arV 
 16339 
 
 The Control of 
 City School Finances 
 
 G, W, FRASIER 
 
OJorneU Mtticeraitg Eibtarg 
 
 It^ara. ^tta fork 
 
 CoIainbia....tInlveralty Library 
 in-exchanga :.... 
 
Cornell University Library 
 arV16339 
 
 The control of city school finances 
 
 3 1924 031 717 030 
 olin.anx 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tliis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031717030 
 
THE CONTROL OF 
 
 CITY SCHOOL 
 
 FINANCES 
 
The Control 
 
 of 
 
 City School Finances 
 
 By GEORGE W. FRASIER 
 
 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the 
 
 Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of 
 
 Philosophy, in the Faculty of Philosophy, 
 
 Columbia University. 
 
Copyright 1922 
 
 Geo. W. Frasier 
 
 Printed in the United States 
 
 of America 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 The public schools of America cost money. This 
 cost has constantly increased until today it involves 
 a vast expenditure. Americans no longer doubt the 
 advisability of public schools, but the question of 
 financing these schools is a vital one. 
 
 It is not the purpose of this book to discuss the 
 merits of different methods of providing funds for 
 the public schools. It shall attempt only to discuss 
 the merits of the different methods of controlling 
 these moneys. In New York City the board of esti- 
 mate and apportionment controls the granting of 
 money to the schools ; in Detroit it is the city council 
 and mayor; in Cleveland it is the county budget 
 commission; in Newark it is the board of school 
 estimate; while in such cities as Philadelphia, 
 Seattle, Chicago and St. Louis, the board of educa- 
 tion raises and expends its own funds. 
 
 The question as to who shall control the raising 
 and disbursing of moneys for the public schools is, 
 and has been for years, a much debated question. 
 It is the purpose of this book to present the different 
 methods used in American cities and to examine and 
 evaluate each in the light of educational efficiency. 
 
 This book was largely written while the writer 
 was an associate in the Department of Educational 
 Administration at Teachers College, Columbia Uni- 
 versity, and he is deeply indebted to the faculty of 
 that department for suggestions and help. Acknowl- 
 edgment is due particularly to Dr. N. L. Engelhardt 
 whose encouragement and advice have been invalua- 
 ble. The writer is indebted to Dr. George Drayton 
 Strayer for numerous suggestions and for the 
 valuable assistance of the "Committee for Chamber 
 of Commerce Co-operation with the Public Schools" 
 of which he was chairman. Thanks are also due Mr. 
 
Fred Richardson, secretary of the above committee, 
 for his kindness in allowing the writer to work 
 many days in his office in New York City. 
 
 If this book helps any city school system in its 
 struggle to free itself from outside control in finan- 
 cial matters it shall have served its purpose. 
 
 Denver, Colorado 
 March, 1922 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 
 
 CHAPTERS Page 
 
 I — The Board of Education — Its Relation to Muni- 
 cipal Development 7-10 
 
 II— The Problem of Financial Control 11-20 
 
 III— The Legal Basis of Financial Control 21-26 
 
 IV — The Problem as It Has Been Dealt with in the 
 
 Past 27-33 
 
 V — The Present Status of the Problem of Finan- 
 cial Control 34-42 
 
 VI— Different Types of Financial Control 43-64 
 
 VII— An Index Number for City School Systems . . . 65-76 
 VIII — The Application of the Index Number to the 
 
 Problem of Financial Control 77-82 
 
 IX— The Case for Fiscal Independence 83-87 
 
 APPENDICES 
 
 I — Selection of Cities and Sources "of Data 88-98 
 
 II — Data Concerning Method of Fiscal Control of 
 
 Schools (169 Cities) 99-106 
 
 III — Data from Which the Index Numbers Were 
 
 Computed 107-114 
 
 IV — The Index Numbers and Standard Deviation 
 
 Values From Which They Were Made 115-122 
 
 V — The Biserial r, Explanation and Computations. 123-125 
 Bibliogi-aphy 126-128 
 
CHAPTER I 
 
 THE BOARD OP EDUCATION 
 ITS RELATION TO MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT. 
 
 The history of American city government is 
 largely a history of experimentation and continuous 
 change. Almost every conceivable combination and 
 type of government has been tried by some Ameri- 
 can municipality. It thus becomes possible to trace 
 a development through many different stages from 
 the earliest charters up to the present forms. 
 
 Previous to the American revolution, few cities 
 were large and important enough to need a separate 
 form of government. The municipalities of New 
 England found that the usual townmeeting form of 
 government was adequate for their purposes. In 
 some cases they have not surrendered this type even 
 where cities have become so large that town meet- 
 ings are scarcely practicable. In all, only twenty 
 boroughs and cities were granted charters during 
 colonial days. Following the usual English custom 
 these charters were granted by the governor of the 
 colony in which the city was located. 
 
 Colonial city charters usually called for a govern- 
 ment which "consisted of a single council made 
 up of mayor, a small number of aldermen and a 
 large number of councilmen, all sitting together.'" 
 
 For some years after the revolution and the 
 adoption of the national constitution, city govern- 
 ment remained very much as it was during colonial 
 days. One important difference which should be 
 noted, however, is the change in the charter-grant- 
 ing power. Charters were granted by the state 
 legislatures where they had been previously granted 
 by the governors. This made a fundamental change 
 
 'Munro, W. B., The Government of American Cities, p. 4. 
 7 
 
8 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 in the meaning of the charter and of city govern- 
 ment. The charters of colonial days were in reality 
 a contract between a city and its governor. Now the 
 charter became a state statute and like all state 
 laws could be changed only by the state legislature. 
 This marks the beginning of state supremacy over 
 the cities. 
 
 The next general change in city government 
 came as a result of the success of the national consti- 
 tution. It was reasoned that as this form of govern- 
 ment was a success in the nation and also in the 
 states, it would no doubt work as well in cities. As 
 a result we find that the new charters were pat- 
 terned after the national constitution. A mayor, 
 who was elected by the people and given some 
 power, and a bicameral legislative body was the ar- 
 rangement. These charters were very much in evi- 
 dence at the time of the civil war. However, it was 
 during this period that, in order to correct the evils 
 which were running rampant through the city gov- 
 ernments, the state legislatures added the plan of 
 government by boards. This plan developed very 
 rapidly during the war and the reconstruction 
 period. It reduced the powers of the council and the 
 mayor and all other municipal officers. In fact 
 every function bf city government was more or less 
 under a board that was authorized by the state. 
 Thus we had the police board, fire board, water 
 board and many other similar boards. 
 
 The board type of government persisted until 
 about 1880 and then the tide of opinion concerning 
 municipal government took a radical turn. The re- 
 sult was what is known as the "mayor" type of city 
 government. Instead of a great many independent 
 boards, each working as it saw fit, the government 
 was largely centralized in the mayor. In fact the 
 mayor was given the right in many cities, to remove 
 at will the heads of all departments. This strong 
 
GOVERNMENT BY BOARDS 9 
 
 "mayor" type of city government still exists in a 
 great many American cities. Since the beginning 
 of the present century two new types of city govern- 
 ment have developed and are being widely adopted 
 by American cities. These are (1) the commission 
 form and (2) the city manager form. In both types 
 the power is centralized and a few individuals are 
 held responsible for the government. In the former 
 type the voters elect a small group of men as com- 
 missioners and each commissioner acts as the head 
 of a large department. One commissioner is usually 
 selected as chief executive. In the city manager 
 plan a manager is engaged to run the city, much the 
 same as a corporation might employ a man to run a 
 factory. 
 
 The most interesting point for our consideration 
 in the above brief sketch is, that during all these 
 recent changes in municipal government the board 
 of education is the only board that has continued its 
 existence. The legislatures in the various states 
 have granted new city charters in which provisions 
 for the numerous special boards have been omitted, 
 but in almost one hundred per cent of the cases the 
 board of education has been retained. Why has this 
 been true ? Why not have the mayor appoint a man 
 to run the schools as he appoints the chief of police? 
 Why have state legislatures made an entirely dif- 
 ferent arrangement for education? 
 
 The theory of American government and Ameri- 
 can education furnishes the answers to the above 
 questions. Fire protection, street cleaning, garbage 
 disposal and all other functions of a purely local 
 nature have been made municipal functions. These 
 duties and responsibilities are delegated to the city 
 by the state. However, education is not and never 
 has been a municipal function.' Education has re- 
 
 'A recent law in Texas makes education a municipal 
 function but as yet this law has not been tested in any court. 
 
10 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 mained a function of the state and is so declared in 
 state constitutions and so ruled in state courts. 
 Reference to the court decisions given in Chapter 
 III will make this point clear. 
 
 Outside the purely legal aspect of the issue there 
 is another reason for putting education in the hands 
 of a board instead of a single commissioner or an 
 officer appointed by the mayor. This plan keeps the 
 schools free from much of the influence of politics. 
 In the majority of cities where the school boards are 
 elected, they are elected at large on a nonpartisan, 
 general ticket. It is believed that it is thereby pos- 
 sible to get a much higher grade of citizen to serve 
 the schools. Thus Munro says : 
 
 " civic clubs and organizations are usually ready to 
 
 take a hand in securing the right type of candidate for the 
 school board, even though they refuse to be drawn into the 
 campaign for mayor and councilmen.'" 
 
 and Goodnow, in his discussion of the board method 
 of school administration, also says: 
 
 "This has had the result, as every one knows, of allowing 
 politics, that is state and nation politics, to have much less 
 influence over the schools than they have over the other 
 branches of city administration.'" 
 
 It is highly signiflcant in the study of the control 
 of city school finances to know that the schools of 
 our cities are in general under the control of boards 
 of education. It is also important to note that this 
 is because (1) this arrangement keeps politics out 
 of the schools, and (2) the nature of public educa- 
 tion in America is such that it cannot well be treated 
 as a purely municipal function. 
 
 'Munro, W. B., Municipal Administration, p. 364. 
 'Goodnow, F. G., Municipal Problems, p. 270. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 THE PROBLEM OF FINANCIAL CONTROL. 
 
 It was noted in Chapter I that the board form of 
 government, for American public schools, is almost 
 universal.* However, these boards do not have 
 equal authority in the control of education. In the 
 matter of finances the range of power is very wide. 
 In fact these powers range from complete authority 
 in cities like Philadelphia to very little real control 
 as in Baltimore. 
 
 In general there are two methods of controlling 
 -city school finances, (1) independent control by the 
 board of education and (2) control in which the 
 municipal government has almost complete author- 
 ity. The former is generally known as fiscal inde- 
 pendence and the latter as fiscal dependence. In 
 fiscally independent city school districts the board 
 of education has power to compile and adopt its own 
 budget, levy its own tax or cause some other author- 
 ity to levy under its direction, and expend the money 
 as it deems right and proper. In fiscally dependent 
 city school districts the board of education must sub- 
 mit its budget estimate to the municipal authorities, 
 who revise and change it as they may desire and 
 then it becomes a part of the regular city tax budget. 
 School moneys thus raised are kept in the city treas- 
 ury and paid out through the same channels as other 
 city expenditures. 
 
 The two types of financial control explained 
 above are the extremes. Between the independent 
 and dependent types a great many intermediate 
 forms are to be found. Thus in Boston the board 
 of education is fiscally independent, but the budget 
 
 'St. Paul, Minnesota, Chattanooga, Tennessee and a very 
 few other cities do not have school boards. 
 
 11 
 
12 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 must be reviewed by the mayor. However, the bud- 
 get can be passed over his veto by a three-fourths 
 vote of the board of education/ In Cleveland the 
 schools have no connection with the municipal gov- 
 ernment, but the budget is reviewed by a county 
 budget commission/ Other intermediate types of 
 control are to be found in Oklahoma, Michigan, Mas- 
 sachusetts and other states.' 
 
 The question as to which method of control is 
 best, has been discussed for many years. In general 
 the authorities on municipal government favor fiscal 
 dependence for city school districts, and in general 
 the present-day authorities in educational adminis- 
 tration favor fiscal independence. The remainder 
 of this chapter will be given to an analysis of the 
 opinions of the best authorities in the two fields. 
 
 AUTHORITIES ON MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT. 
 
 A careful perusal of the literature in the field of 
 municipal government indicates, if one can judge by 
 the frequency of quotations, that Munro of Harvard, 
 Goodnow of Johns Hopkins and James of Texas are 
 among the most eminent men in this field.* All three 
 men refer to education as a "branch of the city gov- 
 ernment." 
 
 James, H. G. 
 James has written a practical volume in which 
 he gives in some detail his ideal plan for a city gov- 
 ernment. He makes the following provision for a 
 department of education : 
 
 'Se,e Acts and Resolves of Mass., 1898, Chapter 400, 
 Section 2. 
 
 'See Class Three in Chapter VI, p. 50. 
 
 'For a full description of many other classes see Chapter 
 VI, p. 44. 
 
 *If it. were possible to do so in a brief space, McBain, ' 
 Fairlie, Briiere, Cleveland, Beard and others should be 
 mentioned. 
 
DIRECTOR OR LAY BOARD 13 
 
 "Sec. 7. There shall be six administrative departments, as 
 follows : Law, Engineering, Health, Safety and Welfare, Edu- 
 cation, and Finance. Sec. 8. At the head of each department 
 there shall be a director. This director shall in each case be 
 appointed by and removed by the mayor, under the limita- 
 tions hereinafter prescribed.'" 
 
 The above plan deals with education exactly as it 
 deals with other "administrative departments." 
 James classes education as a function of the munici- 
 pal government and places it under the control of a 
 single director. In giving a director of education 
 as much authority, in the management of the 
 schools, as the chief of police has in the management 
 of his department, a dangerous situation is created. 
 A salaried school director, giving all of his time to 
 the school system, will without doubt assume duties 
 that are better performed by professional school 
 men. The best school authorities of the day agree 
 that the board of education should be a lay organi- 
 zation and its chief function to legislate on the poli- 
 cies presented by the professional officers it ap- 
 points.' San Francisco became dissatisfied with its 
 school organization and recently amended its char- 
 ter,' doing away with its four paid "school directors" 
 that were required to give full time to the schools, 
 and substituted an unpaid board of laymen. Sacra- 
 mento, California, has recently changed from a 
 director to a lay board of education. 
 
 The cities having school directors, as suggested 
 by Dr. James, are so few and the plan has been 
 established for such a short time that it is impossi- 
 ble as yet to determine the ultimate success of the 
 plan. It is impossible to separate the influence of 
 the previous plan of government from the present 
 situation. A school system that has developed to a 
 
 'James, H. G., Applied City Government, p. 74. 
 
 'See Cubberley, E. P., Public School Administration. 
 
 "November 1920. 
 
14 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 high degree of efficiency in building good buildings, 
 providing ample playgrounds and employmg weii- 
 trained teachers is slow to deteriorate. Hence, to 
 measure the present educational efficiency oi a city 
 school system that has been under the control ot a 
 school director for a few years, would not adequate- 
 ly measure the efficiency of that type of govern- 
 ment. This will be made more evident when the 
 index for city school systems is discussed in Chap- 
 ter VII. It is significant to note that no city school 
 system under the control of a school director, fur- 
 nished the data asked for in the three inquiries of 
 the National Committee for Chamber of Commerce 
 Co-operation with the Public Schools.' 
 
 MUNRO, W. B. 
 
 There is no doubt as to where Munro would 
 place the control of the schools, for he speaks of 
 keeping education in its "proper place" as an "inte- 
 gral part of the scheme of municipal administra- 
 tion.'" 
 
 In his discussion of the board of education as it 
 is found in American cities Munro says : 
 
 "The welfare of the common schools is a matter which 
 comes so close to the home of every citizen that it should 
 never be difficult, so long as any vestige of public spirit 
 remains in the community to get willing service on the 
 board of education.'" 
 
 Concerning the success of the board plan of 
 school administration he says further: 
 
 "The branch of the American city administration that 
 has in general been managed most efficiently, and has at 
 the same time been most constantly in tune with public 
 
 'For details concerning this committee and these in- 
 quiries see Appendix I, p. 88. 
 
 'Munro, W. B., Principles and Methods of Municinal 
 Admmistration, p. 360. ^ 
 
 •Ibid, p. 368. 
 
FISCALLY DEPENDENT BOARDS 15 
 
 opinion, is the school department, Yet this department 
 
 has been almost everywhere intrusted to an unpaid board.'" 
 
 As was stated above, Munro believes that the 
 school board should be a part of the regular city 
 administration, but he sees the danger in this type 
 of control. 
 
 "On the other hand, when it becomes necessary for the 
 board of education to present its annual estimates to the 
 city council and allow them to be pared down as the council 
 sees fit, there is always a grave danger that the schools 
 will suffer in the interest of those other departments (such 
 as streets and public works) in which the opportunities for 
 political patronage are usually greater.'" 
 
 In order to give the school board some protec- 
 tion, though fiscally dependent, Munro suggests the 
 plan of a certain fixed minimum that the council 
 must raise each year. 
 
 "This plan furnishes a convenient solution to the problem 
 of keeping the department of education in its proper place 
 as an integral part of our general scheme of municipal 
 administration, while yet making sure that it will not unduly 
 suffer from too great niggardliness at the bands of the regu- 
 lar city authorities.'" 
 
 The greatest difficulty with the above plan is that 
 the minimum is always placed so low that it proves 
 of no real value to the schools. 
 
 One would be led to believe by the very fair de- 
 scription of the American school board given by 
 Munro, that he would advocate that this board 
 should be fiscally independent for he says : 
 
 'Munro, W. B., The Government of American Cities, 
 p. 256. 
 
 'Munro, W. B., Principles and Methods of Municipal 
 Administration, p. 390. 
 
 'Ibid, p. 391. 
 
16 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 "The body that controls the purse-strings will, in the 
 long run, dictate the policy.'" 
 
 If the school board is less political, more efficient 
 and in tune with public opinion, and if the body that 
 controls the money will eventually dictate the poli- 
 cy, it is strange that Munro does not take the next 
 logical step of demanding that school finances be 
 separated from control by the city government. 
 
 GOODNOW, F. J. 
 
 Dr. Frank J. Goodnow, President of Johns Hop- 
 kins University and formerly professor in the Law 
 Department of Columbia University, is regarded as 
 one of the best authorities on municipal govern- 
 ment. Dr. Goodnow has also worked in the field of 
 educational administration, and was one of two 
 men chosen to make a study of the administration 
 of the schools of New York City in 1913. He pre- 
 fers fiscal dependence for city school districts as 
 can be easily noted from his books in which he refers 
 to education as being a branch of the city govern- 
 ment. 
 
 Special reference will be made here to his late 
 book on municipal government" which was written 
 with the assistance of Dr. Frank G. Bates. This 
 edition is a revision of an earlier book. It should 
 also be noted that in the preface it is stated that an 
 effort has been made to bring the text abreast of the 
 times by "a revision of the statement of fact." 
 
 A reading of the chapter on educational adminis- 
 tration in the book referred to above, reveals a great 
 many inaccuracies. A few illustrations will make 
 this point clear. 
 
 In his discussion of boards of education and the 
 control of the schools he says : 
 
 'Munro, W. B., Principles and Methods of Municipal Ad- 
 ministration, p. 392. 
 
 "Goodnow, F. J., Municipal Government (1919). 
 
ELECTION BY CITY COUNCIL 17 
 
 "In only one city of importance, namely, Buffalo, is 
 the matter in the charge of the city council. In this city 
 a committee of the council performs the duties which in most 
 of the cities of the United States are attended to by the 
 school-board.'" 
 
 The (1916) charter under which Buffalo was op- 
 erating at that time is still in force and provides for 
 a board of education and a superintendent of schools 
 to be elected by the city council." The charter at- 
 tempted to give the city council these and other 
 educational powers but they are nullified by the laws 
 of the state. In fact, the school board is now ap- 
 pointed by the mayor with the confirmation of the 
 council. 
 
 "In any other city of the state, members of the board 
 of education shall be appointed from the city at large by 
 the mayor except as otherwise provided herein, but in a 
 city having a population of four hundred thousand or more 
 and less than one million, such appointment shall be made 
 subject to confirmation by the council — appointed as herein 
 provided for five years.'" 
 
 The Buffalo school board is required by law to 
 make its budget and submit it to the city council as 
 are other fiscally dependent school boards. 
 
 After these funds have been credited to the board 
 of education the city loses all control of them for the 
 law provides that: 
 
 "Such funds shall be disbursed only by authority of 
 the board of education and upon written orders drawn on 
 the city treasurer — such orders shall be signed by the super- 
 intendent of schools and the secretary of the board of 
 education or such other oflScers as the board may authorize.'" 
 
 'Goodnow, F. J., Municipal Government, p.. 347. 
 
 'Buffalo City Charter, Section 290 (1916). 
 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 866 No. 5. 
 
 'Ibid, Section 880 No. 2. (The correctness of these and 
 all other laws quoted were certified to by school officials 
 of the city in question.) 
 
18 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 In his discussion of fiscal dependence, Goodnow 
 uses the following cities as examples of school 
 boards that are fiscally dependent: "Chicago, Phila- 
 delphia, San Francisco, Milwaukee, Newark, Louis- 
 vile, Providence, St. Paul and other cities.'" As a 
 matter of fact a majority of the cities given above 
 have fiscally independent school boards.' 
 
 It is also interesting to compare the statements 
 made by Goodnow concerning the school boards of 
 Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, with the state laws.' 
 The statements made concerning New Orleans and 
 Indianapolis do not correspond with the laws of 
 those states. 
 
 It is unfortunate that such an eminent authority 
 in this field should base his conclusions concerning 
 schools upon the inaccurate evidence presented in 
 this book. 
 
 The most noteworthy conclusion that Dr. Good- 
 now reached in this chapter is as follows : 
 
 "When taken together with the other developments in 
 school administration, it cannot fail to leave the impression 
 that the school board is succumbing to the same influence 
 that destroyed the city council, and that in time there will 
 be a school department with a single commissioner at its 
 head, having toward the school department about the same 
 powers and duties that the single commissioner or other 
 executive department head has toward his department."* 
 
 The above prophecy was evidently written many 
 years ago, because it is also found in the 1904 edi- 
 
 ^Goodnow, P. J., Municipal Government, p. 347. 
 
 'Illinois State School Laws, Section 1 No. 135. Pennsyl- 
 vania State School Laws, Section 524, Class Eight, Chapter 
 VI. Class Three, Chapter VI. San Francisco Charter 
 Amendment, Adopted November, 1920. 
 
 "Pennsylvania State School Laws, Section 202. 
 
 'Goodnow, F. J., Municipal Government, p. 351 and City 
 Government in the United States (1904) p. 271. 
 
CONTROL OF MONEYS 19 
 
 tion of "City Government in the United States" as 
 well as in the chapter under discussion. It can be 
 understood why such a prediction was made in 1904 
 when the wave of commission government had just 
 started, but why it is reaffirmed fifteen years later, 
 with so little evidence to support it, is not as easily 
 understood. 
 
 AUTHORITIES ON EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION. 
 
 The position of the Department of Educational 
 Administration of Teachers College, Columbia Uni- 
 versity is well expressed by Strayer and Engelhardt 
 in the following statement: 
 
 "The city board of education should have the right, 
 within certain limits, to levy taxes in support of education 
 and should have complete control of all moneys, whether 
 raised by local taxation or received from state funds. To 
 give the control of school funds to a local city government 
 is to hamper the board of education in the development of 
 the school system of the city. To give to the local board of 
 estimate and apportionment the control of school moneys 
 will often result in an attempt to divert school funds to 
 other purposes. The rewards to the politician or to the poli- 
 tical machine are very much more apparent through the 
 spending of money in other city departments than in the field 
 
 of education On the whole, those cities in which the 
 
 board of education has enjoyed fiscal independence, has been 
 able to levy taxes, and administer the funds available for 
 education have made much greater progress and maintained 
 higher standards of public education than are to be found in 
 the communities working under the other form of control.'" 
 
 Dr. E. p. Cubberley of Stanford University, 
 another leader in this field, is much in favor of fiscal 
 independence for city school districts. He says ; 
 
 "One important step in the elimination of politics from 
 city school administration is the almost complete separation 
 of the school department from the municipal government.'" 
 
 'Strayer, G. D., and Engelhardt, N. L., The Classroom 
 Teacher, p. 29. 
 
 'Cubberley, E. P., Public School Administration, p. 104. 
 
20 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 "Because the student of education administration does 
 appreciate these differences, and because he knows, from the 
 experience of cities generally, how easy it is to subordinate 
 educational efficiency to political expediency, he does not 
 favor any more connection between the city government 
 and the school department than is absolutely necessary.'" 
 
 "The experience of our American cities indicates clearly 
 the desirability of removing the tax-determining power for 
 the schools from the control of the city council, and of 
 placing it, within certain legal limits to be fixed by the 
 
 legislature, with the school authorities for determination 
 
 The results have been uniformly good in those cities where 
 such powers have been transferred to the school authorities, 
 and the schools of such cities have, in general, been able 
 to make better progress than in those cities where the school 
 department still remains a branch of the city government." 
 
 The above quotations make the position of Cub- 
 berley very clear and definite. 
 
 It is apparent from the subject matter of this 
 chapter that there is a sharp division between the 
 experts in municipal administration and the experts 
 in educational administration, concerning the ad- 
 visability of fiscal independence for city school dis- 
 tricts. 
 
 The following chapter will take up the legal 
 aspect of the question. 
 
 'Cubberley, E. P., Public School Administration, p. 104. 
 'Ibid^j). 412. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 THE LEGAL BASIS OF FINANCIAL CONTROL. 
 
 A study of the arguments given for and against 
 fiscal independence reveals the fact that the legal 
 status of American city schools is the main point of 
 divergence. 
 
 Those favoring fiscal dependence for city school 
 systems repeatedly refer to the schools as the "de- 
 partment," and look upon education in the same 
 light as fire protection or police powers. The school 
 organization to them has the same legal basis as 
 the organization of the health department or any 
 other department of the city. This has always been 
 the main basis of their contention. This is either 
 legally true or false. If it is true, fiscal dependence 
 is the proper method of controlling city school 
 finance, if it is not true then the opposite must be 
 the case. 
 
 Those who favor fiscal independence for city 
 school systems maintain that education is a state 
 and not a municipal function. The school organiza- 
 tion is not a branch or department of the city gov- 
 ernment but a separate and distinct organization. 
 They further maintain that taxes for schools cannot 
 be properly classed as "municipal" taxes, and that 
 as the taxing power comes from the state it is law- 
 ful and right that the state should give to both the 
 city government and the school board the right to 
 levy and collect taxes. 
 
 This problem has been the subject of decisions, 
 both in lower and supreme courts in almost every 
 state in the union. A few of these decisions have 
 been selected at random to show the general idea 
 established. 
 
 In the Smith v. School Trustees case, (141 
 
 21 
 
22 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 North Carolina 143) the supreme court ruled, con- 
 cerning school districts : 
 
 "They are in essence, local branches of the State govern- 
 ment, though clothed in a corporate form in order that 
 they may the better perform the duties imposed upon them." 
 
 This was quoted by the court from "Municipal 
 Corporations" by Abbott. 
 
 In the case before the Arkansas Supreme Court, 
 the Atchison, T. & S. F. Ry. Co. v. State (28 Ark. 
 94) , the court ruled that : 
 
 "The mandate of the Constitution to establish and main- 
 tain public schools through the State is directed to the 
 Legislature of the entire State, and not to any of the political 
 subdivisions of the State." 
 
 Again we have in the case. State, et rel., v. Free- 
 man et al., Commissioners of Elk County Kansas, 
 (61 Kan. 90), before the Kansas supreme court: 
 
 "The matter of education is one of public interest which 
 concerns all the people of the state, and is therefore subject 
 to the control of the legislature." 
 
 The supreme court of Connecticut in the case of 
 Walsh V. Hine (59 Conn. 50) held that: 
 
 "From the earliest period of the history of Connecticut 
 the duty of providing for the education of chilc|ren was 
 regarded as a duty resting upon the state — a governmental 
 duty." 
 
 In the case, Associated Schools of Independent 
 District No. 63 of Hector v. School District No. 88 
 of Reville County (12 Minn. 254) which was tried 
 before the Supreme Court of Minnesota, the court 
 ruled that, 
 
 "The maintenance of public schools is a matter, not of 
 local, but of state concern." 
 
 In the State, ex rel., v. Howarth (122 Ind. 462) 
 case, heard before the Supreme Court of Indiana the 
 court ruled : 
 
 "Every school that has been established owes its ex- 
 istence to legislation; and every school officer owes his 
 authority to the statute." 
 
 In Homer, Louisiana, the city levied a tax to 
 support a high school. The legality of this action 
 was tested before the State Supreme Court. (19 
 
CITY OR SEPARATE FUNCTION 23 
 
 Southern Reporter 271). The court ruled that a 
 municipal government could not establish a school 
 for: 
 
 "A high school is not essential to municipal government. 
 A system of education is not a part of municipal regulation, 
 and the power of the corporation to establish a public school 
 cannot be inferred from any power necessary for municipal 
 existence." 
 
 The supreme court of Kansas decided that when 
 a city extends its limits it does not give the school 
 district, coextensive with that city, control over the 
 schools of the annexed territory. (45 Kan. 560) 
 The court said in this case : 
 
 "We cannot say that the board of education of the city 
 became the owner of the school house by reason of its being 
 taken into the city by an extension of the limits." 
 
 The best known and most famous decision is, 
 without doubt, the one rendered in the Gunnison 
 case in New York State. (176 New York 13) . 
 
 "It is apparent from the general drift of the argument 
 that the learned counsel for the defendent is of the opinion 
 that the employment of the teachers in the public schools, 
 and the general conduct and management of the schools, is 
 a city function in the same sense as it is in the care of the 
 streets, or the employment of police, and the payment of 
 their salaries and compensation; but that view of the re- 
 lations of the city to public education, if entertained is an 
 obvious mistake. The city cannot rent, build or buy a school- 
 house All this results from the settled policy of the 
 
 State from an early date to divorce the business of public 
 education from all other municipal interests and business, 
 and to take charge of it, as a peculiar and separate function, 
 through agencies of its own selection, and immediately subject 
 and responsible to its own control " 
 
 The fact that taxation is a function of the state 
 and that the state may delegate this power to certain 
 subdivisions of the state, is clearly pointed out in the 
 case of, Sharpless v. Philadelphia (41 Pa. 147, 181). 
 
 "The legislature may provide agencies through whom to 
 
 exercise the power of taxation, Accordingly, from the 
 
 beginning of our government, the legislature has divided 
 the state into counties, townships, school districts, boroughs, 
 and cities and has provided for the appointment or election 
 of certain tax officers. This is not so much a DELEGATION 
 OF THE POWER OF TAXATION AS AN EXERCISE 
 
24 
 
 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 THE AMERICAN 
 
 II by WILUUH CIOmOE ■ 
 
 Volume LXII, Number 9 
 
 SubKripUon. t3JM the Yeai 
 
 WHEN THE SCHOOL BOARD IS NOT FINANCIALLY JNDBPENDENT 
 
A STATE FUNCTION 25 
 
 OF IT THROUGH AND BY MEANS OF CHOSEN 
 AGENCIES.* 
 
 They, (the legislature) are obliged to act through chosen 
 agencies when providing for the revenues of the state. .... 
 though the power that controls them resides in the legis- 
 lature." 
 
 The last decision to be quoted also deals with the 
 subject of taxation. The case came up in the Su- 
 preme Court of Kentucky (8 Bush, Kentucky Re- 
 ports 607). In speaking of the taxes collected in 
 Henderson, Ky., for the support of public schools 
 the court ruled : 
 
 "This can hardly be deemed a city or municipal tax. 
 The tax is levied and collected by the municipal authorities 
 because they are exofflcio common school officers for this 
 particular district. The tax itself is a common school tax 
 and NOT A MUNICIPAL ASSESSMENT IN ANY SENSE."* 
 
 In the 1919 edition of Ruling Case Law, is a dis- 
 cussion of the various decisions that define school 
 districts in American cities. The following is the 
 conclusion reached: 
 
 "School districts are purely creatures of state and derive 
 their powers by delegation from the state."' 
 
 A careful search of the supreme court decisions 
 of the different states covering a period of years, 
 failed to bring to light a decision in which the court 
 ruled that a city school system was a branch of a 
 city government or that it derived any power from 
 such city government. The unanimous decision of 
 the courts of the land is that our school system is a 
 creature of the state, that education is a state func- 
 tion, that taxation is also a state function, and that 
 the taxation powers a city government has are de- 
 rived from the state. A state can legally give to a 
 municipal government and a school district, extend- 
 ing over the same territory, the power to levy and 
 collect taxes because both of them are but exercising 
 a delegated state function in so doing. 
 
 *The capitalization is mine. 
 'Ruling Case Law, 1919, p. 262. 
 
26 
 
 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 Tnt LITTLE MlSCHIEfMAKtR 
 IN AMERICAN CITIES 
 
 City Councils more than any other public bodies retard school 
 board work. — (School Board Journal, April, 1900.) 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE PROBLEM AS IT HAS BEEN DEALT WITH IN 
 THE PAST. 
 
 There is no doubt but that there is a problem to 
 solve in the case under consideration. Both fiscal 
 independence and fiscal dependence cannot be the 
 proper relationship to exist between a city school 
 district and the municipal government. The at- 
 tempts that have been made to solve this problem 
 will be given below. 
 
 It is evident that this problem has been attract- 
 ing attention for many years for the cartoon given 
 on page 26 was published in the School Board Jour- 
 nal twenty-one years ago. It is also interesting to 
 note that the cartoon given on page 24 was pub- 
 lished in the May, 1921 issue of the same magazine. 
 Fiscal independence vs. fiscal dependence has been 
 widely discussed during the intervening years. 
 
 A careful study has been made of the literature 
 of school finance. ,The indication is that although 
 much has been believed, written and said in favor of 
 fiscal independence, no one has ever shown by scienti- 
 fic evidence that fiscal independence is a necessary 
 corollary of educational efficiency. It is true that 
 many cases of graft and incompetency have been 
 pointed out in cities where the schools were fiscally 
 dependent and good points indicated in the opposite 
 type. However, in spite of this, most municipal 
 authorities of today as well as of yesterday maintain 
 that schools can be most economically and efficiently 
 run if they are fiscally dependent. 
 
 A notable discussion of the subject under con- 
 sideration took place in Philadelphia in 1900. The 
 chief speakers were Professor J. T. Young and Pro- 
 fessor L. S. Rowe, both of the University of Penn- 
 sylvania. 
 
 27 
 
28 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 Professor Rowe presented the case for fiscal 
 independence. He had written to seventeen school 
 superintendents asking for their opinions on the 
 matter, and he reported that every one favored fiscal 
 independence. He also said: 
 
 "In every case in which school authorities enjoy inde- 
 pendent powers of taxation, the opinions of such authorities 
 are strongly in favor of the retention of the_ system. On 
 the other hand, wherever appropriations are in the hands 
 of local representative assembly we find considerable agitation 
 in favor of independent powers.'" 
 
 Furthermore, he presented data from a group of 
 cities over a series of years to show that financially 
 independent cities received more adequate support. 
 
 The arguments advanced by Professor Rowe can 
 be summed up in two statements, (1) independent 
 cities get more money and (2) the school superin- 
 tendents prefer this type of control. 
 
 Professor Young, presenting the case for fiscal 
 dependence said : 
 
 "In the other system (Independence) the school manage- 
 ment is taken out of the sphere of city government entirely 
 and given to a series of independent authorities with a 
 separate legal and administrative basis. At present _ the 
 second plan is still in operation in soine of our large cities 
 and has proved detrimental to the interest of all concerned. 
 
 Now this method may be well suited to the needs of a 
 rural government, but it is thoroughly impracticable for a 
 large city." 
 
 "In the face of such consideration can it reasonably be 
 said that the department of education is an exception to 
 all other known facts? Can it be maintained that there is 
 something so peculiar about ordinary school management 
 as to require a form of organization which has been abolished 
 in nearly all other branches of city government?'" 
 
 "The whole tendency of the time is, as has been said, 
 toward a more practical, definite fixing of responsibility, 
 and this can only be secured by increasing the power of the 
 city executives.'" 
 
 •'Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social 
 Science, Mfirch 1900. 
 
MUNICIPAL CORRUPTION 29 
 
 Two of his conclusions are worth quoting in this 
 connection : 
 
 "1st. The school system should be a bureau or depart- 
 ment of the city administration and should be directed, as 
 such departments are, not by forty large boards but by a 
 single official 
 
 4th. The head of the department and the board should 
 be chosen by the Mayor.'" 
 
 If the arguments given by Rowe and Young were 
 not dated 1900 it could be readily believed that they 
 had been published in a magazine or newspaper 
 during the current year. 
 
 St. Louis, Missouri, has received more publicity 
 than any other city, as an example of the benefits of 
 fiscal independence. C. L. Eliot, once President of 
 the St. Louis School Board, speaking before the N. 
 E. A. in 1905 said: 
 
 "My experience with the St. Louis law, and its operation, 
 leads me to believe that the best results can be obtained 
 in all municipal affairs by clothing men with ample power, 
 fully commensurate with the purposes of their offices and 
 holding them to full responsibility for the results obtained.'" 
 
 "There is nothing which a corrupt body of men, intent 
 upon making public affairs a means for personal ends, more 
 thoroughly desires than a complication of law which hides the 
 responsibility. Bureaucracy and red-tape are the meat upon 
 which corruption feeds.'" 
 
 Edward C. Elliott, writing in the School Review 
 in 1903, concerning the St. Louis situation said: 
 
 "The city has even attained a bad eminence of late years 
 through the exposition of gross municipal corruption. That 
 during the same period of time the school administration 
 should have been not only exempt from the evil which has 
 permeated the politics of the city but has attained something 
 of celebrity throughout the United States for exceptional 
 
 'Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social 
 Science, March 1900. 
 
 'N. E. A., Proceedings for 1905, p. 223. 
 
30 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 merit, requires an explanation which it is the object of this 
 paper to furnish.'" 
 
 There are other articles on this subject that will 
 not be referred to, because they are of no practical 
 value in this study as they contribute no new ele- 
 ments. They are largely made up of statements of 
 opinion. However, there are exceptions to the above 
 statement, i. e., the surveys made of New York City. 
 
 Professor E. C. Moore made a careful survey of 
 the New York situation in 1911. He showed in a 
 great many instances that the schools were com- 
 pelled to do without supplies and services that are 
 considered educationally necessary, because of lack 
 of funds. He concludes as a result of this investiga- 
 tion that: 
 
 "As every division of the education service is hampered 
 and hindered by shortage of funds, and by lack of control 
 on the part of the board of education of the funds appropri- 
 ated for school purposes, the board should control its own 
 funds in order to administer the school affairs of the city.'" 
 
 "External hindrances to the administration of the schools 
 of the city should be removed by carrying out the established 
 policy of the state to 'separate public education and the 
 control and management of the schools from all other munici- 
 pal interests and business,' by making the board of education 
 independent and giving it the power to determine the amount 
 of money needed for school purposes as has been done in 
 other leading cities of the United States '" 
 
 Two years later the Board of Estimate and Ap- 
 portionment authorized another survey of the situa- 
 tion by Dr. F. J. Goodnow and Dr. F. C. Howe. 
 Their findings were directly opposed to those of 
 Professor Moore. They found that the city govern- 
 ment had been liberal with the schools, for during 
 the preceding ten years, while the average attend- 
 ance had increased only forty per cent, the current 
 budget had increased sixty per cent and the invest- 
 
 ' School Review, 1903, page 465. 
 
 'Moore, E. C, How New York City Administers Its 
 Schools, p. 233. 
 
OPPOSED CONCLUSIONS 31 
 
 ment in plants one hundred and twenty-eight per 
 cent. The following quotations from their report 
 will make their position clear : 
 
 "Under the conditions which prevail in New York we 
 do not feel that it would be safe, even in the case of such 
 an important' and at the same time such a special branch of 
 administration as education, to decentralize the present 
 financial control of the schools. Only a conviction based on 
 long experience, that the interests of the schools had been 
 sacrificed by the present system, would justify a grant to 
 the school authorities of greater independence of the financial 
 authorities of the cities than they now by law possess. Such 
 a conviction may not properly be held by any one who reviews 
 with care the history of the past ten years, during which 
 the present arrangement has been in force.'" 
 
 "The present financial control of the Board of Estimate 
 and Apportionment cannot be charged with causing the 
 interest of the schools to suffer, except when judged by the 
 demands of the educational enthusiast who fails, in his desire 
 to realize his ideals, to give sufficient consideration either 
 to the financial resources of the city or to the demands on 
 those resources made in other directions.'" 
 
 "Concentration in the Board of Estimate and Apportion- 
 ment of financial responsibility and control of expenditure 
 for sites and school buildings seems to us advisable for a 
 further reason.'" 
 
 "By such an arrangement the Board of Education would 
 be the policy-proposing body, subject to the approval of the 
 Board of Estimate and Apportionment, as at present.'" 
 
 It is extremely significant to note that after 
 examining the same conditions in the same city at 
 very nearly the same time, two authorities should 
 reach such diametrically opposed conclusions. The 
 answer may, perhaps, be found in the previous ideas 
 of the investigators. Moore noted all the shortcom- 
 ings of the New York Schools and thought that fiscal 
 independence was the remedy, while Goodnow and 
 Howe maintained that the present system was the 
 best for all concerned. 
 
 'Educational Investigation Committee on School Inquiry, 
 City of New York, Vol., III. pp. 26, 27 and 28. 
 
32 
 
 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 Want School Boards to 
 Control School Funds 
 
 Hew York Evening Globe " 
 
 INEW SCHOOL 
 BILL SEEKS TO 
 FOCUS POWER! 
 
 EDUCATION BOARD 
 POWERS CURTAILED 
 
 Schenectady G-azette 
 
 Rochester Post-Exp. 
 
 MUST PROTECT 
 
 FEDOFCIlYCONTi 
 
 SCHOOL FUNDS '"case°=p"ts %..'?:r 
 
 J\/llUUli 1 Uiwq Fisc al Indepen dence 
 
 Buffalo Evening News 
 
 N. Y. Evenine Globe 
 
 Brooklyn Standard U. 
 
 E 
 
 Albany Knickerbocker 
 
 Urge Action Upon Bill to 
 Gua rd School Finances 
 
 Bew York Evening Globe 
 
 Plate 1 
 Some of the publicity given to the subject of fiscal control 
 of schools. ( From April, 1921, newspapers.) 
 
INDEPENDENCE VS. DEPENDENCE 33 
 
 The foregoing situation illustrates very well the 
 present condition and status of opinion concerning 
 fiscal independence vs., fiscal dependence. Those 
 who believe in either type, for any particular city, 
 can find reasonable arguments to uphold their case. 
 What this field of controversy needs more than any- 
 thing else, is data upon which a general conclusion 
 can be reached, and upheld. It is the purpose of the 
 succeeding chapters to furnish such data. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE PRESENT STATUS OF THE PROBLEM OF 
 FINANCIAL CONTROL. 
 
 In Table I all American cities having a popula- 
 tion of 250,000 or more are given, together with 
 their method of fiscal control of schools. 
 
 Only seven of these twenty-four city school 
 systems are completely (or nearly so) dependent 
 upon the city government in the control of school 
 finances. It is also interesting to compare this list 
 with a like compilation made by Rollins' in 1902 in 
 which he found that fourteen of the same list were 
 fiscally dependent upon the city government. The 
 tendency is toward complete fiscal independence for 
 American city school systems. 
 
 An effort has been made to discover how the 
 subject of financial control of schools is viewed by 
 the citizens and the press. A responsible news-clip- 
 ping bureau was engaged to clip, as far as possible, 
 all news items and editorials occurring in the press 
 of the country, which were concerned with school 
 finance. In the month that this bureau was engaged 
 in this work it clipped over one hundred articles. A 
 large majority of these clippings were from cities 
 in which the municipal government had charge of 
 the school finances and only a few scattering ones 
 from those in which the schools were fiscally inde- 
 pendent. In the following pages many of these are 
 presented in order to show that the problem of finan- 
 cial control of city schools is one that is very much 
 before the public, and one that must be finally solved 
 in the near future. 
 
 'Rollins, Frank, School Administration in Municipal 
 Government, p. 24. 
 
 34 
 
FISCAL SCHOOL CONTROL 35 
 
 Table I 
 Data concerning fiscal control of schools in all 
 American cities having a population of 250,000 or 
 more. 
 
 Number of Elected ? What authority has the city 
 
 members on Appointed government over the finan- 
 
 City school board, by whom? ces of the schools? 
 
 New York, N. Y.. 7 Mayor Almost complete authority.' 
 
 Chicago, 111 11 Mayor None. 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa.. 15 Judges' None. 
 
 Detroit, Mich 7 Mayor Budget dependent upon city. 
 
 Cleveland, Ohio ... 7 Elected None. 
 
 St. Louis, Mo 12 Elected None. 
 
 Boston, Mass 5 Elected Almost none.' 
 
 Baltimore, Md 9 Mayor Complete authority.* 
 
 Pittsburgh, Pa 15 Judges' None. 
 
 Los Angeles, Cal.. 7 Elected None. 
 
 San Francisco, Cal. 7 Elected None.' 
 
 Buffalo, N. Y 5 Mayor Budget dependent upon city." 
 
 Milwaukee, Wis. . . 15 Elected Budget dependent upon city. 
 
 Newark, N. J 9 Mayor Divided Authority.' 
 
 Cincinnati, Ohio. . . 7 Elected None. 
 
 New Orleans, La.. 5 Elected None. 
 
 Minneapolis, Minn. 7 Elected Budget dependent upon city.' 
 
 Kansas City, Mo. . . 6 Elected None. 
 
 Seattle, Wash 5 Elected None. 
 
 Indianapolis, Ind.. 5 Elected None. 
 
 Jersey City, N. J.. 9 Mayor Divided Authority.' 
 
 Rochester, N. Y. . . 5 Elected Budget dependent upon city. 
 
 Portland, Ore 5 Elected None. 
 
 Denver, Colo 7 Elected None. 
 
 Washington, D. C, is not included in the above list be- 
 cause of special method of financing the schools. 
 
 'See class nine, Chapter VI, p. 61. 
 
 'Judges of the Court of Common Pleas of the County. 
 
 'The Mayor may veto the budget but the board of 
 education can pass it over his veto by a three-fourths vote. 
 
 'Most dependent of all large cities. See City Charter, 
 Sections 6, 99 and 36. 
 
 'See charter as amended November 1920. 
 
 'School Board has right to fix salaries of teachers under 
 state law. 
 
 'See class eight. Chapter VI, p. 58. 
 
 'See new charter adopted November 1920. 
 
36 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 It was noted that New York City schools are 
 fiscally dependent and it appears that the subject is 
 always before the public in one form or another. 
 The following item from the New York Evening 
 Globe of April 18, 1921, illustrates the case in point; 
 
 "The problem of the schools of the city is a difficult 
 one and one very close to the hearts of the people. Something 
 should be done to avoid in the future the bickering between 
 the Board of Education and the Board of Estimate, from 
 which the money comes, that has been so familiar in the 
 past. Shall the school board be elected ? Shall it have separ- 
 ate tax power? Shall it have an independent budget? Shall 
 the legislature continue to fix salaries in the schools?" 
 
 "There is a plan to make the Board of Education elective, 
 and thus directly responsible to the people, and to give them 
 all authority regarding the schools, including the right of 
 every kind of _expenditure within a percentage of limitation. 
 This would eliminate the divided responsibility and the conse- 
 quent friction." 
 
 The same problem was dealt with in the April 2 
 issue of the Brooklyn Times as follows ; 
 
 "One of the great hindrances to the cause of public 
 education in the City of New York is, as is well recognized, 
 the dual control of school finances. This has been, particularly 
 since the year 1898, a constant source of controversy and 
 dispute. The present Controller of the city declared in a 
 speech delivered last year in the Washington Irving High 
 School that final responsibility for the schools rests with 
 the Board of Estimate and Apportionment of which he is 
 a member." 
 
 Although the city school board of Rochester, New 
 York is elected by the people the schools are fiscally 
 dependent. The Rochester Post-Express on April 4, 
 1921, expressed the situation for Rochester in a 
 most excellent manner when it declared that ; 
 
 "The fundamental need of our public school system today 
 is centralized responsibility. The only way of satisfactorily 
 meeting this need is to make the Board of Education, already 
 elected by the people, directly responsible to the people. 
 Until this need is met, no permanently sound system of 
 financing our schools will be possible, and the welfare of a 
 
CENTRALIZED RESPONSIBILITY 37 
 
 public school system like the welfare of an industry must 
 rest upon a sound economic basis." 
 
 "The constitution of the state of New York declares 
 that: 'The legislature shall provide for the maintenance and 
 support of a system of free common schools wherein all the 
 children of this state may be educated.' No similar responsi- 
 bility is placed upon the legislature by the constitution of the 
 state with reference to any other administrative function of 
 government." 
 
 Another excellent example of the newspaper 
 man's idea of the importance of the question is to be 
 found in the March 17, 1921, issue of the Buffalo 
 Evening News. This editorial was written as the 
 result of a cut in the school budget estimate by the 
 municipal authorities of Buffalo. 
 
 "The regretful thing is that there has been any cut in 
 the estimate submitted by the board of education. Those 
 who approach the matter of financial control of educational 
 affairs with open mind are certain to come to the conclusion 
 that it would be well if the school board were given complete 
 authority. As it is, the board, acting on the expert advice of 
 the school masters, is subject to the whim of the councilmen. 
 Plans are made for improvements in this and that direction 
 and they all come to naught if it happens that the council- 
 men, who can know little of educational requirements, do not 
 see fit to give their approval. The Court of Appeals has 
 ruled that under the charter, the board of education must 
 submit its affairs to the council. As a result there is a cut 
 of $631,403 in the board's estimate. This means a disruption 
 
 of the whole educational plan It means curtailments 
 
 and the deferring of betterments. And so it always will 
 be as long as there is division of authority. It puts the 
 schoolmasters in the position of choosing whether they will 
 serve the interest of the board of education or the council. 
 Let all responsibility and all authority rest either in one or 
 the other body. The present situation is intolerable. It 
 strikes at discipline, loyalty and efficiency." 
 
 During the 1921 session of the New York State 
 Legislature a bill was introduced to make all de- 
 pendent school districts independent. The discus- 
 sions of the bill in the press of the state furnish 
 one of the finest examples of arguments for and 
 against fiscal independence, and also show the wide 
 interest in the problem. 
 
38 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 A letter written to Richard A. Searing of the 
 State Teachers' Association by Superintendent of 
 Schools, H. S. Weet of Rochester, and reported in the 
 New York Evening Globe of April 4, gives a clear 
 cut argument in favor of fiscal independence. In 
 referring to the bill he writes : 
 
 "Our Board of Education is behind the measure first 
 of all because it is strictly in accord with the general policy 
 which the state legislature has always followed in the ad- 
 ministration of the common schools. This policy in the 
 thousands of school districts in the state of New York has 
 been to have a trustee or a board of education elected by 
 the people, administer school affairs within that district, and 
 be directly responsible to the people for this administration. 
 This is true in the ten thousand rural districts, in the seven 
 or eight hundred union free school districts, and in all but 
 about a dozen of the fifty-seven or fifty-eight cities in the 
 state. This bill simply cuts this line clear through, eliminates 
 these few exceptions and thereby applies the general adminis- 
 trative policy of the legislature in all cases." 
 
 "Our board is solidly behind this measure in the second 
 place, because actual experience has shown the imperative 
 need of centralizing responsibility in the work of administer- 
 ing the schools. Until this is done no sound system of 
 financing our schools is possible, and in the last analysis 
 the welfare of a public school system, like the welfare of 
 an industry, must rest upon a sound economic basis. The 
 bickerings between city authorities and boards of education, 
 where this divided responsibility rests, grows out of this 
 present unbusinesslike system which is unfair to city au- 
 thorities as well as to boards of education. The outcome is 
 a weakened community confidence because it is not possible 
 to fix responsibility." 
 
 The opinion of Dr. Gilbert, Acting Commissioner 
 of Education of New York State, as reported in the 
 Buffalo Evening News of March 19, 1921, is as 
 follows : 
 
 "The situation," Judge Gilbert declares, "demands reme- 
 dial legislation. Boards of education should be directly re- 
 sponsible to the people whom they serve. There should be 
 a separate school tax in every city in the state so that the. 
 people may know the cost of school administration." 
 
 "Such boards should be financially independent, having 
 entire control of school expenditures, subject to such reason- 
 
QUESTION OF TAXATION 39 
 
 able checks through limitations and review as may properly 
 be imposed. Legislation along these lines should be enacted 
 at the earliest possible time." 
 
 The last two articles tend to indicate that the 
 school men of the country are almost solidly behind 
 the movement for complete fiscal independence for 
 all city school systems.* 
 
 The main arguments against independence which 
 were quoted in the press at this time, were from 
 those who feared that the change would raise their 
 taxes and cost them more money. 
 
 The United Real Estate Owners Association and 
 the Real Estate Board, both of New York City, 
 viewed the question of adequate funds for education 
 as a question of taxation. Hence, their attitude is 
 in favor of that type of control that will keep expen- 
 ditures and taxes down to a minimum. The New 
 York Times of April 16, 1921, published the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 "The United Real Estate Owners Association sent a 
 communication to the members of the Legislature urging 
 them to vote against the bill. Among some of the objections 
 given were: 
 
 'It makes the Board of Education a separate and distinct 
 political subdivision of the State independent of and superior 
 to and with all the present and even with greater powers 
 than the city government.' 
 
 'It empowers the Board of Education to increase at will 
 all the salaries of its teaching and other employes, which 
 power the city government has not now got.' " 
 
 The following line from the New York Evening 
 Globe for April 13, 1921, is also suggestive: 
 
 "Edward Doyle, for the Real Estate Board, warned the 
 legislature not to go crazy over legislation and predicted 
 higher rents if increase in school budgets were not halted." 
 
 Not only is this question before the public when 
 it is before the legislature but in cities with depend- 
 ent school boards it is before the public every year 
 
 'In a group of 85 city superintendents, to whom this 
 question was recently referred, 83 favored fiscal independence. 
 
40 
 
 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 ISchool Board WiU 
 Fix Tax Rate Today 
 
 St« -Lotila fir3j>l)e Democrat 
 
 SCHOOLS FIGHT 
 
 Eliminating of $367,334 by 
 
 Council Protested: Mayor 
 
 Ca n Use Ve to. 
 
 Dstro it News 
 
 SCHOOLS LOSE 
 IN BUDGET CUT 
 
 Detroit Free Press 
 
 CITY CONTROLS 
 SCHOOL PAYROUi 
 
 YoaJiers Herald N. Y, 
 
 T 
 
 Richmond Va. Times 
 
 schools and Taxation 
 Chief Issues, Says Ross 
 
 Newp.rk H. J. Call 
 
 Won't Pass Estimate 
 Which School Board 
 Has Ah-eady Spelil 
 
 lev Westminister B.I. 
 
 March Appropriation Not Large Enough to 
 Main tain School Standards. 
 
 Erocjteon, Mass. Enterprise 
 
 Plate 2 
 
 Publicity given to school finances in diflferent cities. (April 
 1921.) The top heading is from a city with a fiscally inde- 
 pendent school system. All others are from fiscally depend- 
 ent systems. 
 
BUDGET ADOPTION 41 
 
 at budget time. The newspaper headings given in 
 plate 2, Page 40, were all clipped from papers in the 
 same month (April 1921). The top one is from St. 
 Louis, Missouri and shows the statement of a budget 
 adoption in a fiscally independent city and all the 
 others are from cities having fiscally dependent 
 school systems. 
 
 Detroit, Michigan, having a fiscally dependent 
 school system adopted its 1921-22 budget but accord- 
 ing to the Detroit News of April 16, this was badly 
 reduced by the city council. 
 
 "Protest against the Council's action in eliminating 
 $367,334 from the public school budget was sent to Henry 
 Stelfens, Jr., controller, by Frank Cody, superintendent of 
 schools, Friday afternoon. 
 
 "In cutting out $75,000 asked for substitute teachers, 
 Mr. Cody stated the board would be compelled to set up a 
 deficit or close rooms and send children home when the 
 regular teachers were ill." 
 
 Other samples can be found in the public press 
 of almost every dependent city particularly at bud- 
 get adoption time. The following two quotations 
 are press dispatches, the first one from Albion, New 
 York dated March 31 and the other one from West- 
 minister, Rhode Island dated March 22. 
 
 "Upon motion of Trustee Cramer the following amounts 
 were deducted from the budget as presented: Items of repair, 
 $500; item of fuel, $1,000; item of contingent, $1,000; total, 
 $2,500, leaving a balance drawn $38,500." 
 
 "New Westminister, March 22 — More trouble is brewing 
 for the School Board. The City Council last evening declined 
 to accept as part of the . estimates for the current year a 
 sum of $3000 to finish two additional rooms at the Spencer 
 School." 
 
 The following quotation concerning Williams- 
 port, Pennsylvania which has a fiscally independent 
 school system, was taken from the 'Sun' for April 
 15, 1921, and is typical of the publicity in such cities : 
 
 "The Williamsport board of education at the regular 
 monthly session held last evening boosted the tax levy for 
 
42 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 this year up to nineteen mills, three mills higher than last 
 year, and within one mill of the limit allowed by law." 
 
 There seems to be no doubt but that the question 
 of the correct method of controlling city school 
 finances is a live issue. At a sectional education 
 meeting, called in New York early in 1921 by Com- 
 missioner Claxton, one entire session was taken up 
 in a discussion of the question of finance. The case 
 for fiscal independence was presented by Judge 
 Dimner Beeber of Philadelphia, and the case for de- 
 pendence by Comptroller Craig of New York City. 
 
 At the 1921 meeting of the Department of Super- 
 intendence of the National Education Association in 
 Atlantic City, New Jersey, the question was re- 
 ferred to time and again as one of the most impor- 
 tant problems of education. 
 
 The control of city school finances is a problem 
 of vital importance, and is one that must be solved. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 DIFFERENT TYPES OF FINANCIAL CONTROL. 
 
 It was noted in the first chapter that there are 
 two general methods of controlling city school finan- 
 ces. These two general methods being (1) inde- 
 pendent control by a board of education and (2) 
 dependent control in which the municipal govern- 
 ment has the real authority. It was also pointed out 
 that there are many intermediate types between 
 these two extremes. 
 
 A careful analysis has been made of the state 
 laws and charter provisions that give the legal bases 
 for financing the schools of the cities under con- 
 sideration.' This analysis has been made in order 
 to discover necessary facts concerning the election 
 and appointment of school board members and their 
 powers in financial matters. It was also concerned 
 with all regulations dealing with compiling the esti- 
 mate, adopting the budget, levying taxes, and col- 
 lecting and distributing school moneys. 
 
 From the above data it was found that the cities 
 could be satisfactorily grouped into nine classes. It 
 will be the purpose of the succeeding pages to 
 explain these nine different types of financial con- 
 trol. All cities included in this study are classified 
 in Table Alpha.' The numbers designating the type 
 of financial control refer to the classes explained in 
 this chapter. 
 
 'For list of cities under consideration, method of selection 
 and sources of data, see Appendix I, p. 88. 
 'See Appendix II, p. 99. 
 
 43 
 
CLASS ONE 
 
 ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS— FISCALLY 
 INDEPENDENT. 
 This is by far the largest group. In fact, prac- 
 tically fifty per cent of the cities under consideration 
 have this type of control. 
 
 The first important consideration in this class is 
 that school boards are elected by the people. Unless 
 otherwise indicated in Table Alpha,' this election is 
 on a nonpartisan basis and members are elected 
 from the city at large. A good example of the legal 
 basis of such an election is the following law under 
 which cities in the state of Washington elect their 
 school boards. 
 
 "Each incorporated city in the state shall be comprised 
 in one school district, and shall be under the control of one 
 board of directors : "" 
 
 "The directors of school districts of the first class shall 
 consist of five members, who shall be known as the board of 
 directors. They shall be elected by ballot by the qualified 
 electors of the district, and shall hold their office for a term 
 of three years '" 
 
 The following example is taken from the Sta- 
 tutes of Missouri : 
 
 " and the supervision and government of public 
 
 schools and public school property therein shall be vested in 
 a board of twelve members."* 
 
 "The members of such board of education shall be elected 
 from such city at large on a general ticket "° 
 
 'Appendix II, p. 99. 
 
 'Washington State School Laws, Section 166. 
 
 'Ibid, Section 239. 
 
 •Missouri State Laws, Chapter 30, Section 540 
 
 •Ibid, Chapter 30, Section 542. 
 
 44 
 
ANNUAL TAX LEVY 45 
 
 Inasmuch as the laws which give the right to 
 elect a school board are very much the same in all 
 states, no more need be quoted here. 
 
 The second and most important consideration in 
 this class is that the school boards are given power 
 to levy and collect taxes. The following quotations 
 taken from the laws of different states, show the 
 type of statute under which fiscal independence is 
 guaranteed to the schools. 
 
 " the board of school directors in each school district 
 
 in this Commonwealth shall be, and hereby is, vested with 
 all the necessary authority and power annually to levy and 
 collect, in such manner herein provided, the necessary taxes 
 required, in addition to the annual State appropriation '" 
 
 " the school board in each district shall certify to 
 
 the board of county commissioners a statement showing 
 the aggregate amount, which, in the judgment of said school 
 board, it is necessary to raise from the taxable property of 
 
 said district, It shall thereupon be the duty of the 
 
 county commissioners to levy, such rate, within the 
 
 limits allowed by law, as will produce aggregate amount so 
 certified.'" 
 
 "The district school board of a school district of the first 
 class shall have the power to levy a tax once each year upon 
 all real and personal property in such district for the 
 maintenance, operation and support of the public school 
 system of said district."* 
 
 "The board of directors shall annually, at a meeting next 
 preceding the annual tax levy for state and county purposes, 
 report to the board of county commissioners an estimate- of 
 the amount of funds, in addition to estimated receipts from 
 the state and county apportionments for said district, required 
 for the support of the schools, the payment of interest upon 
 
 all bonds etc and the county commissioners are hereby 
 
 authorized and required to levy and collect such additional 
 amount of funds, the same as other taxes : '" 
 
 'Pennsylvania State School Laws, Article IV, Section 402. 
 'Colorado State School Laws, Section 336. 
 'Oregon State School Laws, Section 299. 
 'Washington State School Laws, Section 257. 
 
46 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 From the four quotations given from laws of 
 four different states, it can be seen that there are 
 two general schemes of fiscal independence. The 
 laws of Pennsylvania and Oregon give to the school 
 boards the right to levy a tax, while in Washington 
 and Colorado the law requires another body to levy 
 the amount of tax fixed by the school boards. Both 
 classes are equally independent. The detailed 
 method used by each city under consideration can be 
 seen in Table Alpha.' 
 
 The third consideration in this class is the legal 
 limitation on the amount of money that a school 
 board may raise by taxation. In all states under 
 consideration, the law fixes a limit of taxation which 
 the school board must not exceed. This is fixed in 
 many different ways as will be seen in the following 
 legal quotations. 
 
 "The tax levied for school purposes in districts of the 
 first class shall in no one year exceed one (1) per cent of 
 the assessed value of all the taxable property in the district: 
 Provided, That when any greater expenditure shall be deemed 
 necessary in any one current school year by the directors, 
 the question shall be submitted to a vote of the electors of 
 the district — and if a majority of the electors voting thereon 
 at said election shall be in favor of such additional tax, the 
 entire amount so authorized shall be levied and collected. 
 No levy, however, shall exceed two (2) per cent of all the 
 taxable property of said district.'" 
 
 "For school purposes in districts composed of cities, 
 which have 100,000 inhabitants or more, the annual rate on 
 property shall not exceed sixty cents on the hundred dollars 
 
 valuation Provided, the aforesaid annual rates for 
 
 school purposes may be increased in districts formed of cities 
 and towns to an amount not to exceed one dollar on the 
 
 hundred dollars valuation, On the condition that a 
 
 majority of the voters who are taxpayers, voting at an 
 election held to decide the question, vote for said increase.'" 
 
 'See Appendix II, p. 99. 
 
 'Washington State School Laws, Section 258. 
 
 'Missouri State Constitution, Article 10, Section 11. 
 
TAX LIMITATION 47 
 
 "The total annual school tax levy, made in any one 
 year by any school district of the first class, shall not be less 
 
 than six mills, nor, shall the tax levy for the school year 
 
 1920 exceed seven mills, nor shall the tax levy for the school 
 year 1921 or any year thereafter exceed eight mills '" 
 
 " are hereby so reduced as to prohibit the levying 
 
 of a greater amount of revenue for any year hereafter than 
 was levied the preceding year, plus five percent.'" 
 
 If the above rate does not produce enough money 
 the board may apply to the State Tax Commission. 
 The Commission must investigate the case and 
 
 " the said Commission may recommend an increased 
 
 levy for such taxing district and such taxing district is 
 
 authorized to make such excess levy not exceeding five mills 
 on the dollar of valuation of such district; '" 
 
 If the Commission refuses to grant the excess 
 
 tax, or if five mills are not enough the question must 
 
 be submitted to popular vote, and 
 
 "If three-fourths of the votes cast at any such election 
 
 shall be in favor of the increased levy , then the oflScers 
 
 charged with levying taxes, may malce such increased levy 
 for the year voted upon and therafter the limitation of this 
 act shall apply unless the increased levy for the particular 
 year shall be voted at another election in like manner."* 
 
 The four quotations just given are typical of the 
 different methods of limiting taxation for school 
 purposes in fiscally independent cities. 
 
 The method used in the State of Washington is 
 one of the most practicable for it sets a relatively 
 high tax limitation and this rate may be doubled by 
 a majority vote of the people, voting on the quesfion. 
 
 A method that is less elastic, is that of Missouri 
 in which the tax limit has been set by the Constitu- 
 tion and hence it is more diflicult to change. 
 
 Another type is that given for the first class dis- 
 tricts of Pennsylvania where the state laws fix not 
 
 'Pennsylvania State School Laws, Section 524. 
 'Colorado State School Laws, Section 333. 
 
 1 S 4 
 
48 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 only the maximum but the minimum rate of taxa- 
 tion. 
 
 The next type, and one of the poorest, is the 
 Colorado plan where the revenues are held down to 
 last year's levy plus five per cent, to be raised only 
 by appeal as noted in the laws. 
 
 Other special limitations are noted in Table 
 Alpha.' 
 
 After moneys have been raised for school pur- 
 poses it is of minor importance who retains them. 
 The real important point is the location of the 
 authority to pay them out. Two laws are given 
 below to show specimen methods of paying out 
 school funds. It will be noted that they are very 
 similar, in that full authority rests with the board 
 of education. In fact, this operation for all fiscally 
 independent cities is practically the same. 
 
 "The moneys of such school districts shall be paid out 
 only upon warrants signed by the president, or a majority 
 of the board of directors, and countersigned by the secretary. 
 
 "The auditor of the board shall issue all warrants for 
 the payment of money from the school funds, but no warrant 
 shall be issued for the payment of any claim until such claim 
 has been allowed by the board and approved in writing by 
 the business director; '" 
 
 As this class is made up of those schools that are 
 fiscally independent, and have school boards elected 
 by the people, there is no division of authority. The 
 school boards and their employees alone are held 
 responsible for the expenditure of funds and the 
 condition of the public schools. 
 
 'See Appendix II, p. 99. 
 
 'Washington State School Laws, Section 249. 
 
 'Indiana State School Laws, Section 300. 
 
CLASS TWO 
 
 APPOINTED SCHOOL BOARDS— FISCALLY 
 
 INDEPENDENT, 
 
 As far as finances are concerned these cities have 
 the same privileges as those in class one. In fact the 
 only difference between the two is that in this class 
 the school board members are appointed. This does 
 not leave the school board completely responsible 
 because the appointing officer also has an influence 
 on the situation. It establishes a close connection 
 between the schools and the city government for it 
 is usually the Mayor or City Council that does the 
 appointing. 
 
 The following laws that govern the school dis- 
 trict of Chicago, Illinois are quoted as typical of this 
 class. These cities are also limited in their tax rate 
 as are the other independent cities, the limitations 
 for Chicago being $1.20 per $100 for educational 
 purposes and 66% cents for building purposes. 
 
 "Each city having a population exceeding 100,000 in- 
 habitants shall constitute one school district which shall 
 maintain a thorough and efficient system of free schools, 
 which shall be under the charge of a board of education, 
 
 shall consist of eleven members, to be appointed by 
 
 the mayor with the approval of the city council for a 
 
 term of five years.'" 
 
 " the city council of said city shall, upon the demand 
 
 and under the direction of such board of education, annually 
 levy all school taxes.'" 
 
 "All moneys raised by taxation for school purposes, or 
 received from the State common school fund, or from any 
 other source for school purposes, shall be held by the city 
 treasurer, exofficio, as school treasurer, in separate funds 
 for school purposes, subject to the order of the board of 
 education upon its warrants signed by its president and 
 secretary and countersigned by the mayor and city comp- 
 troller.'" 
 
 ■Illinois State School Laws, 1917. Section 1 No. 128. 
 "Illinois State School Laws, 1917. Section 1 No. 135. 
 
 49 
 
CLASS THREE 
 
 ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS— PARTIALLY 
 
 INDEPENDENT. 
 
 This is a special group for the city school dis- 
 tricts of California^ that are included in this study. 
 These school systems have elective school boards and 
 in most functions are independent, but because of 
 their dependence on county authorities for a part of 
 their funds, they have been grouped in this special 
 class. 
 
 The laws and charter provisions that govern Los 
 Angeles are quoted as a sample. 
 
 "The government of the school department of the city 
 of Los Angeles shall be vested in a Board of Education, to 
 consist of seven members '" 
 
 This Board shall be "elected by the electors of the 
 city of Los Angeles at large" (Section 4) "for a term 
 of two years" (Section 5) and "shall receive. . . .ten 
 
 dollars for each regular meeting " The Charter 
 
 further declares that the Board of Education shall 
 have power 
 
 "To establish and maintain public schools including 
 colleges To have and exercise entire control and manage- 
 ment of the public schools in the city in accordance with the 
 constitution '" 
 
 California cities receive a large amount of reve- 
 nue from the state. (Los Angeles received 14.9 per 
 cent in 1920.)* They also receive revenue from a 
 
 "For California cities included in this study see Appendix 
 II, p. 99. 
 
 'Los Angeles City Charter, Section 69. 
 
 'Ibid, Section 76. 
 
 'Computed from data in Questionnaire Number Three of 
 the Committee for Chamber of Commerce Co-operation with 
 the Public Schools. 
 
 60 
 
SPECIAL TAX 51 
 
 county wide tax. Concerning this tax the state law 
 says: 
 
 "The board of supervisors of every county or city and 
 county must annually, at the time and in the manner of 
 levying other county or city and county taxes, levy and 
 
 cause to be collected for the school fund a tax,. . . . .the 
 
 maximum rate of which must not exceed fifty cents on 
 
 each one hundred dollars nor the minimum rate be less 
 
 than sufficient to raise the minimum amount estimated to be 
 raised by the county superintendent of any county, or of 
 any city and county, '" 
 
 All revenue in excess of the amount received 
 from the state and provided for in the section just 
 quoted, must be raised by a special tax which is 
 levied by the County Board of Supervisors at the 
 request of the city school board and the County 
 Superintendent. The provision for this tax is made 
 in the following law; 
 
 "The board of' school trustees or board of education of 
 
 any school district or of any city may submit to the 
 
 county superintendent of schools an estimate of any amount 
 of money in excess of the amounts derived from the state 
 and county funds which will be required for the maintenance 
 of any school or schools in their several districts for the 
 ensuing year. The county superintendent of schools shall 
 thereon examine said estimates and submit copies of the 
 same with his approval or disapproval endorsed thereon to 
 the board of supervisors and to the county auditor at the 
 time he submits to them his estimate for the county school 
 tax for the ensuing school year. If the county superintendent 
 of schools approve such estimates the said board of super- 
 visors may levy the excess amounts so estimated 
 
 and approved.'" 
 
 It appears that although California cities are en- 
 tirely separate from the municipal authorities and 
 have complete control of all school expenditures, yet 
 because they are dependent upon the County Board 
 of Supervisors for this special tax they cannot be 
 classed as entirely independent. 
 
 'California State School Laws, Section 1818. 
 'Ibid, Section 1840. 
 
CLASS FOUR 
 
 ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS— PARTIALLY 
 INDEPENDENT. 
 
 This special class was made for Oklahoma cities 
 because it was impossible to class them with any 
 other group. In Oklahoma the school board mem- 
 bers are elected, but the elections are either by 
 wards or nominations are by wards. This plan is 
 inferior to nomination and election at large. 
 
 The school board is allowed to levy a tax of five 
 mills, and in Oklahoma where property is assessed 
 at practically fifty per cent of real valuation, this 
 means a tax of but two and one-half mills. It is 
 necessary then for the school tax rate to be submit- 
 ted to the taxpayers for a vote, and then according 
 to law it is reviewed by the excise board. Roughly 
 speaking, Oklahoma cities are fiscally independent 
 but practically they are not quite that, hence they 
 are grouped in this special class. 
 
 Necessary quotations from the Oklahoma laws 
 are given below. 
 
 "There is hereby created in each and every county in 
 this state an Excise Board to be composed of the following: 
 County clerk, county attorney, county treasurer, ■ county 
 judge, county superintendent, county assessor and one mem- 
 ber of the board of county commissioners to be designated 
 by said board, which shall perform duties as herein provided 
 without additional compensation.'" 
 
 "School districts levy for the support of common schools 
 not more than five mills ; '" 
 
 "The annual rate of levy of (5) five mills for school 
 purposes may be increased by any school district by an 
 amount not to exceed (10) ten mills on the dollar valuation 
 on condition that a majority of the tax paying voters thereof 
 
 voting thereon shall vote for such additional levy The excise 
 
 board shall have no power or authority to reduce the levy, 
 so voted, and made at a school district meeting, neither shall 
 
 'Oklahoma State School Laws, Section 450. 
 'Ibid, Section 449. 
 
 52 
 
ELECTIVE SCHOOL BOARD 53 
 
 the said board have the authority to reduce the estimate, 
 unless the rate of levy so voted, shall be insufficient to raise 
 the amount thereof in which case the board shall reduce and 
 adjust the items of the estimate to an amount within the 
 limits of the levy.'" 
 
 CLASS FIVE 
 
 ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS— BUDGET PASSED ON BY 
 VOTERS. 
 
 These cities are dependent upon the votes of the 
 people for authority to adopt a budget and levy a 
 school tax. This method of control is common 
 among the small districts of many states but it is 
 employed by very few cities having a population of 
 eight thousand or more. 
 
 Rutherford, New Jersey has been selected as an 
 example to represent this class. 
 
 The elective school board is provided for in the 
 following manner : 
 
 "In each township, incorporated town and borough school 
 district, there shall be a board of education consisting of 
 nine members, except as hereinafter provided; three members 
 of such board shall be chosen at each annual school meeting 
 and shall hold office for a term of three years.'" 
 
 Concerning the school tax the law says : 
 
 "The legal voters may, at an annual or special meet- 
 ing of said legal voters, by a vote of a majority of those 
 present, raise by a special district tax such sum or sums 
 as a majority of said legal voters present at such meeting 
 may agree upon '" 
 
 "The assessor of any taxing district shall assess on the 
 inhabitants of the school district and their estates, and the 
 taxable property therein, in such manner as other taxes shall 
 be assessed, and the collector of such taxing district shall 
 levy and collect such sum of money as shall have been 
 ordered to be raised by the legal voters in the manner afore- 
 said.'" 
 
 'Oklahoma State School Laws, Section 454. 
 
 'New Jersey State School Laws, Article VII, Section 106. 
 
 'Ibid, Article VII, Section 127. 
 
54 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 For detailed information concerning each city in 
 this group see Table Alpha/ 
 
 CLASS SIX 
 
 ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS 
 BUDGET PASSED BY COUNTY BUDGET COMMISSION. 
 
 This condition is true only in Ohio. Here the 
 school boards are elected from the city at large and 
 the budget is adopted not only by the school board 
 but by the county budget commission. The follow- 
 ing laws define the method used. 
 
 "On or before the first Monday in June, each year, 
 
 each board of education shall submit or cause to be 
 
 submitted to the county auditor a budget, setting forth in 
 itemized form an estimate stating the amount of money 
 needed for their wants for the incoming year, and for each 
 month thereof.'" 
 
 "There is hereby created in each county a board for 
 the annual adjustment of the rates of taxation and fixing 
 the amount of taxes to be raised therein, to be known as 
 the budget commissioners. The county auditor, the county 
 treasurer, and prosecuting attorney shall constitute such 
 
 board For the purpose of adjusting the rates of taxation 
 
 and fixing the amount of taxes to be levied each year the 
 county auditor and budget commissioners shall be governed 
 by the amount of taxable property as shown by the auditors 
 tax list for the current year; '" 
 
 "The auditor shall lay before the budget commissioners 
 the annual budgets submitted to him The budget com- 
 missioners shall examine such budgets and estimates pre- 
 pared by the county auditor, and ascertain the total amount 
 proposed to be raised in each taxing district for state, county, 
 township, city, village, school district, or other taxing district 
 purposes. If the budget commissioners find that the total 
 amount of taxes to be raised therein does not exceed the 
 amount authorized to be raised — the fact shall be certified 
 to the county auditor. If the total is found to exceed such 
 authorized amounts — the budget commissioners shall adjust 
 
 'See Appendix II, p. 95. 
 
 ''Ohio State School Laws, Section 5649-3a. 
 
 'Ibid, Section 5649-3b. 
 
REDUCED BUDGETS 55 
 
 the various amounts to be raised so that the total amount 
 thereof shall not exceed in any taxing district the sum to be 
 authorized to be levied therein. In making such adjustment 
 the budget commissioners may revise and change the annual 
 estimates contained in such budgets, and may reduce any 
 or all the items in any such budget, or any item therein.'" 
 
 The quotations taken from the Ohio School Laws 
 outline the special process through which the city 
 school budgets must pass. The fact that a county 
 budget commission may reduce, and many times has 
 reduced school budgets, takes from the Ohio cities 
 their complete fiscal independence. Class six is 
 nearer dependent than independent although Ohio 
 cities do not suffer all the annoyances of municipal 
 control of funds after they have been collected. 
 
 CLASS SEVEN 
 ELECTED SCHOOL BOARDS— FISCALLY DEPENDENT. 
 
 Many different types of control are represented 
 in this class of cities. However, two elements are in 
 common, (1) all school boards are elected by the 
 people and (2) all are fiscally dependent. 
 
 These cities are from eleven different states and 
 it is impossible to give the laws in detail for each 
 individual city. However, the chief points concern- 
 ing each system can be found in Table Alpha.' The 
 laws in full are given for Rochester, New York 
 because it is typical of this class of cities. 
 
 "The officers elected by the electors of the city are:— 
 five commissioners of schools.'" 
 
 "The board of education in each city having a population 
 of less than one million shall prepare annually an itemized 
 estimate for the current or ensuing fiscal year of such sum 
 of money as it may deem necessary for the purposes stated 
 
 'Ohio State School Laws, Section 5649-3c. 
 'See Appendix II, p. 99. 
 "Rochester City Charter, Section 14. 
 
56 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 in this section such itemized estimate in such cities 
 
 shall be filed at such times and in such manner as city 
 departments '" 
 
 "The estimate of the department of public instruction 
 must be submitted on or before the thirty-first day of De- 
 cember in each year.'" 
 
 The board of estimate and apportionment to 
 which the board of education must submit its budget 
 estimate : 
 
 " consists of the mayor, who is president thereof, 
 
 comptroller, corporation counsel, president of the common 
 council and the city engineer.'" 
 
 "Within forty-five days after the commencement of each 
 fiscal year the board of estimate and apportionment must 
 make an itemized statement in writing of the estimated 
 revenues and expenditures of the city for the fiscal year 
 
 The estimate of expenditures for the department of 
 
 public instruction must not be less than a sum equal to 
 twenty-five dollars per capita, based on the total number 
 of persons enrolled as pupils in the public schools for the 
 year ending the preceding thirty-first day of December."* 
 
 After the budget estimate has been adopted by 
 the board of estimate and apportionment it must be 
 submitted in its final form to the common council for 
 its action and : 
 
 "The several sums estimated for expenditures contained 
 in the annual estimate as adopted by the common council, 
 become appropriated for the fiscal year .'" 
 
 However, the common council, which is limited in 
 the action that it may take concerning this budget 
 estimate for the charter says : 
 
 "The common council must not increase any item con- 
 tained therein, but has power to diminish or reject 
 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 877, No. 1. 
 
 "Rochester City Charter, Section 28 
 
 'Ibid, Section 61. 
 
 'Rochester City Charter, Section 62, 
 
 •Ibid, Section 63. 
 
DISBURSEMENT OF FUNDS 57 
 
 except that the items for the department of public in- 
 struction must not be reduced to less than a sum equal to 
 twenty-five dollars per capita '" 
 
 After moneys have been raised by the city or 
 received from the state for school purposes, they are 
 held by the city treasurer and credited to the Board 
 of Education. (State Education Laws, Section 880 
 No. 1). 
 
 The city officials have no more authority over 
 these funds for the law provides that: 
 
 "Such sums shall be disbursed only upon the authority 
 of the board of education and upon 'written orders drawn on 
 
 the city treasurer such orders shall be signed by the 
 
 superintendent of schools and the secretary of the board of 
 education or such other officers as the board may authorize.'" 
 
 Although it is not deemed advisable to give laws 
 in detail for other cities, the following concerning 
 Detroit, Michigan is given to show another good 
 statement of this type of control. 
 
 "Its annual budget shall be prepared at the same time 
 and in the same way, as the city's budget, and shall be sub- 
 mitted to and considered by the same board or officers.'" 
 
 "School taxes for the purposes of the board of education 
 of the city of Detroit shall be levied and collected the same 
 as other city taxes."* 
 
 Perhaps the latest statement of fiscal dependence 
 of this type, was written into the Minneapolis, Min- 
 nesota charter which was adopted in November, 
 1920. 
 
 "The City Council and every board or department of the 
 
 city having power to levy taxes, shall submit to the 
 
 Board of Estimates and Taxation a budget showing the 
 
 estimates and needs for the year the Board of 
 
 Estimate and Taxation shall in that case fix the maximum 
 
 'Rochester City Charter, Section 105. 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 880 No. 2. 
 •Michigan State School Laws, Section 4, No. 370. (1919) 
 'Detroit City Charter, Chapter IV, Section 33. 
 
58 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 of the moneys to be raised by taxation for the purposes of 
 the Board of Education on or before the first day of May 
 next following.'" 
 
 The combination of elective school board and 
 fiscal dependence that we have in this class is an 
 example of divided responsibility. In case of failure 
 to provide adequate schools for a city, no one can be 
 sure where the fault lies. The cities having elective 
 school boards are placed ahead of those with 
 appointed school boards because the school system, 
 in spite of divided authority, is better served by 
 such a board. Although these boards may have small 
 financial authority yet they are better champions of 
 schools than those that are creations of the city 
 government. This is evident through the bitter fights 
 waged between elected school boards and the "city 
 hall" in this type of control. A school board that is 
 the product of the "city hall" will not have the same 
 opportunity to fight for funds as the one responsible 
 to the people only. 
 
 CLASS EIGHT 
 
 APPOINTED SCHOOL BOARDS 
 BUDGET PASSED BY BOARD OF SCHOOL ESTIMATE. 
 
 This class is made up of all New Jersey cities, 
 which are included in this study, except Rutherford. 
 This classification was made and placed in this posi- 
 tion because of three facts, (1) the school board in 
 each city is appointed by the mayor, (2) no school 
 board can adopt a budget without the permission of 
 the special board of school estimate and (3) all 
 levies over three-fourths per cent must be made with 
 the consent of the city government. 
 
 The laws that govern the New Jersey cities are 
 given in some detail in the following paragraphs. 
 
 'Minneapolis City Charter, Chapter XV, Section 2. 
 
BOARD OF ESTIMATE 59 
 
 "In every city school district the board of education 
 
 shall be appointed by the mayor '" 
 
 This school board is given general control of the 
 public schools. 
 
 "Every school board shall have supervision, control and 
 management of the public schools and public school property 
 in its district, and shall keep such property insured.'" 
 
 The laws of New Jersey provide a peculiar form 
 of board to have control of the school budget. This 
 is a joint school-municipal board and is made up in 
 the following manner : 
 
 "In every school district the Board of Education shall 
 appoint two of its members, and the common council, board 
 of finance or other body in such city having the power to 
 make appropriations of money raised by taxes in said city, 
 shall appoint two of its members, and the four persons so 
 
 appointed, together with the mayor shall constitute a 
 
 board to be known as the 'Board of School Estimate' of said 
 school district.'" 
 
 The budget estimate is compiled by the board of 
 education and then presented to the board of school 
 estimate. 
 
 " the Board of Education of such city school district 
 
 shall prepare and deliver to each member of said Board of 
 School Estimates an itemized statement of the amount of 
 money necessary for the current expenses — ^for the ensuing 
 school year '" 
 
 The Board of School Estimate is given power to 
 adopt this budget and the council is required to levy 
 the school tax under certain limitations. 
 
 "Between the first and fifteenth day of February in each 
 year said Board of School Estimate shall fix and determine 
 the amount of money necessary to be appropriated for the use 
 of the public schools in such district for the ensuing school 
 
 'New Jersey State School Laws, Section 49. 
 Ibid, Section 61. 
 'Ibid, Section 86. 
 'Ibid, Section 87. 
 
60 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 year said Board of School Estimate shall make two 
 
 certificates of said amount, signed by at least three members 
 of said board, one of which certificates shall be delivered 
 to the board of education of said school district, and the 
 other to the common council, board of finance or other body 
 in city having the power to make appropriations of moneys 
 
 raised by taxes in such city. Said common council shall 
 
 appropriate the amount so certified and said 
 
 amount shall be assessed, levied and collected in the same 
 manner as moneys appropriated for other purposes in such 
 city shall be assessed, levied and collected; provided, that 
 any amount in excess of three-fourths of one percentum 
 of the taxable valuation of the real and personal property 
 shall be appropriated only with the concurrence and consent 
 of said common council, board of finance or other body, ex- 
 pressed by its resolution duly passed.'" 
 
 The Board of Education is given power to appro- 
 priate and pay out moneys that have been raised for 
 school purposes. 
 
 "No claim or demand shall be audited or paid unless 
 it shall be authorized by law and the rules of the board of 
 
 education nor unless the amount required to pay the 
 
 same shall have been theretofore appropriated by said 
 board.'" 
 
 All moneys paid out by the board of education 
 must be paid out in the following manner : 
 
 "All disbursements of the board of education shall be 
 
 by warrant signed by the president of said board and 
 
 countersigned by the secretary. All warrants drawn in 
 
 accordance with the provisions of this section, shall be 
 
 forwarded by said secretary, to the controller authorized 
 
 by law to audit claims and demands against the municipality 
 in which such district shall be situated.'" 
 
 However, the action that the controller or auditor 
 is allowed to perform is merely to make sure that 
 the warrants are legal. 
 
 "Such auditor shall examine and audit such warrants 
 and statements, with a view of ascertaining whether the sum 
 or sums are proper, and if he shall find them correct, he 
 
 'New Jersey State School Laws, Section 88. 
 'Ibid, Section 74. 
 •Ibid, Section 75. 
 
APPOINTED BOARDS 61 
 
 shall countersign said warrants and forward them to the city 
 treasurer, who by virtue of his office as city treasurer, shall 
 be the custodian of school moneys of said school district.'" 
 
 CLASS NINE 
 
 APPOINTED SCHOOL BOARDS— ENTIRELY 
 DEPENDENT. 
 
 These cities are the most dependent of any class 
 studied. Not only are the school boards creations 
 of the "city hall" but the finances are also in the 
 hands of the municipal government. Table Alpha' 
 gives the detailed information about these cities and 
 but one example need be given here in full. New 
 York City is the most talked of, most written about 
 and most typical example of complete fiscal depend- 
 ence. The following laws, which have been compiled 
 from the New York City Charter and the State Edu- 
 cation Laws, are the laws under which New York 
 City Schools operate at the present time. 
 
 The charter of the city of New York declares that 
 the city shall have a "board of education of forty- 
 six members.'" The State Education Laws of 1917, 
 however, declare that: 
 
 "A city having a population of one million or more shall 
 have a board of education to consist of seven members.'" 
 
 This conflict between New York City's charter and 
 state laws appears in most of the factors under con- 
 sideration in this study. 
 
 The board of education is made up of members 
 who have the following qualifications : 
 
 "No person shall be eligible to the office of member of a 
 board of education who is not a citizen of the United States 
 
 'New Jersey State School Laws, Section 75. 
 
 'See Appendix II, p. 99. 
 
 •New York City Charter, Section 1061. 
 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 865, No. 1. 
 
62 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 and who has not been a resident of the city for which he is 
 chosen for a period of at least three years '" 
 
 The members of the board are appointed by the 
 Mayor and hold office for a terra of seven years." 
 These appointments must be made from certain divi- 
 sions of the city for the law says : 
 
 "Two members of such board shall be residents of the 
 borough having the largest population, two shall be residents 
 of the borough having the second largest population, and one 
 shall be a resident of each of the other boroughs in such 
 city.'" 
 
 This board of education : 
 
 "Shall represent the schools and the school system of 
 the city of New York before the board of estimate and ap- 
 portionment, and before the board of aldermen in all matters 
 of appropriations in the budget of the city for educational 
 purposes."* 
 
 The board of education of New York City com- 
 piles a detailed budget of moneys necessary to run 
 the schools for the next fiscal year. The charter 
 says that : 
 
 "On or before the 15th of September in each year it shall 
 submit an estimate in detail of the moneys needed for the 
 entire school system of the city during the next succeeding 
 calendar year, to the board of estimate and apportionment 
 for its action."" 
 
 The charter further declares that the moneys for 
 school purposes shall be segregated into two funds 
 (1) the general school fund and (2) the special 
 school fund. The general fund is made up of sala- 
 ries, and all other expenses are included in the spe- 
 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 866. 
 
 "Ibid, Section 866, No. 2. 
 
 "Ibid, Section 866, No. 2. 
 
 *New York City Charter, Section 1064. 
 
 "Ibid, Section 1064. 
 
BUDGET FUNDS 63 
 
 Cial fund. The general fund is raised "in bulk and 
 for the city at large" while the special fund is item- 
 ized in the budget showing how much is to be spent 
 in each borough.' 
 
 Concerning this estimate the State Education 
 Law supersedes the charter. 
 
 "If the total amount requested in such estimate shall 
 
 be equivalent to less than four and nine-tenths mills 
 
 the board of estimate and apportionment shall appropriate 
 such amount. If the total amount contained in such estimate 
 
 shall exceed said sum of four and nine-tenths mills such 
 
 estimate shall, as to such ex,cess, be subject to such con- 
 sideration and such action by the board of estimate and 
 apportionment, the board of aldermen, and the mayor as 
 that taken upon departmental estimates submitted to the 
 board of estimate and apportionment.'" 
 
 All moneys raised in the budget of the city of 
 New York must be appropriated by the action of 
 the board of estimate and apportionment. Hence, 
 the "excess" referred to in the quotation above must 
 go through this procedure. This board of estimate 
 and apportionment is made up entirely of ex officio 
 members and it has a system of weighted votes for 
 different members. The officers who are members of 
 this board, with the number of votes possessed by 
 each, are (1) Mayor, three votes ; (2) Comptroller, 
 three votes ; (3) President of the Board of Aldermen, 
 three votes; (4) President of the Borough of Man- 
 hattan, two votes; (5) President of the Borough of 
 Brooklyn, two votes and (6) Presidents of the other 
 boroughs, one vote each. 
 
 The board of estimate and apportionment has 
 the power to reduce the school budget, adopt it as it 
 stands or it "is authorized to make additional appro- 
 priations for educational purposes authorized by 
 this chapter."' 
 
 'New York City Charter, Section 1060. 
 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 887, No. 7. 
 
 'Ibid, Section 887, No. 7. 
 
64 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 After the budget has been adopted by the Board 
 of Estimate and Apportionment it goes to the Board 
 of Aldermen for their action. 
 
 "The Board of Aldermen may reduce the said several 
 amounts fixed by the board of estimate and apportionment 
 except such amounts as are now or may hereafter be fixed 
 
 by law The board of aldermen may not increase such 
 
 amounts nor vary the terms and cortditions thereof, nor 
 insert any new items.'" 
 
 The action of the Board of Aldermen is not final 
 for the charter says ; 
 
 "Such action of the board of aldermen on reducing any 
 item or amounts fixed by the board of estimate and apportion- 
 ment shall be subject to the veto power of the Mayor 
 
 and unless such veto is overridden by a three-fourths vote 
 
 of the board of aldermen the item or amount as fixed 
 
 shall stand as part of the budget.'" 
 
 After these moneys have been collected they are 
 placed in care of the city treasurer to the credit of 
 the board of education and can be disbursed only by 
 order of the board of education." 
 
 'New York City Charter, Section 226. 
 
 "Ibid, Section 226. 
 
 'New York State Education Laws, Section 880, No. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 
 AN INDEX NUMBER FOR CITY SCHOOL SYSTEMS 
 
 The diflferent methods of controlling city school 
 finances were pointed out in Chapter VI. It is inter- 
 esting to know how moneys are raised and controlled 
 and what limitations are placed on the different 
 cities. However, to stop here would be to leave no 
 real evidence to show whether a city school system 
 should be fiscally independent or dependent. In the 
 past, as was shown in Chapter IV, arguments for 
 and against fiscal independence have been largely 
 based on opinion and isolated instances of graft and 
 incompetency. No one has ever attempted to show 
 the general relationship between fiscal independence 
 and school efficiency. One of the reasons why this 
 has never been done is that there has been no ade- 
 quate method of comparing one city school system 
 with another and thus drawing conclusions based on 
 fact. In order to overcome this difficulty an index 
 number for city school systems has been devised. 
 This index number gives credit to all important edu- 
 cational factors for which reliable data are available. 
 
 The Index Number as a Statistical Device 
 
 Index numbers have long been used as measures 
 of the cost of living, general level of wages, market 
 value of stocks and bonds, and numerous other 
 values and conditions. One of the best known and 
 most widely used indices is the one published by the 
 United States Department of Labor as a measure 
 of the cost of living. The method used in making 
 this number will be sketched briefly in order to illus- 
 trate the principle. 
 
 The Bureau of Labor Statistics uses 327 items in 
 computing its index number. These commodities 
 are as follows : 
 
 65 
 
66 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 32 farm products 
 
 91 food articles 
 
 77 cloth and clothing 
 
 21 fuel and lighting 
 
 25 metal and metal products 
 
 30 lumber and building material 
 
 18 chemicals and drugs 
 
 12 house furnishing goods 
 
 21 miscellaneous. 
 The average wholesale price for the month is com- 
 puted for each commodity. In order that each arti- 
 cle may have proper weight in determining the total 
 index number, it is multiplied by the estimated 
 quantity of that article marketed in 1909. The index 
 number for 1913 is fixed as 100 and the computed 
 index number for each month is expressed as a per 
 cent of that obtained in 1913. 
 
 Bradstreet's index number is based on the whole- 
 sale price of 96- articles, taken at the first of the 
 month only, and the cost in dollars and cents of one 
 pound of each commodity is totaled for the index 
 number. The Annalist index number is based on 
 the unweighted, average, wholesale jwrice for each 
 week of 25 food articles expressed in its relation to 
 1890-1899 prices. 
 
 Educational Application 
 Ayres has made an application of the index num- 
 ber method in his "Index Number for State School 
 Systems." He made use of the following ten items 
 in computing his index number.' 
 
 1 Per cent of school population attending 
 school daily. 
 
 2 Average days attended by each child of 
 school age. 
 
 "Ayres, L. P., An Index Number for State School Systems, 
 p. 14. 
 
INDEX NUMBER 67 
 
 3 Average number of days schools were 
 kept open. 
 
 4 Per cent that high school attendance 
 was of total attendance. 
 
 5 Per cent that boys were of girls in high 
 schools. 
 
 6 Average annual expenditure per child 
 attending. 
 
 7 Average annual expenditure per child 
 of school age. 
 
 8 Average annual expenditure per 
 teacher employed. 
 
 9 Expenditure per pupil for purposes 
 other than teachers' salaries. 
 
 10 Expenditure per teacher for salaries. 
 
 By a series of special methods explained in his 
 monograph, Ayres expressed all of his measures on 
 the basis of 100 as a standard. These ten items were 
 then totaled and divided by 10 to give the final index 
 number. This index number was computed for each 
 state. 
 
 Of these ten items it is apparent that five are 
 educational in character and five financial. It is not 
 quite clear just why so much stress (50 per cent) is 
 placed on what education costs. A high correlation 
 is shown to exist between the two factors but this 
 does not necessarily argue for the use of the finan- 
 cial data but rather shows how safe the index num- 
 ber would be without this factor. For this and other 
 reasons the Ayres index is not used in the compari- 
 son of city school systems. An example of the un- 
 fair influence of the financial factor of the Ayres 
 index is seen in a comparison between the States of 
 Montana, rank 1, and Oregon, rank 20 (1918) . By 
 omitting the financial fifty per cent of the index 
 numbers and computing on the basis of education 
 alone, Oregon has an index number of 66.46 and 
 Montana 63.44. It appears that Oregon ranks 
 
68 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 higher in the educational factors, but because it 
 costs Montana more for a less degree of educational 
 excellence, Montana gets a much higher score. 
 
 . The Composition of the Index Number 
 In the index number developed for this study no 
 cost items are included. It is the function of this 
 study to discover what method of fiscal control is 
 best for a city school system, hence the fact that a 
 city spends more money cannot be used as a measure 
 of superiority. A real educational index number 
 should take into account only the products of educa- 
 tion. But, as these products are so varied and large- 
 ly unmeasurable, at least at present, it is not possi- 
 ble to construct a satisfactory index number by this 
 method. The best that can be done at the present 
 time is to make use of those measurable factors that 
 are associated with, and are the necessary corollary 
 of efficient education. It is on this basis that the 
 factors involved in the following index number were 
 selected. The six factors are listed below and are 
 discussed in detail in the succeeding paragraphs.' 
 
 1 The per cent of sixteen and seventeen 
 year old children in school. 
 
 2 The per cent of elementary classes hav- 
 ing fewer than forty children enrolled. 
 
 3 The per cent of children who have 60 
 sq. ft. or more playground space. 
 
 4 The per cent of teachers who have six 
 or more years training above the eighth 
 grade. 
 
 5 The per cent of children enrolled who 
 attend school all day, and in adequate 
 buildings owned by the city. 
 
 6 The per cent of the increased cost of 
 living from 1913-14 to 1919-20 that was 
 
 "Detailed data for all cities, for the six factors, will be 
 found in Appendix III, p. 107. 
 
HOLDING POWER 69 
 
 met by increased salaries for elemen- 
 tary women teachers. 
 
 Factor Number One 
 
 This is a measure of the holding power of the 
 school. A school system to be efficient should hold a 
 large per cent of the boys and girls in school at these 
 ages. If it fails to hold them the cause may be 
 traced to any one of a number of different sources 
 but no matter what the source, it is a mark of ineffi- 
 ciency for a city school system to fail to attract or 
 hold a large number of the children of these ages. 
 
 It was the original plan to compute this measure 
 by comparing the enrollment of sixteen and seven- 
 teen year old children with the census records. This 
 was abandoned as impossible when it was found that 
 a large number of schools do not have age-census 
 data available! The method used was to find the 
 number of eight and nine year old children enrolled 
 and compute the per cent of sixteen and seventeen 
 year old children on this as a basis. The average 
 for all cities used was 39.1 per cent. 
 
 Factor Number '^wo 
 
 A money saving, inefficient means of conducting 
 a school is to group the children into very large 
 classes. This not only saves teachers' salaries but 
 class rooms. This factor serves as a check on the 
 building situation, for in cities where the building 
 program lags behind, the children are usually 
 grouped into classes that are too large for efficient 
 education. Forty is used as the maximum number 
 that should be grouped in a class. This may be too 
 large but more than thirty-one per cent of the ele- 
 mentary classes in the cities studied are even larger. 
 The per cent of elementary classes having fewer 
 than forty children enrolled is the computed mea- 
 sure for this factor in the index number. 
 
70 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 Factor Number Three 
 It is now an accepted educational principle that 
 an important part of a child's education takes place 
 on the playground. An efficient school system must 
 take account of this and provide adequate play- 
 ground space for children. The best authorities on 
 the question advise one hundred square feet of play- 
 ground space as the minimum allotment for each 
 child. The data concerning playgrounds were com- 
 puted on the basis of the number of square feet per 
 child, based on the average number belonging. The 
 playgrounds of the American city schools are hope- 
 lessly inadequate. It was necessary to use sixty 
 square feet as a basis for computing this factor and 
 then only 55.3 per cent of the children exceeded this 
 minimum. The per cent of children who have sixty 
 or more square feet of playground space is the com- 
 puted measure. The average for the total number 
 of cities is 55.3 per cent. 
 
 Factor Number Four 
 
 This factor needs no comment as to value nor 
 explanation as to method. The per cent of the whole 
 teaching force of the city having six or more years 
 of training above the eighth grade is the measure 
 used. The average for the total number of cities is 
 72.7 per cent. 
 
 Factor Number Five 
 
 When schools are over-crowded and the authori- 
 ties fail to provide sufficient new buildings a great 
 many makeshifts are resorted to by the schools. The 
 grouping of children into large classes has already 
 been taken into account. The other methods most 
 used are to make use of portables, annexes, corridors 
 or halls, attic rooms, basement rooms or to rent 
 buildings. If these methods do not provide suffi- 
 cient room for the children they are put on a half- 
 
ADJUSTMENT TO NEEDS 71 
 
 day plan and dismissed for the other half day. The 
 total number of children in all of these makeshift 
 places was computed for each city. This number 
 was subtracted from the total enrollment, and the 
 number thus found was expressed as a per cent of 
 the total enrollment. Thus the measure is the per 
 cent of children attending school all day and in ade- 
 quate buildings owned by the city. The average for 
 all cities is 91.4 per cent. 
 
 Factor Number Six 
 
 The last measure diflFers from the other five in 
 that it is a measure of the ability of the school 
 organization to adjust itself to new financial needs. 
 The six years following 1913 were years of advanc- 
 ing prices. A great many school systems lost their 
 best teachers through their inability to adjust them- 
 selves to the new conditions. It seems that this 
 ability to adjust is a real measure of the efficiency 
 of a school organization. It also reflects largely 
 upon the present teaching efficiency of the schools. 
 No cognizance is taken of the adequacy of salary 
 schedules in 1913-14 or 1919-20 but only the per 
 cent increase between these dates is dealt with. It 
 appears that the amount of money spent per teacher 
 for salaries does not give a comparable measure of 
 different cities, where the cost of living is very dif- 
 ferent. The efficient school organization during the 
 period studied was the organization that increased 
 salaries at least as fast as the cost of living 
 increased. 
 
 It is unfortunate, for the purpose of computing 
 this index number, that the many indices of living 
 costs are wholesale and for the country at large. 
 However, the United States Bureau of Labor Sta- 
 tistics publishes for fifty-one selected cities the per 
 cent of increase of the retail price of food since 
 1913. These figures are based on the retail prices 
 
72 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 of twenty-two standard food articles. This is in 
 reality an index number for the cost of food instead 
 of the cost of living in general. Inasmuch as an 
 index number is desired that is based on retail 
 prices, and is given for different parts of the coun- 
 try, this is the best one to use. Moreover, Burgess 
 in his "Trends of School Costs" concluded after a 
 detailed study of the question, that "On the basis of 
 these and similar facts it was decided that the best 
 single index of the changes in the cost of living 
 would be an index number of the changes in the 
 retail price of food.'" The country was divided into 
 four geographical divisions; North Atlantic, 
 Southern, Great Lakes and Western.' The median 
 increase in living cost was computed for each divi- 
 sion.' This was done by grouping the cities of each 
 division, for which data were available, according 
 to the per cent of increase of cost of living and find- 
 ing the median of these increases. The percentage 
 of increase is given in table II. 
 
 'Burgess, W. R., Trends of School Costs, p. 52. 
 
 'North Atlantic, including Connecticut, Maine, Massa- 
 chusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsyl- 
 vania, Rhode Island and Vermont. 
 
 Southern, including Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Dis- 
 trict of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, 
 Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, South Caro- 
 lina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and West Virginia. 
 
 Great Lakes, including Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, 
 Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin. 
 
 Western, including Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, 
 Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Dakota, New 
 Mexico, Oregon, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Washington 
 and Wyoming. 
 
 "Monthly Labor Review (United States Bureau of Labor 
 Statistics) December 1919, p. 188. 
 
PERCENT OF INCREASE 73 
 
 TABLE II 
 Per cent of increase of the cost of living from 1913 
 to October, 1919. 
 States Per cent increase 
 
 North Atlantic 88.0% 
 
 Southern 91.5% 
 
 Great Lakes 91.0% 
 
 Western 77.0% 
 
 The next step was to compute the per cent of 
 increase of elementary women teachers' salaries 
 over the same span of years. 
 
 The two measures for each city thus arrived at 
 were combined by dividing the per cent of increase 
 of teachers' salaries by the per cent of increase in 
 the cost of living. This is fair for all cities, for if 
 the cost of living increased 77 per cent and salaries 
 increased 77 per cent the city should receive the 
 same 100 per cent credit in efficiency as the city 
 where both salaries and the cost of living increased 
 91.5 per cent. The average for all the cities is 71.4 
 per cent. 
 
 Combining the Six Factors Into an Index Number 
 Now that the elements which are to make up the 
 index number have been selected, it is necessary to 
 determine just how these are to be combined. Ayres 
 combined his elements by adding the ten together 
 and dividing by ten. This is the simplest and most 
 easily understood method of making an index num- 
 ber. This method was tried and discarded because 
 it did not show true relationships. It should be 
 noted that although all factors are on a percentage 
 basis the average for the factors, for all cities, differs 
 widely. These averages are 39.1 per cent for the 
 first factor, 68.8 per cent for the second and 55.3 
 per cent, 72.7 per cent, 91.4 per cent and 71.4 per 
 cent for the others. If each factor is to have equal 
 weight in the index number it will be impossible to 
 use the percentages directly. For example let us sup- 
 
74 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 pose that a city has a score of 65 per cent in factors 
 number one and number five. If percentages are 
 added for the index number the two will have equal 
 value in spite of the fact that 65 per cent in number 
 one is a record reached by few cities and 65 per cent 
 in number five is a record that is extremely low. 
 Ayres claims that he did not weight the factors mak- 
 ing up his index number. Any method of making an 
 index number based on a summation of percentages 
 which come from distributions with different medi- 
 ans, is a weighted method. 
 
 With data such as ours, expressed in percentages, 
 the most valid method of summing is to express each 
 per cent measure in terms of its relative location on 
 a frequency distribution. In Diagram A, two fre- 
 quency surfaces are represented, one about the mean 
 of factor one and the other about the mean of factor 
 five. If a score of 75 per cent is located on the base 
 
 DIAGRAM A 
 
 39.1% 75% 91 ^% 100% 
 
 line, it is evident that if percentages are summed for 
 the index number this score of 75 per cent will have 
 equal value in the index number, no matter in which 
 factor it may occur. It can be seen that this score is 
 an exceptionally good record in factor one and a very 
 low one in factor five. Hence, the method used was to 
 compute the Standard Deviation,' from the true 
 
 'For explanation of Standard Deviation see Rugg, H. 0., 
 Statistical Method Applied to Education, p. 167. 
 
 For S. D. values for each factor, for each city, see Ap- 
 pendix IV, p. 115. 
 
CORRELATION OP FACTORS 75 
 
 mean, for each distribution and then express each 
 per cent in terms of S. D. All S. D, values greater 
 than 3 (plus 3 or minus 3) were used as 3. Only 4 of 
 the 1,014 S. D. values used in the index numbers 
 were effected by this rule. Thus, this 75 per cent 
 given above becomes a plus 2.08 S. D. in factor one 
 and a minus 1.38 S. D. in factor five. The index num- 
 ber is computed by a summation of the S. D. values 
 for each city. 
 
 Correlations Between Factors 
 Each factor, as expressed in S. D. values, has 
 been correlated with the index numbers. These cor- 
 relations were computed by the Pearson product- 
 moment method and are given below. 
 
 r. 
 The per cent of sixteen and seventeen 
 
 year old children in school 60 ± .03 
 
 The per cent of teachers who have six or 
 more years training above the eighth 
 
 grade 46 ± .04 
 
 The per cent of elementary classes having 
 
 fewer than forty children enrolled 45 ± .04 
 
 The per cent of children having sixty 
 
 square feet or more playground space. . .38 ± .04 
 The per cent of the increased cost of living 
 from 1913 to 1919-20 that was met 
 by increased salaries for elementary 
 
 women teachers 37 + .04 
 
 The per cent of children enrolled who at- 
 tend school all day and in adequate 
 
 buildings owned by the city 32 ± .05 
 
 If each factor were intended to measure total 
 school efficiency then one would demand a much 
 higher correlation. It appears that the above corre- 
 lations are large enough to show a high degree of 
 validity and at the same time small enough to guar- 
 antee that a great many INDEPENDENT factors 
 
76 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 are under consideration. If these correlations were 
 near 1.00 it might be suspected that some one 
 spurious element was effecting them and thus reduc- 
 ing the validity of the index. If a school board 
 wishes to make a radical cut in expenses, it may do 
 so by hiring a whole corps of young, untrained 
 teachers and pay them very low salaries. It is 
 agreed by school men that this will reduce the total 
 efficiency of a school system, but referring to the 
 other factors in the index number, this fact will not 
 make smaller playgrounds, poorer buildings or 
 larger classes. However, it may influence the num- 
 ber of sixteen and seventeen year old children in 
 school. Hence, the correlation of .46 between the 
 index number and the per cent of trained teachers 
 is more significant for this purpose than a correla- 
 tion of .99 or one as low as 0. 
 
 Another significant factor that can be noted in 
 these correlations, and can also be seen by going 
 over the original data in either table Alpha or Beta, 
 is that school systems are "poor in spots" and it is 
 seldom that one finds a system that is inadequate 
 in all particulars. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 THE APPUCATION OF THE INDEX NUMBER TO THE 
 PROBLEM OF FINANCIAL CONTROL 
 
 Each city has been previously classified into a 
 certain class based on the degree of fiscal independ- 
 ence possessed by the school board. The index 
 number, explained in Chapter VII, has also been 
 computed for each city. In this chapter these two 
 classifications are combined to show the relation- 
 ship between school efficiency, as expressed by the in- 
 dex number, and the method of controlling school 
 finances. Two methods have been used to study this 
 relationship, (1) the median method and (2) the 
 correlation method. 
 
 Comparison by Medians 
 In Table III the nine different classes of cities, 
 based on types of financial control, are given and the 
 cities are distributed according to the value of the 
 index numbers. The line MI is parallel to the base 
 line and is drawn through the median point of group 
 one, which is made up of cities that have elected 
 school boards that are fiscally independent. Only 
 one city of group nine, which is made up of cities 
 that have appointed school boards that are fiscally 
 dependent, exceeds the median for group one. 
 Groups two, three, four and five are so small that 
 no significant conclusions can be drawn from them. 
 However, it is interesting to note that no fiscally 
 independent school system having an appointed 
 school board equals or surpasses the median of 
 group number one, and that even though fiscally 
 dependent, the cities of group eight, with elected 
 school boards, show a definite degree of superiority 
 over the dependent cities with appointed school 
 boards. The whole table argues convincingly against 
 appointed school boards. 
 
 77 
 
78 
 
 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 TABLE III 
 169 Cities Distributed According to Type of Financial Control 
 and Value of Index Number. 
 CLASSES OF CONTROL' 
 
 Index Numbers 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 3 4 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
 7 
 
 8 
 
 9 
 
 Total 
 
 7.50 to 8.09 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 6.90 to 7.49 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6.30 to 6.89 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5.70 to 6.29 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 5.10 to 5.69 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 4.50 to 5.09 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 3.90 to 4.49 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 8 
 
 3.30 to 3.89 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 2.70 to 3.29 
 
 7 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 12 
 
 2.10 to 2.69 
 
 5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5 
 
 1.50 to 2.09 
 
 7 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 • 
 
 17 
 
 .90 to 1.49 
 
 6 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 13 
 
 .^n tn M 
 
 4 — 
 
 
 
 
 -_1-- 
 
 
 _3 
 
 MI 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 16 
 
 rO\f tU .OJ7 
 
 - .30 to .29 
 
 9 
 
 2 
 
 '2''^^^ 
 
 
 
 y2^ 
 
 
 - .31 to- .90 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 
 ~T^ 
 
 -^ 
 
 1^1, 
 
 1 
 
 11 
 
 - .91 to -1.50 
 
 6 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 5 
 
 3 
 
 \ 
 
 1 
 
 16 
 
 -1.51 to -2.10 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 \ 
 
 V 
 
 6 
 
 -2.11 to -2.70 
 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 v„ 
 
 13 
 
 -2.71 to -3.30 
 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 9 
 
 -3.31 to -3.90 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 6 
 
 -3.91 to -4.50 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 -4.51 to -5.10 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 -5.11 to -5.70 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 -5.71 to -6.30 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 -6.31 to -6.90 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 -6.91 to -7.50 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -7.51 to -8.10 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 -8.11 to -8.70 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 Totals 
 
 82 
 
 6 
 
 9 4 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 25 
 
 15 
 
 10 
 
 169 
 
 Medians' 
 
 .75 
 
 
 .6 
 
 - 
 
 1.02 
 
 -.15 
 
 -.60 
 
 -2.70 
 
 
 The line M connects the medians of all distribu- 
 tions containing nine or more cities. A significant 
 fact is that no city having a fiscally dependent school 
 system surpasses the third quartile of group number 
 one. The median was computed for each distribu- 
 tion containing nine or more cases. These medians 
 
 'For explanation of classes see Chapter VI, p. 43. 
 'Medians not given for groups having fewer than nine 
 cities. 
 
COMPARISONS 79 
 
 also point to the superiority of fiscal independence, 
 as they vary from a plus .75 for group one to a 
 minus 2.70 for group nine. 
 
 Comparisons by Correlations 
 
 The data given in Table III could not be corre- 
 lated by the usual product-moment method because 
 the horizontal steps are not equal. The large num- 
 ber of cases and the bunching of practically half of 
 the measures in group one diminished the useful- 
 ness of the Spearman "R" for interpreting these 
 relationships. The only method that was found to 
 be of value and specially adapted to the interpreta- 
 tion of these data was the "biserial r." This method 
 was devised by Karl Pearson, and published in 
 Biometrika.' 
 
 The "biserial r" was developed for cases where 
 one factor could be measured and distributed in the 
 usual manner into a series of equal steps, and the 
 other factor divided into two groups based on the 
 presence or absence of a particular condition. Pear- 
 son uses this formula to find the correlation between 
 age and the presence of anaemia in children. The 
 ages are distributed in the usual manner and the 
 children of each age group are divided into two 
 classes based on the presence or absence of anaemia. 
 The correlation is then computed from this table. 
 
 In order to use this method, groups one, two, 
 three, four and five of Table III were combined. 
 Groups six, seven, eight and nine were also com- 
 bined. This gives us two groups of school systems. 
 One made up of those schools that are, in a large 
 measure, fiscally independent and the other made up 
 of the schools that are primarily dependent. This new 
 arrangement of the data is given in Table IV. The 
 data are distributed into regular, equal steps on the 
 
 'Biometrika Volume VII, p. 98. 
 
80 
 
 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 Data for 
 Index Numbers 
 
 7.50 to 
 6.90 to 
 6.30 to 
 5.70 to 
 5.10 to 
 4.50 to 
 3.90 to 
 3.30 to 
 2.70 to 
 2.10 to 
 1.50 to 
 .90 to 
 .30 to 
 
 - .30 to 
 
 - .31 to 
 
 - .91 to 
 -1.51 to 
 -2.11 to 
 -2.71 to 
 -3.31 to 
 -3.91 to 
 -4.51 to 
 -5.11 to 
 -5.71 to 
 -6.31 to 
 -6.91 to 
 -7.51 to 
 -8.11 to 
 Totals 
 
 8.09 
 
 7.49 
 
 6.89 
 
 6.29 
 
 5.69 
 
 5.09 
 
 4.49 
 
 3.89 
 
 3.29 
 
 2.69 
 
 2.09 
 
 1.49 
 
 .89 
 
 .29 
 
 - .90 
 
 -1.50 
 
 -2.10 
 
 -2.70 
 
 -3.30 
 
 -3.90 
 
 -4.50 
 
 -5.10 
 
 -5.70 
 
 -6.30 
 
 -6.90 
 
 -7.50 
 
 -8.10 
 
 -8.70 
 
 TABLE IV 
 
 
 »mpuUtion of Biserial r.' 
 
 
 Independent Dependent 
 
 
 School School 
 
 Total 
 
 Systems Systems 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 107 
 
 1 
 
 62 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 12 
 
 5 
 
 17 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 16 
 
 11 
 
 16 
 
 6 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 5 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 169 
 
 basis of index number values and then each group 
 of cities is divided into those having independent 
 school systems and those having dependent school 
 systems. 
 
 The formula for the computation of the biserial 
 r is given in Appendix V. The problem under con- 
 sideration is also worked out in detail and the 
 method explained." For the purpose of the reader 
 
 "For Computation of Biserial r see Appendix V, p. 123. 
 "See Appendix V, p. 123. 
 
INFLUENCE OF SIZE 81 
 
 who is not interested in this satistical procedure it 
 is sufficient to say that this r is interpreted exactly 
 as the ordinary Pearson r. 
 
 The correlation by the above method, between 
 fiscal dependence and school efficiency as measured 
 by the index number, is — .27. This shows that there 
 is a relationship, at least among the cities studied, 
 between fiscal control and school efficiency. The 
 fact that the correlation is definitely negative shows 
 that a fiscally independent school system has a better 
 chance to achieve success than one in which the 
 finances are in the hands of the city government. 
 
 Table IV has also been marked to show the posi- 
 tions of the median, and first and third quartile of 
 both distributions. Besides noting the definite 
 superiority of the independent school systems on all 
 three measures it is interesting to note that the lines 
 are practically parallel showing the consistency of 
 the advantage. 
 
 The Influence of Size of Cities. 
 
 The correlation just completed and discussed was 
 computed on the basis of all the cities included in 
 this study. In order to show that this condition 
 holds as truly for the larger cities, the ninety-nine 
 smallest cities were excluded from consideration and 
 the "biserial r" computed for the seventy largest 
 cities.' The correlation between fiscal dependence 
 and the index numbers was found to be — .28. The 
 same conditions exist for the seventy largest cities 
 as for the total group. 
 
 The Influence of Geographical Location. 
 The correlations computed for the purpose of 
 comparisons between fiscally dependent and inde- 
 pendent school systems have been computed for the 
 country at large without regard to geographical 
 
 Tor Computation see Appendix V, p. 123. 
 
82 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 location. It would be valuable to know if conditions 
 are the same in different parts of the country. A 
 separate correlation for each geographical division' 
 is impossible because (1) there are no cities with 
 dependent school systems in the western division, 
 (2) the southern group is too small for any degree 
 of reliability and (3) the North Atlantic group gives 
 a division into classes and is large enough for a cor- 
 relation but the independent cities are practically 
 all grouped in one state. The only geographical divi- 
 sion where the number of cities is large, and where 
 the independent and dependent school systems are 
 scattered over several states, is the Great Lakes 
 Division. The correlation, by the biserial r method, 
 between fiscal dependence and efficiency for this 
 group of cities is — 2.1' This is exactly the same 
 correlation as found for the country at large. The 
 relationship appears to be a general one. 
 
 New York State furnishes the best example of 
 a single state in which we have a group of inde- 
 pendent and dependent school systems. Six city 
 school systems from this state, included in this 
 study, are dependent and seven are independent. 
 This group is far too small for a correlation and the 
 only comparison of any value is that based on 
 medians. The index number for the median inde- 
 pendent school systems is plus .68 and the median 
 for the dependent school systems is minus 1.99. 
 This is in full agreement with all previous findings. 
 
 There is a distinct tendency for fiscally inde- 
 pendent school systems to have higher index num- 
 bers than fiscally dependent systems. This holds 
 true for cities of different size and geographical 
 location. 
 
 'For Geographical Divisions see Chapter VII, p. 72. 
 ^For Computation see Appendix V, p. 123. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 THE CASE FOR FISCAL INDEPENDENCE. 
 
 1 Fiscal independence is right in principle. 
 Education is a function of the state. This has 
 
 been set forth in so many state constitutions and 
 upheld in so many court decisions that it is a fixed 
 principle of American government. The control 
 over education that is exercised by local school 
 authorities is theirs only through the laws of the 
 state. The authority for every act of the board of 
 education is to be found in the state statutes. The 
 legislature acting within its rights and fulfilling the 
 duty imposed upon it must make provisions for 
 education. 
 
 The authority for all municipal acts must also 
 come from the state. Even in the states that have 
 "home rule" for cities, the right to adopt a charter 
 is conferred upon the city by the state government. 
 The legislature in giving to one body the control of 
 functions that are purely local in character, and to 
 another the functions that are constitutionally 
 declared to belong as a duty to the state, is acting 
 within its legal rights. Belief in this principle has 
 caused the states to create separate, corporate, local 
 bodies to have charge of the city schools. 
 
 2 Fiscal independence is not a violation of the 
 principles of taxation. 
 
 Many advocates of fiscal dependence claim that 
 in granting taxing powers to two separate and dis- 
 tinct local agencies in the same territory, the legis- 
 lature is violating a fundamental principle of taxa- 
 tion. Several of the court decisions given in Chap- 
 ter III, page 21, deal with this question. The facts 
 of the case are (1) a city has no inherent right to 
 levy and collect a tax, (2) the state grants to the 
 city the authority to collect certain revenues, (3) in 
 
 83 
 
84 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 collecting these revenues the city is not exercising 
 the right of taxation but merely collecting a tax for 
 the state (41 Pa. 147) S (4) the state in granting a 
 school board fiscal independence is simply giving to 
 another "agency" the right to collect certain rev- 
 enues for a specific state function. Instead of two 
 boards within the same city "competing for rev- 
 enues" it is a case of two creations of the state, 
 within that state, collecting moneys to pay for cer- 
 tain functions delegated to them by the state. There 
 is but one taxing authority outside of the Federal 
 Government and that is the State. 
 
 3 Fiscal independence works better in practice. 
 
 It is the general opinion of school men that fiscal 
 independence works better in practice. Where 
 changes in financial control are made, the tendency 
 is to change from the dependent type to the inde- 
 pendent type. This is clearly shown in Chapter V, 
 page 34. If one can judge from the articles pub- 
 lished in the newspapers, there is much more dis- 
 satisfaction in those cities in which the schools are 
 fiscally dependent than in cities where the school 
 system is fiscally independent. There is not only 
 dissatisfaction among the school people but among 
 the citizens of the city. One instance of this is the 
 vigorous criticism of the officials of the city of New 
 York by many civic organizations, for failure to 
 provide for the schools. 
 
 The index number developed in Chapter VII, 
 page 65, shows the superiority of independent finan- 
 cial control for the schools. The fact that only one 
 city, vdth a purely dependent school organization, 
 equaled or passed the MEDIAN of those with inde- 
 pendent financial control is highly significant. The 
 correlation of — .27 between dependence and the 
 
 •See Chapter HI, p. 23. 
 
CONTINUITY OF POLICY 85 
 
 index number for school efficiency is not large but 
 the fact that it is clearly negative shows that a 
 fiscally independent school system has a better 
 chance to achieve success, as measured by the index 
 number. 
 
 4 Fiscal independence makes for a continuity of 
 educational policy. 
 
 The successful superintendent of schools must 
 be able to plan for the future. In adopting any new 
 policy he must make definite plans for many years 
 in advance. Changing a school organization from 
 the 8-4 to the 6-3-3 plan, by the introduction of 
 junior high schools, is a good example. If a superin- 
 tendent and board of education wishes to make this 
 change through the whole school system, definite 
 plans should be made for a period of years. These 
 plans would call for the building of so many build- 
 ings and the reorganization of certain elementary 
 schools each year. 
 
 If the school authorities are certain that they 
 will have the necessary funds, these plans can be 
 made and executed year by year. In the same man- 
 ner it is possible to map out a continuous policy for 
 any part of the organization. If the school board is 
 fiscally dependent it may carry out its program for 
 one or more years, and then find its funds shut off 
 by the city government. It is evident in some of the 
 news clippings given in Chapter V, page 34, that 
 this condition exists today. A school system which 
 controls its own finances is able to make certain 
 definite plans for the future and be sure of funds 
 with which to carry them out. This continuity of 
 policy is a valuable educational asset. 
 
 5 Fiscal independence provides adequate financial 
 safeguards for the community. 
 
 An argument of those favoring fiscal dependence 
 for city schools is that, if independent, the school 
 
86 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 board would be extravagant and spend much more 
 money than the city could afford. There are two 
 good answers to this accusation, (1) the state sets 
 a maximum tax rate which the school board must 
 not exceed and (2) in the many hundreds of city 
 school systems that are fiscally independent no 
 school board has yet put the city into bankruptcy. 
 In fact the school board is (in the most independent 
 cases) elected by and held responsible to the voters. 
 Hence, if a school board becomes too extravagant it 
 will be as easy to replace it as to replace the city 
 government. On the other hand, if the school board 
 does not spend enough money on the schools, or if it 
 has violated its trust, it is a much easier matter to 
 deal directly with the school board than to secure 
 reforms through a city government. 
 
 Those opposed to fiscal independence for city 
 school systems claim that it is a waste of money to 
 have two sets of taxation officers and two treasuries 
 in the same city. Fiscal independence of the school 
 board does not necessitate two such sets of officials. 
 Many fiscally independent school systems have their 
 taxes collected by the city or county and held subject 
 to their order, in separate funds by the city or 
 county treasurer. 
 
 6 Fiscal independence tends to keep politics out of 
 the schools. 
 
 The quotations given in Chapter I and elsewhere 
 in this book show that even those who are opposed 
 to fiscal independence for city schools do grant that 
 the schools are influenced less by politics than are 
 any other political bodies. In a school board that is 
 appointed by the mayor, and changes with the party 
 in power, it is impossible to keep the political ele- 
 ment out. With an independent board of education, 
 elected at a special, nonpartisan election from the 
 city at lai-ge and given authority to manage its own 
 affairs, without reference to the party in power at 
 
NON-POLITICAL CONTROL 87 
 
 the "city hall," it is possible to exclude most of the 
 political party elements. This is a very valid reason 
 why the schools should be under the control of an 
 elected, non-political body that is fiscally inde- 
 pendent. 
 
APPENDIX I 
 Selection of Cities 
 The selection of the 169 cities dealt with in this 
 study was not "a matter of deliberate choice. In 
 order to study a city it was necessary to obtain accu- 
 rate data from which to construct the index number 
 explained in Chapter VII. The 169 cities used are 
 the only cities over 8,000 population, for which these 
 data could be secured. 
 
 Sources of Data 
 1 Data concerning financial control. 
 
 The data concerning financial control were 
 gathered from three main sources, (1) city charters, 
 (2) state laws and (3) a questionnaire. 
 
 City charters. A careful study was made of the 
 charters of all cities having a population of 250,000 
 or more. In order to make certain that the latest 
 charter was under consideration, the city clerk of 
 each city furnished the date when the present char- 
 ter was adopted. All charter provisions concerning 
 education were compiled. These were sent to the 
 office of the school system of the city in question, for 
 verification. Thus it was assured that the correct 
 provisions were made use of. 
 
 State laws. In the same manner as above, the 
 latest edition of the school laws was secured and 
 compilations made and checked for all large cities. 
 In the case of small cities the compilation of laws 
 was checked by the questionnaire given below. 
 
 Questionnaire. The author of this study was very 
 fortunate in being able to secure the co-operation of 
 the National Committee for Chamber of Commerce 
 Co-Operation with the Public Schools of which Dr. 
 George D. Strayer is chairman. This committee 
 gathered a great volume of valuable material during 
 1920 and 1921. The following list of questions was 
 made a part of inquiry number three, which was sent 
 out by this committee in February, 1921. It was 
 possible to compare the answers to these questions 
 
 88 
 
SOURCES OF DATA 89 
 
 with the provisions of law and city charters previ- 
 ously compiled. 
 
 LOCAL SCHOOL BOARD. 
 
 1. Are your school board members elected? 
 
 1. In what month does regular school board election 
 take place? 
 
 2. How often are regular school board elections 
 held? 
 
 3. Are your school board members elected from 
 wards or other political divisions? 
 
 4. If so, by how many members is each ward or divi- 
 sion represented? 
 
 5. How many such wards or divisions in your city? 
 
 6. How many members are elected from the city at 
 large? 
 
 7. Is it possible to tell from the ballot the political 
 party of the candidate? 
 
 2. Are the members of your school board appointed? 
 
 ■ 1. By whom appointed? 
 
 2. By whom must the appointment be approved? 
 
 3. Must appointments be made from certain wards 
 or divisions? .'. 
 
 4. If so, by how many members is each ward or di- 
 vision represented? 
 
 3. Length of term of school board members? 
 
 4. Number of school board members? 
 
 5. How are school board vacancies filled? 
 
 6. By whom may school board members be removed from 
 office? 
 
 7. How many members are regularly elected or appointed 
 at one time? 
 
 8. Are all of your school board members paid? 
 
 How much per year? 
 
 9. If all members are not paid give a list of all members 
 that are paid with amount paid each 
 
 Regular member Annual salary 
 
 Other considerations 
 
 10. Check any of the following that are special qualifica- 
 tions for school board membership in your city. If you 
 have other special qualifications, add them. 
 
 1. Property ownership 
 
 2. Children of school age 
 
 3. Ability to read and write English 
 
 4 
 
 11. What is the title of your officer having charge of the 
 
 purchasing of supplies and equipment? 
 
 Annual salary? 
 
90 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 SCHOOL BUDGET. 
 
 1. By what official, officials or board is your school budget 
 estimate compiled? 
 
 2. When does your fiscal school year begin? 
 
 3. Aside from slate and city charter regulations concern- 
 ing amounts, does your school board have FINAL au- 
 thority as to the amount of this budget? 
 
 4. If not, when must your budget be ready for presentation 
 to any authority other than the Board of Education? 
 
 5. Give the following data concerning the board or author- 
 ity mentioned in question 4: 
 
 1. Name 
 
 2. Number of members 
 
 3. Appointed or elected 
 
 4. By whom? 
 
 5. If it is an ex-officio board or has ex-officio mem- 
 bers on it, give a list of the officers that serve 
 on it 
 
 6. What action may this board or authority take concern- 
 ing your school budget estimate? (Underline and add 
 others) 
 
 1. Reduce 2. Increase 
 
 3. Adopt 4. Reject 
 
 7. What action did this board or authority take on your 
 
 last budget? 
 
 (If your budget was itemized give the following) 
 
 1. What items were reduced? 
 
 2. What items were increased? 
 
 3. What items were adopted as presented? 
 
 4. What items were cut from budget? 
 
 8. What percentage of the budget estimate adopted by this 
 board was adopted because of mandatory legislation? . . . 
 
 9. Is the action of this board or authority subject to ap- 
 proval by any other board, governing authority or com- 
 mittee? 
 
 10. Give the following data concerning the board or author- 
 ity mentioned in question 9: 
 
SCHOOL BUDGET 91 
 
 1. Name 
 
 2. Number of members 
 
 3. Appointed or elected 
 
 4. By whom? 
 
 5. If it is an ex-officio or has ex-officio members on 
 it, give a list of the officers that serve on it 
 
 11. What action may this board or authority take concern- 
 ing your school budget estimate? (Underline and add 
 others.) 
 
 1. Reduce 2. Increase 
 
 3. Adopt 4. Reject 
 
 12. What action did this board or authority take on your 
 
 last budget? 
 
 (If your budget was itemized give the following.) 
 
 1. What items were reduced? 
 
 2. What items were increased? 
 
 3. What items were adopted as presented? 
 
 4. What items were cut from budget? 
 
 13. What percentage of the budget estimate adopted by this 
 board was adopted because of mandatory legislation? 
 
 14. Has the mayor power to veto the budget? 
 
 15. If so, how and by whom can this veto be overcome ? 
 
 16. Are other budget estimates considered at the same time 
 
 and by the same authorities that the school budget 
 estimates are ? 
 
 17. If so, underline them and add others if necessary. 
 
 Sewers Streets Police 
 
 Fire City Admintsration 
 
 18. How long has the above procedure of budget adoption 
 
 been in operation in your city ? 
 
 19. Is the present plan satisfactory to your schools ? 
 
 20. If not, what plan would you prefer ? 
 
 21. If your answers to the above questions fail to make your 
 
 situation clear, please write on blank paper and attach 
 to this sheet, an account of how, when and by whom 
 your budget estimate is compiled, and the possible 
 legal actions that any official, board or authority may 
 take in the matter of changing, adopting, rejecting or 
 in any way influencing your budget. 
 
92 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 LOCAL SCHOOL TAXES 
 
 The school tax referred to in this group of questions is 
 that school tax levied on property and collected for your 
 school system by local authorities. By local we mean the 
 smallest unit of taxation for your school system, whether it 
 is school district, city, county or some other unit. 
 
 1. What was your local school tax rate for the last year? 
 
 2. Assessed valuation is what per cent of real valuation? 
 
 3. Is this percentage fixed by law ? 
 
 4. What board or official determines the local school tax 
 
 rate? 
 
 5. If this is fixed by state law, in what year was the law 
 
 passed ? . .' 
 
 What provision does this law make for more revenue 
 for 1921-1922 ? 
 
 6. If this rate is not fixed by state law but just "limited" 
 
 give the limits. Highest possible rate 
 
 Lowest possible rate 
 
 7. If these limits may be changed by popular vote, how low 
 
 can the tax rate be reduced ? 
 
 How high can tax rate be raised ? 
 
 8. If the state requires a certain tax rate for certain school 
 
 purposes, give them below 
 
 Purpose Rate 
 
 (For example) Health Education .2 mills 
 
 9. If this tax rate is fixed by charter provision, when was 
 this provision adopted ? 
 
 10. If this rate is not fixed by charter provision but just 
 
 "limited" give the limits. Highest possible rate 
 
 Lowest possible rate 
 
 11. Give any other city charter requirements as to local tax 
 
 rate for school purposes 
 
 12. What official collects the local school tax ? 
 
 13. What official has final custody of all school moneys ? . . . . 
 
 14. After money has been collected for school purposes 
 
 1. What board or official orders this money paid out ? 
 
 2. What officials must sign school warrants ? 
 
 15. Give in full any regulations not asked for above that 
 
 might in any way affect local tax rate for your school. 
 
TOTAL SCHOOL ENROLLMENT 
 
 93 
 
 2 Data from which the index numbers were com- 
 puted. . 
 
 All data used in the construction of the index 
 numbers, with the exception of the index of the cost 
 of living used in factor six, were obtained from in- 
 quiries one and two of the National Committee for 
 Chamber of Commerce Co-operation with the Public 
 Schools. As the index numbers are computed from 
 six separate factors, the sources of data will be given 
 for each factor separately. 
 
 Factor One 
 
 TOTAL PUBLIC SCHOOL EN- 
 ROLLMENT' 
 
 'TOTAL SCHOOL ENROLLMENT includes all children who have re- 
 gistered in school and have attended for one-half day or more, minus 
 those children who have been transferred during the previous months 
 within the school system. 
 
 Factor 
 
 Size of Classes* 
 
 Two 
 
 Elementary 
 
 19 pupils or less 
 
 
 20-24 pupils 
 
 
 25-29 pupils 
 
 
 30-34 pupils 
 
 
 35-39 pupils 
 
 
 40-44 pupils 
 
 
 45-49 pupils 
 
 
 60-54 pupils 
 
 
 55-59 pupils 
 
 
 60 or more pupils 
 
 
 ♦Based on averagre daily attendance. 
 
M 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 J- c 
 
 O 
 
 I" 
 
 ^% 
 
 a 
 
 B 
 
 lis ?l 
 
 ho" 
 
 I 
 
 d 
 "5 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 3 S 
 
 a S 
 
 J3 
 
 e 
 
 s 
 
 <D 
 
 M 
 
 04 
 
 
 94 
 
I Si* 
 
 fljs g-o 
 
 TS 01 O 
 
 
 0)-. c d" 
 •So " o 
 
 .2 -55 0, 
 
 g et u£ 
 
 0) *j:s 
 
 « «, i * ™ 
 
 K C * f!! 
 
 < ■? d « (8 ** 
 
 
 . * a, oQ 
 g-5£a 
 Eg a 
 
 "S B — 
 
 S"5B 
 3 S-O 
 
 "^ *- an a8 "ti 
 OH 
 
 ^s 
 
 CJ*H 
 
 i"-l 
 
 r 
 
 S u 
 4 o 
 
 no 
 
 * . 
 <;t3 
 
 2-S 
 
 B» 
 
 
 So 
 So 
 
 4) 
 
 96 
 
bo 
 .S 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 
 
 T3 
 
 1— 1 
 
 
 fi 
 
 
 
 -g 
 
 ■l 
 
 
 w 
 
 
 
 M 
 
 g 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 bXI 
 
 
 g 
 
 0} 
 
 , 
 
 O 
 
 -O 
 
 c 
 
 « 
 
 s 
 
 1 
 
 
 3 
 
 
 0) 
 
 cu 
 
 ^ 
 
 OJ 
 
 •V 
 
 -g 
 
 fi =" 
 
 
 
 > 
 o 
 
 c4 
 
 bo 
 
 a 
 
 'm 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 J3 
 
 bO 
 
 3 
 43 
 
 OS 
 
 o 
 
 p< 
 
 3 
 
 bO 
 
 oT 
 bo 
 B 
 
 ■3 
 
 I — I 
 
 ■3 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 be 
 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 2 
 
 
 3 
 
 bo 
 C 
 '53 
 3 
 o 
 
 2 fH 
 
 ^ P 
 
 
 3 
 
 bo 
 
 .S 
 'tn 
 3 
 O 
 
 J3 
 
 F4 
 
 s 
 
 3 
 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 -a 
 
 ffl 
 
 -s 
 
 
 
 J3 
 
 ,£1 
 
 bo 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 
 >. 
 
 '■'1 
 
 
 3 
 
 I s 
 
 •Z3 
 
 bo 
 
 .S- 
 'm 
 
 3 
 o 
 
 .a 
 
 o 
 o 
 
 a 
 
 p< o 
 „.^ 
 
 bo§ 
 
 :;3 c 
 3-'-' 
 
 ^ s 
 
 o +> 
 —I !>. 
 c 
 (U o 
 
 13 
 
 Hi .2 
 
 
 
 -g 
 
 ^ C« 
 
 r^ 
 
 §1 
 «1 
 
 1 
 g 
 
 »'=' 
 
 B 
 
 3 m 
 
 
 
 H 
 
 % 
 
 ■sa 
 
 a 
 
 - -2 -3 
 o 
 
 bo 
 
 (U 
 
 'oj S 
 
 ii z 
 
 bo 
 
 ^ .a 
 
 96 
 
TEACHERS' SALARIES 
 Factor Six 
 
 97 
 
 The source of data concerning the cost of living 
 that was used in this factor was explained in full 
 in Chapter VII. The data concerning teachers' sal- 
 aries were taken from the table given below : 
 
 SALARY GROUPS 
 
 $300-399 
 
 400-499 
 
 700-799 
 
 800-899 
 
 1100-1199 
 
 1200-1299 
 
 1300-1399 
 
 1400-1499 
 
 1500-1599 
 
 1600-1699 
 
 1700-1799 
 
 1800-1899 
 
 1900-1999 
 
 3000 and over 
 
 ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS (a) 
 
 Number teachers 
 whose salaries in 
 1919-20 tell within 
 salary groups 
 listed. 
 
 Men 
 
 Women 
 
 Number teachers 
 whose salaries in 
 1913-14 fell within 
 salary srroups 
 listed. 
 
 Men 
 
 Women 
 
 The data obtained by the inquiries were of much 
 higher order than those obtained by the ordinary 
 
98 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 type of questionnaire. The committee had a na- 
 tional scope. The inquiries were backed by Cham- 
 bers of Commerce as well as the schools, and wide 
 publicity was given to the findings. The inquiries 
 gave evidence of being filled out with great care 
 and accuracy. 
 
 All cases in which the data furnished were not 
 clear or if the accuracy was doubted, the city was 
 eliminated from the list or the data verified by a 
 personal letter to the school authorities of the city 
 in question. 
 
APPENDIX II. 
 
 Table Alpha, which follows, gives for 169 cities, 
 
 the facts concerning the board of education and the 
 
 budget that are necessary in order to understand 
 
 the t3T)e of financial control that exists in each city. 
 
 99 
 
18 (0 
 
 S ^ 
 
 - .! » 
 q o q q oHP^g^ o o 
 
 SS 
 
 9 9 
 
 'O'S'S'9 
 
 6u a 
 e 3 P 
 
 ■3«K 
 
 1 fl'S 
 
 i 
 
 -2-25 
 
 COCQH 
 
 o o < 
 
 ^ 0) fa (4 
 
 o o o o 
 
 tj hi 1h fa 
 
 el (S tf cd 
 o o o o. 
 
 CO fa fa 
 cd <fl 
 
 fa fa fa 
 o o o 
 CQCafQ 
 
 fi o S 
 
 ; >, ft-o a ^ . ^ ^ 
 
 .- ^3 o 0*0 o.t3 o o 
 
 H fa be a ^ 
 t o Da o o o 
 
 5 O 
 
 IT) « S "CO 
 
 'M -(J ■<-> 
 u u u 
 
 
 fa fa fa 
 o o o 
 
 I o o 5 o 
 
 I fa fa 1^ fa 
 
 S«8 ^ aj 
 CT. O 
 
 H»O^>-<r-l»H0000t-Ni-I00Q0'Ht-t- 
 
 -tt- t- 0> rt r-< f-4 fH « t- t- tH 
 
 t-c)t-c~»t-iau3CC(co)iotaiaaoto c-oco 
 
 -iO>000>D-t:-iO»-<ot- 
 
 cDeo W (010 to loeo la la laia u^eo 00 csiooo cj so -^ lo co cp to lo co <d 
 
 
 Ph>^»<CL<P^»< 
 
 
 a 
 
 Ht^fU^U 
 
 ZZ" 
 
 fa fa fa fa fa 
 
 o o o o o 
 
 |g.S ma ixiHHH <!'<»<;»<:< Ed MM Hia» H^iHiaHeKUHH 
 
 .5 w 
 
 B 
 . .g 
 
 I an. 
 
 -g!? 
 
 "■0""3 
 
 P<J! S> 
 
 ■as 
 
 2|| 
 
 on, 
 
 ■2> b g 
 
 a ".•3:5 s-g I 
 
 s . . 
 
 B>7 S 
 
 (1. .3 
 ■o* ^- 
 
 'SS 
 
 " o 5 - - 
 Soi? 
 
 .»Sb 
 
 uPq<!uiJianS»S^ nc 
 100 
 
 3 0.5 
 
 3 „ 
 
 .2.3.31 SI'S 
 
d d 
 
 S6|? 
 
 s1|g|| 
 
 : s 3 
 
 dc^ 
 
 
 ft 3 
 
 ■*-» ^ tj -u -S ■•-» c 
 
 EE B 
 
 ■a S e 
 
 .so-, 
 
 ;. fci 5 ^ t« t- 
 3 d g^d o 
 o o *« o c 
 
 igo 
 
 OS o 
 
 >o!a 
 
 O E 
 
 o°» 
 
 'g.s 
 
 "lEsr 
 
 g I °° 
 E g-g-a' 
 E bd d 
 o»2 o o 
 
 oWHoH »^H 
 
 O d' 
 
 s o o R 
 
 > d d 
 
 > o o 
 
 3T3 o-a 
 
 3 O o O 
 
 E 
 
 E 
 
 g5« 
 
 I (t-t V *M <)■ 
 
 > o I o c 
 
 »- P t. t 
 . e8 2 tf e 
 
 > O^ O C 
 
 ID e^ 
 
 Ho 
 
 Jil 
 
 gE 
 
 |i.gj|-s 
 
 tn J, cj o * '. 
 
 3HcmwH-£ 
 
 O E O O O B 
 f^ S 
 
 "O O "W "CO o 
 fa 'rt fa fa fa "ri 
 eiu d d cs t! 
 o o o o o 5 
 
 tj 
 
 C u 
 
 o o 
 o >» 
 
 ^ C fa 
 
 .t: o o 
 OOCQ 
 
 aOt-t-C-T-'r-flOOlr-lt-Xt-Olt-C-'-'OOCOi-taOOS 
 
 la o c^ ^ c- 1^ C4 c- c- oiiQ QO oi t^- N A o) oi ca OS to c^ Ci o at 0> CO la cs as t* 
 
 i3is-^oj ts w ^ D-ioeoio (ON 00 m wsc w «o K U3 wsoeo « w to ^ co co t- oqn^ 
 
 jjj^jjjjjjj-a^^jj^^ijjjj j^j^J J.j^ .J jj ^hS 
 
 zz 
 
 (UC^ 
 
 9.f^ -3 
 
 O 
 >. >. 
 
 CO d 
 
 s s s 
 
 b fa fa fa fa 
 
 o o o o o 
 >) >. >> >> >> 
 
 fa fa fa 
 
 o o o 
 
 III 
 
 
 101 
 
aj'O 
 
 oo oogooooooootjgoo .S.S.S oooo o 
 
 o u u u S 
 
 P S ? 9 S 
 •O "O "O "5 "O 
 
 «M «fc^ "M <W '*. «M 
 
 O O O Oy o 
 
 •O'O'O'O ."O 
 fci (-1 t< bffi b 
 
 — s s a s * 
 
 M o o o o . o 
 
 C _■ - w H - . - ^, - - _._..... _, »,-■—■■--■ Wi S.-X «** bii 
 
 g| E 
 
 : 3 ci"wS wtoio to osia towoi c- ic lo ;D ic ia«D wio le oi eDiD w oi 10 la eo eo ic eo 
 
 3 W ^; « 
 ■S 'H ^ '? 
 
 Ch »- o 88 Meow ^ ^ w ^ ^M ^ ^ M « u5 M (D ^«o eo to CD ta C4 ec 03 M eo -i* eo 
 
 j5 -a aj a, 
 
 W I Uf ^|g i,"^%"^g^^^gg^" ^^^»- ^;?;? ^iS 
 
 •-J 0) id & S 
 
 C -o "• 
 
 O w 
 
 O >» o 
 
 102 
 
>^3SJB.2SS S S.S.SSSS -2 S SSSSSS S^S -2 o « 
 
 23333HS 3 3P3aSS S 3 3S3333 3»3 *JD« 
 
 ieffi(e'»e*e*^w^oia»e>otSKe>scct-«eiot-»fi»Demaeoi-^ciL-'Coc«c=t-u3s^'COi 
 
 0e■:cc^C'»eo•*M"*■^c5^^?TM0OCO■^}'-;TpT3■-^T•W;?^;^; r;oi«r;«-*M^eO 
 
 j^,ji^j,Jh:-3-3>-:.-; J^J►:JJ-|^J^H:;.-:•JKJ^.-;^-H;J^-:^^J^►^^^^JJ | 
 
 
 i |e 
 
 •a >> 
 
 103 
 
o o 
 n m 
 
 ■>'S 
 
 V 01 
 
 o o 
 
 m n 
 
 .2 . s 
 
 - "I 
 
 OOO * o 
 
 o ■ . w o 
 
 pquoSw 
 
 ! S.S 
 
 u u g u 
 
 ■o55 
 
 ' o o o o 
 
 •^ h h fc. h 
 u d « ca d 
 
 K O O O O 
 
 HnBmm 
 
 ' o o 
 
 Moo 
 
 einta 
 
 O OM o,o 
 •^ '5 " *^ '*> 
 
 Sd'^ ri ca 
 u «0 u u 
 3 S p 3 P« 
 •OT) B'O'O^ 
 
 o o.*4 o o^ 
 
 m taat tarn 
 ieelietlle 
 
 •0 3 
 
 . B S 
 '.S.SS5 
 
 111! 
 
 B B L 
 
 S3 
 
 u u 5 g u 
 
 35 § § 3 
 
 tj-o -co M 
 
 h *- ttl ^4 tj'« 
 
 d (d -if d d u 
 o o o o o K 
 
 o " o o o o o o o o 
 
 •3 -C -O "O "O "O -a TS "O 
 
 ddddddddd 
 ooooooooo 
 
 Bmnnntsnna 
 
 ■3S 
 
 K o 
 
 mm 
 
 73 
 0) 
 
 •a 
 
 a 
 o 
 O 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 Vl 
 O 
 
 bo 
 
 a 
 
 r'^O S 
 Ph O 
 
 e 
 
 3 S 
 
 t-cecof PI 
 
 H f-( rH rH lO i-t r 
 
 •^CCiHiHMeOi-tiHMOOiH 
 
 wl^l 
 
 t-C-t-t-r-l bSiacOeOO to O C- <S to CO 0> tf to C- lA to CO IC U3 CO t- la us CO 
 
 s 
 
 
 te ^ ^ w iO ^eo^eo-^ ^ co w^ « eo M M -^ 
 
 
 *'^ OS oW > K"^ 
 
 
 B I B 
 d B d 
 
 .St2.S Biaap. b<o,p.o,p, P<aap<p>o<0'0<n AO.o.B.P'P.O'aaaa 
 d !^ d 
 
 HHHMHMHHH HMHiaHEdiaiilHE^I^ 
 
 
 .:.Sd;^ 
 
 >■ s 
 
 d-a .gggfe'*£ 
 5Sg.s5S'od-2 
 sS g2 2 Se B E 
 ft S-a « 5 2 dM? 
 
 ^dV4jd^hd^ 
 
 104 
 
 "m . * . 
 
 (^ d d!t^ . B B • 
 jSfeSdSSdoS 
 
 d=3 .3 S.5 d^ 
 
 l-flPS'gS.Sfc.So-B 
 
 £-s=-S sS^ d „ f 8 
 *g^.tJ'd.£3££g.S 
 
a o a 
 
 ITT 
 
 o S a u S a 
 S O 3 a 3 3 s 
 
 ft. 44 4-a *Lj <M 4-t «4 
 
 O O O o o o O 
 •O "O •O •a "CO "O 
 l< U U U hU u 
 
 d cs d Id d cB d 
 o o o o o o o 
 
 « i-t f-l CO i-< i-< w 
 
 lO »o ea f c- lo t- 
 
 JJjJ-^hlJ 
 
 
 >+* 
 
 »-» 
 
 ^ ■ « -s =" 
 
 "Jig 11^ T" 
 
 o ac «s « S o I 
 
 KlmOOQaiH) 
 
 105 
 
APPENDIX III. 
 
 Table Beta, which follows, gives the data ex- 
 pressed in per cents from which the index numbers 
 were computed. Full explanation of the sources 
 of data will be found in Appendix I, page 88, and 
 the meaning of each factor is explained in Chapter 
 VII. 
 
 107 
 
5. a 
 
 iHt- tOt-U5 MTfOvl MOO CJ 0> 05 "3 N 
 
 oioOCOlOOSOONCOOOOOlN'^C-rH.-lCOOOOlO 
 «OCO00NinCOUS«00t-"^r>«O-^a3Q0t'00rHlO 
 
 00 N 
 
 (M t-TH 
 
 to 
 
 «Ot-OC-OOOOCDOOOOS-^«OOCOOOOOO 
 
 030500500500500000000300500500 
 
 T-) rH tH 1-H rH rH vi rH tH rH 
 
 <5 
 
 H 
 H 
 
 pq 
 <! 
 H 
 
 *> o o 
 
 <0 ^ 
 
 ■+J a u V 
 
 g. e-22 
 o „ 
 
 V 
 
 00 03 
 
 05 io t- t- c* in 
 
 c- in 00 1- 
 
 ^fefe 
 
 
 
 3 
 0) 
 
 -a 
 
 •s 
 
 o 
 
 
 cgO 
 
 EQ CQ M 
 
 ■^lOmOr-tlOCOOOt*COm'^W50^HT-(COCOC005 
 -TtcootOOOOC-0005000000«>t-05t-00-^0300t- 
 
 CO O CO Tj* CO 00 00 
 
 eoeoco co laoooo 
 
 l>C00SO03iH05O00OO'^OTHOC0OrHl0O 
 NW^O 05-^ lO t-in«0 00 (MC-t- 
 
 iH toooNost- cotoinojto Nco ta 
 
 t0O<0l>i-l(N''^O«lO-^(NNOmtDOOmO 
 COOOOCDOOiH030Q0000505-^f0005<N'*0'^C- 
 
 ni o CO CO 05 •>:l< eq m iH ooooNtr-Nco thnco 
 
 ooooiaiocoeotocoiaioosoocot^iNmcocviooo 
 ^TjiTf'^m-^'^-^l'NNiocoi-icQNiHintoNin 
 
 c3 m 
 
 5 (3 9> 
 
 * OJ3 
 Go So HPh 
 
 S « S 
 
 • ^ CO > 
 
 > CS ^ 
 
 >>'kI c 
 
 "" s - 
 
 m d O 
 
 « eu 2 
 
 «>#: 
 
 
 ■2iJ 3^ 
 
 OW<!o 
 108 
 
 <u S fe P*' 
 
 S.3 * (S.S 
 
 '£ is »^ s 
 
 ■ GO w 
 
 
rHt-Tji-^^COOOS'^WaiOOCOi-Hasoa-^OO'^i-tiONt-WNOt- 
 0flC00:)OC000l0l0asC0ia?0t-C0CC>OC0iX)00l0THtr-OO00t-'^ 
 
 OJ CJ 00 "^ CO N (M Oi i-( -r-t i-i la tr- OO 
 
 OSt-000<3aOcio05NC3St-OlOrlt( 
 prt /^v ^^N /"* p^i /^\ .9k i-^s (T^ rt^ rti nn e^ eys rr\ i 
 
 CC r-i-^OiOi 
 
 OSt-000<3aOos005NC3St-OlO-^OiOOOOO-^OOCX>C<IlOt-03 
 iH T-H tH iH 
 
 Tt CO "^ ^CDN"3 COOOtH i-I CD iH -tj* -^ CJ N W t> 
 
 O5Diot-C0tr-/vi50t:-"3O05t-!>C<It-i0Cr-OC0C<I00a50aaiC<lt- 
 
 coco ?0 lO rH rH lO t- CO N in N OS '<* Tji t- 00 00 
 
 Or-tiaoooSoooioooocscooioeo-^cooaiHcooot-o 
 
 
 OiTH Tji 1-1 CO CD tH CQ t- lO rHCa 
 
 Cq t-t Ca "^ lO 04 lO 05 U3 Tf* IC CO iH t- CD tH tH t- CO T(* 00 lO OS 
 Ot-CDO00W~'tr-CaTtt00C0rtWTHO'^l0L0XO'«*CDO0JO'^ 
 
 ooit^iowosL— 5DT»<ososoooo"^iHt-in)"^co'^t-Na>ooooioo 
 
 e8 
 
 ^00 C<IC0^(MOi'*tHCOTHi-lTj«COCOO> iHoO Oit-^T*!-** 
 
 Oit-CDWCOCOCJiCQt-tOOSWOmrHaiCOCDiHOOlO'^CO'^Ot-OO 
 THCO-^NNoaiftCOCOCOCONlONCOW^COOO rHCO'^W^ 
 
 S !. O 
 
 a) 
 
 •-•.5 " 
 
 ■^ c — 
 <!QO 
 
 e.5 £>t£ a 
 
 ^ d o S o 
 
 wcopqoO 
 
 °S V O h 
 
 5 M in O 
 > 0) <ur^ 
 
 g ^ ^ ts 
 
 J-a S ^ ^ 
 
 rt - 
 g fi 3 
 
 ■g .a 
 « o^ 
 'J3'S"C 
 
 WHS 
 
 109 
 
 3 B Oi _ ^ 
 
 5 § > S^S^-SJ? 
 
 « . o o o 
 
 tn eg oCQ 
 J5 C n 
 
 c >. II) 
 
 S V ^ 
 
 S " is 
 .S. ^1^ 
 
 3l§||| 
 
 « U 0) 
 
 o So 
 
 O ^ n 
 
 ;<)phW 
 
 
 Ah 
 
 as 
 
 0) 
 
ox CO i-l CO «D 00 lO t- 05 lO 05 t- 00 » 
 
 -M .S 
 
 (MNSOr-l^t-'^O.-ITlllOlCa' 
 Ttc000Tt<r-liHC-V4<'«Tt<O'^ 
 
 •s 
 
 S ^ nl 
 SO? 
 
 ^ Or 
 
 Tl< CO OOCOTl* 
 
 ooNic^cocot-oacoNcao 
 
 00 CO CD m '^ CO CO iHCOCOIO 
 
 OJ lO t- CD 
 
 N W^ 00 CO U3 t-C0U3CO CO 
 
 OOCOIAOOOCQOOCOLAOO 
 OCJt-CDOOOOC-OOOOOCSCD 
 
 THUSOlOfHOOOOOOOCO 
 ^CSOOSffllOC-OOOOOCl 
 
 -w u o 
 s&< 
 
 V 
 
 .:« 
 
 ana 
 
 go 0) 
 
 £ O A 
 •t! ia O O 
 
 ■^lOCOOSiHOS COC0O5'*00 
 
 IMt-CDt~00050Ci^l>COCDOO 
 CO<3iOOt*^t-0'^OOt-Oi0505 
 
 CO t- 1* Ol CO rH CD 
 OCO-^tlOt-OlOTJIOCJOOi-l 
 
 lOcoNioojcooqcjco-^oo-^ 
 
 OOO-^C^COlOONL-Or-fOOfH 
 Csl CO -^ »H U3 tH T-i 
 
 oococococom'>*'<a'cou5(NCD 
 
 OO'^OOOOOOOr-IOCJt- 
 
 laoi ooo coxOiHoo 
 
 U3 IC 00 lO t- 05 CO CO Csl 
 
 THoosoiioiococaooco-^i-H 
 
 ■^OCOi-HCinoOCD-^CJC-TT 
 
 H 
 
 n 
 
 O V 
 
 t- C- C- 00 I" t- CO lO iH iH iHCMi-lt-u:) 
 
 cDCviasasco 
 
 rtO 00 -^ C- t- CO O) N iH 00 O N N t- CO Oq t- O 00 N Ol CO ■^ CJ OS « 
 |2^ CO >-t TJI iH iH iH i-l (N rt CO iH T-l iH TP C- •* lO lO ■^ CO CO US rH lO 
 
 'a 
 
 
 .a "p. 
 
 m N jH 
 
 O o Be 
 
 
 null's 
 
 •t< nft ^i^ r-T A* r-'. 
 
 p r-- 
 
 
 see 
 
 O O <B 
 
 0) CS > 
 
 110 
 
 J.35 
 
 .H.ts o 
 
 Mgo- 
 o S 
 
 Wig a. a 
 
 C9 ^ P<,S <u p 
 h CS <S O ^ W 
 
 SOLO- 
 'S « -►' 
 
 . in On 
 
 <u jjce ff 
 
 SiH si 
 
 o^gs^ 
 
N CO el 00 N t- CO 1-1 t- lO N t- N t- M t- IN CO 03 00 ■>* lO ^ 00 03 
 
 iHOaOOlOCDt-USCOOO-^t-CO-^OO 
 N-^tOUSt- TO t- rH 50 lO Tf OS '^ 
 
 OCO'^i*«5r-IOW«3Nrteq500 
 
 O03t-a>o>ooa3a>maoooooooo 
 
 0> OS ^ « 00 ■* 1-1 0C>O(O N 
 
 C-<Ni4*Q0*Hkac<100C0C<)lA10 00O 
 CO»OlOTOt-TOlOTOSOCQ«Otr-OSO 
 
 0300r-l«0<NOO5000'*t-'* 
 lOSOlOt-NoaTOlO'^C-tOOO 
 TO "-I 
 
 OIOIOOTOOTOIOOTOOO 
 
 oosoooosoososoosoo 
 
 TflO 5D<D 
 
 t-TO IN03.-I 
 
 lOlOt-OS'OUSTO'^OOOrHOO 
 00C<IOS»»O«OTl»TOU3t-00CO 
 
 14 
 
 G 
 
 o 
 
 SrHrHTO 00 00 CD TO "^ ^00 
 
 TOCg lO OS TO 
 
 iHNONTOtOlOM'a'iHlOioioOO 00 OS O O O TO N C- O TO tJi o 
 TOMO'^aS'*'^iH!OOTTOC-lOOO SO t- O O t- t- lO O r-l 00 O 
 
 St •" 
 
 lO CD TO OS t~ *H -^ CO lO (M lO lO 
 t*i4<t-l0OTO10C^00l00STOOO 
 
 t-nt-io 00 OS OS OS 00 >a t- 
 
 TOTO-^ CO.H 
 
 C4TO1000CD1000TOCD-^0 
 OSlO'^t-'^OOlOOOOC-CDOS 
 
 i-l CD 00 ^ iH ^ iH OS ■^ CD C- Oa CO OS iH iH CO t- iH TO lO lO CO t- T(l 
 
 TO r-l CO lO >-l t- 00 oi OS OS 00 r-l 1* lO 
 INlOiHN'»0'^eOr-iejTOOTt-N 
 
 O DO'S S 
 
 ^ g9 flS O 
 
 
 ;ce o^ S*" - 
 
 £•0 
 
 03 
 
 §1 : 
 :.S S-2-S 
 .S-2 § g 
 
 ^ OS 
 
 "iTo « in 
 o "O g 
 
 '.a § 5^ 
 
 13 
 ■2 a)J3'S OS 
 
 .S W^ CO 
 ^ C h c« 
 
 111 
 
 « 2 
 
 •5.2* 
 oTftS 
 
 j|£| 
 III 
 
 s 
 
 c e 0) 
 
 s 
 
 .5 
 "3. 
 
 s =• « 
 
 a, EJco 
 ivi 08 ., 
 04 -S V 
 
 h 01 03 
 O ft, 
 
 Sx 
 
 ^ *- 
 
 S 01 03 
 
 * JSP 
 
 
rU 
 O M 
 
 ". ^M 
 to-" 
 
 1^ 
 ill 
 
 «n 
 
 •o 
 je 
 
 a b u 
 
 •S° ^ 
 ■" o o 
 
 ft "Ip^ 
 
 V 
 
 a (H (i> 
 
 go 0) 
 
 1-1 CO CD Tjt Oi CO CO la CO rH ITS IC Oi UD Oi O 00 CO -^ Oi lO IC W Ol tH CO 
 
 e0'*»-IC0-^t-(M00Tl<C0t-C<iaiU3lA?-(iH'^O(N0S"«#C0OC0'^l£D 
 lOasiOOOOfHCOCOOOU500COCOasl>COOU5CDOtr-rH-^lOmm 
 »-( Cq tH i-Hi-t rH tH tH 
 
 CD t- 00 rH CO 
 
 CSCOrH (MOQt-iHOi-^CO 
 
 COOO XCO 
 
 T)<"^'^lOCOWC>OOOoOOSOOOI>OqiOC<»C^05 000t-OlOLO 
 
 oooacoo^coooooto^ooado^ooaiooaaooooooaocdco 
 
 t- T-f O 00 iH rH COrHt-CDTH Cl t> rH CO t- CO CJ 
 
 TfrHOCDlOOrHCOOlflrHOOilClO^OOaNrHWWCMOOCOOOOt* 
 CO0iNlO0>OL0-^CDt-(3iL0I>C0CD*^C0iC0iC00i00001OCDX00 
 
 Tf<COlOt- CO t- OOOCJ kCt- t-NoOlO COrHt-oO 
 
 OOmi>OOOOrHO€DCOasOOOSOOOOCOCOOCOOOC<ICDOCO 
 
 t-CO-^lOOrHO-'tOCOt-OOCOOOCJOt-OOOOCO-^OOflSt^lOTlf 
 
 r-i iH 1-i r-l i-ti~i 
 
 Git- Oi CO rH CO 00 00 t- CD US CO CO CO '^ (M 00 OS W lO lO 
 
 CgiONOOOrHC^I>OO^NOCgOI>OOodl>rHCOlO(NCOCOOOCO 
 t-OSCDt-OlO-<ti'^NOi05'^asL0000500>CDCOOiOOCDI>050000 
 
 H 
 
 <! 
 
 3 2 oorHco ooiNeacoeoco ^iothmoo 
 Pi H 
 
 iH Tf 00 ■<!)' tH 
 
 S O N N iH to C- IN N CJ IN CO O CO m CO Tf Tjl N rH t- Tjl Tf rt rH t- T]< \0 
 r™ tD'>*NrH^IN'^»INtDlO'<*«O-<f-^T)iC0'*lOe0rHC01O^lO05IN 
 
 •sfl 
 
 •ego 
 
 §-§1 
 
 ■■ a) «8 
 
 M N f 
 
 ■•H S, 
 
 C! " 2 
 5 O C 
 
 in grt 
 
 •=! - c 
 o 
 
 IH^ 
 
 ,0.2.-s^-- 
 ,5o I 
 
 * _ 
 o o'm 
 
 *<=« L^ <> e 
 
 ^l^.-Sg WW o - — 
 
 o .S a)'^S2ol>J??30fe 
 
 m-S-g o u ^S^S -S R-o-- 
 OtnB(H>dS'0'gc3.SimO 
 
 .■„^» ^.sg-S^llc.SalSS*-.! 
 o o 6«o>oo-OMOfeS<<)feSm 
 
 o 
 
 ■ -.20 
 5 o o o 
 
 
 +3 
 
 i I g g <» a 
 
 :i5^ S o g 
 
 13 
 60.2 
 
 o o . 
 
 SSSw 
 
 m.S +3 t! 
 a 9 (d s 
 
 " § c 
 
 HH.S O 
 
 Sag 
 
 112 
 
OJi-l ^ C4 to 00 C<l r-l OJCO 
 
 oooo'^naiTfcQooooc-iooo 
 
 0)a>coiOkOO»cOkOioaotr-<OA 
 
 c]oa>coi><o^03adcat>iou>cico 
 ioa>c4ooa>>-itoiaa>ioio^iH^«o 
 
 Nt-N«DO0 00 as CO rH ei ■<* 
 
 eocow^ os«o oj t- 
 
 t- Tf lO O tH O t~ 00 lO rH tH lO O O O O lO O US 03 O 00 lO O O lO O 
 
 c- a> m oa a> o o w o> OS 00 o> oooooooootooosc-oaooao 
 
 iH rHrHrHtH iH r^ rH 
 
 COOT t- »-IOO 
 
 OOiHtOCOlOOCOOOOOCO 
 I>00-«COa3GOOOO>l>000000 
 
 OTiaoOOOC^OCOiHt-C^COOCO-^ 
 
 coc-oooOTVowc-t-oooo<oac~ 
 
 «<0 lO '* CO 00 C- Tf t- N 00 
 t-OOO»O'^00t-10N«00i 
 
 OOO^OCOOOIOO^OOOO 
 OOOOOt-OONOOOlOCO o 
 
 O500 TjllOearH 
 
 iHOCOOOCOOOCOLOiHCOO) 
 NO'^t-OS«OTft-Tlit-N>H 
 
 NCOrHTlitHO300CO->*N00 
 
 0>0(NCOOOOCOOOt)it)iooO 
 mCOCOOTM^TjiNNNPliH 
 
 >at- CO lo ca -^ >o ca lo coot 
 
 ONOOOOrHWiHCQlOUSOOlOld 
 
 cotoooooocQQOosaoaic-o otoo 
 
 H C-COatkOO iHiHt- ooto 
 
 OOOOCOCOCOlOOOlOOt-OOQC-COt-' 
 COrjilOOO'^THtOC-lOOOCJ^^O'*'* 
 
 03 
 
 CO 
 
 C as 
 60° 
 
 l-ss-g; 
 
 
 1j3 s 
 
 g.S G £ 
 
 . .o <1> 
 
 o boeos , 
 5.S.S-S g 
 
 03 PiQaCt <U . 
 
 i-soaaiME-iC 
 
 8 
 
 ■g.s 
 
 SI 
 ,36 
 
 113 
 
 J St 
 
 o 
 
 g . rt 
 
 =-^ 
 
 g n d ID'S S c 
 O OS ?! G8 00 8 O 
 
 QaoM _^ 
 
 OO"^ C?g 2r° 
 
 a So -g ^ gP^ 
 ft.S g.l g g-o 
 
 §.isJ-ssg?g 
 
 §■09 nU SJa S 
 
 ss 
 
 o o 
 
 OS 
 
 -h S2 
 
 « c S 
 
 ■S^ ^ 
 
 0) 
 
 cm 
 
 09 
 
 p. 
 
 03 
 
 o 
 
 09 
 
h> 
 
 e 
 
 m rH OS T* t- T(l 00 lO 00 00 T|l OS CO tooo 
 «)l-ITO'«*Tll«5(^rH1000tDO>t~rHe01000 
 
 IMU310 COCO t- COCO COOS ttn CO (Oooiacd 
 
 5t3g 
 
 es h » 
 
 go <u 
 
 § 
 
 U 
 I 
 
 n 
 
 04 LO CO lA Cq CO N OS -^ 00 OS ■^ Oa 
 
 oo^caooosoooooscooc^oos'^oo 
 
 OOOOOOOSOSOOTtt-COOSOSWt-OOOO 
 
 iffl^ teO'"* (M t-in t-osrH 
 
 OOCOC-OSU3COOSCOOO^'oicOrHOI>C<l 
 
 ososooast-iaaocoo>ososcot>t>t-osos 
 
 oooocooiaocqoooos^OiHOos 
 
 OOOOOOOSCOOOSCOOXfHOOiOOSOS < 
 
 
 u 
 
 o o 
 *■ a 
 
 1^ 
 
 ^OSCOIO OJ OS rH rH t- OS OS t* Ti* tH 00 
 COCOCOOSmiH010i-IT|i->ail>Io30!Ood^ 
 
 ososiacoost-ococooocococot-woot* 
 
 t-t- CO t- CO N iH ■^ iH lO OS <0 CO 3S CO S 
 
 • • • ..CO 
 
 USOSOlHOtC-'t'^rHCOOSkOCSCOOTHOO *« 
 CO CO CO r-t C- ■^ ^ ^ CO CD iO T)l (M ^ CO T(< 1-1 B 
 
 
 -a a 
 
 • (3 • • 
 . o • ■ 
 
 • -*^ . 
 
 cs bo • OS 
 
 o .So 
 
 (O N h 
 
 .J •Kg' 
 
 Eg : 
 
 
 ils-p^ 
 
 ."a «8.Ss! S 
 
 iM^=3 
 
 n* 
 
 
 CtZ4 1*3 - -J 
 
 "S-S^ Co 
 ij S! _ m 3 
 
 9 g g g.g 
 
 114 
 
 1 -> CO 
 
 I O p,C 
 
 iJtaO 
 
 bo 
 
 ■s.'a> 
 
 & 
 
 .a 
 o 
 
 a 
 a 
 CO 
 
 • CD 
 
 s'E 
 
 OJ V gj O 
 
 OOcQh3 
 
APPENDIX IV. 
 Table Delta, which follows, ^ves the same data 
 as Table Beta. However, the scores are expressed 
 in S. D. values in this table while in Table Beta 
 they are expressed in percentages. The index num- 
 ber is also given for each city. For explanation of 
 the meaning of each factor, and the method of com- 
 puting the index number, see Chapter VII. 
 
 115 
 

 
 iHiHIO NlH 
 
 iH(MeOi-li-l 
 
 III I 
 
 B 
 
 a> 
 
 -a 
 
 c 
 
 »— I 
 
 •^ s 
 
 •^ o 
 ^ 04 
 
 09 
 
 a> 
 
 3 
 
 cS 
 
 O 
 
 u 
 
 •I 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 
 X 
 
 <s 
 
 •t-« 
 
 a 
 
 Pi 
 
 3 
 
 0) 
 
 ,M 
 e« 
 
 S 
 
 -fa 
 
 m 
 
 
 ooeooiOr-tedinMoocot-ejiOrHoo^oowtDTH 
 o»H'*flO'*eotoeoioot-oeviootpcootoeoiot- 
 
 4J /■/! . T* T^ 
 
 « 
 ^ 
 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 a5t-oj'*NC-e<ime<ica<N2«ooe<i'>*c<i.He<r(Noo 
 
 CO'^t-lOt-lOt-Tft-c-t-';iO'^C-r-lt-«Ot-t>00 
 
 
 coosNooiO'H'^ooNoaSJ.-icoooOTioineaoo 
 
 COlOeOMrfrHlONJOmio'^rHi-IO'^fM'-l'OMeO 
 
 ost-t-t-oe<i!Ot-ot>t-}2cot-t-ot-«ooO'«Jit. 
 
 C-Oi-IO<lCOO>H10iHinif5"'rtTHioOOlOOSIO'^10 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 
 CONt-OlO«OOai0^0050-^Ot-iH(MO>OW 
 
 ey. 
 
 I I 
 
 ^ 
 
 a) T("eqee<oi'eoiHMrHiMO<Meo50oot-»HTj"e>5ioio 
 
 °0 ' >H tH iH r-l 1-1 T-l 
 
 U I I I I I I I II 
 
 CO 
 
 
 > 
 Q 
 
 03 
 
 -a 
 ci 
 -2 
 a: 
 
 S N t< 
 
 S • ^ I" 
 O.S <9 > d V h !» 
 
 ■S P- M m i» " 
 
 ^< K » • 
 C » g 5 2 5" J m^^ « m "^ 
 
 
 013 s S -o" 
 
 -rT* w.;-( w (u > ^ 
 C ««H-M fl m 5) £j w 
 
 Li -O ti nt (D £j QprO R 
 
 h 4^ C cS <V h °p.a 5 
 
 >>3 dhX c9 n »S 
 
 3 O ' 
 
 7i «« > 
 
 ra 3 g J- « 
 
 u n >, X 
 
 IS g m ^ u 
 
 ■ m S B K rt 
 
 o 2 oft, S 
 
 so 
 
 >,3 oihja a flms.-S S h-^o 
 BWJfcPiiOW-^OpJoQPqSW 
 
 fO en 
 
 3 13 
 
 116 
 
©■^■^u3«Dcqcoooajoos-^-^cocac<iio«OTHi-tcaoOi-iioo^u5C3oo 
 
 < op ■* N CO ej tH 
 
 i-l N ■>* iH lO i-l (M CO to 
 
 I II I I I I 
 
 «COr-IN 
 
 I I I I I 
 
 OOOlOOOOi-IOOCO'HO«>'*OOCO<nrH!OC-(Ne<llOOOC-'*'^OtO 
 
 r-ioo>-i>-i-<3'c-Tfc»c>]Tj<THoeooeoNrH'<*toiooNoeoooooeo 
 
 I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 lOtr-NOOO!0>OQO<NtOm(NC<I>-liOt-la5C003NN(M5D-fl"*e<I(N(M 
 lOU3C-OOT-f?DOCOiHCOCOt-COCDCOT-IOCQWt*t-^OCOiHt-t-t- 
 
 I I I 
 
 QONOC<ICOCJ-^t-OiOCOOCOrHOOT-)t-OOOi-fiA»-fCOCvl"^WC 
 »HCOt-05»-t05Wi-lOCOCOC»JrHI05D»HWCO»OOt-COOiT-ITj<t>-" 
 
 I I 
 
 <H-*t:-t-t-t-!N00OJt-t-O5N00<MTflcO>OO5-^5OTj't-<n00l> 
 THrHioiocqeq-^-^C<I10lO<3iOCO-^T-(CvlNOt-'^OlOCOt-»0 
 
 oot- S 
 
 I I I I 
 
 I I I I I 
 
 I I I i 
 
 I I I I I I 
 
 ■^^'-O'^l'-^iH'OOiCO'-HOi'rOCO^lOt-COlOCOOOQOCDlO'^t-lOTH'^ 
 i-INt-«OajT-IOt-00>l0500C00100SCOOOOt--^CSI000050«)N 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 T*? 
 
 Jill 
 
 00 O 00 <M T-l-t- O-O CO rH (35 Tjl O •^ t- 00 00 t- iH to lO lO ■* 00 ■* OJ «> iH 
 0-^05050S*-ICOiHC^OOi^OO'^mOqr-t'«1<OOCO'^TjtOOOOOt-0'^ 
 
 .9 
 
 a 
 
 03 
 
 r— t 
 
 A 
 a> 
 •a 
 
 01 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I 
 
 . 0} (B 
 
 ■ an 
 
 ^ ^ /n c! pJ^ 
 
 •■ : g-i 2 111 
 
 •S'S S-5 teM S >» 
 
 «8 >.» Js! 
 ■a a) to sh 
 5 tn fe ° 
 
 > 0)1-5'^ 
 
 b fe fe ® 
 ^•■-•*" - 
 
 -2 OS bo c 
 
 itSisi 
 
 .S "S S ^ ^ 
 
 M m S 
 
 a S s 
 
 o _r ^ 
 
 I 08 eU ® 
 
 
 to 
 
 o 
 
 01 
 
 l'^ 
 
 ^ 
 
 z^ 
 
 X 
 
 
 
 (b2 
 
 01 
 
 
 OK 
 
 p.a 
 ll 
 
 s 
 
 f 
 
 &0 <B 
 
 h 
 
 3 S 
 
 o; 
 
 o S 
 
 > 
 
 ^•^ 
 
 W 
 
 1-3 oa 
 
 
 ^ 3 C 
 o-* a 
 
 m" 
 
 ^ S a 
 
 X a 
 
 f-t a 
 
 
 ^ n ffl S 0) 
 
 a ^1^1 
 - . a g oj" 
 
 S OS O M IS 
 
 0) 
 
 bo 
 
 OS 
 
 A 
 
 OS 
 
 rS 
 
 o 
 
 117 
 
-as 
 
 1.3 
 
 
 TT I if^f-TT "f T' 
 
 >M> 
 
 SlOopiA 1 
 
 I I 
 
 •HeOO>Oi-l«DMrHO»05eJ 
 UJO^tOiHCOOaSOOrHO) 
 
 t-opoot-eoiO'«i'0»e<5r-ieo 
 ujTHWiomeoiHiHooeoeot- 
 
 I I 
 
 N 1-1 Mi 
 
 I I I I I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 3 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 H 
 Q 
 
 S o 
 •2 +^ 
 
 u 
 
 0) 
 
 as. 
 
 Of 
 
 3 
 
 '3 *' 
 rt u 
 
 +j "^ 
 
 OS 
 
 *■ u 
 m o 
 
 o o 
 
 » lO rH t- 0» t- lO C- rt 
 
 lU 
 
 CDCV3 o> 
 
 oeot-cooL~ot-o»t-t-ej 
 
 I I 
 
 CO C^ fH CO CO *-(IA 04 
 
 o 
 
 [it 
 
 
 I I I 
 
 ooeOi-t'^at-t-i-ieoM^oo 
 
 I 
 
 
 g lonr-i iap]Oio 
 Hill I I I I 
 
 -r i"? ,- ,=i'=i"=f7 
 
 rHOOlOMMMlOCOt-MCdas 
 
 T 11 
 
 fe t-OOOCOr-lt-C-Ot 
 
 f~llO0000^''T}'O^ftHt-0]r-( 
 iH04 0)IAIOOOMa0 03C1iH 
 
 H ^rt 
 
 |i< 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 o 0) to >a 00 ^ 03 CO O) o lo t- 00 
 
 -g B -^oi^ioiaorHiaioiaoi 
 
 ."^ iHr-I.Hi-li-(r-l i-HtHi-J 
 
 f^ I I I I I I I I I I 
 
 cococ-oocQt-iooiaiooib- 
 
 NO>^«DiHi-lt-OTe3oOi-lt- 
 
 I I I 
 
 s-gl 
 
 ■« a, S* 
 
 .S M S? 
 
 O o 6S 
 
 O OJ'S 3 
 
 I S'S- 
 
 C 
 
 S S 
 
 •^ m o 
 
 o o 0) 
 V es ? 
 
 . * 
 
 
 u 
 
 3 
 
 Ml ^ 
 
 PL<(»|V| 
 
 5 So -b * 
 
 I o S^^ 
 
 & - 
 
 3'g'^lll 
 
 
 O MI'S 3 o oj 
 > rt 09 O M » 
 
 ill 
 
 boPp 
 
 
 118 
 
0'^cooo*-Hocoiocoioccaa»Ht- 
 
 
 I I I I I I I I I I • I 
 
 coNi-iTHt-ioaTi'to 
 
 eOCOiH ^ COlO CO w^ Oi 5Poo O O r-to t-OJ i-t ONOaON t-CJ 
 t- C-tH lOrHOa NO OOOJ ^ ^ C-00 -^ T-( O rH «D t- -^ lO t- tH »H -^ OS 
 
 MtH 
 
 I I 
 
 CO tH iH rH 
 
 I I I 
 
 t-rHtN-'fOOOO^t-OOt-^t- 
 
 Cdt-PHMOSCMCOOIMOXMCvIN 
 t-MlOC-t-lt-rHeOt-»-IC-t-5D 
 
 I I I 
 
 M Tf t- CO TT 00 00 us N OS ■>* •-; (N O iH lO OS lO O N 00 CO 00 tC 3 N 00 
 NOSOOCOOI>OS CO-^COCO »^CQCO cod iH iH OOCOCOOO O W^ NCO 
 
 I I 
 
 .^ 
 
 =?-". . 
 
 I I 
 
 t- Tl" t- 00 00 <0 ^ OS lO t- lO <5 Tf t- O t- t- t- tH 00 «D C- 00 N t- CO 
 «D«ONCOOe<Ii-lTHe'l«DlO"5 OS eOt-NlONlO'^ONiHOON-^ 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 o 
 
 toeot-o»eo-*i:-<oo><OiHMt-«c 
 
 ■*NNP]t-<O«D0SiHO00t0Ot- 
 
 =? 
 
 ■«'<NTl>t-O»tO«OU500tHtO00t- 
 
 acoacooocot-eamcOT-iooiH 
 
 1*? 
 
 CO 
 
 I 
 
 eOMOOOJOONOOIOlONtOtOt- 
 OSt-COOO'HCDlftCOiHlOO^Ot' 
 
 «o->*Tiiot--*'<»ooe<i«OTiirtoo 
 t-t-eoNOeoNtot-OiHOco 
 
 I I 
 
 .3 to &* 
 
 'i:s#|«:s|gi, 
 
 as -bus 
 Jf*^ fi SI-" 
 
 > B M M 
 
 .so 
 
 S " ° 
 
 1^ o S 
 OZHO 
 
 bp 
 
 s 
 
 rt 08 2 
 jsobll'^ 
 
 x2 - 
 
 
 M "3 Sop 
 

 100»010t-OOTli«ciT(<looOU5t-r-lt-MMr-HOOOmi'^ 
 t0^rHOOaiNmr-IOO(N>H.!OeOOSU5t-50C-OOTHt-OOIN 
 
 ei3«o -^ iH coco 
 
 COt-I iH rHNSpCaiNCO 
 
 
 OSONOOrCOTflr-IOSOOt-aseONWlOCOr-ieOi-KOOO 
 t-C-lOO«DCOT-liHN'<*COOiHOOOCOiHt-COeOiHUSO 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 Q 
 H 
 
 *it3.i 
 
 °f 
 
 f 
 
 OOr-IU5 50 00t->Hi-(00 00'HOiCOTl<iH2(Ni-IIMlO«J-* 
 
 ooiot-'ooooe<itOi-iooom)meoeau5°;oi050jTi't-03 
 
 ^1 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 Jog- 
 
 1000t-t-106-OSt-CO.-IOOCOt-OOt-t-°OorH10t-t-tCi 
 iH(MOeJOe<ICO(MlO«0 05C0 05 05 0a5D°';S5t-COIM5<IO 
 
 I I 
 
 00t-r-j>nOt-lQiHl0«0t0C0t0lOOlO05t0O0ri00"^00 
 
 [^ 
 
 I I I I 
 
 I I 
 
 b SS 00 -^ N t- 00 05 >o 00 OS ■<* to t- ■* CO o> i-ltO •* O UJ U5 '^ 00 
 S tH O t- -^ C35 rH C005C01XieqTf(MC0NTfiHOC0'^"*t-^ 
 
 I I 
 
 1^. 
 
 
 « -5' 
 
 a> CO 
 S N 5< 
 
 Go S 
 
 O S 
 
 i: 
 
 '60S § 
 
 :;S.£fo 
 
 cs d S 
 
 rf o b o _ 
 
 ^ O T^ 
 
 ca o o 
 5", fis 
 
 s-sgtf3^»-^ 
 
 o 
 
 .2 o 3 
 o 
 
 s 
 
 60.2 
 
 30 
 
 iggs'St 
 
 oAofeS<:«!(i.Spq<!O^SSM5qO?pq<! 
 
 •a 
 
 "1-1 h^' 
 ^>:"<s 
 
 3 is P 
 
 120 
 

 N NN rH M N CO iH "H T-l iH ■>* CO 
 II II I I I I I 
 
 coeo t- N" 
 
 OOO'd'-^OOi-lloOr-l'-IOOSO'^ 
 CO?C>WlrtCOOrHcOOt*"^"^T-(WCO 
 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 e]t-o>o»ooe]t-eoN'^-*co«uo^ 
 
 t-eOtHiHINCOOOt-lOINmOOOCO 
 
 ea(NlNCvliHCOMt-(NCOe<3(M 
 
 ^t 
 
 I I 
 
 I I 
 
 OSGOOD 00 00 CO T-l 05 CO (N O W M CO 
 iHCOtO CO -^ C- r-l "5 CO "-I "-I CO t- m 
 
 05THC0oC0t-OC0«0C0OC0 
 OOTHt-550(MCOinONt-50 
 
 I I 
 
 r-l _|N iH 
 
 I II 
 
 OJCOCOTfOt-COt-CDgildOOT-tCOi-l 
 
 ioi-icocot-w^i6(N^coea(Nooo 
 
 t-t-t-t-c-iHt-t-tot-coeo 
 
 (MIM<Mc<l'M>nC^<^IOOCqOOtH 
 
 I I I I 
 
 mu500lOOOO(Mi-tU5eDt-U5 
 
 cQ(M'<«(Ni:-aa«ea)u3oe]iM 
 
 "a 
 
 > 
 
 a 
 o 
 
 I I 
 
 -r^ 
 
 >-• >H > 
 
 t-05t-0(NiHtD«OTHinc050t-<DeO 
 OOOtrTlllMTjl.-IOrH'^tOOOOOON 
 
 tDNioiomt-eoi-ioos'^m 
 
 OlOOOt--<a'CONO»iHt-«DO 
 
 ^ 
 
 I I I I I I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 2 C _ 
 S J3 g «. 
 
 1-1 .S u o 
 
 jj 2 c S 
 
 3 3 to a 
 
 s 
 .2 ".H « 
 
 0)1 
 
 Mo 
 
 -a-^ "< 18 o +^-0 
 
 oSoo 
 
 0) 0) »^ *« ' 
 
 tctc gWt 
 .S.S-S £ 
 
 ft p, rt 01 ^ 
 MCQMHC 
 
 c 
 
 CO CQ 
 
 Wo 
 
 ^ fi 
 
 OS 
 
 
 s-< 
 
 £& 
 
 o « 
 
 
 
 ajs 
 
 QO 
 
 S-2 
 
 2<2 S 
 f: «s c 
 
 C m ^ _ 
 o rt g (S 
 
 -s - 
 
 C3 bl -o 
 
 5^ d (U4J 
 
 ^ 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 w 
 
 . . . 
 
 e 
 
 
 
 
 
 • ' 
 
 T3 
 
 
 
 a> 
 
 
 :5 
 
 . o 
 
 
 ■ M 
 
 
 
 e • c3 
 
 y 
 
 3 -Q 
 
 w 
 
 11^ 
 
 2 
 
 S|l 
 
 to 
 
 -1 
 
 1 
 
 h . b 
 
 <H 
 
 
 
 o S-a 
 
 ^ 
 
 u >.I5 
 
 
 c <u S 
 
 
 mx h 
 
 
 > 
 
 oo 
 
 
 121 
 
« s 
 
 V 
 
 a 
 
 B « g 
 
 S h a, 
 a O S 
 
 'iHNTjJlO " COiHeOiHCOeO ' IH 'r-t 
 
 Wt-OStDOMNOOOOt-KI'^lOlOlONI'OlOt- 
 
 I I I I 
 
 I I I 
 
 I I 
 
 i-(OTt-t-t-tot-M;ot-c-oo>-itDeaooosioej 
 
 I I 
 
 co^ec. 
 
 ■w-g o 
 
 « 
 
 cs h 0) 
 
 Eo » 
 
 H 
 
 Q 
 H 
 
 m 
 
 H 
 
 •So o 
 
 i-iiHoococoooioeooooneooiioaxoiooseoN 
 
 eDiHOC<l'-ltO(MiHt-OOOToOOOO'<*i-IOO<-tO> 
 
 «0t-t-t-t-t-t-O0JOt-lO!0t-00C-r-l>Ha»^ 
 r-ltO(N0]OIC<l<MOOO>COIMOCOe(|O>iHt-rHO3C4 
 
 t-eOtOrHTHlOOOiHNr-ICOtOiHOO'V^t-ea 
 
 =?T 
 
 O 01 
 
 osO 
 
 «t-01000M<N-^00050SlOOO>OlO^C050i-l 
 
 <oe<iioiot-io«ooOMesiNT(iTi'r-i^ioejiOi-iN 
 
 'n '^ .a c eo c 
 
 > 
 
 o 
 
 > 
 
 V 
 
 Q 
 
 h 
 
 ■a 
 
 +» 
 
 CO 
 
 
 '3 ar^ 
 
 
 S -^ _ 
 . - 0) ffl .-o 
 
 o^SM S <a c 
 
 « B B o jjfic 
 
 ,2 2 ■» 2 
 S « s 
 
 ffl 0, g 
 
 122 
 
APPENDIX V. 
 The Biserial r. 
 The formula for the computation of the biserial r 
 is as follows : 
 
 S.D.1 
 (1) 
 
 S.D.. 
 In the problem under consideration: 
 
 p —.76— (+.03) 
 
 S.D.. 2.85 
 
 where p is the difference between the mean of the 
 dependent cities and the mean of the total, and S. D.' 
 is the standard deviation of the total. The denomi- 
 nator of the fraction is 
 
 (2) 
 
 S.D.. 
 
 It is impossible to find q or S.D.. for the B vari- 
 ate because all cases are grouped into two classes. 
 It is necessary to substitute for formula (2) , 
 
 z 
 (3) 
 
 V2(l-a) 
 
 The following explanation will show that this is 
 
 possible. On the assumption that the B variate is 
 
 approximately Gaussian in form, it is possible to 
 
 m^e use of Sheppard's Tables. These tables give 
 
 123 
 
124 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 ordinates and areas of the normal frequency surface 
 in terms of the abscissa. In the normal frequency 
 surface, given below, the area is taken as unity (1) 
 and the central ordinate is c. 
 
 c 
 
 c z 
 In the problem under consideration this fre- 
 quency distribution is made up of 169 cases. In- 
 stead of these cases being divided into two equal 
 groups they are divided by ordinate z into two 
 groups, one of 62 and the other of 107 cases. It is 
 evident now that the location of the z ordinate, 
 measured in terms of the abscissa, will be compar- 
 able to the p of the numerator and hence can be 
 
 substituted for the q of the denominator. Now, the 
 distance between ordinate c and ordinate z is called 
 X and is measured in terms of the S.D. of the dis- 
 
 X 
 
 tribution and is given in Sheppard's tables as ■ 
 
 S.D. 
 
 It is evident then that if the total area is unity, the 
 area to the right of z is V^(l — a) and that to the 
 left is y2 {!-]-&). Inasmuch as the whole number 
 of cases is 169 and the number to the right of z is 
 
 62 
 62, it then follows that 1/2 (1— a) = = .3663. 
 
 169 
 Subtracting .3663 from unity the value of i/^(14-a) 
 is found to be .6387. By reference to Sheppard's 
 
THE BISERIAL r 125 
 
 tables it is found that this value of VgCl — a) cor- 
 
 X 
 
 responds to = .34 and z = .3765. By sub- 
 
 S.D. 
 stitution in formula (3) we have: 
 .3765 
 
 = 1.03 
 
 .2663 
 Now the final substitution in formula (1) gives 
 —.28 
 
 1.03 
 
 Computation of biserial r for the large cities. 
 —1.59 _ (—.96) 
 
 2.58 
 = —.28 
 
 .3966 
 
 .4571 
 
 Computation of the biserial r for the cities of 
 the Great Lakes Division. 
 
 —.03— (.64) 
 
 2.46 
 
 .27 
 
 .3790 
 
 .3725 
 For a full explanation of the derivation and use 
 of Sheppard's Tables see: Sheppard, W. F., New 
 Tables of the Probability Integral. Biometrika, 
 Volume II, page 174. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 City Government 
 
 Beard, C. A., American City Government. (1912) 
 
 Bradford, E. S., Commission Government in American Cities. 
 
 (1911) 
 Bruere, Henry, Efficiency in City Government. Annals of the 
 
 American Academy of Political and Social Science. 
 
 May 1912, p. 3. 
 
 Nevr City Government (1912) 
 Cleveland, F. A., Municipal Administration and Accounting. 
 
 (1915) 
 Fairlie, J. A., Local Government in Counties, Towns and 
 
 Villages. (1906) 
 
 Essays in Municipal Administration. (1906) 
 Goodnow, F. J., Municipal Government. (1919) 
 
 Municipal Problems. (1897) 
 
 City Government in the United States. (1904) 
 Horn, P. W., City Schools Under the Commission Form of 
 
 City Government. Educational Review, April 1909, 
 
 p. 362. 
 James, H. G., Applied City Government. (1914) 
 Matthews, Nathan, Municipal Charters. (1914) 
 McBain, H. L., The Law and Practice of Municipal Home Rule. 
 
 (1916) 
 Munro, W. B., Principles and Methods of Municipal Adminis- 
 tration. (1916) 
 
 The Government of American Cities. (1916) 
 Toulmin, H. A., Jr., The City Manager. (1915) 
 Weber, A. F., The Growth of Cities in the Nineteenth Century. 
 
 (1899) 
 Woodruff, C. R., A New Municipal Program. (1919) 
 Zueblin^ Charles, American Municipal Progress. (1916) 
 
 School Finance 
 Bachman, F. P., Attaining Efficiency in City School Systems. 
 
 Annals of the American Academy of Political and 
 
 Social Science. May 1912, p. 159. 
 Bard, H. E., The City School District, (1909) 
 Blair, F. G., School Revenue. N. E. A. Proceedings. (1914) 
 Brittain, H. L., Financial Relations of Boards of Education 
 
 to Municipal Government. American School Board 
 
 Journal, September 1914, p. 14. 
 Burgess, W. R., Trends of School Costs. (1920) 
 Chancellor, W. E., Our City Schools; Their Direction and 
 
 Management. (1904) 
 
 126 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY— Continued 127 
 
 Cubberley, E. P., Public Education in the United States. 
 (1919) 
 
 School Funds and Their Apportionment. (1906) 
 Public School Administration. (1916) 
 The School Situation in San Francisco. Educational 
 Eeview, April 1901, p. 364. 
 
 Dewey, John, State or City Control of Schools ? New Republic, 
 March 20, 1915. 
 
 Dutton, S. T., and Snedden, David, The Administration of 
 Public Education in the United States. (1908) 
 
 Eliot, C. W., A Good Urban School Organization. Report of 
 United States Commissioner of Education. (1908) 
 
 Elliott, E. C, Some Fiscal Aspects of Public Education. 
 (1905) 
 
 A Non-partisan School Law. N. E. A. Proceedings. 
 (1905) 
 
 Engelhardt, N. L., Ability of a Cil^ to Furnish Funds for 
 the Advancement of Education Within Its Borders. 
 American School Board Journal, June 1919. 
 
 Goodnow, F. J., and Howe, F. C, Educational Investigation 
 Committee on School Inquiry, City of New York, Vol. 
 Ill, pp. 26, 27 and 28. (1913) 
 
 Hutchinson, J. H., School Costs and School Accounting. 
 (1914) 
 
 McDowell, T. L., State vs. Local Control of Elementary Edu- 
 cation, (finance). United States Bureau of Education 
 Bulletin, 22 (1915) 
 
 Moore, E. C, How New York City Administers Its Schools. 
 (1912) 
 
 Pyle, J. F., School Finance, Legal Basis of, in Cities of the 
 North Central Association Having a Population Rang- 
 ing from Thirty Thousand to Fifty Thousand. Ele- 
 mentary School Journal, Februaiy 1919. 
 
 Rollins, Frank, School Administration in Municipal Govern- 
 ment. (1902) 
 
 Rowe, L. S., Educational Finances; the Financial Relation 
 of the Department of Education to the City Govern- 
 ment. Annals of American Academy of Political and 
 Social Science, Volume XV, p. 186. 
 
 Rugg, H. O., St. Louis Survey, Part III. 
 
 Summary of the Literature on Public School Costs 
 and Business Management. Elementary School Journal, 
 April 1917. 
 
 Sears, J. B., The Literature and Problems of Public School 
 Finance. Educational Administration and Supervision, 
 March 1921, p. 133. 
 
128 CITY SCHOOL FINANCES 
 
 Snedden, David, and Allen, W. H., School Reports and School 
 EflSciency. 
 
 Strayer, G. D., City School Expenditures. (1905). 
 
 The Baltimore School Situation. Educational Review, 
 1911, p. 325. 
 
 Strayer, G. D., and Engelhardt, N. L., The Classroom Teacher. 
 (1920) 
 
 Strayer, G, D., and Thomdike E. L., Educational Adminis- 
 tration. 
 
 tjpdegraff, H., Study of Expenses of City School Systems. 
 United States Bureau of Education, Bulletin 5 (1912). 
 
INDEX 
 
 Adequate playground space, 70 
 
 Adjustment of school organization to new financial needs, 71 
 Administration, board plan of, 14 
 American city government, history, 7 
 Amount of training, 70, 95 
 Annual tax levy, 45 
 Application of index number, 77 
 Appointed boards, 49, 77 
 Authority, division of, 37 
 Biserial r, 123; data for computation of, 80 
 Boards, of aldermen, 64; appointed, 49, 77; control of educa- 
 tion, 11; of education, 9; elected, 44, 77; elective, 36; 
 
 excise, 52; fiscally dependent, 15, 55; fiscally independent, 
 
 15, 44, 49; joint school-municipal, 59; of laymen, 13; 
 
 partially independent, 50, 52; plan of administration, 14; 
 
 of school estimate, 59; unpaid, 15 
 Branch, of city government, 12; of state government, 22 
 Budget, 90; adoption, 41, 100; commissioners, 54; detailed, 
 
 62; funds, 63; passed by county budget commission, 54; 
 
 passed by voters, 53; reduced, 55 
 Bureaucracy and red tape, 29 
 Centralized responsibility, 37 
 Changes in financial control, 84 
 Charters, 7; city, 88; granted by governors, 7; granted by 
 
 state, 7 
 City government, branch of, 12; city manager form of, 9; 
 
 commission form of, 9; mayor type of, 8; manager form 
 
 of, 9 
 City school system, educational efficiency of, 14. 
 City or separate function, 23 
 Classes, of control, 78; grouping into, 69 
 Commission form of city government, 9, 19 
 Commissioner, single, 18 
 Common school tax, 25 
 
 Comparisons, by correlations, 79; by medians, 77 
 Compilation of school laws, 88 
 Composition of index number, 68 
 Computation of biserial r, 123 
 Conclusions, opposed, 31 
 Continuity of educational policy, 85 
 Control, classes of, 78; correct method of, 42; different types, 
 
 43; of education, legislative, 22; financial, 34; fiscal, 34. 
 
 35; of moneys, 19; non-political, 87 
 Correct method of control, 42 
 Correlation of factors, 75 
 
 129 
 
130 INDEX— Continued 
 
 Cost of living, 97 
 
 County budget commission, 12 
 
 Data, for computation of biserial r, 80; concerning financial 
 control, 88; source of, 89; verified, 98 
 
 Dependence vs. independence, 33 
 
 Detailed budget, 62 
 
 Different types of control, 43 
 
 Director, salaried, 13 
 
 Disbursement, of funds, 57; by warrant, 60 
 
 Distinct political subdivision, 39 
 
 Divided responsibility, 38, 58 
 
 Division of authority, 37 
 
 Dual control of finances, 36 
 
 Education, a function of the state, 10 
 
 Educational, application of index number, 66; efficiency of 
 city school system, 14; efficiency and political expediency, 
 20; and financial factors, 68; policy, continuity of, 85 
 
 Efficiency, school, 65 
 
 Elected boards, 44, 77 
 
 Election, by city council, 17; at large, 52; non-partisan, 10; 
 by wards, 52 
 
 Elective board, 36 
 
 Excise board, 52 
 
 Factor, one, 93; two, 93; three, 94; four, 95; five, 96; six, 
 97; correlation of, 75; educational and financial, 68; of 
 index numbers, 108; standard deviation values, 116 
 
 Finances, dual control of, 36; independent control of, 11; 
 municipal control of, 11 
 
 Financial control, 34; legal basis of, 21; changes in, 84; 
 data, 88 
 
 Financial needs, adjustment of school organization to, 71 
 
 Fiscal, control, 34; dependence, 11; independence, 11; inde- 
 pendence, superiority of, 79; school control, 35 
 
 Fiscally, dependent boards, 15, 55; independent boards, 15, 
 44, 49 
 
 Fixing responsibility, 28 
 
 Free schools, 49 
 
 Frequency distribution, 74 
 
 Function, city or separate, 23; state, 25 
 
 Funds, budget, 63; disbursement of, 57; general and special, 
 62; shortage of, 30 
 
 General and special funds, 62 
 
 Geographical location, influence of, 81 
 
 Government by boards, 8 
 
 Grouping into classes, 69 
 
 History of American city government, 7 
 
 Holding power of school, 69 
 
 Increase, in cost of living, per cent of, 73; median of, 72 
 
 Independence vs. dependence, 33 
 
INDEX^Continued 131 
 
 Independent, control of finances, 11; powers of taxation, 28 
 
 Index number, 65; application of, 77; composition of, 68; 
 for each city, 116; educational application of, 66; factors, 
 108; making^, 74; statistical device, 65 
 
 Influence of geog^raphical location, 81 
 
 Itemized budget estimate, 56 
 
 Joint school-municipal board, 59 - 
 
 Lay organization, 13 
 
 Legal basis of financial control, 21 
 
 Legislative control of education, 22 
 
 Limit of taxation, 46 
 
 Literature of school finance, 27 
 
 Local school taxes, 92 
 
 Makeshifts, 96; places, 70 
 
 Making an index number, 74 
 
 Mayor type of city government, 8 
 
 Median of increase, 72 
 
 Moneys, control of, 19 
 
 Municipal, acts, stiate authority for, 83; control of finances. 
 11; corruption, 29; creations, 61 
 
 National constitution, 8 
 
 Non-partisan election, 10, 44 
 
 Non-political control, 87 
 
 Normal frequency surface, 124 
 
 Ofiicials, two sets of, 86 
 
 Opposed conclusions, 31 
 
 Partially independent boards, 60, 52 
 
 Per cent of increase in cost of living, 73 
 
 Playground space, 94; adequate, 70 
 
 Policy-proposing body, 31 
 
 Political, expediency and educational efficiency, 20; influence, 
 10 
 
 Popular vote, 47 
 
 Questionnaire, 88 
 
 Question of taxation, 39 
 
 Reduced budgets, 55 
 
 Responsibility, centralized, 37; divided, 38, 58; fixing, 28 
 
 Salaried director, 13 
 
 School, budget, 90; efficiency, 65; finance, literature of, 27; 
 holding power of, 69 ; laws, compilation of, 88 
 
 Separate school tax, 38 
 
 Shortage of funds, 30 
 
 Single commissioner, 18 
 
 Sources of data, 89 
 
 Special, limitations, 48; tax, 51 
 
 Standard deviation values of each factor, 116 
 
 State, authority for municipal acts, 83; function, 25; govern- 
 ment, branches of 22; tax commission, 47 
 
 Statistical device, index number, 65 
 
132 INDEX^Coricluded 
 
 Subdivision, distinct political, 39 
 
 Superiority of fiscal independence, 79 
 
 Table, Alpba, 100; Beta, 108; Delta, 116 
 
 Tax, common school, 25; determining power, 20; separate 
 
 school, 38; special, 51; levied by school board, 46; levy, 
 
 annual, 45 
 Taxation, independent powers of, 28; limit of, 46; question 
 
 of, 39 
 Teachers' salaries, 97 
 Total school enrollment, 93 
 Townmeeting form of government, 7 
 Training, amount of, 70, 96 
 Two sets of officials, 86 
 Unpaid boards, 15 
 
VITA 
 
 The author of this dissertation, George Willard 
 Frasier, was born at Marlette, Sanilac County, 
 Michigan, on September 21, 1890. He received his 
 early education in the public schools of Michigan, 
 graduating from the Marlette High School in 1909. 
 He received a B. Pd. degree in 1915, and an A. B. 
 degree in 1916 from the Michigan State Normal Col- 
 lege, at Ypsilanti, Michigan. He received an A. M. 
 degree from Leland Stanford Junior University in 
 1919. He was a student at Columbia University, 
 during the year 1920-21, and the summer school of 
 1921. He is the author of "A Statistical Study of 
 Sex Differences in Intelligence and School Prog- 
 ress," and nine professional articles published in 
 educational magazines.