Tht  RURAL  NEW-YORKER 
485 
Something  in  the  Woodpile 
The  following  rhapsody  may  be  of  interest  to  your 
readers.  Mrs.  Edna  C.  Jones,  on  page  343.  is  my  in¬ 
spiration — if  I'd  needed  any  after  over  20  years  of 
annual  infection  by  the  hunteritis  pestiveroso  microbe. 
A.  c.  s. 
There’s  a  hunter  hunting  rabbits  ir.  your  woodpile. 
But  don’t  try  to  chase  him  off.  ’cause  it  isn't  worth  your 
while. 
He’d  only  wave  a  happy  hand,  and  yell  derisively: 
“I’ve  got  the  law  behind  me,  so  you  can't  touch  me!” 
You’ve  got  a  cat  called  "Tommy.”  and  he  frees  the  barn 
from  rats ; 
In  your  own  estimation  he’s  the  very  prince  of  cats. 
But  a  hunter  wants  to  kill  him,  so  he  does  it  in  high 
glee, 
“’Cause  the  law’s  behind  me.  Hayseed,  so  you  cant 
touch  me !” 
Busy  with  your  Autumn  playthings,  such  as  bringing 
in  the  corn. 
And  hustling  till  you're  so  dog-tired  you  wish  you’d 
ne’er  been  born. 
You  haven't  had  the  time  to  put  your  trespass  signs  on 
fences, 
(The  hunter  adds  this  small  expense  to  your  other  small 
expenses ! ) 
So  hunters  tramp  your  Winter  rye.  and  tear  your 
fences  down, 
And  act  like  heathens  generally,  as  they  wouldn’t  dare 
in  town.  . 
“You  didn’t  put  your  signs  up,”  they  shout  defensively, 
“So  the  law’s  behind  us,  sonny,  and  you  can’t  touch 
me !” 
There’s  protection  for  the  rabbits  that  destroy  our  apple 
trees ;  .  . 
There’s  protection  for  the  pollywogs,  protection  tor  the 
bees ; 
Protection  for  the  hunter — safe  within  the  law  s  ue- 
fences 
But  the  farmer,  he  must  fight  alone,  and  take  the  con¬ 
sequences  ; 
(With  apologies  to  Kipling,  we  will  now  add  L’Envoi.) 
It’s  “Farmer  this,”  and  “Farmer  that,”  and  “Keep  him 
down,  the  brute!” 
But  it’s  “Savior  of  his  Country  !  when  old  war  is  on 
the  toot.  . 
Bun  over  him  roughshod  with  laws,  or  any  way  you 
SO 
But  tin*  farmer  ain't  no  bloomin’  fool — you  bet  the 
* .  '  - A.  CLIFT  SMITH. 
Suggestion  for  Improving  the  School 
Law 
Hold  It  up  for  Discussion 
1  do  not  think  the  proposed  new  school  law  should 
be  passed  this  year.  1  find  little  or  no  demand  for  it 
except  among  professional  educators  or  officials.  Of  the 
real  patrons  of  rural  schools,  I  judge  that  at  least 
TO  per  cent  are  either  opposed  or  do  not  understand  the 
law.  Much  the  same  situation  was  presented  when  the 
old  township  law  was  passed.  It  was  not  cleaily  under¬ 
stood,  and  the  reaction  from  it  shook  the  State  to  its 
foundation.  It  would  be  a  great  mistake  to  push  this 
law  upon  the  people  until  they  have  had  some  chance 
to  express  an  opinion  on  it.  Such  chance  will  be  found 
in  the  school  meetings  next  May.  It  can  also  be  made 
an  issue  in  the  primaries  next  I  all.  If  the  next  Legis¬ 
lature,  after  a  full  discussion,  contains  a  majority  of 
rural  members  favoring  the  law,  no  one  can  then  fairly 
object.  If,  however,  it  is  forced  upon  the  people  by  the 
voters  of  New  York  City  members,  our  country  people 
will  surely  feel  that  they  have  a  right  to  protest  if  not 
rebel. 
I  find  two  arguments  presented  in  favor  of  the  bill  : 
1. — it  represents  the  work  of  the  Committee  of  Twen¬ 
ty-one  and  therefore  ought  to  pass  without  further  argu¬ 
ment. 
•  2. — If  it  does  not  pass  now  it  will  be  killed  by  country 
people. 
I  do  not  consider  either  or  both  arguments  con¬ 
clusive.  With  all  respect  for  the  Committee  of  Twenty- 
one,  it  never  did  fully  represent  the  rank  and  file  of 
farmers.  It  was  financed  by  interests  never  fully  in 
sympathy  with  rural  education  as  most  of  us  desire  it. 
A  great  majority,  if  not  all  of  the  committee  were  active 
supporters  of  the  old  township  law  which  was  so  thor¬ 
oughly  repudiated  by  farmers.  It  now  seems  to  be  the 
conviction  of  most  country  people  that  this  committee 
started  out  to  give  the  State  just  as  close  an  imitation 
of  the  township  law  as  they  could  put  over.  No  one 
can  blame  them  for  trying  to  do  what  they  think  is  best 
but  they  have  no  right  to  attempt  to  rush  through  a  bill 
which  they  must  know  is  not  fully  understood. 
As  for  the  second  so-called  reason  it  is  little  better 
than  an  insult  to  farmers.  It  is  said  the  committee  has 
held  1500  meetings  and  that  the  bill  has  been  discussed 
in  1000  Granges.  Yet  70  per  cent  of  our  rural  people 
are  either  opposed  to  it  or  indifferent.  As  for  the 
Grange,  any  one  who  attended  the  State  Grange  meet¬ 
ing  knows  that  the  spirit  of  that  meeting  was  opposed 
to  the  bill.  Only  sharp  political  work  on  the  part  of  a 
few  leaders  prevented  an  adverse  report.  They  were 
unable  to  get  an  endorsement  from  the  Grange.  If  the 
proposed  bill  is  sound  and  sensible,  a  continued  discus¬ 
sion  will  convert  country  people  to  its  support.  To  say 
that  it  will  be  killed  if  given  such  further  discussion  is 
to  infer  that  country  people  are  incapable  of  judging 
their  own  interests  or  to  admit  that  there  may  be  some 
“joker”  in  the  bill  which  discussion  will  reveal.  Per¬ 
sonally  I  think  that  “joker”  is  the  fact  that  having  once 
gone  into  a  “community  unit,”  with  its  resulting  taxes, 
a  district  would  be  obliged,  in  self-defence  to  consoli¬ 
date.  Some  of  these  who  are  promoting  this  movement 
have  said  that  this  was  merely  a  beginning  of  what  they 
want.  1  think  that  the  backers  of  this  bill  see  their 
hanee  in  the  peculiar  political  combination  of  this  Legis¬ 
lature  to  push  the  bill  through  against  what  they  must 
know  is  the  wish  of  a  large  majority  of  country  people. 
They  are  not  likely  to  have  another  such  opportunity 
for  years.  To  put  the  bill  through  under  present  condi¬ 
tions  would  be,  as  The  It.  N.-Y.  has  said,  attempting  to 
rule  “without  the  consent  of  the  governed.”  I  think  the 
bill  should  be  held  up  for  further  discussion.  a.  s.  p. 
Wants  the  Plan  Tried  Out 
About  the  proposed  rural  school  law,  I  cannot  agree 
with  your  idea  that  the  matter  be  laid  over  for  another 
year  to  give  the  country  people  opportunity  to  study  it. 
As  a  matter  of  fact  it  will  not  be  studied,  save,  per¬ 
haps,  by  a  very  slim  minority.  I  do  not  believe  that 
two  per  cent  of  the  farmers  in  New  York  State,  dur¬ 
ing  the  next  year,  would  individually  give  the  -proposed 
change  two  hours’  careful  thought.  But  pass  the  law 
and  set  it  in  operation  and  then  see  what  happens. 
That  after  all  is  said  and  done,  is  the  only  practical 
way  to  test  the  law.  Many  country  people  are  now 
honestly  sorry  that  the  township  law  was  repealed  be¬ 
fore  a  fair  chance  was  given  to  try  it  out.  Now  we 
have  a  proposition  that  is  vastly  more  revolutionary  in 
its  ultimate  effects  than  the  township  law  ever  thought 
of  being.  Possibly  when  the  new  law  conies  into  force 
there  will  be  such  a  howl  of  protest  as  will  shake  the 
very  forests  themselves. 
That  the  putting  into  enforcement  the  provisions  of 
the  new  law,  as  per  synopsis-  given  on  page  401  of 
The  R.  N.-Y.,  is  going  to  result  in  widespread  confusion, 
mingled  with  disgust  and  disapproval  throughout  the 
country  district  schools  before  the  first  year  rolls  round, 
can,  at  this  time,  be  prophesied  with  an  almost  absolute 
certainty  of  fulfillment.  On  the  other  hand,  to  forecast 
the  failure  of  the  new  law  in  the  long  run  would  be 
hazardous  indeed.  1  see  many  valuable  features  in  this 
new  law,  especially  with  regard  to  re-districting  for 
taxation  purposes,  whereby  the  burden  will  be  more 
evenly  distributed,  but  it  will  be  that  evenness  of  dis¬ 
tribution  that  will  call  forth  a  storm  of  protest  from 
those  who  have  heretofore  enjoyed  favorable  taxation 
conditions. 
It  is  so  easy  to  criticise  and  so  hard  to  create.  There 
will  be  the  same  objection  to  the  Community  District 
Board  plan  that  applied  to  the  township  plan.  The 
members  will  be  expected  to  serve  without  compensa¬ 
tion  ;  consequently  nobody  will  want  the  job.  There 
will  be  a  conflict  of  authority  in  the  purchase  of  sup¬ 
plies  for  the  schools,  building  repairs,  etc.  Taxpayers 
in  this  section  will  object  to  assuming  bills  for  expenses 
incurred  by  a  school  located  at  a  distant  point  and 
which  their  children  do  not  attend.  That  point  was  one 
of  the  great  bugaboos  in  the  township  plan.  Each  mem¬ 
ber  of  the  board  will  be  jealous  of  his  own  district  rights 
and  as  the  Board  of  Supervisors  are  to  have  a  hand  in 
the  pie,  politics  will  inevitably  creep  in. 
The  intermediate  school  board  scheme  to  elect  the 
district  superintendent  is  a  joke — these  superintendents 
should  be  elected  by  the  direct  vote  of  the  legally  auth¬ 
orized  school  voters.  Here  again  will  occur  a  chance 
for  the  exercise  of  personal  favoritism. 
If  the  community  districts  are  laid  out  so  as  to  take 
in  a  much  larger  territory  than  tin-  present  school  dis¬ 
tricts  embrace,  with  a  member  of  the  board  elected  by 
each  integral  district,  the  scheme  is  going  to  be  un¬ 
wieldy  and  topheavy.  In  the  far-flung  sections  of  the 
country— even  in  counties  like  Rensselaer — it  will  be 
next  to  impossible  to  get  a  quorum  of  the  board  to¬ 
gether  in  the  Winter  time.  Here  we  are  this  Winter 
with  our  best  State  roads  within  two  miles  of  Troy  and 
Albany  blockaded  and  just  about  impassable  for  the 
past  two  months,  and  then  expect  a  member  of  a  school 
board  to  journey  from  Averill  Park  over  to  Stephen- 
town  Center  to  attend  a  meeting — they  simply  will  not 
do  it. 
Now  for  a  suggestion  or  two:  Let  the  trustee  system 
remain  as  it  is;  change  the  unit  of  taxation  for  school 
purposes  to  the  township  plan  instead  of  by  districts; 
let  the  school  tax  be  levied  and  collected  at  the  same 
time  and  simultaneous  writh  the  State,  county  and  town 
taxes.  Each  trustee  to  turn  in  his  budget  to  the  town 
clerk  at  the  beginning  of  the  season.  Teachers’  sal¬ 
aries  and  all  expenses  to  be  paid  by  the  town  super¬ 
visor  to  each  trustee  for  proper  distribution,  balances 
to  be  struck  and  accounting  made  at  the  end  of  the  term. 
This  plan  will  get  rid  of  a  lot  of  school  tax  collectors. 
Elect  district  superintendents  by  popular  vote.  Super¬ 
intendents  to  be  authorized  to  install  a  uniform  course 
of  study  and  text  books,  according  to  grade,  throughout 
each  supervisory  district  and  to  consolidate  schools 
where  desired  by  the  people  thenuelces  and  under  no 
other  circumstances.  Junior  high  school  courses  can 
be  introduced  in  the  schools  of  consolidation  as  may  be 
found  practicable.  All  rural  children  to  have  the  pri¬ 
vilege  of  attending  city  or  village  high  schools  free  of 
tuitional  costs. 
The  transportation  problem  is  the  big  bear  that  stands 
in  the  way  of  consolidation  of  country  schools  in  many 
sections  of  this  State,  and  you  cannot  get  around  it. 
Many  of  the  Winters  are  too  severe  and  the  roads  al¬ 
together  too  bad  to  attempt  the  transportation  of  chil¬ 
dren  from  distant  points  to  a  common  center,  however 
desirable  from  an  educational  standpoint.  In  certain 
portions  of  the  State  it  is  going  to  be  mighty  I^ird  to 
get  away  from  the  district  school.  S.  E.  bryneb. 
R.  N.-Y. — It  seems  to  us  that  Mr  Bryner  answers  his 
own  argument  when  he  states  these  evident  objections. 
The  plan  of  studying  the  law  and  amending  or  perfect¬ 
ing  it  before  its  passage  is  just  what  we  advocate.  As 
Was  the  case  with  the  township  law,  popular  indig¬ 
nation  would  not  amend  it.  but  will  kill  it.  As  for  a 
discussion  we  will  guarantee  to  develop  one. 
A  Woman  from  the  North  Country 
After  reading  D.  Boyd  Devendorf's  article  on  page 
401.  would  like  to  say  it  is  the  best  argument  I  have 
read  either  for  or  against  the  proposed  new  school  law. 
Since  when  have  our  rural  schools  given  such  poor 
satisfaction  that  we  should  throw  them  up?  Haven't 
we  men  in  office,  today,  by  the  hundreds,  who  received 
their  early  education  in  the  rural  schools,  also  men,  by 
whose  vote,  this  bill  would  affect  most,  were  the  means 
of  putting  officers  in  Government  positions.  These  very 
farmers  of  New  York  State  had  very  little  say  be¬ 
fore  this  late  township  system  was  put  into  effect,  but 
the  echo  of  their  protests  was  soon  heard  in  Albany. 
This  new  bill  is  practically  the  same  if  one  “reads  be¬ 
tween  the  lines.”  1  believe  in  the  best  obtainable  for 
our  children’s  education  but  that  consolidation  wouldn’t 
benefit  people  here  in  the  northern  New  York  (Modern 
Greenland.)  First,  the  schools  are  too  far  apart;  be¬ 
fore  a  unit  could  be  combined  our  children  would  have 
to  be  carried  six  or  eight  miles,  our  districts  in  this 
vicinity  do  not  average  more  than  15  scholars, .  which 
can  be  easily  cared  for  by  one  teacher.  Second,  the 
weather  this  last  Winter,  as  lias  been  for  50  years  past, 
would  not  permit  children  to  travel  that  far.  Where  is 
the  father  or  mother  who  would  allow  children  under 
10  years  old  to  start  on  such  a  trip,  not  knowing  what 
storm  would  blow  up  before  night?  The  thermometer 
this  Winter  lias  been  to  3N  and  40  below  zero  more 
often  than  it  was  up  to  zero.  This  last  week,  March 
4  to  10.  the  mercury  at  eight  o’clock  hung  between  20 
and  25  below  zero.  No  child  could  ride  far  under- these 
weather  conditions  even  if  they  were  allowed  to  go  out. 
Therefore,  1  say  that  law  would  be  impracticable  be¬ 
cause  very  few  children  could  attend  school  around  in 
the  mountainous  districts. 
Speaking  of  taxes,  it  is  difficult  to  think  whether  that, 
bill  is  a  reality  or  just  a  dream,  when  one  trying  t  > 
get  a  living  on  a  farm  here  in  the  mountains  where 
grain  and  potatoes  grow  just  between  the  locks,  has  to 
stop  and  think  where  the  cash  is  coming  from  to  meet, 
the  taxes  that,  face  us  now.  What  will  we  do  when 
this  consolidation  movement  is  forced  on  ivs? 
The  Committee  of  Twenty-one  was  just  a  passing 
fancy  in  this  section.  They  called  at  the  school  house, 
but  no  more  was  heard  about  them  until  we  hear  of 
them  of  them  through  the  papers.  Not  one-half  of  the 
residents  around  here  know  the  meaning  or  provisions 
of  this  new  rural  consolidation  movement.  1  feel  safe 
in  saying  that  once  the  expenses  are  outlined  they  will 
give  an  emphatic  “no”  to  any  change  in  our  rural 
school  system.  We  feel  if  time  is  given  to  consider  both 
sides  of  the  question,  and  find  wherein  we  could  better 
the  conditions  of  the  present,  it  would  have  a  great 
deal  of  benefit  rather  than  pushing  the  bill  through  to 
become  a  law,  and  then  have  to  abide  by  the  results. 
Personally  I  can’t  see  many  advantages  in  it,  Inil  I 
can  see  a  number  of  disadvantages.  I  would  like  to 
see  more  discussion  concerning  this  topic.  Perhaps  I 
could  .see  where  I  could  change  my  views,  but  I  believe 
in  seeing  before  changing.  jiks  m  r  o  ii 
Clinton  Co.,  N.  Y. 
The  Milk  Certificates  of  Indebtedness 
On  page  253  Elbert  S.  Brigham  finds  the  pool  price 
of  milk  by  calling  the  certificates  of  indebtedness  “cash 
received  by  the  producer.”  Will  The  R.  N.-Y.  please 
explain  when  the  producer  received  the  cash  represent¬ 
ed  by  these  certificates  of  indebtedness?  Please  answer! 
New  York.  Tj  Jr  g 
WE  supposed  everyone  must  understand  the  cer¬ 
tificates  of  indebtedness  by  this  time.  The 
money  is  first  deducted  from  the  monthly  milk  hills, 
and  is  held  for  investment,  in  milk  plants  or  cream¬ 
eries.  The  association  is  organized  to  do  business 
without  a  profit.  Consequently  the  investment  pays 
no  profit.  'The  association  holds  the  property,  hut  de¬ 
rives  no  direct  income  from  it.  Before  interest  or 
principal  of  the  certificates  can  he  paid,  new  deduc¬ 
tions  from  milk  bills  must  be  made,  and  the  money 
then  will  be  used  to  pay  interest  and  principal,  lyul 
not  to  buy  more  plants.  Mr.  Brigham  simply  count¬ 
ed  the  investment  in  the  plants  as  cash  value. 
Though  the  plants  earn  no  direct  income,  if,  because 
of  them,  the  producer  gets  a  better  price  for  his 
milk,  the  indirect  income  would  he  as  good  as  if  it 
were  direct,  lmt  no  repayments  can  he  made  on  the 
certificates  until  the  money  is  again  deducted  from 
milk  bills.  If  a  holder  of  a  certificate  of  indebted¬ 
ness  withdraws  or  goes  out  of  the  dairy  business,  be 
will  not  contribute  to  the  payment  of  his  own  cer¬ 
tificate,  but  those  who  remain  in  contribute  to  the 
payment  of  it  when  due. 
That  Embargo  on  Live  Rabbits 
ON  page  342  we  referred  to  the  embargo  on  hand¬ 
ling  live  rabbits,  goats,  lambs  and  other  small 
animals  in  this  city.  Under  the  new  ruling  of  the 
New  York  Board  of  Health  these  small  animals  may 
not  he  bought  alive  and  killed  by  the  buyers.  They 
must  go  through  a  properly  conducted  slaughter 
house.  This  embargo  works  against  the  interests 
of  many  shippers  < >1  live  rabbits,  as  there  are  many 
buyers  who  prefer  to  buy  such  animals  alive  and 
kill  them  as  needed.  We  wrote  the  Board  of  Health 
about  this  embargo  and  received  the  following  reply: 
The  Department  of  Health  embargo  provides  that 
goats,  lambs  and  similar  animals  may  be  shipped  to 
New  York  for  sale,  but  they  must  be  slaughtered  in  a 
properly  conducted  slaughter  house.  The  reason  for 
this  is  obvious.  In  a  city  of  six  million  people,  living, 
in  many  parts  of  the  city,  in  a  state  of  congestion  that 
is  not  found  anywhere  else  in  the  world,  the  Department 
of  Health  would  he  derelict  in  its  duty  were  it  to  per¬ 
mit  the*  promiscuous  slaughter  of  animals  throughout 
the  city. 
Were  we  to  permit  the  slaughter  of  rabbits,  goats  and 
lambs  in  tin*  home,  we  should  also  have  to  permit  the 
slaughter  of  poultry  in  the  home  and,  in  fact,  our  whole 
structure  of  sanitary  supervision  would  be  soon  torn 
down.  The  slaughtering  of  rabbits  is  somewhat  sim¬ 
ilar  to  the  slaughter  of  poultry,  and  this  latter  industry 
is  carried  on  under  the  regulations  of  the  Department 
of  Health  without  any  hardshin  upon  either  the  pro¬ 
ducer  or  the  consumer.  royal  s.  coe eland,  m.d., 
Commissioner  of  Health. 
