The RURAL NEW-YORKER 
475 
School Bill Hearing March 19 
A legislative hearing on. the Downing-Porter 
school hill is scheduled for Wednesday, March 
li>, at the State Capitol, Albany. Every man and 
woman interested in this bill should he present if in 
any tray possible. It is of supreme importance that 
farmers make a strong showing at this hearing. 
Come to the State Capitol if it is in any way pos¬ 
sible for you to do so. Drop everything and come. 
Experience With School Consolidation 
in New York 
[At a recent school meeting' in Fulton County, Mr. 
Harvey Van Valkenberg, a farmer, told a pathetic story 
of his experience with consolidation. The audience was 
deeply affected by his plain and sincere recital of the 
facts. We have received the full story, written by Mr. 
\ an Valkenberg himself, and present it herewith for the 
consideration of all—from the Department of Education 
down.] 
In regard to consolidation and union free schools, we 
have had our experience and medicine, and it was very 
bitter. About 1014 they consolidated our district school, 
formerly District No. 11, town of Johnstown, N. Y., 
with District No. 6, in the town of Ephratah (which 
was five miles away), and erected a union free school 
building. Our district superintendent of the first dis¬ 
trict of Fulton County went to our trustee and de¬ 
manded the books, which were turned over. Our trustee 
was so ashamed of it he did not tell the district. In¬ 
stead of Mr. Stryker serving a notice on our clerk, he 
gave it to another party, and they kept the notice; 
therefore we did not know we were set off. When we 
■' UI1( 1 it out it was too late to make an appeal, but we 
made an appeal to the State Board of Education, and it 
was dismissed. District No. 6 came and took all of our 
furniture and equipment out of our schoolkouse, also 
about ,$300 which we had in our treasury. 
When my boy became of school age I made an ap¬ 
peal to Supt. Stryker, also to the trustees of District No. 
0, for school facilities for our children. They carried 
them to and from school for three weeks in an open rig. 
They brought them home one night when it rained all 
the way. My boy was wet through and was sick for 
two weeks. Then they stopped transferring them, and 
fold us it was too expensive; also that we would have to 
carry our own children or have no school. I made an¬ 
other appeal to the superintendent; also to the trustees 
of District No. 0. It was two years from that time be¬ 
fore we received school facilities. I exhausted every 
effort, with no results. 
Then I made an appeal to the State Board of Educa¬ 
tion. That appeal was never decided. I wrote many 
letters to the State Board of Education. I went down 
to Albany several times and took the boy down there. 1 
exhausted every effort. The boy was in his ninth year, 
with the school five miles away. Now, what was I 
to do? 
1 made an appeal to Governor Whitman, and re¬ 
ceived a reply as follows: 
“By direction of the Governor, I write to acknowledge 
receipt of your letter Sept. 30, and to state that the mat¬ 
ter has been referred to the Commissioner of Education, 
who will be requested to make a prompt decision in re¬ 
gard to the same. franklin loud, 
Counsel to the Governor.” 
I waited about another month for a reply from the 
State Board of Education and heard nothing. I wrote 
the Governor again and received a reply as follows: 
“Upon receipt of your letter of Nov. 2 I at once com¬ 
municated with the State Department of Education and 
trust that you will shortly receive information regarding 
the subject matter of your letter. william orr, 
Secretary to the Governor.” 
I waited about another month and heard nothing; 
then I wrote the Governor again and received a reply, 
as follows: 
“1 have your letter of Nov. 29, addressed to the Gov¬ 
ernor, who directs me to reply thereto and to say that 
your communication in relation to the school facilities 
in your district has been referred to the State Commis¬ 
sioner of Education, who will reply to you direct. 
WILLIAM ORR, 
Secretary to the Governor.” 
I waited about a month, but heard nothing; then I 
wrote the Governor again and received a reply as fol¬ 
lows : 
“I am directed by Governor Whitman to acknowl¬ 
edge the receipt of your letter of Dec. 30, and to say 
that the matter regarding which correspondence was hail 
with the Education Department will be again taken up 
with that department in the hope that the trouble which 
you state exists relative to the ability to secure school 
facilities for your children will be corrected. 
WILLIAM ORR, 
Secretary to the Governor.” 
The State Board of Education, Supt. Stryker and the 
trustees of District No. 0 just waked up. I received a 
letter from the State Board of Education Jan. 19, 1917, 
stating that “arrangements have been made to open the 
old schoolhouse in your district and heat in the morn¬ 
ing. The conveyance will stop at the sehoolliouse for 
the children and take them to the central school.” I 
also received a notice from the trustees in District No. 
9 to have my boy at the sehoolliouse at eight o’clock to 
take the conveyance. Thatjineant seven miles for my boy 
to go to school, instead of five; it was 16 below zero 
that morning. The conveyance got there at nine o’clock. 
They had no fire, and the sehoolliouse was locked. There 
was no shelter for my boy to go in, as the sehoolliouse 
Mood on another man’s land, and he had a padlock on 
it. The trustees of District No. 6 took the name school- 
house as a shield for them, and a blind for the State 
Board of Education. How long would I have had a boy 
if I allowed him to stand in a snowbank to wait for the 
conveyance? I wrote the State Board of Education 
they had no fire and the sehoolliouse was locked. I re¬ 
ceived a notice from the State Board of Education to 
meet their representative, Supt. Stryker, and the trustee 
of District No. 6, to make arrangements for school facil¬ 
ities. The trustees of District No. 6 agreed to meet my 
boy at my corner, which is an eighth of a mile from my 
house, but would not send the conveyance to my house ; 
there was no shelter at my corner for my boy, so I built 
him a house and heated it at my own expense. They 
carried him three weeks. Supt. Stryker called me oil 
the ’phone to have my boy up in the woods to meet the 
conveyance, which was a mile from the house I built 
him. or he would not be carried. They had no shelter 
of any kind. We were to have 10 weeks more school. I 
wrote the State Board of Education every week for 10 
weeks that they had not called for my boy as they 
agreed, and they would not answer my letters; therefore 
the boy remained at home. Before school started in the 
Fall I went to Albany. I insisted on seeing ,1. H. Fin¬ 
ley. the State Commissioner, as I told his secretary I 
had been two years trying to get school facilities, but 
had made a poor showing. About that time the 
township law was born. Mr. Finley directed me to go 
back and see the chairman in the town of Ephratah and 
any arrangements we made would be satisfactory to 
that department. I came back and made arrangements 
with that chairman to opeii our sehoolliouse and put a 
teacher in there so our children could get to and from 
school without hardships and exposure. They had school 
m our schoolhouse for two years under the management 
of District No. 6. They brought back four seats for five 
pupils, a desk and recitation bench and a stove; that is 
all we had in our schoolhouse. The teacher had no 
chair, no Hag, no maps, no globe, no charts. 
That went on for two years; then I started for Al¬ 
bany to see if we could not get some furniture for our 
schoolhouse. The State Board of Education notified 
me jf they were going to have school there they had to 
equip that schoolhouse. Instead they went transferring 
the children to District No. 6. My boy had to be at my 
corner at six o’clock in the morning to meet the con¬ 
veyance; some days they would get the children to 
school as late as 11 o’clock. Some days they did not 
come at all. They carried them in an open rig. The 
children froze their hands and feet. Then I started after 
them again to get our school district back. We made an 
appeal to Supt. Stryker. He refused to act. Therefore 
the State Board of Education was compelled to act. 
We got a hearing before the State Board of Educa¬ 
tion. Supt. Stryker or the trustees of District No. 6 
were not there. W e were the only ones to put in any 
evidence, so they informed us they were going to rein¬ 
state our district and form a new district, which they 
did. 
We started school in our district April 5, 1920. We 
had no funds to maintain our district, as we had paid 
our tax in District No. 6. We made an appeal to the 
State Board of Education for the return of our furni¬ 
ture and a portion of our tax to maintain our school to 
the end of the school year; also for part of our 
teacher’s bonus. Our appeal was dismissed, stating 
there is no provision of law which authorizes the dis¬ 
tribution of the assets belonging to the district from the 
territory of which the new district is formed in the ab¬ 
sence of statutory provision. There was a law pro¬ 
vided for them to take our furniture, but no law for 
them to bring it back. Therefore we had to borrow 
money to buy furniture and maintain our school to the 
end of the school year. At that time there was an out¬ 
standing bonded indebtedness of $3,500 on the union free 
school building in District No. 6. We had to pay our 
apportionment of that $3,500 bonded indebtedness, 
which is $1,946.86, of which we will not receive one 
penny’s worth of benefit. 
All this has deprived our children of a lot of school 
facilities and taken a lot of our valuable time and hard- 
earned money, but we are more than thankful to have 
our school district back, so our children can get to and 
from school without hardships and exposure. My boy 
has only missed one day since 1920, and is now in the 
last half of the eighth grade. My school tax in District 
No. 6 was as high as $54.29 in one year. Last year I 
paid my school tax in our district for $9.50. Our prop¬ 
erty was of no value. We could not rent or sell our 
farms. One of my neighbors was going to sell his farm, 
as he had a boy that was of school age, and go where 
they had school facilities. lie put his farm up at auc¬ 
tion. There were different parties there to buy the 
farm. His boy and my boy were there. Those persons 
wanted to know why those boys were not at school. 
When they learned that our school was five miles away 
they remarked that was no place for them, as they had 
children to educate, and the result was he did not get a 
bid on his farm, so he abandoned his farm and moved 
away. 
We have a big storm here at present; the roads are 
blocked, and no telling how long. Our children are get¬ 
ting to and from school every day ; the older ones are 
carrying the little ones on their backs. If they had to 
go five miles they would receive no schooling. We had 
no voice in their meetings in District No. 6, because we 
had no notice, and they did not want us to have any 
voice in these meetings, harvey l. van valkenberg 
Fulton Co., N. Y. 
State of New York.) 
County of Fulton, J RS- ' 
On this 25th day of February. 1924. before me. the 
subscriber, personally came Harvey L. Van Valken- 
burg. to me known and known by me to be the person 
who made the foregoing statement in regard to the con¬ 
solidation of union free schools, and acknowledged to 
me that the same is a true statement of such facts, to 
the best of his judgment and belief. 
GORDON E. PENDON, 
[seal] Notary Public, Fulton Co., N. Y. 
Will the School Bill Pass? 
E have many letters from readers asking 
about the present standing of the school bill 
in the Legislature. Just now the backers of the bill 
are making a desperate effort to push it through. Tt 
may pass the Senate, where there is a majority of 
city members, but there does not seem much chance 
of putting it through the Assembly. At the same 
time we take no chances up to the very last hour of 
the session, and we urge our readers to redouble 
their efforts to make their Assemblymen understand 
how they feel. We hear rumors of a new substitute 
bill to he offered by the political leaders, and we 
have been sounded as to whether we will support it. 
We must first have a chance to study the bill, and 
farmers must have every opportunity to understand 
it. We will support any bill that is fully endorsed 
by country people after thorough discussion. The 
Greenwich (N. Y.) Journal prints the following let¬ 
ter from II. A. Bartholomew, Assemblyman from 
Washington County. AVe think he has it about right 
as the case stands at this moment, though the Sen¬ 
ate is likely to pass the bill as a political move for 
the party now in power. 
~ „ „ Albany, Feb. 25 1924 
Grant J. Tefft, Editor Greenwich Journal 
Greenwich, N. Y. 
Dear Editor: 
In reply to your inquiry regarding the so-called Rural 
fecliooi bill, I am pleased to inform you that I sent 
copies of the bill to each trustee in Washington County 
some 160 or more, and a letter asking them after 
careful perusal of same, to write me what thev as 
trustees of rural school districts thought of the meas- 
tue. the replies are now coming in very fast Per¬ 
haps I have received replies from one-half or more of 
them to date, and not more than five or six favor the 
passage of this bill. The reasons they assign are 
mostly the following : 8 
Distance and inconvenience of transporting small 
children to and from consolidated schools. Extra ex¬ 
pense w-ould more than offset the additional public 
money they would receive. 1 
They object to the additional powers and extra posi- 
tions that would be given to the educational department. 
I lie country schools can give more individual atten- 
lon to each scholar than the larger and crowded com¬ 
munity schools could, and the country boys and girls are 
no\\ finishing the grades in the country schools young- 
ei than the village children. 
Additional public money received from the State 
ff , ol J M ' ”. ot offset extra expense created under this bill 
of building repairs, transportation, etc., and that extra 
Mnk7h CertiU ? f belongs to the taxpayers at large, and 
could be used for other purposes to lessen our present 
high tax rate. 
If more public money is to be had does it not come 
from the taxpayer? 
Vermont tried a similar bill and found it very un¬ 
satisfactory, also some of the Western States, and they 
considered it a failure. 
Suspicion aroused by many who remember the so- 
called township bill that did not work out satisfactorily, 
i recently talked with the introducers of this 
bill, and they are now convinced that the Senate which 
approved of a similar bill last year, will not approve 
(f it this year. Many of the city Senators are oppos¬ 
ing it, and they have give up all hopes of its passage. 
pected haS be(?n mUCh more ‘^Position than was ex- 
These are only part of the objections I have received 
and I would be pleased to show you the correspondence 
1 have received on this subject. Yours truly, 
II. A. BARTHOLOMEW. 
Wants Co-operation of Leaders 
Opinions have been pro and con, one blaming the other 
2* n ft e . c on/fitH)n the dairymen are in. The blame 
slum d be laid to the dairymen themselves. To sav they 
should organize is very well, but is it not the fact that 
the heads of these organizations are the ones that are 
causing the milk war? If men of high standing and good 
education, college students, cannot agree and comprom¬ 
ise on some living wage price, without causing a loss of 
thousands of dollars to the dairymen just because they 
want their way, why point fingers at the dairymen’ I 
say co-operation is the slogan today. Why ‘not com¬ 
promise, have a get-together, save the loss which is now 
experienced by the dairymen, where in these days it 
ought to be added to their bank account, or in other 
words, provide a living wage. 
I am a dairyman, selling milk locally to town resi¬ 
dents and icecream makers. If I had to .sell at prices 
the organizations are paying for milk I would quit the 
milk business. Let’s have a get-together; live and let 
JlV »4 v , *L J• IIALLAUER. 
New York. 
Wants One Price 
I am interested in discussions of the price of milk as 
it is made now. If the different groups would get to¬ 
gether and agree on the price of fluid or Class I milk 
and all stand to it, that is the onlv way to stop price 
cutting or, in other words, to stop playing in the hands 
of the dealers. L. j. deamer. 
New lork. 
Order in Production 
Orderly production is as essential to successful busi¬ 
ness as orderly selling, concerning which we hear so 
much. Just as long as unregulated production mav 
(lump unlimited and unregulated quantities of milk on a 
limited market, chaos will from time to time prevail 
There are now, and always have been, two kinds of nro- 
ducers. 1 
1. The conscientious business dairyman who aims to 
maintain an even supply the year around. 
2. The Summer, or casual producer, who refuses to 
regulate his herd, grain his cattle, maintain his milk 
flow. As a cowman he is a failure, and as a producer he 
is the dairyman’s worst enemy. 
The so-called surplus bogey of Spring and early Sum¬ 
mer, formerly perhaps, a necessary evil of the business, 
should go the way of all bogeys. It no longer exists iii 
modern all-the-year-round grain-fed, regulated herds op¬ 
erated for profit by intelligent dairymen. There need be 
no quarrel with the “grasser.” If he prefers to work 
his herd six months in the year instead of 12, it is surely 
his own business, but he should not be allowed to de¬ 
moralize the market for the man who maintains it for 
him. In order to protect properly the business of or¬ 
derly dairying it is necessary so to regulate the Sum¬ 
mer man, or irregular producer, that he gets paid ac¬ 
cording to his merits as such. One organization must 
really control, to be effective against a combined buyers’ 
association, wherefor I am for a single organization, a 
yearly contract as binding as can be made. Moreover. I 
am for a price schedule based on a man’s production. 
If, as the League holds, it is necessary to have a classi¬ 
fied selling schedule, let us have a corresponding produc¬ 
ing schedule. It is obvious from the past two years’ ex¬ 
perience that the methods to date tried do not “sta¬ 
bilize” the business, at least without great loss to the 
stabilizers. Why not go back to the man who creates 
the need for stabilization and stabilize him? As, for in¬ 
stance : 
1. Give the man who will contract for a fixed amount 
the year around the fluid price. 
2. Give the man who will contract for a fixed amount 
with 20 or 25 per cent variation each way the condensed 
(Continued on Pajje 4S1) 
