($20.00–$5.81) equals $14.19. The difference between the average rate of the twenty places mentioned, and the lowest of private tuition is ($20.00–$13.01) or $6.99 in favor of the public system. It may therefore be said, without fear of negation, that even in a financial point of view, OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS PAY." (Conn. Common School Journal, 1862, 311-313)

There are but nineteen

There is an error in this statement. towns included. This would somewhat change the values. The average then becomes $12.51, instead of $13.01. The first and second differences remain the same, because the average is not considered, and $7.49 should replace $6.99. It is known that private schools existed from very early times in Michigan. Their purposes were varied. Some were commercial ventures of certain teachers; others were maintained by religious sects to further their own interests. (Supt. Rept., 1867, 72) Some were organized to prepare teachers for examinations. (Supt. Rept., 1867, 46) Many of them seem to have been of the academy type and were incorporated by special acts of the legislature. (Shearman, 503-544) No statistics were reported concerning these by the state superintendent until 1863. Table VI (Appendix, Michigan) gives the attendance for both public and private schools. The growth of private school attendance was continuous from 1863 to 1868. From 1869 to 1874, the general tendency was a decline. In public school attendance, the increase was practically continuous.

The private schools of Michigan were not criticised by school officials like those of Connecticut, and evidence is wanting to show other relationships to free schools.

In general, private schools were a hindrance to free school development, as the evidence given shows. The opponents of private schools declared that such schools were often un-democratic, anti-republican, un-American, conservers of caste in an otherwise democratic society, opponents of public schools, agencies which weakened public school attendance, enrollment, and support, and that such schools often grew up because of poor public schools and then continued to exist for the same excuse. That private schools decreased attendance of public schools is evident from the fact that, in both states, private school attendance tended to decrease after the enactment of free school laws. The antagonism against private schools seems to have been greater in Connecticut.

EDUCATION AS CHARITY

Mr. Barnard stated in 1850 that the system of private schools, by withdrawing attendance from the public schools, left the public schools for the poor. (See Private Schools) This view was stated by many others. From this fact, and the fact that indigent pupils were exempted from tuition in public schools, arose the phrase "pauper school." That meant that free education was charity. How strong was such a feeling, and how did it influence the coming of free public schools? If we examine the early apprentice legislation of the two states, we find that in one (Michigan), the management of this was placed in hands of the justices of the peace as overseers of the poor, and that it was intended primarily for the children of the indigent. This was not the case in Connecticut. All who were not educated in some other manner, were to be apprenticed, regardless of economic status. As we review the rate-bill legislation of both states, we find that the exemptions from tuition charges are based on indigence of the recipient, i. e., it was a matter of charity. How much self-respecting persons felt the implications of such exemptions is difficult to tell. Northrop mentioned (1868) a case of a washerwoman who scorned to send her children to such a school. (Conn. Rept., 1868, 135-138) Mr. Philbrick (1855) mentioned the case of a boy idling his time away in the streets because his father was too poor to pay the rate-bill, the implication being that the father was too proud to ask for exemptions and be classed as indigent. (See Appendix) Northrop related an example of a widow who was burdened unduly by the tuition charges and who would not ask exemptions. His best example was that of a carpenter who was reported to have said, "So far, I have always supported my family, and so long as I can work, I won't beg for schooling." (See Appendix) It may have been that such examples were plentiful, but facts do not reveal them. If free school privileges were a mark of charity, we should expect the majority to be opposed to such schools. But we find instead that panics were created when it was found that the ratebill would be increased. People did not want to pay tuition.

INFLUENCE OF BELIEF IN THE MORAL VALUE OF GENERAL EDUCATION

The code of 1650 exhibits the Puritan belief in the religious and moral values of education for all. The later changes in this law still retain the fundamental idea of education for the moral value. Noah Porter's essay strikingly sets forth this view. Governor Minor referred to the moral value of education in 1855. Secretary Northrop's arguments for free schools give much attention to this belief. The Ordinance of 1787 (Art. III, sec. 3) incorporates this belief into law. In the Constitutional Convention of 1850 in Michigan, this view was advocated very well by Moore. In the Michigan sectarian controversy, the statement of Levi Bishop is a defense of the secular school because of its moral value. John D. Pierce held to this view and declared it at various times. The citation from the Norwalk Gazette, the statement of a member of the Connecticut State Board of Education, the memorial of the Hartford Ministerial Association, and the platform of the State Teachers' Association (Conn.) are evidences that this belief was firmly held by the advocates of free schools. This belief and its relation to free schools may be reduced to the following statements: (1) Education produces moral results; (2) it is necessary that all have the advantage of moral training thus afforded; (3) to make these values universal, schools must be free.

SUMMARY

CONNECTICUT

The more remote origins of our free schools were European educational practices. The actual beginnings were in the colonies. In Connecticut, there existed a widespread and firm belief in the necessity of general and vocational education. All men should be able to read and write, should be trained in morals and religion, and fitted for some vocation. For many the vocational training was apprenticeship; for a few the vocational training was obtained in the college or by private study. Two phases of free schooling developed. First, children of the poor unable to pay tuition for instruction in reading and writing, were exempted from such charges, and the expense borne by the community. The poor were schooled at public expense, but it was considered charity. Second, some schools seem to have been free to all who attended them. Apprenticeship, in some cases, may have been supported by the public.

Before the Revolution, decentralization in school control had gained much headway. Immediately after the war it continued, and increased until the state government had surrendered to the small district and society practically all control over education. It was thus easier for disinterested local communities to avoid responsibility for school support.

In 1795 the school fund was established, the first in the United States. The income from this fund, together with the money from the state tax, made it possible to maintain schools in local communities several months each year without charging tuition or levying local taxes. It was believed that the fund income would support the schools. So we find that communities began to place complete reliance for such support upon this income and the state tax. In 1821, the state taxation ceased, and more dependence was now placed upon the fund income. The cost of schooling gradually increased, and communities which had not paid school taxes for several decades faced the problem of meeting the increase. Loath to levy taxes, they followed other early

precedents and charged tuition fees, which action had been legalized after the Revolution by the law of 1796. Other localities levied taxes and charged tuition. The earlier practice of exempting the poor from payment of such fees was revived. Many difficulties were encountered with the bills for tuition and the exemptions therefrom. Attempting to overcome these difficulties the state enacted the following series of laws: tuition law, 1796; fuel exemption law, 1824; first real rate-bill law, 1839; recodification, and fixing of maximum rates, 1856; rate-bills to be fixed "at or before commencement of term," 1858; rate-bills to be made out before close of term, 1860; pupils attending part of term required to pay full term tuition, 1862; many special acts to validate illegal practices, 1860-1864; last rate-bill law, 1864. These laws were all ineffectual attempts to make the rate-bill system work smoothly.

The Town Deposit Fund was wastefully managed and did not better the situation. The necessity of levying taxes to pay interest on these funds may have helped to accustom some localities again to pay taxes for schools. Local taxation, in town and district, was very important, greatly exceeding the support from town deposit funds, state school fund, or rate-bills. The people of Connecticut were slow to recognize the necessity of taxation to support schools. No state tax was levied from 1821 to 1856, yet by 1846 it was evident that if schools were to be free, taxation must be used to supplement other sources.

The income from the state fund was not distributed efficiently to stimulate local support. That such was possible was shown by the record of the state to aid the growth of school libraries. Better methods of distribution of state fund income were advocated several times. If they had been used, local school support would have more rapidly increased.

From 1800 to 1840, the tendencies in education were toward a general decline. About 1835, contemporary with the so-called "Common School Revival" in other states, some manifestations of an awakening interest in the schools began to appear. The work of a legislative committee, the establishment of the Board of Commissioners of Common Schools with Henry Barnard as secretary, and other agencies stimulated greater interest in schools. Gradually the aroused public sentiment took form in the general school code of 1856 which abolished school societies,