32 Anderson William Clark 



has been accomplished in these states can be accomphshed in 

 other states. 



Second — It is urged that a state board of control crushes out 

 the individuality of superintendents. We have already seen that 

 in Iowa and Minnesota superintendents exercise greater powers 

 than are given under advisory state boards of charity. These 

 superintendents select their own assistants and employees and 

 have power to discharge them for cause. We have also seen that 

 the superintendents, being relieved of the burdens of financial 

 details by the board of control, give their time to the study of 

 the problems involved in their work and to preserving and ex- 

 tending the humane, educational, and reformatory purposes for 

 which the institutions were established. As a matter of actual 

 experience it has been found that the individuality and efficiency 

 of superintendents have been greatly increased under this system. 



Third — It is urged that a state board of control does not and 

 can not study the problems of charity and correction as is done 

 by an advisory board. Ohio, Indiana, and other state boards of 

 charity are mentioned as illustrations. It is claimed that three 

 men on a state board of control, burdened with financial details, 

 can not become familiar with the conditions of inmates of the 

 many state institutions, and that, in the very nature of the case, 

 forty or fifty members of local boards of trustees, together with 

 an advisory board of state charities, can give more time to the 

 study of problems of education and care and treatment of the 

 wards of the state. Theoretically this is true, but as a matter of 

 fact it has been found that the majority of the local trustees of 

 institutions devote very little time to the study of the problems 

 involved in the administration of afifairs connected with the in- 

 stitutions. There have been some notable exceptions, especially 

 in Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, and Indiana. These states 

 have also furnished some of the best men of the nation for service 

 on state boards of charity. It has been found impossible to secure 

 the services of such men in the great majority of states where 

 state boards of charities have been created. As a part of the 

 actual experience of state boards of control it has appeared that 

 their members devote all their time to the problems involved in 



388 • 



