SUPPOUT YOU*
HOKE COUNTY
RESCUE SQUAD
Community S#rvKt Sinco 1962
J. H. AUSTIN
INSURANCE
SINCI IMS
AUTO-FIRE-LIFE
CASUALTY
114 W. Edlnborough Avsnus
Phono 175-3467
M
f
? f
r
Book Your
Christmas Parties
Now
at
Country Porch
401 Business
RAEFORD
Telephone 875-5396
OPEN
Coachmen and Four
Hwy.401
Bennettsville, S. C.
Thursday and Friday
Disco Nights
(open until 2 a.m.)
This Saturday Night
Live Band!
"Southern Junction"
open until 12 p.m.
Make Us An Offer Sale!
FRIDAY & SATURDAY
DEC. 3 & 4
OVER 5,000 SQ.FT. OF
USED FURNITURE
AND OTHER ITEMS
Some Antiques And Lots Of Oak Furniture
Curtis T.V.
and
USED FURNITURE
712 S.W. Broad St.
Southern Pines. N. C.
BEAUTY QUEEN ?? Debbie Min
shew of Raeford. the reigning Miss
Cape Fear Fair, was crowned
Queen of the Carolina Holiday
Festival Nov. 19 in Hamlet. Along
with the crown and the roses. Miss
Minshew received 50 silver dollars.
She is the daughter of Mr. and
Mrs. D.L. Minshew of College
Drive.
"He saved others; let him save
himself, if he is the Christ of God,
his Chosen One!"
?Luke 23:35 (RSV)
The Titanic sank on April 15,
1912; and the hundreds of survivors
had Guglielmo Marconi to thank
for saving them. Because of Mar
coni's invention of the wireless, the
Titanic was urgently sending mess
ages. It certainly was not Marconi's
fault that some ships did not hear
the messages or respond as quickly
as possible.
When the Titanic survivors arriv
ed in New York City and learned
that Marconi was staying there,
they marched en masse to his hotel,
cheered him, and shouted, "We
owe our lives to you." Marconi
could have demurred that he did
not have them in mind when he
invented the wireless, but they still
would have known that he had
saved them and been grateful to
him.
Just as the Titanic survivors were
that grateful to Marconi, should
not we be grateful to Jesus, who
saved us by giving His life for us!
PRAYER: Father, thank You for
giving us Your Son to save us. We
remember that He did not offer the
blood of goats and calves, but His
own blood. Increase our gratitude
and response. In His name. Amen.
THOUGHT FOR THE DAY
All the family of God should gladly
shout, "We owe our lives to You."
David W. Richardson
(Centralis, Missouri)
g/lccenl" on
gricull"ure
BY JOHN SLEDGE
N.C. Farm Bureau Federation
The average American housewife
is getting one of her best bargains
in our inflation-burdened economy
when she goes to the supermarket
meat counter, but it is difficult for
her to accept that fact. .
According to statistics compiled
by the American Meat Institute
and the U.S. Department of Agri
culture, the percentage of average
per capita disposable income spent
for meat in I960 was 4.79 per cent,
of which beef represented 2.66 per
cent and pork 1.7 per cent. In
1976, the percentage of disposable
income per capita spent for meat by
the average consumer was 4.13 per
cent of which 2.S7 per cent was for
beef and 1.4 per cent was for pork.
To be more specific, in 1960, the
average price for cattle during the
year was $26.25 per hundredweight
(26.25 cents per pound live weight).
The retail price per pound for beef
at the supermarket that year was 81
cents per pound. In 1075, the
average price for cattle was $36.71
per hundredweight and the average
retail price for beef was $1.46 per
pound.
In other words, the price of cattle
was 25.6 per cent higher in 1975
than it was in 1960, but the retail
price of beef was 80 per cent
higher. That reflects a big increase
in the "spread" between the farm
gate and the retail market. How
ever, in comparison to the increase
in the price of automobiles, farm
machinery, clothing, hospital care,
building supplies and services, etc..
the increase is modest.
And in fairness, the consumer
should be a bit cautious about the
tendency to point a finger at the
retailer and charge that he is taking
exorbitant profits. Some do take
unfair advantage and there un
doubtedly is too much lag between
a decline in the price of cattle and
hogs and lower prices at the meat
counter. But. most of that
"spread" is made up in higher
labor costs to keep up with inflation
-- higher transportation costs, high
er energy costs for fuel, lights and
refrigeration, higher taxes to pay
for more inspections and govern
ment regulations. The extra costs
are "built-in" all along the line.
Consumers would do well to
remember too that the price of
meat would be much higher if
cattle and pork producers were not
vastly more efficient at producing
more and better meat today than
they were in 1960.
In no other nation in the world
can consumers buy the quality of
U.S. beef and pork for comparable
retail prices - either in dollars and
cents or in percentage of income.
Agricultural exports not only
make a big difference in the lives of
American farmers, but they have a
direct effect on U.S. industry and
the economic well-being of every
one in the country.
In fact, one of the leading
products of American agriculture is
cash . ?? th^ money that pours in
from other countries in exchange
for our farm products.
The fact that all too little of that
cash finds its way to the farmer is
another story. But the fact is, farm
firoducts are by far our country's
eading money-making export.
With total sales in fiscal 1976 at a
record $22.2 billion, farm exports
contribute more than anything else
to the difficult job of maintaining a
"balance of payments" -- that is,
trying to even up the dollars we
spend for imports with the dollars
we take in for exports.
This year, despite a six percent
increase in agricultural imports to
$10.1 billion, U.S. agricultural
trade produced a record surplus of
over 512 billion. That onset a
nonagricultural trade deficit of S8
billion, and once again agriculture
put the nation's total trade balance
in the black -- this time by $4
billion for the 12-month period.
If this seems a bit remote from
the interests of the average con
sumer, look at it this way:
Agricultural exports:
?Give the farmer a bigger mar
ket. That means he can produce
more, and more efficiently, and
everyone benefits by paying a lower
percentage of disposable income
for food.
?Create thousands of farm and
off-farm jobs ? in storing, pack
aging, processing, merchandising
and shipping.
?Result in a sharp reduction in
the costs of government farm
programs. That means lower costs
to the taxpayer.
?Help relieve hunger in underde
veloped countries of the free world
and provide the basis for trade
between the U.S. and other na
tions, with a resulting easing of
tensions and conflict.
* * *
Veterans Administration con
struction projects include develop
ment of five new national cemeter
ies.
LEGALS
NOTICE is given by the Board of
Commissioners of Hoke County,
pursuant to G.S. 69-25.11 (1) that
Rockfish Fire District has filed with
the Board, an application for
extension of the limits of its fire
protection .
BEGINNING at a point (1) on
State Road No. 1418, 0.7 miles
HOKE COUNTY
Statement of Financial Condition .Jan-- 30, 1976 as Required by G. S. 153-123/G. S,
GENERAL
FUND
'ASSETS
(ash on Hand and In Bank
Investments
Taxes Receivable
Land
Bui 1 dings
Machinery 5 Equipment
Other Debits
Total Assets ft Debits
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable
Taxes Collected in Advance
General Obligation Bonds Payable
Reserve for Taxes Receivable
Investment in General Fixed Assets
Fund Balances
Total Liabilities j Other Credits
DEBT
S EPA' ICE
FUND
REAPPRAISAL
RESERVE
FUND
REVENUE
SHARING
FUNE
FACILITY
FEE
FUND
160-410-7
GENERAL
FIXED
ASSETS
GENERAL
LONG-TERM
DEBT
129,273.50
508,211 .23
131 ,501 .32
1 ,069 .02
822.07
294.66
13,383.92
5,250.53
200,000.00
1 ,789.38
29 ,065.66
48,572.91
878,812.73
230,766.45
-W.0S Si, SOI. Hi, sn.678.S8 S-.05.250.53 S.TO. 855.04 Si . 1 58 .712^9 Sssloooino
21,525.96
3,528.99
151 ,501 .32
612,429.78
5.00
55,000.0!)
1,886.09 13,678.58 205,250.53 30,855.04
1 ,158, 152.09
Original Budget & Amendments
Actual Revenues
Actual Expenditures
Net Revenues Over Lxpenditures
Fiscal Year 1975-76
Fiscal Year 1974-75
Fiscal Year 1973- 74* (65 , 707 , 270)
$783,986.05 $1,891.09 $13,678.58 S205,250.53 $30,855.04 $1,158,152.09 $55,000.00
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Budget Comparison for Fiscal Year 1975-76
$2,385, 178.00 $7,673.00 $ 5,000.00 $703,733.00
2,332,761.87 7,898.86 5,401 .78 334,230 . 37
2,200,671 .61 7 , 669 .93 -0- 600,762.25
132,090.26 225.93 5,401.78 (266j531.88)
13,404.37
8,398.44
5,005.93
UNCOLLECTED PERCENT
Statement of Tax Levies and Tax Collections
ASSESSED TAX RATE TAX UNCOLLECTED -
VALUATION PER $100 LEVY IN YR. OF LEVY UNCOLLECTED AT 6-30-76 UNCOLLECTED
.85 1,372,085** 73,235.94 5.34% 73,235.94
.80 1,340,344** 67,921.86 5.07% 29,041.30
995,173** 62,963.30 6.33% 17,084.01
$154, 107,946
150,371 ,586
101,088,100 (1.46;. 95
PERCENT
5.34%
2.17%
1 .72%
* - ( ) - Actual Value Rate - 65% and 100% Figures shown for comparison.
** - Includes Penalties, Animal Tax, Fire Districts, and Discoveries
An^x!BuUd"rCntS supportine th? ab?" summaries are on file in the office of thejtounty Accountant at the Courthouse
Prepared by: T. B. Lester, Jr.
County Accountant
Legals
from its junction with State Road
No. 1415; Thence in a southeasterly
direction to a point (2) on State
Road No. 1415 at the Hoke ?
Cumberland County Line; thence
in a southeasterly direction to a
point (3) on State Road No. 1425 at
the intersection with - Stewart's
Creek; thence in a southeasterly
direction to point (4) on State Road*
No. 1003 at bridge over Stewart's
Creek; thence in a southwesterly
direction to point (5) located at the
intersection of State Road No. 1441
and the Hoke - Robeson County
line; thence in a westerly direction
to point (6) located at the
intersection of State Road No. 1440
and the Hoke ? Robeson County
line; thence to a point (7) on State
Road No. 1003, 0.8 mile west of its
intersection with State Road No.
1440; thence in a northwesterly
direction to point (8) on State Road
No. 1422 0.4 mile west of its
junction with State Road No. 1412;
thence in an easterly direction to
point (9) on State Road No. 1412
0.1 mile north of its intersection
with State Road No. 1422; thencer
southeast to a point (10) on State .
Road No. 1413 0.3 mile north of its
intersection with State Road No.
1422; thence in a northerly di
rection to a point (11) on State
Road No. 1406 0.2 mile east of its
junction with State Road No. 1415; 1
thence in a westerly direction
following the center of State Road
No. 1406 to a point (12) 0.1 mile
west of the junction of State Road
No. 1406 and State Road No. 1415;
thence in a northeasterly direction
to a point) on State Road No. 1416
0.3 mile northwest of its junction
with State Road No. 1415; thence
in a northeasterly direction to the
point of BEGINNING.
Persons interested in the ex
tension of the limits of the fire
protection district are invited to
appear at a meeting of County
Commissioners to be held on
Monday, the 20th day of
December, 1976, at 7:30 P.M. at
the Hoke County Courthouse An
nex Building, Conference Room.
Posted, this the 24th day of
November. 1976, at Courthouse
Door, and at three (3) public places
in the area proposed to be annexed.
BOARD OF COUNTY COM
MISSIONERS
BY: T.B. Lester Manager
31-32C
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Notice is hereby given, in accor
dance with the requirements of the
Community Development Act of
1974, that the Governing Body of
Hoke County North Carolina will ,
hold a public hearing on the ^
Community Development Applica
tion on Dec. 16 and 21, 1976, at
8:00 p.m. at the County Court"
house Courtroom.
31-32C
ADMINISTRATOR'S NOTICE
IN THE GENERAL COURT
OF JUSTICE
SUPERIOR COURT DIVISION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
HOKE COUNTY
Having qualified as Administra
trix of the estate of Richard D.
Baker of Hoke County, North
Carolina, this is to notify all
persons having claims against the
estate of said Richard D. Baker to
present them to the undersigned
within 6 months from date of the
publication of this notice or same
will be pleaded in bar of their
recovery. All persons indebted to
said estate please make immediate
payment.
This the 17th day of November,
1976.
Elizabeth H. Baker
Route 2, Box 267- B
Raeford, N.C. 28376
31-34C
NOTICE OF
DISSOLUTION OF
HOKE DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY ,
NOTICE Ii5 HEREBY GIVEN
that Articles of Dissolution of Hoke
Development Company, a North
Carolina corporation, were filed in
the office of the Secretary of State
of North Carolina on the 10th day
of November, 1976, and that all
creditors of and claimants against
the corporation are required to
present their respective claims and
demands immediately in writing to
the corporation so that it can
proceed to collect its assets, convey
and dispose of its properties, pay,
satisfy and discharge its liabilities
and obligations and do all other
acts required to liquidate it busi
ness and affairs. All persons, firms
or corporations indebted to said
corporation will please make im
mediate payment.
This the 12th day of November,
1976.
HOKE DEVELOPMENT
COMPANY
c/o William L. Moses
Moses, Diehl Sc Pate
Attorneys at Law *
Post Officer Draw*; 688
Raeford, North Carolina 28376
29-32C