52 



Indiana University Studies 



State^^ did the governor recommend the creation of a super- 

 visory board, altho the governor of Missouri in his message 

 opposed the board of control idea. Hence there is clearly a 

 very definite and positive tendency at present toward the cen- 

 tralization of the control of State institutions. 



To look upon this tendency as one merely applying to State 

 charitable institutions, however, is to miss the real point in 

 the whole argument for the administrative boards. The 

 present movement towards a central board of control in this 

 field of State activity cannot be understood apart from the 

 general movement now usually designated by the name of 

 ''efficiency and economy" which seems to have taken the 

 popular mind by storm. Whether it may be said that this 

 movement had its origin in the tendency towards the consoli- 

 dation of the boards controlling State institutions or not, cer- 

 tainly the tendency towards centralization in State charitable 

 institutions is now a part of the efficiency and economy move- 

 ment. Historically this was not so, for boards of control 

 were established long before this modern watchword was in- 

 vented. But from now on in the charities field the effect of 

 this general movement will probably be felt. The administra- 

 tive board, already a favorite with recent legislatures, bids 

 fair to ride triumphantly forward on the crest of this wave. 



Now this does not mean that the administrative system 

 will be the system adopted. The keynote of the efficiency 

 and economy movement is the consolidation of existing 

 boards; in the field of charities this would mean only the 

 substitution of a single board of control for the many sepa- 

 rate boards of trustees for the State institutions. Where 

 there was no supervisory board in existence, that would mean 

 the administrative system. Where the existing supervisory 

 board was unpopular, it might mean the abolition of the super- 

 visory board and the adoption of the administrative system. 

 But where the existing supervisory board had been doing good 

 work the resulting system would undoubtedly be the dual 

 system. That was the case in Illinois, tho the supervisory 

 agency was made over into a Charities Commission. The 

 same was true of Ohio, where an administrative board was 

 created in 1911 without abolishing the supervisory agency. 

 The testimony of the past few years is all in that direction. 



^1 Nevada. 



