Newspapers / The University of North … / Nov. 22, 1922, 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
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. NOVEMBER 22, 1922 CHAPEL HILL, N. C VOL. IX, NO. 3 Editorial Board t B. C« BrATison, 8. H. Hobba. Jr.. L. B. Wilson, B. W-ISnlght. D. D. CarroU. J. B, Bullitt. H. W. Odum. Entered as seooud-olasB matter November 14.1914, at the Postoffioe at Chapel HHl, N. O., under the act of August 24, 19H. NORTH CAROLINA LEADS If any body at home or abroad is in doubt as to the will of the people of North Carolina about public education, public highways, and public health, let him consider the bonds freely voted for these means of commonwealth de velopment, and'sold during the first ten months of 1922. The total is $47,392,500, and of all the Southern states Texas alone—which is not a state but an empire—comes anywhere near North Carolina. The details for North Carolina are $10,883,000 for schools, ’ which puts us far away in the lead; $26,244,500 for roads, and Texas alone spent more; $3,644,000 for sewer mains; and $6,621,- 000 for miscellaneous purposes.] The following table gives us a look at the rank of the state in common wealth building: School Buildings North Carolina $10,883,000 Texas 8,862,000 Georgia 5,177,600 Missouri 2,798,000 1 2 3 4 5 * Louisiana.. 2,316,000 6 Oklahoma 2,168,480 7 South Carolina 2,006,600 8 Florida 1,860,000 9 Kentucky 1,931,600 10 Alabama 1,691,000 11 Tennessee 1,619,000 12 Mississippi 719,811 13 Virginia 662,000 14 Maryland 668,000 16 Arkansas 693,000 16 West Virginia 438,000 Public Highways 1 Texas $28,086,750 2 North Carolina 26,244,600 3 Missouri 12,781,000 4 Florida 7,172,800 6 Alabama 4,980,000 6 Louisiana 4,703,600 7 South Carolina 4,605,000 8 Arkansas 4,056,600 9 Georgia 3,009,000 10 Tennessee 2,479,287 11 Virginia 2,377,000 12 Maryland 2,369,000 13 Mississippi 2,049,000 14 Kentucky 1,672,500 15 West Virginia 1,349,000 16 Oklahoma 1,144,400 Why North Carolina Leads In Texas the impetus is sourced in oil-well prosperity. In Oklahoma it is the same story. In Louisiana the state treasury is flush with revenues derived from the proceeds of the severance tax on oil, salt, sulphur, and lumber. In South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi, where public treasuries and private purses have been punctured by the boll weevil, progress is sourced in sheer, grim grit. In Florida the* cue lies mainly in the wealth of tourists and immigrant settlers from the North and West. In North Carolina the awakening of the state is sourced in manufacture- mainly of tobacco, cotton, and furni ture; a,nd even more in leadership—in the magnificence of mind and the rare courage of three governors, Aycock, Bickett, and Morrison, at the cross of the roads in commonwealth policies in critical moments of decision. The list of courageous leaders iq long in North Carolina in the various fields and phases of progress. The preeminent distinc tion of North Carolina in the new cen tury lies in her leaders—no state in the Union has produced them in greater abundance; but not less in the response of the masses. They have definitely and finally ;nade up their minds that no great commonwealth was ever built on illiteracy, ill health, mud, and dust. Given poverty and pluck, a boy has a chance to succeed, said Andy Johnson. The same thing is true of a state. Of poverty North Carolina has always had enough and to spare, and she has it to day in her farm regions. As for pluck, we had it in the eighteen sixties on the field of war and in the nineteen twen ties we have the same variety of it in the fields of peace. The farmer growls, but he votes for school bonds and high way bonds. He is doingtit almost every day in every county of the state. Wealth and Willingness And now that our producing corpora tions are rich—they paid 122 million dollars into the federal treasury in 192l-22,sin taxes on incomes and pro fits—they are standing out in the open for public schools, public health, and public highways, and not a growl or a grouch is anywhere in evidence. They paid more taxes into the state treasury last year than the rest of our taxpay ers all put together, and not a protest among them anywhere, says Governor Morrison. If poverty and pluck are akin, so are wealth and commonwealth. The right relation of private wealth to public welfare is a fundamental problem in all democracies, and the rich are solving that problem in North Carolina with more of wisdom and uncomplaining wil lingness than in any other American state. We say it with emphasis be cause it fairly ought to be said, and if any man doubts it let him hunt down the facts with an open mind. Poverty and prophecy—these are the words that tell the story [of North Caro lina in the days of John Motley More- head and Archibald DeBow Murphey in the first half of the nineteenth cen tury. Wealth and willingness, private wealth and public welfare—these are words that express the hope of North Carolina in the opening years of the twentieth century and in all the cen turies ahead. —Tables based on the Manufacturers Record, November 2, 1922. WHAT NEXT FOR CAROLINA 1. The Boll Weevil and a Re-organ- ized Agriculture was the subject dis cussed by Mr. J. B. Eagles of Wilson county in the second meeting, during the present college year, of the North Carolina Club at the University of North Carolina. His paper is the first of many that will be submitted in com petition for the fifty dollars in gold, of fered by Josiah W. Bailey of Raleigh, for the best answer to “What Next in North Carolina?” The boll weevil is not a native of the United States, as Mr. Eagles pointed out. Its original home is probably the plateau region of Mexico, which is also the original home of the American cot ton plant itself. The boll weevil crossed the Rio Grande river near Browns ville, Texas, about 1892, and began its march through the entire cotton produc ing area of the United States. It is thought that these pests either flew a- cross or were broughtover in seed cotton. They soon spread over Texas and have gradually extended their range from for ty to a hundred and sixty miles annual ly, until in 1922 they have infested near ly all the cotton producing area of the nation. They did very little damage in North Carolina until 1921. There is only one way to grow cotton in the United States today, said Mr. Eagles, and that is to fight the boll : weevil. There is only one way to get entirely free from the boll weevil and that is to plant no cotton for at least two years, but this plan is impractical and would be almost impossible to car ry out. Many methods of fighting the weevil have been suggested, but probably the most successful way would be to com bine several of these. The first and most important one is to reduce the acreage considerably, and to increase the yield per acre, which means more in tensive farming. With the large acreage now planted it is impossible to make any great headway against the rav ages of this pest. The proper amount to plant would probably be around seven acres to the plow, and in order to make this profitable the seed bed should be well prepared and the seed planted early. Plenty of fertilizer of the right sort should be used. An early variety of cotton thut will grow quickly and mature quickly is the best kind. The cotton should be dusted at intervals and i at the right time with calcium arsenate, and all fallen squares should be burned. As soon as the cotton is picked the stalks should be ploughed under. 2. Wherever the boll weevil has invaded a cotton area it has left the people in the very worst sort of busi ness depression. It has affected land-, lords and tenants, merchants and bank ers, alike. In many instances the time- merchants have gone into bankruptcy KNOW NORTH CAROLINA A YanKee Verdict James Arthur Seavey of Asheville is a newcomer to North Carolina, and one who came with no prepos sessions of any nature to influence him towards partiality in estimating the strength and significance of the state’s educational and industrial renaissance which moves him to ad miration. In the New York Times of October 22, Mr. Seavey writes the record of a state oi'iCe far down the list of commonwealths in wealth and agencies of welfare, now push ing the foremost in the Union for primacy in the things that make life more livable. He says: ‘That which has hit North Caro lina is not even a forty-seventh cous in of the old Western boom. It is possible that the native captains of industry would object to its being called a boom at all. It is, rather, a financial, industrial, and commer cial regeneration—the phoenix of the New South risen from the ashes of the Old. The development mania which has swept over the state has expanded itself so sanely that it might be called the dementia of commercial common sense. It bears all the ear marks of permanent success, be cause it lacks all the elements of bubble enthusiasm.” There was a time, says Mr. Sea vey, when there was intense rivalry between Eastern and Western North Carolina, but now all this is changed. There is still rivalry between the sections, but a rivalry based upon the hope that one section may out- achieve in greater good,for a great er state. The whole commonwealth has come to realize that parts can not be greater than the whole; that, in the long run, what is good for Raleigh is good for Asheville, and what works to the disadvantage of Charlotte bodes no good to Salisbury. Hence the slogan of yesterday, to day, and tomorrow in North Caro lina rings like a clarion from the mountains to the sea: Tarheels for Tarheelia, one and in separable; Tarheels without end! With this and more to the same effect as a preface, Mr. Seavey puts down the North Carolina statistical record, which he says reads like a fairy tale. In two decades the state has risen from twenty-seventh to fifteenth in the value of manufac tured products and has today more cotton mills than any other state. It ranks fifth in the value of agricul tural crops. It is now spending on its common schools $16,000,000 a year, besides the millions for col leges. It is building good roads, five miles a day, with an expendi ture of $25,000,000 a year. Its water power arid its abundance of native- born white labor are attracting the attention of capitalists who see New England’s factory v supremacy slip ping away from her. Mr. Seavey and The New York Times have presented North Caro lina with thousands of dollars in ad vertising, but even yet there will be those, if only a few, who will shake their heads and proclaim their re grets that the state ever developed this ambition for progress. These are they who would ask that the corn be shelled, but, fortunately for North Carolina, they are a tribe rapidly approaching extinction.— Asheville Citizen. and many of the farm tenants have moved into towns and cities to seek employment at any wages whatsoever. An important thing in the tenant situa tion is that the boll weevil is driving the negro tenants out of the South. They are going in thousands to the great industrial centers of the North and West because they cannot live on a southern farm. Negro tenants as a rule cannot produce cotton at a profit, and they have never been bred to di versified agriculture. *■ What to Do . When the boll weevil invades a region it is there to stay, and there is only one thing for the farmer to do— namely to re-organize his system of agriculture, go into diversified farming, stock-in with farm animals, establish agricultural industries and cooperative enterprises. This change cannot take place all at once. It must be a gradual but certain change from the old to the new order on our farms. Cotton must be one but only one among many cash crops. Some sections of the South were saved from disaster by a few foresighted men who foresaw the danger and pre pared for the coming of the boll-weevil plague. In North Carolina it is no longer a question of preparation for its coming, but rather a question of deal ing with what is already here. The first thing to do is to provide for the planting of a number of seres in vari ous food crops- enough to feed the farm family and the farm animals. If there be few or no meat and milk animals on the farm they must be put there—in particular, poultry, hogs, and milk cows. The fertility of the soil must be im proved. There must be a well-devised system of crop rotation. In addition to corn there must be enough wheat, oats, and rye for home and farm needs, along with soy beans, cowpeas, velvet beans, and clover to improve the soil and to feed stock. One of the most import' ant items is the planting of a large farm garden, which will furnish not only a great variety of vegetables for the family during the summer months, but also enough to can and store away for the winter. After these needs have been provided for, the remainder of the farmer’s time and land may be devoted to the culture of cotton and tobacco as money crops. And more—the merchants and bank ers in every trade territory must help the farmers to create new market de mands for food and feed products, say sweet potatoes; and they must do it in their own defense. When cotton money fails, other cash crop money must take its place, or the landlords are without rent-money, the merchants are with out business, and the bankers are with out deposits.—A. M. Moser. THE JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY The University has come forward with periodical which, in the opinion of many here, is destined to rank as one of the leading sociological journals of the United States. It is called the Journal of Social Forces and the first issue was mailed to subscribers today. Among the contributing editors are Ernest W. Burgess, associate profes sor of sociology in the University of Chi cago; Owen K. Lovejoy, president of the American Association of Social Workers; William F. Ogburn, professor of sociology in Columbia University; E. C. Brooks, North Carolina state superintendent of education; Mrs. Clar ence A. Johnson, commissioner of pub^ lie welfare of North Carolina; and Burr Blackburn, secretary of the Georgia state board of public welfare. The editing staff here is made up of Howard W. Odum, managing editor, E. C. Branson, D. D. Carroll, Jesse F. Steiner, L. R. Wilson, and Harold D. Meyer. The periodical is published by the University of North Carolina Press. Franklin H. Giddings of Columbia University, one of the leading sociolo gists of America, contributed the first issue’s leading article, The Measure ment of Social Forces. Burr Black burn writes on State Programs of Pub lic Welfare in the South, and Jesse F. Steiner on Community Organization: A Studyof Its Rise and Present Tend encies. Under departmental contributions some of the articles listed are: The Visiting Teacher, by E, C. Brooks, Institutes for Public Welfare, by Mrs. Clarence A. Johnson; The North Caro lina Study of Prison Conditions, by Wiley B. Sanders; Social Work of the Federal Council of Churches; The Church by the Side of the Road, by A. W. Mc Alister; The Approach to the South’s Race Question, by M. Ashby Jones; A Rural State’s Unlettered White Women, by E. C. Branson; State Bureaus of Municipal Research and Information, by T. 6. Eldridge; The Organized Work of Women in One State, by Nellie Rob erson; and The Social Program of the National League of Women Voters, by Gertrude Weil. The advance circulation of The Jour nal of Social Forces includes every state, ranging from two in a few to m(«re than a hundred in North Carolina. In paid subscriptions New York is sec ond to North Carolina.—University Press Item. CULTIVATED ACHES PER FARM IN 1920 Based on the 1920 Census of Agriculture covering the number of improved acres and the number of farms in each state. Cultivated land includes (1) all land regularly tilled or mowed, (2) land in pasture which has been cleared or tilled, (3) land lying fallow, (4) land in gar dens, orchards, vineyards, and nurseries, and (6) land occupied by farm build ings. The average for the United States was 78 cultivated acres per farm; for North Carolina it was 30.4. Only Massachusetts had smaller farms upon an average. Our low rank in the average size of farms is due (1) to excessive farm ten ancy and the interest of the landlord in the per-acre yields and consequently in small tenant farms, (2) to maximum attention to cotton and tobacco our two best cash crops, which require a maximum of human labor per acre, and little machinery, (3) to rniniirium interest in livestock, which requires broad acres in pasture, grain, and forage, and (4) to a minimum total acreage in fruits, truck, and gardens. Our cultivated acreage per farm should be larger. Farm profits lie mainly in per-worker yields. Only 25.8 percent of the land area of the state is im proved land. But our farms arc smaller every decade. The cultivated acreage per farm in 1910 averaged 34.7 acres; in 1920 it was 30.4 acres. In 1920 we had 16,038 more farms but 615,000 fewer acres under cultivation. Other tables in farm economics to follow as already announced. S. H. Hobbs, Jr. Department .of Rural Social Economics, University of Nprth Carolina Rank States Cultivated Acres Per Farm 1 North Dakota 316.2 2 South Dakota 243.8 3 Montana 190.8 4 Nevada 188.0 5 Nebraska 185.7 6 Kansas ' 185.1 7 Iowa 134.0 8 Wyoming .. 133.5 9 Colorado 129.2 10 Minnesota 120.4 11 Illinois 116.1 12 Washington 1U7.6 13" Idaho 107.2 14 California 100.9 15 Oregon 97.9 16 Missouri 94.4 16 Oklahoma 94.4 18 Indiana .... 81.3 19 Ohio 72.2 20 Texas 71.6 21 Arizona 71.6 22 New York 68.1 j23 Utah 66.8 24 Michigan 65.8 Rank States .Cultivated Acres Per Farm 24 Wisconsin... 65.8 26 Maryland 65.5 27 Delaware 64.4 28 West Virginia 63.2 29 Pennsylvania 58.6 30 Vermont 58.2 31 New Mexico 57.5 32 New Jersey 52.4 33 Kentucky 51.6 34 Virginia 50.8 36 Tennessee 44.3 36 Florida 42.5 37 Georgia 42.0 38 Louisiana 41.6 39 Maine 41.0 40 Arkansas 39.6 41 Alabama 38.6 42 Mississippi 34.3 43 New Hampshire 34.2 44 Rhode Island 32.6 46 South Carolina 32.1 46 Connecticut 30.9 47 North Carolina 30.4 48 Massachusetts 28.4
The University of North Carolina News Letter (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Nov. 22, 1922, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75