Guild: State Supervision of Charities 29 



not expected to devote their whole time to the work. The 

 argument which has led to the creation of boards of control, 

 however, has not been directed so much against the super- 

 visory board itself as against the trustee system of manage- 

 ment which exists where the supervisory board is the only 

 State agency. 



The Administrative System.^° In the beginning the sup- 

 porters of the administrative board or the board of control 

 were content to declare that in their State their system worked 

 satisfactorily. Rhode Island was the first State to have an 

 administrative board, and in 1882 the chairman of the Rhode 

 Island board while upholding the Rhode Island system at the 

 National Conference of Charities and Corrections declared: 

 **I don't know of one of the larger States that could have a 

 board constituted like that of Rhode Island,"*' and in the main 

 there was for many years no attempt to advocate the adminis- 

 trative type of board for general adoption. However, from 

 1887 there was an increasing tendency to give larger adminis- 

 trative powers to the existing supervisory board. In 1900 

 out of twenty-five^^ boards, eight** or thirty-two per cent were 

 administrative, — an increasing proportion. About 1905, more- 

 over, the modern ''efficiency" idea began to take root, and 

 from then on the advocates of the administrative type became 

 more prominent. For a long time the idea was prevalent 

 that the two types of boards were quite antagonistic and could 

 not be brought into harmony. 



The keynote of the argument for the administrative board 

 was the emphasis placed on the fiscal side of State charity 

 work. The principles of big business, it was claimed, should 

 be applied to State institutions ; the mere consolidation of the 

 boards administering the different institutions would result 



See National Conference of Charities and Corrections Proceedings, 1895, pp. 37-43, 

 for good discussion of argument for administrative as against supervisory board. Also 

 National Conference of Charities and Corrections Proceedings, 1902, pp. 140-144, pp. 375, 

 376, discussion by Hon. John Cownie ; 1903, pp. 497-500 ; 1891, p. 372 ; 1889, pp. 96-98 ; 

 1904, pp. 180-182 ; p. 601, discussion by Charles P. Kellogg. 



*i National Conference of Charities and Corrections Proceedings, 1882, p. 25, Profes- 

 sor George I. Chase. 



Note comment of committee. National Conference of Charities and Corrections Pro- 

 ceedings, 1902, p. 127. 



*3 Report of committee, National Conference of Charities and Corrections Proceedings^ 

 1900, p. 169. 



Iowa, Kansas, Rhode Island, Nebraska, South Dakota, Washington, Wisconsin, and 

 Wyoming. 



