not a compliance with, but an evasion of, the law. Boards are required to 'make all necessary provisions, and to see that the subject is regularly taught. Owing to the fact that sources of information on this special phase of physiology are scarce, and that many of our teachers are young and comparatively inexperienced, a text-book in the hands of both teacher and pupils is a great advantage if not a necessity."

TEXT-BOOKS.

The superintendent renews his recommendation in favor of a law permitting the electors of any school district to authorize the board of directors to purchase text-books, the the of which is to be free to the children of the district.

ARBOR DAY.

In regard to Arbor Day, Superintendent Akers says: "Chapter 23, Laws of 1882, makes it the duty of boards of directors to plant shade trees upon school-house sites, and authorizes payment from the contingent fund. In obedience to this law, thousands of young trees have been planted; but this necessary improvement has so far been neglected in many districts. For the purpose of encouraging tree planting, and investing the exercise with all possible interest, I issued a circular letter, under date of April 4, 1887, designating the 4th day of May to be generally observed by all the schools of Iowa as Arbor Day. The day was very generally observed, and many interesting and delightful exercises were held. Owing to the early opening of the season, May 4th proved a little late for many varieties of trees, but it is believed that May 4th will be early enough for the average season. The hard-wood trees should be selected, and the planting of such trees may safely be deferred to May 4th."

For additional information concerning education in Iowa consult the Index.

KANSAS.

REPORT ON THE KANSAS SCHOOL SYSTEM BY A COMMITTEE OF THE KANSAS STATE TEACHERS' ASSOCIATION.

To the Kansas State Teachers' Association:

The committee appointed at the last annual meeting of this association to report on the desirability of a change from our present district system to either the township or county system, early in September sent a circular of inquiry to every county superintendent in the State. More or less complete reports were received from about forty counties, and these faithfully represent the condition of all parts of the State, as will be found in perusing the tabular statements embodied in this report.

In the first place, let us ask attention to the fact that the present system results in a choice of three school oflicers from a very small community, and from a very limited

number of men.

They may be (perhaps generally are) as good men as can be found in that community; but this fact does not relieve them from being only too often very poor school officers. Now the county superintendents referred to, in making their special reports, answered very generally this question: "How many school officers in your county visit their schools? A careful compilation of the replies shows that out of nearly 8,000 officers only some 1,300 (or less than one-sixth) discharge this very plain duty. In other words, the result is the same as though in all the odd-numbered districts the officers never visit their schools, and in the even-numbered districts only one member of the board knows by personal observation the conditions and needs of the weighty matters intrusted to him! This would seem bad enough, and might well cause us to look more carefully into district affairs; but there is worse than this. Another question was: "What proportion of your school officers thoughtfully and intelligently discharge their duties?" It is quite possible that some school officers are busy men, with no time for visitations-and yet give much thought to their work. It is not impossible that excellent teachers make visits from the board almost unnecessarry. But there can be no excuse for carelessness, thoughtlessness, or incapability. Yet answering for more than 7,000 officers, but 2,000 were reported favorably. On an average, then, in each district about seven-eighths of a man thoughtfully and intelligently discharges his duties" as a school officer! And the education of our children, and intelligent citizenship, and the future of this State, depend largely on the results of this two-sevenths management! Is it not time to investigate, to see whether the system or the men are to blame; to see what remedies are needed, and what can be applied?

It is quite probable that districts do as well as they can in selecting officers. Further, the superintendents in question have doubtless understated rather than overstated the evils prevalent in their own counties. This last should be constantly in mind. Men speak as favorably as possible of their constituents, even in confidential and privileged communications. We may be sure that the case is worse than actually reported, rather than better.

To proceed: Superintendents having within their jurisdiction over 7,000 officers report 2,000 of these as "wholly unfit for their positions." It might be questioned as to the respects in which these officers were unfit, but on one point the returns are painfully explicit. It is with much hesitation that we quote the figures. As Kansans and citizens we are ashamed of the showing. But we believe that the evil will never be remedied till the facts are brought to the public eye, ear, and conscience.

Asked, "How many officers are virtually illiterate?" the gentlemen interrogated say more than one fifth-1,600 in 7,200 (round numbers)!

We wish to pause right here to ask careful consideration of the facts thus made prominent. As business men, as practical men, it is time citizens carried to school matters practical and business sense. If taxes are not a good investment, then taxes had better come to an end. They can not be a good investment, however, when expended by a body of men a large per cent. of whom have no knowledge of the business, while still a larger per cent. give it no attention whatever. If of any 70 hired men only 13 gave the business in hand the benefit of their presence and personal effort, 21 "thought about it," and 36 knew nothing about it at all, how long could the employers of such laborers keep out of bankruptcy? Suppose that Superintendent Parnham, at the capitol building, should report to the commissioners: Total number of men employed and paid, 70; average reporting for duty, 13; number who say "they are thinking about it," 21; cripples, blind, and wholly unfit" for work, 36; about how long before Superintendent Parnham would be on his journey to Lawrence?

Yet this is precisely what we seem to be doing all over this State-partly because we are wedded to precedent (the district system), and largely because we are so very busy making money that we can not stop to see that it is wisely expended.

For our children's sake, if not for our own, we should seek a remedy for the prevailing inefficiency of a large per cent. of our rural schools.

There is another phase of our present system which is almost as disheartening as the wretched showing made in official zeal and ability. That is, the limitations, inequalities, and rank injustice of the resulting taxation. We are generally so alert to perceive that which touches our pockets, that it is remarkable that this inequality of burdens has not made itself felt before.

From part of the reports referred to the following contrasts have been drawn. The figures may speak for themselves. They are said to be contined to districts in which one teacher only is employed:

Remember, these are communities within the same county limits, in some cases side by side, engaged in the same struggle for existence and for education, as one of the essentials to an enjoyable existence. By a purely artificial division of territory, by lines

which can not be scen but can be most severely felt, for reasons that are frequently inserutable and are often those of some little clique with political influence, these people find themselves under the most unequal system of taxation that can be devised. Why should Atchison County be so divided that one community has over $1,600 assessable values for every child of school age, while another has but $150? Why has one district in Chautauqua $725 assessable for each child, and another but $125? What thoughtfulness, or justice, or equity can be claimed for a system that produces such results as can be seen through the entire list.

The showing ought to arouse public indignation. discussion.

The least it can do is to promote

It will, perhaps, be objected, that the contrasts exhibited in the statistical tables were exaggerated in this respect; that they touched extreme cases only. It is impossible, of course, to make a minute showing of every phase of the present slovenly, unjust, and inequitable system of managing and providing for our schools. But, in order that the question may be wisely discussed, and the presentation of facts as fair as possible, the following table has been prepared. Again the reports are made for districts employing but one teacher. The counties are taken, without selection, from the alphabetically-arranged list, as far as complete returns have been made:

We cannot see the use of pursuing these comparisons further. The result is the same from Alpha to Omega, from A to Izzard! Any one can see the existing inequalities at a glance.

We venture the assertion, that if these inequalities and disabilities were political rather than educational-if they affected the political interests or prospects of parties as they do the educational of communities-there would be a redistricting or a revolution, and that before next spring.

What is a fair estimate of the annual cost of a good school? We do not mean the very best; but the least that we have a perfect right to demand and expect in every district, if our system is to be more than a farce.

Something as follows:

A good teacher six months, at $50.

$300

50

20

25

30

425

We do not care to discuss this statement by even one printed line of argument. Any one whose opinion is worth anything kno ws that this is really a minimum, and by no means all that can be desired.

What kind of schools, then, can be expected in the five lowest districts in each county reported in the last table? Examine the following table for the answer:

That's a comfortable showing! In twenty-two counties-representative counties, selected at random--the average district of the five lowest valuations can raise, by taxing itself to the extreme legal limit, $232, or a trifle more than half enough for a good six months' school! No wonder that the chief qualifications of some rural teachers seem to be "cypherin' and lickin'."

Take the average of the five highest valuations (holding still to districts employing but one teacher); suppose them to tax themselves equally with the five lowest, and then compare the educational possibilities of the children of one with those enjoyed (?) by children in the other. Compare, or, better, contrast, the tables as you read.

This shows an average of $1,014; or considerably more than four times the average of the five lowest. This is called equality of taxation, "equality before the law," educational equality.

In the estimate given above, $425 was considered the minimum expense of a tolerably good six months' school. It was shown that many districts could not raise this amount under the present limitation; while some districts under a 20-mill tax could raise three or four times this amount.

Can a single valid objection be raised to spreading the aggregate running expense of all the schools of a county upon the county rolls?

The State has three objects in view in public education. It wishes to make each man an intelligent voter; it wishes to make each independent of the necessity for public aidthat is, to lift him above possible pauperdom; it wishes to make him strong enough to bear his share of all public burdens. These are such essentials in a fiee republic, that we have accepted as a truism, the State must educate or perish.

Education, then, is the public necessity, a public duty, a public burden (as far as expense goes), and a public blessing. Its methods, therefore, should be as largely public and as little communal as possible.

In this State, as in most Western States, the county is really the political unit. The desirability and justice of distributing to the county at large what had been so long carried by townships (under the rather limited New England system)—such as bridges, the care of the poor, etc.-has long been recognized. The school, which should have been

first to receive this more just as well as more generous treatment, has thus far been left to be handled in a happy-go-lucky way by the petty little communalities, which we insist on retaining for no reason other than "for the sake of self-government;" as though self-government did not exist in the county, or as though self-government were desirable for its own sake rather than for its results!

Let us suppose a county system, for taxation at least, and note the results. The task of making the necessary computations for many counties is arduous and unnecessary. One county, a thoroughly representative one, will be sufficient.

In this county we find, outside of its one city, a valuation of $3,200,000. It has eightyfive school districts-far too many, if any reasonable amount of discretion had been used in districting the county. But we will take it as it is.

The problem then is: 85 times $125 equals $36,225; $36,225 equals 11.8 mills on $3,200,000.

Think of it! A good six months' school in every district in the county for less than a twelve-mill tax. If any district wishes to do more, let it do so; but here is an absolute guarantee of good work throughout the county.

It seems impossible to study the figures in the foregoing tables, and the inferences drawn from the answers of superintendents, without concluding that our school system is wretchedly inefficient, and that our legislature should at once be asked to enact a law which will secure for us a juster taxation, more efficient supervision, more intelligent officers, a simpler machinery, a uniform course of study, uniform text-books, and, as a consequence of all these, infinitely better results in our schools than it is possible to expect under the present system.

Your committee therefore recommend, that all laws in relation to our independent school district system be repealed. We have carefully examined the school systems of various States, and we conclude that the model system of schools for a State, approved by the National Association of Superintendents, at Philadelphia, in 1876, and also by the veteran Commissioner of Education, General Eaton, who has given the best years of his life to a study of school systems, is the best for Kansas, and it is the system your committee now respectfully present to you. As that part of the Kansas school system which relates to higher education is in the main satisfactory, it has not been touched in this report; and all the recommendations made have reference solely to the rural parts of the State, excluding all cities of the first and second class.

In dividing the State for school purposes, we recommend

That the county should exercise a limited general supervisory control over its schools, select a county superintendent, have a county board of education, secure uniformity in text-books, have power to establish county high schools.

That the county board of education should be composed of the school trustees of corporations which are under the supervision of the county superintendent, consider the general needs and wants of the schools under its charge, seek to unify the school work, arrange a course of study, make general rules and regulations in regard to the employment of teachers, time of commencing schools, the government of the schools and the conduct of the teachers and pupils, etc., adopt text-books, levy a county tax.

That the city or township should be left to the local control of its schools, elect its officers, build its own houses, select its own teachers from among those that have been duly qualified under the laws of the State, be permitted to levy local taxes for the building of houses, etc.; be permitted to levy local taxes for the continuance of the schools beyond the minimum period fixed by the State, be permitted to levy local taxes for the maintenance of schools of an advanced grade.

That districts should be formed for the purpose of localizing the patrons of the school; have an advisory power in the selection of teachers and the erection, removal, or repair of school-houses.

That trustees of townships and cities should be three for each corporation; be elected by the people; serve for three years, one retiring annually; receive school revenues; have power to levy local taxes, within specified limitations, for grounds, buildings, furniture, repairs, supplies, apparatus, etc., and for library purposes and for additional tuition purposes; be compelled to locate, establish, and maintain a suficient number of schools for a certain number of months in each year; have power to abolish old school districts, create new ones, build and remove houses; be compelled to make provisions for instruction in certain prescribed branches; have power to establish township or town graded schools; have power to provide instruction in branches additional to those prescribed by law; employ and contract with teachers, being restricted in their selection to those who have been duly licensed by competent authority; properly account to proper officers for all school revenues that come into their hands; receive reports from teachers, and should transmit reports to the county superintendent and other county officers; have authority to dismiss refractory pupils from school; be prohibited from contracting debt; carry out the orders of the county board of education in respect to course of study and text-books.