(^^ A/ a. 6- l8!«>tl!^ .'m;>- '\'''<^\'i m Iii If, Hntt (QoUege of Agriculture National Educational Association REPORT of the COMMITTEE ON axation as Related to Public Education July^ 1905 LB 2825.N2°5""' ""''^'^'^^ "-Ibrary Price List of Reports of Special Committees y^r 1905 Pric« Postpaid Salaries, Tenure, and Pensions, pp. 466, paper cover . . ^0.50 Taxation as Related to Public Education, pp. 97, paper cover .10 Industrial Education in Schools for Rural Communities, pp. 87, paper cover . •; • . . . .10 A discount of 20'>]o is alhwtd on orders of lo copies or more to one address. Address IRWIN SHEPARD, Secretary N. E. A., WiNOMA, MiKM. National Educational Association Report of the Committee Taxation as Related to Public Education National Council of Education July, 1905 PUBLISHED BY THE ASSOCIATION 1905 Copyright, 1905 The National Educational Association (o.^ 33C'I^^ CONTENTS Page Historical Statement 5 Secretary's Minutes 7 Report or the Committee — Greenwood 10 A. Apportionment of Money for Maintenance 10 Table I. School expenditures classified by groups of cities based on' population 14 Table II. Expenditures for instruction and supervision in 1902-3 18 Table III. Relation of school expenditures to municipal expenditures. . . 18 Table IV. School expenditiures classified by geographical divisions 20 B. Observations on Tables I. and II 21 C. The Administration of School Affairs 25 D. Summary 29 Methods or Taxation in New York City — Maxwell 31 Taxation for School Purposes — Schaejfer 37 A Comparative Statistical Study of School Maintenance in the South — Mclver, Coon. . 45 Part I. Financial abiHty to levy school taxes 45 Part II. School taxation laws and funds raised for schools 50 Part III. Twenty years' progress in decreasing illiteracy 58 Part IV. Twenty-five years of general educational progress 63 Part V. Statistics relating to education, 1850-1860 65 Taxation for State Purposes in Pennsylvania! — Schaeffer 69 Sources of revenue with table 70 Tax legislation in Pennsylvania 72 Method of Taxation for School Purposes in Indiana — Carr 75 Table V. — Showing Relation of Cost of Schools to Municipal Expendi- tures, Etc 80 Table VI. — Showing Relation of Cost of Each Municipal Department to Each Dollar for Schools 84 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924013041169 REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION AS RELATED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION To the National Council of Education: The undersigned Committee on Taxation as Related to Public Education, appointed at the meeting of the National Council of Education in Minneapolis, July 8, 1902, submit herewith the following report on the subject assigned for its investigation: James M. Greenwood, Chairman; Aaron Gove; W. T. Harris; John W. Carr; Newton C. Dougherty; Nathan C. Schaefeer; William H. Maxwell; Carroll G. Pearse; Charles D. McIver; Frank A. Fitzpatrick; Committee. HISTORICAL STATEMENT At the Minneapolis meeting of the National Educational Association, held in July, 1902, in the National Council on Monday, July 7, two papers were submitted: — "Taxation for School Purposes," by Nathan C. Schaeffer, superintendent of public instruction of Pennsylvania, and — "Taxation and Teachers' Salaries," by Albert G. Lane, district superintendent of schools, Chicago, lU. Both papers' were fully discussed and the opinion expressed that taxation as related to education should be made the subject of special investigation. At the forenoon session of the Council, Tuesday, July 8, J. W. Carr, of Indiana, offered the following resolution, which was seconded by J. M. Greenwood ; In view of the importance of taxation as it relates to public education, and in order that a more comprehensive report be made on this subject than it is possible to obtain otherwise: Resolved, (i) That a committee of nine be appointed by this body whose duty it shall be to investigate the subject of taxation as it relates to public education, and to make a printed report to the National Council of Education, and not later than the year 1904, unless otherwise directed by this body. (2) That the membership of this committee shall be composed as follows: The Commissioner of Education of the United States, and at least one state superintendent, one superintendent of a large city, one superintendent of a small city or town, one rep- resentative of rural schools; the remainder of the committee to be chosen for their special fitness for such work without regard to the interests they may represent. S NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION The resolution was then referred to the standing Committee on Investi- gations and Appropriations of the council for recommendation. At the close of the session of the council on Wednesday, July 9, J. M. Greenwood presented a report in substance as follows: The Committee on Investigations and Appropriations has considered the resolutions on "Taxation as Related to Public Education," introduced by J. W. Carr, and recom- mends that the council request the Board of Directors of the National Educational Asso- ciation to appropriate the sum of $1,000 00, or so much thereof as may be necessary to defray the clerical and such other expenses as may be incurred in the preparation of a report, as contemplated in the resolutions. W. T. Harris then moved that Mr. Greenwood, chairman of the Com- mittee on Investigations and Appropriations, pres&it the report of the commit- tee to the Board of Directors. Carried. It was moved and carried that the president of the council, Joseph Swain, submit a tentative list to constitute the committee to investigate the question of Taxation as Related to Pubhc Education, and to make a report of its conclusions at some future meeting of the council, as provided for in the resolutions on this subject already adopted. President Swain first submitted to the Council a tentative hst of a com- mittee of nine, with Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler, of New York, as chairman. Later, Dr. Butler explained his inability to serve as a member of the com- mittee, and asked that the Council accept his resignation and appoint Super- intendent J. M. Greenwood as chairman in his place. This the Coimcil agreed to. The committee, to be known as the Committee on Taxation as Related to Public Education, was then increased to ten members, as follows: J. M. Greenwood, of Missouri, chairman. Aaron Gove, of Colorado. N. C. Schaeffer, of Pennsylvania. W. T. Harris, U. S. Com. of Education. W. H. Maxwell, of New York. J. W. Carr, of Indiana. C. G. Pearse, of Nebraska. N. C. Dougherty, of Illinois. Charles D. Mclver, of North Carolina. Frank A. Fitzpatrick, of Massachusetts. At a meeting of the Board of Directors, July 10, 1902, Director James M. Greenwood, of Missouri, chairman of the Special Committee on Investi- gations and Appropriations of the National Council, reported that action had been taken by the council creating a special committee of ten on the subject of "Taxation as Related to Public Education, " to report to the council not later than 1904, unless otherwise directed by that body; and that the council recommend that the sum of |i,ooo.oo, or so much thereof as may be necessary, be appropriated for clerical and other expenses of the committee in the preparation of the proposed report. An informal discussion followed as to the desirability of such an investi- gation and of the ground to be covered by the proposed report. On motion, the recommendation of the council was concurred in and the sum of $1,000.00 was appropriated for the expenses of the committee. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 7 THE WORK OF THE COMMITTEE Shortly after the, adjournment of the council in 1902, a circular letter was addressed to each member of the committee by the chairman, for the purpose of obtaining suggestions on the scope and character of the information that should be embodied in a Report on Taxation for School Purposes. Prior to the meeting of the committee held in Chicago, April 14, 1904, the work had been carried on chiefly by correspondence along lines that had been outlined by different members of the committee, and this conference was called for the purpose of comparing and revising the results, and of extending inquiries into other phases of the subject by assigning definite areas to subcommittees for more careful scrutiny and elaboration. MINUTES OF THE COMMITTEE ON TAXATION AS RELATED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION Chicago, III., April 14, 1904. The Committee met at the Auditorium hotel at 10:30 A. M., Thursday, April 14, 1904. Present, Messrs. Greenwood, chairman; Schaeffer, Pearse, Dougherty, Gove, Fitzpatrick, and Carr. J. W. Carr was chosen secretary of the committee. Tentative reports were submitted on different parts of the proposed report as follows: — 1. History of school taxation. Superintendent N. C. Schaeffer. 2. Apportionment of money for the maintenance and operation of city school systems for specific purposes expressed in per cents, of the total expenditures. Superintendent J. M. Greenwood. 3. Table showing the amounts spent for maintenance and operation of various city departments for every dollar spent for maintenance and operation of schools. Dr. W. T. Harris. 4. Method of school taxation in New York city. Superintendent W. H. Maxwell. 5. School taxes by sections of the country, etc. Superintendent J. W. Carr. 6. Basis for levying school taxes. Superintendent Aaron Gove. On motion the chairman appointed a committee of three — Messrs. Fitzpatrick, Schaeffer, and Carr — to define plan for the forthcoming report. The committee recommended that the scheme submitted by Superintendent Carr be adopted as the plan of the general report, together with report on school expenditures submitted by Superintendent Greenwood, and statistics submitted by Dr. Harris and other members of the committee. The recommendation of the special committee was adopted. PLAN FOR REPORT ON COMMITTEE ON TAXATION AS RELATED TO PUBLIC EDUCATION I. Brief history of school taxation in the United States. If it is impossible to give a brief history for the entire country, certain typical states could be chosen which would give some idea of taxation for school purposes in the whole country. II. Different modes of taxation for school purposes. 1. The state system. 2. Local system of taxation. 3. Combination of state and local systems of taxation. 4. Money for school purposes derived from school lands, school funds and other means of taxation. NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION III. Different taxing bodies. 1. State legislature. 2. City councils. 3. Town meetings. 4. School boards. Merits of each method of levying taxes. IV. Different purposes for which school taxes are collected. 1. Elementary schools. 2. High schools. 3. Kindergartens. 4. Manual-training schools. , 5. Night schools. 6. Schools for defectives, such as blind, deaf, feeble minded, etc. 7. Colleges and universities. 8. Part of tax that goes to teachers. 9. Part for buildings, supplies, equipments, school officers. V. School taxes by sections of the country compared with other nations. VI. Comparison of school taxes with taxes levied for other purposes. This comparison should be somewhat elaborate. If there has been any diminution of amount expended for courts, prisons, almshouses, etc., these facts should be brought out. VII. Suggestions for increasing school revenues where increase is needed. VIII. Most economical way of administering schools so as not to impair their effi- ciency. This is one of the most important divisions of the subject, and should be most carefully written. IX. What returns do the people receive for their great expenditure for schools? 1. Economic returns. 2. Industrial returns. 3. Increase in military power, etc. This part of the report should be carefully worked out so as to show the returns in the best way possible. Subcommittees were appointed to prepare special parts of reports as follows: 1. On statistics already collected and to be collected including expenditures — Messrs. Greenwood, Fitzpatrick, and Gove. 2. History of taxation, etc. Items I-IV, general scheme — Messrs. Schaeffer, Harris, and Pearse. 3. School taxes by sections of the country, etc. Items V-VII, general scheme — Messrs. Carr, Mclver, and Dougherty. 4. Topics VIII and IX, general scheme — Messrs. Gove, Dougherty and Carr. It was ordered to refer sections I and II of Superintendent Gove's memorandiun — (i) Operation, (2) Maintenance of schools — to Committee on Statistics. It was also ordered that the chairman collect information on items III and IV of Superintendent Gove's memorandum — (3) Extension, (4) Bonded debt and interest — and when collected, that the facts be referred to Committee on Statistics. After considerable informal discussion Thursday forenoon and afternoon and Friday forenoon, the committee adjourned. Before adjourning it was agreed that, the committee meet again at St. Louis at the time of the annual meeting of the National Educational Association in July, 1904. J. W. Carr, Secretary. Owing to a press of other matters, and the difficulty experienced in getting a quorum at St. Louis, no meeting was held in St. Louis. Later, the Chairman called the committee to meet at Chicago, December 5, 1904. J. W. Carr, Secretary. Chicago, III., December 5, 1904. Committee met in the parlors of the Auditorium Annex, Monday morning, Dec. 5, 1904. Present; Messrs. Schaeffer, Pearse, Fitzpatrick, Mclver Gove, Dougherty, and Carr. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION In the absence of Mr. Greenwood, Dr. Schaeffer was chosen chairman pro tempore. Communications were read stating that Mr. Greenwood was detained at home on account of illness and that Dr. Harris was compelled to go to New York on account of important ofl&dal business. Each sent material for the use of the committee. Chairman Greenwood was selected to edit the report. Messrs. Fitzpatrick and Gove were appointed to assist Mr. Greenwood in this work. A letter from Dr. Harris was read to the committee and referred to the chairman. The history of school taxation was read by Dr. Schaeffer, discussed by the committee and then referred to the chairman to be incorporated in the report. Mr. Fitzpatrick and Dr. Schaeffer were appointed to write an addenda in reference to taxation by indirect sources, such as hquor licenses, etc. Dr. Mclver was instructed to write in reference to school taxation in the southern states and Mr. Carr in reference to the history of school taxation in Indiana. A subcommittee consisting of Messrs. Fitzpatrick, Pearse and Carr was appointed to compile some statistics relative to cost of textbooks and suppUes. Mr. Gove was appointed to write sections VII and VIII according to the original scheme which was to be signed by Messrs. Dougherty and Carr. On motion by Mr. Fitzpatrick it was ordered that in case the proportional amount of any item of expense in any city appears to be much above or below the average in other cities, that the chairman write to the superintendent of that city, calling his attention to that fact and inquiring whether or not he desired to make any written statement or explan- ation and in case any such statement or explanation is made, the same should be pub- lished as a footnote or an addenda to the report. Adjourned. J. W. Caeh, Secretary. Chicago, III., February 24, 1905. The special committee on formulating the report, consisting of Messrs. Greenwood, Gove, and Fitzpatrick, met in Chicago, February 24, 1905, and dining the 24th and 25th the material collected was arranged and classified preparatory to the final session to be held in Milwaukee, Wis., February 27, 1905. Milwaukee, Wis., February 27, 1905. The meeting of the Committee on Taxation as Related to Public Education was called to order at 4 p. M. at the Plankinton House. Members present; W. T. Harris, Aaron Gove, J. W. Carr, W. H. Maxwell, N. C. Dougherty, C. G. Pearse, and J. M. Greenwood. The session was devoted to reading portions of the report. On motion of Commissioner Harris, adjouriunent was taken to 4 P. M., February 28. Milwaukee, Wis., February 28, 190^. The adjourned meeting of the committee was called to order at 4 : 20 p. M. Members present; Messrs. Fitzpatrick, Harris, Dougherty, Gove, and Greenwood. Additional papers were read, after which it was moved by N. C. Dougherty that the report be printed so that a sufficient number of copies should be ready for distribution at least one month before the meeting of the National Council in July. Seconded by Com- missioner Harris. Motion carried. Ordered that. each member be furnished with advance proof sheets,to be returned promptly to the chairman after reading. Adjourned. J. W. CAKR) Secretary. NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION REPORT OF COMMITTEE JAMES M. GREENWOOD, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, KANSAS CITY, MO., CHAIRMAN A. APPORTIONMENT OF MONEY FOR THE MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF CITY SCHOOL SYSTEMS FOR SPECIFIC PURPOSES, EXPRESSED IN THE PER CENT:S. OF THE TOTAL EXPENDITURES. This section of the report is intended to show how the expenditures for the maintenance and operation of schools in the leading cities in the United States are apportioned among the special departments embraced in the classifi- cation adopted. In view of the general policy which now prevails in many cities of piling up indebtedness by the present generation for the next genera- tion to grapple with, it was deemed eminently proper that one part of the report should treat exclusively of the division and appropriation of school moneys collected by a city each year, and to determine, approximately, an equation showing what part of the total expenditure each item is of the operat- ing expenses expressed by a per cent, of the total. This method of pres- entation is very simple, and at the same time most comprehensive in exhibiting the expenditures freed from obscurity. It is also believed that if the outline of the expenditures herein followed should come into general use in all the leading cities, such a method of expressing expenditures for comparative purposes would be a great improvement over the confusing systems generally employed throughout the Union. For the purpose of gathering definite information bearing directly on this topic, the chairman of the committee sent out the following circular letter to one hundred and fifty city superintend- ents of the leading cities of this country. In asking for and soliciting information, three objects were kept in view: (a) What should be collected; (J) How the material should be arranged after it was collected. (c) What conoliisions, if any, could be inferred from the results obtained. LETTER OP INQUIRY Kansas City, Mo., October 13, 1903. Dear Sir: As chairman of the Committee on Taxation as Related to Public Educa- tion, a report of which is to be presented to the National Council of Education in July, 190% will you please furnish the following items concerning your city schools for the school year of 1902-1903: I. Teacher's salaries: (o) Amount paid for high schools. (6) For elementary schools. ^. Supervision, and under supervision include the salaries of all principals who supervise, special teachers, superintendents and assistant superintendents. 3. Amount paid for janitor service. 4. Amount paid for ordinary repairs. 5. Amount paid for fuel. 6. Amount paid for textbooks. 7. Amount paid for school supplies, reference books, apparatus. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION ii 8. Miscellaneous expense, which should include other oflScers' salaries, cost of taking census, postage, telephone, and all other expenditures chargeable to running expense, not included under the above heads. Yours truly, J. M. Greenwood, Chairman. Replies were received from eighty-three cities, a complete list of which is given further on. The cities from which reports were received, are classified on the basis of population according to the census of igoo into seven groups: First group: Cities having a population of more than 1,000,000. Second group: cities having a population of 500,000 to 1,000,000. Third group: cities having a population of 200,000 to 500,000. Fourth group: cities having a population of 100,000 to 200,000. Fifth group: cities having a population of 50,000 to 100,000. Sixth group: cities having a population of 20,000 to 50,000. Seventh group: cities having a population of 10,000 to 20,000. In computing the percentages, the total expenditure for maintenance and operation was obtained from the replies furnished at first by each super- intendent or his clerk, the separate items were then computed, and the results were then returned to each superintendent with a request that he verify the estimates and return his corrections. This has been done in nearly all cases unless otherwise mentioned. When an item was found that appeared to be unusually large, more definite information was sought and has been most cheerfully supplied. To have given the expenditure of each city in dollars would convey no definite information for comparative purposes without going into the cash or real valuation of the real and personal property as compared with the assessed valuation of the same, and the tax-paying power of the property holders; but to show what per cent, of the total amount expended each item is, would furnish a guide for boards of education and superintendents by giving approximate equational values for each item, and thus avoid exorbitant outlays in one departitient at the expense of other departments. The table of expenditures is designed to furnish a corrective for all such exceptional cases and to reduce and systematize expenditures to a safe business basis. As an illustration, the three items, salaries paid high-school teachers, ele- mentary-school teachers, and for supervision in the cities named run as follows: Chicago, 78.3 per cent, of the total operating expenses; Philadelphia, 73.6 per cent.; St. Louis, 74.8 per cent.; Boston, 72.99 per cent; Baltimore, 77.1 per cent. Comparing the three items separately: Chicago: 7.4 per cent., high school; 61. i per cent., eleinentary teachers; 9.8 pei cent., supervision. Philadelphia: 9.9 per cent., high school; 56.02 per cent., elementary teachers; 7.7 per cent., supervision. St. Louis: 6.6 per cent., high school; 55.7 per cent., elementary teachers; 12.5 per cent., supervision. Boston: 12.57 P^r cent., high school; 52.32 per cent., elementary teachers; 8.07 per cent., supervision. 12 NATIONAL EDUCATION AL ASSOCIATION Baltimore: 9 per cent., high school; 62.5 per cent., elementary teachers; 5.6 per cent., supervision. A comparison of these separate items from these five large cities raises several questions in regard to the per cent, of high-school teachers' salaries, elementary teachers' salaries, and for supervision. Custom and local condi- tions will probably furnish a satisfactory explanation in each case, each system being a growth out of previous practice. A careful comparison of groups of cities will reveal many anomalies, not only in each group, but in comparing one group with another, and yet the percentage appropriated for instruction and supervision runs very nearly parallel throughout the groups of cities, according to population. This was hardly to be expected when each school board works at these questions in its own way, seldom or never consulting other boards as to the division of appropriations. By practice nearly all systems of schools have approxi- mated a safe working basis. The per cent, paid to high-school teachers, is: First group 8.8 Third group 9.0 Sixth group 11.3 Second group 9.7 Fourth group 10.8 Seventh group 14.3 Fifth group 9.8 The inference is that pupils in the smaller cities are going to high school from the rural and suburban population in greater numbers proportionately than in the larger cities. The percentage appropriated for teachers' salaries in the elementary schools in cities of 200,000 inhabitants and upward, is nearly a constant. Total paid elementary teachers: First group 58.5 Third group 55.5 Sixth group 52. Second group 56-8 Fotu-th group 52.3 Seventh group 46.49 Fifth group 54. Supervision costs in each respectively: Firstgroup 8.7 Third group 9.9 Sixth group 10.6 Second group 9.0. Fourth group 9.9 Seventh group 9.6 Fifth group 11.4 Putting the three items, high-school salaries, elementary-school salaries, and supervision, under the head of instruction, the percentage of cost in each group of cities, is as follows: First group 76. Third group 74.4 Sixth group 73 .9 Second group 74.9 Fourth group 73 . Seventh group 70.39 Fifth group 75.2 There is little fluctuation in janitor service taking the cities in groups as in the previous cases. Service costs: Firstgroup 7.5 Third group 6.8 Sixth group 6.1 Second group 6.4 Fourth group 6.7 Seventh group 7.37 Fifth group 6.5 In the department of repairs there seems to be no determining factor judging from the outlay of each individual city, but by groups the mean averages are not so very divergent. The percentages are: REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 13 First group 5.6 Third group 4.8 Sixth group 3.9 Second group 5.5 Fourth group 3.9 Seventh group 3. Fifth group 4.1 The item of fuel varies from almost nothing in the extreme South and in parts of California, to 11 per cent, at Rutland, Vt. The mean average cost in Chicago and Philadelphia is 3.2 per cent, of the total expenditure. In the cities of the second group, 4 . i per cent. ; third group, 3 . 5 per cent. ; sixth group, 3 .8 per cent.; seventh group, 6.3 per cent. The rate is 10 per cent, at Madison and Burlington, and at Lansing 8 per cent, of the total school expenditure. As to the matter of free textbooks, there is not sufficient data to warrant a general statement, yet from a partial investigation, it is the opinion of the committee, that, after the pupils are once supplied, 4 per cent, will be an adequate allowance for this item. We have no data as to whether the same care is taken of the free textbooks as when the parents supply them. The amount required- for school supplies, judged entirely from the reports submitted, can, with safety, be put at 3 per cent. An examination of the reports from the various cities under the head of the "miscellaneous expenses" is, perhaps, with the exception of supervision, the most chaotic of any one of the items in the schedule. As an illustration, under this head, various cities report a percentage as follows: Chicago 4. Cleveland 4. Allegheny 12.5 Philadelphia 8.4 Milwaukee 1.2 Syracuse 5. St. Louis 8.2 Louisville 6.5 New Haven 7. Boston 1.55 Minneapolis ^.6 St. Joseph S-6 Baltimore 3.5 Buffalo i. Los Angeles 2.2 San Francisco 19.0 Providence 9.9 Paterson z. Pittsburg 16.3 Indianapolis 12.2 Omaha 5.5 Detroit 6.4 Kansas City, Mo is. 4 Scranton 7.2 Toledo 12.3 It would seem to be the practice in many cities when an expense item is diflacult to classify that it is most easily disposed of by putting it into the "miscellaneous" account. Tentative equations may be obtained by throwing this item into groups as was done in the previous subdivisions by grouping the cities according to population. The mean average percentage of total expenditure is found to be as follows: Firstgroup 6.^ Third group 7.3 Sixth group 7.3 Secondgroup 4.7 Fourth group 6.8 Seventh group 7.5 Fifth group 5.7 Special attention is called to the expenditures of the two suburban cities, Yonkers and Brookline, as representatives of several wealthy suburban cities in various sections of the country. Yonkers appropriates for high-school teachers' salaries, 7.2 per cent.; Brookline, 15.9 per cent. 14 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION Yonkers appropriates for elementary teachers' salaries, 50.5 per cent.; Brookline, 53.5 per cent. Yonkers appropriates for supervision, 10.8 per cent. ; Brookline, 3 . 7 per cent. It is seen that Yonkers paid 67.5 per cent, for instruction, and Brookline, 73 . 1 per cent. TABLE I.— SCHOOL EXPENDITURES CLASSIFIED Gkotjps I AND 11.— CrriES Having a Population op More Than 500,000 Popdla- IION Total Expense Percentage of Tot-4l for Each Item Name of City Tchrs. Ele- men- tary Tchrs. Su- per- vision Jani- tors Re- pairs Fuel Text B'ks Sup- plies Mis- ceUa- neous 1,698,57s 1,293,697 575238 560,892 508,957 $6,342,502.60 3,609,245.88 1,610,647.32 3,364.592.44 1,408,978.39 7-4 9.9 6.6 12.57 9 61. 1 56.02 55-7 52-35 62.5 9.8 7-7 8.07 5-6 8 7.08 8.1 5-66 6 3-7 4-3 4.1 10.9 3-1 3.6 2.8 1-5 2.86 4.2 •5 1-3 2.22 3-9 1.9 3-9 2.1 " 3.82 1-7 4 8.4 8.2 I-SS 3-S Philadelphia. Pa St Louis Mo Boston, Mass." Baltimore, Md Group III. — Cities Having a Population Between 200,000 and 300,000 Cleveland, O Buffalo, N.Y San Francisco, Calif. . Pittsburg, Pa Detroit, Mich Milwaut.ee, Wis Newark, N. J Louisville, Ky Minneapolis, Minn.. . 381,768 352.387 342,782 321,616 285,704 285,315 246,076 204,731 202,718 $1,697,812-39 1,258,702.00 1,381,398-51 i,iSi,963"iS 986,638.07 853,559-61 986,667.14 528.323.87 830,052.26 TI 54- 8.6 7 8.3 4 3-2 5-9 60.3 9.6 5-4 4-7 6.2 2.4 4.1 7.8 52.9 10.3 3.8 1.2 ■5 1.6 6 49.2 9.2 8.5 4-5 2-5 2-3 1. 1 II. 6 51-9 II. 9 9.6 3-3 3-4 I 6.9 59-4 ii-S 5-9 4.6 6.8 4-5 6.7 55-5 12. 1 6-3 6.4 1-5 4 13.7 48 12.4 7-7 6.1 1.7 .8 2.4 13-4 55 10 7 4 4 1.9 2.1 3-7 1.4 It 6.4 Group IV. — Cities Havino a Population of 100.000 to 200.000 Providence, R. I.. Indianapolis, Ind. Kansas City. Mo. . Rochester, N.Y... Denver, Colo Toledo, O Allegheny, Pa Columbus, O Syracuse, N.Y New Haven, Conn Paterson, N.J Los Angeles, Cahf. St. Joseph, Mo Omaha, Neb Scranton, Pa 175,597 160,164 163,752 162,608 J33.859 131,822 129 8g6 125,560 108,374 108,027 105,171 102,470 102 ,2 ;9 102,255 102,026 $736,710.55 671,544-93 612.450.35 582,346.83 868,948 . 41 433.936-44 452,212.81 447.309-93 460,632.40 445.065.54 311,795-13 588,203.52 197.599-54 401.887.73 416,607.79 13.1 45.» 15-2 7-1 .2 4 7 1.8 2.4 12.4 63 6.6 5-0 2.8 2 8 1.2 3 19.2 46.4 9-7 S-9 6.6 5 4 4.1 8.5 50.7 II. 4 6.2 3-2 4 2 •4 3-4 .3-74 54-2 8.72 5-68 8 -.17 3 25 2.41 1-54 8 .54-8 8.2 3-4 2-7 5 6 2.3 7-3 5-4 45.6 10.4 6.6 6.8 6 1-3 2-5 19-3 46.7 10.7 10.4 3-9 3 .6 I 9 58. 5 10.7 6 1-7 5 4 i.4 1-7 II. 5 47 9.2 6.5 2.9 5 I .8 7-3 5-5 56.9 12.2 5-7 4.8 .T 5 6.4 8.6 62.1 9.4 5.6 S-3 I 4 1.9 3.2 12.14 56 o-s 9.4 5-6 4 5 I "•5 SS-5 8.5 8.7 2.1 4 2 2 1-3 8.4 54.8 4-3 6.1 7 4 7 4.4 3-1 9.9 3 2.4 2.5 6.74 2.3 2.5 4-3 5 7 5-6 5-8 6.S Group V. — Cities Having a Population of 50,000 to 100.000 Albany, N.Y Cambridge, Mass. . . Atlanta. Ga Grand Rapids, Mich Nashville. Tenn Reading, Pa Oakland, Calif Springfield, Mass. . . Troy. N.Y Evansville, Ind Manchester, N. H.. . Utica, N. Y Peoria, 111 Charleston S. C. . . . Duluth. Minn Harrisburg, Pa 94,151 91,886 89,782 87,56s 80,865 78.961 66 ,960 62,059 60 651 59.007 56987 56,383 56,100 55,807 52,969 50,167 $311,364. 433.446. 184.286. 389,564. 177 413, 218.846. 332,783. 403.3SS' 183,205, 207.952 136,461 197.916 223.843 80,403 237,553 170J31 17 9.4 47.1 14.4 5.6 5-7 9.2 2-3 2.4 49 14.2 51 II. 6 8.2 3.17 31 2 2.4 20 10.2 57-7 16. 5 3 S-l 1:9 .02 I.I 05 10.2 45-8 II. 8 7-5 2.6 4-3 8 2.6 3° 6.1 58.8 22. 1 4.6 i.7 1.4 10 I 84 9.2 59- 1 2.1 10 2.9 3.8 3 6 2.6 00 14.7 52-9 12.4 5-5 I 1-3 9 2.2 76 7-8 .52.8 II. 5 6.4 3-2 3 2 3 5.8 00 8.9 67 6.7 8.7 I 2.6 4 1-3 8.^ TO. 5 43 16.,, 6 1.8 1.9 T 16 9 56.4 5.S 4.8 7-3 7-5 45 SO 10 SO 16.6 5.7 3.7 6.3 003 3 71 II. 4 41.3 14-3 7-3 12. 1 2.6 8.7 45 10.6 61.2 14.7 2.6 4-5 .8 3 4 •9 45 7.7 50.2 10.3 10.3 3-4 8.2 I 7 2.6 79 "■3 50.8 4-5 8-3 6.1 4-7 6 8 3-4 4.2 4.4 4.1 14.4 4 6.7 8.S 7.3 2.8 17.2 5.4 10 » Chicago: parental schools, $49,316.98; normal schools $58,102.39; evening schools, $82,918.33; not included in total, $190,337.70. ' $4.39 of 52.3s per cent, is for special schools. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION IS TABLE I— Continued Group VI. — Cities Having a Population of 20,000 to 50,000 Naue of City Popula- tion Total Expense Percentage op Total foe Each Item High Sch'l Tchrs, Ele- men- tary Tchrs, Su- per- Vision Jani-' Re- Fuel Text Sup- tors pairs B'ks plies S-i 6.3 6.8 3.6 .6.4 S-2 5.3 5-5 4.8 1.4 6 1.4 • 4 1.4 6.4 S.2 31 3-3 3.0 S-3 8.9 4 5-9 I.I 1.8 3-S 7-,1 2.7 2.3 .5 I.l 8 4 3-8 3-4 s-s 6-5 7-7 2.8 3-S 7.2 5-1 4 1-7 S-4 13.6 3-6 4.8 6.0 7,2 2.4 ■9 2.S 6.8 1-7 6.8 5-3 1-7 6.0 1.4 2.4 .8 2-7 8., 6.3 3.9 4-3 8.6 4.2 6.9 2.1 3-6 4.2 4-7 1.6 I.I 1.7 9.18 2-95 5.62 2.96 2.29 7-1 .';.7 5-7 2.1 2.1 7.1 7-9 1.8 4-5 3-4 S-l 6.6 S-l i-S 1.6 1.6 l.S ■4 6.49 7.08 4.62 1.69 2-75 6.1 3-8 S-i 3.1 4.1 8.1 .7 4 5-7 •9 6.2 2. 1 1.3 31 3 2.6 2.1 .4 5-7 4 4 2 3 6.8 7-1 1.4 7-3 Mis- cella- neous Yonkers.N.Y Waterbury, Coml. . . , Fort Wayne. Ind Lincola, Neb Wheelini;, W. Va . . . , Birmingham. Ala Tacoma, Wasli Spokane, Wash Terre Haute. Ind. . . . Dubuque, Iowa Davenport. Iowa. .. Springfield, lU Fitchburg, Mass Knoxville, Tenn Wichita, Kans Superior, Wis Sacramento, Cahf . . . La Crosse, Wis Williamsport, Pa Pueblo, Colo Poughkeepsie, N. Y. Austin, Tex Newport. R.I Bangor, Me Lima, O San Jose, Calif Columbia. S. C Colorado Spgs., Jolo Anderson, lad 47-931 45.857 45115 40 169 38,878 .38,145 37714 36848 36673 36,296 35 2.54 34.159 33587 32,637 31.560 31,091 29 282 28895 28,757 28,157 24,029 22,258 22,034 21,850 21,723 21,500 21,108 21,085 20,178 8274,017. ,30 180,918.00 144,106.81 153,646.90 108,644.34 73.556. 40 185,149.79 196.767.74 162,621.00 96,121.66 161,754.24 113.167. 31 115 664.00 56 808 . 44 68,147.00 142.208.50 185 302 . 50 98,197.85 88,026.88 94.835.36 84,189.00 60,351.4s 106,425.85 70,231.97 79327 -99 116.538.76 21.664.18 174.518.67 69,809.63 7.2 6.2 14. S 5.5 8.8 9' :o 12. S ■1-3 10. 4 12 6.2 5.5 9.65 10.2 II. 4 14.8 17. 1 17.2 16.4 7.9 15.4 11. 2 10.8 10. 15 19. 1 13.5 IS-I II. 6 8.9 8.5 17-3 14.2 13.5 7,2 17.7 18.2 0.9 7.2 10. 5 3.3 II. 8 6.S 3-3 6.41 10.9 3 2.7 12.8 11-3 7-9 2.7 5-6 4.6 5-3 10.8 9.7 5-7 6.2 4.6 7 3-3 4 2.4 1.3 9.6 2 3.35 7.6 8.4 14.2 ■3 ■37 •5 ■S Group VII. — Cities Having a Population of 10,000 to 20.000 Brookline, Mass Madison, Wis. - Burlington, Vt. . Richmond. Ind. Lansing, Mich. . Ogden, Utah. . . Cheyenne, Wyo. Shreveport, La. . Rutland, Vt.... Moberly, Mo. . . 19.935 19,164 18,640 18,226 16.485 16,313 14,087 16,013 11,499 10,000 SlSS.675.n 62,802.49 63,884.31 75,859.90 59.292. 83 73 ,873 00 30,768.38 33,024.00 45,064.25 24,142.94 15.9 33-5 3.7 8-1 4-5 3-7 2.2 5-3 23.4 ,18.5 9 7 8 3-1 10.9 OS 4.7 16.6 40.9 5.3 8 8 I 10 4-7 .2 14 49.2 8.3 S 7 2.5 5.4 9-4 16 46.7 6.3 8 5 5 8 2.8 II 41.3 14.6 7 9 4.9 3 2 2 12.7 53-9 7 6 8 4 2 2.6 2.6 8 46.8 28.7 6 6 .1 3 .1 13-7 44-3 8.2 5 8 4-9 II l-S 6 16.5 4S-3 6.2 7 7 3.6 6 1.6 1-3 A SUPPLEMENTARY LETTER OF INQUIRY Kansas City, Mo., May 10, 1904. Superindent Dear Sir: At a recent committee meeting on "Taxation for School Purposes," held in Chicago, an extended discussion and revievir of the statistics ahready in hand took place. Further verification and some modification of the figures returned are desirable. I herewith hand you the statement of the expenditures of your schools as you fur- nished it for the year 1902-03. The committee is very desirious of having trustworthy information. The annoyance of the return of your report for the third time, I trust, will be forgiven, and that you will make it convenient to return the modified report promptly to the under- signed. The greatest possibility of misapprehension occurs in only two items, to which your attention may be confined. First, the item of "Supervision." — Under this head, in order that the basis of compu- tation may be uniform, you are asked to include (i) the entire salary of superintendents, assistant superintendents, headmasters, and supervisors of departments; (2) the entire i6 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION salary of all principals who have no regular classes which they teach; (3) that portion ot the salary of principals who teach all or a part of the time, which exceeds the salary of a regular teacher. For instance, if the principal receives $2,000 a year and teaches half the time and the salary of a teacher doing corresponding work is $700, the amount charge- able to supervision is $1,650 and $350 to elementary teaching; but if the principal teaches all the time and receives $2,000 and a regular teacher doing the same kind of work is paid $700, then $1,300 should be charged to supervision. Second, the item of "Miscellaneous." — Under this head, state definitely what items are included. May I not have yoiu: reply at once ? Very sincerely yours, J. M. Greenwood, Chairman. The following brief explanations furnished by the superintendents of the different cities show what items are included under the head of "Miscel- laneous:" Chicago. — ^AU items not properly chargeable to items specified. St. Loins.— Contingent fund, examining books, expense, furniture, ' gas, electric light, insurance, kindergarten supplies, kindergarten pianos, planting trees, rent of school- houses. World's Fair exhibit, salaries of officers, street sprinkling, taxes — special, vault cleaning, water license, legal expense. BALTrMORE. — Printing, advertising, etc., janitor supplies. Boston. — Rent of school buildings, etc., etc. Detroit. — Officers' and clerks' salaries, kindergarten supplies, manual-training equipment and suppHes, janitor supplies, furniture and fixtures, Hght and motor current, rent of buildings, insurancej office expense, census enumeration, books. Newark. — Miscellaneous includes medical inspectors' salaries, officers' salaries, furniture and supplies, manual-training suppUes, heating apparatus, light and power, water, rent, insurance, playgrounds, incidentals. Minneapolis. — Rent, insurance, administrative and incidental expenses. Louisville. — Law fees, printing and stationery for schools, advertising, census, expense, janitor supplies, insurance, light, water, repairs to furniture and apparatus, commencement expenses for high schools, the salary of the secretary, stenographer, and bookkeepers, supervision of buildings. Denver. — Salaries, water, light, general supplies, printing, insurance, current interest, rent, transportation, telephone, general expenses. New Haven. — Salaries of officers (other than the superintendents of schools), sal- aries of clerical assistants, rent, school census, gas, telephone service, graduation expenses, express, cartage, travel, incidentals, electrical current. SCEANTON. — Gas, telephone, rent, water, labor, furniture, horse and wagon, legal expenses, tax refunding. Omaha. — Advertising, cartage, census enumerating, election expenses, examination committee expenses, freight, legal expenses, messenger service, page service, postage, printing, piano rent and tuning, stationery for secretary and superintendent's office telephones. Los Angeles. — Normal work, electricity in schools, gas, rent of extra rooms, street assessments, water, rent, institute rent of pianos, commencement exercises, insurance of buildings. Albany. — Salaries of superintendents of buildings, clerk of board, stenographer and two attendance officers, compulsory law expenses, night schools, books for school library, school furniture, apparatus, and such incidentals as freight, cartage, telephones and insurance. Nashville. — Salary of one clerk, librarian, carpenter, manual-training supplies census expenses, postage, telephones, brooms, soap, etc. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 17 Reading. — Officers' salaries, secretary, treasurer, clerk, librarian, expenses to conventions, etc. Oakland. — School furniture, census, gas, light, electric ^ower, hardware, insurance, etc. Manchester. — Books and stationery, furniture and supplies, manual training, night schools, salaries of school board, clerk, truant officer. Utica. — Salaries of officers except superintendent of buildings, janitor supplies, printing, postage, stationery. Peoeia. — Only things that cannot be classified under any other head. Charleston. — Ice tickets, postage, stationery for office use and other incidentals. Waterbuey. — No expenditure under the head of "Miscellaneous." Lincoln.— Salary of truant officer, transportation, rent, messenger service, laundry, water, gas, electricity, commencement exercises. Terre Haute. — Clerks, interest, enumeration of children, insurance, telephone, rent, Hght, commission on state textbooks, labor, hauling. Dubuque. — Salaries of secretary, treasurer, clerk and librarian, census, telephone, postage, rent, advertising, freight, drayage, gas, telegrams, water, school election. FiTCHBURG, Mass. — Rents, gas, electric light, clerk, truant officer and numerous other items. Knoxville. — Postage, hauling, express and freight, rent, cleaning up buildings, extra help, toilet supplies, supphes for manual training. Wichita. — Insurance, rents, truant officer, printing, lectures, scavengers, enumeration. Wheeling, W. Va. — Salary of officers, books, stationery and supplies, printing and advertising, census and enumeration, commencement exercises, rent of board rooms, insurance, refund taxes, salaries of examination committee, teachers' institute, dues to suburban board of education, repairing board rooms, telephone, office supplies, etc., etc. Superior. — Bonds and interest, furniture, fixtures, postage, freight, drayage, express, rent, laboratory supplies, carpenter services, printing and advertising, truant officer, light and power, transportation, insurance and repairs, improvements, and a small miscel- laneous account. ' Sacramento, Calef. — Telephone rent, soap, laundry, express, drayage, -diplomas, etc. La Crosse, Wis. — Postage, telephone, express, labor, electric light, gas, printing, furniture, and other incidentals. WiLLlAMSPORT. — Insurance, salary of librarian, salary of attendance officer, bills for freight and express, bills for general expenses of office, etc. Bangor, Me. — Books, regular school suppUes, furniture, fuel, salaries, janitors. San Jose. — Feed for superintendent's horse, school census, apparatus, cartage, rent, water, printing, telephone, gas, insurance, etc. Birmingham. — Salaries of secretary and librarian, insurance, rents, census, interest on loans, printing annual report, school furniture, over-draft from last year, general expenditure. Columbia, S. C. — School furniture, interest, buildings. Cheyenne. — Water, rent, insiu-ance, clocks, hardware, furnitiue, lights, printing, trees, interest, Ubrary, clerk's salary, election expenses, postage, stationery, office supplies. Madison. — Apparatus and library, clerk's salary, printing, insurance, interest. Table II is based on the reports of expenditures furnished by the city- superintendents for the school year of 1902-03, and it includes in the aggregate these three items: High-school teachers' salaries, elementary teachers' salaries, and the cost of supervision, or, more briefly, the cost of instruction as distin- guished from the other expenditures: NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION TABLE 11 Scranton, Pa 67 Albany, N. Y 70 Cambridge, Mass 76 Atlanta, Ga 84 Grand Rapids, Mich.77 Nashville, Tenn 87 Reading, Pa 70 Oakland, CaHf 80 Springfield, Mass. . . .72 Evansville, Ind 69 Manchester, N. H. . . 70 Utica, N. Y 76 Charleston, S. C 86 Duluth, Minn 68 Harrisburg, Pa 66 Troy, N. Y 82 Peoria, 111 68 Yonkers, N. Y 68 Waterbury, Conn. . . .77 Ft. Wayne, Ind 81 Lincoln, Neb 74 WheeUng, W. Va 76.8 Birmingham, Ala. ...77.1 Tacoma, Wash 76.6 Terre Haute, Ind. ... 73 . 3 Dubuque, Iowa 77.2 Davenport, Iowa 65 . 2 Springfield, 111 77.1 Chicago, 111 78.6 Philadelphia, Pa 73 . 6 St. Louis, Mo 78.1 Boston, Mass 72-99 Baltimore, Md 77.6 San Francisco, Calif . 70 Pittsburg, Pa 64 . 4 Detroit, Mich 74 . 4 Milwaukee, Wis 79 Cleveland, Ohio 74 Newark, N. J 74.3 Louisville, Ky 75 . 9 Minneapolis, Minn ...78.4 Buffalo, N. Y 78. s Providence, R. 1 73.5 Indianapolis, Ind. . . .73.8 Kansas City, Mo 75 . 3 Rochester, N. Y 70 6 Denver, Colo 76 . 66 Toledo, Ohio 71 Allegheny, Pa 61.4 Syracuse, N. Y 78 . ii New Haven, Conn ...67.7 St. Joseph, Mo 74-19 Los Angeles, Cahf. . .80.1 Columbus, Ohio 76.4 Paterson, N. J 76.9 Omaha, Neb 75 . 5 Table III was computed for the purpose of showing what per cent, the school expenditure for maintenance and operation is of the total municipal expenditures, based upon the data collected and published by the Department of Labor in Bulletin No. 42, September, 1902. TABLE III Fitchburg, Mass 74 Knoxville, Tenn 82 .g Superior, Wis 64.8 Sacramento, Calif. . . 85 . 7 La Crosse, Wis 73-95 Williamsport, Pa 67.3 Pueblo, Colo 70.6 Wichita, Kas 75.5 Poughkeepsie, N. Y. . 64 . 4 Austin, Texas. .;.... 71 .3 Newport, R. 1 71 .9 Bangor, Me 76 Lima, Ohio 61.9 San Jose, Calif 85 . 3 Columbia, S. C 81 .5 Colorado Sp'gs, Colo. 57. 3 Madison, Wis 70.9 BurHngton, Vt 62 . 8 Richmond, Ind 71.5 Lansing, Mich 68 . 3 Ogden, Utah 66.9 Cheyenne, Wyo 73.6 Shreveport, La 83 . 5 Moberly, Mo 68 Rutland, Vt 66.2 Anderson, Ind 76.6 Spokane, Wash 68.8 City Per Cent, of Total Expenditures Total for Mainte- nance and Operation of Schools Total City Operating Expenses New York, N.Y.... Chicago, 111 Philadelphia, Pa St. Louis, Mo Boston, Mass Baltimore, Md Cleveland, O Buffalo, N.Y San Francisco, Calif. Cincinnati, O Pittsburg, Pa New Orleans, La. . . Detroit, Mich Milwaukee, Wis. . . . Washington, D.C... Newark, N. J Jersey City. N.J — Louisville. Ky. ._. . . . MinneapoUs, Minn. . Providence, R. I."... 19. 16 36.8s 17-37 17-50 13. So 18.61 26. 16 ig.80 19.08 18.12 15-60 n.12 21.44 20.49 21.9s 21.77 13-62 18 -59 25-03 21-34 119,731,629 8,203.493 3-319-604 1.536,140 3,043,640 1,417,392 1,257-345 1,161,834 1,166,763 1,126-631 843 648 478,02s 869,713 764,968 1,182,016 830-081 500-332 512-947 736,981 739,695 $102,046,573 22,260,661 19,106,707 8,715,821 21,898,291 7,613,756 4,805,717 5,865,285 5,891,297 6,215.866 5,406.446 4,297,808 4.055-966 3,733-315 5 387.271 3,812,511 3,598-464 2,774.987 2,044-208 3,465,201 REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 19 TABLE III— Continued City Per Cent, of Total for Mainte- Total City Total nance and Operating Expenditures Operation of Schools Expenses 32-75 $558,630 $1,706,434 20.17 ■ 555.732 2,751-935 24.67 584.702 2,368 991 16.67 550,031 3,238 368 35.93 679 091 1,889 983 25-33 398,805 I,.574,315 22.14 363.027 1,639.540 29. IS 421,588 1,446,274 21-94 517,844 2,364 259 17.86 410,459 2,296.883 26 . 35 382,950 1,453.412 2S-4» 313,166 1,228.754 20.22 326.33s 1,613,904 T7-73 160,490 904996 27.16 392.276 1,144,287 33.76 497,016 1,472,576 15-30 140,863 915,090 41-37 315,146 761,731 23-58 331,899 1,407,470 20.2s 294,065 1,452,016 20.37 439,543 2,iS7,o86 28 268,791 959.286 14.32 166,842 1,164,751 29-42 304,450 1,034.506 33-77 318,402 043 1 94 98-35 124,107 1,261,816 20-63 .169,799 822.282 23-56 263,959 1,120.302 26.4s 385,731 1,457 930 30.70 212.326 691 .480 20.22 195,109 671,113 28.93 242,021 836.568 27-79 222.246 709,660 22-79 179,775 782,71 r 19.52 237,972 1,218.840 40.89 299 017 731,181 22.93 185.821 810371 23.07 234,940 1,107 980 36.69 272.444 742,460 30.92 359.560 1,162,739 28.39 294.374 1,036.717 21.18 215,120 1,015 681 22.43 185.560 828,.'Si4 29.26 175,229 598.742 19.94 125.929 631 284 26 04 169,149 649.502 28.67 199306 694.825 12.75 77,443 607.227 33 40 264.557 780.942 25-84 107,96s 417,673 24.09 241,867 1.006 551 31-12 137 896 442 98s 26.69 126,660 474 510 38.74 144.211 372,229 22.03 116,611 550 042 33.20 157,604 448,155 20.10 139.571 694.289 24.96 207,045 829.422 69.68 58,774 843.462 42.49 179-955 423 469 24.88 197,117 791 951 30.70 111,732 363.835 34.513 145-314 Ji5 932 18.21 125,231 681,382 19.71 98-823 474,810 44-13 165,828 375.527 19.48 92,762 466,822 33-97 142353 419 033 35-67 88.944 249 353 33 63 117,821 350,259 22-17 140 787 635,042 35-28 l56„-)63 443,110 20.39 134,843 664,189 32.24 88,699 275,08s 21.54 94,545 438.783 17-17 50,718 412.982 38-41 76,427 198,953 Indianapolis, Ind. . . . Kansas City, Mo. . . . St. Paul, Minn Rochester, N, Y Denver, Colo Toledo, O Allegheny, Pa Columbus, O Worcester, Mass. . . . Syracuse. N. Y New Haven, Conn. . . Paterson, N. J Fall River, Mass St. Joseph. Mo Omaha. Neb I /IS Angeles- Calif. ... Memphis, Tenn . Scranton, Pa Lowell, Mass Albany. N.Y Cambridge. Mass Portland, Ore Atlanta. Ga Grand Rapids, Mich. Dayton. O Richmond. Va Nashville, Tenn Seattle, Wash Hartford, Conn Reading, Pa Wilmington, Del Camden, N. J Trenton, N. j Bridgeport. Conn. . . . Lynn. Mass Oakland, Calif Lawrence. Mass New Bedford. Mass. . Des Moines, Iowa. . . Springfield, lU Somerville, Mass Trov. N. Y Hoboken, N. Y Evansville, Ind Manchester, N. H. . . Utica, N. Y Peoria, 111 Charleston. S. C Salt lAke City, Utah, San Antonio, Tex — Duluth, Minn Erie. Pa' Elizabeth, N. J Wilkesbarre, Pa Kansas City, Kas . . . Harrisburg. Pa Portland, Me Yonkers, N. Y WarfielH,Va Waterbury, Conn Holyoke. Mass Ft. Wayne. Ind Ypungslown, O Houston, Tex Covington, Ky Akron, () Dallas, Tex Saginaw, Mich Lancaster. Pa Lincoln, Neb Brockton, Mass Binghamton, N. Y. Pawtucket. R. 1 Altoona. Pa Wheeling. W.Va.... Birmingham. Ala Little Rock, Ark 20 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION CITIES GROUPED GEOGRAPHICALLY For convenience of reference geographically, the cities are grouped into six subdivisions in which thirteen cities are in New England group, seventeen in New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware, twenty in the Upper Mississippi Valley, east of the Mississipppi River, ten in the Southern States, twelve in the Central and Upper Mississippi Valley east of the Rocky Moun- tains, and twelve in the Western and Pacific Slope States. TABLE IV Group I.— New Engiaito Cities Name of City Popula- tion Total Expense High Sch'l Tchrs. Percentage of Total por Each Item Ele- men- tary Su- per - Jani- tors Re- pairs Fuel Text B'ks Sup- plies Mis- cella- Boston, Mass Providence. R. I. . . New Haven, Conn. Cambridge, Mass. . Springfield, Mass. . Manchester, N. H. . Waterbury, Conn. . Fitchburg, Mass. . . Newport. R. I Bangor, Me Brookline, Mass. . . Burlington, Vt Rutland, Vt 560,892 175507 J08.027 91,886 62,059 56.987 45.857 33.587 22,034 21,850 19,935 18,640 11,499 S3 ,364 ,592-44 736.710.55 445,065.54 443,446.40 403.355.76 136,461.16 180,018.00 115,664.00 106,425.86 70,231.97 155,675.11 63,884.31 45,064.25 11.65 13.1 11-5 14.2 7.8 9 6.2 17.7 17. 12 16.4 15.0 16.6 13.7 45.2 47 51 52.8 .56.4 60.7 40.1 48 -43 48.7 53.5 40.9 44.3 15.2 9.2 II. 6 ll-S 5.5 10.9 7.2 6.41 10.9 3.7 5-3 8.2 5.66 7-1 6.S 8.2 6.4 4.8 5.2 6.8 6.49 6.1 8.1 8.8 5.8 .9 2. .2 4- 9 5. 17 3. 2 3 3 7. 3 5. 7 6. 08 4. 8 5- 5 3. 1.8 4.8 5.3 1.69 3.82 2.4 7-3 2.4 5.8 4-5 1.4 1.7 2.75 4.1 5.3 1-55 0.9 7 4.4 7-3 5.4 4 5-37 2.5 3.2 12.7 4.1 Group II. — ^Cities of New York, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, .and Delaw.\re Philadelphia, Pa Buffalo, N.Y Pittsburg, Pa Newark, N. J Rochester, N. Y Allegheny, Pa Syracuse, N. Y Paterson, N.J Scranton, Pa Albany, N.Y Reading, Pa Troy, N.Y Utica, N. Y Harrisburg, Pa Yonkers, N. Y Williamsport, Pa. . . . Poughkeepsie, N.Y.. 1,293697 352.387 321,616 246,076 162 608 129,896 108.374 105,171 102 ,026 04151 78.961 60,651 56.383 50,167 47 031 28.757 24,029 $3,609,245 1,285,702.00 1,151,963.15 986,667.14 582,346.83 452.212.81 469.632.40 311,703.13 416,607.79 311.364.17 218846.84 183.205.00 197.916.50 170,731.79 274.017.30 88026.88 84,189.00 9.9 56.02 7.7 7.8 4.3 2.8 3 ■■9 5-9 bo. 3 g.O 5-4 4-7 6.2 2.5 4.1 6 49.2 0.2 8 ■; 4-5 2.5 2-3 I.I 0.7 55-5 12.1 6-3 0.4 l-S 4 8.5 50.7 11.4 6.2 3.2 4.2 •4 3.4 5-4 45.6 10.4 6.6 6.8 6 1-3 2-5 9 .58.5 10.7 6 1-7 5.4 1.4 1-7 5-5 56.9 12.2 5-7 4.8 3.6 6.4 8.4 54-8 4.3 6.1 7 4.7 4.4 31 9.4 47-1 14.4 5.6 5.7 0.2 2.3 2.4 0.2 59-1 2. 1 10 2.9 3.8 3.6 2.6 8.0 67 6.7 8.7 1 2.6 ■4 1-3 10 SO 16.6 5.7 3-7 6.3 .003 3 "•3 50.8 4-5 8.3 6.1 4.8 6.8 ,3.4 7.2 .50.5 10.8 5.3 6.3 6.8 3.6 6.4 10.2 53-8 3.3 7-1 5.7 5.7 2.1 2.1 14.8 43-3 6.5 3.4 5-1 6.6 5.1 1. 5 8.4 16.3 8.3 12.5 6.5 4.2 6.7 2.8 10 4 2-7 7.6 14.2 Group III. — Cities of the Mississippi Valley, East of the Mississi^i River Chicago, 111.* Cleveland, O Detroit, Mich Milwaukee, Wis Indianapolis, Ind. . . . Toledo, O Columbus. O Grand Rapids, Mich. Evansville, Ind Peoria, 111 Ft. Wayne, Ind Terre Haute, Ind. Springaeld. Ill Superior, wis La Crosse, Wis Lima, O Anderson, Ind Madison, Wis Richmond, Ind Lansing, Mich 1,698,575 381,768 285,704 285,316 169,164 131,822 125,560 108,374 59,007 56,100 4S1I15 36,673 34.159 31,091 28,895 21,723 20,178 19,164 18,226 1648s $6,342,502, 1.697.812. 986,638. 853,559. 671,544, 433.936 447.309. 469,632. 207,952 223.843: 144,106 162,621 113,167 142,208 98,197 79.327 69,809 62,802 75,8S0 59.292 19.3 9 10.5 11.4 12-5 14.6 6.2 9.63 7-9 16. 5 23.4 14 16 9.8 8.2 II. 9 11.4 6.6 8.2 10.7 10.7 16.3 14-3 15 8.5 13.5 9.9 10. 5 3 7.9 9 83 6.3 8 7 9.6 5-9 6 6 7.3 6 6-5 6,9 8.6 9.18 8.1 7.1 7.8 5.7 8.5 3-7 8.3 3-3 4.6 2.8 2.7 3.0 1-7 3.8 12.1 1.4 7.7 7.2 4.2 2-95 •7 1.4 31 2.5 5 3.6 4 3-4 6.8 2.8 5.6 30 5.4 T.9 2.6 •4 2.8 2.4 6.9 5.62 4 7-3 10.9 5.4 8 5 1. 2 2 I 4 5 ■9 1 .96 3. ■7 .05 4 3-7 6.4 1.2 3 12.3 4.3 5 17.2 .9 5.6 6.2 3-3 9.6 3-35 I7.S 7.6 2.SS 5.5 7 'Chicago, 111.: Parental schools, $49,316.98; normal schools, $58,102.39; evening schools, $82,918 33. not included in above, $190,337. 70. "I think it is fan: to assume that all money paid to superintendents and principals is paid for supervision." — £. G. Cooley. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 21 TABLE IV— Continued Group IV. — Cities op the Southern States Popula- tion Total Expense Percentage or Total eor Each Item Name of City High Sch'l Tdlrs. Ele- men. tary Tchrs. Su- per- vision Jani- tors Re- pairs Fuel Text B'ks Sup- plies Mis- ceUa- neous Louisville, Ky Atlanta, Ga 204,731 89782 80865 55807 38878 38.145 32,637 22,258 21,108 16,013 S516.821.3s 184 286 . 20 177413.30 80403.4s 108644.34 73 556.40 56,808.44 60351.45 21 664.18 33,024.00 14 10.2 6.1 10.6 S-5 8.8 10.4 17. 1 11. 2 8 49.2 57.7 58.8 61.2 57.8 52.6 54.8 SO. 9 57-5 46.8 12.7 16 5 22. 1 14.7 13. s IS. I 17.7 3-3 12.8 28.7 7-0 u 2.6 5-3 5.9 6.9 3.6 1.6 6.3 51 1.7 45 8.9 I.I 1.4 1.6 2.6 .1 1-7 1.9 ':! i.s 2.4 1.5 2.1 3 3 8 02 19 4 s' 4 2.4 I.I I .9 3.5 2.7 ■ 4 S-7 .1 5 4.1 4 I.I 5-3 10.8 2.4 21.3 31 2.7 Nashville Tenn Charleston S. C Wheeling. W. Va Birmingham Ala Knoxville. Tenn Austin Tex Columbia, S.C Shreveport, La. Group V. — Cities in the Upper and Mississippi Valley and East of the Mississippi River St. Louis, Mo Baltimore, Md Minneapolis, Minn. Kansas City, Mo. . . St. Joseph, Mo Omaha, Neb Duluth, Minn Lincoln, Neb Dubuque, Iowa Davenport, Iowa. . . Wichita, Kans Mobcrly, Mo S7S 238 S08 957 202,718 163.752 102,279 102 255 52969 40,169 36 296 35.254 31.560 10,000 $1,662,987.32 1,408978.39 830 052.26 612450.35 197 -599 -54 401 ,887 . 73 237.553-45 153646.90 96,121.66 161,754.24 68,147.00 24,142.94 6.9 41.4 29.8 8.1 4.1 1.5 1.3 2. 1 9 02.5 6 I 6 3.1 4.2 3-9 1.7 13.4 55 10 7 4 4 1.9 2.1 19.2 46.4 9-7 59 6.6 5-4 4 I 12.14 56 b-r, 9-4 5.6 4.5 I 11. s 555 8.5 8.7 2.1 4.2 2 1.3 7.7 50.2 10.3 10.3 3-4 8.2 1.7 2.6 14.5 40.4 IQ.I 6.4 5-2 31 3-3 3-6 II. 3 48. 6 17-3 7.2 5.1 4 1-7 9 42 14.2 5.4 13.6 3.6 4.8 12 45-3 18.2 8.3 6.3 3.9 4 3 lb. 5 45-3 6.2 7-7 3-6 6 1.6 1-3 8.2 3-5 2.6 2.4 5.6 5-8 S S 4.6 4.6 7 1-3 II. 4 Group VI. — Cities of the Western and Pacific Slope States San Francisco , Calif. . Denver, Colo...._. . . Los Angeles, Calif.. . Oakland, Calif Tacoma, Wash Spokane, Wash Sacramento. Calif — Pueblo, Colo San Jose, Calif Colorado Spgs., Colo Ogden. Utah Cheyenne, Wyo 342.782 133,859 102479 66,960 37.714 36848 29.282 28,157 21,500 21,085 16,313 14,087 $1,381,398.51 7.8 52.9 10.3 3.8 1.2 ■5 .4 1.6 868.948.41 13. 74 54.2 8.72 5-68 8-37 3-25 2.41 1. 54 588,203.52 8.6 62.1 9-4 5.6 5.3 1.4 1.9 3.2 332.782.00 14.7 52.9 12.4 55 I 1-3 • 9 2.2 18s.149.79 9 5b II. 6 7.3 2-7 2.3 ■5 I.I 196.767.74 10 49. 8.0 8 4 3-8 3-4 S-S 185 302 . 50 5-5 73 7.2 4.2 4.7 1.6 l.l 1-7 94835.36 11.4 47.4 II. 8 7-1 7.9 1.8 45 I1653S.76 lS-4 62.6 2.7 6.2 2.1 1-3 31 174 SI8.67 10 3b 11-3 4 4 2 3 6.S 73873.00 II 413 14.6 7-9 4.9 3-2 2 30,768.28 12.7 53-9 7 6.8 4 2 2.6 2.6 19. 6 6.79 2.2 8.5 9-7 5-7 2 8.4 S 21.4 14.2 12 B. SOME OBSERVATIONS ON TABLES I AND II. STJPEEVISION What should be a fair and reasonable apportionment for supervision? How much supervision should obtain ? The data indicate that the extreme limits in expense for effective supervision lie between 8 and 11 per cent, of that for maintenance and operation. Many cities are lower than the minimum and perhaps as many are above the maximum. HIGH SCHOOL EXPENDITURES A relatively high ratio of expense is noticeable chiefly in the following cities, some of which are university centers, namely: Madison, Columbus, Lincoln, Oakland, Austin, Boston and Minneapolis, while Kansas City, NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATIQN Fitchburg', Bangor, Springfield, 111., Newport, Poughkeepsie and Louisville maintain a correspondingly high ratio without the added incentive. In one respect Kansas City occupies a unique position in that the board of education controls the public library and sustains it upon the same basis as the public schools. No special tax is levied for the support and mainte- nance of the public library, but it is carried on as a department of the city school system, designed not only for the education of the children, but as a continuation of the education of the adult population. A cursory examination of Table I further reveals many variations of excessive expenditures, some of which should be mentioned with respect to the broader subjects of levying, collecting and apportioning school revenue each year. Wide dififerences exist in the percentages of expenditures for the same kind of service, or the cost of fuel, repairs, or "miscellaneous expenses. " Some of these items depend upon prices perhaps originally agreed upon as a fair compensation for special lines of service; or, as in the case of fuel, on climatic or other conditions. In looking over the entire list of cities, the last item, "miscellaneous," is worthy of attention. Of the large cities in the first, and second groups, St. Louis stands charged with 8.2 per cent., while Philadelphia has 8.4 per cent, and Boston 1.55 per cent. In the third group, San Francisco charged herself with 19.6 per cent, which appears entirely too large and doubtless includes some expenditures that should have been excluded; or it was an exceptionally heavy expenditure for that year. Providence, charged 9.9 per cent, for the same item, while Newark expended $8.30 of every $100 for the same purpose. In cities having from 20,000 to, 50,000 inhabitants, Tacoma is credited with 9.7 per cent, for "miscellaneous;" Superior, Wis., 9.6 per cent.; Pough- keepsie, N. Y., 14.2 per cent.; Austin, Texas, 21.3 per cent.; Lima, Ohio, 17.5 per cent.; Colorado Springs, Colo., with 21.4 per cent. Among the cities of the lowest group, the highest is Burlington, Vt., with 12.7 per cent. The most reasonable explanation of these variations lies in the fact that many school boards defer some incidental expenditures until the very last moment, and then when they must be attended to, the outlay appears out of all proportion. It would be a matter of public interest to know specifically whether reduc- tions in other departments correspond to the increased cost in this department, and it is possible that the miscellaneous expense one year is very different from what it was the year previous, or it will be the year following, in the same town or city. We have not yet reached -a point where we can generalize safely relative to the comparative items of high-school teachers' salaries, elementary teachers' salaries, and the cost of supervision. If a city has twelve high schools as has Boston, it will cost more proportionately to maintain those high schools than it wiU in St. Louis, where they have but four. There is a substantial agreement, however, as to the ratio which the amount of money paid for REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 23 instruction in its various forms bears to the total amount' expended for schools. From 70 to 74 per cent, seems to be the average of normally situated cities. The difference in cost of fuel alone would explain considerable of the difference in the ratio between Buffalo, N. Y., of 78.5 per cent, and Los Angeles, Calif., of 80.1 per cent, for instruction. It will be observed also, that there is a tendency to a lower ratio of expense for the side of instruction where there are demands for excellent school buildings, and where the schools are equipped with appliances that teachers think necessary. In Fort Wayne, Ind., the ratio of expense for repairs is very low, 1.4 per cent.; the ratio for fuel is also very low, .4 per cent. These two items fall enough below the ratio of a city like Waterbury, Conn., to explain the higher standard which Fort Wayne seems to bear in the relative amount that that city devotes to the side of instruction. Again, Fort Wayne, having a population approximately the same as Waterbury, expends $111,720 for school expenses as against $i79!9SS) expended in Waterbury. The entire municipal expenditure of Waterbury, however, is $60,000, greater than that of Fort Wayne. We should expect, too, to find in a city like Boston, where the total operating expense of the city was $21,888,291, and a city like St. Louis, that is larger than Boston, with a total operating expense of only $8,715,000, a much larger expenditure for school purposes in Boston than in St. Louis. Properly interpreted this means that the standard of living is higher in Boston than it is in St. Louis, and the city of Boston pays more for the comfort and well- being of its inhabitants than the city of St. Louis pays for its inhabitants. An investigation of the comparative cost of schools in the period prior to i860 shows that in Boston, in Cambridge, in Worcester, in Springfield, in Manchester, N. H., and in Holyoke, Mass., a very much larger proportion of the entire city expenditures in this period went for support of schools than in the period since i860. In Springfield, Mass., in 1850, for instance, 50 per cent, of the entire municipal expenditures were devoted to schools, as against 30 per cent, in igoq. In the city of Boston, in 1800, 25 per cent, of the entire expenditures went for schools, and about the same proportion in 1826, as against 14 per cent, in 1900. An examination of the records in this period prior to 1860 also shows that a much larger percentage of the money devoted to the support of schools went to teachers' salaries than in the period after i860. It is easy to understand that during this early era the c6st of caring for schoolhouses, the cost of operating heating plants, the cost of furnishing books and supplies, and the cost of administration, was very much smaller. As a matter of course, then, the development of these demands in the later period, left a smaller increment proportionately to be devoted to the side of instruction. Notwithstanding the advance in teachers' salaries, a much smaller proportion of the total school expenditure is expended now for instruction than in the early period. This much seems certain that, notwithstanding prevalent opinion to the contrary, the cost of schools during the last forty years has not kept pace with the cost of admin- 24 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION istering other departments of the municipality. In short, the schools, instead of being inordinately expensive, have been compelled to give up directly and indirectly part of the income belonging to them in order that other departments of the city government may be properly taken care of. This is not necessarily a criticism upon the other departments of the city govern- ment. The cost of living measured by the same standards as obtained prior to i860 has not only not increased but has greatly decreased. Our standard of Kving is so very much higher than it was that the cost of that higher standard has increased very greatly. If, however, one is willing to live in a house that is not equipped with modem conveniences, rents for such a house are no higher, if as high, than prior to i860. It has been estimated by competent authorities that at the beginning of the Christian Era, $100 would pay all the expenses incident to the' care of a boy from birth until he was twenty- one. At the present time, it is doubtful whether $2,500 is a large enough sum to expend for such purpose in the standard of living obtained in the lower middle class. TEXTBOOKS AND SUPPLIES The following table indicates the experience of the city of Omaha so far as the cost of textbooks is concerned, which seemingly demonstrates a rising and falling of expense in accordance with an established ratio: 1890-91 18Q1-92 1892-93 1893-94 1894-95 1895-96 1896-97 Textbooks, etc Stationery Supplies Enrollment S6,i88.56 5,557.82 1,444.87 13,279 $7 .860. 40 4.1T8.99 1,972.32 14,09s S9.2s3.34 3.990.53 3.586.74 14.900 $10,660.90 3,150.80 5574.09 15,334 $6,180.42 1.436.52 3075.63 15807 $6,648.09 1.845.80 2974-51 16,999 $7,704.27 2,120.43 2.3.57.52 16,580 1897-98 1898-99 1899-1900 Textbooks, etc. Stationery Supplies Enrollment ... . $7,756.41 3,120. 18 2,109.73 18,271 Dt2,I22.2I 3,595. 21 3.740.09 18,970 $11,159.54 4,217.41 3.447.18 19,667 $6,429.59 5,049.70 6,124.38 19.384 $11,901.89 3.915.62 2.967.74 19.704 S8.i35.44 3 957-43 3.677.51 19,020 $7,481.81 4834.28 6.517.40 19.500 Part of the inequality in expense as disclosed- by different cities may be explained by this excessive expense ratio for 1900 being one of the higher terms of the ratio rather than the lower, as it may be in other cities. The item of 2.2 per cent, for the city of Boston represents the lowest results that can probably be obtained from great care in the purchase and preservation of books, a care and oversight that at times borders on parsimony. Where the rate for free textbooks rises above 3.5 per cent, of the appropriation, it is believed that an inspection of the items of expense will show that the cost of furnishing the high-school books in said city is excessive. This cost is certainly excessive where high-school attendance of 5 per cent, of the entire population is credited with an expenditure for textbooks amounting to 33* per cent, of the entire appropriation for textbooks. The appropriatioix REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 25 for supplies indicates also great variation. It is believed that the appropriation for supplies ought not to exceed 60 per cent, of the appropriation for textbooks. In some cities, however, the cost of furnishing blank paper alone to the pupils exceeds in amount the cost of furnishing textbooks. The expense in the state of New Hampshire in the report for 1902, page 277, is interesting in this connection. The amount expended for textbooks is $46,600 ; for supplies, $24,749, and the total expenditure for running expenses is $1,080,000. In 1902, the expenses for textbooks were $49,684, for supplies $27,360, and the total expenditure for the running expenses was $1,070,000. The expendi- tures for the state of Vermont, as disclosed by the itemized statement from each town, as published in the annual report for each year, bear out the same ratio. These two states are the only ones which, to our knowledge, separate the items of textbooks and supplies both in detail and in summary form. ■ C. THE ADMINISTRATION OF SCHOOL AFFAIRS Your committee believe that the most economical way of administering school affairs so as not to impair their efficiency, would be better and more plainly stated, "the receipt of the value of a dollar for each dollar expended." School administration does not differ from the administration of any other enterprise which involves expenditure. The directors of a great railway company refrain from purchasing equipment that adds nothing to the sub- stantial returns. A great manufacturing enterprise makes no investment for material, except the material be necessary for the prosperous conduct of the institution; neither do great industrial or transportation companies expend great sums of money in independent or in judicious experimentation. They readily permit one institution of the kind to make trials of inventions and purchase plants for new projects, and wait to learn the result from the party experimenting before increasing their own respective plants and invest- ments. In the school world we find continual introductions of new and novel devices, methods and modifications in courses of study made too fre- quently, and with the knowledge at the start that only an experiment is contemplated. We find at one time, new and expensive equipment along new lines purchased by school boards for the purpose of testing a new and novel scheme, urged to the outlay by expert agents, skillful salesmen, and bright business men, when such action by one body would be sufficient to determine the probable value of the investment, after which other boards could follow. This seems to, be the practice in the financial, industrial, and commercial world, but unfortunately, with the schoolmaster professing personal claim to originality, insistence upon individual trial is followed by outlay for experiment. An even greater folly than unnecessary expendi- ture accompanies such tests — the triffing with the educational training of hundreds of children whose rights demand that few, not many, be used to demonstrate the value of theories which may be practicable or impracticable. 26 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION School directors will do well to apply the prudence and judgment of forces in other activities of the world to school administration, and thereby assure economy in the conduct of schools and not sacrifice efficiency. In the accompanying report can be read figures concerning detailed expenditure in administration of schools in one hundred cities in the United States, as a study of the tables of statistics will demonstrate. In a group of cities of about the same population, a marked difference will be noticed in the money spent. For illustration, reference to five cities far apart, viz.: Toledo, O., Allegheny, Pa., Columbus, O., Syracuse, N. Y., and New Haven, Conn. These cities, it will be noticed, expended for schools an average of $450,000 a year. Nineteen per cent, of this Columbus gave for high-school teachers' salaries, while Toledo gave 8 per cent, and Allegheny 5 per cent, for the same purpose. That is, Columbus, with the same school expenditure, paid its high-school teachers four times as much as did Allegheny and two times as much as did Toledo. Allegheny gave 45 per cent, for its elementary teachers' salaries and Syracuse, N. Y. 58 per cent. Such observations from these tables can be made almost infinitely. The question to be answered with regard to economi- cal expenditure is, are the high schools of Columbus so much better than the high schools of Allegheny, and the elementary schools of Syracuse, N. Y., so much superior to the elementary schools of Columbus, or do other conditions account for the difference ? To extend this illustration a httle further, the per cent, for janitor service was: Toledo, 3 per cent.; Allegheny, 6 per cent.; Syracuse, 6 per cent.; New Haven, 7 per cent.; Columbus, 10 per cent. Query: Is the janitor service of Columbus so much better than the janitor service in other cities, if so, is the administration economical — or is the plant non-economical ? It should be understood that, for a comprehension of this matter, many local interests and unusual environments, with sometimes an extraordinary large enrolhnent, must be reckoned vwth, and yet in a general way the mass of figures to which reference is made in this report gives substantial information with regard to economical administration. The superintendent of schools, although not in direct control of expenditure, ought to be able, with his hand on the lever, to exert a positive influence on unnecessary or illy considered expenditures. It is not easy to comprehend how money in each of the follow- ing cases is economically spent for janitor service: Reading, Pa., with an annual expenditure for schools of $219,000 gives its janitors 10 per cent, of that amount; Toledo, 3 per cent.; Richmond, Ind., 5 per cent.; Omaha, Neb., 9 per cent.; Charleston, S. C, Columbia, N. C, and Atlanta, Ga.] 3 per cent. Much greater differences will be noticed in expenditure for school supplies, which item is necessarily largely in control of the superin- tendents. Is it likely that modifications of environments or local conditions can satisfactorily account for this material difference in expenditures ? REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 27 A spirit exists with the boards in many cities, in making repairs for schools, to confine the patronage to the town's tradesmen and craftsmen rather than to accept work from other places. However laudable such a practice may- seem to the immediate actors, httle defense can be made for such action. Any public body that pays from the pubhc purse greater prices for work or material in order that their immediate community may have business, interferes with the economical administration of schools under its direction. Under such a poUcy, the Federal Government would permit public buildings in a given city to be constructed only by residents and taxpayers of that city. Only a general statement with regard to the subject in hand will answer the purpose, viz. : Only when a school board administrates its fiinancial affairs along the same lines and with the same business acumen that the prosperous business firm or corporation does, will the administration of the schools be most economically administered. The statistics presented on other pages of this report give an unprecedented opportunity for boards of education and superintendents to correct financial errors of administration in the light of the experience of cities similarly situated throughout the country. We are asked to notice what returns the people receive from the expendi- tures for schools. First, the returns from having an intelligent community. This return alone is ample for the expenditure, because of the composition and conduct of our government and the almost unlimited right of the ballot. The well- informed man needs no essay or volume to persuade him of the value of cultured citizenship, and that the safety and perpetuity of the American government rests solely on an intelligent ballot; only by the hands of a well- informed citizen, can the ballot be deposited. In this money-getting age, where one with difficulty leads his neighbor to thoughtfulness upon public expenditure, one most often meets with what we have learned to call the commercial spirit, that spirit whereby men measure effort by the dollars accumulated. With this thought in mind, the material for meeting this class of men has been placed in our hands by the board of education of Massachusetts. The late Secretary Frank A. Hill of the Massachusetts board of education has recently put forth a unique argument based upon a former report by Commissioner Wm. T. Harris, for the money value of the pubHc schools of that commonwealth. He says : Each child in Massachusetts receives an average of seven years' schooling, while each child in the United States at large receives only 4 . 3 years' schooUng. The average earning power of each person in Massachusetts is 79 cents a day, while for the country at large, it is only 40 cents. The ratio is 79 to 40, the excess being 39 cents per capita. It is to be noticed that this result has been reached by the independent calculations both of Dr. Harris, the United States Commissioner of Education, and of Mr. Wadhn, former chief of the Massachusetts bureau of labor statistics. Mr. Hill points out that this daily wealth-producing power of 39 cents per capita in excess of the average in the nation, means fioo a year per capita, and $275,000,000 a year more than it would yield if the 28 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION per capita production of the state were no greater than the average throughout the country. This is twenty-three times the annual expense for support and buildings. It is not neces- sary to attribute to the schools this vast excess of production above the average for the country to prove that they pay enormous material dividends. If so humble a fraction as a fifth or even a tenth part of this excess can be traced to schools, they are yet invest- ments that each year return to, the state much more than their annual cost. In this con- nection it will be found that while Massachusetts portrays such a noticeably large earning power for each person, that the school expenditures always bear a close relation to the local earning power. A careful consideration of the table prepared by the Commissioner of Education, may be profitably studied in connection with the Massachusetts report. Second, referring to the table showing the percentage of the entire munici- pal expenses allowed to public schools, the reader will find among the highest: Chicago, 36.85 per cent.; Indianapolis, 32.73 per cent.; Denver, 35.93 per cent.; Los Angeles, 33.76 per cent.; Scranton, 41.37 per cent.; Dayton, 33.77 per cent.; Oakland, 40.89 per cent.; Salt Lake City, 33.40 per cent.; Harrisburg, 33.20 per cent. All of these with fifteen more, gave out of the entire municipal budget more than 30 per cent, thereof to schools. And yet, no intelligent observer dare conclude that this great difference in relative expenditure is indicative of the character of the school. The reputation of the schools of Oakland, Calif., that takes 40 per cent, of the operating expenses for the schools of the city, is high. What shall be said of Boston, where the 40 per cent, is changed to 14 per cent. Here are presented the extremes in relative taxation for schools with no correspond- ing accounting for the output. When one reads that the entire 13.8 per cent, in Boston and 17.5 per cent, in St. Louis of the total municipal expenditures is spent for the school department, additional information is required for an intelligent understand- ing. We must also notice, in Table III, that the expenditure for schools in Boston was $3,043,640, and in St. Louis $1,536,140, while the total city operating expenses for Boston was $21,898,291, and in St. Louis it was $8,715,821. While the school expenses of Boston were double that of St. Louis, the entire municipal expense in Boston was three times that of St. Louis, which means that the standard of school expense in Boston bears a relation to the increased standard of living in Boston, as compared with St. Louis, evidenced by the demands upon the municipality for outlays not demanded ^to the same extent in St. Louis. The United States Commissioner of Education in a letter to the com- mittee effectively summarizes the condition as follows: Fiist. That a city hke Boston, with such ail enormous amount of taxable property can furnish a much larger amount of money for schools per capita than a city on the borderland, that has, as yet, accumulated a comparatively small amount of taxable property. Second. It is obvious also, that a community which has a comparatively small earnine per inhabitant cannot afford to supply itself so liberally with schools as a city which pays high wages to its people. Third. It is obvious that in spite of drawbacks of small taxable property and small wages, that a community having the average conviction of the people conscientiously in favor of education at whatever sacrifice, will tax itself very high rates in order to insure REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 29 schooling, while another community, with a lower standard of conviction in regard to the importance of education, will be content with a small rate of taxation for this purpose. The different schemes, of taxation in the Union, made up as they are of such far-differing laws, histories, and environments, make it necessary at present for each community to work out and execute its own method. Yet the total school expenses for the free public education, great as the sum seems to be, is found upon analysis to be most unreasonably small as com- pared with the per capita debt of England and France, and surely must and will be increased at least in proportion to the increase in all other lines of American society. D. SUMMARY Your committee beheves that the authoritative power for levying taxes for the support of schools should rest in the immediate directory of the schools, whether such boards are elected by the people or appointed by mayors or courts. They, however, urge the importance of definite statutory limits upon the amount of school tax levied, and that two distinct funds be created — one for the current expenses and the other for permanent building improve- ments; further that the power of contracting debts for the school department be vested only in the people. Instruction, Teachers' Salaries, and Supervision. — Your committee beheves that so far as the cost of instruction is concerned, as shown by the data furnished, that the management of school systems should consider carefully the question of the number of teachers necessary to do the work efficiently and thoroughly; the number of special teachers and the char- acter and quahty of the work performed; the efficiency and economy of the plant, i. e., the location and size of school buildings in so far as these questions pertain to the school expense, included under the head of instruc- tion; the number of high schools; the kind of high schools; the courses of study in such high schools, viewed from the standpoint of the relative cost to the municipality, and also as to whether in the evolution of any particular school system, that the stage for this or that development has been reached. Interviews with most efficient and competent teachers who are engaged in primary and grammar-school work, confirm the opinion of your committee that not less than thirty-five pupils nor more than forty-five pupils should be assigned to any one teacher. If the number of pupils to a teacher in any school system falls below the number of pupils on the average who can be efficiently and effectively taught, the result will be to increase the number of teachers who participate in the distribution of the wage fund, and thus inevitably decrease the amount of the wage fund that each teacher will receive. It is beheved too, that this unnecessary increase in the number of teachers, while operating to reduce teachers' salaries, also operates by a well-known law in the direction of decreasing the efficiency of the teaching body in such a system. 3° NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION The so-called special teachers or supervisors of studies like music, drawing, cahsthenics, manual training, sewing, domestic science, kindergarten, etc., are justifiable solely because the teachers in charge of the regular classes in the elementary schools have not yet been able to acquire the technical knowledge necessary to teach these branches of study which have come into the schools comparatively recently. Therefore these special teachers or supervisors who are assistants to the superintendent in charge of this special work should expend their energies in teaching the teachers and not in teach- ing the pupils. No school system is rich enough to employ enough of these special teachers to teach all the pupils. Attention to this principle will often save the schools much unnecessary expense. An investment in eflScient supervision is the best that can be made in school or other enterprises, for it brings adequate returns. Supervision groups itself under the head of principals and assistant superintendents, special supervisors and superin- tendents. Too many principals in a school system, caused by too many small school buildings or faulty departmental organization, is a proHfic cause of non- economic management. Schools having fewer teachers than eight do not need the services of a principal who devotes all his time to supervision, and the number of teachers whom a competent principal can help by supervision is nearer forty than twenty. Your committee are not prepared to express an opinion upon the question of how many assistant superintendents can be well and eflSciently utilized in a school system, because the answer to this question depends upon the personal equation, as well as upon the size of the school system. Janitors. — In reading the statistics relating to the relative cost of jani- tor service, some of the variation can be accounted for when it is under- stood that the rent, .light, and heat are furnished in some cases by the board of education. Again, the kind of service rendered by janitors in different cities is a factor in this consideration that should receive attention. A trip of inspection through the country will demonstrate that janitor service varies materially; that clean and healthful schoolhouses is the uniform custom in some jurisdictions, while in others dirt and even filth accumulated in basements and in dark comers are serious reflections upon the efficiency of the janitor service. In the printed rules and regulations of boards of educa- tion, one can read that the school-room floors in a given city must be washed once a year, while in another one reads that the school-room floors and halls must be washed once a month. Fuel.— In comparing the expense for fuel in the several cities, valuable information can be obtained. The parallel of latitude upon which the city is located and the climatic conditions together with the character of the heating plant, as a matter of course, vary according to location, and if one reads that a northern town in Vermont costs the most to heat its schoolhouses and a town south of the Mason and Dixon line costs less, the reasons are evident. Then in cities on the same parallel, the cost of transportation from coal REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 31 mines and the ruling price of coal has to do with the fuel expense, and in given years like that of the great coal strike in Pennsylvania, when one town at least brought its coal from a foreign country, the variation is marked. Repairs. — Your committee find, on inspecting the reports on repairs, that not always is a distinction made between repairs of worn-out material and repairs for permanent improvements. In some cases a small addition to a house or the erection of new outbuildings are designated as repairs, when in truth they are permanent improvements and should be designated as such. Again, circumstances sometimes compel the postponement of needed repairs from one year to another, until extraordinary expense is brought about at one time, and it may be at the very time when these reports were made. The most nearly true statement of the necessary repairs for a given corporation should be made by averaging the amount expended for a series of ten years, rather than pronouncing the amount expended for repairs for any one year. Miscellaneous. — The term "miscellaneous" at the head of any column of an accountant's statistical table is a title which includes every item for which the compiler finds no other place. It is a conglomeration of all expenditures for which the compiler has found no definite column. From this it follows that upon the individual who prepares the report depends the sort of material included in "miscellaneous," and with many officials it is the dumping-ground for expenditures which the compiler does not care to carry to a complete analysis, and so to the reader the item "miscellaneous" in a statistical table of expense fails to convey an intelUgent notion of the various expenditures. In one case, insurance, legal fees, and even school furniture, are extended in the miscellaneous column. It would be helpful to all if a more complete analysis of school expenditures could be presented, biit an unwillingness or inabihty of the clerks of boards of education to separate under appropriate heads the items of expense causes the one great receptacle under the title of "miscellaneous" to be, when presented, of doubtful as well as difficult com- prehension. METHODS OF SCHOOL TAXATION IN NEW YORK CITY BY WILLIAM H. MLAXWELL, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, CITY OF NEW YORK Money for school purposes in New York city is raised or can be raised in eight different legal ways, though in actual practice but four of these methods are employed. Under a broad definition there is, of course, but one real source of revenue — taxation of real and personal property, in which is included revenue from the sale of Ucensed privileges. In whatever way the New York city school moneys are obtained, however, they can be expended only through the following funds: (a) The general school fund. — This is defined by the New York charter (Sec. 1060) as follows: "The general fund shall consist of all moneys raised 32 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION for the payment of salaries of the city superintendent, associate city superin- tendents, members of the board of examiners, attendance officers, lecturers, and all members of the supervising and teaching staff " (6) The special school fund. — This is defined by the charter in these terms: "The special school fund shall contain and embrace all moneys raised for educational purposes not comprised in the general fund." By this is meant, however, moneys raised for the maintenance of the schools during the calendar year. The special fund includes such items as salaries of clerks and employes, wages of janitors, suppUes, repairs, fuel, rents, etc. The special fund may be defined roughly as being that fund which provides for the physical side of the system and those charged with the care and development of the schools on the physical side. The general fund, in contrast to this, provides the salaries of those charged with the development of the scholastic or non-material side of the school system. (c) The bond account. — From this source must come all moneys for the purchase of school property and the erection and equipment of new school buildings. This fund, which is not spent for school maintenance but is used . to extend the pubUc plant, is not considered a part of the special fund. It is looked upon and managed as a distinct fund. (i) The teachers' retirement fund. — ^This fund, as its designation implies, provides for the payment of annuities to retired teachers. This is a separate account and is not grouped with either of the maintenance funds. Two of these funds — the Bond Account and the Retirement Fund — can be raised, as far as taxation is concerned, each in only one way. The moneys for the general fund and the special fund come from various sources and must be raised in accordance with certain legal restrictions. This is true particularly of the general fund or money for the payment of scholastic salaries. The several elements which contribute toward making up the general fund or toward limiting its determination are as follows: THE GENERAL PUND 1. The charter (sec. 1064) prescribes that the general fund may not be less than the equivalent of three mills on every doUar of assessed valuation of real and personal property in the city of New York. 2. The charter (sec. 1091) further prescribes that the general fund may not be less than the amount sufficient to pay the minimum salary schedule for principals and teachers which by act of legislature is a state law. Ordi- narily the amount required to meet the salaries ordered paid by law is less than the sum afforded by the three-mill tax. This element, therefore, does not figure commonly as a determining factor in raising school moneys Should the 3-mill fund, however, prove inadequate to pay these minimum' salaries this salary schedule section, commonly known as the "Davis La " then becomes binding. 3. While sections 1064 and 1091 of the charter prescribe the least amount REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 33 which can be raised for the general fund, there is no provision which prohibits the granting of any sum beyond these minima. In fact the board of estimate and apportionment, with the sanction of the board of aldermen, may allow as much money as they like provided the sum be not less than was required by the two mandatory sections. The question of allowing more money than is necessary to provide these minima is left entirely to the board of estimate as the board of aldermen has only the power to approve or to reduce the amount allowed by the estimate board. The board of aldermen may not increase an appropriation. 4. To this general fund the state also contributes. The state allows the sum of $100 for every trained teacher employed 180 days during the school year. .This is in the nature of a refund to the city of taxes paid to the state. This state fund is not treated as a separate fund, but is held to be included in the amounts allowed for the general fund by the city oflScers. The state fund, therefore, is paid over to the city chamberlain and applied by him to reduce taxation. 5. The general fund may receive support also from another source, namely, the sale of revenue bonds. These bonds may be sold only after the enactment of a law permitting their sale. This is looked upon entirely as an emergency procedure — one which is invoked only to meet unexpected deficiencies or to put into operation new laws necessitating expenditure. Revenue bonds are not sold to provide regular school funds. THE SPECIAL SCHOOL FUND The special school fund is made up of moneys which are obtained ordi- narily in three ways but which may come in part also from a fourth source. The elements contributing to the special fund are: 1. The moneys allowed for the special fund by the board of estimate and apportionment and the board of aldermen. The board of estimate in making an allowance for the special fund is unhindered by any law, and may grant as little as it sees fit. 2. The moneys contributed by the board of regents of the state. These moneys are known as regents' funds. They are allowed by the state to high schools for the purchase of books, apparatus, and supplies. The number of pupils is the basis for determining the distributive quota. 3. Funds from the state hbrary money. These funds consist of moneys allowed by the state to the city for school hbraries. Within certain fixed limits the state duplicates any sum raised by the city for such a purpose. 4. Sums from the sale of revenue bonds. This method of providing money for the special fund is, as is the case vnth the general fund, employed only as an emergency measure. It requires the enactment of a special law for each sale of bonds. 34 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION THE BOND ACCOUNT The funds for the purchase of sites and the erection and equipment of new school buildings come, as has been stated, from one source only — the sale of city stock authorized by law and sanctioned by the board of estimate and apportionment or by that body with the approval of the board of aldermen. THE RETIREMENT FUND The retirement fund, as far as direct taxation is concerned, draws its income from one source, viz., the requirement of section 1092 of the charter that 5 per cent, of all excise moneys collected from the sale of liquor shall be devoted each year to this purpose. The fund, however, receives revenue also from -fines imposed upon teachers and principals for unexcused absence. It may be augmented also by gifts or legacies or in other ways determined upon by the board of education. During the Spring of 1905 the state legislature passed a bill providing that each teacher should contribute one per centum of his salary to the retirement fund. At the present writing this measure awaits the sanction of the governor. In spite of the several methods of raising moneys described above, in reality all school funds with the exception of emergency revenue bonds are considered as coming under these two classifications : 1. Funds for school maintenance. 2. Funds for extension of school plant ; the purchase of sites, and the erec- tion of buildings. Funds for maintenance are included in the yearly budget. Funds for extension of plant come from the bond account and do not figure in the annual budget nor come directly from the yearly tax levy. THE BUDGET The annual budget which provides the funds for' school maintenance but does not contribute to extension of plant, except that it may provide for interest on the bonds, is made up as follows: The board of education on or before September 15 is required by law (charter, sec. 1064) to submit to the board of estimate and apportionment an estimate in detail of the moneys needed for the entire school system during the succeeding calendar year. This budget is prepared under two major headings— "general fund" and "special fund." The items under each of these headings show the amounts required for each of the five boroughs of the city and for the board of education's administrative expenses proper. The several items which appear under the two headings are as follows: Generai, Fund For salaries of teachers, et. al., of schools at this time in operation. For bonus for teaching boys' or mixed classes. For substitute teachers. For additional regular teachers throughout the city. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 35 For additional teachers of special branches. For evening schools. For lecturers' fees. For vacation schools and playgrounds, evening recreation centers, evening roof play- grounds, etc. For corporate schools. For general supervision, including Board of Examiners. For district superintendepts. ~ For attendance ofi&cers. Special Fund Supplies. School Ubraries. Libraries and apparatus — Regents' schools. General repairs (Budget A). Furniture, and repairs of. Pianos, and repairs of. Fire alarms. Transportation. Fuel. Lighting (transferred to another department) Incidental expenses. Rents. Salaries of janitors, et al. Salaries of officers, clerks and other employes. Lectures. Compulsory education. Water. Support of nautical school. Heat, light and power for the hall of the board of education. Insurance. Recreation in public school buildings. When the board of education has reached its conclusions, its departmental estimate or budget — commonly a work of seven hundred closely-printed pages — is forwarded to the board of estimate, which takes the request for funds under consideration. The educational estimate is incorporated with the esti- mate of the several other departments in the general city budget. The work of pruning the demands then begins in earnest. As has been stated before, however, the board of estimate, in dealing with the general school fund, is powerless to cut it either below a three-mill tax or below a sum sufiScient to pay the mandatory salaries. It may cut- the general fund therefore down to this minimum and no lower. It is of course free to grant more than the mini- mum requirement. The special fund, as has been noted, is not so protected, and the board of estimate is entirely free to allow as little or as much as it pleases for the physical side of the schools — supplies, fuel, repairs, etc. The board of estimate, which has this power, consists of the mayor, the comptroller, the president of the board of aldermen, and the presidents of the five boroughs. In voting, the mayor, comptroller, and president of the board of aldermen have each three votes; the presidents of the boroughs of Manhattan and 36 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION Brooklyn have two votes each; and the three other borough presidents one vote each. When the board of estimate has reached a determination, it reports its findings to the board of aldermen. This body may approve the report of the board of estimate or may, with the exception that the general school fund must be left at least at the required minimum sum, reduce the allotment. The aldermen have no power to increase an allowance. Any reduction in the budget by the aldermen is subject to the veto of the mayor, but may be be passed over this veto by a three;fourths vote. If the veto be not over-ridden, the amounts allowed by the board of estimate stand. The board of alder- men is required to act on the budget within a specific number of days. In default of such action within the specified time, twenty days, the budget is deemed legally addpted. BOND ISSUES All money for the purchase of property and the erection and equipment of new school buildings, as has been pointed out, comes from the sale of city bonds, which are not to be confused with the short-term emergency revenue bonds. The city bonds are the long-term interest-bearing municipal stock. The conditions under which this is done are as follows: In the first place, no bonds may be issued in excess of lo per cent, of the city's total tax valuation. This lo per cent, maximum is called also the debt limit; the city is powerless to increase obligations beyond such a point. If the debt hmit be reached the board of education of course would find it useless to ask for bond issues. If, however, the city has not reached its debt-incurring Umit, the board of education's request for bonds would go thru a regular course. It would be transmitted first to the board of estimate and this body has power of itself to issue in one year not more than $3,500,000 for schoolhouses. If, however, more than $3,500,000 are required in one year, the board of estimate considers the request in excess of that sum just as it acted upon the budget. Its deter- mination is then forwarded to the board of aldermen. This body must act within six weeks on a bond issue. If the board of aldermen fail to act within that time, the issue is considered passed and goes to the mayor for his approval or veto. The mayor's veto is subject to review by the board of aldermen. It is interesting to note that, under this system, the city oflacers allowed for school property in '1902, $8,000,000, and in 1903, $9,788,430. These bonds are redeemed Hke the stock of any other municipality. It will be seen after a careful consideration of these several methods of providing money for the maintenance and extension of the school system, that a series of checks through the action of several different bodies on each allowance is interposed between the asking and the levying of school taxes. In general the board of estimate and the board of aldermen, the people's elected representatives, determine this matter. There is, however, one excep- tion — that is in the raising of moneys for the payment of educational salaries. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 37 For this purpose the law prescribes certain minima which guarantee the pay- ment of not less than certain salaries and provide for certain definite increases in salary each year up to the final maxima. These salaries, changing city administrations are powerless to upset. As a result the teachers' salary ques- tion has been taken out of politics and this, in connection with an effective civil-service method of appointment, means that the teachers themselves are free from the degradation of having to look to the politician for their salaries or their promotions. It is small wonder that the teachers speak of this measure as their "Magna Charta." TAXATION FOR SCHOOL PURPOSES BY NATHAN C. SCHAEITER, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, HARRISBURG, PA. In discussing the problem of taxation for school purposes, it is of supreme importance to select the best method of approaching the subject, and to choose points of view from which school officers and taxpayers may see the full import and value of the vast sums now taken from the purses of property owners for the estabhshment and maintenance of free schools. The statistics compiled by the United States Bureau of Education furnish a very interesting study. They serve to show the magnitude of the interests involved in our systems of public instruction and the enormous expenditure of public money that is necessary to keep the schools in operation. Accord- ing to the report of 1903, the total number of pupils in the public schools was 15,925,887. These pupils were under the care of 439,596 teachers. The total amount raised by taxation for school purposes was $209,110,175, and the total value of school property had reached the princely sum of $601,571,307. Vast as these totals are, they do not interest the average citizen half so much as the burdens of taxation which he himself must bear. How each man's tax compares with that of his neighbor, upon what basis the taxes are levied, and what is done with the money collected by the taxgatherer, these are questions of surprising interest to everybody. Mr. Robert Luce, in his prize essay, claims that the average American citizen works one month out of the year for the sake of being governed. He says : In other words, taxation takes one-twelfth of his earnings. This average American is the head of a family of five persons, earning $1,000 per year. He pays $30 of this into the national treasury, $30 into state, county, city or town treasuries, and at a moderate estimate $23 more for the indirect cost of methods of collection. The total, equal to one month's earnings does not affect the equitable distribution of the burden, but emphati- cally shows the importance of this question. DANGER SIGNALS FROM ABROAD The average man in America has not seriously felt the burdens of direct and indirect taxation, because our national debt is not so great as that of other coimtries. According to the bulletin issued by the Department of Commerce 38 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION and Labor, the debt of the United States at the present time is $925,011,627. This looks like a large sum, but it is modest when compared with what some other countries owe. Of all the great powers, the German Empire has the least indebtedness, only $698,849,400, but the Empire is hardly a generation old, and has had no time to pile up a national debt. The individual German states owe considerably more than $2,000,000,000 which runs the total of the Empire and the several states to nearly three billion dollars. Italy owes $2,583,000,000, a burden her people are ill able to bear. Spain, now shorn of nearly all her foreign possessions, has a debt of $1,727,000,000, and finds its taxes almost more than her citizens can pay. Austria-Hungary is another debt-laden country. The debt of the dual monarchy is $1,555,000,000 while each of the two countries has a seperate debt of $1,600,000,000. Is it any wonder that Austria's subjects are leaving by hundreds of thousands to escape heavy taxation ? Russia, which has now no free schools for the children of the peasants, owes $3,333,938,388, or more than three times the debt of the United States'- Her expenditures exceed her income every year and she must borrow largely from other countries. Great Britain owes about four times as much as the United States. One-fourth of this sum was contracted during the war against the Boers. Lastly comes France with an indebted- ness of $5,856,312,892. Although a rich country, her people can scarcely bear the burden which was increased so largely through the ambitious foUy of Napoleon III. If the reckless expenditures of the American people con- tinue we may some day find it difficult to raise enough money for school pur- poses. The per capita debt of the United States is $11.51, that of Great Britain $92.59, and that of France $150.31. The fact that an average Amer- ican works one month each year for the privilege of being governed, and the sad experiences of European countries should wake up the citizens to the dan- ger signals ahead. If this report should succeed in making school officials more careful how they spend the public money, it 'mil do great service. If, however, its effect should be to make school boards stingy in their expenditures for schools, it will do great harm. One should make strenuous effort to avoid this result in all discussions of taxation for school purposes. And it should be always emphasized that the deterioration of the teaching force which results from lowering salaries of teachers, defeats the very end for which schools are estabUshed and maintained. THE BASIS OF TAXATION Taxes may be imposed upon what a man earns, upon what he has, or upon what he spends; that is, upon his income, his property, or his expendi- ture. Our federal government taxes every man's consumption, while the local taxation is based_ upon a man's property, and to some extent upon his occupation or income. The plan of taxing a man's consumption tends to tax the poor man out • This was before the outbreak of the war with Japan. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 39 of all proportion to his ability to pay as compared with the rich man. Hence the so-called luxuries are taxed more heavily than the necessaries of life in every rational scheme of indirect taxation. Indirect taxation for school purposes is an important factor in our insular possessions, because nearly aU the money required for school maintenance is derived from the duties paid at the customhouses. In the states the larger portion of the money needed for school purposes is raised by taxing property and incomes. Where the same rate of tax is levied upon real estate and personal property, there is a tendency to assess real estate below its actual value, because money loaned at interest is apt to be concealed from the assessor. The property of widows and orphans is never concealed; hence they pay an undue share of tax. A concrete example will suflSce to show the iniquity which may creep into the system. A widow received $8,000 life insurance upon the death of her husband. Not knowing how to invest the money, she deposited it in a savings bank which paid 3 per cent, on deposits. The borough levy was 4 per cent., hence all real estate was assessed far below its market value. Hence, the widow was obKged to pay 4 per cent, tax on money for which she received only 3 per cent, interest. In her experience taxation meant con- fiscation of a part of the principal, of her loan. In other instances real estate, by being assessed for local purposes only, has been taxed out of aU just pro- portion as compared with money at interest, which in some of the states is taxed for state purposes only. Some taxing systems are so irrational that they deserve to be swept from the statute books in order to make room for more equitable methods. One writer who is a speciahst on taxation claims that the more some systems of taxation are improved, the worse they become. No tax should be levied imless the money raised thereby can be better employed by the government than by individuals. This was the idea of the revolutionary patriots, and sets the true limit to taxes. The idea is well expressed in the constitution of Pennsylvania of 1776 (sec. 41), which provides that no public tax, custom, or contribution shall be imposed upon, or paid by the people of this state except by a law for that purppsej and before any law be made for raising it, the purpose for which any tax is to be raised ought to appear clearly to the legislature to be of more service to the community than the money would be, if not collected: which being well observed, taxes cannot be burdens. The Vermont constitution of 1777 has the same pro- vision. In discussing the duty of every citizen to contribute toward the support of the public schools, something can be said in favor of a poll tax which assumes that every citizen, no matter how humble his station, should pay annually at least one dollar toward the support of free schools. It is never wise to give people everything for nothing. Everybody should feel an interest in the school, and we always take more or less interest in the things that 40 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION take money out of our pockets. In this connection it is well to say a word about the "incidence of taxation" — a term under which experts discuss the difierences between the tax-bearer and the taxpayer. Every man is willing to let the other fellow pay the taxes. The person upon whom the tax is imposed may shift it to some one else so that the person who originally pays the tax is not the person by whom it is ultimately borne. Thus the owner of a farm may by contract obHge the tenant to pay the school tax, because the school toward the maintenance of which the said tax is collected is for the children of the tenant and not the owner, whose children probably attend a school- in the city or away from home. Nor should tax-shifting' be confounded with tax-dodging. Where a person contributes to the cam- paign funds of the party in power with the understanding that the amount thus paid shall be more than made up to him. by lowering his assessment, it becomes a case of the most reprehensible type. Tax-dodging has developed into a fine art that is very injurious to our civil institutions, whilst tax-shifting may be justifiable, as when banks pay the tax on their stock, thus saving the expense that would be incurred by collecting the said tax from each stock- holder, some of whom might be tempted to conceal their stock from the assessor. In the same connection it should also be emphasized that good schools are expensive. "The best is not too good for my children," said a local politician; and the ward 'boss wiU seldom tolerate any trifling with the par- ■ ticular school to which his own children are assigned. It can not be empha- sized too strongly that good schools cost money, and that the best education for any community can never be made cheap. People are ever willing to get something for nothing, and they are perpetually fooled by schemes to secure good schools without paying for them. Thus it was thought at one time that by the monitorial system of Andrew Bell and Joseph Lancaster education could be made cheap. The scheme received the commendation of Governor De Witt CHnton of New York, and Governor Heister of Pennsyl- vania. It was introduced in Pennsylvania into the schools of Philadelphia, Lancaster, Pittsburg, Erie, New Castle, Greencastle, Milton, and perhaps other places. It was claimed by Joseph Lancaster that by the aid of monitors one master can teach a thousand boys. "Give me four and twenty children today and I will supply you with as many teachers tomorrow, " was the promise of Andrew Bell. Thomas Dunlap gives the following account of what he found upon enterifig the board of directors of Philadelphia 1824:* Seven schoolhouses contained fourteen schools, in each of which about two thousand children were to be educated Schools where the young idea was to be devel- oped in penmanship by scratching with sticks in the sand-bath, developed into arithmetic by a doleful simultaneous chant of the multiplication table, in which neither the school monitor, nor master could detect one intelligible sound, developed into poetry and morals by howhng in horrid groans certain doggerel ballads of Lancaster himself. Schools where the baby of five was the all sufi&cient teacher of the baby of four, save that the latter if * See p. 23, Vol. Ill, Pennsylvania Colonial and Federal. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 41 stQUtest, generally practiced more successfully in flogging his monitor than in figuring in his sand-box, and where but too often the master lounged through two or three hours in the morning and as many in the afternoon in gazing down upon the intellectual pande- monium beneath his rostrum, diversifying his intellectual labors by not infrequently bringing his rattan in as a "thirdsman" between the stout baby and the cowardly baby monitor. The only argument ever advanced in its favor was its cheapness. It was cheap — very cheap. Sand and rattan were its chief returns. The poor results of the monitorial schools sttirted the agitation in Penn- sylvania in favor of schools supported by taxation, whilst the odious distinction between rich and poor, the latter being schooled at public expenses under the constitutions of T790 and 1838, helped the movement in favor of schools free to all. Judge Samuel Breck, whose parents migrated from Boston to Philadelphia in order to escape the taxes which the former city imposed, entered the senate of Pennsylvania and secured the passage of an act to estab- lish free schools. There were only three negative votes in the senate and but one in the house. However, an unexpected storm of opposition followed in which Governor Wolf, who had signed the bill and was its chief advocate, was defeated. During the struggle for its repeal at the next session of the legislature, Thaddeus Stevens made the greatest speech of his life and won for himself the title of "Savior of the Common Schools of Pennsylvania." The plan provided for a system of schools free to all and supported by a system of taxation that was designed to reach the purses of all. A poll tax was imposed in order that every individual might be made to contribute something toward the common schools. The payment of an appropriation by the state was conditioned by the levy of local tax sufficient to run the schools during the minimym term fixed by law. The combination of the two plans of taxation was better than if either state taxation or local taxation had been adopted as the sole means of raising revenue, for the following reasons: 1. People are ever ready to tax themselves for the sake of getting money out of the state treasury. 2. The state appropriation can be made a means of securing compliance with the provisions of the school law. 3. If the state raises all the money for school purposes, the average citizen loses inter- est in the schools after he has no more children to educate. 4. If all the funds are raised by local taxation, the sparsely settled districts have difficulty to raise, money enough to secure good teachers. THE HISTORY OF TAXATION If the taxation of the leading states were studied in its genesis and develop- ment, it might be possible to compare them in detail, to point out the merits and defects of each plan, and to indicate the mistakes which future legislation should avoid as well as the directions in which existing systems can be improved. The committee did not have the sources of information for a comparison of this kind, and hence was obliged to limit its efforts to an investi- gation of the best way of spending the money which is raised for school pur- poses by existing methods of taxation, 42 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION It is gratifying to report that the State Teachers' Association of Indiana is at work upon a very exhaustive study of the problems of taxation for school purposes in that progressive commonwealth. THE TAXING POWER In a representative form of government the taxing power belongs to the legislature, but may be delegated by an act of assembly to the city councils, or to the board of directors, or to the people assembled in town meeting— where the power may be said to belong originally. The policy of fixing the tax rate at the town meeting is characteristic of New England. The power of fixing and levying the rate is delegated to the township board in Pennsyl- vania and other states which have the township system with the exception of Indiana where the township trustee fixes the levy, whilst in the southern states this is the function of the county board. The large cities which delegate the power to councils often report more pupils than school seats, because there are objects dearer to the heart of the average councilman than the education of his neighbors' children. In general it may be said that the officials who have the power to levy taxes should be directly amenable to the people. The schools will then be as efficient as the people wish them to be. In any event it is hard to keep the schools far in advance of public opinion even tho the schools be controlled by the United States government. LIMITATIONS OF THE TOWN MEETING PLAN In reply to a question about the town meeting as an agency for fixing the tax rate, one prominent educator in New England writes: I. The town meeting is probably the most blundering form of government that has ever been devised. This has been known to be true ever since the day when a similar body condemned Socrates. ■J. Nevertheless it is the best form of government in the world, (a) because of its tremendous educational inspirational power; (6) because of the fact that, however it may blunder, it has such flexibility that blunders can usually be righted; (c) because more than all other institutions of government in the world, it does give opportimity for the man who has the talent for leadership, to develop that talent and make himself a leader. As they said in the French Revolution, "Carriere ouverte aux talens." 3. The town meeting, of course, becomes impracticable after the community reaches a certain size. In Massachusetts this limit has been set at twelve thousand (12,000) popu- lation, which would give about twenty-five hundred (2500) voters. 4. Is the town plan of raising the school money entirely satisfactory? It is not. Nothing on earth is entirely satisfactory. Parsimony and favoritism and seven other devils all have their say in town meeting without doubt, and yet having had experience as a superintendent of schools in four county towns and one city, I am best satisfied with the town meeting plan. Another gentleman of very wide experience and observation writes: In Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts the state fixes a minimum rate of expenditure per pupil. The town meetings must vote this much money, but can go above it as much as they s?e fit, After years of observation of town meetings in this section, I REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 43 am of the opinion that they have outlived their usefulness, but jpeople who have lived here all their lives still believe in the town meeting. Salaries of teachers in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshire — yes in Massachusetts — are pretty nearly as low as the Pennsylvania standard. Of course, salaries of principals of high schools and superintendents in Massachusetts are high, and that tends to make the average high enough to cover the deficiency in tjie salaries of assistant teachers. In Maine and New Hampshire, I doubt whether salaries of country teachers average more than $30 a month. In Lowell, Lawrence and many other cities of Massachusetts the salaries of teachers are not as high as that earned by girls in domestic service. This, of course, ha? operated to lessen the efficiency of teaching by driving out of the profession the more com- petent and by continually lowering standards so as to let in the least efficient. Were it not for Boston, BrookUne, Newton, and Springfield, the salaries of teachers in New Eng- land would tend downward from even the present low standard rather than upward. It will thus be seen that even in the state with the best educational senti- ment the law, as in days of old, must be made to serve as a schoolmaster to the people. The fixing of a minimum levy which the town meeting must vote is only a counterpart of the legislation in Indiana, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania, which fixes the minimum salary. -Pressure upon a legislature often accomplishes what average public opinion could never accomplish thru a town meeting, or thru popular vote, or thru the representatives of the people in a township or county board. Every tax-paying body should be limited by statute to a maximum rate beyond which taxes cannot be imposed except by vote of the people. How can the taxpayer be made to see that the money expended in the right education of the children is the best investment of pubUc money ever made, and that it is fully as much the duty of the patriot to pay a just share - of tax for the support of the schools as it is his duty to cast a vote or carry -a gun ? In addition to hnes of argument indicated in the paper read before the national council in 1902, the following statement of Prof. Ely is both suggestive and convincing. I was educated largely at public schools, and it is doubtful whether I should have been able to finish my school education had not the schools been supported by taxes; for where schools are supported by fees, the fees must be high in order to defray expenses, if the schools are of superior quality. My educational advantages have been of pecuniary value to me, while the personal satisfaction which I derive from them is to me beyond price. I have become a taxpayer, and with no children of my own at public schools, I am helping to educate other men's children. If in the course of my life I pay in taxes for schools twenty times what I have I ever received from taxes levied for my education, I shall nevertheless think I have been well repaid, and shall always experience a feeling of profound gratitude for those who establish the American public school system. While I individually gain, the community also gains because it receives back more than it has paid out. This holds generally with regard to wise expenditures for educational purposes. The chief factor in production is man, and the better he is prepared for industrial pursuits by suitable training of head and hand the larger will be the quantity of economic goods produced, and the more rapid the accumulation of wealth. A present burden may lessen future rates of taxation by increas- ing the taxable basis of a state or dty. 44 'NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION TAXATION FOR SCHOOL PURPOSES IN PENNSYLVANIA In Pennsylvania, every township, borough, or city is a school district. Cities are divided into three classes. Philadelphia is the only city of the first class. Pittsburg, Allegheny, and Scranton are cities of the second class. All other cities belong to the third class. A city of the first class must have a population of a milhon or over. A city of the second class must have at . least 100,000 inhabitants and less than a million inhabitants. In Philadelphia the amount of tax to be levied for school purposes is determined by councils. In all other districts the amount of tax to be levied is fixed by the board of education, generally known as the board of school directors or school con- trollers. The amount of school tax shall not exceed the amount of state and county taxes authorized by law to be assessed.. At the time of the passage of this law, the amount authorized to be levied for state and county purposes was thirteen mills, ten mills for the latter and three for the former. The state tax has since been taken off real estate, but this does not afi^ect the amount of school tax that can be levied, for the reason that it was the obvious intention of the law to fix that amount at thirteen mills on the dollar, and thus avoid the perplexing changes that would otherwise cripple the financial mariage- ment of school affairs. This decision has been sustained by the supreme court. The board of directors, or controllers, may also levy at any time, not oftener than once in each school year, a special tax not exceeding the amount ■ of the regular annual tax for such year. This special tax is usually spoken of as the building tax, and can be applied {a) for purchasing grounds; (6) for erecting and furnishing buildings; (c) for the accumulation of a fund for purchasing grounds and erecting buildings; {d) for the payment of a debt contracted in purchasing ground and erecting buildings; (e) for com- pleting improvements in school buildings completed at the time of their erection ; (/) for fencing and improving grounds in connection with the erection of buildings; (g) for the payment of fuel used in heating buildings; Qi) for the payment of the expense of janitors employed in care of buildings. In this way it is possible to assess twenty-six mills for school purposes, half for maintenance and half for building. Careful provision is thus made for teachers' salaries, free textbooks and suppUes, and other expenses incident to the running of the schools, whilst suitable sums can be raised for the erection and equipment of new buildings. A per capita tax of one dollar is levied and collected annually for school purposes for each and every male inhabitant of the age of twenty-one years and upward. School taxes are levied upon real estate and personal property. Burial grounds, churches, hospitals, universities, colleges, seminaries, acad- emies, associations and institutions of learning, benevolence or charity, are exempt from taxation. Unsettled lands are required to pay school tax. REPORT OP COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 45 TWENTY-FIVE YEARS' PROGRESS OF PUBLIC EDUCATION IN NORTH CAROLINA: A COMPARATIVE STATISTICAL STUDY OF SCHOOL MAINTENANCE IN THE SOUTH AND SOME RESULTS* PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTION OF CHARLES D. MCIVER, BY CHARLES L. COON, OF THE NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC EDUCATION PART I. - FINANCIAL ABILITY TO LEVY SCHOOL TAXES The following tables show the present relative financial ability of North Carolina and other southern states to raise school funds by taxation, as com- pared with the country at large and with particular states; also the manner in which the South is making use of her abihty in comparison with other parts of the country. PROPERTY VALUATION OF NORTH CAROLINA AND THE UNITED STATES, 1850-igoO In any discussion of educational progress, the financial ability of the people ■in question must be considered, especially in making comparisons. The following figures are taken from Compendium of Census, 1890, Part III, page 954, and following, except those for 1900, which are based on the Statistical Abstract of the Department of Commerce: i8so i860 1870 1880 1890 1900 Per capita wealth Per capita wealth Per capita wealth Per capita wealth Per capita wealth S'orth Carolina United States $226,800,472 1 7.135.780,228 261 308 358,739.399 16,159,616,068 361 514 260,757,244 30,068,518,507 243 780 461,000,000 43,642,000,000 329 870 584,148,199 65.037,091.197 361 1,036 {847.015,094 94,300,000,000 447 1,23s Per capita wealth Observe the following facts disclosed by the above table: I. The losses of the Civil War account for the per capita wealth of North Carolina being the same in 1890 as in i860. u. The per capita wealth of the whole country in i860 was only 42 . 3 per cent, more than that of North Carolina; in 1900, the per capita wealth of the country was 176.2 per cent, larger than that of North Carolina. 3. Notice that North Carolina, in 1900, was not yet as able financially to educate its children as was the country at large in i860. *A11 the figures used in this study are taken from the census of the United States, the reports of the United States Commissioner of Education, the state reports of superintendents of public scho6ls, and other official documents. The references, calculations, and deductions are my own. — C. L. C. tNot counting slaves as a part of the population but only as property. North Carolina had $391 per capita wealth of free population in 1850 and $542 in i860, in comparison with $407 per capita for United States in 1850 and $588 in i860. \ These figiu*es for igoo are based on an increase of 45 per cent, in the wealth of the country from i8go to igoo, which is the estimate of the Department of Commerce. 46 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION It should be remembered, however, that the per capita wealth of North Carohna for 1850 and i860, as calculated above, includes the free and the slave population for those years. But slaves were then property and made up a considerable part of property values. For instance, the assessed per- sonal property of North Carolina, according to the census of 1850, was $140,- 368,673. The real estate was assessed at $71,702,740; the whole at $212,- 071,413. It was estimated that the true valuation of all property was $226,- 800,472. Slaves were personal property; hence the large personal property values, not only in North Carohna, but in other southern states prior to 1865. But that fact and other facts of interest in the discussion of the subject being considered will appear from the next table. The following table shows the value of real and personal property in the eleven southern states. North Carohna included, from 1850-1870, also the decrease in the assessed value of property during the ten years between i860 and 1870 and the increase in the debts of these states: INCREASE AND DECREASE IN PROPERTY VALUES 1850-1870; STATE DEBTS 1850-1870 1850 i860 A.S5e55ed value of real and personal property* Total assessed valuation of real and per- sonal prop- erty Estimated true valuation of real and personal property Assessed value of real and personal property Total assessed valuation of real and per- sonal prop- erty Estimated true valuation of real and personal property $252,105,824 130,198,429 71,702,740 140,368,673 105,737,492 178,130.217 121,619,739 213.490,486 7,924,588 15,274,146 78,870,718 162,463,70s 65,171,438 143,250,729 176,623.654 49,832,464 28,149,671 25,414,000 17,372,524 19,056,151 107,981,793 87,299,565 $382,304,253 212,071,413 283,867,709 335,110,225 23,198,734 241,334.423 208,422,167 226.456,118 53,563 671 36,428,675 195,281,358 $391,646,438 226,800,472 288,257,694 335,425,714 23,198,734 228,204,332 228,951,130 233,998,764 55,362,340 39,841,025 207,454,704 $417,952,228 239.069,108 116,366,573 175,931,029 129,772,684 359,546,444 179,801,441 438,430,946 21,722,810 47,206,875 155,034.089 277,164,673 157,836,737 351,636,175 280,704,988 155,082,277 Il2-,476,oi3 155,316,322 63,254,740 116.956,590 219,991,180 162,504,020 $657,021,336 292,297,602 489,319,128 618,232,387 69,929,685 432,198,762 509,472,912 435,787,265 267,792,335 180,211,330 382,495,200 N Carolina $793,249,681 S. Carolipa 358,739,399 548,138,754 Florida 645,895,237 73,101,500 495,237,078 607,324,911 602,118,568 365,200,614 219,256,473 493,903,892 » The value of real property ia givea first in these tables; personal property second. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 47 INCREASE AND DECREASE IN PROPERTY VALVES— Continued 1870 Decrease in assessed ^ valuation 1860-1870 Public Debt in 1850 Assessed value oi real and persona^ property Total assessed valuation 0^ property Estimated true valua- tion of property Public Debt in 1870 Virginia 8279,116.017 86.323,900 83,322.012 47,056,610 119,494.675 64,418,662 143,948,216 83,271,303 20,197,691 12,283,152 117,223,043 38,359,552 118,278,460 59,000,430 191,343,376 62,028,514 97,186.568 52.546.361 63,102,304 31426,539 223,035-375 30,746,786 8365,439917 130,378,622 183,^113,337 227,219,519 32,480,843 155.582.595 177.278,890 253,371,890 149.732,929 94,528,843 253,782,161 $409,588,133 260,757,244 208,146,989 268,169,207 44,163.655 201,855,841 209,197.345 323,125,666 159,052,542 156 394,691 498,237,724 $138,836,211 153.735,208 3io44,S6l 12S;875.4I9 10,278.009 295,127,782 35,853.225 355,159,643 1,625,119 34.923,723 37,811.046 238 805,121 39.558,277 292,635.745 89361,612 93,053,763 15,289,44s 102,769.961 152,436 85.530.051 3,044,l9st 131.757,234 813,575,355 977,000 3,144,931 2,801,972 2,800 3,983,616 7,271,707 11,492.566 5,725,671 1.506,562 3,776,856 N. Carolina 855,921,255 S. Carolina 32,474,036 13,075,229 Florida 21,753.712 2,185,838 Mississippi 13,277.154 2,594,41s Texas 53,087,441 1.613,907 Tennessee 4,151,152 48,827,191 t Increase. Observe the following: 1. That, between i860 and 1870, the assessed value of real estate in North Carolina decreased $33,044,560, while the personal property decreased $128,875,419; more than $161,000,000 in all and about eight-elevenths of the value of all the real and personal property of the State in 1850. 2. Observe that the state debt increased' more than thirty-two times from 1850 to 1870; that the state debt in 1870 was about one-fifth of the assessed value of the whole property of the state. In this respect North Carolina fared much worse than any other southern state at the hands of the reconstruction state government. 3. Observe the striking decrease in personal property valuation between i860 and 1870 for the whole South. The real estate valuation assessed decreased $401,809,941 and the assessed valuation of personal property decreased $1,912,333,149 — a total decrease of $2,314,143,090. This amount hardly represents all the losses by war, but it does give some basis for calculating the fearful cost of that war to the South. 4. The Civil War added more than one-third more children to the school popula- tion to be educated, while that war took away millions of the financial abihty of the state What was true of North Carolina was more than true, in 1870, of the whole South. These tables still further disclose the effect of the Civil War on southern property values as compared with other states^ ESTIMATED TRUE VALUATION OF PROPERTY, 1850-1900— T;IE SOJTH 1850. i860. 1870. 1880. 1890. 1900. $430,701,082 288,257,694 335425714 22 862,270 201 246.686 228 204,332 228951,130 233998,764 52,740,473 39,841,025 8793,249.681 548,118,754 645,895,237 73,101,500 493,903,892 495.237.078 607.324.911 602,118.568 365,200,614 219,256,473 $409,588,133 208,146,989 268,169,207 44.163.655 498237,724 201.855,841 209.197.345 323,125,666 159,052,542 156.394.691 $707,000,000 322,000,000 606 000000 120,000.000 705,000,000 428 000,000 354,000,000 382 000.000 825 000 000 286,000,000 8 862,318,070 400,911,303 852 409,449 389 489.388 887,950,143 622.773.504 454,242,688 495301.597 2.105.576 766 455,147,422 $1,250,361,201 S. Carolina 581,321,389 1,224 903,701 Florida Tennessee Alabama. Mississippi Louisiana 1,387 536,262 903.021,580 658.651,897 718,187,315 Arkansas 659.963.763 48 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION PER CAPITA WEALTH BASED ON ABOVE FIGURES 1850 i860 1870 1880 1890 1900 S303 4ii 370 261 201 _ ' 296 3^7 - 452 248 190 , S497 ' 77? b-Li 521 -_. 445 .- , S14 767 850 605 504 S334 226 235 396 . 202 253 445 194 323 $46'7. ■ 323 393 445 -451 339 518 356 $521 348 464 995 502 412 352 443 942 403 S 674 ' 434 687 494 425 520 S.vCarolina Tennessee 'Alabama .'. Mississippi.. lx)uisiana Texac Arlcansas .503 COMPARISON WITH OTHER STATES* 1850 i860. 1870 • , 1880 i8go 1900 Massachusetts. NewYorli Pennsylvania.. Maryland « 573.342286 1,080,309.216 722.486,120 219,217.364 504.726,120 202,650,264 156,265.006 42,056.505 15,5,707 980 200,000,000 % 815,237.433 1,843.338.517 1,416,501.818 376.919.944 1,193 898,422 528835.371 871.860.282 273671.668 444274.114 467,918,324 82,132,148,741 6,500.841,264 3,808.340,112 643,748.976 2,235430300 1,268 180.543 2,121,680.579 702.307329 774631.524 940,976,064 $2 623.000.000 6,308 000.000 4,942.000.000 837,000.000 3,238.000.000 1,681.000,000 3,210.000.000 1,139,000000 779.000.000 1,305,000,000 $2,803,645,447 8.576,701.991 6,190,746.550 1.085.473,048 3,951,382.384 2,095,176,626 5,066,751,719 1,833.308.523 835,120,219 1,445,285,114 - S 4,065,285,898 12,436,217,886 8,976,582,497 ' 1,573.935919 5,729,504,4.56 3,038 005,107 7,346.789992 2,658.297.358 1,210924,317 2,095,663,415 Indiana Illinois Wisconsin Connecticut. .. New Jersey. ... * All the estimates are based on the figures compiled by-United States Census Bureau and the Department of Commerce. PER CAPITA WEALTH BASED ON ABOVE FIGURES Ma.378 2,552,402 From other sources 16,715 2,141,450 Total funds $158,564 $9,529,542 3. Private schools. Number 272 6,085 Teachers 403 12,260 Pupils 7,822 263,098 4. Income of private schools. From endowment $ 15,987 $ 288,855 From taxation 14,202 From public funds 115,724 From other sources 171,661 4,225,433 Total funds $187,648 $4,644,214 5. Colleges. Number of colleges 5 239 Teachers 29 1,678 Students 513 27,821 6. Income of colleges. From endowment $11,300 $ 466,614 From taxation 15,485 From public funds 194,249 From other sources 29,400 1,288,080 Total funds $40,700 $1,964,428 7. All schools. Number 2,934 87,257 Teachers 3,162 105,858 Pupils 112,43° 3.642,694 8. Income of all schools. ' From endowment $ 28,822 $ 923,763 From taxation and public funds 140,314 7,590,117 From other sources 217,776 7,648,120 Total funds $386,912 $16,162,000 9. Children of school age. Between 5 and 20 (white) 215,454 7.134,973 Enrollment in all schools 112,430 3,642,694 10. Libraries {private) . Number 38 i5,6iS Volumes 29,592 4,636,411 11. Churches. Number 1,787 38,183 Value $9°5.7S3 $87,446,371 12. Number of periodicals. Daily .. 254 Weekly 4° 1,902 All others 11 3^0 Total 51 2,326 REPORT OF COMMITTED ON TAXATION 69 DETAILED EDUCATIONAL STATISTICS FOR NORTH CAROLINA AND UNITED STATES, lS6a (From Census i860) 1. Public schools. North Carolina United States Number 2,994 107,880 Teachers 2,928 131,099 ^"P'ls 105,025 4,955.894 2. Income of public schools. From endowment $ 21,462 $ 416,606 From taxation and public funds 239,779 18,952,073 From other sources 7,478 3,179,840 Total funds $268,7^19 $22,548,519 3. Private schools and colleges. • Number 450 7,344 Teachers 755 19,142 I'upils 14,709 521.143 4. Income of private schools and colleges. From endowment $ 24,140 $1,783,025 From taxation and other public funds ii,i9S 969,464 From other sources 454,390 9,417,104 Total funds $489,725 $12,169,593 5. All schools. Number 3,444 115,224 Teachers 3,683 150,241 Pupils "9,734 5.477.037 6. Income of all schools. Total funds $758,444 $34,718,112 From endowment 45,602 2,199,631 From taxation and public funds 250,974 19,929,537 From other sources 461,868 12,588,944 7. Libraries (not private). Numijer 301 27,730 Volumes 190,091 13.316,379 8. Churches. Number 2,270 54,009 Value $1,999,227 $171,397,932 9. Number of periodicals. Daily 8 387 Weekly 57 3.173 All others 9 491 Total 74 4.051 TAXATION FOR STATE PURPOSES IN PENNSYLVANIA NATHAN C. SCHAEFFER, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION FOR PENNSYLVANIA The revenues of the state of Pennsylvania for the fiscal year ending November 30, 1904, were $19,560,698.15. Out of this revenue about six millions were set apart for educational purposes. Not a dollar was derived from taxes on real estate, which is taxed only for local purposes. According to the estimates of the auditor general, this revenue would be diminished by $13,853,865.00, if railroads and other corporations were to pass under federal 70 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION control as proposed by Mr. Garfield. The loss to the public schools of Penn- sylvania would be very serious and far-reaching. Very few persons, even in Pennsylvania, know how the state gets its revenue. It has therefore been deemed proper to add statements showing from what sources this revenue is derived, and how the present system of taxation for state purposes was developed. The statement of the sources of revenue is from the pen of Mr. H. C. Greenawald of the Treasury Department. The "Historical Sketch of Tax Legislation" is reprinted from Eastman's treatise on Taxation for State Purposes in Pennsylvania. SOURCES OF REVENUE Tax on capital stock. — Corporations pay a tax of five mills upon the actual value of their capital stock of aU kinds, common, special, and preferred. Manufacturing com- panies are exempt (including newspapers) except such as are engaged in brewing or distill- ing spirits or malt liquors, and such as enjoy and exercise the right of eminent domain. Under a proviso, fire and marine insurance companies pay three mills. See supplement to act approved June i, 1889, as amended iSgi and 1893. Tax on loans. — Taxes on corporate and municipal loans, at the rate of foui; mills, are deducted by the treasurers of corporate bodies or municipalities jrom the interest when paid to the holders of their bonds or other obUgations, and by them paid into the state treasury. The compensation is 5 per cent, on the first thousand, i per cent, on the second thousand, and half of t per cent, on all sums over $2,000. Moneys loaned at interest to individuals are returned by the lender to the local assessor and tax on same (four mills) paid to county treasurer, and by him to state treasurer. This constitutes what is known as "state personal tax," three-fourths of which is returned to the counties paying the same. There is no tax whatever on real estate paid into the state treasury. In addition, transportation, transmission, and electric Hght companies pay a tax of eight-tenths of ' T per cent, on gross receipts earned in Pennsylvania. Tax on premiums. — Foreign — ^fire, marine, hfe, and accident — ^insurance companies pay, thru the insurance commissioner, a tax of 2 per cent, on all business in Pennsyl- vania. Domestic insurance companies pay eight-tenths of i per cent, on premiums within the state. Bonus on charter. — New corporations pay one-third of i per cent, on amount of authorized capital stock in addition to fees paid to the secretary of the commonwealth. Tax on bank stock. — Banks pay four miUs on actual value of shares as indicated by adding together the amount of capital stock paid in, surplus and individual profits; dividing same by number of shares; or ten mills on the par value. Banks are exempt from local taxes, except on real estate. Notary public commissions. — A fee of $25 for each commission is collected by exec- utive department. Fees of office. — Paid quarterly by secretary of the commonwealth, insurance com- missioner, secretary of internal affairs, health ofl&cer of Philadelphia, and attorney gen- eral, after $7,000, which amount he retains, annually, in addition to fixed salary. Tax on writs. — Registers, recorders, and prothonotaries of the several counties pay 3 per cent, on all receipts of fees, for entering judgments, agreements, mortgages, and other instruments of writing. Collateral inheritance tax. — There is a tax of j per cent, on clear value of all estates which go to heirs, other than father, mother, husband, wife, or children and their descendants born in lawful wedlock, and also on bequests to other than as stated. Licenses. — Licences on mercantile, liquor (wholesale and retail), brewing, distilling, REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 71 eating-houses, billiard saloons, on brokers, auctioneers, peddlers, theaters, and drcuses are collected by county treasurers and paid into the state treasury monthly. Expenses of bank examinations. — This is a tax on state and private banks, loan associa- tions, etc., to reimburse in part the commonwealth for cost of making these examinations by the state bank examiners of the banking department. Interest on treasury deposits of state moneys. — The state now receives 2 per cent, interest on all deposits, payable May t and November i. Altho the receipts of the treasury are 119,370,447.39, less than $17,000,- 000 of the amount can be used for the payment of appropriations. As a matter of revenue the difference is a fiction. In the summary of the receipts 1 have indicated by italic type items which are paid in and returned by auditor general's warrant, viz: Three-fourths of the state personal tax, personal fees of office, annuity for right of way from Erie Railroad company, all Hcenses and fines from the department of agriculture, game commissions, fish com- missions and forestry commissions. STATE TREASURY OF PENNSYLVANIA, RECEIPTS FOR YEAR ENDING NOVEMBER 30, I904 GENERAL FUND Land $ 2,692 . 69 Tax on capital stock 5,449,251 . 28 Tax on building and loan associations' stock 13,187.23 Tax on corporate gross receipts 1,207,753.41 Tax on gross receipts of bankers and brokers 39,352.60 Tax on notarial gross receipts 4,344.47 Tax on bank stock 799,146. 29 Expenses of bank examinations 38,307 • 06 Tax on income 52,440 . 64 Tax on premiums 1,109,145.94 Tax on gross premiums 92,312 . 29 Tax on municipal loans 279,734 . 81 Tax on corporate loans 1,177,175 . 16 Tax on personal property J J 807,074.33 If 2,421, 222. gg Tax on writs, wills, deeds, etc 180,142 .40 Tax on collateral inheritances r,o8o,578 . 08 Mercantile Ucenses, retail 677,382 . 28 Mercantile Kcenses, wholesale 255,275 . 50 Wholesale Uquor licenses 513,306.99 Retail Uquor licenses 605,504.99 Brewers' licenses 288,003 • ^5 Distillers' Ucenses Si>5°S ■ 74 Bottlers' Ucenses iS8>989 ■ S9 Billiard Ucenses 77,760.76 Brokers' Ucenses 38,206.51 Auctioneers' Ucenses 14,530. 71 Peddlers' Ucenses 5,111 . 15 Theater, circus, etc., Ucenses. . . : 16,742 .95 Eating-house Ucenses 30,627.88 Pamphlet laws 123.21 Bonus on charters ■ 508,084.48 72 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION Accrued interest 74-23 Fertilizer license jees IQ,020.00 Oleomargarine licenses 31,2^4. 28 Renovated butter licenses 4i033.43 Fines for violation of game laws 1,606. j8 Fines for violation of fishing laws 3,556-92 Fines for violation of pure food laws 6j,30J . OQ Fines for violation of renovated, butter laws 2,081 . 50 Fines for violation of oleomargarine laws. . .'. 3,01^.^2 Fines for violation of milk laws 1,710.00 Fines for violation of commercial food stuffs laws §0.00 Fines N. G. P. courts martial 423-SS Fines for violation of factory laws 307.00 Penalties 188.50 Notary public commissions 9,225 . 00 Annuity for right of way 10,000 . 00 Escheats ■ 13,667.06 Fees of ofl&ce 182,595.83 Personal fees 36,229.^4 Refunded cash. 20,493 ■ ^S Conscience money 121 . 00 Interest on state deposits 232,721 . 13 Non-resident hunters' licenses 1,726. 12 Fishing licenses 3,302.68 Forestry reservation, sundry revenues 1,076. g8 Receipts from sale of state property 53°. 78 United States government on account Civil War claim 921,134.36 Sale of Carlisle and Chambersburg Road Stock iSS . 00 Insurance on losses by fire Edinboro Normal School 3Q'.00 $19,560,698.15 Amount transferred to sinking fund igo,2jo . 76 Balance in fund $19,370,447 . 39 SINKING PTJND Amount transferred from general fund $190,250 . 76 Allegheny Valley Railroad Bond No. 31 100,000.00 Allegheny Valley Railroad, interest on bonds 27,500.00 Fines for Sabbath breaking 212 .00 Interest on state deposits 79>i83 . 58 . Total $397,146.34 HISTORICAL SKETCH OF TAX LEGISLATION IN PENNSYLVANIA (From Eastman's Taxation for State Purposes in Pennsylvania) Prior to 1831 Pennsylvania could hardly be said to have any system of state taxation. For many years the expenses of state government v^ere so small as to permit of being almost wholly defrayed by the revenue derived from sales of lands, from the dividends paid on stocks of corporations in which the state had invested, and from similar sources. The commonwealth's quota of the Revolutionary War debt was apportioned among the counties. In 1814 a tax was laid on bank dividends, and prior to 1826 this tax, with certain taxes on court officers, constituted the entire state taxation, save in the way of Hcenses. In 1826 the tax on collateral inheritances was imposed, which is still in existence. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 73 In 1831 the first act creating anything like a system of state taxation was passed. It taxed ground-rents, moneys at interest, moneys owing by solvent debtors, mortgages, and corporation stocks on which dividends were paid, public stocks, except those issued by the state, and pleasure carriages, one mill on the dollar of the value thereof annually. This tax was collected by the county officers for the use of the commonwealth. In the same year the commissioners of the several counties were required to increase the county rates by one mill upon the dollar of the value of all real and personal property subject by law to local taxation, and to pay the additional amount raised in this manner for the use of the state. Both the act providing for this taxation and the other act of 1831 above referred to were limited in their operation to five years, it being generally believed that, at the expiration of that time, the income from the gigantic pubhc works, consisting of canals, railroads, etc., which were then in course of construction, would be sufficient to defray all expenses of state government. Both acts of 1831 were repealed by acts of February 18, 1836, and March 10, 1836. From 1836 to 1840 the commonwealth reab'zed certain large sums from the United States bank, incorporated as a state bank after the expiration by Umitation of its charter from the general government, and from the United States, the surplus then existing in the United States treasury being divided among the several states. At the beginning of 1840 the taxes on bank dividends, collateral inheri- tances, writs, etc., and licenses, were the principal sources of state revenue. The debt created for the erection of the public works had by this time assumed such proportions, and the interest charge thereon was so onerous, that it soon became apparent that the commonwealth could not look to the income derived from such works as a means of defraying the expenses of government; and the sale of the works began to be agitated. At this juncture was passed the act of June 11, 1840, which imposed a tax of one mill on the stock of banks and other institutions making or declaring a profit, half a mill on cer- tain personal property, a small tax on household furniture, pleasure carriages, and watches, and a tax on the salaries of the officers of the state. It was estimated that these taxes would produce $500,000 or $600,000 per annum. As the interest charge on the public debt alone was $1,600,000 for that year, however, this act proved ridiculously insufficient for the purposes which it was intended to attain, and in 1843 the commonwealth defaulted in the payment of interest to its creditors. The storm of criticism which followed this violation of faith resulted in awakening all citizens to the demands of the hour, and on April 29, 1844, and act was passed, very sweeping in its provisions, which forms the basis of the tax system now in existence. The act of April 29, 1844, created the existing taxes on capital stock and on personal property. The state tax on real estate therein provided for was repealed by act of Feb- ruary 23, 1866 (P. L., p. 83), and the tax on horses and cattle, for state purposes, by act of March 21, 1873 (P. L.. p. 46). The tax on watches, household furniture, and pleasure carriages was repealed by act of May 13, 1887 (P. L., p. 114). The said act of 1844 also originated the practice, universally observed in subsequent legislation, of taxing corporations directly thru state officers, and personal property through the medium of county officers, acting, for that purpose, as agents of the state. From the inauguration of the new system of taxation by the acts of 1844 and 1846, down to the beginning of the Civil War, no material changes were effected in that system. The taxes on personal property, capital stock of corporations, bank stock and dividends, writs deeds etc., fees of public officers, collateral inheritances, and the various kinds of licenses, constituted during that time the main sources of revenue. The breaking out of the Rebellion necessitated greatly increased expenditures, and to meet these new taxes were imposed. Among these were the tax on the net earnings or income of private bankers and brokers (1861); the tax on the gross receipts of transpor- tation companies (1866); tax on the net earnings or income of corporations (1864); tax on tonnage of transportation companies (1864); tax on the mining of coal (1867); and 74 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION tax on corporate loans, which was not, however, as originally created, a new tax, but merely a new way of taxing certain classes of personal property (1864). After the close of the war many of these new taxes were abolished, among these the tax on corporate loans, the tax on gross receipts of transportation companies, and the tax on the mining of coal, by the acts of March 21, 1873, and April 24, 1874, while, by subse- quent legislation, the tax on the net earnings of corporations was gradually narrowed in its application until it was limited as at present, and the tax on tonnage, materially mod- ified, was gradually diminished until its collection ceased, under the provisions of the act of June 7, 1879, in 1881, by limitation. With the development of the state, increased revenues again became necessary, and in 1877 the tax on gross receipts of transportation companies was revived, and, by the same act, a new tax, that upon the gross premiums of domestic insurance companies, was created. It was also attempted, by the revenue acts of 1879 and 1881, to revive the tax on corporate loans, but, owing to the wording of the sections of said acts providing for the the imposition of this tax, the supreme court declared the tax invalid, and it was not until the passage of the revenue act of June 30, 1885, that the tax on corporate loans as it now exists was created. The said act of 1885, by its twentieth section, also provided for an innovation in the matter of taxing the capital stock of corporations, which reheved manufacturing corpora- tions from the payment of said tax. The act of 1879 had contained a proviso that limited partnership associations engaged in manufacturing or in mercantile business should be relieved from the tax on capital stock, but the act of 1885 was the first to contain a general provision of that nature. That exemption has been continued by all subsequent tax legis- lation, modified, however, so as to reUeve only so much of the capital of a manufacturing company from taxation as is invested in property used exclusively in manufacturing. From 1885 to 1897 no new tax was created, all tax legislation during that period being in the nature of amendments to'the laws relating to already existing taxes. At the session of 1897 new taxes were created on direct inheritances, on the receipts of express companies (in addition to the tax on gross receipts, to which they were already subject), and on the matured stock of building and loan associations. The system of taxation of bank stock was also materially changed. The laws relating to the licenses of distillers, brewers, etc., were also amended. In closing this sketch it may be said that, while the state tax system of Pennsylvania can doubtless be improved in many respects, the system itself is a very excellent one. The bm-dens of taxation for state purposes are almost wholly placed upon corporations, leaving individual taxables subject to taxation for local purposes only, except that the mortgages, bonds, and other classes of personal property taxable under the laws of the state held by them pay a state tax, but three-fourths of even this tax is returned to the counties, to relieve the burdens of local taxation. The state tax laws of Pennsylvania are not only, in the main, just, but they have been so thoroly construed by hundreds of decisions of the courts that but little oppor- tunity exists for disputing over the proper interpretation thereof. Before wholly abandoning a system so long established, so thoroly interpreted, and so generally equitable, for the purpose of adopting any untried system devised by theorists, every feature of which must be construed by the courts, it is believed that thought- ful men will require nothing short of an absolute demonstration that the proposed system vrill prove in all important respects the superior of the old. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 75 METHOD OF TAX A TION FOR SCHOOL PURPOSES IN INDIA NA JOHN W. CARR, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, ANDERSON, IND. In respect to use, taxes for school purposes in Indiana are of two kinds — tuition school tax and special school tax. The former yields a fund that can be used only to pay licensed teachers for teaching; the latter for all other pur- poses for which school expenditures are made, including the erection of build- ings, payment of superintendents of schools, special teachers, etc. If any considerable sum remains in the special fund at the close of the school year it is transferred to the tuition fund. If there is a balance in the tuition fund it cannot be transferred to any other fund, but must be used to pay teachers' salaries. The balance may be carried over to the next year, but this balance is never large. METHOD OF LEVYING SPECIAL SCHOOL TAX In all towns and in all cities except Indianapohs, the school boards, con- sisting of three members, levy the special tax. In amount it varies from nothing to 50 cents on the $100 of assessed valuation of property, and not to exceed 25 cents on each poll. (The property is usually assessed at about two- thirds its actual value. Poll tax is levied on males between the ages of twenty- one and fifty.) In townships, the levy is made by the township trustee, and must be approved by the township council, which consists of three members. Indianapolis is governed by special charter and the school commissioners, five in number, levy a certain amount for all school purposes not to exceed 57 cents on the $100, which can be expended for school purposes as the com- missioners direct. The special tax is always expended in the corporation in which it is levied. MEANS OF SUPPLEMENTING THE SPECIAL SCHOOL FUND There are only three ways of supplementing the amount raised by direct taxation for special school purposes: {a) Sale of property owned by the school corporation. (6) Temporary loans made by school boards or township trustees. Such loans can be made for only small amounts and for a short time. The legaUty of such loans has never been passed upon by the supreme court. (c) Sale of township, town, or city bonds. Such bonds are issued by the township trustee and approved by the township council in the case of townships, and by the town trustees or by the mayor and common council of cities. In no case are school boards authorized to issue bonds. The special funds derived from the sale of such bonds are used for some specific purpose — usually the purchase of school sites and the erection and equipment of school buildings. 76 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION SOURCES OF TUITION REVENUE There are two sources of revenue that may, be used for tuition purposes — state and local. 1. State revenues.— There are four items that go to make up the state school revenue, as follows : (o) A school tax of ii cents on the $ioo of taxable property of the state. This yielded in 1903, $1,698,868.59. This tax is collected semi-annually by the county treasurers and turned over to the state treasurer. It is then distributed to the different school corpora- tions in proportion to the number of pUpils enumerated — all children between the. ages of six and twenty-one. 1 (6) Interest on common school fund loans paid by borrowers. In 1903, this amounted to $401,829 .06. The common school fund is a permanent fund, and in T904 it amounted to $8,032,654.79. This fund has been accumulating for many years. The constitution of 185 1 provided that certain funds and revenues and all fines and forfeitures should go to this fund, the principal of which is kept inviolate, the interest alone being used for school purposes. This fund is apportioned among the different counties and loaned at , 6 per cent, interest on first mortgages on real estate. Each county is held responsible for both principal and interest, so losses are impossible. It is distributed on the per capita basis, that is, in proportion to the number of children in each corporation enumerated. (c) Interest on the congressional fund. In 1903 this amounted to $144,981.53. At the time Indiana was organized as a state, congress appropriated the sixteenth section of land in each congressional township for school purposes. By -an act of congress passed in 1828, the state was authorized to sell these lands and to create a trust fund to be loaned for the benefit of the schools. Most of these lands were sold when the lands were very cheap. As a result, the congressional fund amounts to only $2,465,983 .65. In a very few instances the lands have been kept, and now the income is almost sufficient to support the schpols in those localities. Other states who have school lands should see to it that they are kept and properly managed for the benefit of the schools. (d) A special tax of three-eighths of a cent on the $100 for the benefit of school cor- porations which are now unable to pay the minimum wages to teachers and to maintain schools for the minimum term, six months. This tax will yield about $85,000 annually, and the proceeds will go to about one hundred of the poorest school corporations of the state. This is a new law and embodies a new feature — additional assistance from the state, provided a corporation taxes itself 40 cents on the $100 and is still unable to support its schools properly. 2. Local tuition. — The state funds are inadequate to pay teachers' salaries, so the law provides for raising funds locally, to supplement those provided by the state. There are four different ways in which money is raised locally for tuition purposes, as follows: (o) Local tuition tax. — This tax varies from nothing to 50 cents on the $100 ol taxable property, and from nothing to 25 cents on each poll. It is levied by the township trustee, v?ith the approval of the township council in the townships, and by the school board in each town and each city except Indianapolis. The funds arising from this tax can be used only by the school corporation making the levy. (6) Surplus dog jund. — Indiana levies a dog tax for the purpose of creating a fund to pay for all animals or fowls that may be killed or maimed by dogs. After all such claims^ have been paid, the balance of the dog fund goes into a common fund in the county to be distributed to the different school corporations of the county in proportion to the num- ber of school children enumerated in each school corporation. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 77 (c) Revenue derived from liquor license tax. — The law provides a license tax of $ioo annually for the purpose of selling intoxicating liquors at retail. This entire amount goes into a common fund and is apportioned among the different school corporations of each county in the manner described above. This is the only indirect tax levied for school piirposes. (d) Local tuition. — If pupils belonging to one school corporation attend school in another school corporation, tuition is charged. If a school corporation does not support a high school, it must pay the tuition of each pupil of the corporation that attends a high school elsewhere. The amount allowed by law is $2 per month for each pupil attending high school, and must be paid out the of special school fund. The corporation receiving money for tuition purposes must add it to the tuition fund. There are no statistics to show how much money is received annually from this source. PRACTICAL WORKING OF THE SYSTEM As might be expected, there is great difference in the amount of tax levied locally for both tuition and special school purposes. This is due to a aumber of causes — needs of the schools in the way of buildings and equipments, length of school term, salaries paid teachers, economy in expenditures, differences of assessed valuation of property, number of pupils to be provided for, and so on. There is absolutely no relation between the tax duplicate and the number of schools to be supported. Again, some corporations levy a high rate for tuition, pay good salaries, and have long terms, while other corporations with equal facilities make low levies, have short terms, and pay poor wages. The special school rate also varies greatly in different corporations for different reasons. Sometimes it is owing to difference in valuation of property, sometimes owing to difference in number of schools to be supported, sometimes it is owing to making capital investments for buildings and equipments, some- times it is owing to extravagance in management. The levy made for special school purposes in the same corporation may vary greatly at different times, owing to different conditions. CHART I.— SHOWING RATE OF TAXATION IN 84 CITIES, 224 TOWNS, AND 1,016 TOWNSHIPS OF INDIANA, 1903 For Tuition Purposes For Special School 9, H g u CJ H 0, o- 0. »o o> Oi u 2s 11 08 "9. S!8 2R '-' 2 "9. 2 "s ^ HW ■Bfl > w» •*■?. iJ Fn f; n B a Sn !^n .s ^V' Ua En En En rt ?.° K° 1 ti- t:° a° K° y.° ^ '^ b £ b fe IK < fn b fe h u. < Cities 2 14 3 40 6 16 330 25 35 371 41 114 200 10 24 24 2 30 25 2 I I 38 3 j6 3S6 12 3S 317 28 4P 160 22 39 59 18 84 Townships 4< The actual amounts received from time to time are set forth in Table A below. The falling off in the amount received from the state in 1895 and again in 1897 was due to reductions in the rate levied. The gradual increase in the amount raised by local taxation marks the increase in length of the school term and the increase in teachers' wages. 78 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION TABLE A— SOURCES OF ALL SCHOOL REVENUES IN INDIANA FROM 1880 TO 1903 Taken from Education in Indiana, by State Superintendent F. A. Cotton School Year Ending July 31 State Sources Raised by state tax Interest on common school fund loans paid by borrowers Interest on congressional township fund Total revenues from state sources Revenue per capita from state sources 18R0, 1884. 1887, 1888, 18R9, i8go i8pr 1892 1803 1894 189s 1896. 1897. 1898. 1899, 1900. igoi. 1902, 1903. $1,519, 1,408, Ii443i 1,403, 1 ,3 90 1,446. 1,453 1,483. 1,983. 2,077, 1,980. 1,868, 1,535, I,S68, 1,559 1,595 1,564 1,623 1,698 ,791.66 iil3-49 ,176.5s ,412.91 ,092.27 ,255-46 ,568.01 ,036.42 1348.34 ,323.12 ,452 . 20 .745-11 ,429.04 ,187-59 ,144.91 ,344- 10 .955-27 ,170.87 ,868.59 8204,145 . 30 211,112.19 449,612.15 464,140.73 462,207.22 476,184.31 427,660.42 436,924.66 435,197-84 436,960.17 431,994.76 444,400.13 422,125.8s 437,794-99 436,847 -51 461,055.84 443 .8 II., 36 423,130.68 401,829.06 8197,675-80 187,162.70 197,748-14 218,118.93 199,165.22 180,188.30 213,464.60 191,761.17 157,246.10 161,906.62 153,169-95 154,817.02 162,729.63 148,744-53 167,748.68 147,456.01 153,145-27 139-050-59 144,981-53 $1,921. 1,806 2,090 2,085, 2,051, 2,102 2,094, 2,111 2,575. 2,676. 2,56.') 2,467 2,120. 2,154. 2,161 2,193 2,161. 2,185. 2,271 ,612 . 76 ,388.38 ,536.84 ,672.57 ,464.71 ,628.07 1S83-03 ,722 - 25 ,792-28 ,189.91 ,616.91 ,962.26 ,028.5s ,727.11 ,911.10 ,855-95 ,911.10 ,361.14 ,57° -59 S2.71 2.51 2.80 2.74 2.71 2 72 2.72 2.76 3-31 3-36 3-17 3-08 2-8g 2-87 2.86 2.90 2-73 2.68 2. .91 Local Sources Year Local tuition /rom local tax Dog fund revenue Special school revenue Interest on com- mon school fund paid by counties on the loaned fund Liquor, license revenue Total School revenue from local sources fill I. 2 * 1880 S 589093.21 None $1,461,891.15 $ 8,986.36 $193,512.15 $2,253,482.87 $3.18 $5.89 1884 806,415.35 I7one 1,410.091.09 20,969.11 279,885.89 2,517,361.44 3 so 6.01 1887 951.979.78 None 1,546,659.90 1,377-11 331,256.59 2,861,273.38 ^84 6.64 188S 1,008.072.56 None 1,615,386.52 22,202.16 344,342.79 2,990,004.03 3-93 6.67 1889 1,001,032.6s None 1,657,921.46 31,743.07 346,652.83 2,947,350.04 ^■»1 6.60 1890 1,172,232.39 $45,752.61 1,777,500.85 11,474.30 337,779-83 3,344,739-98 4.42 7.06 1891 1.370.799-85 57.185-13 1,705,727-94 26.421.78 353,155-40 3,513,292-10 4-S6 7.27 1892 1,408,336.64 67.789.30 1,689,135-64 18,872.50 358,407-04 3,542,541-12 4.64 7.40 1893 1.051,796.08 43.714.74 1,810,417.39 25,192.54 391,554.56 3,322,675.31 4.28 7-59 1894 1,433.792.7s 18,630.54 2,048,179.03 18,646.14 395,629.80 3,914,878.26 4.92 8-28 189s 1,562,155.75 17,421.69 2,415,600.44 20,937.54 396,160.00 4,412,275-42 5-45 8-77 1896 1,472,016.56 i5,7i>8i 2,239-349-44 12,671.83 377,937-72 4,117,689-36 S-iS 8.24 1897 1.770,816.24 15,545.71 2,316,077-11 27,588.58 344.492.17 4,474.519-81 6.09 8.98 1898 2,228,546.40 26,926.47 2,493,610.32 29,712.31 386,637.07 5,165,432.57 6.89 9.76 1899 2,489.396.06 15,638.4s 1,855,543-91 30,686.88 401,243.70 4,572,509.00 6., 32 8.92 1900 2,599,262.95 151,744-65 1,838,022.79 19,460.42 426,670.37 5,035,161.18 6.67 9-56 1901 2,687,931.96 96,265.24 2,557.590.51 29,405.41 436.946.64 5,808,139.76 7.68 10.54 1902 2,706.923.83 87.873.67 2,535,696.45 52,403.86 487,601.69 5,870,499.50 7.78 10.63 1903 3,285,490.06 106,806.79 3,163,011.29 83,467.74 496,514.92 7,135,290.80 9.29 12.20 Notes on Above Table. — i. In columns 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 11 the sources of the revenues actually used are the January distribution of any year, together with the June distribution of the previous year, not the two distributions of a calendar year. The school year embraces the last half of one and the first half of the next calendar year. 2. In column 4 the current year is used; The congressional interest remains about the same from year to year. 3. The table shows that the state's participation in education is about the same per capita each year, whereas the local support has more than doubled in the period from 1880 to 1903. 4. The per capita of revenues as above, column 14, does not accord with the per capita cost of education. This is due to the fact that there are sources and expenditures REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 79 which do not come thru the regular channels of school taxes and revenues, e. g., tuition paid by private parties for the privilege of sending a child from one corporation to another. The per capita distribution of school revenue is never a measure of the per capita expendi- ture. The whole object in making this table is to show the relative degrees of participa- tion of the state and local corporations in raising school revenues. The length of school term, the daily and yearly wages of teachers and the highest possible wages of teachers are set forth in Chart II which is given below. CHART n.— GIVING SUMMARY OF THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF SCHOOL TERM IN DAYS, AVERAGE DAILY WAGES, AVERAGE YEARLY WAGES, AND HIGHEST POSSIBLE ANNUAL WAGES OF TEACHERS UNDER THE PRESENT LAW, IN 84 CITIES, 224 TOWNS. AND 1,016 TOWNSHIPS OF INDIANA. igo3 Length of School Average Daily Wages Average Yearly Wages Highest Annual Term in Days OF Teachers OF Teachers Possible Wages £ S S. -a 13 •0 Ov Oi o> 4 M S tT ? ■* ■* Ov ^ 0. ■* o> a a 2 .a 8 & C0 to »0 f^OO 00 - M tooO O O »0 t Oi t^OO O "O l-l Tj- 0\ot*TotoTr fovo ■ I CO N fO to ^ H -tOOO VO Oit^t^OO ^r~OiO ^ ^ I- siood-SuiqiBa puB sasnoqqjBg t- to O o o o o- to\o >o w O M o o o o o o o o ■ H ^00 00 . M M O Q ■ o o o o saSpug pus S3UJ3J[ o o o o o o o O ■ lO tj- • i^O H I^O O. O M ■ to .Tfi-i -00C0w,O,01^M( O -MO ■0000^^000( ■ ^ M Ol H to « ■ to "* O M i^ ■^ . - O O O O O O to NOO 0> fO 53AJCq^ pas S3(00Q ) 'too - "tj- w 2 1 o to • o i^ S" I O O ■ O O O . CO lO "■ • o o - c ■ O O -^ ■ O O M ■^-^ O O SlUBIJ iqSjT 0UJ33IH <* ro-CO (OOO 8 It.:;;::;::::?:;;;;;;;;:;; SJIJOjSVSBQ »8 ■ O • ■ sifJOittjajBAV «8 H 000 a-<}- N to M H « >o moo i-ioooo»o .«0'*- -oooto*^ 0>vO n to to r^ o-O ■ >O00 MNOt^'-'*^ -tsr* -COOit^i^OOOOOOOO POO 00 • HMTtTj-e)««CO -TfN .MMtSWM«(-.MO«OHH - w jqaa "0 ;s3«iui C©vo 00 M 11 r- >J^ 0> O ■«t M »o VOOO H 't to toioo O cohJ>-0 m n ffOfs no »oO wM'tOiOHwx^ OOO to M H oiO t^ N Ti- « t^oo M 00 o CO -r M o tooo o. i/i oi \o H TfioM 'omo'OMio co^tOiOiOi looo « *oo o m H ,^ ,^ H H H M IBAOuia'a aSBqjBO «& s^Hf fomo P) ■'to '-''-' -towHTrr-coro ■ -wo.' O.H p) « w o >-« n o >o cs O" i^oo ogcoi->Q'o -o Oioo tooo • m *»« wrotoOicototOOOLOOfOOOO •woOOOM'^m -OOi WQHMlOHOMOwtNO'^NtO .CONQtOOH -I-IO Suji^inuds 133^13 «$ o O O o O O - O" tO'^ ■ o. lO c ■ O O^ J3UIUE3[3 J33JIS H O O O w w O • >io^o.r^»oN mM Q tooo '^ <-t -I CO ^ ^O to M TOOO O O »oo O mwmmmmnOOhmohO SnijqajT icdputnM »? N N Pt H H 00 00 •*NOr) OOOO'-'OOOOOOOOmmOOOOOOOOOO %-Hi-ei w o ■o o. « a M i^ o> t t^ Oi O o Oi N lo >o t-o i-i N to o toco vo o>oo T^^oo toTroiiot--w to ^O C?. CO t- to vt-O C^Tto^M w-OOQ N Oi CO O t^ CO OO'-'OihmOwmO'-'O'-'OOOOOOO'hmOOm •31H 'siunasiiM 'S3U3I -jBO ;^V 'ssiJBJqiT o>0 Ncooo f^iot-'tt^oi'^'ooo &000 w »-~oo w ■t>-or*i-<>o>o>n -^— ■ifoco toNr--NoowOoott^t(s vooo o to • lO to t in N o to . -._____^«««. .„„„-.-_ -0000000 OOOOO OOOOOOOOOOt-iOOOOOO saiiuBqo JsqiO puE sssnoqsiuiv 'suinijCsv 'siEjjdsoH OO O I-" oO W >0 to 1^00 « N M O O I w « W O O '^O ► l-OWtOOMMHlt I O N f CO N •-< W ( IMMOOfOMOMl- COOO lO N 00 M lo'O t^ t lom O O O O M o juaui^iBdaQ qilBSH O-QO r» o M lO O N t t O O "-i o o 00 comMOOCO o moo IN tooo m o> « o o w too o oo >-' t^ ION i^-ooo^^^trnfoo OimvoiooM w rotoN mn loco OOQi-'OOOOOOi-'OOoOOOOOOOOOOO iaam)iGd3Q sai^i ) r-. CO o o M t « o>o to t o tooo Oifomt-Noo h o ti ' lO 1 (*1 « to 1 lO I^ O. "i ff> ■* N « ■■ luiH rotofow in« w 0>««« « N N « roti- INWCOcOW-^WWVOtHNro < O>00 f* ) ro "TO 1^ S^ ? S °2.i^ O >£) f- o. 'd- t^oo ^« ■o « 0.0 MOOMJOor-wo w 000 IC H,^ ri ?S9.*Q_ O.IOVO ^-00 oo'^ti-Ni-'oo»n aooco Oi o o 'a-o o c^'^-^m o ^n** M-fot-o : ;^c '*0*0 10 ■ ^ ^ ■ o o ■ g M 10 >-• ■0000 ■ *0 N 1-1 • 000 ■ 000 r-co Oi >0 to N O H O ■ >t to • o o -§ :88l )NM^(OOMIOrO lOOOOOOOO •OCO ^ DO 8ro\0 rO 000 OHO ^00 (O ^0 r~ Oi Oi« M irj M O « t O O O. W lOOO ■* M \o f* 0.00 10 o> 0> O 00 «+ H H N M M C) ■" ^OOO ON I-- t«.\0 « M M MiooOt^N OiNOoO M O w O>C0 « 00 CO ^^O 0> "it-OO ^ O" r* 000 « r- 00 TOO to o> 1000 w m o H O H i w O w *0 O t* ^*0 o >o 10 « o. r- ^ to f- to too H 0> Oi M O C^ OOOOHOOOOOO -iHcioOt^ -OOOfOOi' -OQ-00 t >0 H ■ H O Ol ^'(O ■00000 l-t tOMO &-*0>M-000 M N O lO« Oi-O M O" ^*oo OiO O t--inior--r- uioo t-o -^ HOMOMMt-'OOOOOOOOO'-t rfOO OiNOO-O-O OiU^fOfO&rOT lOOO 00 r* -^ rOOO VI w o )i-ir--»0'0'0 lOfOiO'T'vO'O'OiOOiOOOO'O tOOOO-w io^Om ImOOOOmOOOOOOO'^OOO'-'Oi-ihO'hO soooo O>co Tf o f* r- r- looo m MMMi-itOiHM'^rOt-ironM « -tf fO Oi -MO to ro N ^ . i/l to 0"* ■ o o I uni^N mr-o t-*Xoo fO"© o I tOWCN W fOlOM " TW Qoo lOOOOOONOOOOO •-'O DO O f- 0> T fO W too -JfO >-< N rOWvO « t-tOi-f»0 O^M W TtO— &rO-*(OtOrOtOf4 tO« N OifOw roto ■lOOOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOOOOO . o o o o o o < r tooO r~ M \0 oO 'J- 3 lo Ti- ■"ifoo r^ O lo I M o o o o o o H Tj-N M TOW M fOOr^Oii^u -(voroM cs O TTTWO t^tM f hOOOOOOOmwOOmC r«.i>»0 uiTO TOOO NoOO M Otor^ woo MOO tOTTTTfOrOtOTfOT oooooooooooooooo N lo to »o Oi »-■ 00 OiO I- lo T T« toowt^w '-' ^r " " OOOOO000O( MOI^lor«.TT«OTO>i-" -iomT *^00 OOO OtMOO ■ rOTM Oi« r-moOiQ OTW tOTlO TfO 00 l^O T O O too TO*^»oOn«T -nTmi-iio »00 T to to O • O too t^O OoOOO OO tOMta mo O m toro too »o O«O0»W«hThOON ■ro«toOtoOOtOMO« •OOOtOTCtonOMMTOOMMMOOMOOO IrttOVOOI^OOOO M MO w t^O r- N M « T T TOO >o O NO Oi O O OOO OOO foor-wO W Nt^O tooo O0 M 00 lOOO OOOa^Twt^OOOO MTTWTtOtOtOtOtOMt^ ---'--^''— ^'■'"'^•^'-■ O lO O M 00 f^O 00 M M O O «00 MOO _ _ _ ' T W r» O OOO 'ONNOlOtsrOOI-MO. ,_ W Nf*TM*^^OtOtOM M tOfOTT« tOtOM N « (N TtOt^ "O/T- to M lO N O to O T M M OO O O ^ -^ lo M T to O -O -000 -000 ■oooooo -oooo ■ M 00 o M T m ■ M M o M M r* ■oooooo oO M lOM O00 Or^tOlOM 1 trj ij. u. « uu ■ .- T M 00 « to O O T r*0 T M M M tO M 00 OOO ^2 M lO ©OO 00 « N 00 OO T m lO r^ lO to i^ ! S ^ fo T W M M *- M T»OMMOON«00»OPp(OM-^tOtOCOtOMtOTMMMlOlOMtOo t^ob 6i d M « *o T »oo t^oo O d H « '■) Jo M m% m% ^^^^^•^■^•f^-ft^*^^^^"^^^^ ^"O oooooooootir-tl 82 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION SI.113S Snipnxoxg) S3jn;ipa3dx3 l^ejox jamo »s ^Nt-fOG fOM CtOfOOoO OtOHOOMONOO^ OO 0.«10-OCON •■* - O ■ M . w ■ CO - • COO O :'8 H ■ ^ 10>0 ^ CO Ol to . MOO COM Q H O^ ■ o o o o - CO •>D ■ « Q ■ (O • H 5 • ■ O S13J1«IM a& - :;;:;;! § ••O • « o ■ Oi N « ■ ■ to « ■ -.SB'S ■■ :S8 : :;;is saSpijg pn^ saiiJS^ »8 : loss's 8 S- ■00 :8 '■■i '■■ ;l: s: 8S HOM Mt^OiCOWO'O OH 1>M0 M ■^00 H •0 ^00 'O CO « MMtOHtOCO"OHCONh i H ro H ^ (O « CO lOXO > I CO CO CO « H « N ■CO ■ <0 O I- ■-' lO I ■00 • "C 00 Oi ■<*■ 11 J . H - n O O ■-) 04 I • ^00 O "!*■ »n*o M 'd- r- M M ■ lot^OO woo '*'*co^O ■fOIHW OlO ■ t-< CO P) H M jqsQ no 1S3J31UI O>00 OOHOOvWO M fOOit^f^ "OOO « t-t^lON W loOOOO OoO m '3-»0'-'00 O ^"00 T^Q^o w»ooooo N ^t-0 CM O co«r*&r**!j-v)«0 H « r-H m r^r-i}-ol-< H (ON t^O H O CO'^NOO O O ^0>cOOvO't-i ^>0 IBAoms'ii aSBqjBO 1 r- H . 00 t-^ ^00 lo I « m -OOQOO O ^ I O H ■ O O O O H ■ 00 « o -a-vo ■ M O t^ O lO ■ o o o o o ■ 00 CO O • CO N CO -OOO ssjniipusd -X3 433J4S ■18110 O « lOOO 0> O r^O ^ O O ^00 00 - h h Q r^OO 00 O O t^ i-nO O "^^ fO f- m 0> H O CO CJ ■^ H fOOO 00 CO O >0 Oi • ■^OO <3 JO'O «*O0D fw t^O *0«vO\0 '*0 <©OW NHWcoMf^oO OO^N •whhO*OwOhmO>oioi-i'!}-ni-icoh *0 « IH O f^ O O « H J3n!i3{,auds )33>i)S < ■* cs ■* - Q NO I o o o ■ I> W ( ■ O O ( •3n;iiB3i3 133J)S I vO M r* •«*• N ■* O" ■ I (OOO o m ^ o CO ■ I H O-O O O O H . ^ M ^ r^ & 1^00 *o >o « r^ H O lO « M-O H o >o o o hOOOOOOhowih ) CO o lo o ■^ CO o ■* to I O O H o SnpqSiT iBdpiunw ■a-OiM M r-^rOHvO tTioco t-v^O Oit^HOOOOtO ■OiO> H O OiOO N ti-|VO »Ot^MsO lOPl O M tOOO to ^00 ■ 0> Oi SNi-iCTMi-i(Ni-iM«i-t«w(OWW«N«H "(OW ■ r* Oi -^O »o oo '^ t--'0 Oi ■ ooooHOcooooo'do'ooood'obd'oo' o> 1-1 r^ oi H IN r-00 N Tro\OiOicotom o>^ o o> o oo O O O O M 00 H tTOO cOOtnQwMNi-WMOiON ~"~~~~""~"000000000 • O O O O H > M 00 in O to » N ro Oiw H < O O O O O • coo c^O w O>oo mw^o ■ coo TT t- O (OvO CO H H t^ ■ooooooooooo ■31H . to 1-1 m m o m o ■ Tf N « Q CO ^ « ■ o o o o o o o ■OOO -OOO H M O W > O O O S31JIIBII3 -i3q;o pns sssnoqsiuiY ( t^ moo C > r^oo M M o « O in i> (O « Pt 'to M CO O O O inauiUBdsa q;iB3H I t o o o o ► 1 ■«i- cooo I •* ■* to t o o o m M oio w CO O. cs O O H O o ino o> CO ro CO m H **■ O O O O O luauqJBdsa ^^d coO'int-^o inO l-« -^r-Tf (OOO O « 00 -^ ^ . ._—._.-._ . . .. — T « tn w M N CO H m N « •!}■ mo r- — ^ ^ - ©scow N fOw ^«1>-H CO^ IWION tT^IN toco •3J3 'saii03BuiJ0j -sy; 'S3snoqjiiOA\. 'siref 'siJno5 33110^ - r»o 'iroo ■ O O CS CO • 5 o O <^ ia3ui:^Bd3Q 33II0J O « too ot-wr-cocoM o co^ mo m r^ o> o ^ — — " ttoo o « cooo CO coo O ^ OvOO t m — ^ -^ ■ ^ a MM w MocoM COOO r~ 4©« tw ^Mcoroo P) c* w co^t ■*0 C^ oo M ■* P) ■^ m Qv a c MO N •- « w w o - «50 - *3 ta ■c:Sa a as § o.«i-3S g s s ta-s i :Si a 5? g^s-gt g g i^=3-as.s s.s §"1^12.1 wSt^K(S>HZ^ca£>Ha6 s a - . mid r^od (OOOOOOOO MS! '■ S." REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 83 00 0> 0> M COH an o «C0vO t*i»OOit^O (OO W t»QO w m w « O CO CO (0 0*0 »o m moo «Ni-i>or^«r*Oi oioo ^ t^ o O « — — 10 to WHO lOH N OiinOoO ^^t*CT OiOO l^ 10*0 OHO ( N ^ (O CO « ► I w M 00 W ^ 01 « r~*o o too O" t^ »o c >0 to IN « OicQ - ,,.-__,,„ -" — -^ tj- m (oco *o V) to 10 O fiH-O lOM TftOiO coo O « f^ O H r* N to t^oo t^oo O>oo O 00 ijn O N to •-" •_ .*,.^ .n .> .^ — . . — ff^ TfCi m r^ r»- (O • O>g0 •00 O ■ O O to ^00 »o "^ M O •* 0000 O O* ■^00 ■ to « ■ *^ to • Oi Tj- ■ -* « I 1-1 ^100*0 lOOiN OiOO "O lOHQOM tOJ^NOO M OltOM'O W »O0 I 1 ^ t~- O ^ 11 O'CO "O 00 ■ to to M ■ t^ M Oi\o o too ^ ■000 OQwOOOOO t-- ^00 1000 (N TfiOtOO-O IH w O>00 i-" 00 t^ ^ w Oi ^ to O r^oo r^ N ro O O. ^ looo ^ to »ooo «tOO«iHOOONMwro«'OwOcowto ■J « o o -00 W Oi 1 « O M o O. ■ 10 N 000 00 ■*« MOM toM-r^« Mvooo t*)TfM NOOOOOOmOO ■ Oi Tto OM -OO'^iOtO'^ •OO^iOO't^ •OOOiOO-O •OOmOO •0»oOm'«1-m O tomt-coi-^^^M fooo tT m t^oo MO OiM w tooo «tOM««OM«NWfOM • coNdOM»o'OOMM moo 00 to to "^ w r* moo m too m i-- o o>oo w n 00 O « M m« tOtOM tOttOtO>Ottror^tr*M (Orot~-.0 toooo OMOOOOOOMOOOOOOOOtsOOOOOOwOtOOO ( O Oico N i^ Ol M (^00 N mo I ( O'O'M 00 M .o 00 M r-oi ^WOt«M(0■^W MM« « ( ro r^M Oivf-mtoo to i l-rotOMO mttt iw « toN J^wr-tot ■ too ■ Ol . M O ■ « - O o ■ o 00 r*00>o mto^Noo o « i^ i^O t mwoo -tt^toooOO i^M Tt moo C « (O M N » ■ ■ " ~. ~^ -^ - ■) to w N w e mo to r-oo O r* O-O Oi O 00 t too M M m^TM toM tco to iTrtoco« M to« toM NO tt to . -3 J = 5 w R^ ^Sk2oEodH'S.tt30riSs,2='J3«'o 84 NATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION TABLE VI— VALUE OF PROPERTY, COMPARATIVE COST OF SCHOOLS, AND WAGES EARNED IN MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES IN THE 137 LARGEST CITIES OF THE UNITED STATES TABLE ARRANGED BY HON. W. T. HARRIS, U. S. COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION Value of Property and Comparative In MANDFACinRiNO Industries Expenditures in Certain Cities in 1902 1900 (b) True value of ill ll! Number real and personal Wealth 9rA w of Total Average property based per "■^f wage- wages wages on assessment capita Is earners for taxation (0) PI m c United States 820,519,453,820 $1,027.69 $16 . 40 fe-53 2,919,583 $1,371,123,504 $469,63 North Atlantic Division. . . 11,164,090,530 1,086.46 19.03 3-71 1,682,361 806,857,382 479.60 South Atlantic Division .. . 1,264,970,711 947.90 15.23 2.80 172,076 68,729,761 399-42 South Central Division .. . 791 ,560,261 688.24 16.52 2.69 108,486 42,952,296 395-92 North Central Division. . . 5,897,202,210 954.64 13-08 3.62 864,166 401,283,890 46436 Western Division 1,401,630,108 1,362.13 10.43 2.81 92,404 51,300,175 554-63 I. New York, N. Y $5,175,590,127 $1,444.11 $19.89 $v8i 462,763 $245,021,881 $529-48 1,872,902,200 1,151,283,170 1,040.50 862.38 11.88 4.38 2.88 131.065,337- 111,847,076 499.07 453-80 3. Philadelphia, Pa 11. 59 246.445 4. St. Louis, Mo 592,193,556 995.28 14.71 2-57 82,672 38,191,076 461 . 96 S. Boston, Mass 1,152,505,834 2,009.32 19.00 2.64 72,142 30,184,191 543-15 6. Baltimore, Md 614,612,859 1,181.9s 12.39 2.30 78,738 29.220,460 371-11 7. Cleveland, Ohio 392,907,290 1,007.45 12.23 3-19 58,810 27,892 689 470.28 8. Buffalo, N.Y 242,349.138 655.00 24.20 4.79 43-422 19,915.817 458.66 9. San Francisco, Calif. .. 688,499,988 1,967.14 8..;, 1.69 41.978 22,037,527 524.98 10. Cincinnati, Ohio 357,751,033 1,052.21 17.37 3-14 63,240 27,189,069 429.93 II. Pittsburg, Pa • 352,157,335 1,055.94 15.35 2-39 69977 36,684,563 S24.24 12. New Orleans, La 145,673,869 485.58 29.50 3.2« 19,435 7,645,167 393.37 13. Detroit, Mich 353,212,142 1,177-37 11.48 2.46 45,707 18,718.081 409.52 14. Milwaukee, Wis 275,374,811 925.63 13-55 2.77 48-328 20,240.656 418.82 15. Washington, D. C. . . 254,408,333 886.44 21.17 4.64 24693 14.643,714 C593.03 16. Newark, N.J 158,585,63s 621.90 24.04 5.23 49,550 23 999 442 484-35 17. Jersey City, N. J 136,575,088 639.47 26.34 .1.67 19.499 9,126 042 468.03 18. Louisville, Ky 169,250,000 787.21 16.39 3.03 29.926 10.945.720 365-76 19. MmneapoHs, Mum.. . 170,354,175 811.21 17.28 4-32 26608 12,708,523 477.62 20. Providence, R. I 192,801,860 1,083.72 17.97 3-81 44.978 19 998.362 444.63 21. Indianapolis, Ind 193,777,425 1,061.79 8.80 2-88 25-511 10,882.914 426.60 22. Kansas City, Mo 199,442,100 1,156.19 13-79 2.78 15381 7.783 652 506.06 23. St. Paul, Minn 143,928,880 846.64 16-43 4.06 17,593 7 669.80s 435-96 24. Rochester, N. Y 145,561,215 856.24 22.24 3-77 33408 13 832,122 414.04 25. Denver, Colo 134364,115 959-74 14.06 S-os 10.926 6 824 003 624.37 26. Toledo, Ohio 106,767,350 711.78 14.74 3-73 15383 6 84s 687 445-02 27..Allegheny, Pa 108,004,30s 812.06 15.18 .3.36 20804 10.352 502 497.62 28. Columbus, Ohio 131,028,800 988.90 11.03 3.21 17-066 7 718824 452.29 29. Worcester, Mass 114,278,135 944-45 20.69 4-53 25.593 12 894.784 S03-84 30. Syracuse, N. Y 87,104,103 725.87 26.53 4.71 14917 6.735-177 451.51 31. New Haven, Conn. . . 99,502,618 888.42 14.60 3-84 20.536 10016 571 487.76 32. Paterson, N. J 68,098,589 632.96 18.04 4-59 30.190 12812.538 424.40 33. Fall River, Mass 74,554.380 696.77 21.64 4-37 32.780 11,739 129 358-12 34. St. Joseph, Mo 50,693,480 489.79 17-85 3-16 7.429 3 109 647 418.38 35. Omaha, Neb 90.935.465 826.69 15.88 4-31 7-537 3 804.076 504-72 36. Los Angeles. Calif. ... 146,755,860 1,334-14 10-03 3-38 8044 3 992 733 496-36 37. Memphis, Tenn 6^ 121,261 587.17 14-49 2-23 8433 3 641 435 431-81 38. Scranton, Pa 70,062.138 680.21 10.87 4-49 12 669 5 191 522 409-78 39. Lowell, Mass 71,674.588 754.72 19.63 4-63 31-377 11 821 633 376-76 40. Albany, N.Y 69,469 238 694.69 20.90 4-23 12389 6.111 059 493 ■ 26 41. Cambridge. Mass. .. . 96,216.87s 1,022.67 22.42 4-57 12 986 6,785070 522.49 42. Portland. Ore 144,535.123 1.537.61 6.64 1-86 8.572 4 347 876 S07.22 43. Atlanta Ga 79085.266 59956,729 841.33 631.12 14.72 17.25 2-55 S-07 9 3S6 14 361 3,103 989 5 904 670 331-76 411.16 44. Grand Rapids, Mich.. 69,791,230 85,320,567 13-Si 14.78 4-56 1-45 16869 16,692 7 959 792 5,181,659 471.86 310.43 46. Richmond, Va 927.40 (a) Derived from Table XIX of Bulletin No. 42 of the Department of Labor, September, 1902, which gives the assessed valuation of property, and the ratio of assessed to true value. (6) Columns 6 and 7, Census 1000. (c) Includes some government employes. The average wage excluding these is $508.46. REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 8S TABLE VI— Continued Value of Property and Comparative Expenditures in Certain Cities in 1902 In Manufacturing Industries 1900 (&) True value of real and personal property based on assessment for taxation (a) -a--S 6'sa, v,n Wealth 'Vn.d per 1 & capita "n " ESS sla H -s S96.19 $16-96 795- 9-1 15-63 977.77 18.24 535-89 15-73 557-77 15-32 358-18 29-21 715-73 14.89 821.26 12.37 745-26 23-36 982.74 9.92 781-82 15-94 977-45 15-78 810.33 13-08 1,241-79 14-80 849.20 19-22 758.42 17.84 680.92 19-95 437 64 22-72 783-63 13.96 705.92 15-86 2,065.12 5-60 538.77 17-33 851.42 13-75 829.86 16-41 831-43 9-os 743-16 24.18 476-54 16.90 330-71 26.08 697.59 10.26 677.61 14.89 772.07 10.55 888.74 15.02 1,070.34 1519 763.42 20.08 797-71 11.02 839-11 19.82 675-50 10.56 802-71 10.36 826-03 16.61 817-43 13-24 756-47 11-03 959 40 9-73 481 . 80 19-32 547-32 10-98 695-52 11-83 674.84 22-14 468 . 49 23.06 597-52 20.92 872-33 18.73 578-33 11.88 836-61 1311 848-55 8.4s 719-34 14.00 946-67 5.08 650. 13 15-67 1,147-90 14-19 674-32 25-89 707-86 21.88 859-01 15-93 784-53 12.79 Number of wage- earners Total Average wages 47. Nashville, Term 48. Seattle, Wash 49. Hartford, Conn 50. Reading, Pa 51. Wilmington, Del 52. Camden, N. T 53. Trenton, N.J 54. Bridgeport, Conn 55. Lynn, Mass 56. Oakland, Calif 57. Lawrence, Mass 58. New Bedford, Mass . . 59. Des Moines, Iowa 60. Springfield, Mass 61. Somerville, Mass 62. Troy, N. y 63. Hoboken, N. J 64. Evansville, Ind 65. Manchester, N. H 66. Utica, N. Y 67. Peoria, 111 68. Charleston, S. C 69. Savannah, Ga 70. Salt Lake City, Utah. . 71. San Antonio, Tex 72. Duluth, Minn 73. Erie, Pa 74. Elizabeth, N. J 75. Wilkesbarre, Pa 76. Kansas City, Kans. . . 77. Harrisburg, Pa 78. Portland, Me 79. Yonkers, N. Y 80. Norfolk, Va 81. Waterbury, Conn 82. Holyoke, Mass 83. Fort Wayne, Ind 84. Youngstown, Ohio. . . 85. Houston, Tex 86. Covington, Ky 87. Akron, Ohio 88. Dallas, Tex 89. Saginaw, Mich. 90. Lancaster, Pa 91. Lincoln, Neb 92. BrocktoEi, Mass 93. Binghamton, N. Y. . . 94. Augusta, Ga 95. Pawtucket, R. I 96. Altoona, Pa 97. WheeUng, W. Va 98. Mobile, Ala 99. Birmingham, Ala 100. Little Rock, Ark loi. Springfield, Ohio.. . . 102. G^veston. Tex 103. Tacoma, Wash 104. Haverhill, Mass 105. Spokane, Wash 106. Terre Haute, Ind. . . . $ 48,482,300 71,634,873 79,805,088 43.784-990 43-942,981 28,654,210 53,680,262 63,236,971 52,168,015 73,705,945 50,818,446 64,511,991 56,723,400 80,716,117 53,924,200 56,924,599 41,536-341 26.346,190 45,205,017 40,943.240 123.907,170 35,019,802 52,788,282 48,131,882 46,144,507 41,617,181 26,209 984 18,188 897 36,274.818 36 ,930.000 42,463.732 46,214.560 54,587,471 41,988,120 38.400.861 39-951,930 34,450,700 40,135,720 41.301.406 35.558.325 34,041,133 47.969 800 21,680,728 22.691,278 29-599 472 28,680 853 19,208.203 24 498,261 35.442 900 23.133 333 33.464 231 32,923 846 29,492,816 39 286,712 26,005,299 32,141,130 26.972,840 26.314.802 34.360,215 31.381,028 $3.50 3.69 4-83 4-83 4-45 8-45 4.14 2.84 4.56 4.05 3-6s 3 4-80 44-5 5-46 3-77 4-49 6.6s 2.78 4-13 1.60 2.21 2.06 5-49 2-34 S-81 5 -26 6.95 3-97 3-16 3-71 3-02 3-79 1-39 4.68 4-9S 3-24 3-62 3-03 2.61 4.81 1-93 6-56 3-92 3-98 4-87 8.14 3-30 3-80 3-83 2-82 1-39 1-72 1-94 4-31 3-00 6-08 4.66 4-58 4-41 8,447 8,480 13.363 19.165 16,055 8,941 14.457 19,301 17,492 4.012 22.358 16,409 4.557 10,123 4.342 21,564 6.443 7,279 19,032 10,759 8,022 5.027 2.870 2.977 3.073 3.998 9-339 10,497 5.977 10.S44 7,362 5.699 8.61s 4-334 14.914 13.454 7.255 9.150 4.588 3.972 9.030 3.756 4,866 9.349 1,736 10.986 6,106 7,092 12,776 8,090 7,219 2,827 6,675 2,751 6,638 2,058 4.347 10,600 1,779 5.427 $2,889,241 5,575.253 7,603,809 7,544,950 7,439.210 3,824,434 6,791,026 9,123,790 8,576,042 2,129,598 8,972.310 6,730.793 1.942.509 5.176299 2,199491 8,571 923 3.076 23s 2.883 975 7 .030 966 4,148,415 3.901,186 1 ,489 966 1,176,150 1,601,253 1,755.008 2.145444 4.574625 6.024.497 2.286,676 4,486,259 2,949 544 2,612,817 3,888 892 1,571,229 7,564,198 5,730 998 2,928 969 4,951,460 2,409.250 1,555.089 3.971.307 1,852.48s 1.936.558 3.323748 789-356 6.166.462 2.461.0S4 1.806 654 5,230.268 4,619.828 3,096.730 1,139.605 2,587.221 1,384.722 3,160.119 981.827 2.356 028 5.03s 882 1,080 618 2.297,585 $342 . 04 657-46 569.02 393.68 461.49 427-74 469-74 472.71 490.28 530.81 401 • 30 410. 18 426.27 S11.34 506 . 56 397-51 477.61 396.21 369-43 . 385-58 486.31 296.39 406 . 32 537-87 571-10 536 - 63 489.84 573-92 382.58 S02.81 400 . 64 440.92 451-41 362 - 53 507-19 425-97 403-71 541-14 525-12 391-51 439-79 493-21 397-98 355-52 454-70 561.30 403-06 254-75 409 - 38 571-05 428.97 403-11 387-60 503-35 476.06 477.08 541-99 475-08 607.43 423-55 (a) Derived from Table XIX of Bulletin No. 42 of the Department of Labor, September, 1902, which gives the assessed valuation of property, and the ratio of assessed to true value. (b) Columns 6 and 7, Census 1900. 86 ISTATIONAL EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION TABLE VI— Concluded Value of Property and Comparative In Manutactuking Industries Expenditures d, Certain Cities in 190 2 1900 (6) True value of ■gsi S'sl ,Sg'S Number real and persona] Wealth = s,* ■V'-SR of Total Average property based per ■^s." wage- Wages Wages on assessment capita Wrt > |o- earners for taxation (a) PA Is: 107. Dubuque, Iowa $35,661,350 , 950.97 S 9-57 $2.65 5,503 $2,012,153 $365.65 28,147,640 24,729,34s 740.73 579-14 9.82 12.38 2.94 3-31 4,509 8,257 1,918,452 3,409,637 425-47 412-94 109. South Bend, Ind 3x0. Salem, Mass 28,148,743 776.52 19-62 4.19 6,424 2,842,678 424-51 III. Johnstown, Pa 21,094,500 527.36 10.58 4-95 6,116 3,213,189 525-37 J12. Ehnira, N. Y 17.242,953 472.41 27.32 7.54 4,914 1,965,056 399-89 113. Allentown, Pa 27,426,469 761.85 8-50 3-18 8,447 3,150,070 373-03 114. Davenport, Iowa 34,789,210 953 ■ 13 985 4-31 4-348 1,892,737 435.31 IIS. McKeesport, Pa 26,908,898 717.57 12.80 3.90 7,605 4,370.381 574.67 116. Springfield, 111 117. Chelsea, Mass 33,326,855 925.75 11.25 ,^-18 3,871 1,730891 447.14 23,510,770 666.71 28.06 5.29 3-332 1,625,875 487-96 118. Chester, Pa 22,635,006 646.71 10 -55 4 12 7,682 3,462,196 454.69 119. York, Pa : 23,960.601 27,446,600 647.58 791.79 8.54 20.77 3.22 584 7,785 3,082 2,679.175 1,520.658 344.1s 493.40 120. Maiden, Mass 121. Topeka, Kans 29.399,805 852.17 11.10 3.49 3,758 2,110.721 561.66 122. Newton, Mass 39.356,080 1,633.51 17.57 3.33 3.094 581.887 511.28 123. Sioux City, Iowa 23.392.416 658.94 15.43 5-27 3,104 1,485,066 478-44 124. Bayonne, N. J 29,785,193 851.01 16.42 4-65 5083 2,856.776 562.03 125. Knoxville, Tenn 20,148.797 584.02 12.77 2-55 4,714 2.473543 312.59 126. Schenectady, N.Y... 16.928,862 451-44 15-68 3-23 4,431 2,527352 570.38 127. Fitchburg, Mass 24 033,489 751.05 20.20 4-52 6,796 2,113 078 458.08 128. Superior, Wis 2S 808,972 806.53 15.84 4.63 1,958 925,776 472.82 129. Rockford,IU 30.829,920 963.44 9.02 3.25 6,620 2,765,709 417.78 130. Taunton, Mass 21,305,180 686.47 21.70 5-43 7,102 3,331,680 469.12 131. Canton, Ohio 21,157.300 641 . 13 15563 5-21 6,455 2,970,254 460. IS 132. Butte, Mont 32,669,267 1,020.91 15.70 5-45 1,379 1,355,268 982.8a 133. MontRomery, Ala. . . 19,020,000 603.81 1S-19 1.87 2-359 802.188 340.05 134. Auburn, N. Y 14,101,715 402 . 91 20.34 5.60 6,530 2,706,948 414-54 135. Chattanooga, Tenn.. 21,045,492 657.67 12.68 2.25 5472 1,889,79s 345.36 130. East St. Louis, lU. .. 27,019,595 771.99 11.58 2.97 5,642 2,624,749 465.22 137. Joliet, III 19,105,115 597.03 12.45 3-44 6,523 3.957.529 606.70 (a) Derived from Table XIX of Bulletin No. 42 of the Department of Labor, September, 1902, which gives the assessed valuation of property, and the ratio of assessed to the true value. (b) Columns 6 and 7, Census 1900. DISCUSSION J. N. Wilkinson, president of the State Normal Schools of Kansas, Emporia, Kans. — The question of taxation is fundamental to any people. The authority to tax is the author- ity to take away property, even to the extent of taking away the means of living. In taxing for the support of public enterprises, the authorities levying taxes should be guided not alone by the abiUty of the people to pay taxes, but also by considerations as to the purposes among which the taxes are to be distributed. Teachers are in danger of over-magnifying the demands of education, of failing to have a due sense of the relative importance of enterprises to be supported by taxation. There may be such a thing as raising for schools money that never should have been raised. The fines and forfeitures of criminals have, in nearly all times and places in this country, been devoted to education, and there seems to be a feeling that money for education is good, no matter what its source. Possibly the lawmakers have believed that collections of fines and forfeitures would be made more thoroly if the proceeds were set apart to a good use. The turning into the school fund REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON TAXATION 87 of receipts for licenses to sell intoxicating liquors seems a clear case of taking "tainted money." Perhaps a justification is to be found in the fact that the schools are supposed to repair the damage done by the saloon. Is it not rather paying the schools for the privilege of destroying some of their best products ? Does not the giving of this money to the schools do something to give respectability to the traffic? The old-time lottery did not seem such a very bad thing when its proceeds were used to support a college. There is one statement of cause and effect which I am not able to prove. We are told that the maximum of average expenditure for schools in a certain state is the cause of the maximum of average earning power which, it is said, is foimd in that state. If the same state could show the smallest percentage of illiteracy and the smallest percentage of pauperism, and a few other things of that kind, the argument would be more convincing. We should all like to be able to show excellent results from the liberal support of the schools, but it is altogether possible that the taxes raised for education may be so unwisely spent as not to seciu-e the best results, or that the influx of poor and ignorant immigrants may make the heaviest tax insufficient. It is possible that in the state showing the highest average of earnings per capita, an immense population may be underpaid, and a small aristocracy, for which the schools cannot claim all the credit, may be greatly overpaid. I do not say that schools do not increase efficiency, but I suggest that the highest average income may not be in the state whose conditions are best, and yet I do say that generous taxation for the support of schools will pay abundant returns under such management as we have a right to expect the schools shall have. Nathan C. Schaeffer, of Pennsylvania. — It is practically impossible to find a community in the United States that does not spend more money for whisky and tobacco than for education. Careful study of the problem of taxation for school purposes should te carried on in colleges and universities. Frank A. Fitzpatkick, of Boston, in closing the discussion, stated that the committee had been very careful not to draw any definite conclusions from the statistics presented. He warned the members of the Council against making any hasty generalizations, or invidious comparisons relative to the management of the schools of different cities, based upon the expense ratio as disclosed by the figures submitted in the report. The investiga- tions of the committee, however, had led them to see that prior to the war period, 1861-65, a much larger proportion of municipal expenditure, for running expenses, was allotted to schools, than in the period since 1861-65; ^??>-™< that in this earlier period a much larger proportion of the cost of the schools was expended for teachers' salaries, and the items grouped under head of instruction, than has been expended for purposes of instruc- tion in the period since the war. This seems to indicate that the charges so freely made, that the schools are extravagantly managed, cannot be maintained. On the contrary, the growing demands of other departments of the city government seem to be continually encroaching upon the resources of the school. It is the hope of the committee that the different states, thru their state teachers' associations, may be able to take up this discussion after study of the question locally, and thereby make a basis that will be available for future comparison. i i!l!£h!i!:i!l 1! ijlii'ti II 11 mmr. m iiliili; mil :■■■ iiiiil .ijiliiili Iiliili!! ;:!'■:!;; :,;[ '■'■ ill'" 'I'lllli! I'l>''- !if!"!:i":!l!:; Iijilii:::'!-!!': ■•ii'.fi! I hi~: § V Xf