The declining importance of town government is indicated by the comparatively small amount of township taxes, outside of the road and bridge tax.

The data as to tax levies is practically the only information collected in Illinois as to local finances, except as to schools. The various local authorities have records of their own financial transactions; and a number of cities and counties publish financial reports. But none of these give complete information as to the public finances of all the local authorities in any one community; while the great majority of local governments appear to make no public reports of their finances.

An examination of local county records in two counties and of town records in one county for a committee of the General Assembly in 1912, disclosed serious deficiencies in the methods of keeping local financial records and accounts, which probably exist in most counties in the state. There was no budget system nor central record of all the financial transactions of county officers. Separate records were kept by the several county officers, who in some cases paid the expenses of their offices from fees collected, and only the balances. if any, were paid over to the county treasury. The accounts kept by the separate officers were the most primitive system of cash records, with no attempt at classification of expenditures, or any balance sheet of assets and liabilities. Nor was any attempt made to prepare general statements combining the records of the various county officials. The records of town officers disclosed not only the absence of any system of accounts, but the absence of the most essential data as to cash transactions, and frequent errors in the extension of figures.

More satisfactory financial accounts and reports are made by some of the larger cities; but even the best of these are not based on any uniform plan so that comparisons can be made with those of other cities.

One obstacle to a comprehensive system of financial records is the lack of a uniform fiscal year even for county business. Supervisors are elected and take office in April, but their fiscal year begins September 1; while other county officers take office and begin their fiscal year on December 1. Most cities begin their fiscal year on May 1: but Chicago and some others begin on January 1. School accounts and records are based on the school year beginning July 1.

In connection with the more systematic supervision of local school authorities by the state department of public instruction and the county superintendent of schools, better records and reports of school finances are prepared than of any other branch of local administration in Illinois. The following summary of the accounts of school district funds for 1917-18 indicates the sort of data that should be available for all other local districts.

a Illinois School Statistics, 1918, pp. 4-5. Cents are disregarded.

$14,149,006

$68,201,717

In the absence of official records made under state authority, an attempt is made by the United States Census to compile statistics as to local finances. Annual reports are published for cities of over 30,000 population; and more extensive reports once in ten years for counties and smaller municipalities. Even the latter reports do not attempt to cover all the local authorities in the smaller communities; and the data for the authorities from whom information is secured are necessarily incomplete, on account of the deficiencies in the local records. The following summary of the census data for 1913, in the last report on Wealth, Debt and Taxation, is presented, as the best available record of local revenues and expenditures in Illinois.

County and Municipal Finances in Illinois, 1913 "

County and Municipal Finances in Illinois, 1913.a—Concluded.

a U. S. Census Report on Wealth, Debt and Taxation.

$143,911,642

b Mainly tax collections for other local districts and for the state.

$71,950,996

IV. LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN OTHER STATES.

As local government in the United States is determined by the constitutions and laws of the several states, there are many variations in the organization and powers of the local authorities of the different states. But there are certain important institutions and methods which follow the same general ideas in most of the states, and other institutions which are similar in related groups of states. These conditions are due to the fact that American institutions have developed from those of England, to the constant intercourse between the various states, and to the conscious and unconscious imitation ard adaptation by the several states of the institutions and practices of other states.

Historical development. Some features of the English system of local government in the seventeenth century will serve to explain the beginnings of local government in the American colonies. At that time England was divided into counties or shires, and these in turn into parishes; while there were still survivals of older divisions of shires known as hundreds; and scattered throughout the country were many manors and boroughs, with special arrangements and privileges.

The important county officials were the lord lieutenant, the sheriff, the coroner, and justices of the peace. All of them, except the coroner, were appointed by the Crown; but with the decline of the active control of the Privy Council, local administration in practice was much decentralized. The lord lieutenant was head of the militia system. The sheriff was chief conservator of the peace, and executive agent of the centralized judicial courts. Local affairs were mainly looked after by the justices of the peace, acting in some matters individually and in others in petty or special sessions of several justices, while the justices in each county also held collectively quarterly sessions as a court of criminal jurisdiction, which acted also as the judicial and administrative authority for the county.

Parishes were primarily ecclesiastical districts; but under the legislation of the Tudors they became civil districts, in poor law and local highway matters and the assessment of local taxes-taking the place of the earlier towns. The governing body was the parish vestry, which in theory was open to all inhabitants, but in practice had become in many places a select self-continuing body. Parish officers included. constables, overseers of the poor, and surveyors of highways.

Manors, with special local courts and other privileges, were fast disappearing. But there were several hundred boroughs, with their

own local courts and property, and separate representation in Parliament. In most of these, local affairs were managed by a self-perpetuating council; but in some places the council was elected by a varying body of freemen.

In the American colonies manors and hundreds were formed in a few places (in Maryland, Virginia and New York); but they soon disappeared. Counties were organized gradually in most of the colonies. Parishes were established in some of the southern states, but were of little importance. In New England and the Middle Colonies towns were formed; and in New England the towns became the most important unit of local government. In these New England towns the central organ was the open town meeting of legal voters, which elected selectmen and other officers, voted appropriations and local taxes, and passed local by-laws. In New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania, towns were of less importance than in New England.

Important changes in county government were made during the colonial period. Toward the end of the seventeenth century locally elected county boards (of different types) were established in New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, which gradually acquired the fiscal and administrative powers of the justices of the peace. In Pennsylvania sheriffs were made locally elective (in 1705). A number of new county officers were established: county treasurers in Massachusetts in 1654, local prosecuting attorneys in Connecticut in 1704, and recorders of deeds in most of the colonies. A number of boroughs and cities were also established in the middle and southern colonies.

In the organization of state governments at the time of the Revolution, there were some changes in local government but no radical reconstruction. Many of the first state constitutions contained provisions about county government, with some changes in the direction of a more decentralized system, by means of appointment by the legislature (and in a few cases local popular elections) and definite terms for sheriffs, justices of the peace, and militia officers. Towns were mentioned only in the New Jersey constitution; and the government of towns and parishes remained as before.

With the expansion of population, local institutions were developed in the new states, and further changes were made. Up to the middle of the nineteenth century these changes were mainly in the direction of a more democratic and decentralized system. The electoral franchise was extended to include all male citizens. County officials were made locally elective; and the number of such officials was steadily increased. In most of the states an elective county board took over the administrative functions of the justices of the peace: while sheriffs, prosecuting attorneys, county treasurers, county clerks, recorders, and justices of the peace all became elective officials with short terms. Towards the end of this period constitutional restrictions on the formation of new counties began to appear.

Towns were also organized in the northern states, with functions similar to those of New York and Pennsylvania; but in the southern states the parish disappeared as a civil district (except in Louisiana, where it corresponds to the county); and the county became the main