out of politics and such cannot be so long as popular election along with other officers is resorted to. When chosen, his tenure should be understood to be so long, and only so long as his work is satisfactory. Look at Kern of Illinois, or Miss Jessie Field of Page county, Iowa, and others for example. They should be given such territory (possibly more than one county in sparsely settled regions) as would occupy their full time. There should be no division of time with other occupation. With these safeguards more of real worth could be secured. The salary, as suggested elsewhere, should be such as would offer an inducement to enter that line and to remain actively engaged. We need not repeat the duties in detail here. Those elsewhere enumerated would practically all be within. his line of action, his duties being mainly outside first and second class cities. His deputies would constitute his advisory board and with him might exercise many of the duties of a county board. We would suggest some changes and additional duties. Certification as found in many states should be mainly in the hands of the state board. Questions should come from that body; county superintendents oversee manuscript work; grading and certification be done by state; county superintendent to approve certificates for his county. He should make consolidation of weak schools an item of especial attention as a most important movement. Undoubtedly here is opportunity for a larger, fuller rural life. He should strive to build up his teaching force, and encouragement of normal training work in high schools is one of the most promising lines. For purposes of administration of specific schools, including organization, employment of teachers, etc., the township is better than the single school district as unit, and county as unit would be yet better. The success of Richmond county, Georgia, is an example. Undoubtedly we need to get away from the antiquated idea of single districts as units. In the selection of teachers the county superintendent should have larger advisory and stronger selective powers. The list of county superintendent's possible activities before mentioned, and which we need not repeat here, shows how great and far-reaching may be his influence over school and community life. No other officer approaches him in the possibilities of his work. County boards of education, elected by the people, should be carefully chosen and should stand ready to advance school interests generally.

IV. Finance

Reforms in our financial system as suggested are much needed. The tendency is more and more to draw on a state fund for large part of the need. The time has passed when this should be a local matter. A certain part, more than one-half, the needed funds should come from a state tax, and then local areas may supplement this amount as needed. The extreme position of the Massachusetts law before mentioned is, to say the least, not without its proper tendency. By all means should we have reform of our largely used system of financial distribution of moneys.

Some General Objections Answered

Two objections may at once arise. Is not such enlarged plan too expensive? Is there not so much machinery as to stifle the teachers' individuality? Neither of these objections is in the least valid. Statistics show that on an average less than two-thirds of our pupils of school age take advantage of school each day. Our outlay for plant, including cities, is more than one billion dollars, to say nothing of one-third that amount additional for maintenance each year. Compare the two-thirds efficiency with the vast investment and should we not, with the city, utilize the plant and maintenance more fully? Would business employ its capital at little more than sixty per cent of its capacity and be content? Would it not immediately call in overseers skilled to utilize that one-third that was being lost? No business to-day has better investment to offer than does supervision of schools hold before our people. Will not teachers' individuality be stifled? Not at all. Just as well say that railroads would be better run without organization; that Standard Oil owes nothing of success to its men in charge. Just as well might we do away with city supervision, and no one thinks of that. And we do not plead that the rural and small village child is so different unless such difference is to his advantage. It is not that he should have more but that he should have as much as his city cousin. Teachers would be a part of plans; supervisors would come in touch with them to advise, enthuse, stimulate. Where teachers are nɔw so often uncertain as to what best to do, there would then be a confidence born of certainty. Before them would be brought and with them worked out plans along the various active lines before men

.

tioned. Widened opportunities, lines of action based on real needs would give full chance for individual expression and expansion not now even thought of. Under just and full opportunity the rural boys and girls, in no way inferior material, will develop for society and the state large returns. Their education is a problem large. It must be solved, but solution is not alone for them but must be through them. Supervision discovers needs as they locally appear and suggests solutions. The child, aided by an aroused teaching force, encouraged by his parents, can then be trusted for results.

CHARITY FUNCTIONS OF THE PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY

BY ELLA F. HARRIS, A.B.,

Special Agent of Department of Public Health and Charities, Philadelphia.

The evolutionary process by which the functions of the Pennsylvania county have changed from the simple duties of caring for all classes of dependents as paupers to the complicated machinery of the modern municipality, offers a very interesting study. In some parts of the state the old methods survive while in others there is little trace of the original system. The clash of the old system with changing local conditions has brought about this diversity. It will be impossible to trace this in detail, requiring, as it would, the individual history of almost every county in the state. From a general outline of the development, the student of individual county conditions will find an explanation of much that is obscure.

The first recorded divisions of the local government obtained when the Duke of York possessed the territory which now comprises the states of New York, Pennsylvania, Delaware and part of New Jersey. The Duke's "Book of Lawes" formed the legal basis of proceedings of the courts of this territory closely imitating the English system in the form of government.1

Under the proprietary government of William Penn, the county became the most important unit of the administration, the town

A High Sheriff, selected by the Governor from three nominees presented by the Justice of the last Sessions, was the chief officer of the riding. The people, by vote elected a Constable and Board of Overseers, the Constable serving for one year and the Overseers for two years, half returning annually. The Constables and Overseers were also church wardens and as such were responsible for the morals of the parish and for the care of the needy. Provision for the poor was made by the "town rate"-a tax for the support of local government as distinguished from the "public charge," the proceeds of which were applied to general maintenance, though levied in the same manner. By proclamation of General Andross in 1676 the Duke of York's laws were enforced in the three general courts along the Delaware, at Newcastle, Whorekill and Upland (Chester). ("Local Self Government in Pennsylvania," Vol. I, Johns Hopkins Studies, p. 25.) "These Courts had legislative as well as judicial powers and were entrusted with the enactment of laws affecting local matters, fixed rates for highway, the poor and other necessaries, and selected the church wardens. These laws afforded a far greater degree of local independence than ever existed upon the Delaware before or afterward. They undoubtedly exercised considerable influence upon the institutions of the state, indirectly and even directly as some of the provisions were adopted by William Penn."

losing most of its political significance. The king's charter gave Penn the right to divide the country into towns, hundreds and counties, and to introduce the English system of manorial government. The real center of authority was the county court, which commissioned the officers who administered legal affairs and collected the tax for the poor as well as all other taxes of the county.

With the increase in population, the powers of the county court had to be distributed between the county and its subdivisions, the township, borough or municipality. In 1724, provision was made for three county commissioners to perform the duty which had previously rested upon the court of sessions. These commissioners. held a court for trying appeals, had powers to proceed against delinquent collectors of taxes and to penalize the county treasurer and assessors if found guilty of neglect of duty. The subdivisions of the county were chiefly important as facilitating the collection of

taxes.

No important change was made in the form of local government by the Revolution. Substantially the same system was adopted by the commonwealth as had been in force in the province.

At all times, the burden of caring for the poor pressed heavily on the taxpayers. Innumerable acts of assembly were passed to relieve conditions. In order to discourage the seeking of relief, all persons. receiving aid from the county were forced to wear a badge with the letter "P" cut in red or blue cloth, as was the English custom. The act of 1771 (Smith's Laws, p. 332) proved the most satisfactory in dealing with the problem.2

2 This act provided for the appointment of two overseers in each township by the justice of the peace with power to levy taxes for the support of the poor, and formed the basis for the present poor laws of the state. Where the poor are in charge of the township, the overseers must first obtain the consent of two justices of the peace before levying a tax, which shall not exceed one cent on the dollar. To determine the value of the taxable property in the township, the last county valuation was used. (Beitler's Poor Laws, p. 136.) Every means was taken to protect the township from imposters. Strangers had to bring certificates with them and householders who received a pauper or one who subsequently became such, were liable for their maintenance, unless they had given notice to the overseers within ten days after the arrival of the transient. Legal settlements could be gained in the following manner: by executing a public office for one year; by the payment of tax for two years; by taking a lease of real estate to the yearly value of £10 and dwelling upon the same for one year; by hiring as a servant and continuing to abide in such service for one year in the same township. The removal of the poor from one district to another was restricted and one county could sue another for the maintenance and removal of paupers.