actually to supersede the authority of institutional administrative officers and of institutional governing boards.

The authority of the governor of the State over the land-grant colleges is both direct and indirect. As head of the executive branch of the State government he has the power of veto over all State appropriations made for the support of the institutions. By virtue of his office the governor may also make such recommendations to the State legislature concerning the land-grant college or university that he may deem advisable. These powers are general and applicable to every State. But the governor is often in a position to exercise direct supervision over the institutions, participate in their government, and partially, if not wholly, to influence questions of policy in a number of instances.

According to the returns received from 44 colleges, the governor of the State serves as regular president or chairman of the governing body in 3 cases, as ex officio president in 2, as a regular member in 2, and as an ex officio member in 13.

While his responsibilities as head of the State government prevent the State executive from exercising his prerogatives as head or member of the governing board in many of the States, there are others where he attends the meetings more or less regularly and takes part in the proceedings of the body. In one institution, the governor is the president of the corporate body governing the college, signing all official business documents, and presiding at all sessions. Members of the governing bodies are appointed by the governor in most of the States, either with or without the consent of the State senate, but as this relationship will be amplified in the part of this report that deals with the governing board it is not necessary to discuss it in detail at this point.

Through the recent creation of budget systems in the States, the governor has been given increased powers over the finances of the land-grant colleges. In practically all of the States he serves either as the chief budget officer or has the power to change, alter, and revise the budget before its final submission to the legislature. As the budget contains the estimates of the requirements of the landgrant institutions, the State executive is in a position to affect their development by increasing or decreasing requests for funds to be used for their support. The laws of a number of States confer specific powers on the governor over the business, financial, and administrative affairs of the land-grant institution. The entire question of the State budget and its relationship to the institutions will be discussed later.

There is one college where the governor passes on manifests for reimbursement of expenditures of State funds by the institution; another where he controls release of State appropriations to the university; a third where he has authority to provide increased funds for the experiment stations; and a

fourth where he approves all vouchers covering State regulatory funds which go to the college for its support. In one State the governor is chairman of the State printing commission which controls the institutional printing. Four institutions must first receive the approval of the governor before any of the members of their staffs are permitted to travel out of the State. The authority of the governor in one State includes the issuance of deficiency warrants upon State funds for expenditures made by the land-grant college, and in another the governor is empowered to authorize replacement from State insurance funds of property damage by fire or tornado at the institution. The State executive is a member of the board of investment of the permanent university fund in one State; issues commissions for college officers in another; appoints one-third of the board of visitors in a third; fills vacancies occurring in the governing board between one general election and another in a fourth, and controls the purchase of automobiles by the university in a fifth.

In addition to the powers exercised by the governor, the auditor of State has been vested with considerable control over the financial affairs of the land-grant institutions. The amount of his authority varies in the different States, but reports indicate that it comprises complete supervision of the revenues and disbursements of a number of institutions.

There are six States where the State auditor is charged with the auditing of all vouchers and the signing of all warrants covering every expenditure made by the institutions. In another case all vouchers except those in payment of labor must be submitted to the auditor for approval. The State auditor executes warrants for the payment of all claims against State funds of 10 colleges and issues warrants to the institutional treasurers for State appropriations or mill-tax revenues in 8. Other specific powers over the landgrant institutions have been conferred upon him. As a member of the budget commission he participates in the preparation of the State budget estimates for the support of the college in one State. The auditor is a member of the State board of finance which has control of questions involving the use of State appropriations in another State. He is vested with authority to supervise and determine the methods of accounting used by one college. According to the reports, he makes annual audits of the books and accounts of 10 institutions; audits expenditures of State appropriations only of 1; audits specific funds of 1; while in the case of another institution copies of all voucher registers and receipt registers must be filed with the State auditor. This State official is a member of the board of investment of the university fund and has authority to lease unsold university lands of one land-grant institution.

Powers exercised by the State treasurer amount to virtual control of the funds of a number of the colleges. The State treasurer is the actual treasurer of six institutions. In these cases he is custodian of all the moneys and has responsibility for their receipt and disbursement, except in one instance where the local business officer handles. residence, dining halls, and athletic funds. In 15 other institutions. he receives current funds and pays all general bills on requisition either from the institutional treasurer or on warrants issued by the State auditor. Remittances are made monthly to him by some colleges while in others they are forwarded as collected. The State treasurer handles only State funds in 3 States and his connection with the land-grant institutions is limited to sending to the institutional treasurers checks covering State appropriations or mill-tax revenues in 10 others. As a member of the State budget commission, this State official exercises jurisdiction over the estimates for 111490°-30-VOL 1-5

appropriations of one college. In two States he is official custodian of the land-grant endowment and other trust funds of the land-grant institutions. There are two cases in which the State treasurer receives the trust funds of the colleges and invests them on order of the boards of trustees, while in one he is responsible for auditing the Hatch-Adams and Smith-Lever funds expended by the college. Two institutions report that they have no relationship whatever with the State treasurer.

The official relations of the State attorney general with the landgrant colleges are important. While in some States he merely serves in an advisory capacity to interpret the State laws affecting the institutions, in other States he handles all legal matters.

An examination of the reports disclose that the attorney general construes the laws upon request in the case of 22 colleges; that he acts as legal advisor and counsel in 10; and is the attorney of the board of trustees in 1. In 10 States he defends the institutions in all litigation directed against them. The attorney general in two States approves the bonds of officers of the colleges and in two others examines and approves contracts made by the governing bodies. The law in several States has conferred special authority upon the attorney general in the case of certain institutional affairs. In one State he is charged with the enforcement of the proper application of moneys appropriated for the support of the university; in another he is a member of the State printing commission that passes on institutional printing; in a third he has authority jointly with the governor over the release of moneys from the special State insurance fund to replace property destroyed at the institution; and in a fourth he is a member of the State emergency board which in emergencies may provide funds for the institution. The attorney general is an ex officio member of the board of trustees in one institution.

Contacts between the land-grant colleges and the secretary of state are limited in most of the States, although in some instances he exercises considerable authority over their financial affairs. Twentyfive institutions report that they have no relation with this State agency.

In one college, however, the secretary of state maintains all the records of university funds showing credits and debits, approves vouchers, writes checks, and forwards them to the State treasurer for entry and signature. In another institution he passes on and approves each voucher drawn in payment against its funds and attests its warrants. The secretary of state is a member of the board of regents of a third college and audits all claims against State funds, while in a fourth he keeps the records of State appropriations and expenditures thereof. As a member of the budget commission the secretary of state has authority over the budget estimates of the land-grant institution of one State. The institutional printing in the case of two other colleges is under his partial supervision as a member of the State board of printing. Amendments to the university charter must be filed with the secretary of the state in one State and fidelity bonds of college officers in two. The secretary of state issues commissions to the members of the board of trustees of two land-grant institutions, while he is an ex officio member of the governing body in another. In one State the annual report of the chancellor of the university is deposited with this official.

The State departments of education have more or less academic. influence upon the land-grant institutions in practically all the States. As the agency which grants teachers' certificates, the de

partment indirectly prescribes the minimum standards of curricula that are offered in the schools of education of the institutions. The State department of education is also the official accrediting agency of the high schools in the States from which students are admitted to the institutions. In some cases, the department conducts examinations and accredits the colleges of the State. There are a number of States where the State department of education has certain supervisory powers over the institutions or over some of their elements. The State board of education is the governing body of 3 land-grant colleges, and the State superintendent of education is ex officio member of the governing boards of 23. In an additional case the commissioner of education is State budget officer and makes the budget recommendations for appropriations to the institution, has supervision over its purchasing and its printing, serves as personnel officer in the classification of its employees and salaries, and has authority over appointments. The State department of education is charged with the responsibility of investigating the courses of instruction offered in the land-grant institution in one State to see that they comply with provisions of the State laws and in another State the department is authorized to make occasional surveys of the institution. Periodical reports of the executive of one land-grant institution must be sent to the department for transmission to the State legislature. The presidents of two institutions are ex officio members of the State board of education, while in one the president serves as a member of the department's examiners of public schools.

The preceding outline has presented the relationships of the landgrant institutions to the various State officials and State departments. In many instances the contacts between the officers of the State governments and the institutions are merely nominal and transitory. In others they represent the routine machinery set up by the State legislature for the expenditure of State appropriations made to the land-grant colleges. In still others, however, the State officials exercise actual control and supervision over certain affairs of the institution which transcend the authority of the institutional governing board. Separate governing bodies have not been created for the management of the land-grant institutions in 6 of the 44 States from which reports were received. In these cases regular departments of the State governments are vested by law with the administration of the institutions. The University of Idaho, Iowa State College, and Montana State College are governed by the State board of education, a regular department of the State Government. The Michigan State College, Oklahoma Agricultural College, and the Colorado Agricultural College are under the management of the State board of agriculture, also a regular part of the State governmental organiza

tion. In most of these cases the financial affairs of the institutions are handled through the regular State channels. In two States where the State board of education governs the land-grant institutions, its authority extends also to the government of all the other higher educational institutions of the State. In another State the board is charged with the government of all the eleemosynary institutions as well as the institutions of higher education.

An examination of the reports shows further that joint State boards have been established in six other States for the 'government of the State institutions, including the land-grant colleges.

In one State the board is known as the State board of control, in another as the State board of administration, in three as the State board of regents, and in one as the board of trustees. The University of Arizona is administered by a State board of regents which governs all the other higher educational institutions of the State. The University of Florida is under the government of a State board of control which in addition to managing the other higher educational institutions also governs the State's school for the deaf and the blind. The State boards of regents which administer the affairs of the Kansas State Agricultural College and the South Dakota State College govern the other State higher educational institutions while a similar control is exercised by the board of trustees of the Mississippi Agricultural and Mechanical College. In the case of the North Dakota Agricultural College, its governing board under the title of the State board of administration has governing powers over 15 other institutions, including the State university, State teachers colleges, schools of science and forestry, hospitals for deaf, blind, and insane, State penitentiary, training school, and tuberculosis sanitarium. As the central boards of control are in reality branches of the State governments, it is evident that the administration of their affairs are largely centered at the State capitols. There is one land-grant institution, the business affairs of which are handled in their entirety by a State business manager.

State Budget

The establishment of State budget systems has completely changed the methods employed by the State governments in providing funds for the support of the land-grant institutions.

Under the former arrangement State support was supplied through the enactment of general statutes setting aside specific funds for the institutions or through regular appropriation acts passed by the State legislature. Under the budget system, the landgrant institutions are not only compelled to submit requests for the State funds necessary for their maintenance, but they must also justify them to some budget agency through detailed reports, financial statements, and oral presentation. As the agency in charge of the budget is a part of the regular State government often with authority to reduce or increase the requests or estimates, control by the regularly constituted State government has been augmented more or less. The creation of State budgets has further necessitated the revision of the accounting systems and business methods of many of the institutions in order to conform to budget requirements and has resulted in important changes in administrative policy and financial