Skip to Content
North Carolina Newspapers

The University of North Carolina news letter. online resource (None) 1914-1944, May 25, 1927, Image 1

Below is the OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

The i>ews in this publi cation is released for the press on receipt. MAY 25, 1927 THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA NEWS LETTER Published Weekly by the University of North Caro lina for the University Ex tension Division. CHAPEL HILL, N. C. THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA PRESS VOL. XIII, No. 28 E^litorial ItSoardt E. C. Branson, S. H. Hobbs. Jr., L. R. Wilson. E. W. Knight, D. D. Carroll. J. B. Bullitt, H. W. Odum. Entered as second-class matter November 14, 1914. at the Postoffice at Chape! Hill. N. C.. under the act of August 24, 191i. CENSUS VEHSUS TAX VALUES IWFAHT MORTALITY In the year 1926, 6,591 babies died in North Carolina before reaching the end of their first year of life. Looking at the figure.s from another angle, that year there were 83,700 live births of babies in the state, and of that number before the end of the year 6,691 had died, or nearly 8 percent of all those who were born. Analyzing the figures from still another angle, a large per cent of these deaths were caused from diseases like diarrhoea and enteritis, diseases caused from an infectious agent received by the baby through its food or water. There is no need to go further into rates and percentages. These are cold figures, which the most ignorant man or woman in the state can understand Hazardous Occupation Speaking from the standpoint of public hcaltii, the serious import of the j birth rate m North Carolina is the fact that being a baby still constitutes the ; most hazardous occupation in the state. ; A further, and still more significant; •cause for worry and work is the fact; that beginning with the month of May the death rate of babies mounts higher ! and higher throughout the summer, i the curve coming on back down about October, in other words, the death j rate of babies follows the house fly. ! On the other hand, the general death rate including all the adult population beginning with the month of May curves djwa lower and lower, begin ning to climb back up about October or November, in short the summer months are the healthiest and safest period of j .the year lor all the population except! the babies. The army of babies is somewhat in the same position as the old type armies between warring nations who went into winter quarters and a period of inactivity and comparative safety to emerge in the summertime and to go into battle with large casual ties on each side and tremendous hazards to both opposing armies. The army of babies annually go to battle at the beginning of summer with other num berless toes, seen and unseeu. In the htsc place, the babies have to battle against sudden climatic changes which cause hoc days and cool nights, especial ly in the month of May, and unless the parents meet changing conditions in stantly with intelligence and care, the casualties begin. At this period the house flies and mosquitoes and other insect pests which are dangerous to the health of babies begin to make their appearance, and unless protection is complete the lives of many babies are sacrificed from this cause. Spring rains or spring droughts make changes in the water line for the thousands of babies born in the country and living on the farms, which, added to careless habits of parents in allowing the water to become polluted and in failnig to thoroughly boil all water given to babies at this period, is the cause of numbers of deaths. The hot weather affects the milk, which of course, consti tutes the chief food of the babies, and is especially disastrous to bottle-fed babies unless^every care is exercised in handling the milk and keeping it cold and protected from flies from the time it is taken from the cow until consumed by the baby. In this connection it can not be repeated too often that at least seventy percent of all baby deaths under one year of age occurs among bottle-fed babies Slow Progress There has been very little material progress made in lowering the infant death rate m North Carolina, notwith standing educational efforts of the State Board of He^iltb and various county and city boards gf health have been majoring m this direction for many years. The State Board of Health, in cooperation financially with funds pro cured through the Sheppard-Towner law and dispensed through the Children s Bureau at Washington, has been spend ing many thousands of dollars per year for a number of years, but as yet scarcely an impression has been made toward a substantial reduction in the infant death rate. This fact should serve to convince all of us that, the chief need is that the facilities kfxown to protect and save' the babies during the first two years of life must be available for all the mothers in the state, especially the poorest. By facil ities we mean a knowledge of how to avoid mistakes in feeding, clothing, and caring for babies Trom the moment of birth and the will and power to apply practically such knowledge. This means the necessity for state-wide education, teaching by example as well as theory, and the teaching must be driven home to the remotest corners of the state, and will probably take at least a generation to make much progress.— The N. C. Health Bulletin. OUR FURNITURE INDUSTRY According to an official source' of information the furniture output of North Carolina for the year 1926 was more than fifty-one million dollars, or about two-thirds the value of the state’s bumper cotton crop of 1926. The furniture industry is our third most important industry, ranking only after tobaci^ and textiles. North Carolina’s position as a furni ture state is often misstated. Accord ing to official Federal data for the year 1926 there were six states whose furni ture output exceeded ours in value. However, two of these states barely nosed out North Carolina. The follow ing table ranks the important furniture states according to value of output for the year 1925: State Value of products 1 New York $166,826,177 2 Illinois 109,230,867 3 Michigan 99,130,108 4 Indiana 80,687,630 5 Wisconsin 63,915,692 6 Pennsylvania 52,607,048 7 North Carolina 51,208,238 8 Ohio 47,686,668 9 California 36,726,511 10 Massachusetts 33,638,635 11 Virginia 18,792,297 According to a study recently reported in the University of Virginia News Letter the annual value of North Caro lina’s furniture output has increased from slightly more than six million dollars in 1904 to more than fifty-one million dollars in 1926. In other words, the value of furniture manufactured in our state in 1925 was more than eight times as great as in 1904. Only four states experienced a larger total in crease in value of output, our gain over 1904 value of output being forty- five million dollars. We now hold a higher rank as a furniture state than ever before in our history, so far as we are able to discover from available data. GOOD CITIZENSHIP To be a successful citizen of the world, you must begin by being a worthy citizen of your community. You must take an active interest in the administration of government. Consider the matter of voting and the matter of crime. You do not do your full duty to your country and to yourself unless you stand solidly behind the forces of law and order. Do you exert your right of franchise? Do you take the trouble to vote? It is a part of every citizen’s duty to vote—to vote as he thinks is right, but to vote. Less than half the electorate of this country cast their ballots at the last presidential election. Many of those who remain away from the polls are the severest critics of governmental policies.— Chicago Health. Dr. Freeman’s address. The abbre viated report of it says that he em phasized the banker’s potential in fluence in promoting thrift and diversi fied crops. Both of these are im portant but more important still for the farmers, we think, is sound busi ness organization of the industry in all of its branches. Not until this is achieved can agriculture escape from the doldrums, and escape is impossible except through such business leader ship as the bankers are best able to supply. Dr. Freeman wisely indicated that the banker can render effective Service in the towns as well as on the land by using his influence to check the rise in living cost in the towns through heed less expenditures. This is something which those who look ahead in the cities should welcome. The Greens boro Record had an able editorial on this theme the other day, urging that “the essential condition of the steady and healthy growth of a municipality is that it shall be made a more de sirable place to live,” and that to meet this end living costs should not be allowed to outstrip sound values. Here is the objective which ought to be kept steadily in mind and steadily striven toward.—Asheville ('itizen. GIVES SOUND ADVICE Dr. Douglas S. Freeman, the able editor of The Richmond News-Leader, in his address before the North Caro lina bankers at Pinehurst on Thursday dealt forcefully with one of the most significant trends now under way in the South, a trend which, as he clearly pointed out, carries a threat that must be recognized and combatted. He was discussing the diverging standards of living on the farms and in the towns ol Virginia and the Carolinas. The trouble does not come from the fact that farm property in the three States named has suffered a very serious decline in nominal values. That is true of farm property pretty much the world over. The trouble is, however, that with us the standard of living in the towns is steadily rising whereas on the farm this is not the case. Dr. Freeman does not think that the rural standard of living is lower, and we hope that as to this he is right on the whole. But unquestionably for many farmers and in many localities it is very decidedly lower. Standards of living reflect prosperity or its absence and such prosperity as the farming interests are enjoying is not very even ly distributed. In taking the view that the gap thus widening between urban and rural standards of living may have far-reach ing social and political effects Dr. Freeman plays the part of a true sentinel upon the watch tower and cries a warn ing that should be heeded, not resented. His message to the bankers was ad dressed to the proper audience for the banker is, as he declared, the key man in this situation. We have not seen the full text of FARM EXODUS CONTINUES The farm exodus continues. For the last several successive years the Cen sus Bureau has reported a net loss of farm dwellers. The farm population ratio has been declining at the rate of nearly one percent a year for the last five years. Today only about twenty four percent of the population of the United States live on farms. The prospects are for a much smaller farm population ratio in the near future. Just when and where a balance will be struck no one knows. The factors involved are too numerous and compli cated for a reliable guess to be possible. ! The Census Bureau reports the net I loss in the farm population of the j United States for the year 1926 at six j hundred and fifty thousand. Arrivals on the farm, including births and j migrations from cities, towns and vil- ! lages, numbered one million seven hun- \ dred and ninety-three thousand. De- ! partures from the farm, including : deaths and migrations to cities, towns i and villages numbered two million ' four hundred and forty-two thousand. The farm population of the United States on January 1, 1927, was estimated as 27,892,000. The total population of the United States on the same date was approximately one hundred and eighteen million inhabitants. EDUCATION PAYS FARMER The value of an education to a farmer can be discussed in terms of dollars and cents. Analysis of surveys made' in twelve widely separated states shows conclusively that the years spent in high school and college are well repaid by increased earning capacity when , farm activities are undertaken, and that I even a common school education is dis- ' tinctly more advantageous financially ; than no education at all. j A compilation of data on the subject, ; assembled from several sources, has ; been issued in the form of a mimeo- ; graphed circular, “Does Education Pay ' the Farmer?” by F. A. Merrill, of the ! Extension Service, United States De- I partment of Agriculture. The surveys used in this compilation offer a very fair cross section of the country. To illustrate, it was found in Texas that every day spent by a child in school might be considered worth $9. This estimate was arrived at by taking $20,- 000 as the total earnings of an unedu cated laborer over a 40-year period, and $40,000 as the total earnings of the high school graduate who had spent 12 school years of approximately 180 days each in acquiring training. The gain in wages, $20,000, due to these 2,160 days of school, represents a value of $9.25 a day while the instruction lasted. The annual net profits of Georgia farmers without any schooling were found to average $240, while those who had com mon school education earned $665.60, high school graduates $664.60, and those who completed an agricultural college course earned $L,264. Those who had taken only a short course earned $895.- 96, or almost three times as much as those with no education at all. In Indiana, Illinois. Iowa, and Kansas the surveys showed again that the men re ceiving the best training made the largest incomes in both the owner and the tenant groups. In Missouri the better educated men own four-fourths of the land they operate, keep more livestock, handle more crops with each workman employed, and do about one- lifth more business. An interesting fact brought out by the Wisconsin sur vey was that the farmers with high school education acquired the owner ship of their farms in about 7 years, while it took 10 years for those with only a common school education to ac quire a clean title. In New York State among those in any given capital group, the high school graduate at any age I was making more than the common 1 school farmer several years older with ! the same amount of invested capital, i Without exception, every study shows ; that the man with the greater training enjoys the greater prosperity. The circular may be obtained in limited numbers by applying to the Of fice of Cooperative Extension Work, United States Department of Agri culture, Washington, D.C. OUR RAILROADS According to the recent report of the State Corporation Commission the state has an aggregate of five thousand and four miles of railway lines. Of this mileage the Atlantic Coast Line owns 1,008 miles; the Norfolk Southern I owns 680 miles and leases 96 miles more; the Seaboard Air Line owns 627 miles; I and the Southern owns 691 miles, and i leases and operates 778 miles more. 1 Thus these four major systems con- ; trol 3,780 miles of railroad, or 76 percent j of total mileage of the state. The re- 1 maining 1,224 miles consist of forty ' small roads with a mileage ranging i from three miles to 130 miles. ‘ According to this report the total I cost of the five thousand miles of road ; and equipment was $286,084,912, This I is represented by a capital stock of I $106,763,618 and a funded debt of $161,477,232. The operating revenue for 1926 was $87,358,895 and the oper ating expense was $61,679,267. This latter figure does not include interest on bonded debt. The net operating revenue was thus $25,779,638. If we interpret the figures correctly the railroads paid to North Carolina and its subdivisions $4,191,924 in taxes in 1925. CENSUS VERSUS TAX VALUES OF CATTLE In North Carolina in 1925 The following table shows in parallel columns the average values of cattle as reported by the Census Bureau and as reported for taxation, both for the same year. The counties are ranked according to value of cattle as listed for taxa tion. The parallel column shows the average value of cattle as reported by the Census Bureau. In New Hanover county the average tax value of cattle is $38.68, while in Brunswick county the average tax value is $10.00. Only two counties have a higher tax value than Census value. It is well to remember that Census values are always conservative. There is just as little uniformity in listing other forms of property as there is in listing cattle. F. C. Upchurch, Wake County Denartment of Rural Social-Economics. University of North Carolina. Average Average Average Average census tax value census tax value Rank County value of of cattle Rank County value of of cattle cattle per pef head cattle per per head head head 1 New Hanover. ..$38 82 ...$38.68 61 Person ..$36.14 ...$21.73 2 Halifax .. 33.49 ... 34.10 62 Scotland . .. 30.62..... ... 21.71 3 Forsyth .. 37.02 .. 30.68 53 Caldwell .. 27.73 ... 21.60 4 Edgecombe... .. 36.26 .... ... 28.91 64 Catawba .. 34.74 ... 21.66 6 Nash .. 39.71 ... 28.73 66 Bladen .. 31.66 ... 21.61 6 Robeson .. 35.36.,... ... 27.64 66 Stanly .. 32.08 ... 21.49 7 Wilson .. 36.91 .... ... 27.49 67 Henderson ,. 27.70 ... 21.42 8 Richmond .. 31.20 ... 27.39 68 Northampton. .. 34.32 ... 21.24 9 Pitt .. 32.07.... .. 26.71 59 Alleghany .. 22.66 ... 21.01 10 Durham .. 38.28 ... 26.38 60 Ashe .. 22.00 ... 20.95 11 Wayne .. 37.96... .. 26.29 61 Cabarrus .. 33.60 ... 20.90 12 Rockingham.. .. 36.46. ... ... 26.23 62 Union .. 31.41 ... 20.78 13 Chatham .. 34.32 ... 26.91 63 Martin .. 33.33 ... 20.49 14 Guilford .. 37.00 ... 25.68 64 Transylvania .. 25.06 ... 20.23 15 Cumberland... .. 33.38 .... ... 26.25 65 Sampson .. 33.07 ... 20.21 16 Wake .. 34.77 ... 24.79 66 Stokes ... 33.67 ... 20.06 17 Rowan .. 33.96 ... 24.76 67 Columbus .. 33.23... . ... 19.76 18 Davie .. 33.12 ... 24.73 68 Alexander .... ... 36.13 ... 19.51 19 McDowell. .. 23.87 ... 24.62 69 Duplin .. 32.63 ... 18.94 20 Johnston .. 38.19 ... 24.44 70 Avery .. 24.66 ... 18.92 21 Vance 39.17 ... 24.34 71 Hertford .. 27.94 ... 18.91 22 Greene .. 32.63 .. 24.28 72 Swain ... 24.69 ... 18.30 22( Harnett .. 36.40 24.28 73 Polk .. 31.19 ... 18.16 24-Randolph .. 34,02 ... 24.20 74 Chowan .. 30.12 ... 18 16 25 Gaston .. 31.92 ... 24.05 76 Watauga .. 22.94 ... 18.11 26 Mecklenburg. .. 33.79 ... 33,82 76 Haywood .. 20.94 ... 17.89 27 Beaufort .. 31.07 ... 23.60 77 Jones .. 30.95 .... ... 17.68 28 Caswell .. 39.28 ... 23.56 78 Wilkes .. 27.84 ... 17.64 29 Cleveland .. 33.87 .. 23.56 79 Washington .. .. 30.65 ... 17.25 30 Granville .. 37.62 ... 23.60 80 Jackson ... 22.38 ... 17.13 31 Orange .. 37.16 ... 23.49 81 Perquimang .. .. 31 06 ... 17.09 32 Franklin .. 36.13 ... 23.42 82 Mitchell 24.69 ... 16.65 33 Hoke .. 34.24 ... 23.20 83 Madison .. 24.42 .... ... 16.44 34 Craven .. 35.88 ... 23.05 84 Pasquotank... .. 32.23 ... 16.26 35 Surry .. 29.36 ... 23.04 85 Bertie .. 32.10 .. 16.73 36 Lenoir .. ‘6QX7 ... 22.96 86 Graham .. 27.66,.^. ... 16.52 37 Anson .. 31.64 ... 22.88 87 Yancey .. 21.23 ... 15.10 38 Iredell .. 34.04 ... 22.81 88 Camden .. 32.46 ... 16.02 39 Buncombe ..26.28 ... 22.60 89 Macon .. 21.89 ... 14.64 40 Alamance .. 36.12.. .. ... 22.63 90 Cherokee . 24.27 ... 14.32 41 Pamlico .. 33.96 ... 22.34 / 91 Tyrrell .. 28.26 ... 14.28 41 Carteret .. 30.28 ... 22.34 92 Gates .. 28.16..... ... 14.17 43 Moore .. 30.96 ... 22.21 93 Onslow . 27.96 ... 14.11 44 Lincoln .. 30.98 ... 22.18 94 Burke „ 30.16 ... 13.90 45 Lee ■... .. 34.13 ... 22.11 95 Clay . 22.74 ... 12.69 46 Rutherford ... .. 31.16 ... 22.08 96 Currituck .. 33.09 .. 12.66 47 Montgomery.. .. 31.38 ... 21.99 97 Hyde .. 36.05 ... 12.54 48 Davidson .. 33.76 .... ... 21.97 98 Dare .. 29.82: ... ... 11.11 49 Yadkin .. 30.33 ... 21,88 99 Pender .. 34.23 ... 10.11 60 Warren .. 33.83 ... 21.80 100 Brunswick .. 32.60 ... 10.00

North Carolina Newspapers is powered by Chronam.

Digital North Carolina