Dr. B. A. HINSDALE resumed the discussion of Dr. Rickoff's paper. He said: So far as the certification of teachers is concerned, the country presents simply chaos, from which it will be a long time in emerg ing. Teachers certainly have great reason to complain of the unreasonable rules and restrictions which prevail at the present time. When we consider that the educational affairs of this country are administered by the States, and by township and subdistrict and municipal boards, the question as to how we are to lift ourselves out of the inconveniences of this position is not so obvious. I understood Dr. Rickoff to suggest that this section should take some action looking to the further discussion of this topic. It seems to me that it is hardly well to drop the matter where it is. In my opinion, much ought to be done towards correcting the things of which we complain. A good deal is to be done by discussing it, and informing the public mind, and I do not know any body of men in the country who are better qualified for this than the superintendents of the country. I would move that a committee of five be ap pointed, to report during this session at such time as the chairman may designate, upon what further action, if any, is advisable.

The motion was agreed to, and the president appointed Dr. B. A. Hinsdale, of Ohio; Dr. M. A. Newell, of Maryland; Superintendent F. M. Campbell, of Oakland, Cal.; Dr. Richard Edwards, of Illinois, and Superintendent W. N. Barringer, of Newark, N. J., such committee.

The PRESIDENT: The Chair again states that the Department will meet March 15, at 9 a. m., with the understanding that at 1.30 it adjourn to call upon President Cleveland. To night the Institute of Civics will join us in our meeting.

At 4 o'clock p. m. the convention adjourned.

THIRD SESSION.

The convention re-assembled at 7.30 o'clock p. m., Tuesday, March 15, the American Institute of Civics meeting with the Department of Superintendence.

The PRESIDENT: I have the pleasure of introducing to you Dr. W. E. Sheldon, a representative from the Institute of Civics, and also president of the National Educational Association.

Dr. W. E. SHELDON: Since I entered the hall I have been informed that this was to be a joint meeting of the Department of Superintendence and the Institute of Civics. The subject taken for discussion this evening is very akin in its character to, and in harmony with, the spirit and interests and purposes of the Institute of Civics, and it seems very fortunate that those who are eminent educators from different sections of the country should take an interest in that which pertains to good citizenship, not only in its intellectual aspect, namely, knowledge of the civil polity, ethics and economics of our Government, but that we should also be interested in its practical application. The purposes of the

American Institute of Civics are to throw light, by means of the public schools, the higher institutions of learning, the public press, and public sentiment, to the great importance of a general and thoroughly practical knowledge of the elements of sound citizenship; these elements include whatever will secure to this Republic integrity of character among its citizens, and honest and efficient officers in every department, from the humblest, high and low, general and local. It affords me great pleasure to emphasize the duty of educators in training the young that they may become useful members of society, intelligent, co-operative citizens in all that is good in society and in government. In harmony with this is the address of our excellent friend, Hon. Le Roy D. Brown, of Ohio, who is to speak to night on "Civil Service and Public Schools," and whom I have the honor to introduce to you.

CIVIL SERVICE AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

By the Hon. LE ROY D. BROWN, State commissioner of common schools for Ohio.

It is with great pleasure, fellow teachers and fellow citizens, that I stand before you to open the discussion upon what seems to me to be one of the most important subjects that has been recently brought before this convention of school superintendents. The paper which I have prepared for this occasion was written some weeks ago, and not knowing at the time that is thwas to be a joint meeting of the two associations, after the action of this Department last night, I decided that it would be perhaps better for me merely to open the discussion on this subject, believing that there are other members present who will have something of interest to offer us.

Once every year this association of school superintendents assembles at Washington. In the nation's capital you renew your vows to your country, and you rededicate yourselves to the great cause of education.

As executive officers of the respective State systems of public schools, which you represent and which you are unselfishly and laboriously striv ing to improve, you are interested in all that pertains to administrative and executive work. As superintendents of schools, or as heads of systems of schools, you are profited by observing the conduct and the methods of governors, presidents, and other executive officers; for, by such observation, you are enabled the better to discharge the duties which devolve upon you in your own fields of labor.

During the last fifty years the progress of public education in the United States has been marvelous. The growth of State systems of schools in this country may be considered among the wonders of the age. Even the prophetic Horace Mann, who was secretary of the Massachusetts board of education a half century ago, did not foresee the gigantic proportions to which these schools have developed.

Strange it would be if a growth, at once so rapid and luxuriant, should be altogether sound and enduring.

In the affections and judgment of the people are found all that is good in our Government, but in the elective system by which school officers are generally chosen lies the greatest weakness of our school administration. The time was when only the best men were placed on school committees or elected to serve on boards of education.

But that time is, alas, too rapidly passing away. The "spoils system" which obtains in American politics has worked its way steadily but surely into the boards that control the schools. If a school-house site is to be selected, not the site which is the most desirable is chosen, but that site for which a corrupt committee can obtain the most money for their votes. If a school building is to be erected, the best architect and the best builder are not so much desired as an architect and a builder who will give up the largest per cent. of their remuneration for votes. The "spoils system" extends even to the employment of superintendents and teachers. The politician on the board of education gives his support to those from whom he has received favors, or from those who will reciprocate in the future. In the most vital matters, merit is of less consequence than "influence." What is the result? Poorer teachers, inferior schools, and a growing lack of faith in public education. Better the total annihilation of the people's schools than that these schools should become fountains of political pollution or streams of financial impurity.

Fortunately an adequate remedy for these evils is suggested by the the history of "Civil-Service Reform." In my judgment, the friends of free Government and of free schools owe a lasting debt of gratitude to Dorman B. Eaton and his colaborers. I wish that Mr. Eaton's great work on "Civil Service in Great Britain" could be in every public library, and that it might be studied by every American. In that volume we learn of the advantages of the "merit system" in the appointment of public officers, and it is the "merit system" which we need to-day in the selection of school officers, school superintendents, and teachers. The method of applying the "merit system" in our State would probably not be the best in all States, for State systems of education are dissimilar in many respects. But as courts are agencies of the people, and as such are subject to the will of the people, I am of the opinion that in some States it would be best for courts to appoint boards of education. In other States boards of education would better be appointed by a State board of education. It is probable that, in some cities at least, good boards of education may be best secured by ap pointments made by city councils. But the method of appointment is not so important as the kind of men appointed. These men should have fitness for their duties. An intelligence and a character qualification should be required by the appointing power. In suggesting so radical a change in school management, I shall not be surprised at opposition

The goody-goody superin

The politicians will oppose the change. tendent who owes his position to influential relatives, to his church associates, or to his political friends will oppose the change; and, in doing so, will probably say to the people that their voice should be heard in the choosing of school officers at general elections, forgetting that courts, city councils, and State boards of education can more surely choose efficient school officers than the political caucus which too often thwarts the will of the people by giving them worthless candidates who, in the excitement of election day, are chosen.

Throughout our country the general rule prevails that members of boards of education and members of school committees shall be elected to their positions. In the abstract, that mode of choosing these important officers may be correct; but as I have observed the working of the schools in different States, including my own, I believe that the time has come when some modification of that mode must be made. I would not say anything to lessen the interest in school affairs felt by those patriotic citizens who, without pay, have endeavored to discharge the duties pertaining to members of school committees and boards of education. I would not say an unwise word at this meeting that would affect in any way the future usefulness of the public schools of our country; but this is the place in which a free utterance of the truths that we believe should be made. And I am here to assert, and assert, I think with facts that would have great weight with a jury if the opportunity to present these facts was offered, that the "spoils system," of which we have heard so much in this country, has worked its way so far that many boards of education are under its unwholesome influence. I can remember, young man as I am, the time in my own State when only the most worthy men in our towns, villages, and townships expected to be made members of boards of education, but I am sorry to state that the political and personal influences that always accompany the "spoils system" in the great field of politics have come to be felt in the selection of these boards and of their employés. Men who have no capacity, as far as one is able to judge, seek these positions, and openly seek them, for the money that they obtain by corrupt awards of the contracts to be made by them in the discharge of their duties. One of the greatest school scandals that has gone forth from the largest city in my State grew out of a contract for the purchased of a school-house site. The most undesirable site was bought, and bought at an extravagant figure, and some of the money was traced directly to the board of education that had relations with the committee who recommended the purchase. Very often if the employment of an architect is required, so that the most desirable school building may be erected, the most competent architect is not selected, and the man who will surrender the largest share of the cost to the committee obtains the prize. If the matter is the election of superintendents of schools, at least in some of the towns and cities of this country, and I have special reference to Ohio when I make this 3536-No. 3—5

statement, it is not the most worthy man, not the man with the longest experience, who is likely to be elected; but it is the man who is able to pay the largest sum of money to be divided by the committee. The time has come, I think, when this Department of Superintendence should seek a remedy for these evils.

I had occasion to read, not many weeks ago, a telegraphic dispatch which informed the person addressed that a city of 20,000 inhabitants without a superintendent of schools was in such a condition that the pitiful sum of $100 paid by him would secure his election to the posi tion. I am not certain that it is at all in good taste for me to refer thus to special cases, and I shall not do it again on this occasion, but I have not prepared this plain statement without fortifying myself with the facts, which can be produced if necessary, and I believe I am stating what has been felt by others who are present here to-night.

I must not prolong this discussion to a very great extent in this direction. Suffice it to say that I charge that the "spoils system" has taken possession of many boards of education in the United States. I would not say that the remedy needed in Ohio is the remedy that is needed in West Virginia, or in New York, or in Mississippi; I only state it as my opinion that in some way we should change the mode of electing our boards of education. It seems to me that we might make a definite standard of qualification for the place a necessary condition. In some States, and I am inclined to think that this is true of Ohio, relief may be found in appointing the members by the same powers that appoint the State superintendent of public instruction. I have just completed a tour of travel through three or four of the Southern States, and especially in Florida, and I take this opportunity to caution our friends who are doing such noble work in building up education in the South that they should not deprive the State board of education of the authority to appoint local boards of education. It seems to me that we must appoint by State authority many of these boards of education, enough at any rate to have a leavening influence on the whole.

One of the subjects that has most interested me for several years back is this subject of civil-service reform. We have this topic before us to night, and I for one would acknowledge my gratitude, and the gratitude of my profession, to Dorman B. Eaton, and to those who labor with him and especially to the American Institute of Civics, that comes out with boldness to stand for the merit system as opposed to the spoils system, not only in the selection of subordinate officers of the nation and State, but also in the selection of school superintendents, members of boards of education, and teachers. I would that Dorman B. Eaton's book relating to civil service in Great Britain could be read by every school superintendent, by every teacher, and by every friend of education in the United States.

I rejoice, as I converse with members of this Association, and men eminent in public life, to know that here in Washington the cause of