'«)»■«« mi : «>m Wmtk mm * 1 ■■/fiiim &0%2%% "pS^p ::X-Sftb ■a M.;^ if\* slillBiiill BlW« MHfc*rm/ Cornell Uniuerattg iCihraqj Jtljara, SSeia fork LA249 .M4°7 e i9Tr rai,y "^ ^uiinlfiUSliiB «!.?.'. free schools in the U olin 3 1924 032 696 886 Cornell University Library The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924032696886 THE DEVELOPMENT OF FREE SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES AS ILLUSTRATED BY CONNECTICUT AND MICHIGAN BY ARTHUR RAYMOND MEAD SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, IN THE FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PUBLISHED BY GDeacfjers College. Columbia ©ntoersitp NEW YORK CITY 1918 THE DEVELOPMENT OF FREE SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES AS ILLUSTRATED BY CONNECTICUT AND MICHIGAN BY ARTHUR RAYMOND MEAD SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY, IN THE FACULTY OF PHILOSOPHY, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PUBLISHED BY (Eeacfjers College, Columbia SHntbersitp NEW YORK CITY 1918 THE DEVELOPMENT OF FREE SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES AS ILLUSTRATED BY CONNECTICUT AND MICHIGAN BY ARTHUR RAYMOND MEAD, Ph.D. TEACHERS COLLEGE, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY CONTRIBUTION TO EDUCATION, NO. 91 PUBLISHED BY 3Ceacfjer* College, Columbia tHmueritt? NEW YORK CITY 1918 vv /yvpi<^ Copyright, 1918, by Arthur Raymond Mead DEDICATED TO THE FREE PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF AMERICA INTRODUCTION The typical public school of the United States is a free school. It is free in that it charges no tuition fees to resident pupils. However, it is a matter of common knowledge that in an earlier period tuition was one of the means of school support. This was certainly true of all states east of the Mississippi River, except Maine and Wisconsin, and actually if not legally may have been true of them also. A few states west of the Mississippi used tuition as a means of school support. Striking examples are Iowa, California, and Texas. As one reviews the educational legislation of the different states, it becomes evident that in the period of 1840-1870 many laws were enacted having as their aim the attainment of schools free from tuition as a means of support. It is also evident that from an early period, children of the poor were not required to pay such fees. To make schools free meant to exempt all chil- dren from such charges, and to support the schools entirely by other means, largely by taxation upon property. Laws which aimed to secure this condition were enacted in certain states, as follows: Delaware, 1829; Pennsylvania, 1834, 1848, 1868; Louisi- ana, 1847; Indiana, 1852; Ohio, 1853; Texas, 1854; Iowa, 1858; West Virginia, 1863; Vermont, 1864; New York and California, 1867; Michigan, 1869; Connecticut, 1868-1870, and New Jersey, 1871. In some cases, the laws left the matter entirely to local option, as for example the law of 1834 in Pennsylvania. In others, no local choice was given. It is also probable that much of the earlier legislation of this type was largely unrealized in actual practice, but the later laws were backed by sufficient sentiment and finances to make the schools practically free. This development of free schools in the last century consisted not only of changes in the schools themselves, but also of changes in public opinion about the function, the organization, and the administration of the public school. Since our schools depend upon public opinion, the investigation of this evolution to ascer- tain its causes, tendencies, and results, may help us to under- stand better the present problems of education in our democracy. vi The Development of Free Schools The task of studying intensively this movement in all states concerned is so enormous in extent that it was found impossible of accomplishment except by years of research and study. After a brief preliminary survey of the general movement, it was found desirable to select one or more states and study their history to ascertain how they illustrate this educational evolution. It was thought desirable, also, that the states selected should have a population very largely of the same origin; that at least one of the states should illustrate this development from colonial times; and that the vexing problems involved in religious and sectarian controversies about the public schools should not be present to such a degree as to unduly complicate and obscure the main issues. The two states of Connecticut and Michigan met these conditions, and they were selected for study. Certain terms used in this study need definition. Tuition, rate-bill, pauper school and poor school, rate-bill school, rate, and free school, are terms which may be confused. Tuition meant the same as it does to-day, money paid by parents, or guardians, of pupils for schooling. Rate-bill was a term used somewhat carelessly, but usually meant a tuition bill with the added feature that if the parents of children were indigent, such parents would be exempted from payment of the tuition fees. This bill was levied upon and collected directly from individuals, but could be collected, if necessary, by seizure and sale of prop- erty. Like tuition, a rate-bill was usually charged in proportion to the number of children in attendance and the total number of days of school attended. Pauper school and poor school origi- nally meant schools attended only by children of the poor. In time, these terms came to be applied to a public school using rate-bills as a means of support, if the attendance was composed largely of children unable to attend private schools. A rate-bill school was a public school using rate-bills as a means of support. A rate, in contrast with a rate-bill, was what we call a property tax. A free school was one supported entirely without tuition, or rate-bills. It might be public or private, and might be sup- ported by an endowment, or by taxation and other means of public support. As used in this study, it means a public school supported entirely by taxation and other means of public main- tenance. The sources from which the material for this study has been Introduction vii drawn are indicated in the Appendices. The chief sources are reports of the state departments of education, school laws, and educational journals The writer is under obligation to Bryson Library of Teachers College, Hartford Public Library, Library of the University of Michigan, and the United States Bureau of Education for facilities furnished. His chief obligation is to Dr. Paul Monroe, who suggested the study and who has given much help in directing it. CONTENTS PAGE Intboduction v PART I. CONNECTICUT Colonial Beginnings in Connecticut 1 General Social Changes, About 1780-1870 10 Some Legislative and Administrative Changes in Education, About 1780-1870 12 Educational Finance, 1780-1870 18 School Fund, Town Deposit Fund, Local Funds, Town Tax, Society Tax, District Tax, Tuition and Rate-bills, Minor Sources Development of Free Schools 42 A. Up to 1850 B. From 1850 to 1856 C. From 1856 to 1870 D. Extensions of Free School Principle since 1870 E. Immediate Results of Free School Laws and Free School Cam- paign PART II. MICHIGAN General Social Changes 77 Some Legislative and Administrative Changes, 1785-1870 ... 79 Educational Conditions under the Government of the North- west Territory, 1785-1805 81 Free School Development while Michigan Was a Territory . . 85 Beginnings of Free Schools and Free School Legislation under the First Constitution 87 Free School Growth under Second Constitution and to Two Mill Tax and Optional Free School Law, 1850-1860 .... 91 Civil War Period and Abolition of Rate-bills 102 Extensions and Constitutional Changes since 1869 124 PART III. INFLUENCING FACTORS AND SUMMARY Population Elements 126 Influence of Teachers 137 Industries and Labor Union Movement 145 Taxpayers 150 Local Units of School Administration 152 Educational Finance, Connecticut 155 Educational Finance, Michigan 156 ix x The Development of Free Schools R6le op State and Local Administrative Officers r\aa A. Connecticut 163 B. Michigan .... 163 Political Theory and Free Schools 169 Financial Panics and Free Schools 174 Civil War and Free Schools I? 5 Private Schools and Free Schools 176 Free Education as Charity 181 Belief in Moral Value of Education . 184 SUMMARY Connecticut 185 Michigan 187 Causal and Influencing Factors 189 Results . . . ... . 194 Some Principles Demonstrated by the Study 194 APPENDICES General Bibliography 199 Bibliography on Connecticut 200 Statistical Tables — Connecticut I. Population and Social Statistics 203 II. Rate-bills, Districts Using and Support . 204 III. School Fund Dividends, 1799-1883 . . 204 IV. Town and District Taxes, Support per Child 206 V. Teachers' Salaries, 1835-1878 206 VI. Use of Rate-bills by Counties 207 VII. Use of Rate-bills by Towns 207 VIII. Local Revenue and Districts Levying Tax 208 IX. Proportion of Public Funds as Contrasted to Local Funds in Certain Communities 208 Documents — Connecticut 1. State Board Member on Pauper Schools 209 2. Platform of State Teachers' Association, 1868 209 3. Resolutions of Friends of Universal Education 211 4. Petition of Hartford Ministerial Association, 1867 . . .211 5. Endowed Free Schools 212 6. Barnard and Boutwell on Rate-bills and Free Schools . . 213 7. Philbrick on Rate-bills, 1855 214 8. Camp on Taxes, Rate-bills and Free Schools 215 9. Northrop on Rate-bills and Free Schools 216 10. Free Education as Charity 218 11. Northrop on Charity in Education 218 Bibliography on Michigan 219 Statistical Tables — Michigan I. Salaries, Rate-bills, Proportion of Salary in Rate-bills, Gain or Loss in Rate-bills, Total Districts and Free Districts . 220 Contents xi Statistical Tables — Michigan — Concluded paqb II. Population and Social Statistics 221 III. District Tax, Township Tax, Total Income per Child . . 222 IV. Teachers' Salaries per Month for Certain Years .... 223 V. School Fund Income, 1839-1880 223 VI. Attendance in Public and Private Schools 224 Documents — Michigan A. Rate-bill: Teacher's Tuition List 225 B. Rate-bill and Warrant for Collection 225 C. Rate-bill: Notice of Assessor's Sale 226 D. Rate-bill: Collector's Warrant 227 E. Sectarian Definition of Free Schools 227 F. Counter-petition of Bishop McCoskry 228 G. Decision in Kalamazoo High School Case 229 PART I CONNECTICUT COLONIAL BEGINNINGS IN CONNECTICUT The schools of Connecticut became free in the last half of the nineteenth century, but to understand the development of such schools it is helpful to consider some conditions of colonial edu- cation, and to trace the slow growth of the movement and related movements to the time of the enactment of the free school law of 1868. The colonial period, from 1634 to 1776, a period of one hundred and forty-two years, was a time in which European traditions were transplanted, and also gradually modified. Some very important social changes occurred in Connecticut during this period. The colonists of Connecticut came, for the most part, from Massachusetts and were very similar in character and antecedents to the people of that colony. At New Haven and Hartford, settlements were made which had separate govern- ments, and between which a rivalry appeared. The two were united under a royal charter in 1665. The government was similar, in many respects, to that of Massachusetts. At first, the town was the unit of local government. The general control was exercised by the "General Court" and governor, under the charter and a rather peculiar constitution. The "General Court" was an elective body, based upon a limited suffrage, having a combination of legislative, executive, and judicial powers. Religiously, the Connecticut colonists were Puritans. The church and civil government were united in many ways. The early pursuits were, of necessity, hunting and agriculture, but soon a coastwise trade grew up, and primitive manufactures appeared. The times were not peaceful. Indian wars, and the European wars of parent nations brought to the settler of Con- necticut a share of the common burdens of the period. The educational conditions of the colonial period are inter- related with church, local and general government, and economic conditions. Many of the educational conditions are of slight 1 2 Development of Free Schools in the United States importance to this study. Administrative conditions such as finance and control are very important. They will be considered in this chapter. A very early record is that of the action of Hartford, 1643. This is an action of the town meeting. It records the employ- ment of a Mr. Andrews to teach school, and provides that his income shall be sixteen pounds. This income is to come from tuition. The "townsmen" are authorized to pay the tuition of indigent children. In essentials, this is the type of support which later caused a school to be classed as a rate-bill school. 1 Five years later, the town took action "that forty pounds shall be paid in the way of a rate to the townsmen for the time being, for carrying on the said work" — said work being the keeping of a better school. (Barnard, Conn. Rept., 1853, 7) The action of the town of Weathersfield, taken March 12, 1658, provided that their teacher should receive twenty-five pounds, part of which was to be raised by tuition, and the balance by a rate levied upon the tax value of the town. (Ibid., 7) A short series of town actions show school support and admin- istration in New Haven. December 25, 1641, " It is ordered that a free school be set up in this town, and our pastor, Mr. Daven- port, together with the magistrates shall consider what yearly allowance is meet to be given out of the common stock af the town, and also what rules and orders are meet to be observed in and about the same." In 1644, the town ordered the estab- lishment of a "free school" to train for "public service in church and in commonwealth," (Barnard, Conn. Rept., 1853, 10) These two records raise these queries: (1) Are two schools meant, or only one and the same school? (2) Did free mean what we mean by it to-day — was the school or were the schools really 1 This very early record reads as follows: "That Mr. Andrews should teach the children in the school one year next ensuing from the 25th of March, 1643, and that he shall have for his pains sixteen pounds; and therefore the Townsmen shall go and inquire who will engage themselves to send their children; and all that do so, shall pay for one quarter, at the least, and for more if they do send them, after the proportion of twenty shillings the year, and if they go any weeks more than an even quarter, they shall pay six pence a week; and if any would send their children and are not able to pay for their teaching, they shall give notice of it to the Townsmen, and they shall pay it at the Town's charge; and Mr. Andrews shall keep the account between the children's schooling and himself, and send notice of the times of payments and demand it; and if his wages do not come, the Townsmen must collect and pay it; or if the engage- ments come not to sixteen pounds, then they shall pay what is wanting at the Town's charge." (Conn. Rept., 1853, 6) (Italics not in original.) Connecticut 3 free? No definite answer has been found to either question. In 1652, the same town employed Mr. James to teach at an income of ten pounds from the treasury and the rest from the parents of the children. (Ibid., II) In 1657, action of very great importance was taken by the court of New Haven colony. It ordered towns within its jurisdiction which had no teachers to forthwith secure a schoolmaster, and provided that one-third of the salary should be paid by a regular rate, and the balance by parents of the children. 1 These examples from New Haven reveal types of practices. In 1665, New Haven and Hartford colonies united, and the laws were the same for both. The Hartford code of 1650 became the general law of Connecticut colony. The code of 1650 was the work of Roger Ludlow, an attorney, who had lived in England and Massachusetts and served as a justice in the colony. 2 Because of its origin, it is practically a duplicate of the Massachusetts law of 1647 with reference to schools, and the provisions referring to apprenticeship are copied largely from the Massachusetts law of 1642 and from English laws. The provisions relating to education are under the cap- tions "Children" and "Schools." The selectmen were given the duty of enforcing this law, and could call to their help two magistrates. Boys and girls were made subject to a period of apprenticeship training, or required to be given an education "to fit them for higher employments." A general education was to be required of all. Every town of fifty families was re- quired to employ a teacher of reading and writing, and when a town attained to the size of one hundred families, it must also "set up a grammar school" to fit young men for the university. Neglect to provide such facilities made the town liable to a fine 1 At a court of elections held at New Haven, March 27, 1657, "It was pro- pounded that the court would think of some way of further setting up of schools, for the education of the youth in each plantation, for though some do take care that way yet some others neglect it, which the court took into con- sideration, and seeing that Newhaven hath provided that a schoolmaster be maintayned at the townes charge, and Milford hath made provision in a com- fortable way, they desire ye other townes should follow their example, and therefore did now order, that in every plantation where a school is not already set up and maintayned, forthwith endeavors shall be used that a schoolmaster be procuried that may attend that work, and what sallary shall be allowed unto such schoolemaster for his paines, one third part shall be paid by the town in general as other rates, the good education of children being of publique concernment, and the other two-thirds by them who have the benefite thereof by ye teaching of their children:" (Rec. Col. New Haven, 220) 3 He was sometimes referred to as Robt. Ludlowe. 4 Development of Free Schools in the United States of five pounds, "till they shall perform this order." School support was provided in the words "whose wages shall be paid, either by the parents or masters of such children, or by the inhabitants in general, by way of supply, as the major part of those who order the prudentials of the town, shall appoint." It is clear that tuition is meant in the first part of the sentence, but just what the other method was is not very clear. Were the selectmen those who "ordered the prudentials of the town"? Probably so. What was meant by "way of supply"? Was it not possible that these persons might "appoint" to collect more tuition, or levy a rate, or pay by an appropriation from the town treasury? Many features of this very important law remained in the school laws of Connecticut till the free school movement began in earnest. 1 In 1666, a year after the union of the two colonies, the whole colony was divided into four counties, viz., Hartford, New Lon- don, New Haven, and Fairfield. At a court of election held at Hartford, May 9, 1672, grants of land were made to Fairfield and New London for grammar schools. The grants were in each case six hundred acres, and were to be used "for the benefit of a grammer school in the sayd County Townes, and to no other use or end whatever." By a similar action, like grants were made to New Haven and Hartford for the same purposes. (Conn. Col. Rec, II: 176) In 1676 — forty-two years after the begin- ning of the colony — the fine for not keeping a Latin grammar school was increased to ten pounds. The same year, the colony provided that maintenance of the schoolmaster should be by taxation — "by way of rate," — but each town might agree to raise the salary by some other method. (Conn. Col. Rec, II: 312) Two years later it was provided that towns of thirty families "shall have and maintain a school to teach children to read and write." (Ibid., Ill: 9) In the county of Fairfield, a smaller community called Pa- quanake had grown up, and demanded a share of the school money of the town of Fairfield, of which it was an outlying community. The matter was taken to the General Court and Fairfield was authorized to divide its school money as desired by the citizens of Paquanake. In a quite true sense, this marks the beginning 1 Conn. Col. Records, I: 520-521, 554-555. Dexter, History of Education in U. S., appendix. Seybolt, Apprenticeship in Colonial New England and New York. Connecticut 5 of decentralization in school control from town to parish and district. (Ibid., Ill: 8) In 1684, the General Court exempted from taxation all property used for the support of schools and the ministry. (Ibid., Ill: 158) In 1686, a new departure in school support appeared. The colony treasury contained a surplus. By court action, this sur- plus was to be distributed among the various communities for the assistance of grammar schools, or where there were none, to "other schools." (Ibid., Ill: 225) A rather comprehensive reorganization of the school laws was enacted in 1690. The preamble stated that there were "many persons unable to read the English tongue." Then it ordered that " all parents and masters shall cause their respective children and servants, as they are capable, to be taught to read distinctly the English tongue." To enforce this order, the grand jury was required to visit families suspected of evading the law, such visits to be made once a year, and evasions to be reported by the jury to the "next county court where the said masters or servants shall be fined 20 shillings for each child or servant." The word- ing seems a little ambiguous. Probably the fine was levied upon the master rather than upon the servant, if by servant is meant the equivalent of apprentice. The unique part of the law re- ferred to the maintenance of two free schools, ©ne at Hartford, and one at New Haven. The masters were to be chosen by the magistrates and ministers of the two counties, and given an annual salary of sixty pounds. The sixty pounds were to come from three sources: (1) thirty pounds from the county treasury; (2) part of the balance, or all, from gifts or bequests; (3) any remaining balance to be paid by the towns. No mention is made of tuition, or anything that could reasonably be interpreted to be tuition. 1 1 "This Court considering the necessity and great advantage of good litera- ture, doe order and appoint that there shall be two free schooles kept and mayntayned in this Colony, for the teaching of such children as shall come there, after they can first read the psalter, to teach such reading, writeing, arithmetick, the Lattin and Greek tongues, the one at Hartford, the other at New Haven the masters whereof shall be chosen by the magistrates and ministers of the said county, and shall be inspected and again displaced by them if they see cause, and that each of the said masters shall have annually for the same the sum of sixty pounds in the county pay, thirty pounds of it to be paid out of the county treasury, the other thirty to be paid in the school revenue by perticuler persons, or to be given to that use, so far as it will extend, and the rest to be payd by the respective townes of Hartford and New Haven.' ' (Conn. Col. Rec, IV: 30-31) 2 6 Development of Free Schools in the United States At the time of the enactment of this early free school law, towns were given permission to keep "the townes schooles in the several townes, as distinct from the free school," six months in each year. (Conn. Col. Rec, IV: 30-31) In May, 1691, one John Burr tried to get the court to extend the free school order to the other two county towns, but failed. However, two years later, the court did extend the order, but gave each twenty pounds instead of thirty pounds. (Ibid., IV: 50, 97) In October, 1700, a new law was enacted. The four county towns were required to maintain grammar schools, towns of seventy families, a reading and writing school "constantly — from year to year," and towns having less than seventy families, to keep such a school one-half year. The law established a colony rate (tax) of forty shillings upon the thousand pounds valuation to help support these schools. In towns where this would be insufficient, the support was to be increased by income from be- quests, if any had been made for school support, "and for want thereof, the one half to be paid by the town and the other by the children that goe to school unlesse any town agree otherwise." (Ibid., IV: 330-332) The two types of school support men- tioned, state tax and tuition, were destined to play important rdles in the later educational history of the state. In May, 1702, this law was slightly strengthened to insure collection and use of the forty-shilling tax. By 1711, it was evident that it was no easy task to collect this tax. That year, it was distribu- ted to the towns in " bills of credit, two-thirds that sum in money." (Ibid., V: 214) Next year, it was ordered that this money be distributed to parishes where such existed. In 1754, after fifty-four years, due to war expenditures, this tax was reduced to ten shillings. In 1766, it was raised to twenty shillings, and a year later restored to forty. In 1700, the tax valuation of the colony was 395,000 pounds. A forty-shilling tax would produce 790 pounds, but 800 is probably a fair estimate of the actual in- come. This money was re-distributed to each community in the same proportion as it had been collected. Reference has been made to the gradual division of the towns into parishes. In 1717, "every society or parish" was obliged to keep a school, and given power to levy taxes for schools. (Ibid., VI: 10) During the first half of the eighteenth century, the growth of parishes, or ecclesiastical societies, and the increase Connecticut 7 of powers granted to these local units, were both very rapid. Much legislation from 1700 to 1725 concerns this change. In 1723, the colony treasurer was ordered to distribute the colony school money to the parishes. (Ibid., I: 400) Neck and Nahan- tic societies of New London asked for full control of their schools, and their petition was granted. The West School Society of New London was divided into two distinct school societies in 1743. In 1766, power was given to each society and town "to divide themselves into proper and necessary districts for keeping their schools, and to alter and regulate the same from time to time." (Clews, 105, 108, 109) Several bequests for school support were made. An early example was the bequest of Robert Bartlett to the town of New London. (Conn. Col. Rec, V: 378) The bequest of Edward Hopkins is the most important example. Hopkins, at one time governor of the colony, left a portion of his estate in the hands of certain trustees "for the breeding up of hopeful youths both at the grammar school and the college." Considerable difficulty was encountered in administering this part of the Hopkins will, but finally the portion left for the aforesaid purpose was divided among Hartford, New Haven, Hadley (Massachusetts), and Harvard College. Grammar schools developed from the en- dowment for the first three named places. Barnard said that "these schools under many forms of administration have always been maintained — much of the time as free, and always as pub- lic schools." (Conn. Rept., 1853, 16) In 1738, a bequest of lands was left to Middletown for educational purposes. (Clews, 104) In 1743, twenty-five acres of land escheating to the colony by the death of one intestate were given for the use of a school in the parish of Wintonbury. (Clews, 108) Another development of school support occurred in 1733-1741. A legislative committee had been considering what should be done with lands in the western part of the colony, which were claimed by other sections of the colony. In 1733, this committee recommended that the lands in seven new townships be sold, and that the proceeds be set aside forever for the support of the schools and the ministry. In the course of time, the lands were sold, and the proceeds divided among the school societies and towns, to be used for schools. Societies were to be held account- able for this money by the towns, and the towns by the General 8 Development of Free Schools in the United States Court. In 1761, the proceeds from the sales of lands in Norfolk township were used similarly. (Clews, 104f.) School support in colonial Connecticut was of many kinds. Following is a list of combinations of types of school support shown in previous pages, the year indicating the time of record: 1. Tuition paid by parents, that for indigents paid by town. (1643) 2. Tuition, rate (tax), and use of house and land. (1653) 3. Appropriation from town treasury. (1641) 4. Voluntary contributions. (1644) 5. Tuition and appropriation from town treasury. (1652) 6. Town rate (tax) and tuition. (1657) 7. Tuition, or as the townsmen might choose to provide. (1650) 8. Land grants. (1672) 9. Rate, or as town might choose to provide. (1767) 10. Distribution of surplus from colony treasury. (1686) 11. Colony grants of money, private gifts, and rate (tax). (1690) 12. Colony tax, private gifts, town appropriation, and tuition. (1700) 13. Bequests. 14. Money from sale of public lands. (1741) Tuition, local rate (tax), and colony tax were the most common types of school support. Taxation for schools was at first a local matter. In 1666, the colony made land grants for schools, and in 1700 established the forty-shilling school tax for the whole colony. Evidence shows that it was a common practice to exempt children of indigent parents from payment of tuition charges, and that such tuition was actually paid from the town treas- ury. New Haven (1643) is a very early example. Some schools seem to have been entirely free. The administration of education in Connecticut, from 1634 to 1776, centers about four units of control. First, the town had control of education. Second, as the General Court came into existence, it assumed a general control over education. This is well shown by the code of 1650 and its later amendments. Third, there appeared a unit known as the society, first as the ecclesiastical society, and later simply school society. It might be co-extensive with a town, it might be a part of a town, or it Connecticut 9 might include parts of two or more towns. The district was the smallest local unit of school control. The district and society were together recognized by law of, 1766 authorizing societies to divide themselves into districts. Essentially, the change in control of education was from town and colony to district and colony, or, as we would say, it was decentralization. A similar change occurred in church government. (Conn. Col. Rec, 1:3; VII: 107; VIII: 522; XI: 54; XII-XIII) The administrative agencies concerned with education were the General Court, the town meeting, the selectmen, the local ministers, constables and collectors. As societies and districts de- veloped, society and district committees appeared to administer the schools. The General Court and town meeting legislated about education. The selectmen and other local officials exer- cised functions more administrative, and less legislative. Em- ploying teachers, determining location of schools, salary, collect- ing school money and expending it, are typical functions of the local officials. The types of school support and the modes of administering them, the movement to decentralization, methods of adminis- tration of schools, and types of officials are of importance in the consideration of the educational changes of the following period when schools became actually free. All of the machinery of administering education depended upon another factor which must be mentioned. This was the belief that all persons should have an elementary education of some sort, and be trained to some vocation. If the person were from the poor, a manual vocation was demanded, while the well- to-do deemed the ministry, or teaching, or business as the proper vocations for their children. This belief in the need of an ele- mentary education was based partly upon religious reasons dating from the Protestant Revolution. Lastly, as a result of this belief, there was a continual insistence that schools should be provided in each and every community in the colony. The code of 1650 makes this very explicit. It also appears in the colony laws of 1676, 1678, 1690, 1700, 1712, 1714, 1715, 1717, and 1750. The belief in the universal need of an elementary education, and the demand that school facilities should be sup- plied are basic to the free school of to-day. GENERAL SOCIAL CHANGES FROM COLONIAL PERIOD TO 1870 From 1776 to 1787, Connecticut was concerned with the war with England, and the establishment of stable government in the state and nation. Connecticut seems to have been very loyal to the colonists' cause in the Revolution. Two raids by British armies caused sections of the state much suffering. Under the Articles of Confederation, the state was burdened with import duties levied by other states on Connecticut products, had its share of trouble with a depreciated currency, and soon saw the necessity of a real national government. The dele- gates from Connecticut played a very important role in the Con- stitutional Convention in the compromise about representation in the national congress. During the War of 1812, the attitude of the state brought it only ill-repute, but the part played during the Civil War atoned for past mistakes. From 1800 to 1870, changes came more rapidly. Intellectually, some advancement was made. A few leaders appeared, usually teachers, or college administrators. Publications increased. As early as 1850, there were forty-six periodicals of all sorts. (U. S. Census, 1850) In matters of religion, the division into sects be- gun in an earlier period continued, and some of the original denominations made great increases. The number of churches for the different sects, as shown by the census of 1850, was as follows: Baptists, 114; Congregational, 252; Episcopal, 101; Presbyterian, 17; Catholic, 12; Unitarian, 5; Quakers, 5; Chris- tian, 4; Union, 4; miscellaneous, 3. This division of creeds made it quite impossible for an agreement upon an apportionment of school funds for religious teaching, or upon giving religious in- struction in public schools. Slavery had practically disappeared by 1840. (See Appendix, Table I) The attempt of Miss Crandall to establish a school for negroes in Connecticut, her consequent ostracism and persecution, show that plenty of anti-negro senti- ment yet existed. (See Johnston, Connecticut) In 1850, 90 per cent, of the state's population had been born in that state. This helped to perpetuate many of the old traditions, foibles, 10 Connecticut 1 1 and peculiarities. By 1870, illiteracy centered in the foreign element of the population. The percentage of children of school age was gradually decreasing, showing that the average size of the family was also decreasing. (Table I, Appendix) During this period, the industries shifted from a dominance in agricul- tural to a dominance in manufacturing. (Ibid.) This increased the problems of child labor, truancy, and woman labor, and caused a continuous growth of cities. In thirty years (1840-1870), the total population increased 73 per cent. This produced a demand for school facilities which the income from the School Fund and the Town Deposit Fund could not supply. SOME LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES IN EDUCATION, 1787-1870 In evolving a school supported without use of rate-bills, the financial and administrative conditions of education assumed great importance. This being so, the general, legislative and administrative conditions will be described, and then the finan- cial growth will be outlined. Before 1800, several changes were made which should be noted. The first was the school law of 1784. By this the "Act for the Education and Governing of Children remains the same as in the revision of 1702; and the Act for the Appointing, Encourag- ing, and Supporting of Schools embodies the various provisions which have been enacted since the revision of 1750." County towns were each to have a grammar school. Towns and societies of seventy families were each to have a reading and writing school. The forty-shilling tax upon the thousand pounds valuation was retained. Inspection of schools was intrusted to the civil authority and to the selectmen. The selectmen, or a special committee, had the duty of financial management of the schools. The movement toward decentralization of control continued. In May, 1794, school districts were authorized to tax themselves for the construction of schoolhouses, with the sanction of two- thirds of the voters. (Laws of Conn., 1796, 375) In 1795, a law referred to societies as "school societies." In May, 1798, these school societies were granted powers which enabled them to organize as school districts. As Barnard said, by this law the society and district entirely supplanted the town as units of local school control. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 110-111) The society was sometimes co-extensive with the town, but more often it was not. Having its origin in the earlier church government, it now became a hybrid — ecclesiastical and civil. The general law was reenacted in 1799, and gives in lengthy detail the powers and duties of societies as school units. It continually refers to them as school societies. The powers included were as follows: Hold society meetings, levy school taxes, divide society into school districts, see that each school is supplied with a teacher, appoint 12 Connecticut 13 school committee and school visitors, establish schools of a "higher order" than elementary schools, receive and expend state school tax, erect schoolhouses, collect and administer other types of school support. (Barnard, Am. Jour, of Education, V: 116-119. Conn. Rept., 1853, 142-145) A provision enacted in 1801 states that whenever the aggregate "expense of paying and boarding instructors in schools in any society . . . shall equal or exceed the school monies of the society, provided by the State for the same year, such school society shall be considered as having fully accounted for such monies, although any one or more of the districts in such school society shall not have kept a school within the year" . . . "and to draw such school society's money for the next year following." (Laws of 1808, 587) In fewer words, this was equivalent to saying that if a society expended the state school money that was all that was required; it would not be of great moment if schools were not maintained. This was an extreme form of decentralization. Districts continued to secure additional powers. In the law of 1799, the districts were given power to levy taxes for erection of schoolhouses. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 145) In the statutes of Connecticut for 1835, the powers of districts are enumerated and are very similar to those of societies in the law of 1801. In 1839, the district was made a body corporate, and some other powers added to those listed in the law of 1835. (Laws, 1835, 460-467. Laws, 1839, 304) By 1801, the society had become one of the local units of school control, and by this law of 1839, the small district became the unit of school administration. In 1845, there were about 1,600 districts, covering 4,900 square miles, or the average size of a district was three square miles. This unit was very small in area, but had powers that overlapped those of the society. The town had very little power over schools. By the school laws in force in 1853, the district still retained the same powers. That year there were 1,642 districts. (Conn. Rept., 1853, Appendix, 8-11, 49) In 1853, there were 217 school societies. Thirty-one of these had boundaries co-extensive with the towns in which they were situated, 131 included but parts of the towns in which they were located, and 55 included two or more towns. The law of 1853 defines the school society as follows : 14 Development of Free Schools in the United States "Every school society, established as such by the general assembly, and the inhabitants living within the limits of any ecclesiastical society, incor- porated with local limits, or such proportions of the same as have not been specially incorporated, shall constitute a school society, and as such shall be a body corporate. ..." There were 148 towns in Connecticut in 1853. Their educational functions were restricted to those described under "An Act con- cerning Domestic Relations" which placed incorrigible children, and matters of regulation of child labor, in the control of the town. Selectmen had power to place such children out as apprentices. This peculiar arrangement of local units of school control continued until 1856 when school societies were abolished, and their functions given over to towns and districts in towns. Union school districts were exempted from town control. In 1856, there were 153 towns, 222 societies, and 1,626 districts. Thus the law abolishing societies was one of simplification, and as far as the powers were returned to the towns, one of centrali- zation. In fact, most of the powers of school administration were left in the districts, but they now became districts in towns instead of districts in societies. In 1867, a consolidation law for towns was enacted which read as follows: "Every town in this State may at any annual meeting, assume and hence- forth maintain control of the common schools within its limits . . . ; and for this purpose every town shall constitute a Union school district, having all the powers and duties of a school district as now constituted by law . . . " This provided a way for the gradual elimination of small districts, but it had little influence. Actual administration of schools by the towns did not begin again until the decade of 1890-1900. (See Willson, Town Management of Schools in Connecticut) Reference has been made to union school districts. They had their origin in urban localities and manufacturing centers which demanded more and more local self-government. At first, special laws granted these communities powers of municipalities. Then general laws met their demands. They also demanded more control over their schools. In 1839, Hartford, New Haven, and Norwich, actuated by mechanics associations, petitioned that power be granted the districts to tax themselves, and it was al- lowed to these three communities. (Brown, Middle Schools, 315) In 1841, a general law provided that "two or more adjoining dis- Connecticut 15 tricts might associate together and form a union district with power to maintain a union school, to be kept for the benefit of the older and more advanced children in such district." (Conn. Rept., 1872, III) The law abolishing societies exempted such districts. The same privilege was extended to towns by the law of 1867, described above. By 1870, local school control was exercised by towns, districts, and union districts. Thus far, changes have been noted in local educational admin- istration. Some should be considered that refer to state admin- istration. In 1784, the state was levying a tax of forty shillings on the thousand pounds, for schools. This was distributed to schools through towns and societies, and later through districts and societies, and finally through districts. The state also de- manded that all towns and societies of seventy families maintain reading and writing schools. The state retained the general law regulating apprenticeship and control of the poor. Growing out of the sale of the lands in the Western Reserve, the School Fund was established in 1795, the first of its kind in the United States, and one destined to have much influence in the educational development of Connecticut. The state tax continued until 1821, when it was abolished, and the income from the fund was supposed to take its place. When the United States distributed the surplus revenue in 1836-1837, Connecticut placed its share in the hands of the towns, and required that a part of the income, later all of the income, should be used for school support. In 1837, the state began for the first time to require school visitors to make annual reports to the society committee about the conditions of the schools. About the same time, the legis- lature made an investigation of the schools, which revealed many of their weaknesses. In 1838, the Board of Commissioners of Common Schools was created, largely as the result of the inves- tigation and the work of Henry Barnard. This board was com- posed of the governor, commissioner of the school fund, and eight other persons appointed annually by the governor, one from each county. The board was authorized to employ a secretary at a salary of three dollars per day who should be the executive officer of the board, and who should spend most of his time arous- ing the people to the needs of the schools and advising locali- ties as to changes needed in their schools. For the first time 16 Development of Free Schools in the United States societies were required to make an annual report to the state of the condition of the schools, the reports being made to the new board. Henry Barnard was chosen as the first secretary of the board. Under this law, Barnard began his career as an educational official in Connecticut. In spite of a great tendency to indiffer- ence and conservatism, he secured the passage of a law to better schools. His activity and the changes proposed seemed too radi- cal, and in 1842 the board and the office of secretary were abol- ished. No official was provided to take over these duties until 1845, when a new law made the School Fund commissioner ex- officio superintendent of common schools. Accordingly, Seth P. Beers began to give some attention to the work begun by Bar- nard. (Conn. Rept., 1846, 13, 16; 1872, III) In 1848, the legis- lature directed the superintendent "to employ suitable persons to hold, at not more than sixteen convenient places in the different counties of the State, . . . schools for teachers not exceed- ing one week each ..." (Conn. Rept., 1849, 30) In June, 1849, a new law created the combination office of principal of the normal school and superintendent of common schools. (Ibid., 1850, 83) Henry Barnard was elected to this position. The report issued by Barnard in 1851 reveals a very comprehen- sive plan for educational betterment. On January 1, 1855, Barnard resigned and was succeeded by John D. Philbrick. Philbrick took an active part in the movement for improvement, but left the work January 6, 1857, and was followed by David N. Camp who held the office until 1865. During the administra- tion of Philbrick, some of the improvements previously advocated were enacted into law by the inclusive school code of 1856. Camp was active and earnest in the work of the office. In July, 1865, the legislature created a state board of education com- posed of the governor, lieutenant-governor, and four other persons to be selected by the legislature, one from each congres- sional district in the state. This new board of education had all the powers of the old board of commissioners of common schools and some in addition. It was authorized to employ a secretary whose duties should be the same as those of the super- intendent of common schools. (Conn. Rept., 1866-1867, 153-154) At the first meeting of the board the combination office of prin- cipal of the normal school and superintendent was divided. Connecticut 17 Mr. Camp was made principal and Daniel C. Gilman, secretary. Though Mr. Gilman held this office but one year, his report and his work were of considerable value to the state., In January, 1867, he was followed by the Rev. Birdsley Grant Northrop, who continued in office until 1883, and who was the successful leader of the campaign to abolish rate-bills. While Philbrick was superintendent he employed three per- sons to travel throughout the state and lecture and advise on educational questions. Reaching almost every society in the state, their work had considerable influence. The state managed the School Fund as follows: (1) it was under the care of the original legislative committee that negotiated the sale of the lands of the Western Reserve; (2) in 1800, a board of four managers was created for this purpose; (3) due to some evidences of inefficient management, the entire control of the School Fund was placed in the hands of a commissioner of the School Fund in 1810. This office continued during the entire period in consideration. Part of the time, an assistant com- missioner helped with the work. Under this type of manage- ment, Mr. Hillhouse, the first commissioner, converted the fund into a growing, productive source of school support. Some occasional laws referring to Yale College and those about the State Normal School complete the most important changes in the state educational administration during the years 1800-1870. Until 1865-1870, the state had assumed but very slight control over education. Penalties could be imposed for non-performance of duty by local officers, but records of such punishment are rare. Local control granted by state laws was predominant. FINANCIAL CONDITIONS CONCERNED WITH EDUCATION, 1780-1870 The support of public schools during this period was derived from the following sources: (1) the State School Fund; (2) the Town Deposit Fund; (3) local funds; (4) the town tax; (5) taxa- tion by societies; (6) district taxation; (7) tuition and rate-bills; (8) various minor and relatively unimportant sources. At the beginning of this period the state levied a tax of forty shillings- on the thousand pounds valuation for school support. Some com- munities had local funds, the income of which helped in school maintenance. Towns and societies could levy school taxes. By 1794, the school district began to secure taxing powers. The partial support of schools by tuition charges was more or less a matter of custom. The State School Fund The most important financial change, immediately following the Revolution, was the establishment of the School Fund, the first of its kind in the United States. Under charter grants, Connecticut claimed land that was included within the present, boundaries of other states. When the original states ceded their claims to western lands to the United States government, Connec- ticut did likewise but made a reservation of land in what is now northeastern Ohio. About 500,000 acres of this land were given by Connecticut to citizens of the state who suffered from British raids during the Revolution. The remainder, about 3,300,000 acres, was sold to fifty persons for sums varying from $1,683 to $168,185, the total amounting to $1,200,000. It was first proposed to use this money to form a permanent endowment for the support of the clergy; later, to support the clergy and the schools. The legislative and public discussions- about the disposal of this money revealed a very strong tendency against the use of public funds to support the ministry. By act of the May session, 1795, this sum was set aside "and the interest arising therefrom shall be, and hereby is appropriated to the support of schools. ..." It was further provided that 18 Connecticut 19 if a society by a two-thirds vote of its members asked to use the money for support of the church, the legislature had power to grant the petition of such society. The distribution of the inter- est was to be to the societies "in their capacity of school societies, according to the list of polls and rateable estate of such societies respectively," that is, upon a tax valuation basis. (Barnard, Am. Jour. Education, 6: 367. Also Conn. Rept., 1853, 55-109) The following changes were made in 1799: (1) The school committee of each society was required to certify to the state that they had maintained schools according to the law and that the "monies drawn from the public treasury by said society for said year, appropriated to schooling, have been faithfully applied and expended in paying and boarding instructors"; (2) in case of misuse of this money, the state controller was required to recover the money by suit at law; (3) a penalty of sixty dollars could be levied on any society that issued a false certificate of legal school conditions; (4) societies could establish "schools of higher order" (Latin grammar schools) and could use this money to help support them. The interest accumulated until Mar8h, 1799, when the first dividend of $60,403.78 was distributed to the school societies. In March, 1800, the dividend was $23,651. The total population of the state was 251,002, and if 20 per cent, were of school age, the money would have equalled about one dollar per child. A school of thirty children would have received thirty dollars from this income and money from the state tax. Together, these sums would maintain a school several months, without taxes or tuition, if wages were as low as when we first get records of them. The general plans of managing the State School Fund have been described. Before Mr. Hillhouse became commissioner of the School Fund, in 1810, a total of $456,757.44, or an average of $35,135.18 per annum, had been distributed among the school societies. During the fifteen years of the administration of Mr. Hillhouse, the annual dividend averaged $52,061.35, and the capital was augmented to $1,719,434.24. The loans of the capital were placed upon a safe basis, and many loans of questionable nature made before his term began were converted into sound investments. (Am. Jour. Education, 6: 325-366; 421-242. Also, Conn. Rept., 1853, 146) In 1810 the total population was 262,042, and in 1820 the school population was 30.59 per cent, of 20 Development of Free Schools in the United States the total population. (Table I, Appendix) If the school popu- lation consisted of but 20 per cent, of the total population in 1810, there would have been 52,408 children of school age. Again, the pro rata amount per child would have been about the same as in 1800, and this income with the state school tax would make practically unnecessary any local school tax. Yet it is possible that these two sources were insufficient to maintain schools, for we know that a law enacted in 1810 provided that a district might use tuition to help support a school, if found necessary after expending the income from the two sources mentioned. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 147) The constitution adopted by Connecticut in 1818 includes a provision about the School Fund, a portion of which is given: "The fund, called the School Fund, shall remain a perpetual fund, the interest of which shall be inviolably appropriated to the support and encour- agement of the public or common schools throughout the State, and for the equal benefit of all people thereof. . . . and no law shall ever be made authorizing said fund to be diverted to any other use than the encouragement and support of common schools, among the several school societies, as justice and equity Bhall require." (Ibid., 147) The wording "and for the equal benefit of the people thereof" reveals the original conception of the use of such funds. They were not to equalize burdens, and thereby equalize opportunities. But the words "as justice and equity shall require" gave a chance for a better interpretation. Cubberley would have the income from such a fund so distributed that it would " tend to best equalize the burdens and the advantages of education throughout the State." (State and County Education Reorganization, 9) Comparing this statement with the wording "as justice and equity shall require, " it seems that the aims of the two are identi- cal. It would seem, then, that as early as 1818, Connecticut had a constitutional basis for the establishment of the very best mode of distribution of its School Fund income. A rough estimate shows that the income from the School Fund, together with the state tax, made unnecessary much taxation for schools in districts. The people and the legislature evidently felt that the fund alone was enough, for by a law of 1820 it was provided that as soon as the income from the fund reached $62,000 per year, the state tax for schools should be discontinued. The income reached the amount named in 1821, and that year the Connecticut 21 state tax for schools, in existence since colonial times, was dis- continued. In 1820, the school population was 30.59 per cent, of the total population, or 84,184. (Table I, Appendix) Thus the income from the fund would amount to about seventy-five cents per child. Many children of school age were not attending school. In a district enumerating forty children of school age, an income of thirty dollars would be received from the fund. It would be possible, under such conditions, to employ a teacher for three or four months. A writer in the North American Review is quoted by Barnard to the effect that "the public money affords the requisite aliment, " and no obligation rested upon districts or societies to increase school support. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 149) In 1828, Governor Tomlinson said that there was "too much reason to conclude that the liberal endowment of common schools" had caused a relaxation in efforts to keep the schools in good con- dition. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 154) A legislative committee of the same year stated that they were "fully aware that the strong reliance upon annual aid derived from the School Fund" was accompanied by lack of exertion in school districts and societies. (Ibid., 155) About 1828-1830, there began to be some evidences in Connec- ticut of that movement known as the "Educational Revival." Some statements of persons connected with this movement are of significance. The Hon. Roger M. Sherman, writing in 1828 to the members of a New Jersey voluntary association for the improvement of schools, declared that the School Fund income should be distributed to such communities as raise a like amount of money for schools. 1 This is one of the first public expressions of sound principles of apportionment of state school support in Connecticut. The president of Brown University and the chair- 1 "Requiring of the recipients of the public bounty nothing more than it be expended according to the provisions of the law, is an obvious defect in the system. ... A sum proportioned to the amount received from the State, ought to be advanced for the same objects, by all to whom it is distributed excepting the indigent. A public fund for the instruction of youth in common schools, is of no comparative worth as a means of relieving want. A higher value would consist in its being made an instrument for exciting general exertion, for the attainment of that important end. In proportion as it excites and fosters a salutary zeal, it is a public blessing. It may have on any other prin- ciple of application, a contrary tendency, and become worse than useless. They would willingly pay seventy thousand dollars more, if made a condition of receiving the State bounty, and thus the amount would be doubled, for an ■object in which they would feel they had some concern." (Conn. Rept., 1853, 155-156) 3 22 Development of Free Schools in the United States man of the association just referred to both declared that the administration of the income of the Connecticut fund had pro- duced injury to the school system. From New York, Massa- chusetts, and Kentucky came expressions of similar nature. (Ibid., 156-160) Sherman's suggestion included the idea of support by tuition and rate-bills. At a convention of teachers and others, interested in education, held at Hartford in November, 1830, the president of Amherst College declared that the schools had declined because many communities had placed entire dependence upon the School Fund income for school support, and suggested a plan similar to that described by Sherman. 1 The next year, the governor urged an investigation of the effects of the School Fund, and recom- mended a district tax of one cent on the dollar. (Ibid., 163) Thus far, the history of the fund seems to show that it actually weakened school support and fostered a lack of interest in schools. The method of distributing this income may show causes for such influence. When first established, the income was apportioned upon the tax valuation basis. Later, it was changed to the school enumeration basis, the ages included being four to sixteen years. Until 1856, this money was paid over to societies upon receipt from the societies of certificates to the effect that they had main- tained schools for at least four months in the year, that only legally certified teachers had been employed, that schools had been visited (inspected) according to law, and that all money from the state treasury had been used in payment of teachers' salaries. Penalty for non-compliance was the forfeiture of School Fund income. False certification of legal school con- ditions incurred a liability previously mentioned. (Ibid., Ap- pendix, II : 13) When a society received this money, it might use a different mode of apportioning it to the districts, but it could not legally grant any of the money to a district having less than twelve children of school age, or to a district that had failed to maintain legal school conditions. Such money might be appor- 1 "Let your enlightened Legislature, after the example of the State of New York, pass a law, requiring every town to raise a sum for the support of com- mon schools, equal at least to what it draws from the public treasury. Such a law, I have no doubt, would work wonders. It would wake up an interest which is now unfelt. It would make parents everywhere feel that they have something to do. It would enable districts to offer liberal wages, and to con- tinue their respective schools much longer than is now necessary. In this way the public funds might become a great public blessing." (Conn. Rept.. 1855, 161-163) Connecticut 23 tioned upon the enumeration basis, or upon the "number of persons who shall have attended the common school, or schools in said district during the year preceding." As worded, this latter mode was really but little more than an enumeration basis. Each district was to receive at least thirty-five dollars. (Ibid., 13) In 1852, the state also took into consideration this minimum grant of thirty-five dollars in making its apportionment to the societies. Two dividends had been made each year, but begin- ning with 1852 one was made. In actual practice societies dis- tributed the money upon the enumeration basis, but in 1854, the society of Thompson apportioned "according to the actual attendance . . . with the most satisfactory results." In 1855, the superintendent strongly recommended the average attendance basis. (Ibid., 1855, 22) The actual effect of the minimum grant of thirty-five dollars per district was to encourage the erection of small districts when a faction in a society became dissatisfied with school conditions. (Ibid., 1855, 24) In 1855, there were forty-five districts having less than twelve children of school age, and in spite of this they received School Fund money upon the enumeration basis. A year later the limitation concerning twelve children was abolished, and all districts were to receive at least thirty-five dollars. (Conn. Rept., 1860, 34-37) With the abolition of the societies in 1856, the apportionment of this money to the districts reverted to the towns, but they could do no better than the societies. In 1868, the secretary showed that districts could not longer depend upon the fund as the sole source of school support, because "as the number of children increases, the amount per child constantly diminishes." (Rept., 152) During this period the commissioners of the School Fund suggested almost every possible single basis for distribution of the money. None, however, devised or suggested a combination basis, although for a part of the period the state was actually using a sort of combination basis upon which it distributed the school money. The record of the investment of the fund shows an astonishing care for the fund and most successful management in that respect. But as an agency to improve schools, it failed almost entirely for a part of the period, and for the balance it did not have the stimulating influence that it was possible for it to have. It is very probable that it served to keep schools of some 24 Development of Free Schools in the United States sort in session for a required number of months, and that to some degree it secured better qualified teachers. But little evidence exists to show such results, and record of continual complaint of the evil effect of the fund does exist. (See Appendix for statistical record of fund) The Town Deposit Fund The School Fund was created in 1795-1796. The Town Deposit Fund had its beginning in 1836. The Congress of the United States, in 1835-1836, considered the finances of the country in a flourishing condition. The national debt had been paid and the treasury contained a surplus. On June 23, 1836, Congress enacted a law whereby all the money in the United States Treasury, except a reserve of $5,000,000, was to be de- posited on the first day of January, 1837, with the several states in proportion to the combined number of senators and representa- tives in any state. There were 52 senators and 242 representa- tives in Congress. Connecticut was represented by eight men in this group and hence would have received eight two-hundred- ninety-fourths of the total amount deposited. The total of this would have been a little over a million dollars. The distribution was to be made in four installments — on the first days of Jan- uary, April, July, and October, 1837; but after three had been made, the panic of 1837 caused Congress to withhold payment of the last share until 1839. In fact it has never been paid. By this distribution Connecticut received $764,670.60. The money could be legally recalled by the United States government. The state legislature, in December, 1836, enacted the following law concerning the use of this money: "The money which shall thus be received from the United States, . . . shall be deposited with the several towns in this State, in proportion to their respective populations, as ascertained by the last census (1830), . . . and shall be repaid into the State treasury whenever payment thereof shall be required by an act of the General Assembly, or by proclamation of the person administering the office of Governor, for the purpose of being paid into the treasury of the United States." The towns were required to meet other conditions in order to receive this money: "First, that such town keep and preserve the money as a deposit, and in trust for the State. Secondly, that it appropriate at least one-half of the entire income or interest thereof, annually for the promotion of education in Connecticut 25 the common schools in such town, . . . and the remainder for the pur- pose of defraying the ordinary expenses of such town. Thirdly, that it make good each and every deficiency in the amount received, should any loss occur through mismanagement or other cause. Fourthly, that it repay into the State treasury the whole amount received therefrom of said money, or such part thereof as may be required, whenever the same shall be called for in the manner specified in this Act. " Nineteen years later (1855), this law was modified so as to re- quire that the entire income be expended for public schools. 1 By the act of 1836, the selectmen could borrow the money at a very nominal rate of interest, and they made use of their chance, In some cases, the rate was but one per cent. Such conditions existed with legal sanction for twenty-nine years. Finally, in 1859, to stop such outrages against the school children of the state, the legislature enacted a law which made the following requirements: (1) the towns might prescribe terms of loans from this fund, except that the rate of interest must not be less than six per cent. ; (2) towns which had previously loaned this money at less than six per cent, were required to re-loan it at the legal rate prescribed; (3) in any case, they must turn over to school support a net income of six per cent, from this fund. (Conn. Rept., 1864, 49-50) In spite of legal regulations, this fund was mismanaged. The state exercised no supervision over it, and many local commu- nities actually used the capital and left nothing but an obligation to pay six per cent, upon this amount for school support. The 1 The status of this fund, as reported by the superintendent, the secretary of state, and state board of education, is shown, year by year, in the following: Year Amount for Year Amount for School Support School Support 1847 $53441.00 1862 $45819.00 1853 25000.00 1863 45819.00 1854 25000.00 1864 45819.00 1855 50000.00 1865 45819.75 1857 35000.00 1866 47951.72 1858 45819.00 1867 44979.34 1859 45819.00 1868 43983.75 1860 45819.00 1869 44883.94 1861 45819.00 These figures are only approximations. The amount for 1857 is given as $48242.00 in the Connecticut Report for 1858, p. 182. The amount reported annually from 1858 to 1865 is estimated upon the basis of the supposed amount of the fund in existence and the income on this at 6 per cent, as was required by law. After 1865, the amount indicated is that which the secretary of the state board stated was actually reported to him. 26 Development of Free Schools in the United States Connecticut School Report for 1888 (134-147) contains the following commentary upon the management of this fund: "... in 1887 the ostensible amount of this fund was 8753,326.87. Of this amount about five-sevenths has been borrowed from this fund by the towns, or in other words, they have misappropriated it to their own use. They have not put themselves in the position of borrowers, but they have taken the fund, regarding it as belonging to them. It cannot be found that the fund adds to the number of schools, or augments the appliances or the libraries; it does not add to the wages of good teachers, or promote good teaching, it does not increase attendance, or decrease illiteracy, or arouse any general or public interest in the schools themselves. " (Quoted in Steiner, Education in Connec- ticut, 43) So far as the influence of this fund on the development of free schools is concerned, it could have been, under a good manage- ment by the state, a means of furthering this desirable end. As it was, it is inconceivable that it should, in any way, stimulate a locality to taxation for schools — the first essential of a free school system. It is conceivable, however, that in certain localities this income, together with the income from the school fund, amounted to enough to maintain a legal school four months in a year without either taxation or rate-bills. Local Funds The origin of some of these funds has been indicated in the discussion about educational conditions of the colonial period. The Hopkins fund and the Bartlett bequest are two examples dating from that period. Some of these funds may have orig- inated, also, from the distribution among the eastern towns of proceeds from the sale of land in the western towns of the state, during the colonial period. The grants made for the four county grammar schools would be another possible source. In addition other bequests were left from time to time to support schools, e.g., the Staples fund of 1781. Other examples are: (1) A fund of $834.00 given by Isaac Coit of Plainfield about 1812 or 1816. The interest from this and tuition together constituted the sup- port of an academy at that village. (2) Bacon Academy of Colchester had a fund of $36,000 given by Mr. Bacon in 1803. (3) The Norwich Free Academy, originally endowed by sub- scriptions amounting to $76,000, $50,000 of which was perma- nent endowment, in 1890, had buildings and endowment amount- ing to about $400,000. (Steiner, Education in Connecticut, Connecticut 27 47-56) As most of these examples show, such funds were used to support or to help in supporting academies. Yet some of these gave elementary as well as secondary instruction. This was true of Bacon Academy and the Norwich Free Academy. The income from such funds, as reported by the secretary of the State Board of Education, is shown in the table following: Year Income Year Income 1856 $11327.00 1865 $13786.00 1857 11327.00 1866 ' 39782. 79 1 1858 17489.00 1867 38231. 59 1 1859 22815.00 1868 99981. 66 1 1860 15207.00 1869 95527. OO 1 1861 18873.00 1870 12300.34 1862 25584.00 1871 7920.77 1863 11696.00 1872 9627.23 1864 10403.00 These funds may have been indicative of the zeal of some prop- ertied people of Connecticut for the cause of education. Because they helped to maintain academies in the period of transition from Latin grammar schools to public high schools, they may have helped to keep alive an interest in secondary education. But so far as being free schools themselves, only one claimed to be — Norwich Free Academy — but even this institution charged some small fees. For practical purposes, it may, however, be con- sidered a free school. But it was not supported by taxation, nor is it so supported to-day. These funds seem quite comparable with some of the endowments of the English endowed schools. Back of them is no idea of stimulating a community to active interest in education, rather they are supposed to furnish the means of education as a free gift or nearly so — very much akin to charity. The existence of such schools would always be a bar to developing taxation for support. The theory back of such schools, even when really free, is at variance with taxation as a means of support. This is well shown in the case of the Norwich Free Academy. An address made at the dedication of the build- ing of the Norwich Free Academy reveals the ideas of the found- ers. The speaker, one of the leaders of the enterprise, questioned the value of supporting schools by taxation. This was the very first issue he raised. He contended that public opinion might be sufficient to support elementary schools by taxation, but that it include funds from "other sources." In 1869, income from local funds was $8919.15, and from ''other sources," $86,607.85. This would indicate a probable decrease in this source of support. 28 Development of Free Schools in the United States would not work for secondary schools. Again, an endowed school would not be subject to popular elections and changes in con- trol. The points at issue are similar in some respects to those in the Kalamazoo high school case. (See Appendix) Such ideas were widely enough considered to merit the attention of the Hon. George S. Bout well, secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education. He took issue with the advocates of such school support and openly favored public support. He further de- clared that such institutions could not meet future needs of a changing society, as well as one dependent on public support. (Brown, 318-319) While the Norwich institution does not seem to have caused the establishment of a line of endowed institutions, the theory of such a means of school support was opposed to public taxation. In so far as this was a part of the current opinion of the time, it must have helped to retard support by taxation. It should not be overlooked, however, that the very presence of such a high type of school and the instruction it gave worked an amount of good which far outweighed its injury to the development of free schools supported by taxation. The evidence concerning local funds does not show that they had very much influence in stimulating school support and in- terest in education or to have helped in securing free schools. Tuition and Rate-Bills The existence of tuition charges in Connecticut goes back to the beginning of the colony. The action of the Hartford town meet- ing in employing Mr. Andrews, already referred to, shows the recognition of tuition as early as 1643. In fact, this is one of the very earliest examples for this state. Clews (76) shows that in 1658 each child was to pay 8s. tuition in Wethersfield, and that in 1650 Stratford employed a schoolmaster and required parents of the children to pay one-half of the expense. In the Hartford action of 1643, not only was tuition charged, but the other im- portant part of rate-bill support, — the exemption of the poor from payment of tuition — was also present. Other examples occurred from time to time up to the Revolution, but no record has been found that the General Court ever established rate-bills as a means of school support. It did provide for tuition by the law of 1650 and its later amendments. There are examples of action of the Court by which certain poor people were exempted from payment of their colony rates. Connecticut 29 In the first general law after the Revolution, that of 1784, the earlier provisions of 1750 appeared without any mention of tuition or rate-bills. However, in the law of 1796 for schools, there appeared the following concerning school support: "That where in any town or society there is not a sufficiency of money or interest provided, in the manner aforesaid, or by charitable donations, or sequestrations, or in other ways procured for the maintenance of a school as aforesaid ... a sufficient maintenance shall be made up, one-half by the inhabitants of such town or society, and the other half thereof by the Parents or Masters of the youth or children that go to such school; unless any town or society shall agree otherwise; which they are hereby empowered to do." (Laws of Conn., 1796, 371-375) By this law, for the first time after the Revolution the state itself made optional and legal the use of tuition to add to school sup- port so that a school could be maintained longer than was pos- sible by the income of the school fund. It is probable that this law recognized an existing practice, for it had existed before the Revolution; yet no evidence has been found of the actual use of tuition in the period of 1790-1800. It has been claimed that a law enacted in 1810 was the first law to provide for tuition bills, which of course is an error, as this law of 1796 shows. In the codification of 1799, concerned with taxation and the school fund, no mention occurs of a provision like that of 1796. (Barn- ard, Conn. Rept., 185-193) In the codification published in 1805, the provision of 1796 is found intact. (Conn. Laws, 1805) Barnard states that "In 1810 the expense of keeping a district school over the amount of public money was apportioned among the . proprietors of the school according to the number of days each had sent a scholar or scholars to the schools, and in 1811 this was altered so as to authorize the apportionment according to the number of persons sent. 1 (Conn. Rept., 1853, 147) From an early time, it seems that each parent was expected to furnish his share of fuel for the heating of the schoolroom. In 1824, the following law was enacted: "That no child or children shall be denied the privilege of attending school in any school district established by law in this state, to which such child or children belong, for, or on account of the inability of parent or parents, guardian or master of such child or children, to supply his, her, or their proportion of Wood in such district — any law to the contrary notwithstanding. " 1 The writer has been unable to verify this statement. 30 Development of Free Schools in the United States This did not take from the district committee, however, the power to use due process of law to compel the furnishing of fuel or payment of fuel tax. (Laws of Conn., 1824, 46-47) The next tuition law — that of 1839 — is a true rate-bill law, the first one enacted by the state. One extension of the applica- tion of tuition was made. The district committee was empowered to see that pupils were supplied with books, and, if necessary, to furnish such books and assess the expense upon the parents or guardians of the children concerned. This law allowed a district to charge tuition for excess of school expense above the income from "monies appropriated by law." The tuition was to be charged in proportion to attendance of pupils. Contingent expenses other than salary could be included in these bills, but not to exceed a total of twenty dollars per year. Children unable to pay could not be excluded from school, and the tuition of such children would be paid by the town to the district, whenever the district committee and the town selectmen agreed upon the exemption of the pupil from the charge. All the machinery of rate-bills except the collection and blank forms used in collection of tuition was provided in this law. 1 It should be remembered that this law was enacted in the year when the school district became a corporate body with strong power. Before a new law was enacted opposition to the use of rate-bills had begun to appear. In 1856, as a part of a comprehen- 1 The important sections of this first general rate-bill law read as follows : "15. Whenever the expense of keeping a common school by a teacher duly qualified, shall exceed the amount of monies appropriated by law to defray the expense of such school, the committee in such district for the time being, may examine, adjust, and allow all bills of expense incurred for the support of said school, and assess the same upon the parents, guardians, and masters of such children as attended the same, according to the number and time sent by each. " " 16. Whenever the contingent expenses of any school district, arising from repairs of schoolhouses or its appendages, books, costs, damages, or any other source, shall not exceed the sum of $20 a year, the same may be included in the above assessment." "26. No child shall be excluded from any school supported in all or in part out of any money appropriated or raised by law for this purpose, in the district to which such child belongs, on account of the inability of the parent, guardian, or master of the same to pay his or her tax or assessment for any school purpose whatever; and the school committee of such district and the selectmen, or a majority of the same of the town or towns in which such district shall be located, shall constitute a Board with power to abate taxes and assessments of such persons as are unable to pay the same in all, or in part, and the said selectmen shall draw an order for the amount of such abatement upon the treasurer of the town in which such persons reside, in favor of said district. " (Barnard, Conn. Com. Sch. Jour., 195-196, Law of 1839) (Italics not in original.) Connecticut 31 sive codification of the school laws, a new rate-bill statute was enacted. Even though enacted after seventeen years of practice under the law of 1839, this law shows few changes. Rate-bills could be charged for tuition, fuel, books, etc., when the state money was insufficient. While the law would not permit use of rate-bills so long as there was state money to use, the prohibition was practically of no concern. No one thought of using such means, unless state money ran out too soon. The district com- mittee alone could exempt indigent persons from payment of these bills, while the law of 1839 required such exemptions to be made by a board composed of selectmen and district committee. In the law of 1839, no maximum tuition rate was fixed; by this law there were two maxima — one of one dollar per scholar for twelve weeks in common schools, and two dollars, for a like term, in "the higher grades. " A very important change was that "all such bills may be required in advance." This was a device which it was hoped would be used to stop the decrease in attendance as soon as public money gave out. 1 While this law was in force, many districts began taxation. The number for 1855 was 63; for 1857, 125; and for 1858, 245. Many districts desired a higher rate of tuition and many desired free schools. (Conn. Rept., 1860, 40-42) In the actual working of the law of 1856, it was soon found that the optional advance payment of tuition bills was not utilized. This caused trouble in payment of teachers' salaries, because the actual school support could not be determined until the tuition was collected. Two years later, a new rate-bill and tuition statute was enacted, with the purpose of remedying this condi- tion. By this law of 1858, tuition bills might be fixed "at or before the commencement of a term." The use of the terms 1 Chapter IV, sec. 13, of the law of 1856, read as follows: "Any school district may fix, or authorize its district committee to fix, a rate of tuition to be paid by the persons attending school, or by their parents, .guardians or employers, towards the expense of fuel, books and other expenses (including estimated deficiencies of payment) over and above the money re- ceived from the town or state appropriations, and the district or district com- mittee shall exempt therefrom all persons whom they consider unable to pay the same; provided, that the rate of tuition shall not exceed one dollar per ■scholar for any term of twelve weeks, except in districts where different grades of common schools are established where the rate for the higher grades shall not exceed two dollars per scholar for the same time. "All such bills may be required to be paid in advance, or may be delivered to the town or district collector, and may be by him collected in the same man- ner as town taxes are collected." 32 Development of Free Schools in the United States "may fix . . . the rate of tuition, " seemingly left it optional again. However, the state superintendent interpreted the provision as mandatory. This law soon produced confusion. Legally no district could use a rate-bill unless it was fixed "at or before" the beginning of a term. Many district committees through ignorance or carelessness failed to do so, and when they later made out such bills found them illegal, and hence very diffi- cult to collect. They were legally able to levy a tax to make up such deficiencies, but unwilling to do so. The mode of exempt- ing an indigent person was also changed. "The selectmen, or board of school visitors, as a board, shall, on application of the district committee, exempt therefrom all persons whom they consider unable to pay the same. " This placed final action in such matters with the towns, where it had partly been by the law of 1839. The maximum rates of tuition were also changed to two and four dollars respectively. 1 Of course a protest came up to the state capital from many districts and the law was changed in 1859. This law had but two changes in wording; otherwise it was identical with the law of 1858. The words "at or before the commencement of any term," and "including estimated deficiencies" were omitted. (Ibid., 41-42) This did not stop the difficulties. The following complaints were now presented by those aggrieved: (1) "By not requiring any particular time at which rate-bills shall be fixed, parents and guardians are uncertain in regard to the expense of sending to school, and often detain their children or wards at home on account of uncertainty in regard to the expense, or send to the private schools, to the great injury of the public schools"; (2) "There seems to be a strong desire in some portions of the state that the schools shall be either 1 In 1858, sec. 13, of the law of 1856 was replaced by sec. 1, ch. 43. "Any school district may fix, or authorize its district committee to fix, at or before the commencement of a term, a rate of tuition to be paid by the persons attending school, or by their parents, guardians, or employers ; towards the expense of instruction, fuel, books and other expenses (including estimated deficiencies of payment), over and above the money received from the town or State appropriations, and the selectmen or board of school visitors, as a board, shall on application of the district committee exempt therefrom all persons whom they consider unable to pay the same; and the selectmen shall draw an order on the treasurer of the town in which said district is located, in favor of such district, for the amount of such abatement; provided that the rate of tuition shall not exceed two dollars per scholar for any term of twelve weeks; ex- cept in districts where different grades of common schools are established, when the rate for the higher grates shall not exceed four dollars per scholar for the same time." (Conn. Rept., 1860, 41) (Italics not in original.) Connecticut 33 made free, or the rate of tuition fixed and known before the term of school begins"; (3) "In some cases, long after a term has been closed, districts have fixed a rate-bill when a majority of those attending school were unable to pay, and the districts have sought abatements and orders on the town treasury for the amount of these bills." {Ibid., 42) It took such experiences as these to convince people that they were trying to do an impossible thing. If they fixed a rate of tuition before the term, the attendance might be too small to bring in tuition enough to meet expenses; if they failed to fix the rate of tuition, people objected because of the uncertainty and some would not send their children. In either case, the district committee was in a dilemma, and yet it took ten years more of such experience to convince enough people of the state of its futility to finally enable the legislature to abol- ish ratcbills entirely. The legislature amended the law in 1860 as follows: "All rate-bills, or assessments for tuition, made by any district, in accordance with chapter 43, section 1, of the acts of 1859, shall be made out and delivered to the district collector within one week from the close of the term; and the said collector 1 shall have the same power and authority in the collection of such rate-bills, as the collectors of town taxes have. " (Sch. Laws of Conn., 1860, 26, in Conn. Kept., 1860) By the first part of this act, it was hoped that difficulty number three, mentioned above, would be avoided. The second provision tightened up the reins of control with regard to actual collection. From earliest times, the collectors of taxes had power to levy on goods or property and sell them for unpaid taxes. This power, though implied in previous laws, was now made specific. This was one step further towards property taxation for school sup- port. The law of 1860 did not remedy the situation, for in 1862 the whole rate-bill statute was reorganized. By this law a rate-bill could be made out at any legal meeting of the district, from the beginning of the year to three weeks after the close of school. In the next place, the maximum rates of tuition were put upon a yearly basis instead of a term basis. It is impossible to tell whether these rates are raised or not. In the third place, an attempt was made to charge all persons the full term tuition so they could not have the excuse of saving tuition as a device to evade attendance. This was so fixed that deductions could not 34 Development of Free Schools in the United States be made, in any case, for less than a continuous absence of four weeks. The cases where deductions could be made were "absences from school on account of sickness, death, removal from the district, or other good reason, when the district committee may make a reasonable deduction. 1 These exceptions should be noted here, and also the agency which could make the deductions. Speaking of the practice of making out rate-bills on actual attendance, in 1864 the secretary of the state board said: "There are a few districts, mostly in agricultural towns, which still make out a school bill in this manner, but there has been no legal authority for the collection of such bills for many years. The common schools in all the cities, in most of the larger manufactur- ing villages and in many agricultural districts are made free by a tax on property" and thus avoid all of this trouble. (Conn. Rept., 1864-65, 53) A year later the same official said: "The 1 The rate-bill statute of 1862 was as follows: "Sec. 1. Any school district in lawful meeting, may fix, or authorize its district committee to fix a rate of tuition to be paid by the persons attending school, or by their parents, guardians, or employers, towards the expenses of instruction, fuel, books, or other expenses, over and above the money received from the town or State appropriations ; and the selectmen and board of visitors, as a board shall, on application of the district committee, exempt therefrom all persons whom they consider unable to pay the same; and the selectmen shall issue an order on the treasurer of the town, in which such district is located, in favor of such district, for the amount of such abatements. "Sec. 2. The rate of tuition fixed as aforesaid shall not exceed six dollars per scholar for each school year or a proportionate sum for each term of school, or part of a year, except in districts where different grades of common schools are established, where the rate for the higher grades shall not exceed twelve dollars per scholar per school year. " Sec. 3. Such rate of tuition may be fixed by a district at any time during the school year, or within three weeks after the close thereof, and shall be assessed on all persons who may attend, or upon their parents, guardians, or employers; and for any person attending schools during any part of the term, the whole tuition fee for said term shall be paid, except in cases of absences from school on account of sickness, death, removal from the district, or other good reason, when the district committee may make a reasonable deduction from the sum to be paid for each person; but in no case shall any deduction be made for any absence except for a continuous absence of not less than four weeks. "Sec. 4. Whenever a rate of tuition has been fixed by any school district, in accordance with the provisions of this act, the rate-bill, or assessment of such tuition shall be made out and signed by the district committee, and may be delivered to the collector of the district, or if there be no district collector, then to either constable of the town ; and said collector, or constable shall have the same power in the collection of the same, as is possessed by collectors of town taxes; and such constable shall be allowed the same fees for collecting as are allowed the collectors of State taxes. " The last section repealed all other rate-bill laws and provided that the change should not affect any past events concerned with tuition. (Conn. Rept., 1864- 1865, 52-53) Connecticut 35 amount received from this source last year was 131,422. More difficulty is experienced in collecting this amount in school bills than in collecting $227,000 assessed as taxes by districts and towns." (Conn. Rept. 1865, 8) Instead of lessening the difficulties, the legislature condoned them. This is shown by a long series of special validating laws for illegal acts. One of these, enacted June 19, 1863, validated assessments for rate-bills when officials failed to make them out within the prescribed time. (Laws of 1863, Chap. VIII) A law enacted five days later attempted to remedy difficulties caused by carelessness of collectors. If any collector was found to be un- provided with the proper warrant for collection of rate-bills or taxes, "it shall be lawful for the selectmen ... to apply to some justice of the peace . . . to issue a warrant. ..." (Laws of 1863, Chap. IX) On July 10 of the same year another validating act was passed. (Laws of 1863, Chap. XLVIII) At various times, certain joint and union districts had been organized in various parts of the state. In much of the school legislation, provisions were inserted making the usual rate-bill regulations and laws apply to them. As late as 1861, such pro- vision was made for New Haven. (Laws of 1861, 21-26, Chap. XXVII) Joint districts were formed of territory from two or more adjoining towns. In some cases, the amount of school tax collected in the territory belonging to one town exceeded the amount collected in the other. By a law of June 30, 1864, it was provided that the excess school tax in such cases should be applied to the payment of tuition bills of children residing in the town where the tax was collected. (Laws of 1864, Chap. XXII) July 9, of the same year, the whole rate-bill law was re-codified. It differed from that of 1862, in one important particular, which is shown in the section following: ' "All applications made to the selectmen and board of visitors for the abate- ment of tuition bills assessed by any district, shall be made within twelve months from the close of the school term, for which such tuition bills are due." (Laws of 1864, Chap. LXXVI; Conn. Rept., 1866-1867, 168) No other general or special laws relating to rate-bills have been found in the legislation of Connecticut since 1864, except the free school laws of 1869-1870, which will be treated elsewhere. In going over this legislation one must be impressed with the utter futility of efficiently regulating such a financial scheme as 36 Development of Free Schools in the United States Connecticut tried. Any change made seemed to accentuate existing difficulties or create some new difficulty of administering the law. Having shown the legislative history of tuition and rate-bills, an attempt will next be made to indicate the actual use of these means of school support. By reference to Table II (Appendix) this is partly shown. In some cases these may be general approximations. Yet they show a general tendency to a grad- ual increase from 1846 to 1868, the last year they were legal. One may ask, "What about the previous period, from 1790 to 1840?" Not having many statistical records of those years, no one can say absolutely what conditions existed. There is a strong supposition, however, that rate-bills were used but little then, because, as has been shown, the income from the school fund in many districts was sufficient to pay teachers' salaries for three or four months a year. By reference to Table IX B and C, Ap- pendix, it will be seen that as late as 1848 the amount contributed by the school society was very small, 2.6 per cent, for Willimantic and 3.8 per cent, for Salisbury. By inspection of Table II, it will be further seen that rate-bills constituted approximately 10 per cent, of the total school support for the years 1855-1868. Im- mediately after the Civil War all school expenditures increased. (See Appendix, Tables II, III, and IV) The increase was least marked in the expenditure of money from the school fund. In fact, it may hardly be called an increase. It is most marked in town and district taxes and rate-bills; in other words, the local community now assumed more importance in school support. The figures showing the numbers of districts using rate- bills are incomplete; yet those given (Table II) show a marked tendency to a decrease. In 1855, 70 per cent, used the rate- bill; in 1865 nearly 31 per cent, used it. And the figures given in Table VI (Appendix) for 1863-1865 seem to show the same tendency. The 296 districts for 1865 represented slightly over 18 per cent, of the total number of districts in the state. It is also shown in Table VI (Appendix) that there was a lesser tendency to use rate-bills in the eastern counties, i.e., Windham, Tolland, and New London; yet they do not seem to show any stronger tendency to use district taxation. This may be partly accounted for by the fact that the town tax now began to play a Connecticut 37 greater rdle, even though the district tax was also increasing rapidly. (Appendix, Table IV) Local Taxation At various times in Connecticut there has been practically no local taxation for schools, .either voluntary or required by the state law. It has been shown that a colony rate was levied which was re-distributed to the towns. This practice continued until 1821, when the legislature abolished the state tax, due to the income of the state fund. This state of affairs continued until the enactment of the law of 1856 abolishing societies, when the so-called one per cent, tax was established. This was essentially a town tax, although required by the state laws, for it was levied, collected and disbursed within the towns themselves. In 1859, the last year this tax was levied, the 161 towns of the state col- lected $72,342. This was the largest amount collected under the one per cent, law which was in force from 1856 to 1860. (See Appendix, Table IV, for amounts of this tax) In a change made in 1858, it was required that such taxes were not subject to abate- ment. (Conn. Rept., 1861, Public Acts, 28-29) In 1860, this rate was changed to three cents on the hundred dollars, and the law was referred to as the three per cent, law. 1 The revenue derived from this the first year (1860) was $72,342. (Appendix, Table IV) The law set the minimum. The super- intendent of common schools, in 1863, said, "Some towns raise more than this amount." (Conn. Rept., 1863, 8) In 1861, this ■"three-tenths" law was changed so that in the distribution of the money to the districts, it should be used to make a sum equal to 1 The so-called three per cent, tax law read as follows : "It shall be the duty of each of the towns in this state, annually, on or before the first day of March, to raise by taxation such sum of money as they may deem advisable, not less than three-tenths of a mill on the dollar, or three cents on the hundred dollars, on the grand list on the said first of March last made and perfected, and cause the same to be paid into the treasury of the several towns, respectively, for the benefit, support and encouragement of common schools; and the whole amount of money so raised shall be annually distributed to the several school districts within each town, under the direction of the selectmen and school visitors. "2. If any town shall neglect to raise such sum of money, not less than three- tenths of a null on the dollar, in the manner and within the time limited in the preceding section of this act, or shall fail to distribute the same according to the provisions of said section, such town shall forfeit and pay to the treasurer of the state a sum equal to the amount which it was the duty of such town to raise as afore- said, to be recovered by said treasurer in an action upon the case, under the statute." (Conn. Rept., 1861, Public Acts, 28-29) 4 38 Development of Free Schools in the United States thirty-five dollars per district whenever the money from the state school fund did not reach that amount. (Conn. Rept., 1864, 50) The income from this tax increased from $72,342 in 1860, to $93,726.10 in 1866. This is evidence in itself that many towns levied more than the required "three-tenths of a mill," for it is not likely that the tax valuation would change so much in six years, and especially during this period. In 1866, the law was amended as follows : "Be it enacted . . . that the part of section fifty seven, page three hundred thirty six (of the general statutes, 1866) that reads 'not less than three-tenths of a mill on a dollar', shall read 'not less than .4 of a mill on a dol- lar'." (Conn. Rept., 1868, Appendix CXXVIII) This change, together with the increase in tax valuation and possible levies above four-tenths of a mill, increased this source of income to $149,680.99 in 1867, an increase over the income of 1866 of 59.4 per cent. In 1867, the legislature proposed several laws and continued them till the next session. One of these proposed that the money from the town tax and town deposit fund should be distributed to the districts on the average daily attendance basis. (Conn. Rept., 1868, Appendix CXXXIV) On July 24, 1868, the legislature enacted two laws, one of very great im- portance, both concerned with the town tax. The first enacted into law the proposal of the previous year to distribute the in- come from the town tax and deposit fund upon the basis of aver- age daily attendance, but only after each district had received from these two sources and the state school fund at least fifty dollars. (Conn. Rept., 1869, 216) The second of these laws was the following: "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Assembly convened: "Sec. 1. Each of the towns in this State, shall annually on or before the first day of March raise by taxation, in addition to the four-tenths of a mill tax required by section fifty seven, page three hundred and thirty six of the general statutes of 1866, as amended by an act approved June 30th, 1866, such sums of money as each town may find necessary to make its schools free, not less than six-tenths of a mill on the dollar on the grand list of 6aid town made and perfected, and cause the same to be paid into the treasury of the several towns, respectively, for the support of common schools; and the whole addi- tional amount of money so raised shall be annually distributed to the several school districts within each town, under the direction of the selectmen and school visitors. "Sec. 2. If any town shall neglect to raise such sum of money, in the man- Connecticut 39 ner and within the time limited in the preceding section, or shall fail to dis- tribute the same according to the provisions of said section, such town shall for- feit to the treasurer of the State a sum equal to the amount which it was the duty of the town to raise aforesaid, to be recovered by the said treasurer in an action upon the case. "Sec. 3. This act shall take effect from the beginning of the next school year, but shall not affect any suit then pending, or any claims for rate of tuition in schools then in session, or accruing during the present school year. "Approved July 24th, 1868." (Conn. Rept., 1869, 217) This law is the first free school law for elementary schools enacted by Connecticut. It is thus important, as well as a town tax law. Under its provisions the income from the town tax leaped from $160,347.35 in 1868 to $415,318.26 in 1869, a gain of $254,970.91, or 159 per cent. This sum of money may be taken as the approximate amount of money needed in 1869 to make the schools of Connecticut free. This sum is equivalent to five-eighths of the total school resources of 1859. (Appendix, Tables II and IV) The amounts collected by the town tax from its inception as the "one per cent, tax" of 1855-1856 to 1875 are given in Table IV, Appendix. From 1855 to 1857 it was greater than the district tax. By the passage of the law of July 24, 1868, it was made approximately equal to the district tax. Having shown the history of the town tax, the district tax will be discussed. The law of 1839, creating districts as bodies corporate, carried with it unlimited taxing power, so far as state laws were concerned. Yet it should be remembered that the acquisition of this power was a part of the decentralization move- ment previously described, for as early as 1799 the local district had power to levy tax for school buildings, furnishings, and fuel. Both union districts and small districts had the power of taxa- tion as early as 1841. In the codification of laws in 1853, the status remains the same. (Conn. Rept., 1853, Appendix 8-9) All taxes levied resulted from action of the district meeting in- cluding all legal voters of the district. In any case, it would be necessary to convince a majority of these of the necessity of a tax before the district would ever have a tax for school purposes. They could use the income from funds and rate-bills instead. With a different form of organization, this type of taxation might have developed more rapidly, although it is but a probability. Yet the possession of the power to tax was valuable to those dis- 40 Development of Free Schools in the United States tricts which desired to use it. In 1862 and 1863, laws were enacted providing for the taxing of manufacturing establish- ments in the district where they were located — an immense ad- vantage to the district fortunate enough to include such an es- tablishment. (Conn. Rept., 1864, 47) Down to laws in force in 1910, the state has not required districts to levy taxes. In the decade of 1790-1800, as has been described, the ec- clesiastical society practically supplanted the town. With this of course went the power to levy a "society tax" for school pur- poses. This power remained with the societies until their aboli- tion by the law of 1856. However, much of the history of the society taxation covers a period when few records were kept, and also when the state school fund was the main support of the schools, which facts make it impossible to say much more than that probably society taxation was never used to any extraordi- nary extent. Table IV (Appendix) shows that in 1855, the year before the abolition of the societies, the sum of $25,884 was thus collected, or twice as much as the district tax. A comparison of the town and district taxes has already been, made. Some comparisons are here noted with other items of school support. From 1855 to 1864, district taxation was less than the income from the school fund. Since then, it has ex- ceeded the income from the school fund. The year 1864 may be taken then as the point at which local interest produces enough action to do more than the state was doing — a sort of balancing point, in fact. As compared with the estimated income from the town deposit fund, the district tax seems to have equalled it by 1856, and rapidly outdistanced it thereafter. (See Appendix, Table IV) From a comparison of Tables III, IV and IX (Ap- pendix) it will be seen that as far as resources per capita were con- cerned, local taxation from 1861 became the most important factor in school support, and that the great portion of this for some time came from district taxation. Besides the means of support thus far described, there were other kinds utilized in varying degrees from time to time. For example, "voluntary contributions" appears as an item on two or three occasions. Yet the important sources of school support are the ones already described: school fund, town deposit fund, local funds, town and district taxation, and tuition. The manner in which the state distributed the state school tax, Connecticut 41 the school fund income, and the town tax, was such that only a minimum of local activity, if any, was aroused. That the state could have stimulated local communities more is shown by ex- perience of the state in encouraging the development of district school libraries. In the general codification of 1856, a provision authorized the state treasurer to pay ten dollars to any school district for a school library, if the district would raise a like sum for the same purpose. From 1857 to 1868 the state paid out $11,- 960.71 for this purpose, and the districts raised at least $13,667.23. Except for the years of the Civil War, the number of districts availing themselves of this aid averaged 200 each year, or about one-eighth of all the districts. These facts show that the state could have done more with other funds, as well as with aid for school libraries. (Data compiled from Conn. Rept. for 1857-1869) DEVELOPMENT OF FREE SCHOOLS Growth of Free Schools and Movement Against the Rate-Bill The state of Connecticut established free schools by the law of 1868; but it had had many free schools before that time. Even in colonial times some schools seem to have been free from the tuition charge. The action of New Haven on December 25, 1641, is an example. The only means of support mentioned is a "yearly allowance — to be given it out of the common stock of the town," and it is expressly referred to as a free school in the sentence, " It is ordered that a free school be set up in this town." The historians of education in Connecticut and of New Haven, as well as writers on general history of Connecticut, have always referred to this as a free school, in the sense of being free from tuition. There is also the action of New Haven of 1644 concern- ing a free school of grammar school type. In 1652, the action concerning Mr. James specifically mentions two types of sup- port — "ten pounds a year out of the treasury and the rest he might take of the parents of the children." This action says nothing about a free school; those of 1641 and 1644 did use the term. The action of the Court of Elections of 1657 again men- tions these two types of school support, and says nothing about a free school. The law of 1650 is silent on this point. The act of 1676 mentions the use of the rate, as means of school support, but leaves way open for other methods. The law of 1680, to establish two grammar schools in Hartford and New Haven, provides for their support without tuition. There also occurs the passage to keep "the towne schools in the several townes as distinct from the free school." In the general law of 1700 for the use of rate and tuition, nothing is said about free schools. All of these examples show that when the term "free school" was used, no use of tuition was mentioned. Another fact should be remembered in this connection, and that is the practice of the people of England from whence these people originally came. This whole matter has been studied by Leach ("English Schools 42 Connecticut 43 at the Reformation") who concluded that a "free school" was one charging no tuition. 1 These two sets of facts seem to point to but one conclusion, viz., that when the colonists of Connec- ticut used the term "free school" in their laws and educational practices, they meant a school free from tuition charges. The colonial law of 1650 regulating apprenticeship made no provision for public support of this type of education. A com- prehensive poor law was enacted in 1786. This provided for limited compulsory support of paupers, and compulsory appren- ticeship for "any poor children in any such town that live idly, or are exposed to want and distress," but it made no specific provision for public support of such apprenticeship. (Conn. Laws, 1786, 343-344) If, however, poor children had been found who should have been indentured as apprentices, and if no master could be found to care for them by an ordinary contract, what would have been done? It seems very probable that such cases would have been handled according to English traditions, and as they were actually handled in some other colonies. If so, the town would have been called upon to pay a fee, probably five pounds, to some person who became master to the child or children. While no specific provision for such support existed, it may be that apprenticeship was to a very slight degree supported from the public purse. 2 And, if so, it constituted a means of free education for children of the poor. For the period from the Revolution to 1840 we find some little indirect evidence of the possible existence of free schools. The great dependence placed on the State School Fund during this period seems to point to the conclusion that practically nothing else was used to support schools. Such scanty information as comes to us from this period indicates: (1) that teachers' wages constituted practically all of the school expense (fuel usually being contributed) and that teachers' wages were very low (See Appendix, Table V); (2) that practically all of the teachers' wages were paid from the income of the School Fund; (3) that the income of the School Fund was sufficient to maintain a school for three or four months. If these suppositions are true, many of the district schools would be free from tuition because the income from the School Fund was sufficient to maintain them. 1 The writer recognizes that not all historians agree with Leach. 2 Seybolt assumes that such was the case in Connecticut but gives no exam- ples of it. See Bibliography for title. 44 Development of Free Schools in the United States Barnard, in commenting on the law of 1788, makes the following statement: "No time being specified, the schools were soon kept open just long enough to use up the public money drawn from state and society funds, and then closed as public schools." (Conn. Rept., 1853, 145) In 1821, the state-wide tax was abol- ished, and seemingly complete dependence placed upon the in- come from school funds as a means of school support. At no time during the early part of the nineteenth century were communities required to maintain schools longer than such funds would keep them. These facts then seem to point to the con- clusion that public schools were free in many cases, but supported only as long as the income from school funds would keep them going. However, this did not prevent a private school of the same grade, charging tuition, to appear as soon as the public free school had closed. One should not be led to believe that free schools were universal in Connecticut during this period. There was too much legislation concerned with rate-bills and tuition during this period to allow such a presumption. The laws of 1796, the changes of 1810 and 1811, the fuel law of 1824, and the very comprehensive law of 1839 are the evidences show- ing the legal right to use tuition bills, and which, very probably, was widely enough used to require such laws. What would be the need of the law of 1824 if fuel bills were not actually used? From 1840 to 1868 laws concerning tuition bills were enacted in 1856, 1858, 1859, 1860, 1862, 1863 and 1864. The need of more support for schools than that furnished by income from funds, was answered by this series of laws, the permissive laws for district taxation, and the required town-tax laws. In a great degree this was the period of the development of free schools supported largely by taxation. (See Appendix, Tables II, III, IV and IX) How did rate-bills and tuition actually affect the schools? Upon the answer would depend the reasons for a change. A school visitor of Prospect Society is quoted as follows: "Many scholars stay away from school to avoid paying balance of term bill. It is a wretched policy to tax parents in proportion to the attendance of their children. It is a premium on non-attendance. Societies should be obliged to see that every child is in school at least four months to be entitled to public school money for that child, and be obliged to continue a free school four months in 6ummer and winter." (Conn. Com. Sch. Jour., 1834-1840, p. 222) Connecticut 45 The editor of the American Quarterly Register (1833) declared that taxation was a better means of school support, because it removed the burden of school support to property. (Am. Quar. Reg., May, 1833, 297) In the same year that the first com- prehensive rate-bill statute was enacted, Henry Barnard, then secretary to the Board of Commissioners of Common Schools, argued against such a law in no uncertain terms. 1 His statement seems to be one of the very first examples of determined opposi- tion to rate-bills. He placed stress upon the evil effect upon attendance, the increase of the tuition of those who did attend school, and the relation of the private schools to the system. Later in the same year, he again declared that the rate-bill sys- tem encouraged the wealthy to patronize private schools, and estimated that 10,000 children were attending such schools. He further declared that he found such schools opposing improve- ments in the public schools. 2 The Board of Commissioners of Common Schools expressed similar views but in a more guarded statement. 3 In 1838, Governor Elsworth urged that the money 1 "It is difficult to frame a law to operate more unfavorably, unequally, and in many instances, more oppressive than this. There is not only the ordi- nary pecuniary interest against it, but it is increased from the fact that all the abatements for poor children must come upon them who send to schools. . . . Again, many of them who are thus required to pay the bills of their poorer neighbors, are just able to pay their own, and the additioh of a single penny beyond that is oppressive, so long as the burden is not shared by the whole community. . . . Again it is an inducement to parents to keep their children at home, on any trifling demand for their services — for in so doing, there is no pecuniary loss sustained ; as on the other hand, their school bill is by bo much diminished. . . . The unequal operation of the present mode of continuing the schools becomes more oppressive as private schools increase — and a larger number of the wealthier members of Society withdraw from the public schools. It thus throws all the extra expense of the schools, as far as the poor are concerned, upon that class, who either from pablic-spirit, or other motives, send their children to the common schools. As to this por- tion of our school law, I have found but one opinion prevailing among the most intelligent men practically acquainted with the working of it; that it is radically defective." (Conn. Rept., 1855, 21-22. Quoted by Philbrick) (Conn. Com. Sch. Jour., 1838, I: 162) 2 "The present mode of supporting common schools, principally by public funds and by taxation on the scholars, has operated to encourage men of prop- erty to abandon them and patronize private schools. Judging from official returns . . . there cannot be less than 10,000 children under 16 years, in private schools, at an aggregate expense of not less than $200,000 for tuition alone. . . . "Nay, more^ I have found an antagonist interest arrayed against every effort to improve the common schools. (Barnard, Com. Sch. Jour., I, p. 173) s "On the subject of private schools, which have greatly increased in recent years, the Comrnittee feel hardly prepared to express a decided opinion, espe- cially with regard to the general infhience which they will eventually have on the common schools. That this influence, at present, in certain circumstances, 46 Development of Free Schools in the United States spent in tuition at private schools be united with the support given the public schools and thus enable the children of the poor to obtain better education. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 163-5) The effects of rate-bill schools and of consolidated free schools were illustrated by the conditions existing in certain districts, and the improvements due to consolidation and support without rate-bills. Private schools disappeared, attendance in public schools increased, the average expense per pupil was lessened, and the educational advantages were open to all whether rich or poor. 1 The secretary of the board declared that the city schools of Connecticut were inferior to those in other states, because the outside schools " were free, and children of all classes . . . are found in the same schoolroom." (Rept. Sec. of Bd., 1842, 26-27) In 1842, Henry Barnard, as secretary of the Board of Com- missioners of Common Schools, again attacked the rate-bill system and advocated support by taxation, in the following words: "To place these schools on their old footing, and interest the community in their welfare, I have advocated the abandonment of quarter bills, or charge per scholar, and making property, whether it represented children or not, chargeable with their support. This is the cardinal idea of the free school system, and with the aid now furnished from the school fund, which is appro- is injurious, they have no doubt." (Address of Bd. of Comm. of Common Schools, 1838, 23) 1 "In 1838, there were four districts with 885 persons over 4 and under 16 years of age. Of this number 276 attended the common schools. The poor, and those only who felt but little interest in the education of their children sent to them. The schoolhouses were old and very much out of repair. The studies were those ordinarily pursued in the common school. There was no uniformity of books, and the teachers were constantly changing. There was no money raised for their support, beyond the avails of the public funds. . . . At this time there were 8 or 9 private schools taught by well-qualified and well-paid teachers, and including the children of those parents who cared most for education. The aggregate expense for tuition alone, in these schools, was three times as great as the whole expense of the common schools. "In 1839 after several public meetings, an entirely new system of public schools was adopted. The four districts were made into one society. Four primary departments . . . and one high school were established. . . . In 1842, out of 849 children between the ages of 4 and 16, 675 were connected with the public schools and among them are (were) the children of the best educated and wealthiest families of the city. Nearly all the private schools have given up, and a saving effected this way of nearly $4,000.00 a year. The entire expense of the public schools is nearly $2,000.00 less than was expected on the private schools in 1838 and the average expense per scholar is less than it was at that time. The crowning glory of the whole is — that it is a practical illustration of what can be done to make the common schools good enough for the richest, and cheap enough for the poorest, and thus to make the advantage of a good education common to the rich and the poor." (Rept. Sec. of Bd., 1842, 26) Connecticut 47 priated for the equal benefit of all people, this charge cannot be considered burdensome. This too is the practice of every city which has an efficient system of schools. The practical abandonment of it in our cities, has led to withdrawal of the children, and the active interest, of the wealthy, from the private schools. Many parents who now send to private schools, would send to the common schools, if they were taxed annually for their support. . . ." (Rept. Bd. of Comm., 1842, 25) The school visitors gave evidence concerning the effects of rate-bills and desire for changes. In the school report of 1846, statements against rate-bills were made by visitors from the fol- lowing societies: Greenwich second; Norwalk; Ridgefield first; Stamford first; Brooklyn; Ashford first; Killingly; Plainfield; Thompson; Voluntown; Torrington first; Torrington (Torring- ford) ; Warren; Winchester second; and Westbrook. Their state- ments included the following: (1) rate-bills encouraged non- attendance; (2) they make collection of salary by teachers more difficult; (3) an equal amount of educational privilege was denied many children. Others recommended taxation for schools, and better methods of distributing the school fund money. One district was reported as having a surplus of $100 from the school fund income, while others were compelled to charge rates of tuition varying (in one town) from $1.34 per year to $13.52. Many urged that each community be required to tax themselves for school support as a condition to receiving the state school money. One said that the great fund "lulled the people into a state of indifference." (Conn. Rept., 1846, 83, 85, 90, 92, 99, 102, 106, 107, 112, 113, 133, 135, 141, 151) In the same year the superintendent of common schools pub- lished a list of eleven defects in education, as he saw them in the visitors' reports. In none of these did he mention free schools, but he did urge an agitation for taxation of local com- munities for school support, the abolition of small districts, to make common schools better able to compete with private schools, and to distribute the public money to help weak dis- tricts and increase attendance. (Conn. Rept., 1846, 8-13) A brief mention of the monitorial system as used in the schools in Middletown occurs in 1846. At an earlier time it was in use also in New Haven. Governor Wolcott recommended its adop- tion as early as 1825. In spite of the fact that it was a cheap device for reaching many pupils, no evidence has been found to indicate its wide use in Connecticut. When its use was the 48 Development of Free Schools in the United States fashion, Connecticut was relying very largely on the school fund; when Connecticut became aroused to the need of greater school facilities and taxation, the monitorial system had ceased to be the fad of the moment. (Conn. Rept., 1846; 1853, 151) An appeal to the real utility of free schools and the fact that they could be established was made by the superintendent in 1849 : "In Worcester, Lowell, Salem, Roxbury, and Cambridge, and many other cities corresponding to our own, in respect to population, free schools are estab- lished, of so elevated a character, as to compel even the wealthy to abandon private schools." (Conn. Rept., 1849, 97) In 1846, the legislative joint standing committee on educa- tion recommended a list of eight important changes in the school system of the state; but they did not mention taxation or free schools. They did, however, recommend the abolition of school societies. (Conn. Rept., 1847, 8-21) A study of the governors' messages up to 1850 reveals the fact that not one of them had said a word about free schools. Most of them referred to the school fund, one recommended a small district tax (1831), and they usually urged that the legislatures consider the state superintendent's report. One of the advances made in the state during this decade was the change effected at Hartford in 1847. Horace Bushnell cham- pioned the cause of popular education there with telling effect. Henry Barnard came back into the state at the request of friends of this movement and spoke and wrote in favor of better educa- tional conditions at Hartford. A pamphlet prepared by him and used in this campaign is given, in substance, in his annual report as superintendent, for 1850. As a result of the campaign, Hartford voted "to establish a free school for instruction in the higher branches of an English and the elementary branches of a classical education, for all the male and female children of suita- ble age acquirements in this society, who may wish to avail them- selves of its advantages." The old colonial school of Hartford had been previously transformed into a sort of an academy. Now this ancient foundation was incorporated into the new high school and the income from its endowment used for the support of a classical teacher. (Brown, 312) The law of 1690, which estab- lished the old grammar schools here and at New Haven, provided for support without tuition. Yet it is the grammar school upon the Hopkins foundation which seems to have survived, which in Connecticut 49 some of its period was a free school. This school would represent, in its tradition, the ideal of a free school, as well as exemplifying in one locality and institution the three great stages in the evolu- tion of American secondary education. (Steiner, 25-28; 50-52) As a sort of finale to the development of this decade, came the establishment of free teachers' institutes, supported by the state (1848), and the establishment of the State Normal School (1849). The institutes were established by a resolution of the General Assembly which provided as follows : "That the Superintendent of Common Schools be, and hereby is, directed to employ suitable persons to hold, at not more than sixteen convenient places in the different counties of the State, in the months of September and October, annually, schools of teachers, not exceeding one week each, for the purpose of instructing in the best modes of governing and teaching our common schools; — and the compensation of the persons so employed shall not exceed three dollars per day, in full, for services and expenses for the time occupied in teach- ing and traveling to and from the several places where the schools may be held-^which compensation shall be paid from the civil list funds of the state." (Conn. Rept., 1849, 30) The superintendent, in his notice announcing these "schools of teachers," said, "the schools will be open free of charge to all who propose to teach in our public schools. ..." (Ibid., 31) With some degree of truth this may be called the first free school law of the state. The normal school was established by a law of June 22, 1849. This law provided that the state should pay the expenses "in- curred by the trustees"; and that the number of pupils should "not exceed two hundred and twenty." "To all pupils so ad- mitted to the school, the tuition and the privileges of the school shall be gratuitous." (Conn. Rept., 1850, 82) If we call the law of the preceding year for the establishment of teachers' insti- tutes the first free school law, then this becomes the second. This decade was one of marked progress compared with the preceding. The uniting of districts in urban communities began under the short-lived law of 1841. Henry Barnard appeared as the advocate of taxation as a means of school support, many of the sehool visitors were urging taxation for schools, the Hartford high school had been established as a free school, and the state had begun to furnish free facilities for the training of common schoolteachers. Much yet remained to be done; public opinion was yet too inert. 50 Development of Free Schools in the United States The Movement for Free Schools, 1850-1856 The next decade was marked by a great advance in public opinion and by some very important legislative changes, chief of which was the school code of 1856. The events leading up to this enactment will be described. Henry Barnard, as principal of the Normal School and superintendent of common schools,, carried out an extensive propaganda for better schools. In 1850-1851, this work was conducted by Barnard and seven other persons. They made more than two hundred addresses in at least one hundred different societies during the first year. (Conn. Rept., 1851, 4) In 1852-1853, the propaganda was more exten- sive and intensive, affecting teachers, school patrons, pupils,, publication of reports, and cooperation of more newspapers than previously. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 3-4) It is not known that these men made free schools one of their important specific issues,, but it is known that their work was to better schools in any re- spect. In 1854, they urged "consolidation of districts," and "support of schools by tax on property." Barnard was suc- ceeded in 1855 by Philbrick, who continued the propaganda with the aid of three helpers. (Ibid., 1855, 37-38; 80-88) The Con- necticut Common School Journal was used to great advantage- It published facts about schools of Connecticut and other states, articles from school officials and private citizens, cooperated' with the state superintendent and State Teachers' Association, in urging better schools supported by public taxation. Some of the larger cities of the state made advances, and estab- lished free schools. This had its effect. An association com- posed of school committees and friends of education, held at South Coventry in 1851, petitioned the legislature for changes,, chief of which were the abolition of tuition and support of schools- entirely by public funds and taxation. They submitted with their petition a proposed law for reorganization of schools and. school support. (Conn. Rept., 1851, 79-80) An essay written by Noah Porter in the previous decade was republished in the report for 1850, and otherwise given wide circulation. It urged free schools supported by public funds and taxation. 1 1 "The doctrine should be understood and proclaimed in Connecticut, that the property of the whole community may rightfully be taxed, for the support of public education. It should be proclaimed because it is a true doctrine.. Connecticut 51 In 1854, Mr. H. H. Barney, commissioner of common schools of Ohio, addressed the Connecticut State Teachers' Association, and strongly urged free schools. (Conn. Com. Sch. Jour., 1854, 195-196) The commissioner of the School Fund (Mason Cleve- land) in 1854 declared against tuition and rate-bills as means of school support, and described some of their injurious effects. He recommended that all districts be required to raise, by a prop- erty tax, an amount equal to one-third that received from the School Fund. 1 In 1851-1852, Governor Seymour condemned the loss of local The pecuniary interests of a community like our own, to say nothing of those interests that are higher, are deeply concerned in the question whether all shall be educated. They are vitally concerned too, that all shall be well edu- cated. The property of the rich whether they have children or not, may and should be taxed, because the security of that property demands that this insur- ance should be effected upon t. The tax which they pay is only the premium on this insurance. Besides, it is cheaper as well as more grateful, to pay a tax for the support of schools, than it is to pay the same for jails, and poor- houses. In Connecticut this right is denied and disputed. A tax may be levied on a district for the construction and repair of schoolhouses but when a sum is to be raised additional to that which is received from public funds, it is left to those who have children to send to school. The consequences of this system are most mischievous. The summer school becomes a select school instead of a public school. Or perhaps to make it open to all, for a month or two, the allowance from the public treasury is eked out by the greatest possible extenuation. . . . When this 'short allowance' is consumed, the children of the laboring poor, at once the most numerous and the most needy, are re- tained at home, because the parents can or will not pay the capitation tax. . . . This bad and unequal system is sustained from two sets of causes — the opposition of so many tax-payers to a system of property taxation — unac- countable, the opposition of these who are tax-voters but not tax-payers, who are set against such a system because it tends to build up schools for the rich! More than one instance can be named, in which this doctrine has been indus- triously circulated by some cunning miser among his poorer neighbors, and they have gone to the school meeting to vote against all expense, not dreaming that their advisers were trembling in their shoes. . . . This is unequal, anti-republican, and wrong; it ought to be made odious. It should be held up in all its unfairness. The right of the town or school society to tax itself should be embraced by all parties." (Conn. Rept., 1850, Appendix L) (Noah Porter) 1 "Already, as you are aware, a great number, if not a majority of the dis- tricts . . . are compelled to raise money in some way to enable them to comply with the provisions of the law now in force, which requires them to support a school not less than four months in each year, as a condition of their participation in the benefits of the fund. The course adopted in most cases is to levy a tax or assessment upon the scholars belonging to the school, in proportion to the time they attend, which not infrequently induces the poorer classes to withdraw their children, at a time when this continuance is of the highest importance to their mental advancement. I regret to add that the instances are not rare, in which the same course is pursued by those who are abundantly able to continue the children after the public money is expended; the result of which is to impose on a few the burden of supporting the school the allotted time, in order to secure their proportion of the school fund." (Rept. Com. Sch. Fund, 1854, 11) 52 Development of Free Schools in the United States initiative in school support due to the School Fund and declared against control of schools by societies. Most important was the recommendation that local school units of control levy tax suffi- cient with other funds to keep schools open at least eight months each year. (House Jour., 1851, 30; 1852, 20-21; 1853, 14) Gov- ernor Dutton (1854) called attention of the legislature to the backward condition of the schools and recommended, among other things, a tax for school support. (House Jour., 1854, 24-26) The first recorded instance of a governor sanctioning free schools occurred in 1855. Governor W. F. Minor, in that year, said to the legislature, "I shall cheerfully cooperate with you in making our common schools free; for such, in my opinion, the true policy of our government requires that they should be." (Reports to General Assembly, 1855, 7) The next year the same governor strongly urged a system of free schools. 1 The work of the Superintendent of Common Schools assumed a leading r61e. The general work of Barnard has been mentioned. His exact attitude towards the problems of rate-bills and free schools should be stated. In 1845, he was an unqualified oppo- nent of rate-bills, and advocate for free schools. In 1851, he changed his attitude and advocated the use of rate-bills by dis- tricts and societies. 2 In 1853, he recommended, among other things, a tax equal to one-third the amount received from public funds, distribution of public money on attendance basis with a bonus of $50.00 for bettering certain conditions, use of public 1 "No argument is required to convince us of the absolute necessity of edu- cation for the masses — a necessity obviously greater now than in an earlier period of the existence of the State. If we could elevate the character of the State, sustain the intelligence of its citizens, promote virtue and morality, and add stability and permanency to its laws and institutions, we must fur- nish to all, without regard to their means, the rudiments of an education which will qualify them to be good and honest citizens, upright and honorable rulers. "I do not refer to a system which enables a portion of our children, and only those whose means will admit to attain to a higher degree of excellence in intel- lectual culture and scientific attainment, but to that system of public instruc- tion which will be free and accessible to every one, whatever his condition or circumstances may be; such system will conduce to make a virtuous and intelli- gent population eminently essential to the correct administration of law, for however well and guarded the laws of any community may be for the preserva- tion of the rights of person and property, it is clear that those rights are inad- equately protected, unless the tone of public sentiment is in harmony with the laws." (Reports to Gen. Assembly, 1856, 13) 2 "Districts and societies should be authorized to establish a rate bill or tui- tion, to be paid by parents or guardians of children at school, graduated accord- ing to the class of school, and in no way oppressive to the poor, and diminishing to each family according to the number of children attending school the same term." (Conn. Rept., 1851, 47) Connecticut 53 money for salaries only, districts raising a tax of 25 cents per pupil to receive an equal amount from the income of the Town Deposit Fund, and again recommended the use of rate-bills and tuition. 1 The same year he advised the people of Thompson ville to use rate-bills. 2 In 1850, Mr. Barnard, in describing a high school said, "A public high school is not necessarily a free school. It may be supported by a fund, a public tax, or an assessment or rate of tuition per scholar, or by any combination of these modes," and then in a lengthy statement he urged the establishment of such schools. (Conn. Rept., 1850, 25-32) 3 In 1855, . Mr. Philbrick, as superintendent, took up the dis- cussion of rate-bills. Referring to the rate-bill statute, he said the he regarded it "as the most objectionable feature" of the school law. In a circular to school visitors, sent out the same year, he again condemned the rate-bill system and urged taxa- tion. (See Appendix for Philbrick's statements) In 1856, Phil- brick published in his report Horace Mann's article on free schools. This may have served to counteract the effect of Bar- nard's change of attitude. The sentiment which had been grad- ually forming found expression in a memorial sent to the legis- lature by the State Teachers' Association, in 1855. This me- morial asked for twelve important changes in the school laws, among which were the following: (1) distribution of school fund income on basis of average attendance and approved school- houses; (2) abolition of districts of less than 20 children; (3) introduction of industrial training in schools; (4) change in con- 1 "Every school district, or district committee, when authorized by the dis- trict, may establish a rate-bill or tuition, to be paid by the parents or guardians of the children attending school, and graduate the same according to the grade of school which the child may attend; provided, that the rate shall be fixed before the opening of the school in any term; and provided further that the sum to be paid shall not exceed one dollar for a term of three months, or in that proportion for the year in any grade of common schools; and provided also, that no child shall be excluded from any common school, to which he would be otherwise entitled to attend in consequence of the inability of his parents or guardians to pay any school tax or rate." (Conn. Rept., 1853, 169- 171) 2 "This might be raised by a rate-bill, payable by the parents or guardians of the pupils, of one dollar for each, and the balance should be raised by a tax on the grand list of the district, as is now provided for by law. The rate-bill should be so small that the poorest family can pay it cheerfully, and it should be collected in advance." (Conn. Rept., 1853, 73 T 74) 3 The reasons for Barnard's position appear in a discussion between himself and George S. Boutwell, at a meeting of the American Institute of Instruc- tion at Springfield (Mass.), August 19-22, 1856. The gist of this discussion is given in the Appendix. 54 Development of Free Schools in the United States trol by societies; (5) public to furnish text books for children of poor; (6) a commission to revise the school laws; (7) "To amend the law relating to the mode of supporting schools so as to abolish rate or quarter bills altogether, or provide that the amount shall be determined before the opening of school, and to be collected in ad- vance." This was signed by Henry Barnard, E. F. Strong and E. B. Huntington representing the Association. (Com. Sch. Jour., 1855, 309-311) When the legislature convened in 1856, action resulted in the appointment of a commission to codify the school laws. In the meantime, the people of Fairfield County had passed resolutions asking for free schools. (Com. Sch. Jour., 1856, 118) The legis- lative commission made a series of recommendations, including taxation and free schools. The State Teachers' Association declared by resolution that "while we approve, very generally, of the proposed changes and amendments, we regard with special satisfaction those proposing the establishment of school libraries and free schools." (Com. Sch. Jour., 1856, 188) The school code of 1856 resulted, but it was a disappointment in some respects. It abolished school societies and transferred their duties to the town and district; it established a one-mill state tax for schools, and enacted another rate-bill statute. So after years of careful planning, of hard work, of creation of favor- able opinion, the hope that schools would be made free was blasted. What seemed to be almost certain victory turned out to be a partial and temporary defeat. The Movement for Free Schools, 1856-1870 Notwithstanding the temporary defeat of 1856, from that time three lines of development continued. Discussion and agitation continued to create favorable sentiment. School sup- port continued to develop, and schools, in larger numbers, became free. The development of favorable opinion will be considered first. The Development of Favorable Opinion among School Visitors From the visitor of New Canaan came the following: "The visitor is very sensible that the great evil of the system lies in the prac- tice of raising money by tuition bills, made out according to the time of pupils' actual attendance; thus virtually paying a bounty on absences." (Conn. Kept., 1855, 105) Connecticut 55 The visitor from New Haven reported that rate-bills had been used for many years, particularly from 1835 to 1849. How- ever, then the city was levying taxes for schools. (Conn. Rept., 1856, 61) The visitor at Plymouth (1857) said : "There are at least 150 children within the limits of this school society, between the ages of 4 and 16, that have not attended either a public or private school during the year, for until our public schools are free to all, many youths of poor parentage will grow up in ignorance and vice, and not only they but the community will suffer a loss which money can never repair." (Conn. Rept., 1857,65) This referred to conditions in 1856, for there were no school soci- eties in 1857. Bridgeport reported that rate-bills were abolished. (Conn. Rept., 1859, 90) In 1856, Voluntown had appropriated the one-half of the income from the Deposit Fund which was not granted to the schools by law, to the use of the schools, in order to evade levying the one-mill tax required by the new law. The school visitor, in commenting on this action said: "We say it to their shame ... if there is a town in old Connecticut that needs enlightment on common schools that is Voluntown." (Conn. Rept., 1855, 90) In 1860, expressions concerning the question of free schools and related problems appeared as follows: Chatham — people unwilling to tax themselves for better schools; Middlebury — abolish rate-bills and establish taxation; Orange — our people encourage shifting of teachers because it is cheaper and it relieves them from taxes; Seymour — establish free schools, by property taxation, extensive enough to enable a poor boy to enter the University; Windsor — "Rich men have very often, by a narrow and mistaken policy in regard to schools, depressed and dam- aged their property"; Thompson — a healthy interest in better schools exists; Bridgeport — too many small, weak districts, and poor private schools; New London — free education is most economical. (Conn. Rept., 1860, 69, 72, 75, 77, 79, 80, 93, 94) In 1861, the superintendent of common schools asked the visit- ors, " Is any further legislation, in your opinion, necessary to promote the interests of common schools?" Twenty-eight replied that no legislation was necessary. "Of those which recom- mended an alteration in the law, the greatest unanimity was upon the subject of free schools." Chester, Clinton, Colchester, Colebrook, Kent, Middlebury, Norwalk, Plymouth, Redding, 56 Development of Free Schools in the United States Rocky Hill, Stafford, West Hartford, and Woodbury were in- cluded in the list — thirteen in all. Nine recommended a better law for the distribution of public money. (Conn. Rept., 1861, 36-44) In 1852, the superintendent asked the visitors, "What in your opinion is needed to make our common schools more efficient?" Bloomfield, Bridgeport, Brookfield, Durham, East Hartford, Madison, Norwalk, and Stamford directly recommended free schools. Several others recommended increased taxation as a means of school support. (Conn. Rept., 1862, 12-21) Their reports were not published in 1863. In 1864, only three or four published reports recommended increased taxation and free schools. (Conn. Rept., 1864, 73-104) In the published reports for 1865, the following towns recommend free schools : Canter- bury, Huntington, Meriden and Putnam. Some few others urged more taxation. (Conn. Rept., 1865, 43-83) In 1866, the following condemned either rate-bills or advocated free schools: Barkhamstead, Colebrook, Cromwell, Litchfield, Oxford, Stam- ford, Torrington, and Watertown. Cromwell and Litchfield re- ported their schools practically free, and Torrington reported that one district had levied tax to make its schools free. (Conn. Rept., 1866, 183-223) In 1867, Bridgeport, Danbury, Morris, Oxford, Redding, and Southington, recommended either increased taxa- tion or free schools, while many others condemned the system of small, weak districts, and urged consolidation. (Conn. Rept., 1867, Appendix B) In 1868, either more free school sentiment existed, or more of the reports of these men were published. The following list includes towns whose visitors recommended free schools or support by taxation: Bridgeport, Canterbury, Dan- bury, Darien, Farmington, Haddam, Lebanon, Meriden, New London, Norfolk, Salisbury, Stafford, Stonington, and Oxford. Others urged consolidation. Of the above list Bridgeport, Dan- bury, Lebanon, and Stonington presented lengthy arguments to support their recommendations. In harmony with this was the report from Middlefield that the town had voted to levy a "tax of one mill on the dollar for school purposes instead of four-tenths of a mill as required by law." (Conn. Rept., 1868, Appendix LIII-CXX) It is believed that this description does not rep- resent adequately the free school sentiment among the visitors, for when asked directly they responded well, and still further, it Connecticut 57 is known that only extracts from their reports were published from year to year. In spite of these facts, the evidence shows that there was considerable development of free school senti- ment among these men. The School Fund Commissioner and Free Schools, 1856-1870 This official occupied a position in which valuable information was constantly accessible. It was possible to use this to create public opinion. Each year he published a statement concern- ing the status of the fund. But not until 1868, did he speak about free schools. That year, Commissioner G. A. Paine urged the establishment of free schools and property taxation for school support. (Conn. Leg. Doc, 1868, Rept, Com., 5) The Governor of the State and Free Schools, 1856-1870 In 1859, Governor William A. Buckingham, after setting forth the practices used in supporting schools said that "the policy of sustaining our schools by a tax on property is gaining favor, and may be regarded as nearly established." (Reports to Gen. As- sembly, 1859, 6-7) How near he was to the truth is shown by the following facts, computed from Tables II, III, and IX (Appen- dix). The School Fund contributed $1.30 per pupil, rate-bills produced S.37 per child, local taxation, required and voluntary, produced $1.49 per pupil, and but 252 districts out of 1,624 levied taxes. A year later (1860) he spoke a little more accurately: ". . . 252 districts have established free schools — voluntarily laid a tax on property. . . . This number, I am confident would be increased, if the subject were, by law, brought before each district for consideration at its annual meeting." (House Jour., 1860, 25-43; Senate Jour., 1860, 23-40) In 1863, Buck- ingham referred to this matter again. During 1860-1870, all of the governors— Buckingham (1860-1865), Hawley (1866), Eng- lish (1867-1868), and Jewell (1869) had something to say about the general educational situation. But it was not until the leg- islative session of 1868 (May 6) that one of them — Governor Eng- lish — finally spoke directly concerning rate-bills and free schools. His words were as follows: " The board are unanimously of the opinion that the rate-bill system should be abolished, and the schools sustained at the c&mmon expense. It is cer- tainly desirable that all the schools should be under a uniform system, and 58 Development of Free Schools in the United States the fact that the free school plan has been generally adopted throughout the State, while the rate-bill system is becoming rather the exception than the rule, renders the change an easy and practicable one at the present time. The very idea connected with a common school is, that it should be free, or sup- ported at the common expense, while the rate-bill is essentially a tuitional charge. The Report will be before you and I commend the several recommen- dations therein urged to your favorable consideration." (Conn. Rept., 1868, 70; also Senate Jour., 1868, 44) Governor English also served on the committee "to stand as the representative of the friends of the public schools." (Conn. Rept., 1868, 119) Such was the record of the governors of the state up to 1868. The State Superintendent and the State Board of Education and Free Schools, 1856-1870 In 1857, Mr. D. N. Camp became superintendent, and in his report for 1858 he attacked the system of school support and argued for free schools. He said the number of free schools dis- tricts was increasing, and that such districts had better schools. Yet he felt that it was not quite time to have an obligatory free school law. He called attention to the laws for school taxes which then gave permission to make schools free, and stated that gradual development under such laws was more stable and sat- isfactory than to force people to make their schools free. (See Appendix for complete statement from Conn. Rept., 1858, 11-13) In 1859, concerning free schools, he said: "During the past year a large number of the common schools have been made free schools. ... It will be found, almost without exception, that where the system of making the schools free by a property tax has been adopted, the schools are better, more permanent in their arrangements and more regu- larly attended than in those districts where rate-bills are still collected." (Conn. Kept., 1859, 36) In 1860, after reviewing the various enactments on rate-bills, he recommended that the subject receive the attention of the Assembly, but that the present law be changed as little as pos- sible. (Conn. Rept., 1860, 42-15) In his report for 1861, he reviewed the whole question of school support and free schools (pp. 26-35), pointed out the difficulties of the rate-bill system, and stated that "of the 54 towns whose school visitors recom- mended some alteration in the law, the number that recommended a law requiring free schools was greater than that advocating Connecticut 59 any other alteration in the law." Said he, "I do not deem it necessary to submit in connection with these facts, any argu- ment in favor or against the system of free schools." He also sent a circular to the school visitors asking what changes they thought advisable in school laws, and published their replies, (pp. 36-44) The next year, Mr. Camp asked again of the school visitors, "What is needed to make our common schools more efficient? " and published their replies. (Conn. Rept., 1862, 12-21) He himself had nothing to say directly about rate-bills, or free schools. The next year, 1863, he discussed the various items of school support briefly, pointing out that some districts had free schools because they received enough from the income of funds to make them free for the required term with a cheap teacher. He collected statistics of attendance and showed that 9,213 pupils were attending private schools, many of whom were under 16 years of age, while "more than ten thousand of the children enu- merated between 4 and 16 years of age are in no school whatever for any portion of the year." He reviewed the existing school laws, showed that less than half of the districts used rate-bills, and by concrete illustrations showed the evil results of the small district system. (Ibid., 1863, 9, 11-12, 44-51) The next year he said that more difficulty was encountered in collecting the rate- bills than all of the local taxes, and argued for public taxation for high school support. (Ibid., 1865, 8, 29-30) A year later Mr. D. C. Gilman became secretary of the newly established board of education. He published quite a complete list of agencies of secondary education, public and private — a fair picture of free and tuition schools of that grade. The dis- trict system in its/ glaring deficiencies was opposed. He gave the first concrete and valuable facts about the evils of non-attend- ance and child labor. The adoption of the high school, free or nearly so, was also advocated. (Ibid., 1866, 33, 43-54, 70-83, 89-93) In 1867, the Rev. Birdsley Grant Northrop came upon the scene and was soon engaged in a campaign for free schools. His first report (1867) followed much the same form as that of Mr. Gilman and published about the same type of information. He at once organized at his office a real "State Educational Bureau" of information. In order he discussed the following problems : 60 Development of Free Schools in the United States 1. Evils of the System of the Small School Districts. 2. Education for the Neglected — Employment of Children in Factories. 3. Support of Schools by a Tax on Property. 4. The Value of Graded and High Schools. Under the third heading he recommended the abolition of all rate-bill laws, and the increase of the town tax to make the schools free. (Ibid., 1867, 75, 86-89) The next year, the campaign was led by Mr. Northrop to a successful issue. In his lectures in the state that year, two of his subjects were rate-bills and free schools. He showed that the "percentage of average attendance in sum- mer is but 43.25 and in winter only 47.25 per cent. Less than one-half of the children of the state are found — in our public schools." His first remedy recommended was to abolish the "odious rate-bill." He published the resolution of the Hartford Ministerial Association asking for free schools and property taxation. He gave thirty-three pages to a discussion of the rate- bill and printed the seventeen letters of state superintendents concerning rate-bills and advocating free schools. These letters came from the following states: Michigan, Maine, Ohio, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Wisconsin, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, New Hamp- shire, Rhode Island, and Massachusetts. Not one writer among the seventeen favored rate-bills, and their statements, published throughout the state, surely helped to create favorable opinion. (Conn. Rept., 1868, 13, 17, 25, 37-71) The letters came in re- sponse to the following questionnaire : 1. Are your public schools free, or supported in part by a rate-bill? 2. If free, how long have they been so? 3. What is the effect of free schools, compared with tuition schools, upon attendance, the interest of parents and the public at large, and upon the general efficiency of the schools? From the letters Mr. Northrop formulated the following con- clusions : 1. Many states copied the rate-bill from Connecticut. 2. All these, with one exception, have given it up. 3. The results of the change are favorable, and meet universal approval. 4. No state that has once tried the free system has since adopted the rate- bill. 5. The free system greatly increases the whole number in attendance. 6. The free system elevates and dignifies the school, in the esteem of the pupils. Connecticut 61 7. It lessens tardiness, irregularity and truancy, and thus increases average attendance. 8. It enhances the interest of parents. 9. It quickens the educational spirit of the whole people. 10. It has tended to lengthen the school terms. 11. It has led to the erection of better schoolhouses. 12. It economizes the expenditure of money, securing a better result for the same cost. 13. The rate-bill i3 a source of trouble and strife. 14. It is burdensome and odious to the poor, imposing an unequal tax upon those more blessed with children than in their basket or store, becoming a tax upon parental affection, and a barrier between poverty and intelli- gence. 15. The free school tends to break down invidious distinctions and to frater- nize people. Some of these conclusions are hardly justifiable upon a basis of the letters, but they may have served well as campaign material. Mr. Northrop's own discussion of rate-bills, apart from that above, included the following: 1. The rate-bill is the greatest hindrance to improvement in schools. 2. It is wrong in principle. 3. In practice, it causes strife, ill-feeling, difficulties in collection of tui- tion, decrease in attendance, divides districts into factions, and keeps those unable to pay out of school almost entirely. 4. It tends to make paupers of honest working people unable to pay the tuition demanded. 5. It makes the state an undesirable place for people to reside. Mr. Northrop published resolutions of various associations asking for free schools, and discussed evil influence of private schools and the conception of "pauper schools." The new state board of education urged consolidation in their first report, and in the second argued at length against rate-bill schools because they tended to produce undemocratic racial distinctions in a democratic state. (Conn. Rept., 1866, 12) 1 One 1 "No man surely ought to suppose that the State designs to create or foster distinctions among the citizens, by a system of public education which is sus- tained by public funds, the common treasure of all. And it is obvious that that would be the effect, whether it was the design or not, if it were generally understood that the public schools of the State were maintained for the instruc- tion of the poor, and were not, also, intended for those who had the pecuniary ability to educate their children. Such a theory would make all the public schools institutions of charity, like alms-houses and hospitals for the insane poor, and if it were generally recognized as the true theory, it would inevitably bring the schools into contempt with the very class for whom they were de- signed, and they would abandon them in scorn. Such a theory would be 62 Development of Free Schools in the United States member of this same board, speaking semi-omcially before a teachers' institute at Bridgeport, argued for the same view, but with different analogies. (See Appendix) Development of Favorable Opinion as Shown by Voluntary Asso- ciations, 1856-1870 As early as 1827, a society "for the improvement of common schools" was organized at Hartford. It appointed a committee (1827) to investigate the needs of the common schools. Bar- nard spoke of this as the first organization of its kind in the United States. Again, in 1830, a convention of "Teachers and Friends of Education" was held at Hartford. One speaker advocated a required local tax for every school. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 154) In 1848 occurred the establishment of free teachers' institutes as has been described. These were held each year for at least one week in from ten to sixteen places in the state. During the time when the agents of Barnard and Philbrick were campaigning the state, several voluntary organizations were effected, and a series of county organizations proposed. At least two county organizations were heard from afterward. One of the most interesting documents of this period is the petition sent to the legislature "Adopted at a Convention of the School Committees and Friends of Education in Tolland County, held at South Coventry, on the 14th of May, 1851." (See Appendix) This petition called for taxation for schools and total abolition of rate-bills, a better administration of the income of the school fund, and declared the educational advance was dependent upon the changes they suggested. Another county organization was the "Windham County Educational Association." It held its ninth annual meeting in conjunction with a teachers institute at East Woodstock, September 24, 1857. A committee recom- mended that men and women prepare essays on the various phases of the subject, "Education for the entire people." It inconsistent with the spirit of republican institutions, and would necessarily yield before the prevalence of true democratic principles. A democratic com- munity would obviously be untrue to itself, which should not aim, so far as its public acts could have a bearing on such results, to obliterate the artificial distinctions of society by bringing all the citizens nearer to an elevated equality. And if it is proper to maintain, by the public treasure, a system of public courts of justice, for the free use of all classes of citizens in the State, it certainly can- not be wrong to have a similar understanding in respect to the public schools which are supported in a like manner." (Conn. Rept., 1867, 1-2) Connecticut 63 stated as its object "to promote, by all means, the elevation and improvement of our Common Schools throughout the County and the State." Its membership included some teachers. (Conn. Rept., 1858, 104) General public conferences were held concerning the further- ance of popular education at Hartford, New Haven and Meriden. At one of these meetings a committee was named to "stand as the representatives of the friends of the public schools." It was composed of L. P. Waldo, Gov. J. E. English, Gen. J. R. Hawley, John D. Ferguson and Henry M. Cleveland of the General As- sembly, Francis Gilette, Rev. Horace Bushnell, F. F. Barrows (president, State Teachers Association), Henry P. Haven, Rev. J. Cummings (president, Wesleyan University), Professor Wil- liam W. Niles of Trinity College, D. C. Gilman, and Henry E. Sawyer (principal, high school, Middletown). This committee met at Meriden, November 8, 1867, and se- lected an executive committee composed of D. C. Gilman (New Haven), H. M. Cleveland (Brooklyn), J. D. Ferguson (Stam- ford), H. E. Sawyer (Middletown), F. F. Barrows (Hartford), and B. G. Northrop, secretary of the state board of education, and "it was determined to request the clergymen of all denomina- tions in the state, to address their congregations on the principles of public education." This request was very generally complied with. Many of these discourses were printed, or repeatedly delivered. So far as known, all of them avoided any sectarian aspect of the subject. At one of these conferences, a platform was adopted setting forth the sentiments of the friends of public education. Persons present included members of the General Assembly, an ex-governor, superintendents of schools of New Haven and Hartford, D. N. Camp, D. C. Gilman and Henry Barnard representing the state department; two editors and others. Others not present, wrote letters expressing approval and cooperation. The platform of this committee was adopted by the State Teachers Association at Meriden, 1867. This platform de- manded, among other things, property taxation for school sup- port, free schools, high schools, consolidation and continued work until these aims should be attained. (See Appendix for this platform) The general platform of the committee was in harmony with the one adopted by the State Teachers Association. 64 Development of Free Schools in the United States (See Appendix) The subject of free schools came before the- State Teachers' Association several times. The matter was discussed and referred to committees to give further considera- tion. In 1861, the committee was instructed to bring this sub- ject before legislature. (Conn. Rept., 1861, 26) A "Common School Association was organized at Enfield for the purpose of bettering education." (Conn. Rept., 1866, 191) Teachers' institutes continued to meet under the provisions of the state law. They served as a means of increasing favorable sentiment among teachers and patrons. The Hartford Ministerial Association, about 1867, sent a memorial to the legislature urging the establishment of property taxation for schools, consolidation of schools, and urged schools "good and free" for every child in the state. (See Appendix) Miscellaneous Evidences of Favorable Sentiment As early as 1853, the Rev. W. A. Goodrich, of Bristol, delivered a sermon, "A Plea for Increased Means of Education." It was later repeated by Rev. Goodrich and also published. Sections of it were published in the School Report for 1853. He declared that there were no real free high schools in the state, that Con- necticut was not equal to Massachusetts in supporting schools, and made a strong plea for more school support. (Conn. Rept.,. 1853, Appendix, 87-92) Daniel C. Gilman, formerly secretary of the state board of education, was the author of an article which was republished by his successor in 1868. Under the title, "What sort of schools ought the state to keep?" he discussed many conditions. He urged free schools, taxation for schools and abolition of rate- bills. (New Englander, Jan., 1868. Conn. Rept., 1868, Appen- dix, CXXXVII) Some general newspapers published articles favorable to free- schools, and the Connecticut Common School Journal circulated throughout the state. The Union, Middletown Advertiser^ Christian Secretary, Windham County Telegraph, Norwich Exam- iner, New Haven Register, Norwalk Gazette, New Haven Journal, The Palladium, Willimantic Herald and the Religious Herald are known to have published some articles and editorials favorable to free schools before and after 1856. (Conn. Com. Sch. Jour.^ 1856-1868) Connecticut 65 The Common School Journal contained considerable material, editorial and otherwise, relative to free schools, rate-bills and related matters. Both sides were discussed in these articles. (See Appendix) Actual Development of Free Schools, 1856-1870 Before 1856, some few communities had established free schools. Hartford had free schools before 1850. In 1853, Mr. Barnard described the development of schools in urban com- munities and named the following as then having free schools: New Haven — schools "free to all"; New London — "like New Haven she has done with the collection of rate-bills. . . . The people of New London have adopted the principle of prop- erty taxation for all necessary purposes"; Collinsville — "It is a free school"; Norwalk — "children of all classes . . . enjoy- ing the same privileges"; and Norwich, to which reference has been made. (Conn. Rept., 1853, 6-10) Further evidence as to New London appeared in the report of the visitor for 1858. The school support included the following: School Fund, $2,968.00; Town Tax, $3,000.00; Former Society Funds, $106.00; Deposit Fund, $687.63. "Any further expenses of sustaining the schools have been borne by taxation within the districts." (Conn. Rept., 1858, 82) Consolidation and beginnings of taxation for schools were reported 1854-1855 for the following: Bristol, Bridgeport, Plymouth, Hollow, West Killingsly, Farmington, Naugatuck, Stonington, Southport, Fair Haven, Birmingham, Meriden, New Hartford, and New Britain. (Conn. Rept., 1854, 107; 1855, 12) The status of the cities of Connecticut in 1857 was described thus: "There are seven cities in Connecticut. Instead of uniformity, four of these cities are divided into distinct independent districts, each under the management of a district local committee. ... In two cities the districts are consolidated with one board of finance officers. ... In one city, a portion of the districts have been consolidated into one, while another portion still remains separate. There is also want of uniformity in the system adopted ■in the larger villages." (Conn. Rept., 1857, 8-9) During the same year, the following towns had high schools: Hartford; Middletown; Bridgeport; New London had a high school for boys and one for girls; New Haven had high grade grammar schools; and Norwich had just opened its endowed free academy. Middletown claimed the oldest high school in 66 Development of Free Schools in the United States the state. In some towns where districts had united, high school work had just begun. (Ibid., 9-13) The dates of founding of the high schools, as given by Steiner, are: Middletown, 1841; New Britain, 1850; New Haven, 1859. (Ed. in Conn., 56) He should have added Hartford (1847) to the list. The status of free schools in urban communities in 1861 was described by the superintendent as follows : "All the cities of the state, with one exception, several of the manufacturing villages, and many agricultural districts have adopted the system of free schools." (Conn. Rept., 1861, 35) Of unique importance was the establishment of Norwich Free Academy. This was created by act of the legislature in 1854, by the establishment of a self-perpetuating body of trustees. (Conn. Rept., 1857, 77-107; 1861, 19. Steiner, 53-56. Am. Jour, of Ed., II : 664 ; III : 190) This was an endowed free school. Concerning such schools, a divided opinion existed. Hon. G. S. Boutwell declared that "These institutions are public in then- use, but not in their foundation or control, and are therefore not public schools. (Brown, 318-321) A public school, in his view, was one used by the public, established, controlled, and sup- ported by the public. In 1866, the schools of Wolcottville district of the town of Torringford, and of the town of Cromwell were reported as free schools. Cromwell voted a tax to "equal the amount which would otherwise be assessed on the scholars, and thereby to make our schools free." (Conn. Rept., 1866, 187, 212) The same year six town and twelve district high schools were reported. No direct evidence is given as to their support. (Ibid., 45-46) In 1867, the secretary of the board conducted a study of this field. The free secondary schools which he found, and their enrollments are here given. School Enrollment 1. Branford, senior department of a graded school 55 2. Bristol (same) 75 3. Bacon Academy 95 4. East Hartford High School 250 5. New Haven High School 217 6. Hartford High School 225 7. Middletown High School 139 8. New London, Boys' and Girls' High Schools 120 9. Norwich Free Academy 91 10. Stamford 40 11. Torrineton 51 12. Waterbury 100 13. Windham 100 Connecticut 67 Besides these, four schools were reported — Cromwell, Griswold, Montville and New Britain — about whose support no definite information was given. The "Staples Free School" charged tuition. In contrast with this there were reports from sixty- private schools, supposed, in many cases, to be secondary schools, in which the enrollment varied from 23 to 114. (Conn. Rept., 1867, 54-66) In 1868, the "First School Society of Wethers- field" had a high school, attended by children from six districts. The support came from the income of a donated fund and taxa- tion. (Conn. Rept., 1869, 202) In the spring of 1866, there was a controversy about continuing the high school established in 1857. It went to a popular vote. " It was decided by a vote of 1,170 against 479 that the high school should be maintained." (Conn. Rept., 1867, 90) It is possible to indicate the comparative degree of free school development from the number of districts having free schools. Districts having schools not supported in any way, by rate-bills or tuition, would be free school districts. From Table II (Ap- pendix), these districts are estimated from 1855: 1855 699 1856 776 1857 979 1858 838 1859 1,033 1860 846 1861 900 1 1862 955 1 1863 l.OlO 1 1864 1,065! 1865 1,124 1866 1,175* 1867 1,225* If these estimates are approximately true, the law of 1868 would have had effect upon about three hundred districts, the others being free at that time. The degree to which rate-bills were used indicates the degree to which schools were not entirely free. By comparing with total school support, year by year, it is possible to ascertain how much was contributed from types of school support used to make schools free. Again referring to the data in Table II (Appendix) the following percentages are computed : 1 Figures interpolated. 68 Development of Free Schools in the United States Rate-bills Free School Support Per cent. Per cent. 1856 10 90 1857 11 89 1858 12.7 87.3 1859 9.8 90.2 1860 10 90 1861 9.2 90.8 1862 8 92 1863 7.3 92.7 1864 8 92 1865 11 89 1866 13.6 86.4 1867 12.7 87.3 1868 14.1 85.8 This table shows that from 1856 to 1868 approximately 90 per cent, of the school support came from other sources than tuition and rate-bills. It also shows a real increase in the use of rate- bills beginning in 1865. This might be accounted for in two ways : First, a real increase in the number of districts using rate- bills, regardless of increase in total school support; second, an increase in school expenditures. The increase in total support from 1865 to 1868 was over 100 per cent. This seems to show that the increase in rate-bills did not mean more schools and districts using rate-bills; but more money was needed and the rate-bills were made larger. 1 Of course, such bills could not exceed the limits set by law. These evidences indicate that the general trend was toward the gradual establishment of more free schools. The town tax law of 1868, or the first law requiring free elementary schools, undoubtedly made most all schools free. Although there was some opposition to it, the compliance with its provisions was very general. However, three other enactments relative to free schools were soon made. By an act of August 1, 1868, it was provided that: "The public schools of this state shall be open to all persons between the ages of 4 and 16 years, and no person shall be denied admittance to and instruc- tion in any public school in the school district where the person resides, on account of race or color, any law or resolution of this state heretofore passed to the contrary notwithstanding." (Conn. Rept., 1869, 218) The nature of this law shows it to be a reaction of the Civil War. A year later (1869) a new law was enacted. It combined the features of taxation and distribution in one law and made other 1 Conflicting evidence is given in Tables VI and VII, Appendix. Connecticut 69 changes. Its main features were: (1) retention of the town as the unit for handling the School Fund income, income from De- posit Fund, and taxation; (2) towns were required to appropriate the income from the two funds and enough more to make the schools in all districts free, in no case less than a one-mill tax; (3) towns failing to provide such support were subject to a fine equal to the amount they should have raised; (4) in order to receive this support districts must maintain schools thirty weeks each year, employ qualified teachers, make return of statistics, and the schools must each have an average attendance of at least five pupils; (5) in case districts found the expenses greater than the support thus provided, they must provide the added support by a tax. 1 Some objections were made to this law, and 1 The free school law of 1869 was as follows: Sec. 1. For the purpose of maintaining free schools in this State, each town shall, at the annual town meeting on the first Monday of October in each year, appropriate a sum of money equal to the total of the following amounts, viz.: The amount received by the town the year next preceding, from the Connecticut Common School Fund: the amount so received from the Town Deposit Fund, and such additional amounts as shall be deemed sufficient by the legal voters in said meeting assembled, to make the schools free of expense to the districts of the town, for the period of at least thirty weeks, of not less than one mill on the dollar, on the grand list last made and perfected. And the amount so appropriated shall annually, on or before the fourth day of March, in each year, be distributed, under the supervision of the joint board of selectmen and school visitors, to the several districts as follows, viz. : There shall be paid to each whole district, where a district lies in two or more towns, its proportionate part of sixty dollars according to the enumeration last made and the remainder of said appropriation shall be divided among the several districts according to the aggregate attendance of the scholars, in days, for the year ending on the 31st day of August, 1870, no district shall receive any part of the money so appropriated, unless the school in said district has been kept by a teacher duly qualified, for at least thirty weeks during the year end- ing Aug. 31st, next preceding such appropriation, nor unless the returns here- inafter required shall be duly made. Sec. 3. If any town shall neglect to appropriate such sum of money in the manner, and within the time limited in the preceding section, or shall fail to distribute the same, according to the provisions of said section, such town shall forfeit to the state a sum equal to the amount which it was the duty of such town to appropriate, as aforesaid, to be recovered by the treasurer of the State, in an action founded thereupon. Sec. 6. If the expenses of any district for school purposes shall exceed the amount appropriated by the towns, such excess shall be defrayed by a tax laid by the Legal voters of said district, in a meeting duly warned, upon the prop- erty and polls of said district. Sec. 7. The income of the Connecticut Common School Fund, when re- ceived by the several towns, shall be paid into the town treasury, and the income of the Town Deposit Fund shall also annually be paid into the treasury of the several towns in part payment of the amount appropriated for schools under the first section of this act. No town shall be compelled to maintain a school in, or give any money to a district which during the preceding school year has had an average attendance of less than five scholars. (Conn. Rept., 1870, 244-245) 6 70 Development of Free Schools in the United States in 1870, another was enacted. By this the towns held the same functions as before. Districts having an enumeration of twenty- four or more must keep schools for thirty weeks, and smaller districts twenty-four weeks each year in order to obtain town and state support. Schools maintained longer than the minimum term might be supported by "voluntary contribution or tuition." Added expense incurred by a district in any other manner was to be paid by a tax levied by the district. Similar provisions as to forfeiture for non-compliance were retained. 1 Extension op Free School Peinciple since 1870 By 1870, common schools were free for thirty-two weeks in a year in a majority of the districts, and twenty-four weeks in others; the Sheffield Scientific School was giving free instruc- tion to a few students of agriculture and mechanical arts, and 1 Sec. 1. For the purpose of maintaining public schools in this state, each town shall annually raise by tax on the Grand list of the town, in connection with the tax levied for other town purposes, and shall appropriate for the sup- port of its public schools a sum of money which, together with the income from the Connecticut Common School Fund, and the income from the Town De- posit Fund, and the income from any other fund which may be appropriated for the support of schools, shall be sufficient to pay the wages of teachers, the cost of fuel and the incidental expenses of the public schools of the town for at least thirty weeks of each year, in every district in which the number of persons between four and sixteen years of age at the last enumeration was twenty four or more, and for at least twenty four weeks of each year in every district in which the number of persons at said enumeration was less than twenty four. Sec. 6. If any district maintains a school of higher order than is required by law of the State, and thereby incurs increased expense for its school; or if any district shall continue its school for a longer time than is provided for at the expense of the town according to the first section of this act; or if any dis- trict shall expend for teachers' wages or other purposes a sum which the afore- said joint board deem unnecessary and extravagant, the cost of such school, above the sum received by such district from the town treasury shall be paid by a tax laid by the legal voters of said district, in a meeting fully warned, upon the property and polls of said district. Nothing, however, in this act is to be construed as forbidding the payment of additional expense of continu- ing any longer than the time required by law, by voluntary contribution or by tuition charges. Sec. 7. No town shall receive any money from the income of the Connec- ticut Common School Fund for any district, unless the school in such district the preceding school year was kept according to law at least thirty weeks in each district in which the number of persons between four and sixteen years of age at the enumeration made within said school year was twenty four or more, and for at least twenty four weeks in each district in which the number of such persons at said enumeration was less than twenty four. Sec. 9. If any town shall neglect or refuse to provide for the maintenance of its schools according to the provisions of the first section of this act, such town shall forfeit to the state a sum equal to the amount which it was the duty of such town to raise and appropriate as aforesaid, to be recovered by the Treasurer of the State in an action founded thereupon. (Conn. Rent., 1871, 210-212) Connecticut 71 the principle of free tuition in the Normal School was established. At various times (1884, 1888, 1889, 1895, 1897, 1899) the free common school law was changed. In 1910, such school must be maintained "at least 36 weeks in each year in every town and district." But no school was required in a district with less than 8 pupils. Further the schools were opened to all children by the vote of any board of education "over four years of age." This was in fact extending free school privileges to the age of twenty-one years. By acts of 1886, 1888, 1889, legislation con- cerning kindergartens was enacted. In 1910, any town or dis- trict could "establish and maintain kindergartens which shall be open to children over three years of age." By act of 1907, towns were authorized to vote on the question of free text-books. Under a similar act of 1905, 72 towns voted "yes" for free text- books and 45 "no." By act of 1903, every town in which a school is discontinued must furnish school accommodations, by transportation or otherwise, for all children within said school between the ages of 7 and 16. (Conn. Sch. Doc. No. 10, 1911, 17-20, chap. Ill) By act of 1897 "any town in which a high school is not maintained shall pay the whole or any part of the tuition fee of any child who resides with his parents or guardian in said town, and who, with the written consent of the school visitors, or town school committee, attends a high school in an- other town, provided that the high school shall be approved by the state board of education. Any town paying out sums for tuition in this manner will be reimbursed to the extent of two- thirds of the amount from the state treasury. Such privilege is extended so the pupil can attend an approved private or endowed school. If the town itself does not maintain a high school, it must pay transportation expenses of pupils to other schools, and the state will reimburse the town to the extent of one-half the amount. (Ibid., 26-29, chap. V) By a series of acts on even- ing schools culminating in one of 1909, all towns and districts of 10,000 or more population shall establish evening schools of com- mon school grade, and on petition of at least twenty persons over fourteen years, add high school branches. Such work is free to persons over fourteen years of age. (Ibid., 29, chap. VI) By act of 1909, the state board of education was authorized to establish in two towns in the state, "a free public day school and evening school, for instruction in the arts and practice of trades." 72 Development of Free Schools in the United States No person under fourteen years of age can be admitted. (Ibid., 30-31, chap. VII) By act of 1888, the expense of schooling inmates of detention houses is paid by the county. (Ibid., 31, chap. VIII) By a series of acts (1857, 1864, 1879, 1881, 1883, 1888, 1897, 1899, 1901), free school privileges are furnished defec- tive, dependent and incorrigible children in the Connecticut School for Boys and the Connecticut Industrial School for Girls. (Ibid., 104-110, chap. XXII) These enactments make the period of 1868 to the present, the period of free schools, sup- ported without tuition fees, in Connecticut. Immediate Results of Enactment of Free School Law and Fbee School Campaign One of the objections to the rate-bill was that it decreased attendance. Did free schools increase attendance? The first free common school law was enacted in the summer of 1868. In the report for 1869, the secretary of the board claimed that the effect had been to increase the attendance. The figures following show the statistical record for the whole state. Enrollment and Attendance, 1868-1871 Per cent, of Enrollment in Average Attendance Winter Summer 1868 71.3 70.8 1869 72.41 71.36 1870 73.13 71.40 1871 71.10 70.14 Enumeration Per cent, of Children Enumeration in 4-16 years Average Attendance Winter 120,884 47.2 123,650 48.11 124,082 52.15 125,407 53.35 (Conn. Rept., 1868, 5; 1869, 11-12; 1870, 23-24; 1871, 15-15) In 1870, Mr. Northrop interpreted his figures as follows: "They show that nearly 6,000 children were kept out of school by the rate-bill." (Conn. Rept., 1870, 29-32) The next year, he said, "The increase in the whole number registered the first term of free schools, as reported last year, was 6,208, and for the corresponding term now reported, 5,744, or an increase in two years of 11,952. How beneficent that legislation which has led nearly 12,000 children to school and thus to a higher future. The proof now before the public, that over 10,000 children were barred from school by the rate-bill, buries it beyond the possi- bility of resurrection." (Ibid., 1871, 19, 22) The following reports from visitors give their opinion regard- Connecticut 73 ing increase of attendance for 1870. "North Bradford Town: Last year the average attendance was but 28 per cent, of the children enumerated; this year it is 53 per cent. Last year 26 per cent, of the children between 4 and 16 years of age attended no school; this year we have reduced this to 7 per cent. This is due mainly to the abolition of rate-bills." "Norwalk: Free school law is increasing attendance." " Wallingf ord : Percent- age of children in the schools, this year, 94.6 per cent., last year, 90.8 per cent. The average attendance in winter has increased from 58 per cent, in 1867-1868, to 80 per cent, in 1868-1869." "Westbrook: The abolition of rate-bills has brought into our schools a class of scholars that would otherwise have been kept at home by reason of inability or unwillingness of their parents to pay for their tuition." "Windsor Locks : The average attend- ance is much larger now than at any time hitherto." "Bridge- port: The attendance is largely increased by the new law." "Colchester: Free school law, . . . rate-bills and tuition have not been a source of annoyance in this town." "New Mil- ford : We are unable to see that it (free school law) has yet pro- duced any flattering results." "Trumbull: The free school law . . . has not wrought out any of those blessings to the cause of education which its friends so confidently predicted." In 1869, the secretary said : " In one town, over 400 more pupils, and in a single district in Danbury 330 more are enrolled in the schools than ever before." (Conn. Rept., 1869, 18) No one would claim accuracy for the statistics about yearly attendance, nor are the other evidences complete, yet the whole evidence seems sufficient to conclude that immediately following the laws of 1868, 1869 and 1870, there was an increase in school attendance. Besides the matter of attendance, the enactment of the free school law called forth a number of expressions from various agencies in regard to such a policy. In the first place, the state board of education went on record as follows: "The abolishing of the tuition charge, and the transfer of its burden from the individual parent to the property of the town and district, which was pro- posed in our report of last year, and urged by his Excellency, the Governor, in his message, was a radical change; but the cordiality with which it has been received by the people fully endorses the wisdom of the Legislature, which adopted it with unusual unanimity. The reports come to us from all parts of the State of a largely increased attendance of the children of those parents 74 Development of Free Schools in the United States who were unable, or more frequently unwilling, to pay charges for tuition, and while we have no sympathy with this last class of parents, we rejoice that their children need no longer suffer for this their parents' neglect. The form of the law might, however, be changed in some particulars, so as to make its provisions more clearly understood and distinctly defined." (Conn. Rept., 1869, 5-7) Second, Governor Jewell, in his message of 1869, expressed belief that the free school law was "accomplishing the good re- sults anticipated by its friends and originators." (Conn. Leg. Doc, 1869, 5, 10) Third, in 1871, both political parties of the state went on record in their platforms in favor of the free school system. 1 In the next place, two sets of expressions came from the school visitors, in both 1869 and 1870. Those for the first year have been quoted. Visitors from the following places spoke in glow- ing terms of the laws of 1868 and 1869: Bridgeport, Canterbury, Colchester, East Haddam, East Haven, East Lyme, Lebanon, Lyme, Manchester, New Canaan, North Branford, Norwalk, Putnam, Wallingford, Vernon, Westbrook and Windsor Locks, — seventeen in all. Their statements concerned increase in attend- ance, general satisfaction, and approval of schools supported by taxation. Still others reported increase in attendance. Such were Brooklyn, Groton, Guilford, Northford and Sharon. Some expressions of a different tone came also. From East Granby: "Our free school system will work well when our people fully understand the law." Litchfield reported that "the present school law does not meet the full approbation of the public." Southbury reported: "The new law has had a bad effect in our 'Democratic Party's Resolution, adopted January 17, at Hartford. "Re- solved, That the source of power being in the people, free schools and general education are essential to good government and the perpetuation of free insti- tutions." Republican Party's Resolution, adopted January 25, at New Haven. "Re- solved, That general education is essential alike to the preservation and pros- perity of the Republic, the source of thrift in peace, and power in war, the cheapest defense of the nation, the wisest police agency, seeking the prevention rather than the punishment of crime; that the wealth of the State consists in its men, in its treasures of mind; that education tends to economy, thrift, and virtue, while ignorance means waste and weakness, if not pauperism and crime, that it is the duty and interest of the State to secure a good common school education free to the children of all classes, the poor as well as the rich; that we commend the growing harmony and cooperation between labor and capital, and the recent liberality and interest of our manufacturers and capitalists in promoting the education of the children of the State, and congratulate the people on the encouraging progress of this great interest." (Conn. Rept., 1871, 23-24) Connecticut 75 schools." Stamford reported some friction and excitement over the law, while from Thompson came the statement that they could "hardly see where they were the gainers by the new law." In the legislature opposition came up, and in 1870, an attempt was made to repeal the free school law, but it failed. (Conn. Rept., 1870, 30-32, 154, 168, 208, 217, 1879, 32-36) The result in increased expenditure for schools is very evi- dent. In 1868, the total resources increased $278,819.62, an increase of over 33 per cent. In 1869, the increase was $159,280.39, or about 14 per cent. (See Appendix, Table II) In total resources per child, the amounts changed as follows: 1868, $8.14; 1869, $8.44; 1870, $10.23; 1871, $11.83. In 1860, it had been about $3.78. (Appendix, Table IV) About the same time wages of men teachers increased: 1867, $45.21; 1863, $52.00; 1869, $58.74. Wages of women teachers increased also, but by smaller amounts: 1867, $23.14; 1868, $24.91; 1869, $29.16; 1870, $31.29. (Appendix, Table V) In 1879, Mr. Northrop reviewed the first decade of free schools in his annual report. He showed that the average length of the school year had increased from 163 days, in 1869, to 178 days in 1879. The enumeration had increased from 123,650 to 138,407: The winter registration from 82,140 to 100,288; the summer from 71,177 to 91,413. The number of different scholars reg- istered, from 29,390 to 119,828. The per cent, registered, from 80.38 to 86.56. The average attendance from 59,489, in winter, to 77,218; and in summer, from 53,645 to 69,832. It should be remembered also that in the earlier part of this decade, the first compulsory attendance law was enacted, and that such figures would be somewhat affected by its operation. The wages of teachers had changed from $56.64 per month for men, to $61.03 a month; and for women, from $26.93 to $36.50. The number of teachers increased from 1,453 to 1,947, a gain of 494 of "teachers continuously employed." The income from funds had increased from $188,919.90 to $194,426.52; and from taxes, voluntary contributions, etc., from $354,166.81 to $1,314,732.33. The expenditures for schools per capita of children of school age remained about stationary, being $10.23 in 1870 and $10.90 in 1879. (Conn. Rept., 1879, 21-22) In reviewing the fight for free schools he made the following remarks which show a change worthy of note: 76 Development of Free Schools in the United States "The enemies of free schools have either been converted or have learned the futility of open opposition. Dissentients are still found whose sympathy is needed to give the highest efficiency to the system. . . . Comparatively few now press the objection which was widely urged ten years ago, viz., 'It is unjust to tax me for the education of other people's children. I have none. Let those who have, pay the cost of their schooling.' The law has received an emphatic ratification from the people. Two years later, when its influence in increasing taxation had been fully felt, an earnest effort was made in the legis- lature for its repeal, which signally failed. ... As a result of free schools, the great majority of the towns concur in saying that there has been a decided advance in the number at school, in regularity of attendance, and in the mani- fest interest of the people. Moreover it is felt that the schools belong to the people. In patronizing them the poorest parent is proudly conscious that he has no leave to ask, no patron to conciliate, and no alms to beg." (Conn. Rept., 1879, 32-36) Besides this review by the secretary, Mr. Northrop, a session of the State Teachers' Association, held at New Haven, was in the nature of a meeting for self-congratulation on the ad- vance in free schools. It was also pointed out that the claim, made in 1868, that free schools were a species of communism, had been disproved. And finally it was shown that the idea of free education as charity had practically disappeared. (Ibid., 37, 46-49) PART II MICHIGAN GENERAL SOCIAL CHANGES The early period of exploration under French auspices had so little influence upon the period of 1800-1870 that it is purposely neglected. By 1800, Dutch and English traders, and settlers from New York and New England began to appear in the ter- ritory. After the opening of the Erie Canal, settlers from New York and New England came in large numbers. The population increased from 4,700 (1810) to nearly 400,000 in 1850. A very small percentage were negroes, but slavery was practically non- existent. By 1860, foreign immigrants added largely to the illiteracy of the state. Ten years before, the major part of the population consisted of persons born in New York, Ohio, Ver- mont, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, Connecticut and New Jersey. From New England the total was 30,923. New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey contributed 148,870. The pro- portions were similar in 1860. From 1800 to 1870 agriculture was the dominant vocation. In 1860 the ratio of the number of persons engaged in agriculture to the number engaged in manufacturing was six to one. The northern part of the state was not well settled until after 1870, but important cities like Grand Rapids, Ann Arbor, and Detroit had grown up in the central and southern parts. From 1800 to 1870 the government changed very much. Before 1805 the government was under the ordinance of 1787, and was composed of a military governor and a court of three justices holding sessions successively in different places in the Northwest Territory. Michigan, or the County of Wayne, was a part of this area. The officials were appointed by the Federal government. In 1799 a legislative assembly met at Cincinnati and the County of Wayne sent three delegates. The governor and three justices, before 1799, exercised all legislative, executive and judicial powers. In 1805 the Territory of Michigan was 77 78 Development of Free Schools in the United States created. The government was vested in a governor (William Hull) and three justices, the four possessing the powers of the three departments of government. Local government was vested in district courts and courts of justices of the peace. De- troit was given a city government composed of a mayor and council of two chambers, all appointed by the governor. Public land questions and titles were causing much discussion and trouble, and the unsettled status of the Indians and British con- stituted a menace to rapid development. The War of 1812 retarded the growth of the territory. In 1813 Lewis Cass became governor. In 1815 the county system of local government was adopted, and by 1822 eleven counties were organized. In 1819 the territory was given a popularly chosen representative in the national Congress. In 1823 a legislative council, appointed by the Federal authorities, was established. In 1827 the people were empowered to elect their council. The people adopted a constitution in 1835-1837, and the state was admitted into the Union. The new state kept this consti- tution until 1850, when a second was adopted, which remained in force until 1908. The territorial legislature established the town as the unit of local government, smaller in area than the county. This was very much like the New England town with its annual meeting and elective officers. (Cook, Government of Michigan) The plan adopted for the government of Detroit in 1805 was modified and applied to other urban communities, so that in the period in question Michigan had its general government and three types of units of local government — the county, town, and mu- nicipality. The panics of 1837 and 1857 had their influence upon the state, and the Civil War held the attention of the people for four years. Before 1850, the state had its fever for speculation and "wild- cat" banking. SOME LEGISLATIVE AND ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES, 1785-1870 By the national ordinance of 1785, the system of townships was provided. By the ordinance of 1787, a general government was provided. Under a law of 1795, the township was made the unit for administration of poor relief and apprenticeship. After Michigan became a separate territory, a law of 1809 required the overseers of the poor in each judicial district to divide the territory into school districts. The oft-quoted law of 1827 made townships and districts the local units of school administration, with most power in the township. Each district was to have three trustees who were required to levy a tax for school support. The townships had a board of five inspectors with general super- vision over schools. In 1829 three commissioners replaced the five inspectors, and the powers of districts were enlarged. The constitution of 1835-1837 adopted the district and perpetuated it by requiring that a school be maintained for at least three months each year in each school district. In the territorial period the University of Michigan was under the control of the legislature and a board composed of the gov- ernor and judges. The constitution of 1835-1837 provided a board of regents composed of the governor, lieutenant-governor, supreme court justices, and twelve other persons appointed by the governor and senate. This type of board continued to exist until 1850, when the new constitution provided for a new board. The members were to be elected, one from each judicial circuit, and were to have general supervision and control of the univer- sity. Still later (1862) the board was made up of eight regents, two to be elected each year. Under these types of management the university established several branches or secondary schools in the territorial period, and the higher education was developed. As early as 1833, the territorial legislature provided for a super- intendent of common schools. The constitution of 1835-1837 provided for a superintendent of public instruction to be elected by joint action of the governor and legislature. The constitu- tion of 1850 provided that this official should be elected by popu- 79 80 Development of Free Schools in the United States lar vote. The same document provided for a state board of education of three members with the superintendent a member ex-officio. This board had control of the state normal school only. In 1859 a deputy superintendent was added to the office of super- intendent of public instruction. A law of 1867 provided for county superintendents. In 1842 the city of Detroit was organized into one school district with full control of its schools. In 1859, all districts having more than one hundred children were empowered to reorganize and to establish graded and high schools. Following the lead of Detroit, many other cities reorganized into union districts under special acts of the legislature. The main items of school support used during this period were district taxes, township taxes, rate-bills, and income from the state school fund. The lands granted to Michigan for schools (Sec. 16, swamp and university lands) were gradually sold, some- times at a fair price, but usually at a low price. Money received from the sale of lands in section 16 became known as the Primary School Fund; that received from the swamp land, as the Swamp Land Fund. The state soon adopted the policy of borrowing this money as it was paid in. On the Primary School Fund it paid seven per cent, interest, and on the Swamp Land Fund, five per cent. Since then, the first is known as the Seven Per Cent. Fund, and the latter as the Five Per Cent. Fund. (Swift, Chap. XXX) District and township taxes were authorized in the law of 1827. In 1841, townships could levy taxes to the extent of one dollar per child of school age. Changes were made in this law in 1843, 1844, 1845, 1851, 1853, 1859, and 1879. In 1851 it was made two mills on the dollar; in 1853 changed to one mill, and raised again to two mills in 1859. No restrictions existed upon the power of the district to levy taxes until 1875. The law of 1827 uses the word "rate-bills," but the actual be- ginning of rate-bill legislation was the law of 1829. Later changes were made in this provision in 1843, 1850, 1859, and rate-bills were abolished by law in 1869. EDUCATIONAL CONDITIONS UNDER THE GOVERN- MENT OF THE NORTHWEST TERRITORY, 1785-1805 The history of the evolution of free schools in Michigan may- be grouped into six periods, as follows : (1) 1785-1805: Educa- tion in Michigan under the government of the Northwest Territory. (2) 1805-1837: Education under the Territorial regime. (3) 1837-1850: Development under the First Con- stitution. (4) 1850-1860: Free school development under Second Constitution to Civil War period. (5) 1860-1869 : Devel- opment from increase to two-mill tax to Free School Law for Common Schools. (6) 1869 to present. The first period, 1785-1805, is marked by some legislation of importance, but such educational conditions as existed were meager and their history very obscure. By act of Congress, 1785, all territory lying northwest of the Ohio River was or- ganized into a "Northwest Territory." Two types of legislation occurred in this period to influence education, viz., Federal and Territorial. The Federal legislation consisted of the land survey provisions of 1785, the section on education in the ordinance of 1787, and the powers to the board of treasury of the same year. The Territorial legislation consisted of two laws enacted in June, 1795, by the governor and judges of the Northwest Territory, the first entitled "A law establishing Orphans' Courts" (June 17), and the second "A law for the relief of the Poor" (June 19). The first of these laws was "An Ordinance for ascertaining the mode of disposing of lands in the Western territory," adopted by Congress, May 20, 1785. It provided for the system of land survey used in the Northwest Territory, including the township, divided into thirty-six sections one mile square, numbered con- secutively from one to thirty-six. This system applied to "the territory ceded by the individual states to the United States, "which has been purchased of the Indian inhabitants." The im- portant provision follows : " There shall be reserved the lot No. 16 of every township, for the maintenance of public schools, ■within the said township." (Hinsdale, A. B., Documents, 1269) 81 82 Development of Free Schools in the United States Following the agitation of the Ohio Company, and especially its leader, Dr. Cutler, the ordinance of 1787 was enacted. Article III, sees. 3 and 25, concerns our problem. "Sec. 3. . . . Religion, morality and knowledge being necessary to- good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of instruction shall forever be encouraged by legislative provision, not inconsist- ent with the right of conscience." "Sec. 25. That no law shall be passed to prevent the poor in the several counties and townships within this state from an equal participation in the schools, academies, colleges, and universities within this state, which are en- dowed in whole or in part from the revenue arising from donations made by the United States for the support of schools and colleges, and the doors of these said schools, academies and universities shall be opened for the reception of scholars, students and teachers of every grade without any distinction or preference whatever, contrary to the intent for which said donations were made." These provisions were enacted July 13, 1787. Ten days later, Congress defined the "Powers to the board of treasury to contract for the sale of the Western Territory," in which is found the fol- lowing provision: "The lot No. 16 in each township, or fractional part of a township, to be given perpetually for the purposes con- tained in the said ordinance (1785)." (Hinsdale, Documents, 1269) These provisions have as their most important result the devel- opment of the "Public Permanent Common School Funds." In Michigan this became the source of the Primary School Fund, the interest from which was an important factor in school support for many years before the schools became free from the rate-bill and its evils. 1 The second type of legislation, the Territorial, was a direct establishment of the apprenticeship system. The legislative authority consisted of Governor Arthur St. Clair, and the two territorial judges, John Cleves Symmes and George Turner. These officials, June 17, 1795, enacted a law to establish "Or- phans Courts." The enacting clause states that it was " adopted from the Pennsylvania code and published at Cincinnati." Section I provides that an orphans' court shall be kept by the j ustice of the peace in each county. Section VII gives the j ustices power to appoint guardians, tutors, and to bind minors as ap- prentices : 1 Fund has been used up and state levies tax to pay interest. Michigan 83 " ... and at the instance and request of the said executors, admin- istrators, guardians, or tutors, to order and direct the binding or putting out of minors, apprentices to trades, husbandry, or other employments as shall be thought fit." "Sec. XII. Provided always that none of the said Orphans' courts shall have any power to order or commit the tuition or guardianship of any orphans or minors; or bind them apprentices to any person or persons, whose religious persuasion shall be different from what the parents of such orphans, or minors professed, at the time of their decease; or against the minor's own mind or in- clination, so far as he or she has discretion and capacity to express or signify the same; or to persons that are not of good repute, where others of good credit, and of the same persuasion, may or can be found." (Laws, Northwest Territory, Maxwell's Code, Vol. 3, 81-89) On June 19, 1795, two days after the enactment of the law es- tablishing orphans' courts, "A Law for the relief of the Poor, Adopted from the Pennsylvania Code, and published at Cincin- nati," was enacted by the same authority. By section I, justices of the peace were required to appoint two overseers of the poor in each township. Section IV allowed said overseers, with consent of the justices, to levy a ratio on real estate not to exceed two cents on the dollar, and a poll tax of seventy-five cents on every ' 'freeman" not paying other tax "which assessments may be re- peated by the authority aforesaid, as often, in one year, as shall be found necessary for the support of the poor; to be employed in providing proper houses and places and a convenient stock of hemp, flax, thread and other ware, and stuff, for setting to work such poor persons as apply for relief, and are capable of work- ing; . . ." In section VII, power is given to collect such rates by force, if necessary. Section IX, " Concerning Poor Children," follows : "It shall and may be lawful for the overseers of the poor of the township afo'resaid, by the approbation and consent of two justices of the peace of the county, to put out as apprentices, all such poor children, whose parents are dead, or shall be found by said justices unable to maintain them, males till the age of twenty-one, and females till the age of eighteen years." {Ibid., Vol. 3, 127-148) Although these laws were enacted for the whole Northwest Territory, the Federal laws did not influence Michigan during the period in question, and the general territorial laws seem to have had even less influence, then or later. However, it should not be overlooked that these apprenticeship laws were the beginnings of a type of laws later enacted quite generally throughout the states, 84 Development of Free Schools in the United States in which apprenticeship as a means of education was considered applicable to the children of the poor. During the period of 1785-1805, the population of Michigan consisted of Indians, French, half-breeds, and, in or around De- troit, some English-speaking people. The British retained con- trol of this military post during a good share of this period. The French were interested in trapping, trading, and farming; the British, in trading and military affairs. Neither seem to have given much concern to matters educational. Their time was consumed largely with the physical activities of real frontier life. It is possible that some elementary parochial schools were maintained by the Catholics, but the writer has found no evi- dence of them. Immediately upon the establishment of a sepa- rate territorial government for Michigan, matters of education were given some attention. Out of the legislation of this period comes the Federal policies of land-grants for common schools, and that the advantages of such schools should be open to all without distinction. It is also the beginning of much apprenticeship legislation for states west of the Appalachian barrier. There is also a possibility that the Poor Law organization effected by St. Clair and the judges for the Northwest Territory in 1795 gave some suggestion to Hull and the judges for the enactment of the Michigan law of 1809 which is referred to in the following section. FREE SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT WHILE MICHIGAN WAS A TERRITORY, 1805-1837 The relation between schools and pauperism appeared very early in Michigan. It is seen in the following law enacted by the Territory of Michigan, February 26, 1809: "Be it enacted by the Governor and Judges of the Territory of Michigan, That it shall be the duty of the overseers of the poor of such judicial district within this Territory, some time in the month of May next, to divide their respective districts into such sections as, in their judgment, will be most con- venient for erecting school houses, and maintaining schools, which sections shall be styled school districts, which may be altered from time to time as will best accommodate the inhabitants." 1 This seems to have been the first legislation for schools in Michigan and it is significant that the schools are placed under the care of the overseers of the poor. In 1817, this idea again appears in the curious act establishing the Catholepistemiad, or University of Michigan. A section of this law provided that the tuition of indigent students should be paid from the public funds, as follows : "If the judges of the court of any county, or a majority of them shall certify that the parent or guardian of any person has not the adequate means to de- fray the expense of the suitable instruction, and that the same ought to be a public charge, the honorarium (tuition) shall be paid from the treasury of Michigan." 2 The writer has found no evidence of actual use of this provision. A law enacted by the Territorial legislature, April 12, 1827, is important. Its general provisions are modeled very closely after the Massachusetts law of 1647. Parts of section 6 and section 7 of this law are relevant. "Sec. 6. And it shall be the further duty of the trustees of each district, as soon as may be, after the trustees have voted a tax, to make a rate-bill or tax list, which shall raise the sum voted, with 4 cents on the dollar for collection fees, on all the taxable inhabitants of said district, agreeable to the levy on which the township tax was levied the preceding year, and annex to the said tax list or rate bill a warrant." 3 1 Territorial Laws of Michigan, Vol. IV, p. 90. 2 Report of the Commissioner of Education, 1897-98, Chap. XIII, p. 601. 3 Territorial Laws of Michigan, Vol. II (pub. 1874), p. 472. 7 85 86 Development of Free Schools in the United States Section 7 provided for the exemption of parents of children of the poor from supplying fuel as follows : "That no child or children shall be denied the privilege of attending school . . . for or on account of the inability of the parent or parents, or master of such child or children, to supply his, her or their proportion of wood in such district. . . - 1 The law was obligatory in all townships that adopted its pro- visions by a two-thirds vote at an annual meeting. The use of the words "rate-bill or tax list" obscures the real meaning of section 6. It is not clear that a real rate-bill was meant. It may have meant this, and also a property tax, or the terms may have been synonymous. Smith and Sherman both assume that a tax is meant by section 6. The following facts seem to show that what was meant was really a tax: (1) The phraseology " taxable inhabitants"; (2) the trustees are to vote a tax; (3) it seems that the tax was to be in proportion to the township tax levy of the year previous. If the law really meant a tax, the use of the term rate-bill is inaccurate. Yet it is significant that the term appears in the law. The exemption feature of section 7 again shows clearly the relation between exemption from charges and pauperism. A law enacted in 1829 provided for actual rate-bills. Sec- tion 17 provided that each person should be assessed in pro- portion to the number of days of school attended by his or her children. This makes it clear that tuition was meant. Section 24 provides exemption of the poor from payment of the tuition. 2 Section 23 provides that persons living remote from the school- house might be exempted from tax to build schoolhouses. If parents failed to supply fuel, their assessment would include a levy to pay for fuel. 'Territorial Laws of Michigan, Vol. II (pub. 1874), p. 472. 8 Sec. 24. "That whenever there shall be within any school district any poor and indigent persons, unable to pay for the instruction of his or her children, or where there shall be poor children without parents in any district, the directors of such district may, in their discretion, order such children of poor parents, or those without parents, to be instructed at the school of said district, and the expense of instructing such children shall be raised by a tax upon the taxable inhabitants of such district, and the assessment and col- lection of such tax shall be in proportion and after the same manner as herein- before mentioned for the raising and collecting of other taxes in said district." (Laws of Michigan, 1829) BEGINNINGS OF FREE SCHOOLS AND FREE SCHOOL LEGISLATION UNDER THE FIRST CONSTITUTION, 1837-1850 The next important action occurred while Michigan was organizing a state from a territory, and appears in section 3 of the article on education in the constitution as drafted in 1835, in the following: "The legislature shall provide for a system of common schools by which a, school shall be kept up and supported in each school district, at least three months in every year; and any school neglecting to keep up and support such a school may be deprived of its equal proportion of the interest of the public fund." (Shearman, 18. Hinsdale, Rept. U. S. Com. of Ed., 1892-1893) This did not provide for free schools. It required, however, a minimum term of three months in each district, and this pro- vision made the use of the rate-bill necessary in certain cases, in order to keep the school going for three months. Governor Mason, the first chief executive of the state of Michi- gan, in his message of 1836, dwelt upon education as follows : "It becomes then your imperious duty to secure to the State a general dif- fusion of knowledge. . . . Your attention is therefore called to the effectu- ation of a perfect school system open to all classes, as the surest basis of public happiness and prosperity." (Shearman, p. 20) The condition referred to was not realized as the governor recommended. The legislature of 1837 enacted a codification of school laws which seems to have been silent on the matter of rate-bills. Much was said about the financial conditions of the time by the legislators and the governor to indicate that this mat- ter was absorbing all of the attention, and leaving little or none for the concerns of education. The constitution adopted while Michigan was being admitted to statehood provided for a state superintendent of instruction. In harmony with this John D. Pierce was appointed by the governor to this office. No constructive educational legislation was undertaken until Mr. Pierce, at the request of the Assembly, outlined a system of schools. In his recommendations, he wrote in very definite terms: "Let free schools be established and 87 88 Development of Free Schools in the United States maintained in perpetuity and there can be no such thing as aristocracy in our land." He even went further and urged com- pulsory attendance for three months for all children between five and seventeen years. Some conditions of school support and attendance in 1840 will be indicated before proceeding further. The total district tax amounted to $59,126. The total attendance was 47,901, or the districts were raising a small amount above one dollar per pupil for school support. This, together with all other sources, still necessitated the use of the rate-bill. As to real attendance, its status was discouraging. In 1841, the state superintendent es- timated that "not more than one-half of our school attending children are in the habit of attending regularly summer and winter." (Shearman, p. 97) Ninety-seven districts had no schools. Such were some of the conditions with which the new system outlined by Mr. Pierce had to cope. Governor William Woodbridge in his message of January 7, 1841, wrote as follows: "The revenues necessary for the erection of schoolhouses, and the sustain- ment of the system generally, are derivable, first and principally from a course of taxation provided for by existing laws. The entire plan upon which this course of taxation is founded seems to me obnoxious to the most serious ob- jections." "Every system of taxation, to be just should be reasonable, equal and uni- form. It is a proposition as notorious as it is lamentable, that the assessments of taxes for school purposes, ... are neither equal nor uniform, and in some cases have been most highly unreasonable." While his words were general, they referred to conditions, one of which was the rate-bill, a phase " obnoxious to the most serious objections." (Sic!) The first free school law enacted in the state was a special act of 1842, for the city of Detroit. Section I reads as follows : "Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, That the City of Detroit shall be considered as one school district, and hereafter all schools organized therein, in pursuance of this act, shall under the direction and regulation of the board of education, be public and free to all children residing within the limits thereof, between the ages of five and seven- teen years inclusive." This law has a very important bearing on later developments. It legalized free schools in a city, and even made it necessary to maintain them. Soon other cities demanded this privilege, and Michigan 89 the example of Detroit had its influence. This procedure was similar to developments in Connecticut. While the year 1842 marked the enactment of the first free school law in Michigan, the year 1843 brought forth legislation fastening more firmly the rate-bill upon the common schools. This law empowered the assessor to collect rate-bills, if necessary, by distress and sale of goods and chattels. The moderator, di- rector, and assessor were constituted a district board which was required "To exempt from payment of wages of teachers or pro- viding fuel for use of the school, such indigent persons, as in their opinion should be so exempted." The director, at the request of any two persons liable for fuel and tuition bills, must call a meeting of all such liable, to consider need of raising school money. This had the effect of extending local district option in school matters. The same section exempted all persons liable for fuel bills, if they could show that they had provided their share of fuel. The director was required to make out all rate- bills. (Laws, 1843, 88) No definite information as to the amount of money collected by rate-bills was given until 1846, although earlier references are made to them, and their existence must have constituted a very serious problem. A township tax for the support of schools of one mill on the dollar was established in 1842, and amounted that year to $1,120 for the whole state. 1 This shows, on the face of it, that the law was not in operation in the entire state. In 1846, certain items of school support were as follows: Rate- bills $26,558; district tax $92,584; township tax $6,579. Thus four times as much was collected by rate-bills as by the township tax, while the district tax was about three and a half times as large as the total of the rate-bills. The attendance was very irregular, and complaints regarding this condition were frequent throughout this period, and even after the close of the Civil War. The school census of 1846 reported 97,568 children of school age in the state. In such districts as reported there were 4,578 children of school age who were also illiterate, and not attending school. It was also estimated that 15,000 children lived in such places that they had no access to schools. (Shearman, 154) The usual attitude toward the education situation was undoubt- edly voiced in the message by Governor Alpheus Felch, January 1 Township taxation was established by the law of 1827. 90 Development of Free Schools in the United States 4, 1847, when he said "The laws on the subject of common schools, it is believed, are such, when faithfully executed, as generally to secure, in a manner highly satisfactory, the great in- terests of education. . . . The chief obstacles to the realiza- tion of all the benefits of our noble school system, are found in the want of punctual attendance on the part of the scholars, and the deficiency in the qualifications of teachers. To correct the former rests principally with parents and guardians. The latter is an evil, deplorable in its consequences, and difficult of correc- tion." (Joint Document, 1847, 8-10) No thought appears in the message that conditions could be bettered by real free schools, but he would make the parents realize their own responsibility regarding attendance. Indeed, it is not very probable that the social consciousness of the people included, as an accepted prin- ciple, the principle that schools should be free at all, and sup- ported by public taxation. Other changes in the law concerning rate-bills appeared in 1850. By these new provisions, the district board was empowered to graduate tuition according to the studies pursued and to have usual coercive authority to collect rate-bills based upon such graduated rates. (Laws, 1850, 20) This added another detail to a plan of school support, already condemned by experience, but condoned because of inability to see the economy of its abolition. FREE SCHOOL DEVELOPMENT FROM ADOPTION OF SECOND CONSTITUTION TO ESTABLISHMENT OF TWO-MILL TAX AND OPTIONAL FREE SCHOOL LAW, 1850-1860 In 1850, the slowly developing free school sentiment began to take form in legislation. The superintendent of public instruc- tion suggested for consideration by the legislature the expediency of "adopting a system of Free Schools." (Shearman, 197) The committee on education in the House of Representatives took up the matter, as suggested and reported as follows : " The voice of the public press, the petitions which have been presented to the legislature at the present session, and the generally expressed desire in many parts of the State, have induced your Committee to examine this question with a view to ascertain its present practicability. . . . The example of other states is undoubtedly operating extensively among the people of this State as a stimulus to the establishment of free schools. And the fact that three states formed out of the ancient Northwest Territory have already pre- ceded us in this step upon a higher level of education effort . . . ought to command our earnest attention to a subject of such paramount impor- tance." (Shearman, 207) This committee estimated the total cost of tuition at $80,030.24, of which $50,412.36 came from public sources, and $29,717.88 from rate-bills, or, in other words, slightly over 37 per cent, of tuition was thus raised. At an earlier date a law had been en- acted allowing districts to tax themselves not to exceed one dol- lar per pupil, for school support. The committee recommended the repeal of this law, and the increase of the one-mill township tax to two mills which would make "a fund sufficiently large . . . to make primary schools of the state substantially free." (Shearman, 210) No legislation seems to have resulted from this recommendation. The question was yet a live one, however, and it was a part of the work of the state constitutional convention of that year to make some settlement of the question. The year 1850, in Michigan, is memorable for the formulation of the second constitution of that state. For fifteen years the state had progressed under the first constitution. The conven- tion was now called upon to reorganize the fundamental law to 91 92 Development of Free Schools in the United States meet the changed conditions of the commonwealth. In 1830, the population was 31,639, and the state ranked twenty-seventh among the twenty-eight at that time. In 1830, the population was rural and pioneer — it had all the characteristics of a new frontier. By 1850, the state had several cities of some impor- tance, such as Albion, Ann Arbor, Grand Rapids, Ypsilanti, and Detroit, the last named having a system of free schools. The State University was slowly developing. Private schools and academies were appearing; hardly a session of the legislature passed which did not grant one or more charters for such institu- tions. In 1836, the school enumeration (5 to 16 years of age) was 2,337; in 1850, the enumeration (4 to 18 years) was 132,234. These are some indications of the changes in the fifteen years. The convention took up the discussion of the proposed article on education submitted by Mr. Walker of Macomb. All sec- tions seemed fairly satisfactory except the third, which included the provisions following: 1. That the legislature should establish a system of primary schools; 2. Such schools shall be maintained in each district for at least three months in every year, without charge for tuition; 3. Such schools should be free to children between 4 and 18 years of age; 4. The English language and no other should be taught in such schools; 5. Any deficiency that might exist, after the distribution of the interest of the Primary School Fund, should be raised in the several townships and cities by a tax upon the whole taxable property in such townships and cities respectively. The adoption of this section would have gone far toward making schools free, and would have made all primary schools free for at least three months. And further, it would have placed the tax where it belonged — upon property, rather than upon individual parents or guardians. The committee of the whole took up this section. Sixteen amendments and amendments to amend- ments were proposed in the committee of the whole. Then it came up to the convention proper where no less than six amend- ments were offered. Some of the more important will be men- tioned. Fralick of Wayne offered a substitute which provided Michigan 93 for a tax upon property regulated by the number of scholars, any deficiency, after the distribution of interest from the Primary School Fund, to be raised by a tax levied by the legislature upon the property of the township or city. This was a move from dis- trict domination, and also towards support by taxation on property, both highly desirable. Morrison of Calhoun made the straightforward proposition that, beginning with 1855, an annual tax, not to exceed three mills, be levied upon the taxable property of the entire state for the support of common schools, such tax to be collected in the same manner as any state tax for state purposes. This, of course, was too wide a departure from local autonomy for men schooled in the politics of New York and New England local government to readily accept. Leach of Genesee proposed a substitute as follows: "First, a primary school shall be kept in each district at least months in each year; second, all persons 4 to 20 years of age could at- tend such schools; third, for the support of such schools (a) a state tax of not less than cents per scholar returned to the office of state superintendent, (b) this tax and school fund inter- est to be distributed to districts in proportion to the number of scholars in each, (c) any deficiency, that then might exist, to be met by a district property tax." John D. Pierce, who was then a member of the convention, opposed this. He favored free schools and a state tax. Several others spoke in favor of real free schools. The chairman of the committee, Walker, opposed Leach's proposition because of its similarity to New York prac- tices which, he had been informed, contained elements of dis- cord. Again Fralick came back with another proposition, this time retaining the idea of district taxation and control. This was immediately opposed by others. Still others favored the re- quirement that the legislature establish the system and attend to its details. After various proposals and much discussion, N. Pierce offered a substitute for section 3, as follows: "The Legis- lature shall establish by law a system of primary schools, by which our schools shall be kept in each and every school district, for at least three months in each year, and shall provide for the levying of a tax not exceeding two mills upon the dollar upon all the taxable property in the state, for the support of said schools; and the English language shall be taught in such schools." The words "and without charge for tuition" were inserted after 94 Development of Free Schools in the United States "free." Mr. Pierce's substitute, as amended, was then adopted by the committee of the whole. When this substitute came up in the convention proper, six amendments, of various kinds, were offered. The substitute offered by the committee was finally adopted, together with an additional section providing that dis- tricts failing to comply with constitutional provision as to free schools should forfeit their share of school fund income. How- ever, the matter was not ended here. On the 6th of August, Cornell moved to recommit the article on education to the com- mittee with instructions to strike out section 3 and insert another substitute. The vote on this instruction was carried, 45 yeas, 23 nays. The article was reported back the same day. Some further amendments were proposed, a vote taken to adopt the section as amended, and lost by a vote of 33 to 28. Here John D. Pierce came to the rescue of this rather unfortunate cause and moved to reconsider, which was done, and the whole article laid on the table. Again on the motion of Pierce, the article was re- committed to the committee on education. The following day it was reported back. A slight amendment was added requiring instruction to be in English, a substitute offered by Fralick was voted down, and the section and article adopted. The results of this discussion, argument, and contest are given in sections 4 and 5 of Article XIII of the Constitution of 1850: "Sec. 4. The legislature shall, within five years from the adoption of this constitution, provide for and establish a system of primary schools, whereby a school shall be kept, without charge of tuition, at least three months in each year, in every school district in the State; and all instruction in said schools shall be conducted in the English language." "Sec. 5. A school shall be maintained in each school district at least three months in each year. Any school district neglecting to maintain such school, shall be deprived for the ensuing year of its proportion of the income of the primary school fund, and of all funds arising from taxes for the support of schools." (Shearman, 212-261) If the friends of free schools thought the victory theirs, they were surely deceived. The only loophole left open was utilized to delay the legal establishment of the free school principle. "The Legislature shall within five years . . . provide . . ." was not carried out, and no one could compel the law- makers to do it. Of course, other causes helped to delay free schools until 1869, but this loophole gave the opportunity for evasion. Michigan 95 This contest brought forth several statements of the argu- ments for and against free schools, although the majority favored free schools. Throughout all of this discussion, there appears such prominent factors as the value of the district system, the experience of other states, the principle of property taxation versus taxation of parents who send children to school. Other arguments are quoted as follows: (1) "This amendment pro- vides that a tax shall be levied upon the whole taxable property of the State. ... As a friend of universal education, I go for this measure, believing that the whole property of the state should be taxed for the education of the children of the state." (Shearman, 217) "The true theory of government, as under- stood at the present day requires the whole property of the state to support the government of the state, instituted for the pro- tection of property." (2) " . . . a tax for educational purposes is but an interest tax for the protection of property, and should be paid equally by all taxable property protected." (3) "... the children of the state are the property of the state, and entitled to support, education, and occupation, whether their immediate guardians can give it to them or not." (4) The opposition argument that the wealthier communities would have to pay taxes which would be taken out of their communities appears several times. This was best stated by Fralick, who showed that nineteen counties would lose by a state tax, while this same loss would be gain to twelve other counties. (5) Further, it was held by some that it would be injurious to the new coun- ties. Walker said that most of the new counties would be re- quired to raise much more money than they would receive back again. Orr held that the "proposition has for its object . . . to rob the new and sparsely settled counties of the State of a por- tion of the money raised in such counties . . . and give it to the older and more densely settled portions of the state." (6) N. Pierce held that it was worth while to have a district tax in order to keep the people interested. (7) Gale and some others held flatly that free schools were good in theory but absolutely impracticable. Walker replied that "the history of the New England states shows that it can be done." (8) Walker also stated the argument that children of the poor were barred from schools as they were, and even from sharing in the benefits of income from land given by the United States for that purpose. 96 Development of Free Schools in the United States (9) A refutation of argument that tuition should be paid by pa- rents according to the number of children sent to school was stated by Walker: "It might be said that the man who has ten children should work ten times as much highway as the man who has no children. He travels the road ten times as much. So with poorhouses; so with courts; so with prisons. . . ." (10) Moore gave the best ordered list of arguments for free schools of any. They were : (a) Value of property and peace of society are enhanced, for education diminishes vice and crime, (b) Hence it is the duty of the state to provide an education for all its children, (c) "These common schools are of exceeding value by way of bringing forward and cultivating minds of great worth, that had otherwise lain forever buried in the obscurity of poverty. They are like scientific surveys for the discovery of the mineral resources of the state." (d) Free schools help to disseminate the principles of true democracy, (e) A general tax is the best means of support, (f) The state has already begun and should finish the establishment of real free schools. (Shearman, 212-259) A few months later the legislature convened and Governor Barry wrote in his message to this body concerning free schools as follows: "One more step is required to secure to all the children of the state the benefits of a common school education, and that step is the establishment of free schools. Though hitherto the charge of tuition has always been remitted to those not able to pay, yet, from a sentiment of delicacy or pride, the poor have not, in all cases, sent children to school. By provision of the revised consti- tution it is made the duty of the legislature within five years to provide for and establish a system of primary schools, to be kept in each district of the state at least three months in the year without charge of tuition. A provision of this kind cannot but meet the cordial approbation of every patriotic in- dividual and well wisher of his country. The taxation to carry this into effect, will hardly exceed that of the last and previous years collected for the purpose of education; and the common schools will, in name and in fact, be free to all." (Shearman, 262) Governor Barry was destined to see the rate-bills continue, although the legislature did enact a law calculated to relieve the evils of the situation. It was approved by the governor, April 7, 1851, and is known as the "two-mill tax law." It reads as follows : Michigan 97 "Sec. 107. The supervisor shall also assess upon the taxable property of his township, two mills upon each dollar of the valuation thereof, in each year, and twenty five dollars of the same shall be applied for the purchase of books for the township library, and the remainder thereof shall be apportioned to the several districts in the townships for the support of the sehools therein." (Laws, 1851, 172) Some changes in school support should be noted. The town- ship tax for the years 1850 to 1860 shows a steady increase, the greatest change coming in 1860. But in five of these years, the rate-bills exceeded the total of this tax, and were approximately equal to it in three other years. In five years of this decade, the rate-bills exceeded the amount of the Primary School Fund interest, and in some others did not vary from equality; the general tendency was for the rate-bills to be a little higher than this interest fund. In no one year did the rate-bills equal the amount raised by district taxes. In five years of the decade, rate-bills increased as against five when there was no increase, the increase varying from $2,600 to $21,641. In the year 1860, the township tax made a large advance and the rate-bills were lessened $37,384. This shows the possibilities of such a tax. (Appendix, Tables I, III) No attempt to fulfill the conditions of the new constitution appeared until 1855, when Governor Parsons reminded the legislature of their duty in his message in the following words: " ... it will therefore become your duty to see that the requirement of the constitution is complied with." (Joint Docu- ments, 1855, 18-20) The words of the governor were unheeded. No bill was introduced in the legislature to accomplish such a purpose. Why the legislature was indifferent to the requirement of the constitution is not clear. Some probable causes are the following: (1) The state was yet much like a frontier, and people were too deeply concerned with the sterner necessities to give much attention to such a matter; (2) the state superintendent made no serious objection to rate-bills; and (3) it is probable that the evils of rate-bills were not yet fully apparent to many people. In the years just preceding the Civil War, attention was again directed to the question of free schools. In 1857-1861, the statements of three governors bear upon free schools. Governor K. S. Bingham, January 7, 1857, said: 98 Development of Free Schools in the United States " No one now has the hardihood to question that property is safer and better protected in proportion as it is contributed to universal education. I trust, therefore, that you will not fail to make provision by which the requirements, of the Constitution shall be enforced that there be a free school in each dis- trict at least three months in each year." (Joint Documents, 1857, 8-10) After this rather feeble effort of Governor Bingham, the chief executive remained silent until 1859. In that year Governor Moses Wisner brought up again the question of free schools and the constitutional requirement. His statement follows : "It is to these primary schools that we must ever look for the stability of our institutions. It is here that our children meet on a common level. The children of the rich and poor, the high and the low, are here taught alike. Our primary school system should, however, be so perfected that no man within our State could be able to claim that poverty deprives him from edu- cating his children. Our primary schools should be free. The State should make ample provision for carrying into effect that clause of her Constitution, declaratory that 'a system of primary schools shall be established without charge for tuition.' " (Governor's message, 1859, 12-14) His words had no effect. That very year legislation actually extended the rate-bill as a means of support. One important type of legislation appeared, however, that tended to increase the growth of free schools. The legislation directly concerned with rate-bills was undoubt- edly due to rapid increase of this means of school support during this period. (See Table I, Appendix) By this law, the director was required to ascertain the amount of money which would have to be raised by a rate-bill. To this end, he was required to ob- tain from the teacher a record of the pupils' names and the number of days each attended. To make sure of this, the law required the teacher to keep an attendance record. Within twenty days after receiving such list, the director must send to the assessor a bill for tuition, fuel, and five per cent, of assessor's fees. This was to be accompanied by a warrant signed by the director and moderator. The warrant ordered the assessor to collect the respective amounts, within sixty days, and "if any person shall neglect, or refuse, on demand, to pay the amount. . . . for which he is liable, he (shall) collect the same by dis- tress and sale of goods and chattels of such person wherever found. . . ." (Gregory, School Funds and Laws, 176-182) By one provision, the moderator and director could exten,d the. time of payment of these bills "not exceeding thirty days."' Michigan 99 Perhaps the most important of all is the re-enactment of the exemption clause which was as follows : " Sec. 58. Said board (i. e., the district board) shall exempt from the pay- ment of teachers' wages, and from providing fuel for the district, all such per- sons residing therein as in their opinion ought to be exempted, and shall certify such exemption to the director; and the children of such persons shall be admitted to the district school free of charge during the time of such ex- emption." (Gregory, School Funds and Laws, 187) The state superintendent, in commenting on the section, said, " None ought to be debarred from school for lack of means to pay the rate-bills." Practically all of the features of this law of 1859 appeared in the law of 1829. Had the interest manifested in 1850 continued through the decade, possibly this law, fastening upon the state exactly the thing which the Constitution prohibited, would not have been enacted, but instead there would have been a free school law. It was this year when the township tax was again raised to two mills, where it remained for twenty years. Section 107 of the school law of February 15, 1859 provided that, "The supervisor shall also assess upon the taxable property of his township two mills upon each dollar of the valuation thereof, in each year. . . ." (Supt. Rept., 1860, 14) In the first year of the existence of this tax, rate-bills decreased from $104,869.20 to $67,484.87. The township tax was increased to $262,130 from $129,524, ap- proximately 100 per cent., while both the district taxes and in- terest money showed low increases. The decline in rate-bills, due to this tax, was continuous until 1864, when other factors caused an increase in them. "Of 628 townships and cities re- porting, there were 70 in which no rate-bill is reported," wrote the state superintendent. (Supt. Rept., 1859, 18) He also reported that 1,202 districts, or nearly one-third "are free from this ob- noxious tax." Equally as important as the two-mill tax, if not more so, was the law for graded and high schools, enacted in 1859. The im- portant sections are sections 1, 3, 5 and 150. Section 1 provided that "any school district containing more than 200 children be- tween the ages of 4 and 18 years, may elect a district board con- sisting of six trustees: Provided, the district shall so determine at annual meeting, by a vote of two-thirds of the voters attending such meeting. . . ." Section 3 granted the trustees powera 100 Development of Free Schools in the United States to classify scholars, establish high school on vote of annual meet- ing, fix rates of tuition, and prescribe courses and texts, and make regulations for the government of schools. Section 150 author- ized such districts to make schools free. 1 Section 5 authorized any two or more contiguous districts to form a single district when two-thirds of the voters at an annual meeting so voted. (Laws 1859, 446-8) This was seventeen years after Detroit was created into a school district and its schools made free. Now what was legalized in Detroit, by act of 1842, was made permissive throughout the state by this law of 1859. It did not make the schools free, but it did give towns and cities the op- portunities to make schools free, and, as we shall see, they used their opportunity. Before proceeding with the Civil War period, it is well to sum- marize the development up to this date. The relation between the free school and pauperism appeared in territorial enactment placing schools under care of the overseers of the poor in 1809. It again appears in the law of 1817, establishing the University of Michigan. The first real rate-bill law was enacted in 1829. The first constitution drafted in 1835 provided that schools be kept at least three months in each district of the state. In the following year the governor urged free schools in his message. The first state superintendent appointed under the constitution was John D. Pierce. It was he who planned a system for the state, most features of which were enacted into laws at that time. In 1842 the first real free school law was enacted legalizing free schools in Detroit. The next year the essentials of earlier tuition and rate-bill laws were codified in a single law. In 1850 the state superintendent urged the necessity of adopting a system of "Free Schools." The House of Representatives referred the matter to the committee on education, which recommended the establishment of free schools. During the same year, a new state constitution was drafted. The questions at issue were fought out in committee and in convention between friends and foes of free schools, with the result that the legislature was di- rected to establish free schools within five years. During the decade of 1850 to 1860, general interest in free schools seems to have waned. Even the recommendations of the two governors that the constitutional requirements be met were not considered. •See pages 185-186. Michigan 101 Rate-bills increased until they constituted over a fifth of the total school support. In 1859, rate-bill legislation was again enacted, a two-mill township tax established, and a law passed allowing districts having 200 or more children of school age to establish free graded and high schools. It has been shown that the in- come of the two-mill township tax was sufficient to decrease con- siderably the rate-bills in the state. GROWTH OF FREE SCHOOLS IN CIVIL WAR PERIOD AND FINAL OVERTHROW OF RATE-BILLS IN MICHIGAN, 1860-1869 The actual condition of educational finances from 1860 to 1869 needs explanation because of its relation to the movement. The amount of the two-mill tax increased every year except 1862 and 1863. The lowest amount was $248,934 in 1862; the highest was $323,246 in 1869. The average amount was about $290,000. The amount of the district tax increased every year except 1862 and 1 863 . The lowest amount was $233 , 1 25 in 1 863 , and the highest was $1,308,618.78 in 1869. The average amount was about $578,000 per year. The interest from the Primary School Fund increased every year except 1861 and 1865. It was lowest in 1861, amount- ing to $103,457. The highest figures were $165,651, in 1869. The average income per year from this source was about $135,720. The amounts collected by rate-bills varied more. A decrease in 1860 of about $37,000 was followed by smaller decreases each year until 1864, when $50,080 was the total. From 1865 to 1869, the annual totals averaged about $100,000. This increase must be accounted for by changes in teachers' salaries and cost of fuel. (See Appendix, Tables I, III) The number of school districts increased from 4,087 in 1860 to 5,052 in 1869. This meant a corresponding increase in the teach- ing force. During the Civil War period, fewer men and more women were found in the teaching staff of the schools. Scarcity of men teachers and normal increase in demand produced a great increase in salaries of men. Then, at the close of the war, men came back into the profession in larger numbers and at an in- creased salary. The growth in districts, and consequent addition of schools, brought more teachers of both sexes into the profession, but more often women than men. There was also a greater pro- portional increase in salaries of women teachers than men. In ten years, the number of teachers increased 2,328, or 29 per cent. The salaries of men in seven years increased 70 per cent., while the salaries of women increased 97 per cent. The increases for the last four years were 347 men and 400 women. At the average 102 Michigan 103 salary paid these teachers for these years, the total increase in cost of teaching was $24,194.10 per month, or for the average school year of 6.2 months, a total increase of $150,003.42 per year. This added expense was undoubtedly the cause of increase in the rate-bills. 1 This contention was upheld by the state super- intendent in 1863. (Supt. Rept., 1865, 43) Two other explanations of this increase in rate-bills seem prob- able. The first is that the increase is more apparent than real, and what seemed a real increase came as a result of getting facts which before had not been reported. The state superintendent for the years 1864 and 1865 said much about the inaccuracies of reports sent to his office and the failure to send them at all in some cases. "Responses more or less full were made in reports from about half of the towns in the state. " (Supt. Rept., 1864, 59) In the Superintendent's Report for 1865, several pages were given to considering this problem of inaccurate and unreliable re- ports. (Supt. Rept., 1865, 37-44) It is believed that this is a partial explanation. A third explanation is possible. It is that other school rev- enues did not increase during this decade proportionately and hence teacher support had no other resource but that of the rate- bill. But it has already been shown that the income from these sources had a steady and fair increase. This is further verified by reference to the facts for each year. Assuming that all of these facts are more or less subject to in- accuracy, it is here held that two things explain the rate-bill in- crease: (1) It was partly an apparent, rather than a real increase — how much it is impossible to ascertain; (2) such increase as did occur resulted from increase in number of teachers and teach- ers' wages. These, it is believed, are the most important factors. 1 Salaries and the number of teachers for the decade 1860 to 1869: Men Women Wages per month Year Teachers Teachers Total Men Women 1860 2586 5335 7921 1861 2326 5484 7810 1862 2380 5958 8338 1863 1918 6907 8825 $28.17 $12.44 1864 1816 7000 8816 34.00 16.63 1865 1326 7466 8792 41.77 17.54 1866 1687 7495 9182 43.53 18.44 1867 2007 7377 9384 44.03 19.48 1868 2095 7535 9630 47.78 21.92 1869 2354 7895 10249 47.71 24.55 (Compiled from Superintendent's Reports) 104 Development of Free Schools in the United States Having shown the conditions of school support for the decade, the development of free school districts, so far as possible, will be •indicated. The table which follows gives the total number of districts in the state for each year, and the number of these re- porting free schools, i. e., having no rate-bills. No. of Dist. No. of Dist. Percentage Year in State Free Free 1859 3968 1202 33 1860 4087 1785 43.6 1861 4203 2199 52 1862 4268 2364 56 1863 4382 2642 60 1864 4426 2662 60 1865 4474 2550 (est.) 57 (est.) 1866 4625 2503 54 1867 4744 2480 52 1868 4855 1869 5052 Figures for free school districts for the years 1865, 1868, and 1869 were unobtainable. The year 1870 began with all districts free from the rate-bill, so far as the reports reveal. As to free school counties, in 1869, 11 reported no rate-bills and 53 reported ^an average of $1787.78 per county. The average amount paid to teachers in those counties where rate-bills were used was $21,211. The percentage of the teachers' salaries paid by rate-bill in these counties was 8.4 per cent. Yet there were wide variations from this percentage. In Antrim County, the percentage was 13 ; in Berrien, 3.8 per cent., in Calhoun, 11.9 per cent., and in Hillsdale, 13.0 per cent. (Supt. Rept., 1869) How well did pupils attend schools partly supported by rate- bills? The first evidence is that which comes from the rather imperfect statistics of the time. The state superintendent's office never compiled data bearing directly upon this problem. Hence information from this source will be subject to error. The first figures relating to this problem are for the years 1841 and 1842. Non-attendants of school age for these years were 3 and 10 per cent. (Computed from Shearman, 94) The record for 1841 is very good. The state superintendent said that ". n