IMPEFSSIOXS OF AMERICA. 



341 



" at the rate of one quota for each qualified 

 teacher " who has taught in the district-schools. 1 



The " taxing " powers of the local educational 

 authorities are not so great as the "rating" pow- 

 ers of our own Boards of Education under the act 

 of 1870. Where the original " township " organi- 

 zation is preserved, the tax is fixed, I believe, by 

 the meeting of legal voters. In the cities the 

 " appropriation " is made by the city Council, and 

 the Council has power to revise the estimates of 

 the Education Board. When in New York I heard 

 that the board could not induce the Council to 

 make as large an appropriation as they wanted, 

 although I am bound to say that at the close of 

 1875 the Education Board had an unexpended bal- 

 ance of more than £56,000. In Chicago, the com- 

 mittee of the Board on Buildings and Grounds re- 

 port in 1876 that "on account of the failure on 

 the part of the city to enforce the collection of 

 the taxes levied for the past three years, your 

 committee deemed it advisable not to contract for 

 any new buildings during the year, but as far as 

 possible have met the wants for increased school 

 accommodation by renting buildings. . . . We 

 would urge that the city Council grant the board, 

 as soon as possible, all that they have asked for, 

 as in every instance the demand is great, and in 

 some cases it has been so for the last two years, 

 and as several of the lots have been purchased 

 and paid for, it is a loss not to erect the build- 

 ings." 2 



But, generally, the popular feeling in favor of 

 the schools is so strong that the boards have no 

 difficulty in obtaining necessary funds. In the 

 elections which were being held in New York on 

 the day that I sailed for England I noticed an 

 amusing illustration of the manner in which the 

 popular zeal for education is appealed to in mu- 

 nicipal and political contests. On the upper half 

 of a large placard some of the conspicuous repre- 

 sentatives of the dominant party in the city were 

 represented as indulging in most luxurious splen- 

 dor, and on the lower half they were handing a mis- 

 erable pittance to a half-starved " schoolmarm." 



The pressure of the school-tax varies very 

 greatly in different cities and different States. In 

 the city and county of New York the total sum 



1 Dr. Frasev's "Report," p. 48. Mr. Eaton's ac- 

 count of the New York State law (" Report," pp. 289- 

 291) is too brief to include all details; but one of the 

 paragraphs seems to imply that the principle of dis- 

 tribution which existed at the time of Dr. Fraser's 

 visit is still maintained. 



2 "Report of the Chicago Board of Education," 

 1876, p. 70. It should be remembered that at this time 

 Chicago was snfferins from the fire. 



apportioned to educational purposes in 1875 was 

 $3,653,000 ; $3,068,345 came from the local tax ; 

 this was at the rate of about 10s. 2d. per head 

 for the whole population. This does not repre- 

 sent, however, the whole amount raised by the 

 city and county of New York for educational 

 purposes. In the same year they paid for State 

 school-tax $1,503,983 ; the amount apportioned 

 to them from the State tax was $530,350, and 

 from the State school fund $54,303. The to- 

 tal received from the State was $584,654, as 

 against $1,506,914 paid. Including the State 

 school-tax and the city school-tax, the popula- 

 tion of New York paid in 1875 about 15s. 3d. per 

 head for educational purposes. 



In the city of Philadelphia $1,646,929 was 

 raised by the local tax ; nothing was received by 

 the Education Board either from local funds or 

 from the State. The tax for the city schools was 

 rather more than 8s. 2d. per head for the whole 

 population. 1 



In the same year (1875) the total educational 

 expenditure of the city of Boston was $2,081,- 

 043. The returns are defective, but they ap- 

 pear to show that the whole amount was derived 

 from the locaJ tax. If this impression is correct, 

 the people of Boston paid, per bead, 24s. id. for 

 the support of their own schools. 



The cost per head of the education of the 

 scholars in these three cities also varies very 

 much. In New York it amounts to 114s. Sd. on 

 the number of scholars in average attendance ;. 

 in Philadelphia to a fraction over 7Ss. Gd. ; in 

 Boston to 147s. 6c?. Deducting " incidental ex- 

 penses," the cost per head on average attendance 

 of " instruction and supervision " is 89s. 8d. in 

 New York, and 105s. 3d. in Boston. The analy- 

 sis of cost is not given for Philadelphia. 2 



From a table in Mr. Eaton's report it appears 



1 In 1£76 the tax was a little over 9s. per head. 



2 The results in the above paragraphs are worked 

 out from Table II. of Mr. Eaton's " Report," pp. 55C- 

 585, which gives some particulars concerning the 

 revenue of the school boards not contained in the 

 annual reports which were courteously furnished me 

 by the clerks of the boards. The summary of Mr. 

 Eaton's tables on pp. xlvi. et seq. of his " Report" is 

 misleading. The figures given in columns 19 and 20, 

 as showing the average expenditure per capita of 

 enrollment in public schools, are the same as those 

 given in columns 120 and 121 of the complete tables, 

 as showing expenses per capita of average attendance. 

 I have treated the figures as representing the cost per 

 head on average attendance, believing that the sum- 

 mary tables are wrong and the complete tables 

 right. It must, however, be always remembered in 

 dealing with American educational statistics that the 

 Central Government has no power to enforce the 



