imperfect idea of their real condition and adaptation to the

conveniences of schools.

Some towns have reported as in "good" condition buildings which in every respect are inferior to those which in other towns, not far distant, have been reported as in "poor" condition. This remark is not intended to reflect on the integrity of those who make the reports, but to show the ideas different persons have of the fitness of buildings and furniture to school purposes. It would seem that in many cases the reports have reference to the clapboards and shingles only.

While the location and outward appearance of too many. school-houses are not what they should be, the interior of the buildings and the furnishing are still more objectionable. It is surprising to find any school-houses still retaining the old desks slanting from the wall and extending round three sides of the room, and narrow benches without backs. In every room where I found these desks, the benches were much too high, though this is not the principal objection to this arrange

ment.

I do not remember to have seen any home-made desks and seats, whether old or new, which were properly graded and arranged for the health and comfort of the children. The introduction of modern school-furniture into most of our schoolrooms is a great improvement, and even on the ground of economy it is quite surprising that any committees will persist in furnishing a school-room in the old way. A large number of the smaller school-houses are deficient in black-boards; they are not sufficient in size and the surface is poor. Even many new buildings and those just repaired are deficient in this respect. Some mistakes, I am sure, would have been avoided if in every case regard were had to the law which requires that "No new school-house shall be built except according to a plan approved by the Board of School Visitors." This includes, or ought to include, the arranging and furnishing of the school-room. If the plans and suggestions given in the Report of the Secretary for the year 1875 are consulted in building and repairing small school-houses, many of the errors now too common will be avoided. Some school-rooms have been found entirely destitute of maps, globes or anything for illustration.

In such cases I have directed the attention of teachers, committees or school visitors to the provisions the State has made for this purpose.

The work done by the teacher, whether with or without proper conveniences, is of far more importance than anything else pertaining to the school; and this is as varied as the appearance of the different school-rooms. Not that in the best houses there is always good teaching, and in the inferior houses teaching of corresponding quality. Though generally where intelligence and enterprise have provided a good schoolhouse, more care is taken in selecting a good teacher, than where the old house as it was used in ancient times is thought to be good enough for the present generation.

With the present supply of good teachers, those who have learned the art of teaching by special study, or by experience with study and observation, and with what the Normal School is doing for the State, there is no good reason for placing in charge of schools persons who are in no way fitted for the positions except that they have passed over the studies usually pursued in the schools. In the school-rooms, the Normal graduates show that they understand their work, they do not appear to be groping in the dark, but they lead their pupils onward in an intelligent, systematic manner, which shows that they comprehend not only what they are to teach, but in some measure, at least, the minds of their pupils. Free-hand drawing and map-drawing I have seldom found taught in any of the small district schools except by these teachers. They are doing good service for the State, and honor the institution which has fitted them for their work.

I have said that there is no good reason for employing as teachers persons not fitted for their positions, but there is an apparent reason in some towns for such practice, and that is the meager appropriation doled out by the town for the support of the schools. In one town which I visited I learned that for the support of eight schools thirty weeks, the town had voted fourteen hundred dollars only, including the amount to be received from the State and all other sources. I will not say what the quality of the teaching is in that town in the public schools, but only what the parents think of it, as shown by the

.

fact that they support six private schools. If there is any real economy in maintaining at a starving rate fourteen schools when eight fairly provided for would do the work, it is not apparent.

I should not mention this case were it not that a few other towns are disposed to try the same kind of economy. When the people in each town elect their wisest and best men to have charge of their schools and leave with them, as the law of the State requires, the business of deciding what amount of money is necesary for the support of its schools, its educational interests will be well cared for, and the inhabitants will not have to reap the fruits of hasty, inconsiderate and parsimonious action.

ESSEX, Dec. 31, 1878.

GILES POTTER.

DECENNARY OF FREE SCHOOLS.

The free school system of Connecticut has now had a trial of ten years and is no longer an experiment. This new law" was so radical in its character as to meet general opposition when first proposed in 1867. During the next year there was so great a change in public sentiment that it was enacted with great unanimity by the General Assembly of 1868. The struggle which this system had to wage for its existence is over, for it has been amply ratified by the people. The gauge of public interest is the increased burden of taxation which the people of Connecticut have chosen to bear, for school taxes are self-imposed. The amount raised by taxation for schools ten years ago was $628,152.12. The amount raised by State, town and district taxation last year was $1,252,248.63, or about double the amount reported in 1868.

The enemies of free schools have either been converted or learned the futility of open opposition. Dissentients are still found whose sympathy is needed to give the highest efficiency to the system. As the condition of the schools in each district answers largely to local public sentiment, the coöperation of every parent and citizen is essential to the fullest success. A brief review of the history and results of the free school

system furnishes encouragement to its friends, and presents facts fitted to satisfy the minds of all honest doubters. Convinced that the rate-bill was wrong in principle and harmful in practice I directed my earliest efforts, on entering the service of the State, to secure its repeal. During the session of the Legislature for 1867, the Joint Standing Committee on Education finally consented to recommend a bill for free schools, though with little faith in the measure and no expectation of carrying it. As the bill met no favor in either House, out of courtesy to its author, it was referred to the next General Assembly. During the next year the subject was fully discussed in numerous meetings in all parts of the State, the Secretary giving two hundred and six lectures on this and kindred topics.

Many sincere friends of education, deprecating these efforts, gave faithful warning as to their certain failure. The subject was freely discussed also in the press, and brought very prominently before the people. The sentiment was widely proclaimed that it is the duty and interest of the State to furnish substantially equal common school privileges to the children of all classes. Self-protection was claimed to be the right of the government. For this purpose it maintains armies and navies. But safer and better every way than forts and fleets, indispensable as they may be, better for its peace and security, its prosperity and protection, is universal education.

Comparatively few now press the objection which was widely urged ten years ago, viz: "It is unjust to tax me for the education of other people's children. I have none. Let those who have, pay the cost of their schooling.' This objection is founded on a false theory of government. The State justly claims a right to its citizens for its defense, a right to lay its equal and needful claim on their property, time and service. For the achievement of our independence, and more recently for the preservation of our institutions, how many were called to endure toil, hardship and death. This claim of the State involves the correlative truth that the State has duties as well as rights, and foremost among them is the duty of securing a good common school education to the children of all classes.

t

The right of a State to support free schools is little else than its right to defend itself by a humanizing and civilizing education against what otherwise would become a degraded and dangerous class in society. The right of a free State to selfexistence implies the right to maintain free schools, essential as they are to its preservation and prosperity. Education is the cheapest police agency a State can employ. In a wisely administered government, educational taxes are the fares which we pay on railroad cars, the price for being safely carried and well provided for, through the journey of life. These taxes are founded primarily not on the idea of benefiting parents and children, but the broader view, that the State has a proprietary interest in all persons and property within its bounds and especially has a stake in her youth that they may be well qualified for her service, whether that shall be on the farm, in the factory, in the counting room or in the field of arms. It was really the better education of the North that saved the Union during the late civil war, as it was the ignorance of the "poor white trash” making them the dupes of demagogues that rendered the rebellion possible in the South.

In 1868 Governor English exerted his influence strongly in favor of free schools. In his annual message to the Legislalature he said: "The rate-bill should be abolished and the schools sustained at the common expense." In his parting address to the General Assembly of that year he said: "The measures which you have adopted to promote the interests of the people will meet with a generous approval at their hands. Especially will they thank you for the interest you have taken in the common schools. In adopting the free school system recommended in my annual message, I am confident you have taken an important step forward in the cause of education, and that your action in this regard will prove as beneficial in results as the motives which prompted it were free from political influence or bias."

As Governor English intimates, this new law was not in any wise a party measure. That a measure so radical should pass unanimously in the Senate and with only four nays in the House was more than its most sanguine friends expected. The press of the State was a unit in its favor. The leading men of