organization of each township into school districts, provided, however, that the districts within the township should be laid off with due regard to the rights of existing private school companies and library companies. It also provided for the election of a school committee in each school district consisting of three persons who were authorized to cause the erection of a school house in some convenient place and to receive either by donation or purchase, any quantity of land not exceeding two acres that they may deem expedient, the title of the same to be vested in the school committee and their successors in office; two-thirds of the householders having previously agreed upon the erection of such school house.

I quote Sec. 9 entire as it has a direct bearing upon my subject; Sec. 9. "that the property of all persons residing in said district and which property may be situated therein and liable to taxation for state or county purposes, shall be liable to be taxed for the purpose of erecting a school house as aforesaid, and also for the purpose of making up the deficiency that may accrue by the schooling of children, whose parents or guardians are unable to pay for the same; and said Committee is hereby authorized to assess taxes for these purposes, on property as aforesaid, not exceeding, in any one year, one-half of the amount of taxes, which might, by law, have been levied on the same objects for state or county purposes; and said collector shall have power to collect the same in such manner as county taxes are collected." The omission of property of non-residents was not made in subsequent laws but in 1831 it was enacted that a district school house tax should not be levied upon the property of a non-resident twice within three years "by an alteration of districts" nor should such tax be levied on non-residents' property lying more than three miles from the school house.

The law further provided that in townships entitled to money from rent of section 16, on the school lands, the trustees of said township should proportion said income in accordance with the laws then in force.

An act passed February 5, 1825, required the commissioners of the several counties to levy one-half mill for school purposes and apportion the same among the different townships. It provided that the trustees of the townships should subdivide the township into districts in order to participate in the division of these funds, and the trustee of any township entitled to rent or moneys from section 16 or any such section or lands in lieu thereof should divide such revenue in proportion to the number of families in each district.

On January 30th, 1827, a law was enacted establishing a fund for the "support of common schools to belong in common to the people of the state." The proceeds of section 16 were funded and the State pledged to pay to the townships 6 per cent on the amount of the fund.

The act also provided for a state fund for the support of common schools to consist of the proceeds of the sale of the salt lands, donations, legacies, etc., interest thereon to be funded annually until 1832 and then distributed annually to the counties in proportion to the number of free male inhabitants above the age of 21 years.

The legislative session of 1827-28 extended the policy adopted in regard to section 16 to Virginia Military and U. S. Military school lands.

In 1829 county commissioners were authorized to levy 3/4 of a mill for school purposes.

From this time until 1858 county levies continued as follows:

An act passed during the session of 1831 allowed the commissiners to add 14 mill to the county levy.

1834, commissioners must levy one mill and might add 1⁄2 mill.

1836, must levy 11⁄2 mills and might add 1⁄2 mill.

1838, must levy 2 mills.

1839, commissioners were allowed to reduce the levy to 1 mill.

mills.

1847, could reduce to 1848, authorized but not required to levy one mill.

1851, required to levy not less than one mill.

By the act of 1853 the county tax was abolished and a 2 mill state levy was substituted.

On March 2, 1831, the proceeds of the sale of salt lands, donations, legacies, etc., were refunded until 1835 the proceeds to be then distributed as provided in the act of January 27, 1832.

The act of March 7, 1838, established a state common school fund which was made up as follows:

1. Interest on the surplus revenue at 5 per cent.

2. Interest on the proceeds of the sale of salt lands.

3. Revenue from banks, insurance companies, bridge companies and others.

4. Funds from these sources to be provided to the amount of 200,000 dollars and distributed to the counties according to the number of unmarried youth between 4 and 20 years of age.

This state appropriation for common schools was reudced to $150,000 on March 7, 1842 and raised to $300,000 March 24, 1851. There was then added to the state fund, "All monies paid into the state treasury for license to peddlers, for auction duties and for taxes upon lawyers and physicians."

In the school law of 1853 when a state tax was authorized the sources of revenue making up the common school fund were turned into the general treasury and the money arising from the two mill levy was distributed according to

the enumeration of unmarried youth between 5 and 21 years of age.

The surplus revenue above referred to consisted of a fund which was a part of the revenues lying in the U. S. Treasury loaned to the states then composing the Union. Ohio's share amounted to $2,007,260.34. This sum was apportioned among the different counties and placed in the hands of fund commissioners who loaned it at their discretion, the income going into the common school fund.

By an act of February 8, 1847 the income from this fund could be used for the support of county institutes.

Before 1853 the common school fund was made up from a great variety of sources. Into it were turned monies from the sale of swamp lands, fines for cock fighting, profane swearing, bull fighting, gambling and a great many other sources. In this way the penalty for the violation of law was made to contribute to the most important agency in training for good citizenship.

The constitution of 1851 in Article 6, Section 1, and 2 outlines a policy of taxation for educational purposes since followed by the legislature. It is as follows:

Section 1. The principal of all funds arising from the sale or other disposition of lands or other property granted or intrusted to this state for educational and religious purposes, shall forever be preserved inviolate and undiminished; and the income arising therefrom, shall be faithfully applied to the specific objects of the original grants or appropriations.

Section 2. The General Assembly shall make provisions by taxation, or otherwise, as with the income arising from the school fund, will secure a thorough and efficient system of common schools throughout the State, but no religious or other sect or sects shall ever have any exclusive right to, or control of, any part of the school funds of this State.

The act of March 14, 1853, in lieu of the common school fund of $300,000 and the county tax of not less than one mill provided an annual levy on the grand dupilcate of the state of 2 mills. The amount arising therefrom to be distributed to the counties in proportion to the enumeration of school youth. The law also provided that townships should maintain school for at least 7 months and might be compelled to levy for this purpose a tax of 2 mills.

Boards of education in sub-districts were allowed a special tax to build school houses at their discretion. In the same law a tax of 1-10 of a mill was authorized for the purpose of furnishing common school libraries.

In 1854 by act of the legislature, the state levy for common schools was reduced from 2 mills to 1 1-2 mills. Owing to the increase in the grand duplicate however, the fund was not decreased. The amount received in each of the two years was as follows:1853 under the two mill rate $1,118,089 1854 under the 1 1-2 mill rate 1,208,283

By act of the legislature in 1856 the 1-10 mill for library purposes was suspended.

In 1857 township boards were limited to two mills for school houses, sites, fuel, repair or any other purposes except the payment of teachers.

This was changed to three mills in 1864 and raised to five mills in 1867.

The law of 1879 provided that the legislature should fix the state common school levy every two years. In case the legislature failed to do this the levy should be one mill.

At the same time the maximum levy for township districts was raised to seven mills.

In what is known as the school code of 1904 the maximum levy for any district was increased to twelve mills and provision was made for the division of the levy into four funds as follows:

4.

Bonds, interest and sinking fund. The law also specified that the levy must have the approval of the board of review in all city districts before it becomes valid. An additional levy may be made by submitting the same to a vote of electors.

The law of 1906 abolishes the board of review in city districts and leaves the matter of school levy entirely in the hands of the board of education.

Ponds may be issued upon a favorable vote of the electors and within certain limits without such vote, but a beard of education may not borrow money for any other purpose except to refund or extend existing indebtedness.

The maximum levy remains at twelve mills but upon a favorable vote of the electors, a board of education may be authorized to levy an additional five mills for a period of not more than five consecutive years.

From a review of this subject it is gratifying to note the steady and substantial progress that has been made. The educational doctrine "That the property of the state ought to educate the youth of the state" has been universally accepted.

The free school principle, as far as tuition is concerned, has received general recognition and there is a growing sentiment throughout the state in favor of making our schools absolutely free, by providing free text books in all grades below the high school. This seems to be the logical result of a compulsory attendance law.

The high school, which is the most expensive feature, has come to be regarded as an essential and vital part of our common school system, intended not only for those pupils who are preparing to enter the learned professions but of equal value to those who

are to become teachers, to enter upon mercantile and mechanical pursuits, or to work upon the farm.

The length of the school year has been gradually extended. At first the period was irregular; then the law required a minimum year of six months; later legislation extended this to seven months and the present code provides for a minimum school year of thirtytwo weeks.

There has been but little change in the tax levy made by the state but there has been a marked increase in the rate of local taxation. This rate was very small for many years. It was finally raised to seven mills. As a result of the recent legislation the maximum levy has been raised to twelve mills. Under the present code, with a favorable vote of the electors of any district, a levy of seventeen mills may be made for any or all school purposes.

The amount of money expended in the support of our public schools is six times what it was in 1860 and nearly double the amount expended in 1884.

At my request the statistical clerk of the department has prepared a table showing the rate of state levy from the beginning; the amount received from the same each year; the yearly income from the irreducible debt; amount raised by local taxation; sale of bonds, fines, licenses, etc. It is an interesting table and shows at a glance the progress that has been made.

There has been but little variation in the state levy. It was two mills in 1852 and reduced to one and a half mills the next year. In 1860 and 1861 it was one and four-tenths mills. From 1862 to 1871 it was one and three-tenths mills. From 1872 to the present time it has been one mill with the exception of 1902 and 1903 when it was reduced to 95 of a mill.

In 1838 the state appropriated $200,000 for school purposes. Appropriations

varying in amount were made until 1853 when the two mill levy yielded $1,186,793. The amount received from the state levy in 1860 was $1,244,155; in 1880 $1,558,207; in 1904 $1,858,228.

The income from the irreducible debt was $88,480 in 1846. In 1860 it had increased to $170,640. In 1880 it was $245,744 and in 1904 $246,455.

The amount received from the local taxation in 1851 was $424,831. This had increased in 1865 to $1,634,607; in 1885 to $7,213,254 and in 1904 it amounted to $14,707,113.

The entire amount expended upon our public schools in 1860 was $2,924,109; in 1870 it had increased to $7,427,031; in 1880 it was $7,526,222; in 1890 the amount was $11,649,990; and in 1900 the total reached $14,426,855.

We are now expending annually about eighteen millions of dollars upon our public schools. This seems like a large sum but as we look over the field I believe as educators, we are ready to endorse the statement of Pres. Elliott of Harvard that "More money is needed for the public schools."

If we would increase the salary of competent and deserving teachers, we must have the means wherewith to do it.

We need more money to command the best talent for the teaching profession; to extend the work of supervision in the rural schools; to provide suitable accommodations for the children in our rapidly growing cities and in some instances to reduce the number of pupils per teacher; to extend the advantages of the manual training and domestic science departments, now enjoyed by a few cities throughout the state; to increase the number of our normal schools and to provide in some way for the professional training of our rural teachers in the several counties. We need more money for these

purposes and yet we have about reached the limit in the matter of local levy. This is one of the most important questions that can come before this association.

I hope you will be able to assist the Commission in its efforts to secure increased school revenues without a rate of taxation that will be burdensome to any citizen.

TAXATION OF CORPORATIONS AND FRANCHISE VALUES.

HON. S. D. SHANKLAND.

Since reference has been made to me personally as a member of the General Assembly, I could hardly begin my talk without stopping for a moment to pay a tribute of respect to my predecessor Mr. Kimball. It seems to me that the schools of Ohio owe a debt of gratitude to Mr. Kimball for his efforts in their behalf. If each of us can serve our schools, our community and our state as well as that man did, the standard of the profession would be raised in Ohio and adequate preparation made for every interest of education in this state. The question under 'consideration this morning is really this: Is there more money available for the schools of Ohio and if so how are we to get our hands upon it? In the years gone by, in olden times, the kings had a custom of conferring certain monopolies upon their friends in order that they might make as great revenue out of it as possible. Later on as the expenses of government increased and the desire of the kings for revenue increased, they gradually withdrew these revenues and took the returns from them for their own individual benefit. We have followed in part the examples of these kings of the older days. We have had at our disposal great monopolies and we have had in our possession privileges of inestimable value which we

have given freely to favored individuals and favorite corporations of the state. There is in this state as well as in every state numerous public service corporations whose franchises are today worth a vast sum of money and yet no return is made to the people who granted these franchises. As an illustration I might cite the little car line on which 90 of us rode up last evening at 10 cents each. I know nothing of its franchise, but I presume that all the money thus earned goes to the company which owns and operates the line. No doubt this community has furnished the right of way free and they have built up hotels and parks to attract the people here to spend their money and yet the community gets nothing in return at all. The total returns go to the company operating the line of railway. It is a fact also that the laws of Ohio provide no means by which a telephone company can pay anything for its franchise. Last year a telephone company applied for a franchise in a village and wanted to pay for the franchise. They were willing to have council fix a rate for the use of the telephone system, but a decision of the Supreme Court in the Toledo case made it impossible for that corporation and that council to enter into that agreement. The only power that council had was in directing how that company shall come in and to tell how the poles shall be set or to direct as to the color of the poles. Here was a telephone company willing to pay and the council willing to take, but was prevented by the law. In a very excellent report made to the Indiana State Teachers' Association in 1884 we find 4 answers to this question of raising revenues for school boards. The first way suggested was the taxing of franchises and it was pointed out that New Jersey raised a large sum of money for school purposes in that manner. The second way