The state chronicle. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1883-1893, 1888-01-19

was great omission and is to be regretted.
The issue is forced, and we must meet it
by exposing.the robbery that takes money
out of the pockets of ten poor men to help
one rich one.
The III ONE estead Law.
The topic upon which there was more
discussion than any other, was the pro-
position to repeal or modify the homestead
law. Upon this there was much discus
sion in which I was much interested. The
committee reported a resolution recon-
mending a modification of the law and
a reduction of the amount of the exemp
tions. Mr.. Herbert E. Norris, of Wake,
wanted the entire homestead law abolish
ed. He said that nobody except lawyers
and spectators opposed the repeal of the
homestead laws. He declared that the
average legislator was as afraid of the
homestead law as of a dog law. | noticed
throughout the convention that the stand
ard of comparison Of what measures
legislator was afraid of, was the dog law.
1t was taken as fixed that all of them
were tOO tlIllu W tdChic ~. but tlio
by the way. Mr.. Norris made an earnest
speech in favor of total repeal of this
law and said some strong things, among
them that the politician is a good friend
of the poor man while on the stump, but
that he forgets the people when he is IN
the Legislature.
a humorous writer's most humorous
character once gave this toast: ''OUR No
BILE SELVES, and this was called to mind
by a remark of Mr.. Cole, of Moore county,
men" | agree with him. Mr.. Blocker
wanted some reduction Of the homestead
law, but he counselled moderation. Let
US not set our coulters too deep; let us not
ask too much, but go sure and thus go
perfectly" was his advice Capt sgd. AL
exander gave it as his opinion that if we
ought to have homestead law at All We
ought to have one upon which a man can
live He advocated this plan: Let the
Farmers Convention recommend a change
in the Constitution so that every man
must register his homestead before it is of
any effect. This would make it optional
with every man whether he would avail
himself of its privileges, and registration
would give notice. Unless registered, no
man would be entitled to a homestead.
Capt Alexander urged the consideration
of this plan, but did not offer a motion to
have it endorsed. The discussion continu-
ed at length and was participated in by
many. Whether to ask for a repeal of the
only was the question that divided the
farmers, when vote was taken. The fol-
lowing, offered by Mr.. Herbert F. Norris,
of Wake, was adopted by a big majority
as the sense of the conventions:
WHEREAS, the Farmers Association of
North Carolina, now in session at Greens
boro, n. c., recognizing that one of the
greatest grievances aud drawbacks to the
farmers of North Carolina is what is known
as the mortgage and crop-hen system,
which is the child and offspring of the
present Homestead laws, and said Asso-
citation desiring to take such action as may
bring about a repeal of the same, it is
RESOLVED, That the Legislature of 1898
and SO for the State of North Carolina,
is requested to pass bill submitting to
the people of North Carolina the question
as to whether or not the Constitution Of
North Carolina shall be amended so as to
repeal said Homestead and exemption
laws.
The Public Roads,
The next question of interest, as it ap-
peared to me, was the discussion of the
Public Roads and How to Make them Bet
ter Capt S. B. Alexander, chairman of
the committee, made most interesting
and instructive address on the subject of
roads. We recall few of his statements
and will give them to the CHRONICLE read
ers. He said, among other things:
1t is the duty of the State to keep up the
roads because they are necessary for all
business and are criterion of civilization
There are but three ways of keeping up
the roads:
1.t-By taxing labor and only the coun-
try labor.
2nd-By taxing labor and property.
| 3rd-By taxing property alone.
! The first is a failure. Under it the en-
tire burden falls upon the farmers. Men
| who live in town escape. City folks have
an idea that calling out the country peo-
pie to work upon the public roads is a
privilege. They do not put proper esti-
mate upon this labor. Before 1879 twelve
days labor was required. There were
10000 men thus employed for twelve
days. At one dollar per day that amount
ed to 81, 400, ,00O-all of it paid by the
farmers to keep up the public roads. In
1879 new road law was passed. 1t pro-
vided that each man should do AT LEAST
three days work on the road-more if nee
essary. Under this law, in some counties,
men were worked 35 and SO days. AT the
special session of the Legislature (when
the W. n. c. r. R. was sold) the limit was
fixed at six days, or at $3.50, 900 per year,
paid entirely by farmers. This is more
than all the State taxes, part Of which the
farmer pays ''It is wrong" said Capt.
Alexander, and l said ''Amen and amen.
There never was any justification in max
ing poor man work rs much and pay as
much tax to keep up the roads as rich
man 1t Is monstrous unfair taxation
and it must be changed. Property ought
to bear part of the expense. A wheel taA
would be better than this present unjust
law.
The second way is by taxing labor ant
property This is the system now adopted
in Mecklenburg and Forsyth. IT OUGHT
TO BE EVERYWHERE. Under this system
every man works four days in the yea
and tax of from seven to ten cents il
levied on the $10O. This is the best sys
TEN for North Carolina, and the most JUS
op6 au1itabla