Popular Education / For the use of Parents and Teachers, and for Young Persons of Both Sexes

by Ira Mayhew

Provisions for the Support of Schools.—The provisions which have been made for the support of schools may be reduced to three kinds: first, by means of funds; second, by taxation; third, by a combination of both of these methods.

Connecticut, which has a school fund of more than two millions of dollars, long ago adopted the first plan named. But the inefficiency of her system of public instruction, until within a few years, is proverbial, and affords conclusive evidence that a large school fund is of little or no avail in the absence of a correct public opinion and a due appreciation of the importance of education. The improvements in the schools of that state during the last few years are not in consequence of any increase in her school fund, but because the importance of the subject has been so frequently and impressively presented before the public mind, by means of lectures, public discussions, educational tracts, school journals, and in various other ways, as to overcome that popular indifference which had well-nigh precluded all advance. The late improvements in that state have taken place in spite of the school fund rather than because of any aid derived from it. Dr. Wayland has expressed the opinion that school "funds are valuable as a condiment, not as an aliment; and that they should never be so large as to render any considerable degree of personal effort on the part of the parent unnecessary." This is true only when a fund is so far relied upon as to slacken personal effort for the improvement of the schools, and to induce parental and popular indifference in relation to them.

The second plan is by taxation, and Massachusetts furnishes an example of it. In most of the counties of this state there are small local funds, the avails of which are added to the amount raised by tax for the support of schools. There are also still less amounts appropriated from the income of the surplus revenue for the purpose of increasing the educational advantages of the children; not to be subtracted from, but to be added to, what the towns would otherwise grant. We may, then, consider the school fund of this state as embracing the entire taxable property of the state, from which such a sum is annually raised by tax as is necessary for the support of the schools. In Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine, the schools are supported essentially as in Massachusetts, the difference being chiefly in the mode of taxation.

Dr. Wayland, in a letter written some years ago, makes the following remark in relation to the support of schools: "The best legislative provision with which I am acquainted is that of Maine. They have no fund whatever, but oblige every district to raise for education a sum proportioned to the number of its inhabitants or its property. If a town or a district neglects to do this, it is liable to a fine."

In those states whose systems of public instruction are best administered—which have the best schools, and the greatest proportion of the population in attendance upon them—the schools are generally supported almost entirely by a direct tax, the great principle that the property of the state should educate the children of the state being practically recognized. It not only appears, then, that large funds are not required for the successful administration of systems of public instruction, but that actually the best schools, and those which are doing most for the correct education of the rising generation, may be found in those states that are destitute of funds, and whose public schools are supported by a direct tax upon the property of the state.

The third plan of supporting schools is a combination of both of the others. New York until within the last year,[67] Rhode Island, and Michigan may be cited as examples of this plan. Where this plan has been adopted, the districts or townships have generally been required to raise by tax an amount equal to or greater than what has been received from the school fund. Where the expense of supporting the schools has exceeded the whole fund derived from both sources, the balance of the expense has generally been made up by a rate-bill, parents who are able being required to pay in proportion to the number of days their children have attended school. This feature is objectionable even where provision is made for the children of poor parents to attend without charge, for it offers a pecuniary inducement, although the schools be nearly free, to withdraw scholars from attendance upon them for the slightest causes. This plan has obtained very generally in the states northwest of the Ohio River, which have received from the General Confederacy a grant of one section, or six hundred and forty acres of land in each township for the support of schools. In some of these states the additional tax is already sufficient, when joined with the avails of the school fund, to render the schools entirely free. If one plan is superior to both of the others, this is, perhaps, entitled to the pre-eminence. The school fund lessens the amount which it is necessary to raise by a direct tax; and still the sum which is levied in this way has a tendency to beget and maintain a lively interest on the part of capitalists in the administration of the educational department, and in the maintenance and improvement of the public schools.

Without a correct public opinion and a due appreciation of the importance of education, either of the three systems named, or any other which may be adopted for the support of schools, will, and, from the very nature of the case, must, be inadequate to meet the necessities of a free people. But let the public be alive to the advantages of education, and rank it first among the necessaries of life, and almost any system will be attended with eminent success. If, then, one system is superior to all others, it is that which is best calculated to beget in the popular mind a realizing sense of the necessity of educating all our youth in good schools. If this can be done in a state which has a large school fund, without diminishing the interest of the people in education, or relaxing their efforts to maintain improved schools, then may such a fund prove serviceable, as it will lessen the general tax. But if the citizens of any state can not be brought to realize the importance of maintaining an elevated standard of common school education, and of rendering its blessings universal, without defraying the whole expense by a direct tax, then will a school fund prove to them a curse, and not a blessing.

Where there is a will there is a way, says the adage. Mr. Duer, as quoted at the head of this chapter, says, "I would recommend that each state should raise a fund sufficient for the entire support of the schools; that a suitable school-house and apparatus, with a convenient dwelling-house for the teacher, be furnished by the state for each district; and that every school-house be supplied with a well-qualified teacher, who shall receive from the state a suitable compensation." In this recommendation I fully concur. But with me it is immaterial whether the state raises a separate fund, set apart exclusively for the purposes of education, or regards the entire taxable property of the commonwealth, personal and real, as a general fund from which there shall be drawn annually a sufficient per centage to provide for universal education in free schools. This only do I insist upon, that the people be brought so fully to realize the advantages of a good common education as to place it high on the list of indispensables; then will they provide for rendering its blessings universal. The mode of doing this in any one state may, in view of the peculiar circumstances of a people, be different from that which it would be most advantageous ordinarily to adopt. If there is no other sure way of meeting the expense of common schools, and of begetting and maintaining a deep and abiding interest in popular education, then let the property of the state be regarded as a common fund from which there shall be annually drawn a sum sufficient for the maintenance of improved free schools, in which every child may receive a generous education, as this is the interest first in importance to individuals and families, to neighborhoods and communities, to states and nations.

The state should maintain an Educational Department. The magnitude of the interests involved renders this of the utmost importance. At the head of this department in every state there should be a minister of public instruction—whether he is called school superintendent, school commissioner, secretary of the board of education, or superintendent of public instruction—and he should be allowed time to make himself familiar with all the leading writers on the subject of education, in whatever age or language their works may have been written. Such an officer can not in any other way become qualified for the proper discharge of the duties which pertain to his profession. He should also be allowed time to acquaint himself with the current literature belonging to his department as it emanates from the press; to examine new school-books, and new kinds of school apparatus which claim to possess advantages, that he may be prepared to give to school teachers, school committee-men, and others whose opportunities for examination and investigation are less extended, and many of whom must be inexperienced, such advice as shall enable them judiciously to expend their means for their personal improvement or the improvement of their schools. He should likewise have time and opportunity to become so conversant with the practical operations of different school systems as to be qualified to give such suggestions in official reports as may be of service to the Legislature in perfecting their own, and to subordinate officers in its successful administration. All this would be necessary were we only to consult the pecuniary interests of the state in the judicious expenditure of the means which are annually devoted to the support of common schools. Of how much greater importance is it that there should be such an officer in every state, and that he should enjoy every possible means for increasing his usefulness, when we consider that the successful bestowment of his labors will contribute greatly to increase individual and social happiness, and the general prosperity of the state in all coming generations.

In the further consideration of the means of rendering the blessings of education universal, we shall introduce leading topics in the order in which they naturally suggest themselves.