Page images
PDF
EPUB

general school purposes. The supervisor of the township assesses the taxes voted by the school district, as well as others laid upon it, which is collected by the township treasurer and disbursed by him on order of the proper district officer.

Wisconsin.—The annual school meeting elects a district school board, a member of which is treasurer. No district may contain more than 36 square miles, and any township may adopt the township system. The district meeting levies taxes for support of schools, which taxes are assessed and collected by town, whose treasurer appears to hold district money subject to the order of the district board. The money apportioned to the districts by the State (teachers' money) comes to them through the hands of the county and township officials; money raised by township is apportioned by township to districts.

Minnesota.-Any district may contain an entire township or 36 square miles in different townships. The district meeting elects a district board of trustees, one of whom is treasurer. In addition to the 1 mill county tax assessed by county on each district and returned to it, each district meeting may vote a tax for support of schools or for building purposes. It would appear that the district treasurer receives all money raised and in the district. He disburses all moneys coming to the district either mediately or directly from county officials.

Iowa.-Each civil township and each originally independent school district is a [township] school district, but each township district is divided into subdistricts. Each subdistrict elects a subdistrict school director and the subdistrict school directors form the township school district board. This board estimates the amount necessary to support the schools, which the county "civil" authority levies and eventually pays over in the same manner as other township taxes are paid over. The county "civil” authority also levies and apportions a county tax. The financial agents of State and county school funds are the same as control State and county revenne. Each board of township directors has its own treasurer, who receives money from county "civil" treasurer.

Missouri.-The school meeting elects a board of district school directors and fixes the rate of tax to be levied, which is apparently collected and disbursed by “civil” township authority. State moneys are apparently disbursed by county "civil" treasurer.

Arkansas.-District school meeting elects district board of directors and may levy tax, which apparently is collected and paid over by county "civil" authority.

Teras.-The voters of each community (district) elect a board of district trustees and may vote tax upon itself, which is levied and collected by county authorities, by whom it is disbursed, as are (presumably) all school moneys coming from the State treasury.

North Dakota.-Each civil township not organized under the district system is a [township] school district, which elects 3 school directors and a treasurer. The board levies tax by resolution, which tax is collected by county auditor and is paid by his order on the county treasurer to the district treasurer.

South Dakota.-Each civil township in each county not organized under the district community system is a school township district, but each school township district may be subdivided by vote. The voters elect a district school board, and may levy taxes for the support of schools. One member of the board is elected as treasurer. The tax voted by district is levied by "civil" county authority at the same time as county school taxes are levied. The school district treasurer disburses school moneys on order of board, which moneys he receives from county "civil" treasurer on order of the county superintendent.

Nebraska.-The electors of each school district elect a district school board, one member of which is treasurer, and decide what tax shall be levied (through the county "civil" authority). The State and county money is held in county treasury until apportioned by county superintendent, when it is received and disbursed by dis trict treasurer. The district money is paid by county "civil" treasurer to school district treasurer on order of district board.

Kansas.-The voters, in school meeting, of each school district, elect a district school board, one member of which is the treasurer, and may levy a tax. State and county money is paid to county "civil" treasurer, from whom it is drawn by school district treasurer, after being apportioned by county superintendent.

Colorado. The voters of each district elect a district board of school directors, and may levy tax if money received from State and county taxes is insuflicient to pay school expenses. Such tax is levied by county "civil" authority, and held in county treasury as are the other school moneys coming from State and county, subject to the order of the district board.

Wyoming. The voters of the district cleet a board of directors, who may levy a tax, which is levied by the county “civil” authority, at the same time that the county school taxes are raised; but the collector shall pay the district tax directly to the treasurer of the district that voted it. State and county school money are held in county treasury subject to the order of proper officers.

Montana.-The voters of each school district elect a district board of trustees, and may tax itself for school purposes, but such tax is collected by county "civil" authority, and when collected is held to the credit of the district. State and county money is apportioned by county school superintendent.

Idaho. The voters of the school district elect a board of school trustees and vote tax which shall be levied by county "civil" authority, which levies and collects the county school tax. The county superintendent apportions State and county money in county treasury to each district to whose order it is thereafter subject. In independent districts the board of trustees may levy tax.

Washington. The voters of each school district elect a board of district directors, which may levy tax if ordered by vote of electors. Such is levied and held by county "civil" authorities subject to order of district, as are the State and county school money when apportioned by county school superintendent.

Oregon. The voters of each district elect a board of district school directors, and may levy tax. The county treasurer is the custodian of all funds apportioned to districts in the county, and holds such funds subject to order of clerk of school district when they have been apportioned by county superintendent.

California. The voters of the district elect a district board of school trustees, and may vote tax, which the county “civil” authority levies and collects at the time of collecting county school taxes. The county superintendent apportions State and county school money to districts, but the State funds may be used only for paying teachers. The county treasurer seems to be the general custodian of all school money received by or raised in county, cities excepted. No county assessor, collector, or treasurer is entitled to fees for handling school money.

Nevada. Each village, town, or incorporated city is a school district, which elects a district board of school trustees, and may levy tax, which is levied and collected by county "civil" authority at the same time as county school taxes are collected, all of which are collected into county treasury as on special deposit. State school money is devoted entirely to paying teachers, and it and the county school money are apportioned to the districts by county superintendent.

CHAPTER XXXV.

THE CONVEYANCE OF CHILDREN TO SCHOOL.

The question of the consolidation of rural schools continues to receive the thoughtful attention of educators. It has been frequently demonstrated and is generally conceded that it would be better, both on economical and on pedagogical grounds, to unite the many small and weak schools of a township, dispersed over a large extent of territory, into a few strong, well-equipped and well-conducted graded schools, located at convenient points.

The adoption of the town system in the management of school affairs in several States has rendered this procedure more feasible, by placing the control of all the schools under one central authority, with power to locate and discontinue schools wherever needed in its discretion, and which is competent to reduce the disjecta membra of a school system to healthy and well-rounded educational organisms. The chief hindrance to consolidation now to be considered lies in the distance some of the pupils would have to travel from their homes to reach the nearest union or graded school, in thinly populated sections.

The expedient has been tried on a considerable scale in Massachusetts, and is being favorably considered elsewhere, of transporting the more distant pupils to school at the public expense. The importance of this experiment and the influence it may exert in determining the future character of rural and village schools, would seem to render it advisable to recapitulate what has been undertaken and accomplished in this direction.

A law of Massachusetts approved April 1, 1869, reads as follows: "Any town in this Commonwealth may raise by taxation or otherwise, and appropriate money to be expended by the school committee in their discretion, in providing for the conveyance of pupils to and from the public schools."

The then secretary of the State board, J. White, refers to this act as "introduced into the legislature through the efforts of a practical man from one of our rural towns of large territory and sparse population, where the constant problem is, how to bring equal school privileges to all without imposing undue taxation.

"In too many cases the town seems to have forgotten that the most important element in the solution of the problem has been the character of the school, and have bent their efforts to making them accessible to all. This has led to such an unwise multiplication of them as not only to shorten the time of their continuance, but greatly to diminish their efficiency, while at the same time the expense of maintaining them has been largely enhanced.

"The act recognizes the fact that it is a far better policy for the town to spend a few dollars in conveying, in severe and stormy weather, and through drifts of snow, children who have no means of conveyance, to a well appointed and good school, rather than to waste hundreds in planting small and feeble schools at their doors. "I have little doubt that the future history of not a few of them will amply justify the wisdom of the grant.

It is to be remembered that the law is not compulsory. It simply gives the power to the towns, whose citizens are amply qualified to judge as to the propriety of exercising it. Certainly there is little danger of its abuse."

Secretary White then quotes from a letter written by the chairman of the school committee of an important town in Worcester County, which he says "shows what has already been accomplished by the aid of this act and of the act to abolish the school district system, and is a sufficient reply to the sneering criticism to which it has been exposed in high quarters." The letter runs as follows:

"We have been consolidating and grading since spring. Instead of 11 schools of the old six-months grade, we have now 5 primary and 2 grammar, and shall be able to keep at least eight months this year, with no addition to the appropriation, though we pay better wages and transport the children in two districts at an expense of $10 per week."

The first general statement of the results in Massachusetts of the law authorizing the public conveyance of pupils to school was made by Supt. W. L. Eaton, of Concord, in 1893, in a pamphlet prepared for the Massachusetts public school exhibit at the World's Columbian Exposition. In it he said:

"Since the year 1869 the cities and towns of Massachusetts have been authorized by law to appropriate and expend money for the conveyance of pupils to and from the public schools. At first this anthority was used, in accordance with its apparent purpose, mainly to convey pupils to the high school, as generally there was but one such school in a town. Within a few years, however, many communities have used this authority to increase the educational advantages of the children-constantly decreasing in numbers-who live in the districts at a distance from the centers of population. This has been accomplished by closing many district schools and transporting, at public expense, their pupils to the neighboring district school or to the village.

*

*

*

"In order to secure full information regarding this important movement, a circular letter of inquiry was sent to 165 cities and towns. Replies have been received from 135, and the auswers tabulated. The following summaries are of interest:

"I. The cities and towns that reported an expenditure for 1891-92 of $33,500, will expend for the current year $18,300.

"II. Fifteen towns and cities report conveyance to high school only, at a cost of $8,650.20 for 462 pupils.

"III. It appears that in the remaining 120 towns and cities there were, prior to the beginning of this movement to consolidate, 632 outlying schools. Of this number, 250 have been closed within the past twelve years, and to-day nearly 2,000 pupils are being conveyed to adjacent district schools, or to the village schools.

"IV. To the question, Is it the policy of your town ultimately to close all the schools outside the centers of population? twenty-five answer yes, without qualification; forty answer no; and nearly all the others reply that their towns are working for that end, or are considering the question, or hope to accomplish such a result. V. To the request of a brief statement of the reasons that determined the towns to close district schools and transport the pupils to other schools, the replies indicate two distinct purposes-one financial and the other educational. In many of the towns of the State the depopulation of the districts outside the villages has made it cheaper to transport to other schools the few pupils living in the districts than to teach them in situ. In other towns the desire to make strong central schools, and the purpose to give all the children of the town the benefit of better teachers, better appliances, and better supervision, have been the dominant motives to determine consolidation.

"VI. To the question whether the results have been satisfactory, there is a substantial agreement in the affirmative. The most emphatic expressions of satisfaction come from those towns in which the educational motives have been the dominant ones. Repeatedly comes the assertion from this latter class of towns that the parents would not return to the old system of isolated schools if it were possible.

"The town of Concord is regarded generally and properly as the pioneer in this movement to close all district schools and to convey their pupils to the graded central schools."

State Agent G. T. Fletcher thus reports (Mass., 1893-94):

"The exodus of young men and women to the cities of Massachusetts and the States of the West has left many of the towns poor in people and property. For what these rural communities have done and may do for the Commonwealth they deserve aid in their time of need. The State should cooperate with the towns in securing for their children educational advantages equal to those possessed by wealthy communities. The school population has diminished in a greater ratio than that of the adults because large families of children were common formerly, uncommon now; but the number of schools has not been reduced in like proportion to the number of the children, and as a result many schools are too small to be interesting and profitable.

"Last year sixteen towns in three counties had a school attendance of only 1,076 pupils, an average of 11 to a school, for seven months in the year. The average cost per pupil for schooling was $18.33. As some schools had only 6 pupils, and a few only 3, the cost per pupil was much greater, being as high as $60 in the smallest school, while in a school of 25 pupils, the cost averaged less than $8. These figures show the expensiveness of educating pupils in small schools, a fact which the people do not seem to realize. The average wages of teachers in these towns was only $5.50 a week, for which sum good teachers can not be secured.

"Two things may be regarded as objects to be kept in view-efficiency and economy. Means to secure these ends are comfortable and convenient schoolhouses; necessary appliances; no more schools than are needed; intelligent teaching and skilled superintendence. There can not be efficiency without economy in school matters. A scattered population with small means must endure some privations not

« PreviousContinue »