All of these classes of schools receive annual aid in flat sums varying from $1000 for a four-year high school to $75 for an ungraded elementary school having a term of seven months and employing a second grade teacher. Consolidated schools may also receive aid for building purposes, and for the transportation of students. High schools receive tuition for nonresident pupils. There are also provisions for aid for classes in agriculture, home training, commercial training, and for special classes for defective children, including those who are deaf, blind, subnormal, and crippled, and those with defective speech, and for the purchase of library books. A new type of aid for the equalizing of school opportunities, grants not to exceed $50 per year to assist in paying for the transportation and board of pupils living beyond reasonable walking distance from school.

All of these types of aid may well be said to serve to equalize school opportunity.

To equalize school burdens, the law allows special aid to districts with maintenance tax levies exceeding 20 mills. The provision is as follows:

To any school district whose tax levy for maintenance lies between twenty (20) mills and thirty-two (32) mills, the state shall pay as supplemental aid one-third of the excess above twenty (20) mills. If the tax levy for maintenance exceeds thirtytwo (32) mills, then, in addition to the above amount, the state shall pay as supplemental aid one-half of such excess above thirty-two (32) mills, provided that no school district shall receive supplemental aid if a tax levy of twenty (20) mills in such district will yield the equivalent of one hundred dollars ($100) for each pupil enrolled in the public schools of such district; and provided also that no school district shall receive supplemental aid equivalent to more than two hundred dollars ($200) for each elementary teacher employed and two hundred fifty ($250) for each high school or special teacher employed. In school districts maintaining only ungraded elementary schools, if a twenty (20) mill tax levy does not raise the equivalent of six hundred dollars ($600) for each teacher employed for at least seven (7) months during the school year, then the state board of education at its discretion may grant to such school district an amount, which together with the proceeds of a twenty (20) mill tax levy, will give such school district the equivalent of six hundred dollars ($600) for each teacher employed as herein provided, but such state aid shall in no case exceed the equivalent of two hundred dollars ($200) for each such teacher employed, but shall be in addition to all other state aid including supplemental aid as otherwise provided in this section."

This provision takes the place of the former one which gave to districts one third of the amount raised by the portion of their levy which was in excess of twenty mills, with certain maximums for the various types of schools.23

"To stimulate educational progress" the state, jointly with the Federal government under the Smith-Hughes Act, grants aid for vocational training. In addition, the state grants further aid for training in agriculture, general

22 Minnesota School Laws, 1921, p. 65, sec. 218.

23 Session Laws of Minnesota, 1915, p. 417, ch. 296.

industrial training, home training, and for commercial training.

Under

the same classification, the state grants aid to classes for five types of defective children.

For the stimulation of educational work not yet generally established, aid is granted to superior ungraded schools and to evening classes for persons over sixteeen years of age.

It is necessary at this point to call attention to one type of aid which. works the gravest injustice to many districts maintaining state-aided high schools. Such schools are required to admit all children from any district in Minnesota which does not support a high school, and for the tuition of each such child, they receive $7 per month or $63 for a nine-month term, and the state apportionment for such a pupil, which amounts to not more than $7, making a total of $70. In our study of 237 high and graded school districts, it was found that in 82 per cent of the districts, the local tax levy for 1921-22 raised more than $70 per pupil in average daily attendance. In Lewiston, for example, a total school levy of 28 mills raised $123.53 per pupil in average daily attendance. It is a well-known fact that more money is expended per pupil in high school than for those in the grades, but since in Minnesota there is no separate report of either receipts or expenditures for high schools, we are unable to present data on this point. Accepting the average for all of the pupils, however, we see that the taxpayers of Lewiston paid out in taxes $53.53 for every nonresident pupil in their high schools. Yet in 1920, the State Department reported that Lewiston's high school enrollment was more than half nonresident pupils. In a like manner, Wayzata, with more than half its high school enrollment consisting of nonresident pupils, raises $148.83 per pupil by local taxation, being robbed of $78.83 for every nonresident pupil. In this way, the enterprising districts are penalized to benefit those too indifferent, too stingy, or too sparsely populated to provide high school training for their own pupils.

Minnesota offers in this respect a striking contrast to such states as Illinois, California, and Colorado. In each of these states, a compulsory high school tax is levied upon all property not included in a high school district for the purpose of paying costs of providing free high school education to pupils not residing in any high school district, but attending a high school.

Table XXXIV, shows the twenty-one special projects or classes of projects eligible for state aid during the present year, 1921-22, the amounts of such aids provided by law, and the conditions to be fulfilled in order to receive the same. The first apportionment of state aid under these rules has not as yet been completed, nor can state authorities give an accurate estimate of such an award even yet. Furthermore, it is probable that many of these

All of these classes of schools receive annual aid in flat sums varying

In addition, the state grants further aid for training in agriculture, general government under the Smith-Hughes Act, grants aid for vocational training. "To stimulate educational progress" the state, jointly with the Federal

23 Session Laws of Minnesota, 1915, p. 417, ch. 296.
Minnesota School Laws, 1921, p. 65, sec. 218.

industrial training, home training, and for commercial training. Under the same classification, the state grants aid to classes for five types of defective children.

For the stimulation of educational work not yet generally established, aid is granted to superior ungraded schools and to evening classes for persons over sixteeen years of age.

It is necessary at this point to call attention to one type of aid which works the gravest injustice to many districts maintaining state-aided high schools. Such schools are required to admit all children from any district in Minnesota which does not support a high school, and for the tuition of each such child, they receive $7 per month or $63 for a nine-month term, and the state apportionment for such a pupil, which amounts to not more than $7, making a total of $70. In our study of 237 high and graded school districts, it was found that in 82 per cent of the districts, the local tax levy for 1921-22 raised more than $70 per pupil in average daily attendance. In Lewiston, for example, a total school levy of 28 mills raised $123.53 per pupil in average daily attendance. It is a well-known fact that more money is expended per pupil in high school than for those in the grades, but since in Minnesota there is no separate report of either receipts or expenditures for high schools, we are unable to present data on this point. Accepting the average for all of the pupils, however, we see that the taxpayers of Lewiston paid out in taxes $53.53 for every nonresident pupil in their high schools. Yet in 1920, the State Department reported that Lewiston's high school enrollment was more than half nonresident pupils. In a like manner, Wayzata, with more than half its high school enrollment consisting of nonresident pupils, raises $148.83 per pupil by local taxation, being robbed of $78.83 for every nonresident pupil. In this way, the enterprising districts are penalized to benefit those too indifferent, too stingy, or too sparsely populated to provide high school training for their own pupils.

Minnesota offers in this respect a striking contrast to such states as Illinois, California, and Colorado. In each of these states, a compulsory high school tax is levied upon all property not included in a high school district for the purpose of paying costs of providing free high school education to pupils not residing in any high school district, but attending a high school.

Table XXXIV, shows the twenty-one special projects or classes of projects eligible for state aid during the present year, 1921-22, the amounts of such aids provided by law, and the conditions to be fulfilled in order to receive the same. The first apportionment of state aid under these rules has not as yet been completed, nor can state authorities give an accurate estimate of such an award even yet. Furthermore, it is probable that many of these

provisions will be considered for revision by the legislature which will meet within the current school year. This situation is, however, typical of the uncertainty which permeates the whole situation of state aid in Minnesota.

The foregoing discussion of state aid gives the bare outlines of the present system, and makes no pretense of including the State Board of Education's rules governing participation in state aid, which constitute several booklets in themselves. The account bears out the criticisms made of the system in Chapter IX of this study. The whole system of state aid, it is plain to be seen, has grown so complicated, offers aid on so many bases and for such varying purposes, that it has completely failed to accomplish its two fundamental purposes: to equalize school burdens, and to equalize school opportunities. The per cent of school expenditures furnished by the state in the various counties is not in proportion to wealth per child, to school tax levy, to total school expenditure, nor to quality of educational opportunity provided, as measured by length of term, by per cent of children in attendance, or by the preparation of the teachers employed.

COUNTY FUNDS

In eighty-four of the eighty-six counties, there are no important county funds. The receipts from such fines and forfeitures as are devoted to the county school fund are distributed with the state apportionment and are subject to the same rules. As already noted, only two counties, namely, Itasca and St. Louis, provide genuine county funds. Our account of the disbursement of county funds will be limited, therefore, to these two counties.

County funds in Itasca County.-Itasca County, like the state of Minnesota, naturally falls into two parts: the rich and the poor. The eastern part of the county is rich in iron mines, and the western part, which was once heavily timbered, has been logged over, leaving regions characterized by typical slashings, regions which may some day become valuable agricultural land, but which at present are barren and impoverished. Itasca County is divided into eight school districts. How widely these districts vary with respect to ability to provide schools is shown by Table XXXV in which the eight districts are arranged in order of their assessed valuation per child.

How great are the differences in the ability of the districts included in Itasca County to support schools is strikingly shown by Table XXXV. District No. 2 has more than nine times, and District No. 9 more than five times, as much wealth per child as has District No. 11; No. 12 is more than four times as able to support schools as No. 6.