These two points are to be kept in view. The funds must be distributed so as to equalize as far as possible school privileges, and at the same time stimulate the community to take advantage of the opportunities thus afforded their children. A few extracts from letters and reports will illustrate the methods in use at present, and also show the trend of educational opinion.

Illinois. The state apportions the amount derived from the state school fund to the common schools on the basis of the number of persons under twenty-one years of age residing in the counties, as shown by the national census.

New Jersey. Our ungraded schools derive most of their entire revenue from this state in the following manner: Two hundred dollars per each teacher employed and the balance per capita according to school census.

Pennsylvania.-The revenues for the support of the ungraded schools in Pennsylvania are distributed on the basis of the number of taxables at the triennial assessment.

Florida. The one-mill tax is apportioned among the counties on the basis of the average attendance upon schools.

Mississippi.-The money is distributed to the counties and separate school districts on the basis of educable children in each.

Nebraska. The interest of the permanent state endowment is apportioned to the school population.

Rhode Island.-The state money for schools is divided in all the cities and towns upon two different plans. Each town gets one hundred dollars for each school up to fifteen in number, and after that, all that is left is divided in proportion to the number of children of school age.

Minnesota. The current school fund is apportioned to the districts in proportion to the number of pupils who have attended school at least forty days in the

year.

tion.

Virginia.-State school money is apportioned on the basis of the school popula

Ohio. The auditor of state shall apportion the state common school fund to the several counties of the state semi-annually, upon the basis of enumeration of youth therein. But the law, in another section, provides that so much of the contingent fund as may be set apart by a township board for the continuance of schools after the state funds are exhausted shall be so apportioned by the board that the schools in all the sub-districts of the township shall be continued the same length of time each year.

Iowa Report.-The suggestion made by my predecessor, that the apportionment of money, at present derived from the interest of the permanent school fund and other sources, should be based upon the average daily attendance for the preceding year, as reported by the county superintendent to the superintendent of public instruction, carries with it much force. It seems the only just and equitable way, when we consider that the money would thus reach those schools in which there is the most work to be done on account of the large number of pupils. In fact, such an enactment would doubtless increase the attendance, and act as a very efficient auxiliary to a compulsory law.

Washington Report.-The manner of apportioning the common school fund among the various districts is a matter that has often been the subject of interesting discussions; and, while the method at present in vogue seems not to have been very seriously criticised since its adoption, there are grave doubts as to its efficacy in accomplishing the best results possible with the fund at our disposal.

South Dakota.-The apportionments of state and county general school fund should be based on the total attendance as shown by the annual reports of district clerks, and not on the total number of persons of school age. When the amount of each quarterly apportionment is made dependent upon the school attendance, there can be no doubt that more pupils will be enrolled in our schools than there have been heretofore, and that their attendance at school will become more regular. Such an amendment would probably increase the per cent of attendance much more rapidly than our compulsory attendance law has yet done.

New Jersey, 1893.-A fair distribution of state school moneys would require that a part, if not all, should be apportioned on the basis of the number of pupils actually enrolled or taught in the schools, and not as now, wholly on the basis of the number of children of school age, whether enrolled and taught, or otherwise.

It is plainly the consensus of opinion that the prevailing system of distributing school funds, pro rata, upon the school population as a basis, is detrimental to the interests of the rural schools. The result of this plan of distribution has been to give an undue advantage to the schools in the strong districts, and to leave those in thinly settled and impoverished districts helpless and unprovided for. Several states have already sought a remedy. If it is right to tax all for the benefit of all, then it is just to so distribute the funds thus raised as to accrue to the advantage of the entire community.

The most feasible methods of distribution cannot be discussed without reference to the next topic in this report; that of organization. We, however, cannot fail to reach the conclusion that justice to the rural schools demands that some method be devised which will insure a reasonable support to the weakest school, and at the same time act as a stimulant in obtaining the highest possible per cent of attendance.

ORGANIZATION.

The limits of this report will only allow to us to say, that, with but very few exceptions, the judgment of state superintendents, as gathered from their replies to the circular sent to them and from various state reports, is strongly in favor of the township as the unit of organization.

A few extracts from these papers must suffice. However, the old maxim applies, "From one learn all:"

Missouri. I prefer the township system, because it operates on a larger scale and is likely to give expression to the sentiment of better men.

New Jersey. The system (district) introduced many years ago, whereby townships were divided into school districts to fit the then prevailing conditions, is today antiquated, inefficient, and expensive.

Michigan. We prefer the township system, because it would lead to a uniformity of text-books, taxation, and length of school year for all of the children of the township, and equal facilities so far as teachers and apparatus are concerned.

Wisconsin Report, 1894.-In my judgment, the substitution of the township for the district, as the unit of the system, would result in the increased efficiency of the common schools.

Mississippi.-I believe the township system is the true philosophical system for public school organization, although we cannot reach it, owing to uneven distribution of population.

Texas. I prefer the township system, with the county system as a close second choice. The district is too small to permit the organization of schools of different grades. The county is larger than necessary. The township is free from both objections.

Pennsylvania.-We prefer the township organization to district and county

organization.

Indiana.-We tried the district system several years ago, and should consider it taking a long step backward to drop the township and take up the district system again.

Vermont. It is doubtful if any law (township system) enacted in the State of Vermont, received under such antagonistic and discouraging circumstances, ever won more or stancher supporters than our present law during the short time it has been in operation.

Ohio. To anyone who will take the trouble to give this subject careful study, the conclusion will be evident that the township is unquestionably the correct educational unit.

Iowa. The only feasible remedy for these evils is to return as soon as possible to the provision of the organic law of 1858, making each civil township a district for school purposes.

New Hampshire.-The most far-reaching change made in the last ten years has been the substitution of the town system for the effete and impotent system of district schools. The district school had lost much of its usefulness, and was, in many towns, no longer susceptible of improvement. Under the town system it is regaining its power, and a better educated class of children is growing up in the rural sections of the state.

Rhode Island.-As fast as our towns have abolished the district by their own vote, they at once begin to consider the matter of a high school. So long as the districts exist, we shall not have high schools; but if we can get rid of the districts, we shall ultimately be able to provide high school facilities for the greater part, if not for all, of the children of the state.

The principal arguments in favor of making the civil township the unit may be stated briefly as follows:

1. The number of school officials would be greatly reduced; and, hence, less liability to loss of funds through incompetency or dishonesty. In Iowa, 27,000 school officers are serving as members of school boards. The secretaries and treasurers receive $135,000 annually as compensation for their services. In Minnesota, the township system would reduce the number of school officers from 18,000 to 3,000. In Wisconsin, it is estimated that the sum of $190,000 is wasted annually upon unnecessary schools. Under the district system, there is a great waste of supplies in one school, and a want of the same in another; buildings are allowed to become dilapidated for want of attention; several school officials are paid, when one officer

would suffice. In these respects the township system would effect a saving of thousands of dollars annually. It is simply applying business principles to the business affairs of the schools.

2. The township board of education, a certain proportion going out of office every year, should be armed with the same powers and exercise the same duties as the board of education in the city or in the independent district. They should appoint teachers, locate buildings, select text-books, determine courses of study, designate what schools pupils may attend, consolidate schools when their numbers are re duced to a certain extent; and, in fact, transact any business which may lawfully come before them. Subdistrict lines would disappear and a most fruitful cause of trouble cease at once. In unity there is strength. To place all the schools of a township under the control of one governing board would tend to equalize length of terms, strengthen the teacher's position, and lift the schools to a higher place in the estimation of the public.

3. The township system affords the only means through which we may hope to reach township high schools and township supervision. We believe these two points are essential in any system looking to the improvement of the ungraded schools. The township high school has become a necessity, if we are to lift the rural school out of the rut into which it has fallen. To promote the highest efficiency of such a school it must be in complete and perfect harmony with the schools of the township. This cannot be the case unless they are all under the control of one board and supported from the same general funds. The establishment of these high schools would furnish a needed incitement to the pupils in the lower grades in the country, and would stimulate them to remain longer in school that they might graduate at the end of the course. It would dissipate the aimlessness of study and instruction so prevalent in the country schools of to-day. The answer to the question, Is it possible to arrange the course so as to lead up to the establishment of the township high school? is invariably in the affirmative. Township supervision is a natural result of the township system. It has already become an established feature of the Massachusetts system. It is rapidly gaining ground in Ohio under the Workman law. It is the objective point at which the board of education is aiming in New Jersey, and other states are developing the idea of either township or of some other form of close supervision in connection with the ungraded schools.

The establishment of the township high school would tend to strengthen the county superintendency. These schools would afford better facilities for the academic instruction of teachers. They could be utilized as centers of normal instruction. The township superintendent would naturally become the ally of the county superintend

ent in conducting educational meetings, in grading the schools, and in fostering a healthy public opinion in favor of good schools, competent teachers, and liberal salaries.

4. The adoption of the township system equalizes the burdens of taxation, and renders it possible to distribute state school funds in inverse ratio with the wealth of the towns. If the towns of the state have a valuation upon a common basis, then it is just, that, to a certain extent, those lowest in the scale should receive the greatest aid from state funds, in order that every community may be sure of good schools. This is the Massachusetts plan. In some states, notably in Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Rhode Island, a fixed sum is set aside for every school before any general distribution is made. The method of determining the exact amount thus placed to the credit of each school may be different in different states, but we believe the underlying principle to be correct, that public policy demands that the strong shall help bear the burdens of the weak. The remainder of state or county funds should be distributed to each township in a ratio based upon the actual attendance of pupils as shown by the record of the preceding year, with a possible discrimination in favor of those towns most willing to impose taxes upon themselves.

There is not time to discuss other points. Under the Workman law, in Ohio, many of the benefits of the township system may be obtained without abolishing subdistrict lines. Under the Boxwell law, in the same state, the tuition of graduates from ungraded schools may be paid by the township board in the high school of any neighboring city or village of the county. Such a provision in the law is. practically introducing the county high school, and in many states would be a most desirable feature. In Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and other states, township boards are authorized to pay out of public funds for the transportation of pupils to such schools as it seems best for them to attend. Thus they are enabled in small towns to bring all the children to a central school, or to unite two or more small schools, lessening the expense, and at the same time improving the educational advantages of the townships. These points, with many others, are all germane to our general subject, but there is not time to discuss them in this connection. It must suffice to say, that we can reach no other conclusion than this: The substitution of the township for the district as the unit of organization is absolutely es sential to the highest good of the ungraded schools.

SUPPLY OF TEACHERS.

The great question of the supply of competent teachers for the ungraded schools remains to be discussed. Of every one hundred pupils enrolled in the public schools, Texas reports that eighty are in the