This is not because country districts are less able to afford taxation than city districts. Although detailed data for the whole State are not available, Table 21 shows valuation, school census, and per capita wealth for the three largest cities in the State and corresponding figures for the other districts in the counties in which they are located, after deducting census and valuation of cities from the county totals. Not only is the wealth per school child greater in each case in the county than in the city, but the combined valuation is such that rural districts could afford to provide not only elementary education, but high-school education as well, without increasing the tax rate above the average city rate (this estimate is made on a basis of a 5-mill levy, and presupposes some assistance from the State and county on the per capita teacher basis). While the conditions shown in this table may not hold in exactly the same way throughout the State, it illustrates the fact that a change in present methods of taxation is necessary if an equitable adjustment is to be accomplished and adequate educational facilities, including high schools, are to be furnished to children in the rural districts.

TABLE 20.-School census, valuation, and special taxes in school districts in which cities with high schools are located.1

Incomplete information prevented the giving of all. The average amount raised by special tax in the cities of the State is $17.35 per child. The average special tax rate is 4.95 mills.

It is true that while an apportionment on per capita basis works a hardship on the rural districts, apportionment on a per teacher basis is a hardship on the cities. It is for this reason that a consideration of number of teachers, plus aggregate daily attendance, is usually fairer to all concerned. However, the country usually contributes to the taxable wealth of cities in such a way that the cities can afford to make some recompense. For example, most of the cities in Wyoming would not be favored with railroad terminals and shops, sugar-beet factories, and other taxable corporation property were it not for the industry of the people in the surrounding rural districts. Therefore, the country districts may justly partake of some of the benefits coming from a tax on these corporation properties. Moreover, under the existing system, the injustice done cities through the county method of distribution is largely compensated by the State method of distribution. Let us take, for example, the actual situation in the three largest cities of the State, Cheyenne, Sheridan, and Laramie. According to the report of the board of trustees of the city of Cheyenne, the city received from the county general tax $18,000 and paid into the county fund $31,000, an excess of about $13,000 in favor of the rural districts. Cheyenne received from the State $22,800, the remainder of the county $12,000, an excess over the rural districts of about $10,800 in favor of the city. While these funds do not exactly balance in amount, it should be remembered that the city of Cheyenne, employing 40 teachers for its elementary schools, receives from the State an amount equal to approximately $5701 for each elementary teacher employed, in addition to $300 from the county fund, while the rural schools in Laramie County, employing 104 teachers in elementary schools, receive only $115 from the State for each teacher, in addition to $300 from the county. Since the true expense of maintaining schools is based on the number of teachers necessary rather than on the number of children attending, the cities really receive from the State and county combined more aid in proportion to their needs than rural districts.1

The city of Laramie receives from the State $11,500, an amount equal to approximately $575 for each of 20 teachers employed in the elementary schools and the junior high school, in addition to $300 per teacher from the county fund. The rural schools receive from the State only $5,695 for 52 teachers in elementary schools, or about $109 per teacher, in addition to $300 from the county. The city of Laramie pays into the county fund about $11,000 and receives therefrom about $9,000. Here again this excess of $2,000

If high-school teachers, special supervisors, and the city superintendent are included, the amount received would be $428 for each. High schools are omitted in the calculation because the country districts have no high schools.

paid to the county is more than balanced by the excess received from the State ($5,808).

The city of Sheridan receives from the county fund $13,500 and pays into the same fund $6,495. The country districts therefore, through county tax as well as the State through apportionment, are helping the district of Sheridan to maintain its schools. (These figures are only approximately correct, because actual statistics were not available. Those given are obtained by multiplying valuation by tax levy in mills in the one case and multiplying census by $8.39 the State per capita apportionment-in the other. They do not allow for uncollected taxes and the expense of collection. They are, however, nearly correct, the proportions are right, and the conclusions are practically true.)

One important consideration in the whole question of the support of education is the method of bookkeeping in the various school units. Each board at present elects one of its members treasurer. He keeps the board's accounts in his own way, although a special clerk's and treasurer's record book is recommended by the State superintendent. Each board may audit its treasurer's accounts if it sees fit to do so, or the district may vote an audit. No other agency has power, however, to examine the records of the treasurer. As a matter of fact, very few accounts are ever audited and information concerning them is difficult to obtain. It was obtained for this report in relatively few cases. Instances similar to the following are reported as common by the county superintendents. One district in reporting to the county superintendent shows a balance on hand at the beginning of the fiscal year, May 1, 1915, of more than $500 less than the balance on hand at the close of the preceding year as given in the preceding annual report. On one report from a large district the balance on hand at the close of the year was approximately $5,000 less than the difference between the expenditures and the receipts for the year including balance brought over from preceding year.

An inquiry was sent to the clerks of 359 boards asking for definite information of their accounting systems and of the general conduct of the business side of their work. The answers received were in nearly all cases vague, indicating very clearly the decided need of more businesslike methods of handling school funds and accurate methods of bookkeeping. It is recommended in another section that all school funds be left in the county treasury, credited to the various districts, and paid out by the treasurer on warrants signed by two members of any board. The county treasurer thus acts as a banker for the funds, and his accounts with the individual districts necessarily show the expenditures of the districts and the purposes for which made.

IV. MOVEMENTS IN OTHER STATES AS OUTLINED IN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR WYOMING.1

State administration.-In Wyoming, as in older States, there is a growing feeling that the State must assume more and better supervision over the public schools, so that the State school funds shall be expended in the best possible way. This does not mean that the State should attempt to administer the entire school system in all of its details from a central office. There is always a tendency toward a mechanical system in school affairs when a central office has a large amount of detail administrative work to handle. County management and a certain amount of local district management are desirable for this and other reasons of even more importance. However, there should be enough control from the State to assure that each local unit provides satisfactory education for its children and expends the State funds wisely.

As the population of a State increases, with the resulting growth in the school system, and as the work of education becomes more and more complex, the need of well-organized State leadership becomes greater. A State should establish a general educational policy and provide means for carrying it out consistently. To do this the leadership must be continuous. Older States than Wyoming have provided continuous leadership by creating a nonpolitical, continuing State board of education and a State department of education under the immediate management of a professionally qualified State superintendent of education selected by the board. In 37 of the 48 States of the Union there are such boards with functions relative to the public schools. In 15 of the States the State superintendents of public instruction are appointed officers, not affiliated with politics nor with political parties.

The composition of the State boards of education varies greatly in different States. In eight States the boards are made up ex officio of State officers, usually including the governor, the superintendent of public instruction, and one or more other State officers. Such boards have shown themselves to be of relatively little value. In 10 other States the boards are composed of ex officio members and members appointed at discretion by the governor. In several States the boards are made up ex officio of persons engaged in education. Neither plan gives a wholly satisfactory board. The drift is toward

1 This section was prepared and included at the request of members of the State School Code Com. mittee.-A. C. M.

the board appointed by the governor and composed of broad-minded men and women of affairs who may or may not be engaged in educational work, but who are particularly adapted to the position in personality and experience. The recent change to State boards of this type in Vermont and California is an indication of the trend.

Appointment of the board by the governor has a twofold merit: (1) It recognizes the executive head of the State as responsible to the people for the efficiency of every department of public service; it tends to make the board responsible to the public.

(2) It centers responsibility where it can be definitely located, as can not be done where the board is elected by the legislature or by the people.

The size of the board, the term of office, and mode of retiring are all important factors. The board should be large enough so that a death or resignation occurring at the time of the expiration of the term of any of its members would not change the majority of the board; and the term of office should be long enough, with not over one-fifth expiring any year, so that the board may be continuous. A board of seven or eight members, holding office from six to nine years, with one term expiring each year or two terms each biennium, fulfills these conditions. Such a board would guarantee that degree of continuity in service without which no business can be successfully administered, and it could not be changed to satisfy the caprice of any individual or to meet the political needs of any State administration. A larger board means additional expense to the State, additional difficulty in determining policies, and difficulty in securing a quorum to do ordinary routine business. The best boards are those whose members serve without pay except for necessary expenses incurred in conducting the business of the board.

The preference in the various States seems to be for a State board with duties and powers which make it responsible for the efficiency of the whole State elementary and secondary systems. The duties and powers actually given vary all the way from almost no control to almost complete control of the public schools. The consensus of opinion in the United States seems to be that the board should have definite functions concerning the regular public schools of elementary and secondary grade, advisory control of all special schools of elementary or secondary grade, such as schools for the education of delinquents or of the blind and deaf, and of special State vocational schools; also control of the preparation and certification of teachers for the public schools. Otherwise its policies in regard to school management can be carried out only with difficulty. Between the State board of education and the State superintendent there need be no clash. The functions of the board, apart from appointing the superintendent, and therefore approving or