North Carolina Newspapers

THE FRANKLIN TIMES A. F. JOH!HSO?lt i:*lt?i ??< Ob* Tear *1.40 Ntl Months 76 Fou Months SO I Foreign Advertising Rcprt?ent?live ' THt AMERICAN PRF.SS ASSOCIATION ?ftwtnpnri m thn fnat OfTIr? at Tallin. burg, N. C., as second class matter. I nt? nil PITT,!. 1nr a Rlf^OKR aud lfiCTTEli LouUburg. Klorida was visited by a severe wind and rain >torm the past week. Loulsburg Is the BEST town on earth, but lets make 4t a little BET TER?Join the Chamber of CummwiTg and PUSH. The railroad strike situation is still serious Some claim It will be set tled before the walkout, others claim there is nothing that can vtotrtcr And mm a nne la any yeatlng J, \y. Bailey, former feyenue collector as Governor of North Carolina in 1924. There Is no telling who will be Inen tioned next. The hearing of the receivership cage Ihn X\rr-n^ T~l-,.y I'r, wn ? mmnltl. ed Thursday evening of last week, by the appointment of Maj. S3. P. Boddie, Receiver. A most excellent selection. with ua in welcoming Plain Tom back to the columns of the TIMES. It has been many years since his interesting and encouraging lellers hk?*S ipitMIMl in print in the TIMES, but he has al ways been held as one of our most es teemed correspondents. We hope he will make full use ot space In the fu ture and help us in our forward ad Tance. Now that the Chamber ot Commerce has" shown the Warehousemen and buyer? that tobacco can Jje Drought to Loulaburg, let them get up and get at It and llTen up the majket. There is no reaaon why Loulsburg shouldn't hare as good a market as anywhere, but you can't blame a rarmer for go ing where he thinks he can get more hl* "T **"* ? Klrr*r Interest taken In his behast. There Is some talk ot the revival of the Recorder's Court tor Franklin aion that the people ot the County were paying all the taxes they want to pay. Its a dead cinch that a Re ceraer? com t wuuld coal the Cmrnty around $6.000 a year. The average I voter can determine around wbat por- j tlon of this will be saved the County. | Th- y can't argue that the costs will1 take care ot it as the same costs would j IW paid lutu the Qupciltii- Court.?aad-j the establishment ot the Recorder's> Court would not relieve the County of; a cent of cost of the Superior Court. I Another thing it would do would be1 to Increase the salary of the County I officers. Do you want ?t? While we were not supporters of I Gov. Morrison, and there are many things he or Ills administration have j done that we do not approve of, we \ can't help but admire his stand in the ] ? case of J. T. Harris, we see abso- I lutely no use having Courts to ?ry criminals if we are going to have Gov- I ?cMiuig Umii them loose.?Its true?^ few days more time given the man. to 1 live would not have seriously hinder ed the effect of the execution, still at I best it would have resulted in a pro-' lengation of the agony ot expectation or paved the way to dlrectiv or indi rectly turn a criminal loose on the public neither of which would have been wise. The American people are entirely too sympathetic and emotion al. and in this case too many let their tender feelings get the'1 upperhand of their better judgment. Tne fact that the Supreme Court was divided, is no argument In Harris favor as it is the rarest thing at all that It is ever unanl mous on any question of Importance. Heretofore we have been "cussing" Governors for using their pardoning powers. Now we are "cussing" him for not using them. I>et*-be consis tent and let the law take Iti course. Society will profit thereby. HALLOWE'EN ENTERTAINMENT AT CEDAR ROC* The public Is cordially invited to a Hallowe'ea entertainment at Cedar Rock High School on Monday night, Oct. 31. Come and enjoy an hour or two of fun. Admission 10c for child ren. 20c for adults. Proceeds for the benefit of the school. HI'PRESE COI'RT DECISION la K reek I la Coaaty Tax fax*, Hald lag to M Per ( eat Krdartlna The following In a copy of the Su preme Court decision on the Franklin County tax Injunction C*se: North Carolina Supreme Court, Fall Term 1911, No. 160, Franklin. 1.' 8. William?. R? Ala. taxpayers V. Co tut y Commissioners of Frank-1 Itn. AbpmI by Defendants from or <M of Ron4 J. continuing restraining ortler to tke hearlnji. This to an action by 1. ft. Williams a?<l others. lax pay?? S of Franklin r to i?lialii the county commit, at Frank Un from revaluation I raisin( the levy of taxaa after the date praacrlhad by tew. The restrain te? order was grantM by Darin J. a August 1M1. Tba mattea to dlaao^e j The motion was refu?c<i t mining order wan continued to the fi nal hearing- Appeal ^)y Defendants. W. M. Person for plaintiffs. W H. Varborougn and Ben T. Wulden fur defendants. Clark, C. J. TFe defendant board of commissioners of Prauklln County 4**?-accordance with the pruvialojia of_ laws 1921 Ch. 38 met on Tuesday after the flist Monday in April 1921 and af- j ter inquiry and investigation as,to the value of the real estate in said County , recommended the value be reduced by a Horizontal reduction of 40 per cent I applicable to tjie wholexounty. Their recoTTvmenrtatton was dertTfied to the ; state tax commission under section 28 (a> and upprovod by?Um?state?tax commission 15 June 1921. was the same day certified to the defendant board ter xm Lhe second Monday In July 1921 the defendant county commissioners met as a board of equillzatlon for the purpose of hearing complaints afrd equalizing values in the various local ities. There bein^ a number of com plaints. the cognnissioners in order to ascertain more fully the vaiues in the different localities passed resolution to Inspect such parcels of real estate in mmiutMV With thp vnrtniiM or other freeholders residing In their respective townships, and after mak ing such investigations the commis sioners qh 26 July Issued 3Q* notices to taxpayers in 2 townsntps in which they had made an increase of approx imately a million and a hair dollars in valuation to another township in which they had made an Increase of $10.000 and to taxpayers in the 3 towns of Youngavllle. Frankllnton and Lou - isburg in which there had also been Increases in taxation, to show cause against the increase on 2 Aug. but no notices were sent put to any taxpay ers in other townships. There y* Are ten townships in Franklin County. Why this discrimination does not *ap pear. The ground upon whicn Judge Dev ln granted the restraining order and Judge Bond refused to dissolve the same and continued the restraining order to the final hearing and upon which this court Is asked to affirm rests chiefly. If not entirely, upon the proposition that the county commis sioners acted without aucflorlty in at tempting to revalue the property In the parts of the county above designa ted at a time when they were Functus Officio. I Laws 1921 Ch. 38 Sec. Z8 (a) au thorises the board of cunmy commls aloneraon Tuaaday after the first Mon day in April 1921, acting as a board of | reYlew. to make a horisontal reduction thruout the county, If, in their Judg rneut tllcy fluij that the asseseed ?alue is In excess of the actual value. At such meeting the board of commission ers made a horizontal cut of 40 per cent as above stated, which waa cer tified to the state tax commission "not later than 20 April 1921"; and the state tax commission approved said horizontal reduction, and cartlflad their aproval to tile eouo;y colomlt sionera "not later than 15 Jon?"- - the statute provides. This section further provides that this norixonVal reduction "shall be the values at which the property shall be assessed for tax ation unless and until tne same snail have been changed and revised by the state tax comnrisslon, and certified to the board of county commissioners of such county, which shall be done>not later than 1 July 1921." This was certified as above stated on 15 June. Section 28 (b) of said cn. 38 further provides that the county commission ers shall have authority to hear spe cific complaints of over-valuation or under-valuatlon of any particular tracts of land If the complaint is made and the re-assessment and re-appraise ment by the board was made during [the month of May. This was not done Thrrtng" May as to any of the property-] affected by the re-valuation as to which ;this injunction is served. | Section 28 (b) further provides that, | the county commissioners may appoint j i auditor or any resident freeholder of] i the county to investigate and report upon all such specific complaints and ! provides "The tfbard of commissioners j shall thereupon approve or revise such , recommendations, and snail not later than 15 July 1921 make report to the state tax commission of the increases and reductions in the valuation of spe Iclflc properties made under authority of this section. i Said Chapter 38 Sec. (c) provides that if the board of commissioners at their regular meeting on first Monday In April 1921 "shall be of the opinion that the valuation of real estate in such Vrountles is so unequal as be tween the owners of real property In such county as to require more gener al reyision of assessments than is practicable to be made under provis ion of subsections <a> and (b) of this section"?that Is by horizontal cut re duction as was made, and by specific complaint which should have been fil ed In May?" or the value of the real property as heretofore appraised In such county aa a whole Is In'excess of the present actual value of such prop erty. It may by resolution so find and order that such revision be made. In the event that such order is made, It shall be In lieu of the remedies pro vided subsection (a) and fb) of this section, and tho board of county com missioners shall appoint a board of re view composed of 3 resident freehold era who have general knowledge of the value of real eetate in inch coun ty, and such board ot review may ap point such revision, not later than 1 July 1921." Then followa the man ner In which they should execute their duties. which aa above provided should be completed "not later than 1 July 1921." This section further provide? complete abstract of such revised assessment by townshlpa. ?ivtng aver age value per acre, and value ot town lota, and the value as a whole shall be made to the board of county com missioners ot such county, and to the state tax commission "not later than IS July 1921." and ahall be ?subject to the authority of the state tax commis sion. aa the state board of equlllsatloo. so aa to preserve a proper equalised value of real property In the several COTTON tEADS on the ROAD to Prosperity A. Bid CHANGE FOR THE BETTER ? IN MAKING YOUR FALL, AND WIN TEB PURCHASES TRADE AT THE STORE OFFERING THE BEST BAR GAINS. WE TEACK YOUR DOLr LAR3 MORE OCNOB. YOUR PEN. NIES WILL GO FURTHER HERE. WE OFFER THE BEST BARGAINS, BE SURE TO DO YOUR ?PALL-TRADING .1 LOUISBURG'S BARGAIN SPOT OCR LINES OF MEN'S, WOMEN'S .AND CHILDREN'S REAiJt-TO-WEAR AND SHOES ESPECIALLY, ARE T-rTWrff THAN FVFP, ""'K ARE PREPARED TO OUTFIT^ EVERY THE FAMILY FOR. less MONEY. : : : : THE COMPETiTiQJI FOR THE SAME QUALITY MERCHANDISE. READ! COME! AND BE CONVINCED. Unsurpassed "SHOE" Values Men's Endlcou-Johnson, uoaman. Rnrt Welnbrenner work shoes I2.9S Women's Star Brand every day shoes, black only (2.9$ man cushion sole and rubber heei shoes $2.93 M?n'? ^nrtirnn-iolmson dress shoes /- li.ll ' Children's Qodman and Vallar shoes. sizes S 1-2 tO 8. big value $1.98 Children's Oodman and Valley shoes, ? email sixes 1IT4S KILL UXE "WA1W!P B0T8 AXI) , QIRLS SHOES ?.??'tpT". HEX'S -BEACON" DRESS SHOES? TA* AKB BUCI . MJ? to ?8 W BLACK BROGUE $7,? TVOHjEH'S (JUKI* Q6AL1TI SHOES $7.16 to ?.?S Hoati'i Brogue OlfeM~ IS.M ^_ -?? .H * , UEMEMBGR WE ARE NOW EXCLUSIVE AGENTS th j.nmamimfl. ?? E!H)ICOTWOH!ffiOin?H?tS STAB BRAND SHOES RODMAN SHOES WALTON SHOES BEACON SHOES ?? QUEEN QUALITY SHOES CRADDOCK-TERRY LION BRAND You will admit these are the LEST POPULAR PRICED SHOES ON THE MARKET COME AND LOOK OVER OUR UNES WOMEN'S STYLISH COATS i mpels, "Velours, t*Qln rinths, nnmt) with tur collars, all colors *9.95 Up Misses Co?t?r all wool Cheviots, some with fur collars all colors $7.95 Up Children's Coats, large and beautiful, ..all wool coatl&gs, all colors $4.95 Up wftMEVs t*n mssKS' poat suits All Wool Trlcotlne, Veloi-rs. Serge; Blue."Black and Brown, some plain, others embroidered, and some with fur collars $14.95 Up Trlcotlne Dresses, wonderful value ?8.95 Satin and Taffeta Dresses -t. $4.98 Charm eus? Dresses, black, blue and brown -a $9.95 SWEATERS Boys' and" Girls' Sweaters, all colors, ? wonderful .vaJua 4St: . Youth's Sweaters, solid colors, blue, brown, lite $1.45 Men's wool Coat Sweaters, blue, ma roon, grey - $1.48 Coffege Sweaters, pure wool, white, maroon, blue, worth $8.09, now on . ? : $4.98 -^beu#?7 effects 3 J^98 colors : $1.48 Black and White all wool Sweaters $5.95 JUST RECEIVED All Wool Misses Peter Pan Sweaters Large variety of color combinations. These must be seen to be apprO-x elated. Ask to see them. $3. ?8 MEN! MEN. SPITS ? OVERCOATS Just Sis More Left HERRINGBONE AND BLUE PIN STRTPE SUITS $16.95 Only 25 ALL WOOL WORSTEAD - SUITS?Both -Oottaervattve and ? ? Young Men's ModelB >14.06 ALSO AN EXTENSIVE LINE OF THE SEASON'S BEST SUITINGS $M.f5 MEN'S OVERCOATS Fine Quality, good Winter weight, Black, Grey and Mixtures ?tt'p ?? Overalls,\elastlc baCV , 9Be Work Shirts, heavy grade 76c Extra Pants, good Quality i >1.46 Men's Dress Shirts 89c Men's Sox, extra value 10c ?Men's Hats, ^us}. a few 89c Also a complete line of teen's high " grade gents furnishings. UNDERWEAR Infants Shirts , 35c -Women's Shirts and Pants 48c Children's Union Suits i 49c Men's Fleece lined Underwear 76c Men's fine grade Ribbed Underwear 89c Boy's Fleece Union Suits 98c Women's Union Suits $1.25 Men's Extra fine Union Suits $1.95 Dress Ginghams, desirable patterns 15c Yd Cotton Checks, best shirting mater ial 15c Yd Dress Percales, yard-wide 15c Yd Solid Color Outings, good quality 12 l-2c Yd BLANKETS and Comforts We bave a complete line of pure wool blankets and good warm comforts. Priced to please. Outing, light and dark fcolorB 10c Yd Curtain Scrim, plain and fancy bor l6o Yd Flannel N'ight Gowns, full make 98c Each Toboggans 25c Each L. KLINE & COMPANY "When Seen or Advertised Elsewhere Its Always Cheapest Here" LOUISBURG, N. CAROLINA counties. Section 28 (d) provides that the re port of the county commissioner* made pursuant to section 28 (n) and the ab stracts as reported by the ooard of re ?lew under section 28 (c) shall be the basis for the assessment of taxes, un less and until the same are changed by the tax commission on or before 1 September 1921 certify down to the board of county commissioners of the several counties Its findings and con clusions upon said report and ab stracts." It will be seen by perusal of the above provisions of the statute that sec. 28 (a) authorised the county com mtfssloners on the Brst Tuesday after the first Monday In April to make 4 horizontal redaction of the valuation thruout the county and report the same to the state tax commission not Ister than 20 April lttl, and that said commission shall act upon said report and that said values shall be the val ues assessed for taxation anless chan ged by the state tax commission who shall certify down their action not la ter than 1 July 1M1. The action of the county commissioners In making a ?0 per cent redaction was approved and certified to defendants IS Tmw. Then Sec. 28 (b) provides that dur ing May specific complaints may be made as to the valuation of any par ttcular tract of real estate after t h? \ general equal listIon order provided tor 111 the preceding section shall have been made, and the board daring the month of May may act upon such com plaints and shall report any modifica tions thereby made In the general or der and shall report such modifications "not later than 16 July" to the tax commission. That not having been done, the at tempt of the board on the second of An gust 1921 to make Increases of over one and a halt million dollars In the valuation for taxation of the proper ty of ?04 tax payers In S townships and towns was without authority of law and the restraining order w properly granted by Judge Devln and the refusal to dissolve the same by Judge Hon d must be affirmed The defendants, however, contend that they acted under aeo. tS (c) which authorised the county commissioners when they "shall be of the opinion that the valuation of real estate In such ooanty Is'so unequal as between the owners of real estate In such county as to reqalre a more general revision of assessment? than la practicable to be rasde, under the provisions of sub ?^LtXjus (g) as? (b) of this section-? that Is by s general horraontab reduc tion and by Specific r-omplslntt 'hey "may" by rseolutlon ao find srft order i that such revision be made. In the ?vent such order la made It shall be In I lieu of the remedies provided In sub ]?actions (a) and (b) or tms section." It therefore an alternative remedy which the commissioners might have elected to adopt in their meeting on Tuesday after the first Monday in April. But having adopted the other system of "horlsontal reduction and ?pacific complaint?" they eould not In July proceed to act under subsection (c). Even if tbey could do so. It would be necessary to set aside their horltontal reduction of 40 per cent as to the entire county though . It had b?an approved by the state tax com mission, and then proceed under suh section (c) In lieu thereof. There li this further Insuperable ob Jectlon that If subsection (c) had been chosen as the alternative to the "horl sontal reduction find specific com plaints" the legislature provided that proceedings thereunder should he com pleted "not later than 1 July 1921,' and that the county cotnmlsloner* should make their report of such re vision under subsection (c) to the state tax commission "not later than IS July 1921" and that body should certify down their action nn or be fore 1 September 1921. On Tuesday after the first Monday In April the board o< commissioners had their election to pToceefl T>y a general horizontal reduction and specific com plaints which they did and which ha? been approved by the state tax com mission. Or, they might have chosen then to have proceeded under subsection (c) under which the work could be com pleted "not later than 1 July" and re ported "not later than IB July" to the tax commission which wae practica ble. They chose the first metnod. When becoming dissatisfied with that they attempted In August to proceed under subsection (c) they had no authority to set aside the horizontal reduction which had received me approval of the state_>ax commission for they were functus officio and It was too late be cause the statute was speelflq that the revision should be completed "not la ter than 1 July" and reported to the state tax commission " not later than 11 July." There are some circumstances un der which a requirement tfpt a cer tain act shall be done On a d*te named may be treated as directory, ?ut that la not possible when the statute conferr ing a power provides that It shall be i performed "not later than" the time specified. The order appealed from Is AFFIRMED.