24 



1 



Indiana University Studies 



the insane asylum, State penitentiary, and reformatory. In 

 Tennessee a Board of Control was established to govern nine 

 State institutions. In both instances the former separate 

 boards for each institution were abolished, and the new board 

 took over their powers. The Tennessee law makes more care- 

 ful provision for the financial side of the institutions. 



Of these thirteen States, Colorado, Illinois, Minnesota, Ne- 

 braska, New Hampshire, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, and 

 Tennessee are strictly of the dual type; that is, they have 

 two State boards over the same field, one primarily of the 

 Iowa type, the other of the Indiana type, but both with pow- 

 ers, duties, and functions so defined as to avoid conflict of 

 authority. California, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont 

 are in a distinctly different class. In each the peculiar char- 

 acteristic is found in the existence of administrative agents 

 whose powers are fiscal only, while the power of appointing 

 superintendents and of otherwise controlling the management 

 of the institutions is in the hands of another body. This is 

 in reality an administrative dual system within the real dual 

 system. There is a supervisory board, but there are two State 

 agencies of control over the same institutions, and the admin- 

 istrative function is divided into fiscal and nonfiscal. 



V. Arguments for and Against the Three Types 

 OF State Systems 



There is really no argument today in favor of what may 

 be called the trustee method of administering State institu- 

 tions. That is, sentiment is almost unanimous today in favor 

 of some sort of State central supervisory or administrative 

 agency. This is clearly seen in actual practice, for out of 

 forty-eight States, forty-four, or ninety-two per cent, have 

 some kind of State board.^^ 



For a long time, however, in the history of State super- 

 vision of charities, there has waged a vigorous controversy 

 between advocates of a single State board of administration 

 on the one hand, and a single State board of supervision on 



2» See p. 7. 



