had the
greater advantages, needs them in
clearing the way for her great cam
paign to show what a socialized and or
ganized State can do to improve her
own people and to set an example to
the Nation.
SOUTHWARD HO!
Southward the star of the empire
ought now to take its way. The future
belongs to the south if the men of the
south will only have it so. Southern
farm lands, under your rare climate, can
yield more corn for the feeding and cloth
ing of the world than any like acreage
on earth, and these fertile fields now give
only a small part of the wealth they are
meant to give and can be made to give.
Southern mines are as.rich in iron, coal
and other minerals as any on the globe,
and these storehouses are as yet almost
untouched. Southern water power is
greater than that of New England or
the far northwest, and most of it runs
unharnessed to the sea. Southern timber
equals the stumpage of Russia and the
greater part of it is still unused.
The place of the south on the map of
the world ought to make it the heart of
industry and civilization. The greatest
system of waterways on the globe
gathers into a mighty trunk line which
pours through the south to find its out
let in your southern gulf. This vast
land-protected sea is an ocean in itself,
giving to^ the south trade advantages
which, if used, would be unrivaled. The
great Panama canal opens the coijimerce
of mankind to the south more than to
any other single part of the public.
From NoHolk to Galveston the south
has a chain of seaports, the poorest of
which is better than the best German
seaport and the best of which is as good
as those of England.
And the people of the south are as yet
of almost pure descent from the first
American stock. Theirs i.s a fighting
blood, which counts no cost when stand
ing for what they believe to be right.
Theirs is a love for that idealism which
alone makes prosperity worth while and
which alone can save the present-day
craze for money-getting from rotting
the heart of the nation. Theirs, too, is
an aptitude for statesmanship and a
gift for public thinking coming down
from forefathers whose work in found
ing the republic is one of the priceless
traditions of the American people. —
By former Senator Albert J. Beveridge,
of Indiana.
DAIRY cows IN NORTH CAROLINA
Show Large Decrease From 1920 to 1925
In the following table the counties are ranked according to percent increase
or decrease in dairy cows from 1920 to 1925. The parallel column gives the num
ber of dairy cows in the county in 1926.
New Hanover ranks first, having increased her dairy cows 92.2 percent.
Hertford ranks last, showing a five-year decrease of 96.5 percent.
Seventy counties had fewer dairy cows in 1926 than they had in 1920. The
state suffered a net loss of 12 percent in dairy cows, declining from 364 thousand
in 1920 to 312 thousand in 1925.
Based on preliminary announcements of the U. S. Census of 1925.
Dei^rtment of Rural Social-Economics, University of North Carolina
THE PRESS RECOGNIZED
The University of North Carolina
Press has recently had the enviable dis
tinction of having two of its books listed
by the American Library Association
with forty important books of 1924 pub
lished in the United States. The Ameri
can Library Association selected this
list of forty books at the request of the
Committee on Intellectual Cooperation
of the League of Nations. These books
are considered by the Association as the
most important published during the
countries.
Law and Morals, and Franklin H.
Giddings’s Scientific Study of B
Society. Both of these books hav
throughout this country and in f(
countries. For instance, recentl
copies of Law and Morals were s(
one order to a concern in J^pan.
Scientific Study of Human Society al-
consin, Minnesota,
Chicago, North Cai
Number
Percent j
Number
Percent
Rank Counties
dairy cows
increase
Rank Counties
dairy cows
decrease
1926
1920-26
1925
1920-26
1 New Hanover.
... 972
.. 92.2
60 Y adkin
...3,134 ..
. .. 9.3
2 Durham
. 3,723
. 62.0
61 Wayne
2,307
.. 10.0
3 Onslow
.. 646
...47.0
62 Stanly
.3,208 ....
.. 10.3
4 Brunswick....
.. 698
...42.1
53 Polk
.1,451
.. 10.6
6 Lenoir
..1,491
....40.0
64 Iredell
6,271
... 11.0
6 Nash
..2,719
...36.3
66 Surry
4,749
... 11.7
7 Jones
... 398
...32.6
66 Harnett
2,096
... 11.8
8 Bladen
. .1,746
., 23.7
67 Richmond ...
. 422
... 12.1
9 Pender
...1,204
...21.3
68 Duplin
.2,166
... 13.2
10 Lee
...1,721....
.. 20.0
69 Person
2,738....
.. 13.8
11 Carteret
.. 271....
...16.3
60 Chatham ....
.4,736
... 14.7
12 Mecklenburg.
...9,331....
...12.2
61 Jackson
.2,044 ....
... 16.0
13 Vance
...2,606,. .
... 8.1
62 Sampson
2,013
... 15.6
14 Cabarrus
...4,867,...
... 7.9
63 Currituck....
. 333
... 16.9
16 Hyde
...1,368
... 7.1
64 Montgomery
.1,669 ....
... 16.6
16 Wake
.. 7,185....
... 6.9
66 Columbus ...
1,642
... 16.7
17 Washington .
... 308....
. 6.8
66 Halifax
2,306,..'.
... 16.7
18 Granville ....
...4,439....
... 6.6
67 Wilson
.. 983....
... 16.8
19 Alamance
.. 4,588....
... 5.2
68 Bertie
.. 676 ...
... 18.0
20 Avery
...2,254,...
... 6.0
69 Alexander....
. 2,338 ...
... 18.6
21 Orange
.. 3,461....
4.1
70 Pamlico ....
.. 671....
... 19.6
...3,046....
... 3.2
71 Greene
.. 666
23 Beaufort
... 866....
... 3.1
72 Lincoln
. 2,740....
... 23.6
23 Hoke
... 961....
... 3.1
73 Mitchell
. 1,603....
... 23.7
26 Guilford
..7,867....
... 3.0
74 Swain
..1,457....
... 26.0
26 Catawba
...6,068....
... 2.3
76 Caswell
.2,189....
... 25.2
26 Graham
.. 1,078....
... 2.3
76 Pitt
. 1,191....
... 26.0
28 Henderson...
...3,161....
.... 1.0
77 Craven
.•1,134....
. . 26.6
29 Martin
... 682....
.... 0.1
78 Burke
.•2,193....
... 26.7
30 Transylvania.
...1,276,...
... 0.0
79 Moore
..1,940....
... 28.8
V
Percent
80 Rockingham.
...3,446....
... 29.6
decrease
81 Buncombe..,.
. 6,604....
.... 31.1
31 Cherokee
...2,476
.... 0.3
82 Camden
.. 341....
.... 32.4
32 Gaston
..4,268....
.... 0.7
83 Alleghany ..
..1,107....
.... 36.8
33 Warren
.. 3,301....
.... 1.0 ,
84 Macon
. 1,640....
.... 37.0
34 Rutherford ..
...4,868....
.... 3.0
86 Scotland ...
674....
.... 38.0
36 Franklin ....
...3,413....
.... 3.6
86 Clay
.. 693....
.... 44.2
36 Robeson
.. 3,128....
.... 3.6
87 Watauga ...
. 2,302....
.... 46.S
37 Cleveland ....
...6,769....
3.8
88 Stokes .....
-.2,070....
.... 48.8
38 Caldwell
,...3,236....
.... 4.0
89 Haywood ...
.,2,177....
.... 49.6
39 Madison
....4,078,...
.... 6.3
90 Pasquotank
.. 924....
.... 61.8
40 Cumberland..
....1816....
.... 6.6
91 McDowell...
..1,024.'...
.... 64.0
41 Forsyth
.. 4,801....
.... 6.3
92 Northampton
...1,007....
.... 66.1
42 Randolph .
...6,167 ...
7.2
93 Chowan
.. 141....
.... 61.8
43 Anson
3,497...
7.4
94 Yancey
.. 996....
.... 70.6
44 Edgecombe ..
...1,263 ...
. ... 7.8
96 Ashe
..2,307....
.... 73.6
JR Willrps
....6,360....
8.0
96 Dare
.. 13 ...
78 n
46 Johnston ....
....3,742....
8.1
97 Gates
.. 126....
.... 80.2
47 Rowan
....5,914....
8.2
98 Perquimans..
... 279...
.... 82.0
48 Union
6,770....
9.0
99 Tyrrell
... 78...
.... 9i.o
49 Davidson....
....5,073....
.... 9.2
j 100 Hertford.;..
... 61...
.... 96.6