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 Press for the yniver-
sity Extension Division.
AUGUST 8,1923
CHAPEL HILL, N. C.
VOL. IX, NO. 38
Editorial it tarlt E. G, 3ran,oo. S. id. Hobbs. .Tr.. L. R. Wilful. E. W. Knight. D. D. Carrol], J. B. Bullitt. H. W. Odum,
Entered as second-class matter November 14.1914, at the Postoffice at Chapel Hill. N. C., under the actofAuerust 24, 1912
MOW NORTH CAROLINA
STUDYING THE HOME STATE
This issue of the News Letter is par
tially devoted to an exhibit of the
studies of the home state at the Uni
versity during the college year 1922-
23—one hundred and thirty-eight in
number including fifteen North Carolina
Club studies. There have been more than
eleven hundred such detailed studies of
the home state made by the students
and members of the rural social eco
nomics department at the University
during the last nine years.
There is no other such accumula
tion of data, simply interpreted, to be
found in any state. The studies are all
filed in an orderly manner to be used
by students of North Carolina' life and
and livelihood, both on and off the cam
pus. These studies form a part of the
vast library of information about the
home state aagembled by the Depart
ment of Rural Social Econd^ics. Any
information or study we possess goes
free to any person in the state who
writes for it.
U. S. Studies
1 Value of Farm Land Per Farm.—
John Mendenhall, Greensboro.
2 Changes in the Occupancy of
Farms. —W. H. Holderness, Tarboro.
3 Negro Farm Ownership in 1920.—
J. C. Cheeseborough, Asheville.
4 White Farm Ownership in 1920.—
G. M. Hill, Rutherfordton.
6 Value of All F^m Wealth Pro
duced Per Farm in 1922. —H. Hol
derness, 'Tarboro. University News
Letter, Vol. IX, No. ,36.
\ 6 Value of Animal Products Per
Farm inl922.—H. Holderness, Tarboro.
7 Value of Land Per Farm in 1920.—
G. A. Sparrow, Chapel Hill.
^...8 Value of Buildings Per Farm in
1920.—G. A. Sparrow, Chapel Hill.
9 Imported Food and Feed Supplies
in the United States in 1920.—Miss H.
R. Smedes, University News Letter,
Vol. VIII, No 47.
10 Farm^ Property in the United
States, Average Per Farm in 1920.—J.
H. Burton, Rockingham County, Uni
versity News Letter, Vol. VIII, No. 60.
11 Livestock Values Per Farm in
the United States in 1920, —H. D.
Laughinghouse, Pitt County, Universi
ty News Letter, Vol. IX, No. 1.
12 The Value of Farm Buildings Per
Farm in the United States in 1920.—S.
H. Hobbs, Jr., University News Let
ter, Vol. IX, No. 2.
13 Farm Implements and Machinery
Per Farm in the United States in 1920.
—S. H. Hobbs, Jr., University News
Letter, Vol. IX, No. 6.
14 Livestock Sold and Slaughtered
in the United States in 1919.—Univer
sity News Letter, Vol. IX, No. 12.
16 Taxes on Farm Lands, Average
Tax Per Acre of Farm Lands, 1921-22.
—S. H. Hobbs, Jr., University News
Letter, Vol. IX, No. 23.
16 Bank Capital Per Inhabitant in
1922.—J. H. Highsmith, Fayetteville;
C. E. Williams, Benson, University
News Letter, Vol, IX, No. 34.
17 Bank Account Savings in the
United States on June 30, 1921.—S. H.
Hobbs, Jr., University, News Letter,
Vol. IX, No. 9.
18 Land Resources and Land Utili
zation in the United States.—J. H.
Zollicoffer, Henderson.
' 19 Ratio of Divorces to Marriages,
University News Letter, Vol. IX, No.
20.
20 Illiterate Native Whites, Ten
Years Old and Over in 1910 and 1920.—
University News Letter, Vol. IX, No.
21.
21 Damage by Forest Fires, Six-
Year Average, 1916-21.—J. S. Holmes,
State Forester, University News Let
ter, Vol. IX, No. 31.
22 Farm Population Ratios in the
United States in 1920. —S. H. Hobbs,
Jr., University News Letter, Vol. IX,
No. 33.
N. C. Studies
1 White Farm Ownership Ratios in
1920.-W. L. Whedbee, Greenville,
University News Letter, Vol. IX, No.
24.
2 Value of Farm Buildings Per Farm
in 1920.—P. M. Thompson, Mebane.
3 Value of Land Per Farm in 1920.
—W. H. Holderness, Tarboro.
4 Negro Farm Ownership Ratios.—
W. L. Whedbee, Greenville, University
News Letter, Vol. IX, No. 27.
5 White Farm Ownership in 1920.-*
G. M. Hill, Rutherfordton, University
News Letter, Vol. IX, No. 28.
6 Cultivated Acres Per Farm in
North Carolina in 1920.—S. H. Hobbs,
Jr., University News Letter, Vol. IX,
No. 6.
7 Farms Buying Stock Feed in'
North Carolina in 1919.—George Spar
row, Orange County, University News
Letter, Vol. IX, No. 7.
8 Livestock Values Per Farm in
North Carolina in 1920.—S. H. Hobbs,
Jr., University News Letter, Vol. IX,
No. 8.
9 Farm Property in North Carolina,
Average Per Farm in 1920.—S. H.
Hobbs, Jr., University News Letter,
Vol. IX, No. 10.
10 Farm Implements and Machinery
Per Farm in North Carolina in 1920.—
S. H. Hobbs, Jr., University News
Letter, Vol. IX, No. 11.
11 Per Capita Bank Loans and Dis
counts in 1922.—J. T. Barnes, Jr.,
Wilson.
12 Per Capita Bank Capital in 1922.
—J. T. Barnes, Jr., Wilson.
13 Bank Savings Per Inhabitant in
1922. —D. L. Ward, Jr., New Bern.
14 Bank Capital Per Inhabitant in
1922.—C. E. Williams, Benson.
15 Bank Resources Per Inhabitant
in 1922.—P. C. Cocke, Jr., Asheville.
16 Bank Capital Per Inhabitant in
County.—W. T. Shuford, Spencer.
9 Natural Resources of Rowan Coun
ty.—W. T. Shuford, Spencer.
10 Farm Conditions and Practices in
Union County.—F. 0. Yates, Monroe.
11 4?''arm Conditions and Practices in
Cumberland County.—J.H. Highsmith,
Fayetteville.
12 Industries of Alamance. —Miss
Mabel Walker, Graham.
13 Facts About the Folks of Ala
mance.—G. C. White, Mebane.
14 Wealth and Taxation in Ala
mance.—Miss Mabel Walker, Graham.
15 Rural Schools of Alamance. —
Gus Bradley, Burlington.
16 Farm Conditions axid Practices in
Alamance.—Wilbur Stout, Burlington.
17 The Local Market Problem in
Alamance.—R. B. Lacy, Burlington.
18 Things to Be Proud of in Ala
mance.—Wilbur Stout, Burlington. • ,
19 The Problems of Alamance and
Their Solution.—Gus Bradley, Burling
ton.
20 History of Henderson County.—
L. V. Huggins, Hendersonville.
21 Natural Resources of Henderson
County.—Cameron Shipp, Henderson
ville.
22 Industries and Opportunities of.
Henderson County. —L. V. Huggins,
Hendersonville.
23 Facts About the Folks of Hender
son County.—Cameron Shipp, Hender
sonville. i
24 Wealth and Taxation in Hender
son County.-«-E. L. Justus, Flat Rock.
25 The Schools of Henderson Coun
ty.—E. L. Justus, Flat Rock.
26 Farm Conditions and Practices
of Henderson County.—H. S Capps,
ern North Carolina. — J. M. Brown,
Wilkesboro.
6 Business Principles of Coopera
tion.—F-. J. Herron, Biltmore.
7 The Growth and Outlook of the
Textile Industry in the South.—G. P.
Hunt, Oxford.
8 The Textile Mills of North Caro
lina.—J. B. Eagles, Walstonburg.**
9 County-Wide and County Group
Hospitals for North Carolina. —W. L.
Smith, Greensboro.
10 The Furniture Industry of North
Carolina. —E. C. Gregory, Salisbury.
11 The Knitting Mill Industry of
NortK Carolina.—R. G. Little, Green
ville.
12 Labor Conditions in Southern
Textile Mills. —Mrs. A. B. Ensminger.
Studies of Other States
1 Population Density per Square
Mile in Georgia.—C. B. Yarley, Atlan
ta.
2 Value of Farm Property per Farm
in Georgia.—C. B. Yarley,"'*Atlanta.
3 The Boll Weevil and a Re-organ
ized Agriculture in South Carolina.—
J. |i. Cathcart,, Winnsboro, S.C.
4 Value of Farm Property Per Farm
in Louisiana.—Louise Theus, Mdnroe,
La.
North Carolina in December 1921. Uni- Hendersonville.
versity News Letter, Vol. IX, No 36. j 27 The Local Market Problem of
17 Cotton Production in North Ca- County.-H. S. Capps,
rolina.-D. L. Ward, Jr., New Bern. ; Hendersonville.
18 Inhabitants Per Motor Car in j . 28 Things to Be Proud of in Hender-
1923.-F. 0. Yates, Monroe, University County.—E. L. Justus, Flat Rock.
News Letter, Vol. IX, No. 26, [ 29 The Problems of ftenderson Coun-
19 Investment in Motor Cars Per I ^^d Their Solution.—L. V. Huggins,
J. H. Mendenhall, : Hendersonville.
Inhabitant in 1923.-
Greensboro.
20 State Income Taxes, 1921.-
Highsmith,^ Fayetteville.
I 30 History of Richmond County.-
-J. H. I LeGrand Everett, Rockingham.
31 Resources of Richmond County.
21 Tax Burden Per Inhabitant in; -LeGrand Everett, Rockingham.
1921.—J. C. Cheeseborough, Asheville, i 32 Industries of Richmond County.-
22 School Taxes Per Inhabitant in i LeGrand Everett, Rockingham.
1920-21.—G. M. Hill, Rutherfordton.
23 County Government Costs Per
Inhabitant in 1921.— W. H. Holderness, |
Tarboro.
24 Value of Personal Property Per ,
Inhabitant.—W. L. Whedbee, Green-,
ville, University News Letter, Vol. IX,
No. 26. - . i
33 History of McDowell County.—
A. Blanton, Jr., Marion.
34 Farm Conditions and Practices
in Chatham County.—A. H. London,
Pittsboro.
35 History of Guilford County.—
J. R. McClamroch. Greensboro.
36 Resources oi Guilford County.—
26 Tax Burdens Per Inhabitant in r. c. Price, Greensboro.
1921.-E. B. Smith, Asheville. | 37 Industries of Guilford County.-
W. D. Harris, Sanford.
26 School Tax Burdens Per Inhabit
ant inl921.—E. B. Smith, Asheville.
27 Ten-Year Gains in Rural Popula
tion, 1910-1920.—J. B. Eagles, Walston-
burg.
28 Ten-Year Gains in Urban Popu
lation, 1910-1920.—J. B. Eagles, Wals-
tonburg.
29 Does North Carolina Read?—L.
R. Wilson, Librarian, University News
Letter, Vol. VIII, No. 46.
30 Food and Feed Supplies in 1920,
The Percent? of Needed Supplies Pro
duced at Home.—Miss H. R. Smedes,
Vol. VIII, No. 49.
31 Statistics of Public Libraries in
North Carolina in 1921-22. —University
News Letter, Vol. VIII, No. 43.
32 School and College Libraries in
North Carolina in 1921-22. —University
News Letter, Yol. VIII, No.‘ 44.
33 Daily Newspaper Circulation oil
April 1, 1922, as per the Editor and
Publisher .June 10, 1922.—University
News Letter, Vol. VIII, No. 45.
34 Our Chemical Industries.—F. C.
Vilbrandt, University News Letter,
Vol. IX, No. 22.
County Studies
1 Resources, Industries, and Oppor
tunities in Wilson County.—T. H.
Woodard, Wilson.
2 Farm Conditions and Practices in
Wilson County.-T. H. Woodard, Wil
son.
3 Facts about the Folks in Wilson
County.—T. H. Woodard, Wilson.
4 Wealth and Taxation in Wilson'
County.—T. H. Woodard, Wilson.
6 Farm Conditions and Practices in
Rowan County.-W. H. Woodson,
Salisbury.
6 The Industries of Rowan County.
—W. H. Woodson, Salisbury.
7 Wealth and Taxation in Rowan
County.-W. H. Woodson, Salisbury.
1 Facts About the Folks of Rowan
38 Facts about the Folks of Guilford
County.—Thomas Turner, High Point.
39. The Schools of Guilford County.
— Thomas Turner, High Point.
40 Wealth and Taxation in Guilford
County.—R. C. Price, Greensboro.
41 Farm Conditions and Practices in
Guilford County.—R. C. Price, Greens
boro.
42 The Local Market Problem in
Guilford County.—R. C. Price, Greens
boro.
43 Greensboro the Insurance City of
the South.— R. C. Price, Greensboro.
44 Things to Be Proud of in Guil
ford County.—Thomas Turner, High
Point,
46 The Problems of Guilford County
and Their Solution.—Thomas Turner,
High Point.
46 History of Chatham County.—A.
H.^iLondon, Jr., Pittsboro.
47 Wealth and Taxation in Pitt
County.—J.T. Little, Ureenville.
48 Gains in Schools in Pitt County.
—J. T. Little, Greenville. *
49 Natural Resources of Edgecombe
County.—W. H. Holderness, Tarboro.
50 Wealth and Taxation in Edge
combe County.—W.H. Holderness, Tar
boro. '
51 History of Forsyth County.—C.
N. Siewers, Winston-Salem
Special Studies
1 The Rise of Cotton Mills in the
South.—Allan Stainback, Greensboro.
2 The Taxation of ;^and Values.—
C. C. Holmes, Council.
3 The History, Present Status, and
Possibilities of Water Transportation
in Tidewater Carolina.—W. L. Whed
bee, Greenville.
4 The Cooperative Marketing of
Apples in Western North Carolina.—
J. M. Brown, Wilicesboro.
5 Cooperative Creameries for West-
THE EQUALIZATION FUND
The general assembly of 1923 appro
priated $1,250,000 to be used as an
equalization fund and directed the state
board of education to certify to each
county on or before June- l, of each
year the amount each county shall
be entitled to draw from the equalizing
fund.
The amount apportioned on May 31,
including $20,000 for transportation of
pupils, is $1,192,929.42. This leaves a
balance of $57,070.58, which according
to law, must be apportioned later so as
to encourage the more backward coun
ties in improving the \standard of the
teachers. This sum, therefore, will be
apportioned later to about 12 counties
that have just begun to improve the
grade of teachers, provided the budget
shows that an additional amount is
needed.
If the reader will study the following
awards in connection with the table
showing school taxes paid per inhabit
ant he will find some interesting facts.
The inequities are sourced in the coun
ties themselves. Several counties that
could easily support their own schools
come in for a large slice of the equali
zation fund. The intent^of the equal
ization fund is partially defeated.
The awards made to date follow:
Alamance $24,970.95; Alexander
$24,338.04; Alleghany $12,647.93;
Anson $9,435.14; Ashe $23,747.36; Avery
$28,272.58; Bertie $26,186.26; Bladen
$18,053.35; Brunswick $6,913.09; Burke
$11,496.26; Caldwell $23,682.19; Camderv
$8,333.61; Carteret $21,316.43, Caswell
$2,895.60; Catawba $27,099.48; Chat
ham $28,606.90; Cherokee $28,775.71;
Chowan $2,694.56; Clay fe,452.-
03; Cleveland $5,128.16; Columbus
$30,800.86; Currituck $12,170.92,
Dare $15,488.41; Davidson $7,011.53
: Davie $4,993.63; Franklin $13,546.77
Gates $11,674.36; Graham $3,061.62
Granville $6,360.50; Harnett$14,248.57
Henderson $21,241.98; Hertford $5,824?
73; Iredell$21,957.70; Jackson $21,308.
30; Jones $3,915.02; Lee $14,142.42
Lincoln $17,675.59; Macon $33,101.19
Madison $17,006.02; Mitchell $4,607.22
Montgomery $16,640.52; Moore $18,-
615.70; Northampton $16,754.30; Ons
low $8,963.15; Orange $18,242.16;
Pamlico $21,847,84; Pender $20,677.71;
Perquimans $15,521.41; Person $10,378.-
16; Polk $16,520.86; Randolph $30,207.26;
Richmond $6,725.17; Robeson $10,843.-
77; Rowan $6,838.99; Rutherford $26,-
008.07; Sampson$28,456.84; Stokes $18,-
512.99; Surry $23,584.04; Swain $6,062.-
23; Transylvania $16,895.86; Tyrrell $6,-
802.80; Union $42,903.02; Warren $19,-
544.93; Washington $3,116.87; Watauga
$17,136.65; Wilkes $75,647.41; Yadkin
$23,611.36; Yancey $15,983.63.
SCHOOL TAX PER INHAITANT
In North Carolina for 1920-21.
Based on the 1921 Report of the State Commissioner of Revenue and the
1920 Census of Population, covering all taxes paid for school purposes, state,
county, and local, in each county, divided by the population.
The school tax per inhabitant in Wilson county was $12.90. In Macon it
was only $1.58. State average was $4.32. There is no uniform assessment or
tax rate on property. Some poor counties rank high while some -rich counties
rank low in school taxes per inhabitant.
Wilson county has only twelve school districts. She has sixty-two school
trucks, or one ninth of all trucks in the state, which transport about 2,500 pupils
daily. In many counties ranking low the one-teacher school still predominates.
E. B. Smith, Buncombe County
Department of Rural Social Economics. University of North Carolina
Rank County «
School Tax
Per Inhab.
Rank
County
School Tax
Per Inhab.
1
Wilson
$12.90
51
Mecklenburg
$3.89
2
Durham
7.92
61
Camden
3.89
3
Wayne
6.67
63
Graham
....... 3.82
4
Hyde
6.07
63
Forsyth
; ' 3.82
5
Wake
6.97
55
Lincoln
3 73
6
Vance
6.96
66
Henderson
3.73
7
Onslow
6.70
57
Gates
3.68
8
Halifax
6.63
68
Alamance
3.71
9
Craven
6.69
59
Bladen
3.70
10
Pitt
'6.65
60
Lenoir
3.63
11
Hertford
5.62
61
Carteret
3.48
12
Guilford
6.47
'62
Perquimans
3.47
13
Nash
6.38
63
Cleveland
3.45
14
Greene
6.31
63
Catawba
3.45
15
Edgecombe
5.30
65
Richmond
3.43
16
Gaston
5.25
65
Anson
3.43
17
Scotland
5.23
67
Currituck
3.42
18
Washington
6.17
67
Alexander
.' 3.42
19
Cumberland
5.06
69
Davie
3.28
20
Harnett
6.00
70
Stanly
3.27
21
Hoke
4.92
71
Polk
3.20
22
McDowell
4.88
72
Lee
3.16
23
Duplin
4.74
73
Iredell..
3.15
24
Martin
4.73
74
Surry
3.13
25
Buncombe
4.67
75
Stokes
3.12
26
Robeson
4.64
76
Burke
3.03
27
Rockingham
4.63
77
Alleghany
2.88
28
Columbus
4.60
78
Randolph
2.87
29
Granville
4.60
79
Haywood
2.84
29
Moore
4.60
80
Clay
2.83
31
Swain
4.48
81
Caswell
2.81
32
New Hanover ...
4.47
82
Chatham
2.79
33
Montgomery
4.46
82
Cabarrus
2.79
33
Tyrrell
4.45
84
Madison
2.76
35
Warren
4.43
86
Mitchell
2.67
36
Union
4.40
85
Person
2.67
37
Franklin
4.26
87
Avery
2.60
38
Johnston
4.24
88
Rutherford
2.66
39
Cherokee
4.22
88
Sampson
2.66
40
Orange
4.20,
90
Dare
2.63
41
Jackson
4.11
91
Yadkin
2.61
42
Transylvania
4.09
92
Caldwell
2.46
43
Northampton ....
4.06
92
Watauga
2.46
44
Pender
4.03
94
Ashe
2.42
44
Rowan
4.03
95
Brunswick
2.38
46
Beaufort
3.97
96
Davidson}
2.32
47
Pasquotank
3.96
97
Yancey
2.22
48
Pamlico
3.92
98
Chowan
2.16
49
Bertie
3.91
99
Wilkes
1.98
50
Jones
3.90
100
Maco.
1.68