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 its University Ex
tension Division.
MARCH 1, 1922
CHAPEL HILL, N. C.
VOL. Vlil, NO. 15
Editorial Board » E. C. Bratison, S.H. Hobbs, Jr., L. R. Wilson, B. W. Knight, D. D. Carroll. J. B. Bullitt, H. W. Odum. Entered as second-class matter November 14,1914, at the Postordce at Chapel Hill, N. C., under the act of August S4, 1918.
SALE VALUES AMD TAX LISTS
TAX Aira SALE VALUES
Real property was sold in North Caro
lina in the first six months of last year
at about 150 percent of the value at
which it was assessed for taxation.
This is shown by data supported by af
fidavits from 98 of the 100 counties, the
two counties not included being Dare
and Green, in which there were few
transactions, and these small. The
transactions included in the enumera
tion include only those involving $1,000
or more. Of such transactions, in the
98 counties, the total involved $30,600,-
000, nearly, and the assessed valuation
of the property disposed of, as listed
for 1921, was under $20,375,000—or
66.58 percent of the sale price. Where
the consideration was not named in the
deed affiants took the amount as indi
cated by the revenue stamps attached.
The Mid-State
In Guilford total sales were $2,337,000
on an assessed value for the same prop
erty of $1,627,000, or under 70 percent
of what was realized by the sellers.
Property sold between January 1 and
9 June 30 in Davidson county was assessed
at $268,653 and brought $478,760; as
sessment being 54.02 percent of sale
value. Forsyth sold property to the
amount of $2,139,000, assessed at 71.34
percent of that. Stokes, next door,
disposed of land at $169,465' which was
taxed at only 59.20 percent of that
amount. Rockingham sales of $815,821
were made on property assessed at 64.30
percent as much. Caswell, sales $92,-
606, assessed $56,660, or 61.25 percent.
Alamance realty assessed at $355,184
sold for $517,606; 68.62 percent. Ran
dolph dirt changed hands involving $235, -
365, and was assessed at 67.42 percent
of that amount.
The West and East
So much for this immediate section.
In the western section, Cherokee lands
were assessed at 65.39 percent of the
sale price; Clay, 71.51; Henderson, 87.12;
Macon, 61.26; Polk, 71; Swain, 72.83;
Surry, 54.80; Transylvania, 62.25; Yaji-
cey, 89.22; Buncombe sold property for
$3,361,000 that was assessed $2,256,000,
or something over 69'percent.
In the extreme east, land in Beaufort
was assessed at 70.84 percent of what
it sold for; Bertie, 50.46; Carteret, 98.66;
Currituck, 66.37; New Hanover, 87.60;
Onslow, 91.46; Pasquotank, 67.14; Cam
den, 43.85; Washington, 51.95; Tyrrell,
70.41.
Of larger counties not included in
these groups, Durham land was taxed at
68.40 percent of what it sold for. Meck
lenburg sold property aggregating $3, -
169,000 assessed at $1,815,000, or 57.28
percent. Pitt was assessed at 83 percent
of sale value; Vance, 61.50; Wayne,
35.91; Lenoir, 90.06; Craven, 81.77; Wil
son, 63.44; Wake, 88.45, on volume of
sales amounting to $810,175.
On this showing Carteret’s assess
ment was highest, being 98.66, and that
of Wayne, 35.91, lowest. Only'a few of
the counties had property valued at 80
percent or more of the price at which it
sold.
Have Land Values Fallen?
Assuming that the intrinsic value of
land was declining during the period
covered and that it has since continued
to decline, there is a safe margin for
the assumption that tax values are still
far below the mark that was set for
them by the framers of the so-called
revaluation law, namely 100 percent.
The great effort to make the tax books
tell the truth, in the words of Governor
BJckett, did not accomplish that, actu
ally, at the time; did not make them
speak the truth as to value during the
year 1921, nor during the present year;
the effort failed, not by going beyond
the correct figure, but by falling short
of it, except as to a mere handful of
counties.
Land values have not declined 30 per
cent, nor any considerable part of 30
percent. Moreover, whatever considera
tion ought to be given, in considering
the revenue structure, to temporary
excesses of valuation, followed by re
cessions, land values do not, in the long
run, decline; they advance.
Incident to their own quarrel with
the state’s taxing powers, the railway
companies have performed, in the gath
ering of these statistics, a service of no
small value to the people of the state
who seek the truth, and are anxious
that the truth shall be the ruling con
sideration in laying the basis for the
state’s revenue system. The citizen
who seeks the truth will find profit in a
comparison of these sale values with
the resulting assessments in those coun
ties where the revaluation Was attacked
by horizontal reductions.—Greensboro
News.
BETTEa LOCAL GOVEKNMENT
A general revision of county govern
ment in North Carolina is contemplated
in steps which Governor Cameron Mor
rison is now taking with the approval
of the Council of State, for the prepa
ration of legislation to be submitted to
the 1923 General Assembly. Governor
Morrison is in process of appointing a
commission of a score or more of dis
tinguished men in the state to under
take the drafting of a reform measure
which will be submitted to the Legisla
ture as a basis for its consideration.
The governor is satisfied that great
improvement can be made in the coijnty
governments in North Carolina. The
present law under which the counties
of the state are governed, says the
Governor, is out of date. It has been
handed down, in its main principles,
from the first county government act
adopted after the War Between the
States.
The only thing in the world that in^
sures good and efficient government in
the counties of the state is the men
who are elected to fill the offices, said
the Governor yesterday. The law as it
now stands, the Governqr went on, is
submerged in a mass of amendments
and special legislation to the extent
that even the lawyers in many cases
are puzzled. A complete reorganiza'
tion of the county government and the
accounting systems in operation in them
is the Governor’s aim.
While Governor Morrison was not yet
ready to make any announcement of
definite plans yesterday, he stated that
he was selecting a commission for the
purpose of taking the whole matter into
consideration and of aiding him in the
drafting of a new law for submission to
the next General Assembly.—News and
Observer.
GOOD HUNimG, GOVERNOR
Absolutely, positively, unequivocally,
and without reservations do we hasten
to express hearty, admiration for the
notion that has struck Governor Morri
son to see if something can’t be done
for poor, old county government in
North Carolina. Connty government
needs help, needs revision. Getting it
to accept is quite a different thing, but
that question is not before the house at
this time.
The Governor announces his intention
of appointing a commission to study
the situation and make recommenda
tions. Something ought to come of this
if those who can see the defects can de
vise a remedy. The lack of efficiency
in county government is visible to the
naked eye and the deafest ear hears
some of the knock and rattle that speak
so eloquently of lost motion.
There are perhaps in North Carolina
half a dozen counties in which the tax
payers get approximately their money’s
worth—this no fault of the system but
due to a wise selection of officials and
unification of the usual rule by them;
but the overwhelming majority of the
hundred counties ought to have receiv
ers appointed for them. It stands to
reason that a commission such as the
Governor contemplates—and it must be
handed to him that he lists rather to
ward business men than politicians in
in his appointments thus far—can de
vise some means of handling public af
fairs which will be superior to the old
hit-or-miss style in vogue. Surely no
commission with a business man on it
would recommend the retention of the
board of county commissioners with its
present first Monday treatment of fi
nancial problems. And we believe that
such a commission would also abolish
the county treasurer or give him some
thing worth while to do.
Good hunting, Governor!—Raleigh
Times.
(Released for week beginning Febru
ary 27.)
KNOW NORTH CAROLINA
Need for Better MarKeting
A. W. McLean
The greatest material need in
North Carolina today is a better sys
tem of marketing our agricultural
products.
Our interests are preponderantly
agricultural, but, either through in
difference or lack of constructive ef
fort, our producers are annually sus
taining enormous losses on account
of crude and ineffective marketing
methods.
They receive from ten to twenty-
five percent only of the prices which
the consumer pays for such special
products as melons, peaches, straw
berries, and the like, and not more
than fifty to seventy-five percent of
what the consumer or manufacturer
pays for the more important pro-|
ducts, such as potatoes, grain, to
bacco and cotton.
Our unexcelled agricultural resour
ces are being exploited, while our
producers are either selling below
the cost of production or at less
than a living profit.
The old processes of marketing
should be supplemented, not only in
the interest of the producers*but al
so in the interest of all classes, for
whatever increases the aggregate
wealth of our agricultural popula
tion necessarily increases the ma
terial wealth and prosperity of all
our people.
To bring about these results there
ought to be generally a”seller’s mar
ket, or at least a market where buy
er and seller can bargain upon sub
stantially equal terms, instead of
the present situation^wherein the
sellers are too often at the'mercy of
the buyer. There should^be a mar
keting system which would inform
producers as to supply and demand,
and particularly as to the best avail
able markets, both domestic and for
eign; reduce the cost of marketing,
including the cost of^transportation;
and, above all, provide reasonable
interest rates, so a3.jto;prevent the
disastrous glutting of markets, as
is now too frequently^the case.—A.
W. McLean, War Finance Corpora
tion, Washington, D. C.
OUR FOREST PROBLEM
The North Carolina Geological and
Economic Survey has recently published
and now has available for distribution.
Circular No. 1, entitled The Forest
Problem in North Carolina. The au
thor, W. Darrow Clark, briefly describes
the process of forest exploitation in any
new country; points out the part^that
the lumbermen play as ’agents of the
people in supplying the demand for
lumber; explains how extensive forest
exploitation necessarily accompanies
rapid development of the|country; and
shows how forest fires constitute the
greatest menace of the forest in that
they continue tb kill the youngjtrees
fast as they establish themselves on
cut-over areas.
After discussing many of the indirect
as well as the direct beneficial influ
ences of the forest, the author empha
sizes the great need for making it
somebody’s business to enforce the for
est laws, to run down the origin of
forest and field fires and to extinguish
such fires in their incipiency. The con
clusion of the circular is an appeal to
the boards of county commissioners to
cooperate with the state and federal
forces by making a small 'appropri
ation to cover one-half the cost of
establishing a county forest warden
organization for protecting one of thei:
most important sources of future rev
enue.
A REAL FARMER
One is refreshed by meeting up with
real farmer who loves his job and
who loves country life; one who really
has his eyes open to the pleasures and
privileges of living in the great out-of-
doors. As a rule such farmers are suc
cessful. We ran across ond of this kind
a few days ago and in conversation with
him we drew out, in substance, the fol
lowing statement: “The world may be
wealth mad, and pleasure mad, but as
surely as we live, it is coming to itself
soon, and the result will be ‘back to
the land’, in such a rush as has never
before been read of, much less seen.
‘ ‘As for wealth and pleasure, ’ ’ he went
on, “both are there abundantly when
the disturbed race becomes settled
enough to recognize real wealth and
pleasure when it sees them. Why bless
me, ’ ’ he said, ‘ it’s all wealth and pleas
ure, and nothing else. To set and train
the fruit and shade trees, and dream
what their future may be; to store away
the winter supplies, cut and haul the
winter wood, watch the growth of the
calves, pigs, and colts, and when the
cold winter nights come on, and the air
is thick with snow and hail rattles
against the windows and on the roof,
to sit by the fire and know that all stock
are properly housed and fed, and plenty
of wood in the dry, while the supplies
for home use are right at hand, nothing
to do but figure on new plans for im
proving this or that field, or remodel
ing this or that building—it certainly
is great, and the fellow who feels that
life in the country is a drudgery for
v.'ant of movies and other pleasure
making establishments, needs but to
discover what real life is like.’’ — Mocks-
ville Enterprise.
TAX VALUES AND SALE VALUED
The following information was in each of the 98 counties, the com-,
compiled for the railway companies pilation being sworn to by C. J.
to be used in establishing certain O’Brien the two counties missing
* . are Greene and Dare, and it is stated
contentions m their resistance to that the figures all represent trans
assessment for taxation in North actions of ?1,000 or more, and that
Carolina, presented as an affidavit where the consideration was not
in “Southern Railway Company vs. named in the deed, it has been ar-
A. D. Watts et al,” and is supported rived at from the revenue stamjis
by affidavit of one or more person* attached;
County.
Name of
Affiant.
Consideration
in deeds
recorded six
months, 1-1-21
to 6-30-21.
Total as.sessed
value same
property, 1921.
Per cent'
assessed
value
to deed
value.
Alamance ...
• B. M. Rogers
5 517,606.00
5 355.184 00
68.62
Alexander ..
• J. P. Crouch
50,175.00
24,860.00
49.54
Alleghany ..i
.E. L. MicMillan ...
97,167.56
70,088.00
72.13
Anson
.Fred J. Coxe
111,603.42
67,721.00
60.68
' Ashe ........
.C. W. Higgins
225,374.89
122,591.00
54.39
Avery
.Avery Goodman -A,
63,480.50
62,975.00
83.45
Beaufort . .u
.Chas. M. Weeks ...
555,540.00
393,592.00
70.84
Bertie
• P. T. Perry
304,883.80
153,828.00
50.46
Bladen
.D. B. Johnson
131,930.00
123.267.00
93.40
Brunswick ..
.L. J. Poisson. .....
61,610.00
44,600.00
72.39
Buncilombe ..
.George H. Wlright..!
3,261,452.00
2,255,839.00
69.16
Burke
.George H. Battle ...
96,380.00
51,268.00
53.19
Cabarrus ...
.John H. Oglesby ..
146.619.00
90,602.00
61.78
Caldwell ....
.John M. Crisp
85,905.00
74,960.00
87.26
Camden . .. -
.Carteret ....
.P. G. Sawyer and
M. B. Simpson
.D. W. Morton
107,200.00
121,433.00
47,024.00
119,800.00
43.85
98 66
Caswell ....
.E. F. Upchurch ....
92,606.00
56,660.00
61.25
Catawba ....
.Klutz B. Clippard ..
369,116.00
211,231.00
57.22
Chatham ...
.Jas. L. Griffin
99,445.00
58,594.00
58.90
Cherokee ...
.W. M. West
128,522.00
84,042.00
65.39
Chowan ....
.R. W. Boyce
106,545.00
97,300.00
91.32
riav
.Wayne L. Swanson.
54.550.00
39,010.00
71 51
Cleveland ...
.R. L. Weathers ....
428,109.35
301,044.00
70.30
Columbus ...
.L. V. Grady
228,820.00
' 167,222.00
73.03
(’raven
.Wni. Dunn, Jr
379,831.66
310,610.00
81.77
('iimberl.'ind
E. L. Hall
414,122.03
270,615.00
65.35
Currituclc .. .
.P. G. Sawyer and
M. B. Simpson
108,781.86
72,210.32
66.37
Davidso.i ...
.W. pi; Phillips ....
478,760.00
258,653.00
54.02
Davie
.J. S. Daniel
35.438.00,
28.308.00
79.88
Duplin
.H. L. Stevens
87,165.00'
6-2.250.00
71.41
Duriiam ....
.M. G. Markham ...
492.250.00
.336,5:12.00
68 4‘J
-A
Edgecombe .
.J. L. Bridgers
209.382.24
130,055.00
G'l.C.)
•
Forsytli ....
.Phillip L. Kainer,
li. G. Parker and
C. A. Vogler
3,139,311.57
1,526,368.70
•71.39
Fr:i;iklin . . .
.T-Iugh W. Perry ....
75,458.29
40,-172.00
.ij.'i’.)
Gaston
.Cecil C. Cornwell..
202,167.00
136,374.00
67.70
Cates
.P. L. Hoffier
133.575.00
84,760.00
C3.15
Graham ....
.A. H. Eller
39,904.50
17,486 00
•i:i.S2 ■
T’lVllle ...
.C. G. Powell
272,387.87
141,930.00
52.1.)
Guilford ....
.John H. JIcAdoo ...
2.337,104.00
1,627,041.00
69.61
Halifax ....
.R. C. Dunn
237,30.3.50
125.777.50
54.69
J-larnett ....
.J. C. Clifford
116,685.00
70.045.00
60.03
Haywood .. .
.T. Troy W yche ....
221,720.83
129.;;42.00
58.:) 3
Henderson .-
.uMrs. J. E. Bishop . .
678,562.05
591,194.05
.87.12
6L12
Hertford . ..
.J. E. Vann
100.22(i.00
67,268.00
Iloke
• Oscar Leach
24,042.25
22,325.00
92 85
'
Hyde .. .
Tredell . .
.T.ackson .
J n h nston
Jones . . .
Do- . . . .
Ijonoir .
Lincoln
Jtacon .
IMadison
^’artin ..
McDowell
Mecklenburg
iTitchell .. .
lilontgomery
Moore
Nash
New Hanover.
Northampton
Onslow
..Elmo Mann
...John li. Millholland
..R. R. Nicholson ...
..E. F. Ward
..John R. Barker ...
. .D. E. Mclver . . .
..C. W. Pridgen ..
. ..Tohn E. I-Joover
. .J. F. Ray
. .J. W'ill Roberts .
.1-1. W. Stubbs ....
.H. R. Ledbetter .
..Geo. IVL Phifer ..
..T. D. Pannell . . . .
..W. L. Wright ...
.N. A. McKeithen
.J. P. Bunn
.W'm. L. Smith ...
.P. F. Calvert . . . .
.Frank Thompson
Orange J. F. McAdams ....
Pamlico G. W. Rawls
Pasquotank ..P. G. Sawyer and
M. B. Simpson
.Ponder J. T. Bland
Perquimans . .W. F. C. Edwards .
Person A. P. Clayton
,Pitt C. F. Manning and
J. C. Gaskins
Polk W'. C. Hague
■ Randolph John M. Brittain ..
'Richmond ....H. V. Guthrie'
Robeson Wade Wishart ...;
iRockingham ..Nurna Winstead ...
■Rowan Max L. Barker ....
Rutherford
Sampson . .
Scotland
I Stanley ....
I st-'kes ....
i'riinsylvania
iT.yrell
Union
Vance
Wake
Warren
Washington
Watauga . ..
Wayne
Wilkes
"Wilson
i■^'adkin
Yancey
.M. T. Wilkie
.H. A. Grady
.T. i. Dunn
.Oecwge P. Palmer.
.N. Earl Wall
.B. F. Folger
.D. E. Nichols
.Roland Owwen ...
.A. Melson
.M. L. FloW
.Robert G. Kittrell.
.H. E. Glenn
.E. C. Price
.Z. V. Norman
.T. E. Bingham ...
.D. E. Grantham ..
..Frances Ilendren .
.R. D Brinkley . ...
.John D. I^eece ....
.C. C. Caraway ....
Totals
84,712.50
234,405.00
190,967.00
382.507.56
204,486.00
90,027.00
212.570.06
217,764.00
32.275.00
29.780.00
623,064.03
93,675.00
3,169,115.25
93,991.00
244,638.00
210,678.00
361.74Q.43
989,207.00
54,848.00
82,418.00
162,269.00
41,150.00
188.681.15
90,000.00
95,002.00
59,124.00
459,976.50
40,743.20
23,5.365.00
80,070.00
119,272.00
815,821.00
179,097.90
106,706.93
222.556.00
61,200.00
151,874.00
169,465 00
198.624.00
55,435.00
39,950.00
48,603.33
473,906.00
.5OO.C06.C0
S10.175.no
131,427.33
112.1C2..50
207,632.00
244,67.5.00
113,512.40
30-1,9x34.00
71.495.00
194,974.00
60,905.00
155,250.00
44,125.00
224,047.25
117.763.00
74,457.00
191.465.00
111,146.00
1 9,775.00
18,327.00
238,679.0(1
54,480.00
1,815,279.50
65,056.00
158,764.00
119,410.00
165,891.00,
866.550.OO;
48.620.00
75,475.00
120,706.00
15,556.00
126,778.00
64.SS5.00
383.157.00
28,929.00
135,150.00
55,610.00
68,004.00
524,584.00
130,391.75
79,672 00
110,837.00
39,561.00
119,2.56.00
100,339.00
108,860.00
40,374.00
24.870.00
34,232.00
3:11,924.00
301.311.00
7(6,648.00
69,200.00
,58,230.50
133,018.00
87,851,00
66.214.00
191,107.00
48.128.50
173.972.00
71.90
69.17
23.10
61.26
61.51
38 31
■58.16
.57.28
69 21
64.89
56.70
45,85
87.60
88.64
91.46
74.88
37.80
67.14
72.90
92.39
77.07
83.00'
71.00
57.42
69.40
57.00
64.30
65.52
74.70
49.80
64.64
78.78
59.20
54.80
72.s:{
62.2.5
70.41
70.00
61.50
88.45
52.60
5i 95
64.07
35.91
58.33
63.44
67.31
89.22
. ?30,5D3,475.00 520,373.684.07 66.58
-Greensboro Daily News, Februry 2, 1922.