The news in this publi
cation is released for the
press on receipt.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
NEWS LETTER
Published VV'eekly by the
University o{ North Caro- ;
lina for the University Ex
tension Division.
SEPTEMBER 16, 1925
CHAPEL HILL, N C.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA PRESS
VOL. XL NO. 44
Editorial Boardt 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 PostofTice at Chapel Hill, N. C.. under the act of August 24, 1912
Xn. FEDERAL TAXATION
1.
1.
A. Outline
Confititutional Limitations:
No duties may be levied on ex
ports.
Excises and import duties must be
uniform throughout U. S.
Direct taxes, except income taxes,
must be apportioned among the
states on the basis of popula
tion. Not levied except in
emergencies.
Kinds of Taxes used by the Federal
Government:
a. Excises, or internal revenue
duties, on tobacco, playing cards,
oleomargarine, drugs, chewing
gum, cameras, automobiles, etc.
b. Customs duties (tariff).
Specific.
Ad valorem.
c. Corporation Tax.
d. Inheritance Tax: (estate tax)
" A graduated, or progressive,
tax.
e. Income Tax:
Normal rate — First $4,000
above exemption 2 percent,
next $4,000 4 percent, bal
ance 6 percent.
Surtax rates—Graduated from
1 percentjto 26 percent.
For example:
Income above
exemption
Normal
Tax
Surtax
Total
- $ 6,000
$ 160
none
$ 160
20,000
960
$1,600
2,660
50,000 2,760
f. Stamp Taxes:
6,000
7,760
Placed onlionds, stocks, deeds,
• mortgages, insurance policies,
letters, cablegrams, steam
ship tickets, etc. '
g. Occupational Taxes:
Brokers, proprietors of bowl
ing allies, distillers, etc.
h. Special Tax on Use of Boats.
i. Sales Taxes (so-called luxury
taxes). Levied only in emer-
/ gencies. Paid by purchaser
of jewelry, fountain pens, ice-
^ cream, cosmetics, furs, etc.
j. Admission Tax:
Paid by patrons of theatres,
ball games, etc., if admission
exceeds a certain figuae.
B. Explanation
The power conferred upon Congress
to levy and collect its own revenues is
almost absolute, except (1) that no
duties may be levied upon exports; (2)
that excises and import duties must be
uniform throughout the United States;
and (3) that direct taxes except income
taxes, if levied, must be apportioned
among the states on the basis of popu
lation.
The spread of governmental activity,
the various forms of federal aid, and
the tremendous cost of the World War
lifted national annual expenditures to
the unprecedented total of around four
billion dollars. Even now, seven years
after the close of the war, .they amount
to well over three billion dollars a year.
President Coolidge recently said: “In
my opinion the government can do more
to remedy the economic ills of the peo
ple by a system of rigid economy
public expenditure than can be accobi-
piished through any other action. The
national taxes still amount to about $27
for each one of our inhabitants and the
costs of our national and local govern
ments combined now stand at a s'Um
close to $100 for each inhabitant.’’
The People Pay
Even though federal taxes average
$135 per family there is less complaint
about them than there is about state
and local taxes. This is probably
because much of the federal tax
is collected indirectly and the peo
ple do not realize that they are
paying it. There is one fact that should
be kept in mind, however. All taxes,
federal, state and local, come from the
same source; they are paid out of the
collective income of the American peo
ple, and economy at Washington or at
the State Capital ultimately benefits
the remotest taxpayer. If the federal
and state governments skim the cream
off the national income, the local gov
ernments will have to be content with
“skim milk’’.
It is, therefore, just as important for
the individual taxpayer to analyze the
appropriations of Congress as to analyze I
those of the local school board. The I
cost of one battleship would build 200
splendid high-school buildings or 1200
miles of hard-surfaced road. And it is
well to remember that whichever way
the money is spent, the same people
ultimately pay. it follows, therefore,
that tax reduction is dependent upon
the maintenance of peace, not an armed
peace, but a relation of mutual good
will and cooperation among the nations.
No one can consistently urge tax re
form, who does not at the same time
work for the outlawing of war, and the
establishment of a reign of law and
justice in international relations.
There is a difference of opinion as to
the advantage and real value of federal
aid in highway construction, education,
agricultural improvement, and so forth.
Governor Ritchie of Maryland says:
“The federal government can scarcely
be said to ‘aid’ the states, when all it
does is take money from the people of
the states and then give it back to them
again. Most certainly the federal gov
ernment does not ‘aid’ the states,
when what it actually does is to give
back only part of what it collects from
them, and keep the rest to pay the cost
of expensive bureaus maintained for the
purpose of giving it back.’’ On the
other hand President Harding said:
“The federal government should extend
aid to the states for the promotion of
physical education, the Americanization
of the foreign-born, the eradication of
illiteracy, the better training of teach
ers, and for promoting free educational
opportunities for all the children of all
the people.’’
C. Questions
Are the expanding actii?ities of gov
ernment a genuine measure of the prog
ress of civilization?
If the functions o^ government did
not expand would private initiative
undertake to do the things we want
done? *
When viewed as the collective agency
for waging war on the five deadly ene
mies of mankind—ignorance, poverty,
disease, waste, and inhumanity—is gov
ernment worth all it costs?
Is not much of the so-called federal
aid in reality financial assistance ex
tended by the richer to the poorer
states?
If federal aid encroaches upon state
rights why do the states accept it?
Does federal aid stimula?b the states
to undertake new functions?
Are centralization and democracy con
tradictory principles of government?
Are people more interested in efficient
government than in autonomy?
Should federal taxes be reduced by
abandoning the policy of federal aid?
Should both the federal and state
governments levy an income tax?
Should both the federal and state
governments levy an inheritance tax?
Is a protective tariff a tax? Does it
yield any revenue? Does it cost the
people anything?
Should first-class postage be reduced ,
to one cent?
Would there be any justification for
operating the postal service at a loss?
What proportion of the federal reve
nue goes for the support of the army
and navy?
If society could dispense with war
would the other costs of government
be so light as to encourage a more rapid
extension of governmental functions?
Would the government be justified in
transferring the amounts saved to the
support of education?
D. Sources of Information
American Government, Frank A. Ma-
gruder, Allyn and Bacon, New York,
1918.
University of Iowa Extension Bulle
tin Number 124, May 16, 1926.
Statements of United States Treas
ury Department, especially the a^nnual
report of the Bureau of Internal Reve
nue.—Paul W. Wager.
A TAX POLICY
We would lay this down as a policy
prerequisite to further extending the
school equalization aid the state now
extends to maintain a six months’
school term in all counties of the
state, namely—(1) the listing of all
taxable wealth in North Carolina at
a uniform percent of its true value,
and (2) a minimum assessment for
school maintenance purposes on such
property before any equalization
fund is distributed. Educational op
portunities are far from equal among
the ^bunties of the state, but so is
local v-’illingness to support schools,
or to list properly for taxation.
Pie pleaded for an educational policy
that would make people law-abiding
and one that would be evidenced in the
citizenship of the state. ‘'We spend
millions for schools,’’ he said, “and
brutal murders are on the increase.
We build stately educational mansions
and the lawless erect stills hard by.
We have more church members than
any state in the Union in proportion to
populatiori, yet we find few of them
strongly behind the law and demanding
its enforcement. We have mansions
and palaces, but few homes. A family
of half a dozen seated around the fire
side in a home, enjoying the delights of
parental association and the joys of
filial devotion would be a film of such a
novelty that it would supplant Charlie
Chaplin’s walk.
“A ton of books can not make citi
zens for North Carolina. Our educa
tional system is top-heavy. Individijaj-
ism has given way to mass play.. A
school system suited to the mountaineer
on Mount Pisgah is not suited to the
banker on the sands of Hatteras.’’—
News and Observer.
Pamlico and Currituck. The reader
would find it very interesting to study
the table to see the way in which the
counties are scrambled, poor counties
at the top, fairly well-to do counties
near the end, and rich and poor side by
sid^ throughout the table.
Academic Factors
The school facilities of urban and rural
children in the state are far from equal.
And so it is for the rural children in the
various counties of the state. For in
stance, in one county the rural schools
operated 182 days, while in another the
average term was only 118 days. In
•one county the scholarship index of
rural teachers was 82, while in another
county it was only 46.3. In one county
23 percent of the enrolled children are
in high school, in another less than four
percent. The academic index for the
highest county is 82.8, for the lowest
county it is only 48.6.
Financial Index
In New Hanover county the average
■ annual salary paid rural teachers is 2.4
i times as much as in Mitchell county.
: In New Hanover the cost of instruction
j p4r rural child enrolled is 3.3 times, as
; much as in Surry county. In one county
j the average rural child has four times as
; much spent on him for all current ex-
; penses as the average per rural child in
another county. And most significant
: of all, perhaps, is the fact that the in-
j vestment in rural school property per
I child enrolled is morh than twelve limes
1 as much in one county as it is in another!
' The rural schools of North Carolina,
j and urban schools too, vary widely in
! rank, and the wide differences are due
i to two main factors: (1) differences in
j true wealth, and (2) differences inwill-
i ingness to support schools. Variation
i in willingness is perhaps even greater
than variation in wealth. Which means
that rural schools in many counties
could become greatly improved on local
willingness alone, such willingness as is
exhibited by a dozen or more tidewater
counties, for instance. «
JUDGE WIHSTON’S PLEA
Judge Winston’s plea was for an edu
cational policy which would make for
peace and stability and not for con
fusion. He charged inefficiency and
confusion in the courts and enlarged
upon “the spectacle of all the Supreme
and Superior Court judges and twenty
of the best lawyers in the state trying
their best to devise some scheme to
make the courts function.”
OUR RURAL SCHOOLS
Below we are presenting two tables,
the first one showing the rank of the
one hundred counties of the state ’in
rural school sj^stems, and the second
showing the rank of the school systems
in the twenty-four largest city schools
of the state. The counties and cities
are ranked according to a general index
figure arrived at by averaging the rank
of the counties and cities in ten impor
tant school concerns, -—five academic and
five financial. The academic factors
are: (1) percent enrollment in average
daily attendance, (2) average length of
term, (3) scholarship of teachers, (4)
percent of enrollment in high school,
and (6) the percent of children of nor
mal age and upder age for the grade in
school. The financial factors are: (!)•
average annual salary of teachers, (2)
cost of instruction per student enrolled,
(3) total cost for current expenses per
chfid enrolled, (4) total current expense
per teacher and principal, and (5) value
of school property per child enrolled.
New Hanover First
The rural schools of New Hanover
county rank first in the state with an
index score of 76.7, followed closely by
Pamlico and Currituck, relatively poor
tidewater counties. The high standing
of the rural schools of New Hanover is
due to the fact that every dollar of tax
able wealth in the county, the bulk of
which is in Wilmington, goes to sup
port every school in the county on an
equal basis, It is worthy of notice that
the tidewater counties as a group rank
well up in f'ural school systems, far
higher than would be expected, their
wealth, sparse population, and popula
tion ratios considered. They are to be
congratulated for the high rating they
have attained, ranking side by side and
often far ahead of the wealthier and
more populous counties of the state.
Surry county ranks last in rural
schools, h|r general index being only
36.3, or less than half the index of New
Hanover. The bulk of the mountain
and a large number of the central and
western hill counties fall towards the
end of the table. And it is into these
counties that the bulk of the state school
equalization fund is poured each year.
Without the equalization fund the index
for many of these counties would be far
lower, unless of course they made the
same heroic efforts made by several
equally poor counties that rank well up
in the table,-Dare for instance, or
RURAL EDUCATION IN NORTH CAROLINA
How the County School Systems Ranked in 1923-24
The following table, based on State School Facts, Vol. 1, No. 23, shows
the rank of the one hundred counties of the state in rural school systems. The
rank is on the basis of.general index figures averaging the rank of each county
in five academic and five financial factors.
New Hanover ranks first in rural schools, her general index being 75.7.
Surry county ranks last, her index being only 36.3. In one-half of the' counties
of the state th^ index for the rural schools is below fifty. Nearly all of the
tidewater counties rank in the first division, many of them very high, their
wealth and population considered. The mountain counties rank last as a group.
However, many rich and poor counties are found side by side.
The general index for North Carolina is 66.9. For the rural schools it is 60.1,
and for the city schools it is 81.1. The index for the 24 largest cities is 83.6.
Rank
Counties
General
Rank
Counties
General
Index
Index
New Hanover
75.7
61
Dare
49.9
2
Pamlico
70,1
61
Pender
49.9
3
Currituck
... . 69.4
63
Franklin
49.5
4
Durham
.... 68.3
64
Polk
49.4
6
Wilson
.: . 66 2
65
49 a
6
Northampton
66.2
56
Forsyth
49.2
7
Hyde
64.4
67
Columbus
49.0
8
Edgecombe
63.6
68
Chatham
47.8
'^9
Warren
63.2
69
Lee
... 47 y
10
Washington
61.8
69
Stanly
47.2
11
Cumberland
61.6
61
Swain
47.1
11
Guilford ....
61.6
62
Anson
47.0
13
Halifax
60.6
63
Alleghany
46.9
14
Nashv.
60.2
63
Union
46.9
16
Granville
60.1
66
Henderson
46.7
16
Scotland
60.0
66
Lenoir
46.5
17
Hertford
69.9
67
Cleveland
46.3
18
Craven
69.7
68
Davie
46.0
19
Vance
69.6
. 68
Iredell
46.0
20
Camden
69.4
68
Tyrrell
46.0
21
Pasquotank.
69.2
71
Graham
45.4
22
Gaston
58.0
72
Beaufort
46.1
23
Montgomery
57.6
72
Davidson
45.1
24
Bertie
57.6
74
Lincoln
44 9
24
Mecklenburg
67.5
75
Cabarrus
44.6
26
Alamance
67.1
76
Onslow
27
Rockingham
65 6
76
Perquimans . .
28
Jones
66.3
78
Burke
44.3
28
Robeson
.... 66.3
78
Caswell
44.3
30
Pitt
56.2
80
Cfildweli
31
Buncombe
.... 66.5
81
Harnett
43.9
82
Chowan
..... 64.7
82
Sampson
43.8
33
Hoke
... 64.6
83
Person
43.7
34
Duplin
64.4
84
Johnston
43.4
36
Wake
64.2
85
Rutherford
42.6
36
Gates
53.9
85
Watauga
42.6
37
Bladen
53.8
87
Clay
42.4
38
Richmond
.... 53.4
87
Randolph
42.4
39
Orange
.... 62.6
87
Yancey.
42.4
40
Transylvania
52.6
90
Macon
42.0
41
Carteret
.... 62.1
91
Brunswick
41.6
42
McDowell
.... 51.9
92
Haywood
41.3
43
Avery
.... 61.4
93
Stokes
40.7
44
Catawba
.... 61.0
94
Wilkes
40.4
44
Wayne
.... Bl.O
95
Ashe
40.2
46-
Alexander
. .. 60.4
96
Yadkin
38.8
47
Martin
.... 60.2
97
Madison
38.2
47
Moore
.... 60.2
97
Mitchell
as 2
47
Rowan
.... 60.2
99
Cherokee
37.1
60
Greene
.... 60.0
my
Surry
36.3
The Twenty-four Largest City Systems
The following table shows the rank of the twenty-four largest city
school systems in the state. The general index is arrived at in the same way
as explained above for the rural schools:
Rank
Cities
General
Index
Rank
Cities
General
Index
1
Greensboro
.... 91.9
13
Wilson
81.1
2
.Durham
.... 91.4
14
Statesville
80.6
3
Roanoke Rapids ., .
.... 90.9
16
Goldsboro
80.6
4
Winston-Salem
.... 88.7
16
Burlington
79.4
6
Wilmington
.... 86.9
17
Kinston
...:. 78.6
6
Raleigh
.... 86.4
18
High Point
77.0
7
Hickory
.... 86.2
19
Rocky Mount
76.9
8
Asheville
.... 84.0
20
Concord
76.8
9
New Bern
....' 83.9
21
Charlotte
76.0
10
Salisbury
.... 82.9
22
Gastonia
;.... 75.0
11
Elizabeth City
.... 82.2
23
Henderson
69.9
12
Fayetteville
.... 81.6
24
Mooresville
69.8