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

Page Text

This is the computer-generated OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It may be empty, if no text could be automatically recognized. This data is also available in Plain Text and XML formats.

Return to page view