The news in this publi
cation is released for the
press on leceipt.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
NEWS LETTER
Published Weekly by the
University of North Caro
lina for the University Ex
tension Division.
OCTOBER 27, 1926
CHAPEL HILL, N C.
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA PRESS
VOL. XII, NO. 50
rcl. E. C. Branaort. S. H. Hobbs. Jr., L. R. Wilson, E. W. Knisrht, D. D. Carroll. J. B. BulHtt H. W. Odum.
Entered as second-class matter November 14. 1914. at the Postoffice at Chapel Hill, N. C., under the act of August 24, ISIS
STUDYING THE HOME STATE
We are pa-esenting below a list of >
research studies made by students in i
I le Department of Rural Social Econom-;
i:s during the college year 1925-26.
Brief summaries'of many of the studies
have appeared from time to time in the
News Letter, as indicated. These
studies are all concerned with some
phase of North Carolina, economic
and social. During the last twelve
years some sixteen hundred such studies
have been made by students and faculty
m the Department of Rural Social-
Economics. These reports are all
properly filed away and are a part
of the department library, which li
brary, by the way, contains the largest
collection of economic and social data
about the home state to be found in
any state.
U. S. STUDIES
19.
20.
How the States rank in Public
Schools.—University News Letter,
Vol. XI, No. 43.
Developed Water Power in the U. S.
-University News Letter, Vol.
XI, No. '45.
Federal Income Taxpayers for 1923.
— University News Letter, Vol. XI,
No. 46.
Wealth Production: Rank by States
in 1923.—S. H. Hobbs, Jr.. Uni
versity News Letter, Vol. XI, -No.
49.
Investment in Almshouses per In
mate, 1923-24.—University News
Letter, Vol. XI, No. 60.
The Per Inmate Cost of Almshouses
1924, Rank by States.—S. H. Hobbs,
Jr., University News Letter, Vol.
Xil, No. 1.
Farms in the U. S. in 1926, Percent
increase and Decrease 1920 to
1926 —S. H. Hobbs, Jr., University
News Letter, Vol. XII, No. 2.
Cost of State Governments per In
habitant, 1924.-S H. Hobbs, Jr.,
University News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 12.
Number of Persona in Prison per
100,000 Population, January 1, 1923.
—Univeifsity News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 13.
Dairy Cows per Farm in the U. S.
January 1, 1926.—S. H. Hobbs, Jr,,
University News Letter, Vol, XII,
No. 22.
Incomes in the U. S. in 1919; Farm
and Non-farm Compared. —Univers
ity News Letter, Vol. XII, No. 23,
Radios on Farms, January ], 1926.—
University News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 26.
School Auto-bus Transportation
January 1, 1926.—J. A. Hunnicutt,
Orange county, University News
Letter, Vol. XII, No. 28.
Bank Resources per Inhabitant,
June 30, 1926. —S. H. Hobbs, Jr.,
University News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 29.
Farm Tenancy in the U. S. in 1926.
—S. H. Hobbs, Jr.^University News
Letter, Vol. XU. No. 30.
Hospitals in the U. S., Inhabitants
per Hospital in 1926.—Margaret
Bridgers, Edgecombe county, Uni
versity News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 34.
Patients in Hospitals for Mental
Disease per 100,000 Inhabitants,
January 1, 1923. —University News
Letter, Vol XII, No. 36.
Illiterate Native-born White Women
in the U. S —Miss Harrietts Wood,
Pine Mountain, Ky.
County Government Chaos.—E. C.
Branson, in The Country Gentleman,
September, 1926.
Country Telephones in the U. S.—
George N. Harward, Chatham
county.
North Carolina Studies
Growth of Building and Loan Asso
ciations.—University News Letter,
Vol. XI, No. 40.
Educational Progress in IS. C. 1900
to 1924.—University News Letter,
Vol. XI, No. 41.
Rural Education in North Carolina,
Counties Ranked, 1923-24.—Univer
sity News Letter, Vol. XI, No. 44
Progress in Education in North Caro
lina: Facte for 1899-1900, 1918-1919
1923-1924.—University News Letter
Vol. Xri, No. 6.
North Carolina State Government
Financial Exhibit for the Fiscal Year
Ending June 30, 1925.—S. H. Hobbs,
12.
16,
29-
Jr., University News Letter, Vol.
XU, No. 6.
Number of Farms in N. C. by Coun
ties in 1926: Percent Increases and
Decreases, 1920 to 1926. —S. H.
Hobbs, Jr., University News Letter,
Vol. XU, No. 10.
Bonded Debt by Counties. June 30,
1926.—S. H. Hobbs, Jr., yniversity
News Letter, Vol. XII, No. 11.
Farm Tenancy in N. C. in 1926, and
Percent Increase or Decrease 1920
to 1925.—S. H. Hobbs, Jr., Uni
versity News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 14.
Dairy Cows in North Carolina in
1925, and Increase and Decrease by
Counties from 1920 to 1926. —S, H.
Hobbs, Jr., University News Letter,
Vol. XU, No. 16.
Crime in N. C., Superior Court Con
victions from July, 1923, to July,
1924.—Ethel Crew, Northampton
county, and F. S. Wilder, New
Hampshire, University News 'Let
ter, Vol. XU, No. 17.
Crime in N. C., Superior Court In
dictments from July, 1924, to July,
1926. —Ethel Crew, Northampton
county, and F. S. Wilder, New
Hampshire, University News Let'
ter, Vol. XU, No. 19.
Cattle on Farms in N. C. 1925, and
Percent Increase and Decrease 1920
to 1926. —George M. Stephens, Bun
combe county, University News
Letter, Vol. XU, No. 20.
Liquor Law Violations in N. C. for
the Year Ending June 30, 1924.—
Ethel Crew, Northampton county,
and F. S. Wilder, New Hampshire,
University News Letter, Vol. XU,
No. 21.
Crime and Sectional Differences in
North Carolina.—F. S. Wilder, New
Hampshire, University News Letter,
Vol. XU, No. 24.
N. C. Physicians.—L. M. Brooks,
Orange county, University News
Letter, Vol. Xli, No. 26.
Bank Resources per Inhabitant in
1926.—S. H. Hobbs, Jr., University
News Letter, Vol. XU, No.- 26.
Homicides in N. C., 1923 to 1926.—
Ethel Crew, Northampton county,
and F. S. Wilder, New Hampsh^e,
University News Letter, Vol. XII,
No. 27.
, Value of White Rural School Prop
erty in N. C. per Child Enrolled in
School, 19^:4-26. —University News
Letter, Vol. XU, No. 31.
County Government in N. C., A
series of three articles.—Paul W.
Wager, Orange County, Vol. XU,
Nos. 31, 32,.33.
Median Ages of Offenders in North
Carolina for the year ending June
30, 1926.—F. S. Wilder, New
Hampshire, University News Let
ter, Vol. XII, No. 32,
Current Expenditures for Rural
Schools per Caiid Enrolled, 19^4-25.
— University News Letter, Vol, XU,
No. 33.
Crime in N. C., a general sum
mary report on crime stuoies con
ducted by the inatiiuce for Research
in Social University of
North Carolina.—F. S, Wilder, New
Hampsnire, University News Let
ter, Vol. XU, No. 36.
. investment in Motor Cars and
School Property: A Comparison by
Counties lor 1926.—S. H. Hobbs,
Jr., University News Letter, Vol.
XU, No. 37.
. Western North Carolina:Economic
and Social.—George M. Stephens,
Buncombe County.
Our Water Power Resources.-A.
T, Cutlar, New York.
. Municipal Government in North Ca
rolina.—Brandon Trusseli, Texas.
The Solitary B’armstead. —George N.
Harward, Chatham county.
The Problem of Health in the Small
Towns of N. C.—Miss Ina V.
Young.
42. Town and Country Interdependen
cies—fourteen studies which were
made by members of the North
Carolina Club, and which appear in
the 1925 26 North Carolina Club
Year-book. These studies were
enumerated in last week’s issue of
the News Letter.
County Studies
Carteret County: Economic and
Social. This is a booklet of a hun
dred pages describing and analyzing
OUR GREATEST RESOURCE
Our greatest resources are not our
factories, but our farms. Without
these, our factories would not pros
per. There is a tendency for bankers
and business organizations to finance
the building of factories that more
men may be employed. With the
uncertainty of management, output,
and market this is often a question
able venture, but in our state we
have thousands of farm factories,
employing tens of thousands of men,
women, and children. These farm
factories are capable of being in
creased several fold in efficiency
through cooperation. Indeed, the
very continuance of factories in our
cities depends more than we think
upon the success of the farm fac
tory.—W. S. McKay, Chairman Agri
cultural Committee, Pennsylvania
Bankers Association.
the , resources and institutions of
Carteret county. —Aleeze Left'erts,
H. C. Lay and C. W Lewis, Carter
et county.
2. Mecklenburg County: Economic and
Social. (Now in process of print
ing.) Similar to the one mentioned
above.
3. Landlessness and Lawlessness in
Wilson county, N. C. —Miss Julia
Taylor, Wilson, N. C.
4. Landlessness and Crime in Orange
County, N. C, —Brandon Trussel),
Texas.
6. During the college year eighteen
intensive courthouse studies were
made in the effort to assemble in
formation relative to county govern
ment and county afi’airs in the state.
■ Each of these surveys represented
about three weeks in a county and
the reports each contain sixty to a
hundred pages. The following coun
ties were surveyed: Pamlico, Craven,
PRESERVING THE TAXABLES
The second major function in good
county government, according to the
report submitted by the County Govern
ment Commission, is the careful preser
vation of the taxables.
Local governrhent is supported mainly
by the general property tax. It may
be true that the amount of one’s prop
erty is not an accurate measure of his
“ability to pay’’, but it is the accepted
basis of local taxation and probably as
fair R basis as any that can be suggested.
It is not a fair basis, however, unless
the tax is applied with thoroughness and
impartiality. Unless all the property
subject to taxation is placed on the
books, and at a uniform valuation, the
burden is not equitable anf some of the
people suffer an injustice.
Much Property Escapes
The county government studies which
have been made to date disclose the
fact that there is a large amount of
property each year which escapes taxa
tion. in one county a ten-thousand-
dollar farm had not been on the tax
books for six years; in another county
one man owned nine tracts or parcels of
real estate, none of which appeared on
the tax books; in still another county
twenty-odd lots in one small village
were not on the county books. Such
examples might be multiplied indefi
nitely. If land, which is fixed, escapes
the eye of the assessor, what must be
the situation in regard to personal
property, which is movable, and often
invisible? And if tangible property
escapes, what about intangible property?
The truth is that a vast amount of tax
able property of all sorts does not get
on the tax books.
What is the explanation? Is it due
to a lack of moral sensitiveness on the
part of North Carolina taxpayers? Yes,
to do an exhaustive job. The fault is
not all with the list-takers, however.
Rarely do they have any aids to assist
them, other than the previous year’s
abstracts. There are no real estate
maps, no corrected poll lists, no record
of land transfers, no record of automo
bile sales, nor any other helpful guides.
Neither can there be such records until
there is a capable, full-time tax super
visor in every courthouse whose duty it
is to assemble the information. There
are a few counties where the tax super
visor is more than a figurehead, and in
these counties the taxables are being
preserved rather successfully.
After pointing out the defects which
appear in so many counties the report
of the County Government Commission
reads:
“We have counties in North Carolina
in which this major factor is carefully
safeguarded in the following manner:
By keeping a permanent or continuous
record of all the taxables of the county;
by inspecting property in every section
of the county periodically for improve
ments or depreciation; keeping a record
of all officials who receive fees, fines,
forfeitures and penalties—in other
words, providing a complete record of
all the sources of county revenue This
includes the proper listing of taxables,
preparing tax books for tax collectors,
keeping property values up to date,
guarding against errors, delinquents, etc.
The function o'f this office should be
performed by one selected by the com
missioners because of the skill and
ability required. Since the services to
be performed are somewhat technical
and very sensitive to political influences,
this official should not be selected by the
vote of the people.’’—Paul W. Wager.
Beaufort, Washington. Chowan.
Perquimans, Gates, Pitt, and New in part, but more to lax assessment and
Hanover, by Brandon Trusseli;, listing practices. The individual prop-
Moore, Union, and Cabarrus, by : erty-owner is not going to go out of his
Myron Green; Polk, Rutherford, way to remind the tax officials that he
Burke, Alleghany, Ashe, and Cald
well by Paul W. Wager.
Special Studies
1. Three Possible Centers of Country
Community Life. —Elizabeth G.
Smith, South Carolina.
2. Country Life Recreation.—Miss
Kate Fulton, Mississippi.
3. Social Significance of Fiighways.—
G. H. Singleton, Orange county.
, r. J- A J A o t some of them are not, and the fault is
4. The Re-directed County School.—* ... . . . ...
with the taxing machinery. I‘
George N. Harward.
6. The Social Significance of Defi
cient Communication and Trans
portation Facilities.-BrandonTrus-
sell, Texas. ^
INLAND-WATERWAYS
has been overlooked. Again, the indi
vidual delinquent justifies hiSi action on
the ground that there are so many
others doing the same thing. In fact,
he does not consider his action as delin
quency; he looks upon it as an act of
self-defense. One frequently hears the
remark, “I don’t mind paying high taxes
if 1 can know that all my neighbors are
paying accordingly.” He knows that
is in
evitable that some intangible property
should escape taxation, but there is no
good reason why tangible property
should do so.
Unequal Assessments
Even less excusable are inequalities
in assessments. The State Constitution
Plenty enough reasons exist for | provides that all real and personal prop-
veloping this country’s great inland
, waterway facilities. But one reason
i that is paramount right now is the need
I of equalizing sectional advantages that
I are working unfavorably on the people
i of inland America.
j In the past the benefits that might
accrue from waterway transportation
were largely theoretical. But they are
erty shall be taxed according to its true
value in money. This is the only satis
factory basis of evaluating, for a frac
tional valuation inevitably leads to in
equalities, if not between ' adjoining
properties, at least between sections or
between different classes of property.
Money value is the only fair basis, and
that means, I take it, not purchase price
not any longer. The annual report of current market price in cash.
the chairman of the Inland Waterways
Corporation makes them realities.
With diminished wheat and coal traffic
in 1926, with forty percent of its equip-
1 ment on the Mississippi unavailable be-
I cause of litigation, this government
1 organization transported a total of 1,142, -
i 219 tons of freight. On the Mississippi
Division it showed a net operating in
come for the year of $277,826.47, and
the report expresses the belief that the
Warrior River operations will become
self supporting within this year.
But the real meat of the report, as it
concerns inland farm and business in
terests, is the savings in transportation
costs, amounting to from 90 cents to
$3.70 a ton.
Due-to the shilly-shallying methods of
Congress, our available waterway trans
portation facilities consist only of in
complete and unconnected units. They
comprise but a small fragment of the
possibilities, not enough to render any
general benefit. But such as they are
they do show that waterway transporta
tion is not only feasible but economical.
The need of a definite, well-.worked-
The grossest inequalities now exist.
I know of a business block on a strategic
corner that is easily worth $20,000 and
it is on the tax books at $3,334. Another
property worth $100,000 is assessed at
$20,450. There is no uniformity. Some
property in the same county will be
listed at twenty percent of its true
COUNTY GOVERNMENT
In its efforts to improve things in North
Carolina the University News Letter
keeps hammering away on the subject
of county government. Its efforts are
praiseworthy and we believe they have
already borne considerable fruit. It
will not do to let up though and the
News Letter should be backed by every
newspaper in North Carolina in this
particular enterprise.
There seem to be a few counties in
North Carolina whose affairs are well
administered. There are a good many
that are handled fairly well and some
that are thoroughly discreditable. In a
few cases in recent years evidences of
positive dishonesty have been revealed.
There is plenty of joom for improve
ment in almost every county in the
state. It is the plain duty therefore
not only of newspaper editors but of all
honest and intelligent people to demand
that there shall be improvemeiiit.
The first requisite to bettering the
government of any county, town, or
state is to learn how matters .stand, in
other words to publish the facts, to
turn on the light. There is no cure for
misgovernment that is equal to publi
city. The best disinfectant on earth is
sunlight and the greatest foe to ineffi
ciency or dishonesty in government is to
turn the spotlight of publicity on it,
Evils that pass unnoticed in the dark
become repulsive when they are seen in
the full light of day.
The laws of North Carolina require
that every county and municipality shall
publish annual statements of their
affairs. This requirement is but poorly
observed. A few counties getoutstate-
ments that are comprehensible. Some
publish no statements at all and others
, ^ A . publish figures that are hard to under
value, some at fifty percent, some at \ , .. . , * • i_ • «
’ A ^ .... : stand, that do not give much mforma-
.r anH of oil if ic [ '
seventy percent, and some at all it is ^, ... a. • * j j a
. A GA • A L tion and probably are not intended to
worth. Not often IS property assessed ■ . . - .. au a. au
^ K , . . : give information that the average citi-
at more than its true value, though it i j . j u i
, Y. , ^ : zen can understand. How manv people are
is not uncommon to find farm land j.. ' • r> a u \ ^ ^
, ^ ,, -A • ■ therein Carteret county who know What
assessed for more than it wil bring at . , .l.
, , . . . . the bonded'indebtedness of the county
a forced sale. Automobiles, live stock,
furniture, and other personal property
is assessed at all sorts of ridiculous
figures.
Remedies Proposed
These conditions exist because tax
assessing, tax listing, and the prepara
tion and preservation of the tax records
have been done by amateurs, serving
for a brief period and for a slight com
pensation. Sometimes the list-takers
are paid so much per name, and they |
is, when these bonds are due, what the
interest charges are on them? We
venture the assertion that there are not
ten persons in the county who have this
information and we are in that class.
Who knows anything about the run
ning expenses of the county? How
much does it cost to take care of the
poor? What do our courts cost? What
is .spent for schools? How much are
we spending to keep up bridges and
roails? What ha's been spent for roads
recently? How much fo^grading, how
feel that they cannot afford to run down : engineering? What have the
letrt tuoiA J I hard surface roads cost a mile? Can
out plan of waterway development; the stragglers. Sometimes they are j answer these questions? If
should no longer be open to doubt.—, paid a lump sum for a township, in they can it is^ time they were doing it.
Country Gentleman.
1 which case there is even Jess incentive i —Beaufort News.